# Sticky  treating vs. not treating for mites: opinion thread



## squarepeg

the title says it all. 

civility remains the rule and personal attacks will be deleted. 

this thread has been started as the place to have the debate in order to keep threads on other topics from becoming derailed or side tracked.

posts appearing in other threads that are more appropriate for this one will get moved here.

so have at it but be nice.


----------



## johno

Guy sand girls lets start by saying that I have no problems with beekeepers who do not wish to treat their bees, I treat my bees because it is the only way I can keep them alive and thriving. Thriving means that I can make increases of over 100% per year with losses of less than 10% per year, and still make a fair crop of honey in a state which is low on average honey per hive. What is more I do it only using OAV which to some beekeepers is not possible. When the time comes that queens are available with traits that will stay in the local gene pool that will keep our bees mite free or virus free I will be in line with many others to purchase such queens but that time is not here so I am left with the only option available and that is the use of some sort of miticide. There are many beekeepers around this forum who do not treat and seem to keep their bees alive but few mention the secret of their success. Do they really know the secret or is it just a factor of their locality or of the mites in their area, until we can get answers to this can we really learn anything from this. Mostly when questioned about mite densities most reply that they do not sample for such and never do. So until we get some answers to these questions nothing is gained.
Johno


----------



## Cuttingedgelandinc

squarepeg said:


> the title says it all.
> 
> civility remains the rule and personal attacks will be deleted.
> 
> this thread has been started as the place to have the debate in order to keep threads on other topics from becoming derailed or side tracked.
> 
> posts appearing in other threads that are more appropriate for this one will get moved here.
> 
> so have at it but be nice.


My opinion is that we have Mites that infect the bees with Viruses. Those viruses cause mortality in bees. Some even make the colony crash. As a result, I treat to keep my bees alive!


----------



## mdohertyjr

In my first year, we did not treat. In our second year, we were able to split to 11 hives. Those 11 hives were not treated. Before Thanksgiving all 11 hives crashed and died.

Crawling bee's, mite droppings, deformed wings, prove that mites killed all 11 hives.

We now treat.


----------



## gww

I am not treating for now. I believe people are keeping bees and there are ferals and that you can not control what is around you and so it is you that has to keep your bees.
I stole this quote from michigan mike cause it expresses my overall view best.


> I did not enter this thread with the view that it is anti treatment free beekeeping.
> 
> My reading of the premise is a desire to have bees that do not rob other colonies as a way to minimize mite issues. I mentioned TF only because Nancy mentioned she offers instruction to local beekeepers on testing and treatment as a means to address the problem and that Shinbone mentioned that his area has a large number of TF beekeepers that by definition would not be open to her instruction. I monitor and treat but have no issue with those who chose not to. My bees are my responsibility not theirs, I have a TF beekeeper about 100 yards down the road, I do not hold him responsible for my mites, I respect his right to keep his bees as he deems appropriate. I try not to live in the world I wish for but rather the one that exists. We have many members on this forum that tackle the mite issue in various ways, ankle biters, hygienic, forced swarm and the like. Shinbone has introduced the elimination of robbing as another tool. I just happen to think it is unrealistic; robbing is only one of many ways mites are introduced into a colony. I do not judge any members motive or method. We have members along the whole spectrum from Nancy who pampers to the extreme to a member who takes all the honey, eliminates his colonies and starts fresh the next year. I respect them all. It was not my intention to offend anyone. I expect the same respect and would not take kindly to someone showing up at my door and suggesting that I need to install robbing screens or asking whether or not I monitor and treat. Shinbone I believe was asking what *he can donot what others should do. Help him find those honest bees. *


*
I don't say what it takes for you to raise bees but also don't discount out of hand what others are doing just cause I might not be able to do it. I do believe the weakining of bees by treating and don't put much creadence in the mighty mite bomb. I don't mind if people treat and it works for them but don't buy that it is the other guys fault if what they do doesn't work. My view is I can not control the other guy and so all things can happen around me and so I just need to figure out what makes me happy.
Cheers
gww*


----------



## Lauri

I thought when I started with bees I'd be treatment free and as organic as possible as I have been for over 40 years of small home farming.

I still like the idea of how things could be in a perfect world, but after several years with bees I've learned to become realistic _*quick*_. I am whole hardly FOR treating with the appropriate methods, at the appropriate time for maximum effectiveness with the least invasive and accumulative treatment possible.

I admit it, I love killing the little [email protected]#^#(*! *
I get a real kick out of being proactive and protecting my bees from unnecessary stress and the slow agonizing death associated with being a parasitic host. I occasionally will miss or overlook a hive that had declined from a mite load (usually along with an aging, failing queen) and feel like a real piece of 'you know what' because I allowed them to suffer. In my opinion, it's senseless.

I've also been absolutely amazed by their recovery when given a new young queen, mite treatment and feed. Recovery has been like a miracle right in front of my eyes. Bringing a hive back from the brink of failure is very rewarding.

I view occasional issues with hive health a great opportunity to become a better beekeeper and learn to identify the issue and resolve it- along with future avoidance of repeat issues.

I have a lot of hives and their needs are varied. Some need treatments, some don't depending on their age, genetics and broodless period histories. I don't have so many hives I have to rely on a strictly scheduled one size fits all treatment plan. 

I am pleased I have learned not to be a day late and a dollar short, when it comes to mite control. I don't let anyone shame me for treating.

Popular or not, my methods are what make sense to me, with my genetics, my goals & needs, my specific climate. I am fortunate I have a broodless period during winter and many of my hives can easily wait until winter for OAV treatments without undue negative effects from waiting. 

Having good genetics, young well mated queens and a broodless period earlier in the year due to the delay in virgin queens getting mated and laying are a big part of my management decisions. 

My lines are resistant to mites, not allowing them to reproduce unchecked and they have excellent tolerance against viruses due to the presence of mites. 

I am fortunate to be pretty secluded from other beekeepers and my risk of infestation from outside sources is very limited. My biggest threat is an unusually warm winter that allows very early brooding. That combined with older, less vigorous queens will result in the need for early spring treatment. I had that in the winter of 2013-2014 and am grateful for normal winters that keep them cool and inactive! 

I OAV with the ProVap at optimal times of the year, fill in with Apivar when brood is present if treatment is necessary and cannot wait for OAV broodless periods.

I also use other methods to reduce mite loads coming out of winter such as cutting capped drone comb and running virgin queens through nucs (Break up overwintered hives that come out of winter in less than excellent shape) to help clean them up and get a fresh start. A virgin queen is like a secret weapon. Their effects are not always 100% enough to control all mites if they are badly infested, but what they do for older frames that need to be freshened is truly magic.

Hacking out the capped drone comb sections ( with those frames of partial foundation) when I make up those new nucs takes the first bite out of the mite breeders immediately. The virgin queens continued cleansing usually finishes the job quite well.

















Sometimes this is beneficial, sometimes it is not needed. Pays to check though, especially in those colonies that have brooded up earlier than others.

























I've pushed my hives to the limit many times in many respects for years so I know my genetics well and have faith in their ability. Sure, they may be fine for a couple years without mite treatments, but if they are kept from swarming, the queens is aging and slowing down and the colony had not had a summertime brood break in years, I am not going to let them decline to the point of crashing. I've pushed them by design at times, pushed them due to circumstances beyond my control at other times. Weather extremes and serious seasonal anomalies to name one thing, My mother falling and breaking a hip another time which left most of my colonies unattended for a considerable length of time while I helped her recover. 
Too many colonies to manage well on my own and a yard too far away to get to as much as I'd like. All those things result in no or greatly delayed management, yet most were in great shape. I have no doubt though, extended neglect would ultimately result in serious loss es at some point.
But these tests do help me recognize those superstars out there that I end up selecting for grafting. Hives where all things being equal, impress me every time I get into them.

I have no hives in my yard I do not know the full extent of their history. 
These hives have overwintered multiple times, I personally reared all the queens in them so the age and genetics of the queens are not in question.

A colonies peak performance and longevity don't last forever, there is a point a beekeeper needs to take control to keep colonies fresh and clean.


Could I go totally treatment free and survive ? ( No chemical or OAV treatments) With 30 hives or less, absolutely I feel I could do it, after getting the education I have running about 200 colonies for the last few years.

But if your TF requirements include not using management such as splitting and using virgin queens, then the answer would be no. I don't think I could be successful long term. Then there would also have to be a plan for isolating the hives that started to get over run when organic methods were not enough. Then what? Allow those to dwindle and fail? Spread mites to feral hives? I couldn't do that.

Focusing on the health of the colony instead of surplus honey production when I started beekeeping has worked well for me. I've been totally self sufficient ever since my second year, never buying bees again after my original purchases.


----------



## JWChesnut

I have run a paired TF / Treated set of yards since I returned to the States in 2001. 
The non-treated yards have consistently suffered high mortality. No instant "evolution" to "survivor" bees has occured. I consider TF beekeeping a pure fraud.
In 2017, the colonies of 27 of 30 F1 daughters of a Instrumentally inseminated VSH breeder queen purchased from VP Queens died in my TF yard as of January 7, 2018.
In 2017, 28 of 30 colonies of **treated** bees survived in the treatment yard.

There is *zero* comparison between the survival of mite-controlled colonies, and colonies left to succumb to mite-vectored virus. None.


----------



## BeeHoosier

When I first started I wanted to go without chemicals to treat for mites and probably leaned in the direction that a lot of new beekeepers do in the idea of, I am going to do this the "right" way. Obviously nobody wants to put anything in their hive that could be harmful, so chemical treatments and such are unappealing. Then my first hive died from mites.... I would guess that happens to many many new beekeepers. Even though I had already read numerous books and website articles, I read even more and researched different options and thoughts behind them. I then began using treatment for mites. Overall I think the bees will eventually adapt and evolve in time, and in a perfect world we would do everything to help them along (by not propping up weak genetic strains, reducing pesticides, etc). Without getting too deep, I think that as a society we too often will do something without enough thought to long term potential issues and then just deal with the inevitable problems when they inevitably arrive (pesticide use, deforestation, human and farming antibiotic overuse, etc.) In the short term hopefully there are more numerous and continuously improving queen breeders that can help along with more science based research and studies. Many of the chemicals are "soft" and although they do have some negative effects I think at this point that can be accepted as a tradeoff. At least some of the chemicals for mite treatments are not showing resistance but who knows if we use them long enough. As long as we continue to research the problem and not rest with the current treatment regimen, we can hopefully continue to evolve. There is no one perfect way, but learning more and more and understanding the pros and cons of the different options while keeping an open mind are really important.

Also, I think monitoring is a big key. I don't think beekeepers are helping themselves or their bees by just treating on a set schedule. Monitoring for mites and then, applying chemicals when needed instead of a blanket treatment based on the calendar is better in my opinion. Knowing why you are using something and what it is doing instead of just putting it in because somebody told you to. I don't think anything is helped by putting a chemical in the hive just because it is a certain date/time. Monitoring (before and after treatments) will help in using the least amount needed instead of using it when it may not be necessary and therefore exposing the bees when not really needed. Monitoring also allows us to see if the treatment was effective. 

I enjoy reading and learning more on this topic and I am excited to see this area of research continue to evolve. I will continue to keep an open mind and constantly re-evaluate what I am doing and how I am doing it to hopefully continue to be a better beekeeper.


----------



## snl

JWChesnut said:


> I consider TF beekeeping a pure fraud.


I believe some can do it..... 
What I consider a fraud is telling (from either the seller of the bees or some GURU) new beekeepers buying packages and nucs from non-TF folks, not to treat. I also think it is disgusting to let a hive succumb to mites from either a desire to become TF or laziness. Just my opinion.


----------



## 1102009

I am firmly convinced that with the appropriate selection of the more resistant colonies and the prevention of the proliferation of susceptible colonies both in the practice of commercial beekeeping and in hobby, both treated and without treatment, there have long been resistant bees.

I also think that the unnatural managements of the bee colonies makes them vulnerable.

Unfortunately, however, the susceptible colonies are being multiplied, the main thing being the production of honey.

I do not want to take responsibility for an animal that can only be kept alive with constant treatment, this applies to the bees, my chickens, and the livestock for my meat consumption.
Treatment is necessary in my eyes only in case of illness, but not as a basic application.


----------



## clyderoad

squarepeg said:


> the title says it all.
> 
> civility remains the rule and personal attacks will be deleted.
> 
> this thread has been started as the place to have the debate in order to keep threads on other topics from becoming derailed or side tracked.
> 
> posts appearing in other threads that are more appropriate for this one will get moved here.
> 
> so have at it but be nice.


posts were made in another thread this morning, causing the creation of this one, which haven't been moved here -only deleted. :scratch:


----------



## squarepeg

clyderoad said:


> posts were made in another thread this morning, causing the creation of this one, which haven't been moved here -only deleted. :scratch:


here you go clyde:



SiWolKe said:


> Let´s treat forever...





johno said:


> Lets try to keep them alive any way possible
> Johno





squarepeg said:


> let's not challenge the motivation of others espousing different approaches please.





johno said:


> Who's challenging what If someone has a better way lets hear it and see the results, remember its the hives alive that produce the honey.
> Johno





SiWolKe said:


> I respect and understand this attitude. But I find it to be depressing. IMO. That because there are lines of bees that are able to cope with the mites, which in my eyes should be promoted.
> If this treatment would make the mites go extinct I would even join in the treating if needed.





johno said:


> SiWolke no problems , I just like to be realistic. whoever has these mite resistant stock that can survive anywhere and produce a fair crop of honey should be very wealthy by now from all the queens they must be selling, and all the buyers would be shouting from the rooftops about how at last they no longer have to treat for mites, However I hear no one shouting at all. When one day there is a breakthrough in this area I am sure many will move in that direction. I have brought in queens of this type and even breeder queens and yet if I do not treat my bees will die. I have tried these mite biter queens, the one I got to test I think was so busy biting mites that she forgot to lay many eggs so that did not last long. So until then if I have mites I kill them.
> Johno





johno said:


> SiWolke no problems , I just like to be realistic. whoever has these mite resistant stock that can survive anywhere and produce a fair crop of honey should be very wealthy by now from all the queens they must be selling, and all the buyers would be shouting from the rooftops about how at last they no longer have to treat for mites, However I hear no one shouting at all. When one day there is a breakthrough in this area I am sure many will move in that direction. I have brought in queens of this type and even breeder queens and yet if I do not treat my bees will die. I have tried these mite biter queens, the one I got to test I think was so busy biting mites that she forgot to lay many eggs so that did not last long. So until then if I have mites I kill them.
> Johno





gww said:


> johno
> 
> Every time somebody phrases thier wording like this it seems like a put down to those who are keeping bees with out treating. Like the first thing a person does that doesn't treat is to go into queen rearing for others. I have not been treating and I can garrantee that I don't intend on going into queen rearing for others. I don't care how anyone keeps bees but I don't keep bees the way I do so I can spend all my energys trying to save the world. I do it like I do cause that is what is working for me so far. I don't blame you if you feel you need to treat but am not sure that those that don't are just not having any success. I have seen the fall back postition mentioned in many threads that it should not be believed that poeple have success and don't treat cause they don't make queens for everybody else and so it must not be true is not what I believe.
> 
> I don't know how long I will be successful or if I have a day of reckoning coming but I do know that I have no intention of making and selling queens for others. I might give somebody a queen cell that is close to me if I have one and they need one but I am not trying to save the world and that does not mean I am not doing what I am doing. I don't mind if you are happy with what you are doing and even look up to you if you are making money from your bees while doing what you are doing.
> I do think the phrasing I highlighted is like calling others liers on what they are doing just cause they don't want to start a queen rearing buissness.
> Cheers
> gww
> Ps I do understand that my bees might not live everywhere like they live here but I also am not going to make queens to find out. I just do what I do and it has worked so far though it is early in my beekeeping and maby it will go bad sometime.





SiWolKe said:


> No problem to me too, johno. I´m realistic person myself. But I hear no enthusiastic shouting about how nice the bee colonies fare if they are treated ( here or on forums). No, beekeepers who treat always talk about the mite problem.
> And many hives die in spite of this treating. There are other problems with those susceptible bees or regarding the managements..perhaps the Lithium Chloride will make it easier.
> A breakthrough would be very nice
> 
> At least professional breeders now care for resistance as a trait. As one of the traits. So not only weak genetics around sometime.
> Isn´t it crazy we have to treat livestock not as an exception but always? Just like pigs or chicken are treated with antibiotics. Do we really want to produce our food like that?
> Well sorry, this is off topic. Please ignore me.





SiWolKe said:


> gww,
> I would love the tf beekeepers who have the chance to breed queens and distribute them. More if they would not be so expensive.





clyderoad said:


> this post is a perfect example of why the debate and argument continues ad nauseam.





wildbranch2007 said:


> :thumbsup:


i had to do it this way to keep the first post in this thread first. from now on the the time stamp of any moved post will stay as it was. thanks everyone.


----------



## jonsl

I personally would like to be treatment free. However, I understand the reality of my location. My focus has been to treat as I learn how to keep bees alive. So far so good. 

As long as the commercial beekeepers continue to treat and are migratory it will be an uphill battle to be treatment free in the US. Their numbers will just overwhelm everyone else except those that are lucky enough to be isolated.

I have made the decision to only use those so called “natural” treatments, thymol, formic acid and oxalic acid. These are working for me. Attention needs to be paid to mite counts all the time. They can very easily surge even after treatments.

I frequently lurk in the treatment free forum to keep up to date on developments there. After a couple of more successful years I will most likely start to dabble in TF and see how I can adapt that to my area. 

Thanks to everyone on this site for all the knowledge sharing and let's keep it civil! There's enough incivility in the world today. 

Jon


----------



## gww

Treatment free has to do with mites but I think bee keeping is so verible of what those doing it want out of it that just saying treatment free does or does not work narrows the focus too fine. One part is, if you have a hive, how big can you make it and how long will it live. The other part is what does the bee keeper want to focus on getting out of his bees. The mad splitter would rather consintrate on selling bees and so makes multiple splits knowing he is on the small edge of bee density but has enough that he still wins the numbers game.

A guy might have free wood and a lot of room and so consintrates on just having more hives and so the higher percent of death might not impact him in the same fassion. Another might just buy packages and use his drawn frames to get as much as a package can give him over just a one season period.

One might not even bee a bee keeper but might be a fruit grower and care more about pollination.

The measure of success regaurdless of how mites are handled is in the hand of the beholder.

Skill is a funny thing too. A person may have skill in what he is doing but not in what another is doing. Throw in local enviroment wether for mites or honey production or how many beekeepers are around and maby what they are doing and my guess is there will never be a uniform way that can be pointed to as the only right way and even if there was, people would still do what they want. 

Most adress the single mite issue from where they are standing and measure success in the same way.

My view is pick your poisen and then persue it and make whatever adjustments are needed till you get what you consider success. I do think that there is only one way to do anything and that is to just try it and also that just cause you try it and it doesn't work for you does not mean that someone else does not have a differrent experiance and the reason may just not be clear. Nobody can say that they know and have the right answer cause if it was easy to do, every one would be doing it. If it was too easy cause everyone knew the answer, nobody would buy honey cause everyone would just have thier own hive. It is not supposed to be easy. It is easyer for those who have figured out thier cog in the big wheel.
Cheers
gww
Success? Some people paint and some don't, I don't glue my frames many say that is bad. Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder.


----------



## Nhaupt2

Bees are livestock in the states, always have been, always will be. Feral bees are not wild bees. I agree with the idea that if we just let bees be bees they will return to their natural state. That state just so happens to be not existing here. The results of Natural Selection are not always a better stronger animal, Sometimes things just cease to exist. 

Any livestock that is in my care is going to be kept In the best possible health that I can keep it in. Anything else seems like borderline animal cruelty to me. If a sick bee looked like a sick horse or a sick dog, none of these TF people would be doing what they are doing.


----------



## squarepeg

a few more earlier posts moved from another thread:



baybee said:


> Confusing... What does "TF" stand for then? Thoughtfree? Total failure? Must be the victims of the local beekeeping clubs where the idea of TF beekeeping is hyped up by some without teaching necessary techniques.





SiWolKe said:


> That's not it, I think it's a sympathy with the bees that you do not want to expose them to the evil mites.
> I understand that. It's really hard to watch the bees learn to fight back and accept the risk that they will not make it.





baybee said:


> Do you mean they treat out of sympathy or go TF out of sympathy (whatever "sympathy" means when one talks about responsible beekeeping)?
> 
> "...most lines of honey bees today will succumb to the varroa/virus complex within a year or two of starting the hive, unless realistic measures are taken by the beekeeper to reduce the mite population. Please read my article “The Varroa Problem Part 6b–Small-Scale Breeding,” in which I discuss some of the misconceptions often advocated by well-intentioned (but biologically misinformed) “treatment-free” promoters." -- says one beekeeper with 50 or so years of experience. I have heard similar opinion from another beekeeper, who is local with hundreds of hives and 47 years of experience.


----------



## gww

Nhaupt2


> Bees are livestock in the states, always have been, always will be. Feral bees are not wild bees. I agree with the idea that if we just let bees be bees they will return to their natural state. That state just so happens to be not existing here. The results of Natural Selection are not always a better stronger animal, Sometimes things just cease to exist.
> 
> Any livestock that is in my care is going to be kept In the best possible health that I can keep it in. Anything else seems like borderline animal cruelty to me. If a sick bee looked like a sick horse or a sick dog, none of these TF people would be doing what they are doing.


This is a nice view but how many of those dogs are killed each year cause they are not wanted. The last old dog I had that got a big cancer groth on its belly got a 22 cal shell in its head but the next one might get me a thousand dollar vet bill. How many chicken farmers cull thier old stock. The reason for culling comes down to money and not good treatment to living things. How many bees that end up in bad places are sprayed?

Which time are facility and which times are cuelty?

The truth is most livestock things are treated as they are because of monitary reasons even if we want to believe other wise.

How long does a feral bee have to be around before it is considerred a wild thing? 100 years? 200 years?

You are correct that nature is in constant arms war with itself and there are some times losers. Some times the loser is something humans value and sometimes the things humans value win and the bad bug loses. Never ending.

It is very easy to point to others actions and say how bad they are and I sure believe there probly is a line but may not draw it where you do. I don't find pleasure in pulling the wings of flys but don't mind swatting them at all.

I have chickens get sick every once in a while and I don't take a five dollar chicken to a fourty dollar vet. I would rather it not get sick but not so much that I don't let them free roam which allows interaction of my birds with wild birds that might be sick or cars or foxes. It ain't worth it to build a giant inclosed fence to me and cruel or not, it makes sence finacially for what I do.

Why do we value bees? Because they are worth something? We don't value termites.
Cheers
gww
Ps I bet the big hog operations don't bottle feed the runts of the litter.

Ps Ps If bees were like chickens, If you killed a chicken that had Mirics (spelled wrong) disiese that is incurable, are you being cruel or or you being good cause that chicken won't have eggs that hatch into more disiesed chickens. If you let weak bees die and strong ones live, are you helping or hurting the livestock. I am not sayin more then it is a lagitamate arguement for discussion. I do know many breeding stock of other live stock take the position of not breeding from weak or damaged animals.


----------



## Nhaupt2

Gww, I'm sure they don't, but when diarrhea hits the farm they don't sit back and say they will hope for diarrhea resistant hogs to emerge from the ashes either.


----------



## rwurster

I was able to be TF for 6 seasons and suffered between 15% to 60% losses, usually about 30%. It's labor intensive, invasive and rough on the bees with brood breaks, drone culling, etc. I would get lots of survivor bee stock from swarms in town and try to breed from them. The reality of the situation is that there's a commercial who has thousands of hives that he migrates all over the county. Both of my yards have 150+ hives within 1/2 mile (0.8 km). If I move my bees further out into the sticks there's always someone running Carnis or Italians or Russians or Hybrids or whatever somewhere relatively close. I don't have or want hundreds of hives to try to make my own DCAs. So the concept of breeding and keeping survivor stock is nullified by reality.

I've seen people treat with amitraz and Apivar and whatever else rolls down the pike, seen them use terrmycin (sp) essential oils etc. which in my opinion are good thing to see. Knowing the hows and whens of other people's routines adds to my own experience. And I always knew the harsher treatments just weren't what I wanted to do so I went with the "softer" OA. Being TF gave me a broader perspective and a bigger set of tools in my beekeeping toolbox than some of those who treat may have but I'm never going to be TF again. 

As for the commercial, I've seen threads where people say to go tell someone to move their bees or else type of comments. The guy's been beekeeping for 70 years, he's worked for and earned every spot he drops his hives just like I've worked hard to get outyards and places in town to put hives. Come tell me to move bees Im going to tell you to shove off and thats if Im in a good mood  So I work with what's around me and quite honestly I like to rub it in the commercials face a little when I call him each spring and ask him what kind of stock he's running so I know what my mutts are going to look like. I also like to tell him how my mating yard is right by 80 of his hives and how my queen success rate is 95% lol (just to aggravate him). Its all in good fun but we both know there isnt a darn thing either one of us can do to about the other.

To each their own, like Johno said "Lets try to keep them alive any way possible" and square peg said "let's not challenge the motivation of others espousing different approaches please" good advice guys :applause: much nicer than I ever could have said it :gh:

I haven't been in the TF forum since Sol left, and I'm richer for it  my $0.02


----------



## Charlestonbee

What Johno and Lauri said. I got into bees because I like animals and outdoors. I had no direction so I searched online. There were websites that led me to believe treatment free was possible and great. I personally had around 80% mortality rate. Also I had no comparison because I had never seen another hive. I had nice brood patterns and made around 60 lbs of honey a year. They always crashed come fall or next year. As lauri stated brood breaks feed and requeening the survivors helped. Eventually I decided I wanted to try to become a sideliner. I knew I needed to treat. You can’t make a dime if 80% of your bees die. I began treatments with oav and chased mite loads because we never have a broodless period. Vsh, ankle biters, mite slayers whisker dos and whooskes don’ts never worked for me. I currently use oav, apivar, and Formic depending on timing and needs. Since I started treating Four years ago I’ve never lost over 20%. I am shooting to get to 5% mortality or less. Oh and the same locations that made 60 lbs of honey now have several hives that are able to make 100lbs. Had a couple make around 200. I would like to start selling nucs and queens in 2019 or 2020 and I would feel horrible selling someone mite bombs. All my stock is from a swarm caught in a Tupelo swamp 6 years ago. . It took many trials of different queens until I found what I liked.


----------



## gww

Nhaupt2


> Gww, I'm sure they don't, but when diarrhea hits the farm they don't sit back and say they will hope for diarrhea resistant hogs to emerge from the ashes either.


But they might if they only got 40 dollars for the pig at market and the treatment was 50 dollars. They might just get more hogs to make up for the losses. The point is that it will be a finacial reason that they keep the pigs and thier decisions will be based on finacial return and not that it is cruel or not. If a new pig comes out that is less suceptable to diarrhea they may start raising them. I see your point on taking care of your stock but if a guy is making money with bees and a few hives die or he decides it is worth it to do counts every month and treat four times a year, he gets to be the one to add the cost to bennifit and cruelty is not the deciding factor. In most agroculture, it is money made that is the deciding factor of success or failure. There are many "cruel" things in big ag because we find value in certain animals and plants.
Cheers
gww


----------



## Geno

Treat them to keep them healthy. Way to many examples of mites vectoring virus that leads to colony collapse.


----------



## gww

Charlestonbees


> Since I started treating Four years ago I’ve never lost over 20%. I am shooting to get to 5% mortality or less. Oh and the same locations that made 60 lbs of honey now have several hives that are able to make 100lbs.


I am not questioning your experiances at all. I just wanted to ask if you atribute some of the improvement in prodution to having more drawn comb and learning minipulations better.

You should be proud of you improvement and I only ask cause I am in a 50 lbs state wide average per hive area.

I believe member danial d had simular results when he started treating and started using foundation after 4 years of tf beekeeping. I am not talking for him and hope I have this right but am always curious of cause and effect.
Thanks
gww


----------



## Charlestonbee

gww said:


> Charlestonbees
> 
> 
> 
> Since I started treating Four years ago I’ve never lost over 20%. I am shooting to get to 5% mortality or less. Oh and the same locations that made 60 lbs of honey now have several hives that are able to make 100lbs.
> 
> 
> 
> I am not questioning your experiances at all. I just wanted to ask if you atribute some of the improvement in prodution to having more drawn comb and learning minipulations better.
> 
> You should be proud of you improvement and I only ask cause I am in a 50 lbs state wide average per hive area.
> 
> I believe member danial d had simular results when he started treating and started using foundation after 4 years of tf beekeeping. I am not talking for him and hope I have this right but am always curious of cause and effect.
> Thanks
> gww
Click to expand...

Gww, yes. I should hope I continue to learn and get better. Certainly my timing with things, manipulations, I can control, and drawn comb helps tremendously. Still growing so I don’t have all I need. Also haven’t been keeping bees long enough to have consistent experience with all sorts of weather patterns affecting honey crop. I also FIRMLY believe in my Queen stock. Ian Steppler has a talk about his queen rearing. He doesn’t discredit and major commercial queen breeder but found something happening between their door and his hives. That’s my experience as well. I had queens that were good better and best. Few poor. Well I got with a guy who keeps about 200 production hives. He got back into bees 8-10years ago something like that. He caught 20 swarms in a Tupelo swamp and chose the best queen to graft from the next year. That’s where my stock comes from. His queens just worked better for me and stood up well against treatments. I requeened everything I have in August 2017. I will be grafting this year for the first time and will try to keep this stock. They are 5th generation now and have always been open mated. We will see how long they work for me. I did have multiple 4x4x4 nucs come out of winter last year booming. Put them in full size hives, pulled 4 frame splits off them March 17, they made ab 100lbs honey pulled July 4 each drawing all foundation in supers, pulled 3 frame splits out July 30 to make up nucs and all overwtinered. I tried to push them as hard as I could to make honey and increase. Back on topic, all I was saying is I firmly believe treated and healthy bees that have correct protein and sugar intake will make you more honey. How much more I can’t say.


----------



## Andrew Dewey

Long term, the development of a bee that can co-exist and thrive in the presence of Varroa is most likely the only hope.

In the meantime, I have realized that my operation is too small, and area Varroa too strong for me to participate in breeding or finding such a bee. i have purchased as much stock as I am going to that promised to be TF Survivor stock. The short response - not in my area. I am not interested in doing things like brood breaks. My season is so short I can't afford them.

While I hope progress is being made on the TF Front, for the time being I treat. My concession to ideology is that I don't use the so called "hard" chemicals.


----------



## gww

Charlestonbees
Thanks for the responce. 
gww


----------



## Lauri

I did some experimenting last season with a few hives that were well populated up late winter and ended up with a spring mite load. Not enough to take them out, but enough they didn't progress later in spring as the other hives were.

In order to get my half sized deep drawn frames filled, I set them on top these hives and fed. A few days after the bees occupied the frames I caught the queen and isolated her to those mini frames with an excluder, so they would get worked and laid up as fast as possible. I left them that way longer than was necessary due to bad weather, until all the brood in the boxes below (2 deeps) had emerged. 


I then removed the top box with the mini frames, now filled and the majority of them capped, distributed them to mating nucs. When I came across the established queen, returned her to the old hive- bottom 2 deeps that were full of bees, but now totally broodless. Not only broodless, but due to the _removal_ of most of the mites in the capped mini frames, quite clean from what I could tell. Had I been thinking, I would have done an alcohol wash at that time for some actual numbers.

Although it was not planned, I saw the potential for an experiment due to the removal delay and resulting conditions of the mite occupied mini frames & broodless colony below.

The hive settled back into a routine and exploded with solid brood patterns, unlike the quality they had come out of winter with. It was pretty impressive. Now a queens given empty drawn comb to lay up is like a blank slate and she will typically have better patterns just because of that. But were the patterns better as well because of the reduced number of mites?

Now, most of the mites were trapped under the capped brood I just removed, I made up the mating nucs and gave them a ripe queen cell. No treatments were given. I kept track of their progress. 
It was dismal to say the least. It was a great test. I had more failed returns and absconding than I have ever had with those mating nucs. I've run hundreds of queens through mating nucs, so I have a very good perspective on what is normal.

The problem is, a queen cell near emergence can have a bit of overlap of old capped brood and new brood just capped, never truly having a full brood break when bees with good hygienic ability can have the chance to clean themselves up. If they get a break when there is only open brood & eggs, the 'brood break' at least is not one of any length. Especially true if they get mated and start laying quickly as I see early spring.

I suffered with spotty patterns and failures for a while, resisting treating to see what happened. One by one they would have a failed return and make their own queen, invoke a lengthy brood break. The effects were amazing. Solid patterns, content little colonies, efficient feed collection and storage, etc. 

One way to compromise to get better results (Other than letting a tiny colony make their own queen with limited resources) would be to install a grafted queen cell in those mating nucs that was only about 48 hours old, instead of one of eminent emergence stage. Filled with royal jelly and well started, all the mating nuc has to do is keep it warm and cap it. Effectively cleaning up the mites without chemicals in both the parent hive and each nuc.

That's great, unless you are needing those new crop queens early.








































But it does work. 
It _takes _work, timing & bees that will cooperate. And it would not be everlasting, just a seasonal nip in the endless fight to suppress an opportunistic pest. And if used in _combination _with a treatment during the broodless period, the treatments would be very effective and could be used with much less lengthy exposures. 

Using overwintered mating nucs with late summer mated queens helps for your early spring needs, using both methods for providing spring queens are an option for control without chemical treatments and could sustain a smaller operation. But wouldn't be applicable for those needing quick production for early sales of any volume.

I have done walk away nucs (full sized deep frames) in past and really dislike them. The colony is brought to the brink of failure with an extremely small window to intervene if there is a failed return. Sure it cleans them up, but in my opinion it is a risk of resources and leaves them in a weakened state. But in _mating nucs_, it is different. Less risky because the size of the colony is tiny. It is not meant to grow to production or overwintering strength in a single season. But it will delay your first round of mated queens by a couple weeks.


So if you run mating nucs and you would like to improve your mated return %, consider the information above. Remember your mating nucs last season that reliably produced round after round of mated queens? Remember those mating nucs that didn't? Ever wonder what the difference was?

Have a quad that reliably produced mated queens out of 3 sections, while that 4th section was a dud most of the season? Mites will migrate to and colonize the weakest section where there is less pressure from bees. THAT was likely the dud. Maybe not just bad luck with returns or orientation difficulties in a quad unit, it may have been the most hostile environment and stressed colony that caused the higher percentage of return failures.

This may be old news to the more experiences beekeepers, but for me, it was a bit of an eye opener.

( Just for the record, when I talk about treating, I am only talking about treating for mites. I don't use any antibiotics or meds like Fumagillin. Being fairly secluded, not migratory and never bring bees in from other apiaries, I don't have health issues that warrant their use)


----------



## Lauri

Here's one I messed up the newly drawn cup, but you see the interior development.









I wanted to tell this story FYI. But also so you know, although I treat for mites not only to protect my investments but to appeal to my need for what I consider competent animal husbandry, I still work towards the need for less treatments and less potentially residual toxic exposures. I am more into the science end of beekeeping so experiments keep it interesting.

As I say, if you took the use of virgin queens away from me, I'd have to change up my whole program and use treatments much more than I currently do to get the same result.

But Virgin queen use is _sustainable_. 

Unfortunately, many beekeepers are afraid of using them.

It's not likely mites will evolve fast enough to become immune to the effects of a good brood break, but they eventually do become resistant to mite treatments of the chemical kind, especially if overused and not rotated with other forms of management. Using treatments along with brood breaks is well known to be very effective. The trick is to invoke a brood break during the season without sacrificing the colonies performance and production. And not so labor intensive it is not practical. 

My quest for alternative mite management is in my realization If I don't get something sustainable figured out, I am setting myself up for eventual failure if the treatments I rely on eventually become no longer as effective or no longer available.

Whether you treat right now or not, every beekeeper should have a plan for the future if they want to continue with any kind of success.

A couple of my favorite quotes : "If you wait to prepare until there is a problem , it is usually too late"
& "Over prepare, then go with the flow"

What would you do if approved mite treatments you rely on were pulled from the market or were so expensive they were cost prohibitive? 
Didn't that happen to the commercial guys around 2012 when they regulated/ banned Amitraz from off label use? As I recall, there was some severe scrambling and losses for a while.


----------



## DanielD

gww said:


> Charlestonbees
> 
> 
> I believe member danial d had simular results when he started treating and started using foundation after 4 years of tf beekeeping. I am not talking for him and hope I have this right but am always curious of cause and effect.
> Thanks
> gww


Gww at this point i am assuming the foundation was the cause of my big increase of honey harvest. I did treat some hives last year one session in the fall, and did the same this year. My best colony this year was a swarm capture last year that I put into a hive and did nothing. I didn't feed it, treat it, or any special winterizing. It came out of winter and powered up hard, producing about 200 lbs. I am fairly sure it came from a friend's colony that's in a hive that never got treated for years. I have no idea if it's the same colony all that time. It's unlikely. I started this round of new colonies from one swarm capture in September of 2014. With splitting and 2 other swarm captures in 15, I am at 24 colonies. I expect losses from a couple that have been weak and/or insufficient winter prep by spring, but hope it's not too rough a loss. My OVA treatments were minimal and what I read, I should have hard losses all the time. I lost 2 overall so far, one in the late fall of 16 and a freeze out last spring when brood up time was hit with about 7° one night. The fall loss was, I found the colony dwindled with a supersedure cell opened up and a small virgin looking queen.
Last fall I spot checked some established colonies that have had since '15 and found less than 1% mites with alcohol wash but treated the older ones anyway. We will see what springtime being a. This year I felt overloaded and not too concerned if I have some losses. Last week's warm spell saw most of them with activity or buzzing inside, so I expect some bees in the spring and plan to make some nucs to sell instead of piles of honey.


----------



## Ian

I had supper with Gerry and Christine Rozema, Irene and Randy Oliver at the BCHPA this past October. Randy had some extremely interesting results come out his early operational mite sample trial. His only criteria was mite suppression. He was not looking for function. 
There were hives within his operation (1000 plus hives) which showed impressive mite suppression “ability” , then others which fell apart completely, those of which he’d identified, bombed with Formic and requeened.

I do believe an open mind is key...stretching mine ever so slowly. A plan slowly develops


----------



## gww

Danial D
What you do and your history always interest me expesially cause you are in the same state and so even though not that close to me, I feel it is closer climate wise then some. I kinda threw you under the bus here to show that even though I do what I do, I am willing to reconize how stuff works for others. I hope I was paying attention enough to not throw out untrue things and if I ever do, I expect to be called on it. I like knowing others experiances cause in my newness, it gives me things to think about and try for myself. 

I am glad you posted here with the whole story. I know I am new but have not lost a hive yet but then again, it aint spring yet either. Next year will be my third summer with bees so that poeple reading what I write can know my newness.

Cheers
gww
Ps lauri, I tried your flyback split from a differrent thread this year but had to do it with a queen cell cause I could not find the old queen and the hive may have already swarmed. It was my favorite split out of the few I tried.


----------



## DanielD

gww, I didn't think you were throwing me under the bus or saying anything that was not correct. I am glad you are interested in what's going on with my colonies, as I like to hear what's up with you. I haven't been active on the forums much lately, as I haven't had much interest in doing so. I would say we are very much in a similar climate, etc. I do think we are in a zone where there are feral bee colonies that can resist mite loads for a time. Spring will tell more of the story. My best queen made new queens for several more colonies, and none of them have been treated, to keep that line untreated and see what happens. They all seemed to go into winter very good like the original colony did last year. A blunder of mine lost the original queen though. I never lost a queen to silliness on my part till that one. When I write about losses, I didn't include failed queening of nucs that had to be combined with another colony, just losses due to die outs. 

Last winter I had some colonies that I was sure wouldn't make it till spring, and they are still kicking, maybe. I actually split off the queens of some to add a different queen line to it, but still kept the old queen split and they built up enough to winter this year, maybe. My problem this last summer was that I felt over extended and lost interest in pushing any farther with expanding, plus other issues I needed to tend to kept me from working them as I should have. I don't see that I want to go past what can fit on my property anymore, so this spring may have a sell off of nucs or just hold colony numbers. Of course, that might make a lot more 5 gallon buckets of honey that I am not doing a good job of selling so far.


----------



## msl

If beekeepers were forced(maby by cousmer pressure or honey testing) to follow pesticide lables we would see a lot more instrest in resistant stock. 

I say resistant stock as there allways will be a time and place when domestic live stock needs a helping hand or you face losses , and if you don't contoral a sick head of live stock you endanger the other wise healthy yard if the pathogen spreads. Basic animal husbandry, to suggest a some one should just let livestock die for the lack of a few pennys of prevention only makes sense to a zealot.

The flip side of continual and constant chemical intervention and off lable use, such as the illegal use of OA with supers on simply because its cheap and easy is also not the way forward. Unless some selection for resistance is made, stock can be made more susceptible .

Like most things the middle ground is likely the best path forward, IPM... and I don't mean sugar dusting as its often equated to in the bee world
The foundation is resistant stock, 2nd level is management , 3rd is targeted, effective chemical intervention as needed to prevent economic losses 
As a realworld example
2016 I made up 4 July nucs of sister cells, gave them all a broodless OAD in Nov
2017 t mite counts taken mounthly, they made till a late Oct broodless TX with the split(s) and drone culling.
They all were managed a bit differently (one was a fly back, one run for production and swarmed, one was run for production and had the queen pull start of the flow, one was broken up for spring nucs) I want to talk about what showed great results, the fly away/fly back split(learned form a lauri post)
On 4/7 I took one of the overwintered KTB nucs and move it 10', I pulled an open bar of open brood and the queen from it and placed it in a new nuc in the old location along with 2 bars of drawn comb.This leaves almost all the mites in the old hive. The old nuc in the new location drew cells and was broken up 3 ways mids summer the nucs were split again again giving me a lot of nucs going in to winter.
The queen right side was allowed to grow to full size, drawing out all that comb and making a harvest of 6 lbs, and I left a lot on the hive to insure it wintered well The other 2 sister nucs that were grown to full size, made 16 or so pounds between them 
now 6-8#s a hive isn't much, but it was a dry year with a VERY poor crop The guy next to me installed 18 packages on drawn comb(he took 100 losses last year) and had drawn supers... he made 6.6lbs per hive, No drawn comb and a KTBH vs langs
Now mites
The rolls were (per 300 bees) 6/26=2, 7/27=3, 8/23=2, 10/25 (brood less)=14
I did a 10/25 roll on neighbors bees to show him how, I kept losing count in the high 40s, 
No drawn comb and a KTBH vs langs I don't think it didn't hurt my honey production by much, I made a lot of nucs, and got by on one chemical TX a year. I suspect my crop would have been much larger if I had done the fly away in a full sized hive in stead of a 9 bar nuc =to 6/7 lang deeps

Now lets go a little more main stream... Perform the flyaway/flyback split in a lang and stack the hives a sold divider with the queen right on the bottom, hit the queen right side with OAV, come back in 22 days and hit the top box with OAV now thats its brood less. Now you have knocked the mites to almost 0. after the new queen is laying recombine and run for honey... 
your spring mite control and swarm control in one fell swoop, and if you have let the 2nd queen brood up a bit your getting a big population boost(OTS style) for bigger harvest. 
Targeted, effective and productive 
do that to the entire yard and you have put a big dent in the mite landscape. 

We should be looking at best management practices, and they come from bolth sides of the debate. 
We should be looking at the practices of those who have dealt with mite longer, and had miteasides start to fail 1st . 

unless we are migratory keepers we should as a whole look towards locally adapted stock…
http://www.coloss.org/the-gei-experiment/
showed when you move stocks, even the famous Avignon TF bes (that haven’t been treated sense what, 94? ) died and about 80days earlier then the local stock of the area.

If the 2 sides could get behind local stock we could see progress…. The TF crowd would need to see that treating a hive to save it and next year requeening with local stock, or pinching the queen and letting it open mate with local stock is a far superior plan to letting it die and bringing in forren replacements (again, and again), if we have more local bees alive come spring we will have more for sale, breaking the dependence on imported stock, and alowing local stock to take hold

The hard core treaters will need to see the value in selecting for restiance and that at some point you need to start elimating lines that require contestant chemical matiance and not let them persist in your yard, you do need to cull from time to time. 
Randy Olver said something to the effect 80% of the mites are in 20% of the hives (I don’t rember the exact numbers ) as Ian notes when he finds a “mite candy” hive it gets blasted with formic and requened he dosent fuss aroound w

baybee’s epic battle comes to mind http://www.beesource.com/forums/showthread.php?340377-high-mite-drop-after-OAV


baybee said:


> Total treatment:
> 4 OAVs 5 days apart: Aug 23 - Sept 8;
> full-dose MAQS: Sept 14;
> 5 OAVs 5 days apart: Oct 25 - Nov 14;
> full-dose MAQS: Nov 20
> 3 OAVs 4 days apart: Dec 28 - Jan 6.


Does anyone realy, and I mean truly, want to keep bees like this? 
In my opion, when you have a problem hive or set of hives, at some point you need to submit the queen to the Mike Plamer hive tool test, let it go broodless, hammer the mites with a sold targeted TX and put in new gentinicks. In some cases it may cost you some of the honey crop from that hive this season if you have to pull supers early and put them on other hives to finish, while you deal with this, or spending the extra $$ on MAQS vs OA to keep the supers on… but ending that genetic line will pay dividends down the road and if they are that compromised by the mites they are likly not making a great crop to start with

once you get an areas mite load down, and its resistance up TF becomes easier and less TXs are needed to protect economic performance A win win 

By working together on common ground we would bolth benefit.. but instead we chose to go round and round, a snake eating its own tail in the dark obliviously.

I realy wish we could all be a little more Hippie….. Interested in community effort and respectful of nature yet “chemistry” is still part of our culture :lpf::lpf::lpf:


----------



## gww

Danial
You told me to feed my little bitty warre a pint/quart a day cause you had good luck getting those little ones like that through. Me being lazy like I am, just added a gal on top at one time. I don't know what the future holds but that little cluster in that warre was still alive the last flying day we had after that big cold spell. 

Selling honey (or anything) scares the heck out of me. I don't think I am going to be good at it. You are still working and have more going on then me. I have not wanted to move bees to other places and I am retired and so I feel you on the getting overwhelmed. 

I wish you the best and your advice to me has always been sound advice.
Cheers
gww


----------



## 1102009

Lauri,
many thanks. Your posts are great learning.

msl,


> If the 2 sides could get behind local stock we could see progress…. The TF crowd would need to see that treating a hive to save it and next year requeening with local stock, or pinching the queen and letting it open mate with local stock is a far superior plan to letting it die and bringing in forren replacements (again, and again), if we have more local bees alive come spring we will have more for sale, breaking the dependence on imported stock, and alowing local stock to take hold
> 
> The hard core treaters will need to see the value in selecting for restiance and that at some point you need to start elimating lines that require contestant chemical matiance and not let them persist in your yard, you do need to cull from time to time.


:thumbsup:
I will probably requeen with stock from resistance breeding ( not local) because we have only susceptible stock around which must be treated all the time. I would prefer local.

I had my first hive dying in spite of treatments ( done by my prof. mentor then) a terrible experience for a newbie. If I had gone tf then I could have blamed myself , but thoughts were : why treat if they die anyway.

First year tf zero losses. Second year 2/3 losses, but most were queen problems and mistakes I did because of lack of experience.

I changed my methods and will see what happens now. I believe I have to go for 2 more seasons before being able to blame my losses on the mites and not on my mangements or on environment.

Some members told me I will need 5 years to evaluate my situation and decide how to go on and about the tf possibilities. That´s true.


----------



## tnmtn

mdohertyjr said:


> In my first year, we did not treat. In our second year, we were able to split to 11 hives. Those 11 hives were not treated. Before Thanksgiving all 11 hives crashed and died.
> 
> Crawling bee's, mite droppings, deformed wings, prove that mites killed all 11 hives.
> 
> We now treat.


More or less my same experience. Starting over come spring with a new resolve to test and treat regularly. It's too expensive for a "hobby" where we lose everything we worked for.


----------



## Eduardo Gomes

I treat (about 600 hives). 

In the biennium 2016-2017 less than 2% of my hives perished due to varroa. 
In the 2017/2018 biennium so far 0% mortality due to varroa. 

From what I read in BS some people do not treat because of the aspects related to residues in honey and residues in the wax. 

I am currently more concerned about the chemical residues resulting from the dishwashing where I eat every day. I'm not the only one:scratch:
http://readynutrition.com/resources...icals-is-right-inside-our-own-homes_03092014/
https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=43392.0


----------



## Virgil

The difference between my bees when I had a laissez-faire attitudes towards varroa monitoring and treatment and after I started to take it seriously with alcohol washes and treatments if required is night and day. In my bees, if I can keep varroa below 2-3% the colonies are noticeably more vigorous than those with higher counts. 

I think however there is still a long way to go for beekeepers to understand the importance of monitoring varroa if you treat or not. If you do treat knowing varroa load helps you treat when is needed, if you don't treat varroa counts give a fair indication of how hives are coping.

It is easy to become enamoured by Internet gurus who claim some magical method of keeping bees with almost no effort, I've fallen for them myself more than once. I'm now much more influenced by members of my bee club who keep bees I would want to keep - strong colonies that over winter and are a pleasure to work. I'm sure we know beekeepers that will tell you how you should do it while have weak, dying bees themselves.

Seeing is believing.


----------



## CLSranch

Nice experiments Lauri
gww Mareks (I can't remember how you spelled it) and yes hog raisers usually cull the young.
Virgil good good point. If been doing what I (professionally, career not bees) do for 14 years now. At year 2,3,5 and still today I've tried to learn from everyone. Earlier on Mostly from those who have been at it awhile. Then and now (I'm good at what I do, not bragging) I've noticed people who have done this long enough to know what they are doing. And while trying to learn a better way for me, instead I learned they suck and will NEVER be all that good.

Now to do with bee's. In my early research after getting started I noticed several successful beeks who didn't treat didn't do a whole lot of extra, then Mich B Lazy beekeeping and liked it. Then watched A LOT of beginer classes from various clubs. ALL talked about treating and it HAD to be done every time at X time of year. Holy cow theirs a lot more work. I agree with trying to be treatment free. That being said don't heckle me.

Also reading GRIT or Mother Earth News about gardening. (this has a some similarities to MBs not treating) It stating that to be rid of a large amount of pest to NOT treat the garden. Keeping certain bugs alive they keep other bugs down. Such as wasp eat lay/eggs in worms and spiders. Certain good mites attack bad mites. And with certain crushing of tomato worms and a few others instead of spraying the whole garden, the dirt daubers (because I Kill the red wasp regardless) will take care of other things such as ear worms. Spiders will take care of other things. Good mites eating bad mites. Could be used in the case of varroa. Maybe.
I have sprayed a whole pasture because ticks and fleas were so bad in a place I moved into. No problem after one spraying. Bee's made it. I wasn't keeping bee's at the time but they were in my garden and covering my neighbors garden.

Back to bee's and off topic. Wax moths. Has anyone thought about if a bug zapper could help with wax moths. I know even though some don't realize that they are meant to just lure them away from the front door so they are not flying in the house when you open the door, NOT that they actually kill enough to make a difference. Could that help hives in yard if it's close to your house. Maybe a new forum topic.


----------



## Lauri

SiWolKe said:


> Lauri,
> many thanks. Your posts are great learning.


Those mating nucs are overwintering right now. (divided deep nucs with a colony on each side-combined with other mating nuc resources late summer/fall for overwintering prep) They received no treatment until late Nov when I did an OAV. Second one in Dec when they were likely broodless. I'll see how they come out of winter.










(Photo taken 1-13-18)
View attachment 37102


OAV was not legal in my State until last year. I got my Provap in December 2016 and only did one wintertime OAV treatment, late December and My application methods were a little rough until I got the hang of it.









This fall and winter I did multiple treatments. I am looking forward to seeing if I come out of winter in better shape. I have not been one to do spring mite treatments, but every season as it progresses I always see a couple that would certainly have benefited from a spring treatment. I'm trying to avoid that by timely and thorough OAV winter treatments.


----------



## vtbeeguy

In my humble opinion no greater damage is currently being done to our new beekeepers than the damage by some of the "gurus" on here shoving treatment free down the throats of every newb who asks a question. I'm sure if you have at least a dozen hives and are ok with constant crashes, massive splitting to simply maintain hive #s each year, and are either into buying bees constantly as well or are someplace you can catch lots of swarms then you could be "treatment free" and live merrily. However when you have a first year beek or worse one without bees yet asking what should I do for x,y,and z and in swoops people saying "we'll I don't treat and I'm successful so don't treat either" you are setting that newb up for failure. Just think about it what's the difference between you? First year vs 5, 10, or 40 years keeping bees. New beeks face countless struggles and issues on their way to surviving the first few years, building their apiary to where they want it, learning the basics, and understanding what a normal healthy hive looks like. They are never going to stick with it if they never taste success. 
As for brood breaks themselves as a form a varroa control pretty sure Randy Oliver has a graph on his site showing it does essentially nothing. Now a brood break combined with some other sort of treatment very effective. Honestly if brood breaks worked by themselves why do our northern colonies not come out of winter with less mites than when they went in? It don't hold water.
If treatment free is truly doable why don't some of the major "pushers" of said philosophy open the books on their apiary? How many hives do you have? How many splits did you make? How many queens you produce each year? #s of honey produced and total losses for the year? If it can be done and is something that you believe repeatable shouldn't be a problem providing some proof of it.


----------



## 1102009

humble opinion? :scratch:

I don´t think tf is being shoved down the throats because people interested in tf beekeeping normally have the idea beforehand.
And the tf "gurus" as you call them, are very helpful with all questions to beekeeping aside from tf.

That said treating was shoved down my throat much more when I posted I wanted to be tf. I was called a bee killer and irresponsible...but there is the tf forum thankfully.


----------



## Lauri

vtbeeguy said:


> As for brood breaks themselves as a form a varroa control pretty sure Randy Oliver has a graph on his site showing it does essentially nothing. Now a brood break combined with some other sort of treatment very effective. Honestly if brood breaks worked by themselves why do our northern colonies not come out of winter with less mites than when they went in? It don't hold water.


It's true a brood break is not always enough. But I've seen enough nucs turned around by just placing a capped cell in them to have faith it knocks the heck out of the mites and usually gets that nuc back on track. Possibly better genetics and a new vigorous young queen doesn't hurt. If done in combination with a treatment, sure it is going to be very effective. But I do run them without treatments with anything I may want to graft from down the road or to evaluate daughters performance and resistance, so I can keep an eye on what my bees can do on their own.

If I wasn't rearing queens, It would be different. I would treat them all at that broodless time.
If you have more than a few hives though, it would take some serious coordinating in that few days when your window opens, then slams shut. Using a just started queen cell would extend that window.


----------



## psm1212

I look at varroa destructor in the same way I see the snakehead fish or the Burmese python. They are an invasive species that were placed here by artificial means (man) into an ecosystem that did not have the benefit of thousands of years to adapt to its presence. It is in many ways an Apex predator that, but for a healthy market that demands the artificial proliferation of the honey bee, could wipe out the native species (well, not truly native). I think it borders on hubris to believe that we will somehow evolve or adapt the honey bee in a matter of a few years, or even decades, to deal with this invasive species by simply leaving it alone. 

It is one thing to breed for an EXISTING trait. I can select from cows with shorter legs, or chickens that do not have as strong of a brood instinct, or honey bee queens with more gentle offspring. 

IF I could readily identify and scientifically prove the existence of the strong trait of mite biting, or mite hygiene, or virus resistance within a honey bee queen, then I suppose I could begin my program of selection.

However, I am not convinced that this trait actually EXISTS. Yes, some might have more success than others. Some might seem to survive more than others. But have we isolated the trait we want? Other than just the trait of plain survival?

There has been a lot of talk, a lot of studies and a lot of proclaimed successes. We all know that there will be a very healthy market for a scientifically proven queen line that has this mythical trait. And yet, I still cannot buy one. 

Is it there? I have my doubts. But I want it to be true as badly as any tf beek out there. Good luck.


----------



## gww

vtbeeguy
However, the guys that are doing it know what they are doing wether they feel the need to prove it or not. I saw four new members join the forum this year with all of them saying they had bees for three years and did not treat and thier bees were still alive. I don't discount the horror stories of others who have tried it and had a bad experiance either. 

Never being around bees at all when I started, I didn't treat but it wasn't because I was a purist and against treatment but more that I already did not know what I was doing even after reading for a year and learning how to treat was just one more thing to maby get to someday but learning how to feed with out robbing and how to inspect a hive came first and even that was pretty intimidating. 

Since I read a year before getting bees, I did know the risk and so to me, if you know the risk, you get to make the choice. I expected all my hives to die but they lived. I still expect them to die and they may but have not yet. Even if it does go bad, I am further along and have other knowlage of bee keeping gained and will also be able to see what differrence treating makes cause I have experiance not treating and should be able to see the differrence. 

The numbers of people keeping bees is like 50% don't treat. I do not question for one second that poeple on this thread that talk about trying it and having a bad experiance. Just as I don't question that squarepeg is having the success he is having and he did give those numbers you talk of.

I didn't treat cause I didn't know how and did not prioritze learning that first. But I did know the risk and made a decission to try it knowing those risk. My view was that you don't know till you try.

I would not be one that says it will work for everyone but would also say you don't know untill you try. So if you were brand new and it was one of the things you would like, now is the time to try it. Know the risk, if it goes bad, make what adjustments you need to make. It would depend on your over all goals and why you are keeping bees. 

I would say of those four people that joined the forum that had a couple of years treatment free and thier bees were alive. They may not have did it on purpose but more just got some bees and got lucky cause they had not learned enough to "know better". However, they do know now what they have already did. I don't even write this saying I know my nine hives will be alive come april, only that they are alive now.

I do know when you keep live animals or bugs, you take some risk of them dieing. I went to a bee club meeting and sevaral new beekeepers had lost all thier bees and it had nothing to do with wether they treated or not but more to do with them being new. The guy that still had bees had kept them for 20 years and does not treat. He had one to sell me and nobody else local did.

I don't stand here and say it will work for everyone cause the post on here prove that but also think that if that is what a person wants to end up with, there is only one way to try it and see. 

I may treat someday just to see but am very happy that I have not yet just to see also.

I wouldn't think of myself as a pusher cause I don't care what you do and wish whatever it is that you do well. I do think your position is kind of a pusher position cause it discounts what others know they have did wether they prove it to you are not. Even if they tried to prove it to you, you would have to believe what they told you.

I think the best way to let a newby start beekeeping is to tell him of the options and the risk and let him that spends the money decide. Tell him that just buying bees does not mean something can not go wrong and that they may die. Tell him when he is inspecting he might kill the queen. Let him know he can treat if he decides to and that oct might be too late if he makes that decission.

Tell him open feeding by a newly hived package may cause robbing.

Tell him there are pushers of all philosopheis and some successes and failures for new guys on all sides and he can decide. 

Just so you know. I don't do brood breaks due to mites. I do make any split I was going to make anyway in a mite friendly way. I have not tried to cull drone comb to get rid of mites. 

I try to stop swarming though I am not good at that yet.

Everybody can look at somebody else and say I could get more out of what he has but what is important is is the person doing it getting enough for hisself that it is worth doing. The one with the sweat in the game is the one who gets to decide when he is happy with what he is getting.
Cheers
gww
Ps I see by the responces that I type pretty slow


----------



## Ian

squarepeg, hows your treatment free project coming along ?


----------



## gww

Ian
I am not squarepeg but do read his thread and he made $600 per hive after takeing out the cost of building a bunch of new hive bodies.
I think he has lost 2 or three hives this year so far.
Cheers
gww


----------



## squarepeg

vtbeeguy said:


> If treatment free is truly doable why don't some of the major "pushers" of said philosophy open the books on their apiary?


i certainly do not consider myself a "pusher" of any philosophy, but there are several of us in my area are having year after year success with survival and honey production while keeping bees off treatments.

see post 1331 on this page for 2015-2017 tallies:

http://www.beesource.com/forums/sho...eg-2015-2018-treatment-free-experience/page34

please post your numbers so that we can do a side by side comparison.


----------



## msl

vtbeeguy said:


> In my humble opinion no greater damage is currently being done to our new beekeepers than the damage by some of the "gurus" on here shoving treatment free down the throats of every newb who asks a question.


perhaps in the past... a quick look at the BIP says the numbers of TF keepers are crashing, now at about 1/2 the 10 year advrage with 2/3s less hives being manged TF. TF is failing them and they quit or change.....I Blame the let them die message...it makes no sence to tell some one that there package bees will "develop" anything... I spoke out about this being a poor path http://www.beesource.com/forums/sho...tead-of-bond-as-the-path-to-TF-for-new-back-y 



vtbeeguy said:


> As for brood breaks themselves as a form a varroa control pretty sure Randy Oliver has a graph on his site showing it does essentially nothing. Now a brood break combined with some other sort of treatment very effective. Honestly if brood breaks worked by themselves why do our northern colonies not come out of winter with less mites than when they went in? It don't hold water.


I haven't seen this graph... his mite model and the research of outhers says it has an impact around 40% I see iy in my yard as well when the dearth hits, my aug roll are lower, or the same as the July rolls. 
enough on it own maby in some places, not in a lot of outhers...but a tool in the bag, yes



> IF I could readily identify and scientifically prove the existence of the strong trait of mite biting, or mite hygiene, or virus resistance within a honey bee queen, then I suppose I could begin my program of selection


Its easy, mite counts! 
you select for hives that resist the build up of the mite population. You don't need the "how" just the end result... ie you don't need to know /test for fast twitch vs slow twitch mussels, you just breed from the fastest or strongest horses in your program.


----------



## 1102009

The different opinions on what influences bee health are very interesting, for example:



> In recent years, beekeepers on several continents have been suffering heavy losses of colonies. If we systematically investigate factors causing the losses, we can justifiably ask whether the way in which honey bees are kept is part of the problem. Could hive design, frames, foundation, intrusion, artificial queen breeding, drone suppression, queen excluders, artificial feeding, medication, transhumance and overstocking - all elements of modern beekeeping - be reducing the vitality of bees?


David Heaf




> Honey bees are increasingly important in the pollination of crops and wild plants. Recent reports of the weakening and periodical high losses of managed honey bee colonies have alarmed beekeeper, farmers and scientists. Infestations with the ectoparasitic mite Varroa destructor in combination with its associated viruses have been identified as a crucial driver of these health problems.


From the lithium chloride link Bernhard Heuvel provided recently.


----------



## Scott Gough

squarepeg said:


> i certainly do not consider myself a "pusher" of any philosophy, but there are several of us in my area are having year after year success with survival and honey production while keeping bees off treatments.
> 
> see post 1331 on this page for 2015-2017 tallies:
> 
> http://www.beesource.com/forums/sho...eg-2015-2018-treatment-free-experience/page34
> 
> please post your numbers so that we can do a side by side comparison.


Looks like the post you are referring to is on Page 67 Post 1331...

http://www.beesource.com/forums/sho...eg-2015-2018-treatment-free-experience/page67


----------



## squarepeg

(the exact page number depends on how the pages are formatted on your device, for me it's page 34, should be post 1331 for everyone)


----------



## gww

msl


> perhaps in the past... a quick look at the BIP says the numbers of TF keepers are crashing, now at about 1/2 the 10 year advrage with 2/3s less hives being manged TF. TF is failing them and they quit or change.....I Blame the let them die message...it makes no sence to tell some one that there package bees will "develop" anything... I spoke out about this being a poor path http://www.beesource.com/forums/show...for-new-back-y


Bip is interesting when you look at the surveys. 
Treating bee keepers lost 34 percent and non treaters lost 43 percent. But of course if you dig further.
Those that replaced the queen lost almost the reverse of the mite numbers and the ones that did not replace had less loss and then the screened bottom board was reversed again with screened bottom boards losing less then other. In the end there is not more then 10 percent differrence in the survey numbers and unless you knew the bee keeping coctail, you can not attribute one single thing to the numbers. With the right busness plan and the differrence between 30 and 40 percent is not that bad. It is all about taking it all and comeing up to a compermise position that is giving enough to make it worth doing.

It is like solar, you need a big enough battery cause of when the sun don't shine but you can only have a big enough battery that your solar can charge at a certain rate for it to work and also so there is not too much waste. Winter tilt is differrent then summer tilt and so you have to add up a compermise that gives enough of both and you want air conditioning but to get it you have to decide if having too much power for nine months when you don't need air is worth the cost.

Those are numbers (even the bad ones) that can be worked with and this is expecially true when they are just average numbers that some will be worse then but some will beat consistantly. I don't think even treaters are satisfied with the posted 34 percent average. 
Cheers
gww


----------



## GregB

As for me, TF is the only way to go to make any sense...
Otherwise, I don't even care to keep bees (seen most of it already as-is - enough). 
No challenge, and no fun, and no long-term utility in keeping medicated bees. 
Medicating is the dead-end, folks.


----------



## gww

I would put one cavate to my view. I take exactly the opposite view on it being bad to advise a new bee keeper to start treatment free. I think if that is what they want then they might as well try it. If, however I already had a succesful buisness that was putting shoes on my kids feet and was having no problims and was a treater, I would not go cold turky and mess up my game plan that was working. I might do small expermentation but would be pretty sure of myself before switching over from something that was working to something I was just trying.

You got to talk from where you are.
Cheers
gww


----------



## GregB

gww said:


> ... If, however I already had a succesful buisness.....gww


Most people arguing here TF vs. Medicated don't really depend on the bees for their way of life.

Those who are in serious business and depend on the bees for living, they have no time or desire to argue here.
They just go about the business as needed. 
I would not worry about them doing some crazy moves.


----------



## johno

Well here we go again all smoke and mirrors and no substance. Square why don't you tell us how your mite counts were in mid summer and how they were in the fall, or any other beekeepers who do not care about mites on there bees. First of all are you keeping resistant bees or are you keeping benign mites or do you have mites at all because if you cannot answer these questions you yourself do not know why your bees are alive while others die and most probably yours could die if moved to a different location. We need answers not dreams.
Johno


----------



## gww

Greg
There are bigger bee keepers that are treatment free. One of my recent post on this thread was about zelots pushing for one way. I like to think of my postion as more of open minded and not discounting other peoples experiances. So I don't think little ole me is going to influince successful poeple that know more then me and are proving it by doing it. I just posted it so that those who are reading this thread know that I lean one way but am also willing to reconize why people do what they do. They work from where they are sitting.
Cheers
gww


----------



## gww

johno


> First of all are you keeping resistant bees or are you keeping benign mites or do you have mites at all because if you cannot answer these questions you yourself do not know why your bees are alive while others die and most probably yours could die if moved to a different location. We need answers not dreams.


By this logic it could be said there are a whole bunch of people that are treating now and would not have to be cause thier bees would live.

Doing something is not smoke and mirrors cause it is being done. I don't think claims were made that everyone has the same success and even sientist are still guessing why it is working in some places. They make the same guesses you made on benigh mites and such. You have nothing new but a repeat guess of why you think it works for Square. The point is, it is working for him and others. Yes, new things may come along and change that and you might get a differrent flue then what might have been around last year. That is the nature of nature. Now if your position is there is never adjustments made in nature, there is probly enough proof to prove that wrong.
Square peg is not the only person that gets by with out treating and yes, some have had no luck but that doesn't mean that some that do have luck is not true. They killed a whole bunch of chickens in korea due to a chicken virus but I am still keeping chickens. Some poeple have burnt hives due to foul brood but poeple still keep bees with out using antibiotics. 
I hear you but don't buy what you say. 
Cheers
gww


----------



## rwurster

I've heard TF works exceedingly well somewhere in Nebraska :lookout:

+1 Johno @ benign mites :lpf:


----------



## gww

There are a few studies out there that show that bees with long standing mite pressure have made mites a bit more benign but supressing the mite reprodution. The sientist don't know how they are doing that but do know it is happening.
Just saying.
Cheers
gww


----------



## johno

Gww I think you miss the point, when I sample my bees and my mite level is above 3% in mid summer I try to lower my mite count because I know my bees are susceptible to DWV or whatever other viruses they may be carrying. Now there must be a reason someone who cares not about his miteload and still keeps his bees and succeeds. I would like to know how this is done. Unfortunately very little useful information seems to come from this quarter especially about mite loads. smoke and mirrors, because no tangible answers are forthcoming. Some say everything works if you let it but for me everything will die if I let it. The only feral bees in my area are a few swarms that have escaped from my yards. So very little progress is being made in the search for the perfect stock all round.
Johno


----------



## msl

Johno hits the nail on the head and that is why I am so data driven... be it TF or Fad fogger cures.....show me the numbers 
however I think SP has doen a good job documenting his program, most of what you want is there... counts, losses, yealds.. yes its deep in a long thread, but if you feel like digging its there.

The issue is simple its realy hard to repucate the results of TF relibuily, its real easy to repucate the results of cems

Side note, will never have perfect all around stock... you cant buy a bunch of VT Holstein milk cows turn them out freerange in TX and expect them to do well, any more then sticking a longhorn in milk barn is a good idea.


----------



## clyderoad

JWChesnut said:


> The non-treated yards have consistently suffered high mortality. No instant "evolution" to "survivor" bees has occured. I consider TF beekeeping a pure fraud.


My experiments have yielded the same results. I also consider TF beekeeping a fraud, which is very easily perpetrated for reasons unknown to me.


----------



## gww

johno
I see your point and don't discount your experiance. I believe the other guys on this site that say they have had horrible experiances. I am the type that thinks you have to do what you have to do to keep your bees alive or why have bees. I do not keep bees for the bees, I keep bees for what they might give me.

I do say this also though. When I decided I was going to just see what happenned, I did not pre judge the out come but more just tried it hoping for the best and expecting the worse. The worse may still happen. I do not keep counts cause I figure who needs them if I am refusing to do anything about them anyway. So if my bees did live, I would just be able to say that and not really give the reasons why. So though I would have no ill will to others, I also don't feel like becoming a sientist to help everyone else. I don't want to hurt them either. So I just say what works for me and tell the truth on it but don't say it will work for you. My view is that you have to try it.

Ok, you tried it and it doesn't work. I don't have the answer for that. The possibilities are that may change someday like it has changed from the beginning where when the mites showed up 90 percent of the wild hives died but now they have stable populations. Enough time or other factors may have held your area back in this development and so in my mind, it might still be a possible future for your areas but it is not there yet and you have to deal with realities.

I do know that all the bees are not all the same and I am sure all the mites and virouses are not the same and this is why even with people you will have cluster outbreaks of disiese. Things evolve in and evolve out. I think in your area that if somebody is willing to eat the losses and keep the pressure on that it might evolve faster but just like me taking mite counts and posting them, it would not be your responcibility to be the one to do it for everyone else.

I do think with the right work, it might be possible to make all places treatment free but doing that would not be pain free and so I don't blame anyone or think it is their responcibility to be the one. Plus, I could even be wrong that it is possible. It is possible where I am for whatever reason and that could change or it could even get better. I can't see not doing it if it is working just like if I was in your shoes, I could not see me being the one to try and make it happen if I was getting along fine with out it. Yes, I am selfish enough to relie on others to do it for me.

beekeeping is kinda funny and every one sorta has to look at what is out there and try a few things untill he is getting what he needs for his bees. Plus what is wanted out of bees is also diverse. Sometimes there is no one shoe fitts all and you gotta do what you gotta do.

I don't have answers, I just don't discount the possibilities out of hand.
Cheers
gww


----------



## msl

clyderoad-the reason is simple...
Anti Big AG, Anti establishment sells, we want to believe we are sooooo much smarter/better then the geunration before us. Instead of learning lessons form them we discount there experience and are worce for it...


----------



## cbay

gww said:


> It is possible where I am for whatever reason and that could change or it could even get better.


Interesting you say that, i remember someone on the forum mentioning that not too far from here the area had decent TF results. Didn't realize an "area" could play a factor..?
The only beekeeper that i know is 100% treatment free and has decent success. Success is relative - but he is sustainable for his goals. He's always trying out different queens but from what i can tell he hasn't landed on any specific queen genetics that he breeds from. Example, last year he bought an II VSH queen and did some grafting from her.
I was afraid to chance it starting out and honestly the more i learn the harder it is becoming to see changing in the future.


----------



## Mike Gillmore

squarepeg,

I think you have opened up Pandora's Box and created a new Frankenstein. My bet is that this will be the longest thread in Beesource history. ​

Back to the topic..... 
I'm not a professional beekeeper, have never had more than 25 hives, but I've been at this for a while. Kept bees in the late 70's (pre-Varroa Mite) and still keeping bees now in the present "Varroa" era. Based on my own personal experiences, and what I've gleaned from other beekeepers accounts around the country, I'm convinced that Treatment/TF success is largely dependent upon "regional" conditions. 

If an area is not saturated with genetics that demonstrate varroa resistance, good luck going treatment free. I went down the TF path some years back, prompted by my desire to raise my bees in the most natural conditions as possible. Tried to do everything right. Small Cell, bought Hygenic mite resistant queens, used clean chemical free comb, no treatments. Still, lost almost all my hives to mite pressure. 

I believe there are some segments of the country where successful TF beekeeping is possible. But where my bees reside, it's a losing proposition. Beekeepers need to understand their surroundings, and do what is necessary to keep their bees healthy and thriving. To this end I now use the most effective treatments available with the least amount of negative side effects on the bees health. If you are in an area where TF is possible, go for it. 

My 2 cents.​


----------



## gww

Cbay
If you are happy with your results, keep doing what you are doing. The key to me is if the person that is doing the work is happy with his results.
Oldtimer told me one time that if I kept the bees like the treatment free guy I got them from kept them, I should have the same results as him. Then the question is, are those results good enough? I have not lost any hives yet. I am not sure that if I lost 30 percent but was still ending every year with more hives then I had the year before, if that would bother me even if I could do more work and improve that result. The thing is, there is always some way for improvement in life but most don't take advantage of it due to the work and being happy with where they are.
Cheers
gww


----------



## rwurster

You're right about one thing gww, it isn't someones responsibility to record their experience for the benefit of others. Doubters can get out of the arm chair and try techniques themselves then report their own "scientific" findings. Funny how those who claim to have open minds are often the most critical. I remember when squarepeg started his thread. He deserves some applause for being transparent with his techniques and findings, that takes some guts.

The other thing people mistake is TF being synonymous with Management Free. TF requires extensive management and a good sense of timing. Starting grafts, pinching queens, culling drones, doing splits all to battle mites. All that energy with the mite crash looming over you. All my tf stock came from the old parts of town from captured swarms and to be honest they always did pretty well. The mite rolls were always pretty consistent (leaving out years of data intentionally ). Hygenic bees :lpf:Selling people what they desperately want :thumbsup:

That's a lot of work once you get over 10 hives, 20 hives, whatever. A little OA and your apiary doubles and doubles and doubles


----------



## msl

cbay said:


> Didn't realize an "area" could play a factor..?.


Were you keep makes a huge impact. Area mite loads (invastion rates), background gentincts, nutrition, loacal effects like brood breaks, etc 

pulling numbers from the BIP
If you look at square pegs state of AL the 5 year advrage for a TF keeper is 26.1% losses (50 and under hive group)
in johno's neck of the woods (VA) even if you treat you lose 32.1 and the TF guy will lose 42%
In GWW's MO TF lose 33.2%

You look at the numbers and you can see why SP feels it's no problem and johno can't see how its a possibly and Gww would feel the losses are execptabul 

AR is 28.3% TF losses, what happen to Sol when he moved to a state that takes 47% TF losses ?

In my state a few years after I started the TF losses were 28.5% (2011), the next year 39.1%, the year after 40.4, last year (2017) 61.8!!!!! I don't keep TF at the moment, and haven't for a while, the growing losses were too much.. at 28.5% its reasanuble to tell fokes to make a go of it if they want the risk...at 61.% they are just fulling them selfs about there chances and that is realy bad advice 

were you keep bees MATTERS, maby more then anything elce... and there are areas (bolth state and micro climates) were it is not reasonable to keep TF and thats a part of the discourse that needs attention.



> The other thing people mistake is TF being synonymous with Management Free. TF requires extensive management





> That's a lot of work once you get over 10 hives, 20 hives, whatever. A little OA and your apiary doubles and doubles and doubles


well put!!
if your out side one of the sweet spots its a ruff go. once I did a little oad my hive count expanded rappidaly


----------



## gww

rwurster


> I remember when squarepeg started his thread. He deserves some applause for being transparent with his techniques and findings, that takes some guts.


:thumbsup:
gww


----------



## johno

We are still no nearer to the answer, do you have resistant bees or benign mites! I give up.
Johno


----------



## Delta Bay

> The other thing people mistake is TF being synonymous with Management Free.


This says a lot! Which begs the question, how is chemical treatment management doing anything to improve the bee stock in regards to varroa and disease resistance? With TF at least there is a definite ability to select and cull appropriately.

For both sides what are your grand plans to improve beekeeping in your localities?

Here's a few ideas leaning toward the treatment free groups.

http://www.pedigreeapis.org/biblio/artcl/MEAMcNsurvivor14en.html


----------



## rwurster

Hahaha Johno, that begs some philosophizing. If we had resistant bees, would there be benign mites? Or maybe its, if we had benign mites would there be resistant bees? :ws:


----------



## gww

johno
All I can say is that I have mites and bees and both are alive.
Cheers
gww


----------



## JRG13

Johno, it's an interesting question and we've seen both sides of the story in various studies or examples. I think location plays a strong role, in terms of mite pressure and colony health. Some places seem better than others, and one of the common factors to me, is these areas are quite productive in terms of honey or at least, above average. The other thing I've noticed, is the TF group really grasps onto certain concepts, typically ones leaning towards more healthy/sustainable concepts w/o any other real understanding of the biology, biochemistry, or sometimes just the very basic theory of the thing. For instance, someone signed me up into the TF FB group, and I was trying to discuss how actual breeding is a much stronger selector than natural selection. Of course, this concept was immediately dismissed, nature has been selecting for millions, well, billions of years, how can we compete, but the concept is totally lost on them, that yes, nature is a good selector, typically with broad strokes, but look at what we can do in a short time in teasing out and isolating variation and really selecting for the fringe gene expression that can really get you good results. Also, the counter argument is pointed to something Randy Oliver posted, on selective breeding and the ultimate loss of other traits that comes of it.... yes, this may happen, but then again, look at what the argument is for getting mite resistance... stop treating and yes, maybe we'll lose 80-90% or more, but what's left will be the bees we need to live in balance with varroa.... ok, but now look at what your genetic diversity will be... essentially a huge bottleneck will be created but this is way better than selective breeding.... I just find it funny, that their counter argument is typically very contrary to their concepts as well, but they never really make that realization..... they want to maintain diversity, but yet, the whole theory behind TF breeding is to pull from a very narrow genetic pool and find some local adaptation that typically doesn't hold up elsewhere or under areas of higher selective pressure.

At the same time, I don't discredit any success I hear about. I believe there can be success, but when you look at the numbers it's usually on smaller scales. Even when looking at case studies such as the Gotland experiment and the Arnot forest bees... it's a handful of colonies they're referencing and they stay fairly isolated. To get back to some sense though, I think it is a two pronged approach, when you look at the philosophy of not treating, or the Gotland experiment, I think two criteria have to be met and it also answers Johno's question.... it's both. The colonies that survive have bees that tolerate or deal with the mites, and the mites that survive will be the less virulent mites, when both of these criteria are met, those are the hives that survive these studies and maintain the balance.


----------



## JRG13

Delta Bay said:


> This says a lot! Which begs the question, how is chemical treatment management doing anything to improve the bee stock in regards to varroa and disease resistance? With TF at least there is a definite ability to select and cull appropriately.
> 
> For both sides what are your grand plans to improve beekeeping in your localities?
> 
> Here's a few ideas leaning toward the treatment free groups.
> 
> http://www.pedigreeapis.org/biblio/artcl/MEAMcNsurvivor14en.html


I made this realization years ago on my own, although I don't limit myself to local genetics. I want to see proven heritability that holds up in a broad range, not just local adaptation. Luckily I live in an area that seems to have very high pressure, which makes it somewhat difficult but also that if I do see some resistance, its actually something tangible and will hold up in most areas.


----------



## Dan the bee guy

If you can be treatment free and your bees live good for you! Your one of the lucky ones! If I want to have bees I have to treat. Mixing of the bees in the almonds mixes mites and viruses. So one question do the guys with bees without treatment mix their bees with other bees, is isolation the reason?


----------



## gww

jrg13
Just my view right now. The problim with selective breeding is that even on the bees that are being studied with the exception of a few traits, the sientist don't know how the bees are doing what they are doing. They know some things are happining but not the why. 

So the risk is missing something important. However, I am one of those guys that has no real ideal about how stuff works. I read the studies that I can't understand and so read them several times and get what I get and look for trends across the studies and still don't really understand. I understand that they say vhs on its own is not enough and stuff like that but in the end it mostly seems to be theories that will still need to be tested out. In other words, best guess. And they are working pretty hard at it.

So far it does not seem like anyone can say the have the answer. On a base level, just knowing it is happening has to be enough for a dummy like me to try it and see if I get lucky and then I guess why I might be getting lucky.
The big guys that want to sell something and are working towards that with all thier energy will probly come up with something but untill then.....
Cheers
gww


----------



## msl

JRG13 said:


> For instance, someone signed me up into the TF FB group, and I was trying to discuss how actual breeding is a much stronger selector than natural selection. Of course, this concept was immediately dismissed, nature has been selecting for millions, well, billions of years, how can we compete, but the concept is totally lost on them


bingo! if you just split everything that lives to make up for losses you not puting enough selection pressure to make head way and you end up with a lot of sub par queen VS using select breeder queens...nature culls 80% or so of the queens per year and 1/2-2/3s of the colloneys die each year just to maintain advrage perfomamce, to beat that and make improvements you have aply strong selection pressure breeding from the exceptional queens and culling the poor performers.... 

Johno is SP's case it seems to be limited restiance... He has been playing with Randys mite modle, and with his build up/delcine rates and brood breaks is showing it only takes a slight amount of restiance for bees to surive in his area 


squarepeg said:


> (with some coaching) i've been playing around with randy oliver's mite model.
> from my journals i've entered typical numbers for frames of bees and frames of brood at semi-monthly intervals throughout the year.
> i found that when using the 'default' colony characteristics a six week mid summer brood break was not enough to keep the colony from crashing.
> however when i 'dialed in' a minimal amount of 'mite resistance' the colony remained sustainable.


Those bees when exported to say your area would liky crash.


----------



## gww

Dan the b......
There was one study that it was not done in isolation as far as isolation from comercial stock goes. I swear I did read about one tf keeper working almounds but would be hard put to find all the things I have read again.
I am in a rural setting though I do think on a small scale that small beekeepers buy packages with in flying distance from me. My swarms were caught over a 30 mile radious and I do not believe there are comercial bees in that radious.

Luck and lazyness of me and maby the people in my area might make more poeple keep bees like I do.

So for me in my situation, I would have to say that I am mostly issolated.
Cheers
gww


----------



## squarepeg

Mike Gillmore said:


> squarepeg, I think you have opened up Pandora's Box and created a new Frankenstein...


perhaps. 

i started this thread primarily to provide a venue for comments from all sides of the topic and hopefully keep other threads from becoming derailed.

so far so good. it's interesting to see how the thinking in community has evolved over the years.


----------



## grozzie2

Ian said:


> I had supper with Gerry and Christine Rozema, Irene and Randy Oliver at the BCHPA this past October. Randy had some extremely interesting results come out his early operational mite sample trial. His only criteria was mite suppression. He was not looking for function.
> There were hives within his operation (1000 plus hives) which showed impressive mite suppression “ability” , then others which fell apart completely, those of which he’d identified, bombed with Formic and requeened.
> 
> I do believe an open mind is key...stretching mine ever so slowly. A plan slowly develops


hmm, me thinks you forgot to mention one more person that was with us at that dinner, I seem to remember your wife was there too 

The way Randy described the methodology was interesting, because it was indeed a focussed selection program, much the same way you do it with cattle and we do here with chickens. Use your cattle example, it's calving season now, and in another 6 weeks or so you will have a few hundred calves on the farm. Statistically half of them should turn out to be bulls, but not all of those bulls will be the show winning prize bulls you can sell for huge bucks at an auction. I'm pretty sure your program is similar to ours, as those young bulls mature they will be graded according to a breed standard, and those that make the grade will be segregated into a group to become potential future breeders, the rest will end up in a herd that is ultimately destined for the butcher shop. We dont call that 'culling' because the animals are not wasted, they just go into a different stream, and you are picking the best of the crop out for future breeding potential. But a true breeding program must include culling in some way, shape, or form. In a well set up program, culling from the breeding pool doesn't involve wasting the animal.

The dual track nature of the presentations on Sunday at that event meant nobody would see them all, so Chris and I split up, she went into one room I went into the other. You missed the other presentation by Randy because you were busy in the other room giving another talk to a group. Randy started that presentation with an interesting question, worded along this line. If we have a healthy, stable feral bee population in an area, how many colonies die off annually ? Lots of muttering of the word 'none' around the room. His response, 'WRONG ANSWER'. Think it thru. If we have a healthy strong colony in the spring, on average they will throw a prime swarm and an afterswam. Colony count grows by a factor of 3 during swarm season, so if we have a stable population year over year, then 2/3 of those colonies will die off annually. It does get one to thinking a little differently when you pose the situation in those terms. From another of his talks about doing targetted research, one detail I remember well, due to the wide variance between colonies, for any kind fo bee study it is accepted that there must be at least a dozen colonies in each test group to be statistically significant.

As a beekeeper it's fairly easy to replicate this kind of behaviour, just do 3 for 1 splits every year, then we can survive a 66% annual loss and continue with a stable colony count year over year. The problem with this methodology, if we split 3 for 1 there isn't going to be a lot of honey production, and none of the units will be up to grade at the times they are needed for pollination. We cant sell any of them as surplus as they need to be kept for covering the losses moving forward. We may have a stable bee population, but, it's not a tenable situation if we are trying to have something to sell so we can make a living. Another problem that comes up trying to replicate feral behaviour, feral bees tend to spread out when they swarm, so, they dont end up with a dozen colonies in a row where bees are drifting between colonies. So as a beekeeper, to replicate this, I need to start the season with a dozen colonies, split them all 3 for 1, then place them in widely separated locations, not all bunched together in a single yard. The wider separation is really important to help reduce the lateral transmission of diseases between colonies due to drift. 36 colonies in 36 separate locations is going to run up a huge gas bill and provide nothing in return. That only works if you are keeping bees for the sake of keeping bees, and have no expectations of any return on investment.

I take issue with many of the folks doing a bond style program where they essentially throw a bunch of bees in a yard and deprive them of any form of treatment as a way to 'select for the fittest'. That is not a focussed breeding program meant to enhance one or more specific traits, it's just plain negligence. In the bee yard type of setting, lateral transmission of problems places pressures on colonies far greater than they would experience in a feral setting. The original title is 'treat vs non treat', and does not specifically state with respect to varroa, so I'll home in on other diseases and pressures that afflict our bees instead, it's less 'emotional' that way. if we have a yard with a population of 30 colonies, and are testing them for a specific trait and/or response to a specific management method, that is a valid reason to potentially withhold some form of husbandry that would otherwise be deemed appropriate. BUT, if during that test period some other affliction shows up, use EFB as an example, then we have a new influence that should be dealt with. EFB can easily be managed, but, if left for the bees to 'figure it out' in a bond style of selection process, one infected colony will very quickly spread that infection to all of the colonies as it collapses and bees drift to neighboring colonies, then the sick colony ultimately gets robbed out. In a feral situation where colonies are farther spread out, it's likely not all colonies in the population would end up with the infection simply because of spacing. Not all of the would discover the collapsing colony to participate in the rob-out before it's fully depleted of stuff to rob, but in the tightly packed bee yard, everybody is going to join in the party quick enough. This scenario creates an artificially high level of selection pressure as compared to feral colonies when we group them together in a single yard. In this extreme example, one could easily conclude that 'none of the bees in this yard can cope with mites' if that was your initial goal, but in fact, it's quite possible all of them could cope with mites just fine, but none of them could cope with EFB. When selecting on a trait, it's so important to isolate that one trait, and not let other factors confuse the issue. Bone yards dont do that isolation, it's just a 'throw some **** at the ceiling and see what sticks' kind of methodology.

In this respect, Randy's concept is very different. Leave the bees be without treatment until they reach a threshold deemed to be to high, then remove them from the selection group, knock back the problem and requeen with different stock, hopefully better stock. If after that requeening they start to show promise, they can be re-introduced into the population from which selections are being made. This is a very targetted breeding program, the culling of undesirable is accomplished by requeening, and no colonies are left to just wither and die. The drawback to this method, it's VERY labor intensive, doing mite washes on a thousand colonies doesn't happen in an afternoon if you only have 3 or 4 folks working on it, and there is a LOT of paperwork to track it all. On the other hand, after the first round of testing the target colonies can be whittled down to a manageable number, so it's not as labor intensive moving forward after the first round.

ofc one other thing that many seem to take for granted, there is an underlying assumption on the part of many that we can coax a trait out of the European Honeybee that will bring on some form of resistance, and do it without losing all of the traits that make them valuable for honey production and pollination. History is littered with examples of species that didn't survive the changes when a new predator or pest was introduced, they went extinct, unable to cope with the new pressure on the population. I'm not convinced that complete resistance to any pest or disease can be achieved in a setting where yards of many colonies are kept in close contact with each other.


----------



## Ian

>>>hmm, me thinks you forgot to mention one more person that was with us at that dinner, I seem to remember your wife was there too <<<

Oh ****!! Ah ha ha ha , you are right!
Good thing she doesn’t read up on beesource regularly lol


----------



## Oldtimer

squarepeg said:


> it's interesting to see how the thinking in community has evolved over the years.


Certainly is. Back when I signed up one had to be very careful admitting to treating bees, cos you would instantly have a horde of year one beekeepers calling you ignorant, mindless, and worse. Being a "treater" was like having leprosy.

Reading between the lines of what people were saying back then, it could be seen how the current situation was probably going to come about. Because although noone ever admitted it, the bee math revealed that most TF folks were losing most or all their hives. Give it a few years and it had to happen that those folks would quit, or convert. Add to that the introduction of 2 effective treatments being Apivar and OAV, meaning people could actually treat and it would work, they would see the results, and the balance had to swing to where it is now, other than folks in places where they can actually keep bees successfully and be treatment free.

Rather than the agro of the past, most TF folks are prepared now to accept that for some folks in some places, TF is not going to work, and most treating people accept that for some folks TF can work. So there is more of a live and let live attitude, each to what works for them. Which is healthy for the community, we all share a love of bees, and should not be trying to kill each other.


----------



## squarepeg

great post ot, many thanks.


----------



## Ian

Gerry, 
That feedback and reflection is exactly why I use you (secretly) as my “thinking” contact.
Love the input 

Guys, that was a long post, read it twice


----------



## Charlestonbee

I just want to see a treatment free beekeeper with more than 30 hives, less than say 200 that makes an average honey crop of at least 60lb per hive minimum for longer than 5 years and a surplus of bees. Grozzie was typing while I was. What he said is how i think. I can’t have 50 hives at 50 locations split 3:1 and make any money.


----------



## odfrank

Charlestonbee said:


> I just want to see a treatment free beekeeper with more than 30 hives, less than say 200 that makes an average honey crop of at least 60lb per hive minimum for longer than 5 years and a surplus of bees.



I could have met those requirements for many years, but not because my bees were not dying. But because I am able to bait hive in 70 new swarms a year and use other propagation methods. All very time consuming. After 60% loss last winter I went to Apivar this year. In my neighborhood treatment free means 50%+ annual losses.


----------



## Charlestonbee

Yeah I should have said that. No catching swarms. Also another caveat HoneyHouseholder is the best treatment free beekeeper. His method doesn’t count in what I was saying lol


----------



## vtbeeguy

squarepeg said:


> i certainly do not consider myself a "pusher" of any philosophy, but there are several of us in my area are having year after year success with survival and honey production while keeping bees off treatments.
> 
> see post 1331 on this page for 2015-2017 tallies:
> 
> http://www.beesource.com/forums/sho...eg-2015-2018-treatment-free-experience/page34
> 
> please post your numbers so that we can do a side by side comparison.


 Square I have checked out your thread and I think it's great your willing to put your #s down as proof of your success. I wouldn't consider you a "pusher" of tf and the existence of your thread indicates you were not someone I was referring to but I have no problem putting my #s up. Started 2016 1 package and 3 mite ridden nucs. Did a half strength formic acid treatment that Aug. Had 2 hives dead by Jan. (had a moisture issue which I fixed) did a mite wash had over 40 mites per 100 dead bees which was major cause of crash. Got a vaporizer and did a couple OAV tx on the 2 remaining. Took my 2 hives in spring made 3 splits raising my own queens. About 6 weeks later took another 2 splits home raised queens. 3 weeks later 4 more splits purchased queens from advertised tf stock and 3 splits home raised queens. Total of 12 splits plus 2 original hives did a few combines in fall ended with 10 colonies going into winter. Had probably 60 deeps and 40 medium frames drawn, harvested couple gallons of honey from a nuc started early. I have no mentor completely self taught and responsible for all my success and failures. Wouldn't have gotten anywhere near the rate of expansion I got without keeping mites low by treating. What I'm truly interested in know in knowing is the #s on some of the big tf beekeeping "gurus" apiaries. If they're confident enough to tell beginners it's possible to be tf successfully why not confident enough to give a yearly summary of their apiary. And although I'm not pushing anything other than the need to practice good animal husbandry I have no problem giving a rundown on mine whenever asked.
I went back and looked and couldn't find the graph I was thinking of on Randy's site might have been somewhere else but I did find some good quotes on his site. This one under first year care, "Question what should I do?" "Answer: There are no shoulds in bee keeping other than practicing good animal husbandry. Bees need only a dry caveat, food, and PARASITE MANAGEMENT." 
My problem with a brood break alone is even if some of the mites are killed during it most won't as well as the bees that are left have been compromised. Think about it the bees are dinner for the mites which depletes vittogellin (think I spelt that right) levels in the bees. Lots of research indicating once those levels are depleted the bee is not long for this world as well as being unable to produce top quality brood food. Makes it tough for a mite ridden colony coming out of a 5 month winter to hand over the colony to the summer bees without crashing and burning


----------



## jonsl

As opposed to mite resistant bees vs less virulent mites, perhaps the bees have developed resistance to the associated viruses in TF locations.


----------



## JRG13

Odfrank, that's what many deem as successful TF beekeeping though... sustaining their numbers with swarms and cutouts, I don't see that being successful at all in terms of progress that is. Also, the other thing that comes up, is how genetically superior feral bees are to commercial stocks... I kind of face palm every time I have to read that statement which means my hands keep pretty warm when I'm reading the TF FB forums.... When you look at populations, the most pure lines in terms of the original or novel stocks will be the most isolated ones. Co-mingling diversifies the rest from the isolated lines. As long as diversity remains, there's always the chance to be able to select back to something that resembles the original strains, but there's no new genes introduced and the isolated lines are not genetically superior in any way.


----------



## rwurster

I'm all for starting with original strains, AHB anyone? It's my understanding they might possess an undesirable trait or two though. :lookout:


----------



## JWChesnut

One of my genuine irritations with the "TF catechism" is its reliance on "factoids" that are never demonstrated. After a number of other magic theories have been discarded over the years, the center of gravity of the TF belief system is found in the catechism postulate that "feral bees" are more diverse (and by implication better) than commercial stock.

A recent paper (open access) from David Tarpy lab throws doubt on this endlessly repeated item of catechism. http://elsakristen.com/docs/LopezUribe_2017_Apis_diversity_immunity.pdf Higher immunocompetence is associated with higher genetic
diversity in feral honey bee colonies (Apis mellifera) Margarita M. López-Uribe · R. Holden Appler · Elsa Youngsteadt ·
Robert R. Dunn · Steven D. Frank · David R. Tarpy

This paper sampled 1) domestic commercial stock and 2) feral honey bees in North Carolina. It found (as did an earlier paper by the principal author) that commercial stock had significantly higher allele diversity than the feral bees. Let's repeat: Commercial stock is more diverse than wild collected bees. It did find that within feral bees the more diverse the allele diversity was, the better your immunocompetence to virus innoculation compared to more impoverished feral diversity. The feral bees showed evidence of a genetic bottleneck and recolonization from domesticated bloodlines. 

This reduced genetic makeup may have allowed local 'resistance' to develop in a process of natural selection aided by the restricted (rather than expanded) diversity. In other words, the paper has encouraging words for both sides of the TF-Treat debate and the role of Bond culling, however the crude argument that feral bees represent some sort of pure survival of "ancestral bees" unsullied by evil commercial breeding is not supported.


----------



## 1102009

Some experience of a commercial beekeeper you find here if you scroll down.
http://www.elgon.es/diary/?cat=88
he uses antibiotics against EFB while queen cells are built but no treatment on his production hives.

I´m looking forward to work with Erik Österlund in summer. I informed him of this thread as I know he is very interested in such discussions. 
The mailing with him starting 2 years ago convinced me of changing my methods from "live and let die" which means 100% loss in my area to IPM strategies, treating the susceptibles or isolating them or shift the queens and to the strategy of finding a group to work with in my area.



> I've heard TF works exceedingly well somewhere in Nebraska


I explained this change of my attitude to MB in a private mail. He is no "pusher" and he is no "guru". He understands this. He is a guy convinced of the truth in his own approach and it works for him and many others.
Why don´t you accept this? Treaters or not, you do just the same. Do you envy his self efficacy? 

We call someone a "Guru" or a "pusher" when we don´t want to be responsible for our own decisions whether they fail or are successful. The decision to follow someone is entirely our own.

What I realize reading this thread is once again the treaters will not change their attitudes if they have no silver bullet. But the mites will not go away and there will never be a silver bullet.
The tf interested are more realistic about what work should be done and what the chances are.

I´m more and more proud to stay convinced of my work. Even if it is hard on me and the bees in my area.


----------



## 1102009

Lauri,
thanks again.



> A colonies peak performance and longevity don't last forever, there is a point a beekeeper needs to take control to keep colonies fresh and clean.


Tf or not tf this should be considered.



> And it would not be everlasting, just a seasonal nip in the endless fight to suppress an opportunistic pest.





> My quest for alternative mite management is in my realization If I don't get something sustainable figured out, I am setting myself up for eventual failure if the treatments I rely on eventually become no longer as effective or no longer available.





> Whether you treat right now or not, every beekeeper should have a plan for the future if they want to continue with any kind of success.


----------



## Virgil

SiWolKe said:


> What I realize reading this thread is once again the treaters will not change their attitudes if they have no silver bullet. But the mites will not go away and there will never be a silver bullet.
> The tf interested are more realistic about what work should be done and what the chances are.


Isn't a more gracious view that those that use the full range of effective animal husbandry techniques would use other techniques if they are shown to be repeatable and effective as well?


----------



## 1102009

Virgil said:


> Isn't a more gracious view that those that use the full range of effective animal husbandry techniques would use other techniques if they are shown to be repeatable and effective as well?


But there are such techniques already!
IPM strategies.
And if the discussions come to a more natural beekeeping, why is that not considered on the treater`s side?


----------



## Virgil

SiWolKe said:


> But there are such techniques already!
> IPM strategies.
> And if the discussions come to a more natural beekeeping, why is that not considered on the treater`s side?


What IPM strategies keep my mite levels below 3%?


----------



## 1102009

Virgil said:


> What IPM strategies keep my mite levels below 3%?


And how do you keep the mite infection permanently below 3% with treatments?
With constant treatments.
How do you keep the mite count permanently below 3% without treatments?
By only multiplying the colonies whose infestation remains underneath and not treat them. Or by beekeeping methods which exclude chemicals and acids. Or both.

Well, that´s the theory. But beekeeping is not static and infestations change monthly. 3% is an illusion IMO.


----------



## Virgil

SiWolKe said:


> And how do you keep the mite infection permanently below 3% with treatments?
> With constant treatments.
> How do you keep the mite count permanently below 3% without treatments?
> By only multiplying the colonies whose infestation remains underneath and not treat them. Or by beekeeping methods which exclude chemicals and acids. Or both.
> 
> Well, that´s the theory. But beekeeping is not static and infestations change monthly. 3% is an illusion IMO.


My mite levels are below 3%. I measure the hives every six weeks and knock down mites in those that are above that threshold that's a strategy. One that I can articulate and replicate easily, QED.


----------



## 1102009

Virgil said:


> My mite levels are below 3%. I measure the hives every six weeks and knock down mites in those that are above that threshold that's a strategy. One that I can articulate and replicate easily, QED.


No problem to me.  What´s QED?


----------



## 1102009

Virgil


> I'm super simple. I split my colonies into two groups: good, not so good. I raise queens from the good pile and cull the not so good pile. I'm not sure I'd go so far to say I'm managing the genetics, just selecting for meta traits I personally want.


You do it for production, tf beekeepers do it for resistance and if you are successful like SP you can select for more traits than resistance. Are you as successful with production selection you can select for resistance too?


----------



## Virgil

SiWolKe said:


> Virgil
> 
> You do it for production


No I don't.


----------



## 1102009

Virgil said:


> No I don't.


You do not? Why not clear me up then?


----------



## Oldtimer

Virgil said:


> My mite levels are below 3%. I measure the hives every six weeks and knock down mites in those that are above that threshold that's a strategy. One that I can articulate and replicate easily, QED.


Just a thought on that. Keeping mites below some threshold is a thing we hear a lot, but just to refine that, when the mites are knocked down it is important to knock them down to as near zero as possible.

Reason is, a mite level below some threshold can give the feeling all is well. But a mites function from the beekeepers point of view, is to spread virus infection to every bee it bites. Individual bees do not recover from any viral infection it persists till they die.

So with a low but constant mite level, there is constant viral infection replicating in the hive. Even if not obvious, it does affect productivity, and eventually the bank balance.

So what to do? When the hive is treated for mites, it should be done in such a way to knock the mite population to zero or as close as possible. This means that for a month or two at the least, no new bees are being infected with viruses via mites. The old infected bees die off and the hive is left in a much cleaner state, from a mite vectored virus perspective. We now have bees with low virus levels which means that even as the mite population begins to rebuild, the transmission rate from one bee to another is less, as all are less infected. 

A periodic total mite knockdown will give a better result long term, than just keeping mites under some threshold.

Virgil I realise you may well already be doing that, but just thought I'd bring it up.


----------



## CLSranch

wow SP it may be the longest thread here. I spent an hr after work catching up on yesterday.


Any way johno you seam to be the biggest pusher here. Several others have said to absolutely treat or TF. But I've noticed the only "Guru" pushers are treat only. I'm with gww. do what you want just don't disinform some one else because that's what you believe. This topic is stronger with beek's than religion with everyone else.


Also I here people talk about stats my hive died/ didn't die. It still seems to me treat people say mites is why they died. doesn't matter if they had not been treated and saved you money and time on the treatment, and still died. But you did and they still died. NO MATTER what may have happened without treating yea the same result. But more so than that new Beek's don't say on this forum hay my hive did great. What do I do to fix it. It is something isn't right or my hive died. Probably they took to much honey and didn't leave enough winter stores. FROM PEOPLE WHO TREAT (like Johno Not all) it doesn't matter what actually happened. What was your mite count OOOh you didn't do it. What if it was 1%. No one will every know. What if their hives could THRIVE at twice the mite loads as other places. I doesn't matter. The response is YOU killed your hives because you didn't treat. I find that annoying.

I like people like gww who says what works for you works for you. NOT you must treat or your killing your bee's. You must treat or your inhumane etc...

I started with feral bee's surviving in my back yard several winters 15 feet from the back door. They weren't treated. Found some at a house up the road I thought would be great to add swarms catchers near that I noticed a definite size difference to, telling me they are off of large cell foundation. I'll still take em'. I tell every one I'm just a dumb hillbilly. And if I meet anyone on here I would display that strongly. But I actually get paid rather well to think for a living. 
Therefore I THINK that if this guy or gal can do wonders TF why can't I. given location. This guy treats and has to, to have success. Why am I stupid and wrong for going TF. That is not a word I like to be called because YOU don't know what's going on here. Not to say any one here has actually called me or anyone else stupid just simply implied it. And when again treated bee's die it's still mites to blame even if it wasn't.

Where's the smiley dodging the book thrown.lol


----------



## Virgil

Oldtimer said:


> Virgil I realise you may well already be doing that, but just thought I'd bring it up.


You've synthesised my strategy beautifully, thank you.

I use to treat to a well-known schedule, treat after the honey flow and an oxalic trickle during a brood break to knock down the phoretic mites. 

This worked to some extent I still lost some hives to what was obviously varroa. Mostly due to my own laziness unable to stick to the regime. What I also realised was that I didn't really know my own varroa levels, apart from a vague impression on the inspection boards - mite drop doesn't work for me.

So I started doing alcohol washes, to begin they were pretty infrequent (lazy again), but they gave me a very good indication of the varroa loads. The insight encouraged me to do more frequent checks - I now check three to four times a season. This means if I do treat I'm doing it for a very specifc reason, as you point out - to inhibit varroa population growth. It has worked for me and I've noticed a marked difference in my bees.

Varroa trends are also selection criteria in my queen selection, as I have the data point now, although it is one of the lesser factors as I don't know why they are lower than the population - it could be the bees, the treatment regimes or the mites themselves. Varroa is highly mobile in a bee yard so I like to assess the varroa population at a colony and community level. 

Every little helps I guess.

Thanks


----------



## johno

Cls and a number of others, you just don't get it. I am not a pusher of anything, what you do with your bees is your business and I do not care less. It is my bees that I care about and if they cannot pay for themselves plus a little for the rent on their hives they are of little value to me and that is what they would be to me if I did not treat. Now I would love to have bees that I did not have to treat and I guess so would Oldtimer and a lot of other beekeepers but dead bees make no honey and until something comes up that will make treatment free profitable for us we must continue to treat. As for all the treatment free fellows who are running productive colonies share some of your knowledge, shine the light of truth onto the subject let us know about some of the reasons your bees seem to survive. As I have mentioned I have brought in over the last 4 to 5 years resistant queens and breeders from treatment free stock and all I have seen is a lower honey yield and just as many mites. There has got to be a reason why bees will survive treatment free in one area and not so in another and all I ask is that the reason for this to be found so as to further our knowledge in this area for the benefit of all. This thread seems to carry on and on with very little of substance being revealed, what we need are the reasons for the difference
Johno


----------



## DanielD

We have this habit of experiencing something that we've done and it failed or succeeded, then we form an opinion that can't be changed, especially if it happens more than once. It happens all the time. I buy a Ford that's a lemon, so all Fords are lemons and you can't convince me otherwise. I plant beans on a Sunday and they don't grow, so never plant beans on a Sunday. Mine is Taco Bell. They messed up an order twice in a row, (I am sure it was them not me) so they can't ever get it right. I am guessing that might not true, but I am sticking with my boycott. We're stubborn.

To say something will never work is saying many people are lying when they say it does. I would agree that the treatment only side tends to be the biggest pushers here, though there's some both ways. A person can insist upon something, well and good, but when mocking or belittling is added to the comments, or saying their doomed to fail, it becomes pushing. 

My experience tells me so far that surely treatment is necessary more times than not, but treatment free can work in the right circumstances. I shouldn't have bees and should not have harvested an above average honey take last summer bast upon some views. I have done some spot treating for insurance out of concern over all the warnings, but I didn't really have a valid reason to last fall. I spot checked some established colonies that didn't get split last summer and had 1 to 3 mites in alcohol. I had only treated some of them last fall. The only time I think I found over 3% mites (eleven mites) was the one hive that failed in the fall of 16' that had what looked like an unmated queen in a diminished cluster. I treated it with OAV in early Sept. that year when I found the mite count, but in late October or early November I found them diminished with the supersedure failure. Treatment could have resulted in a dead queen somehow. I also had one hive last summer that had signs of mite stress and I just made a brood break to see what would happen. It was small and I was curious about doing what I did. It was alive into winter, but I don't expect to see it this spring. I have one line of bees from last year's swarm catch that his power packed and has no hints of mite stress, so I haven't done counts or anything. They look the best of what I have and are good honey collectors, so I will see how they hold up. The queen offspring has been expanded into 6 colonies so there's a good test going on. I have never treated any of the colonies from that line and want to see what happens. 

I like the ideal of treatment free, but also see there's treatment needed by most keepers and I don't want heavy losses. If I would be treatment free yet not productive with bees, I don't want to bother at this point. I am trying to evaluate without any closed minded approach to the bees I have. My goal isn't necessarily treatment free, but minimize them as best as I can, eliminate if possible. I would like to find a balance between productiveness and low level treating. I don't see myself as having a lot of experience and knowledge with bees, so I have a lot to learn yet. One thing that hinders learning is making conclusions too soon and closing the door to re evaluation.


----------



## gww

Oldtimer


> Just a thought on that. Keeping mites below some threshold is a thing we hear a lot, but just to refine that, when the mites are knocked down it is important to knock them down to as near zero as possible.


First a disclaimer that I am still too dumb to come to any conclution and so am not being argumentive but more conversational.

I watched a vidio that randy oliver was giving either in NZ of germany. At treatment method came up (I don't remember which method) that was giving a consistant 97 percent mite kill. I do remember randy's reaction in the vidio, which broken down to gww language was basically that they were heading for trouble cause those 3 percent of mites that were left were going to be some bad mamba jambas. My genaral take from this was that too high of a mite kill had its own problims on the speed it would take for the treatment to no longer work.

I repeat, I read a lot of stuff and many times they have opposite out comes and so if all is believed then a compermise position on both sides of an arguement seems the middle ground best effect.

It is very hard to be smart and I don't claim to be.
Cheers
gww
Ps Danial, your view is sorta my view.


----------



## spencer

I've been keeping bees now since 2005 and have never treated. For the first few years I was on the package bee route. I'd buy the bees, they'd last through the 1st winter but almost always died the 2nd winter. I went to a beekeepers meeting in the spring of 09' and Mel Disselkoen was speaking on his methods of never having to buy bees again. I don't do exactly what he does but I do make nucs and splits out of my hives every year. I believe the brood break is what helps a hive with the mites. I lose anywhere from 1/3 to 1/2 of my bees every year. I keep anywhere from 13 to 20 hives so the ones that survive I can split and get my numbers back up to where they were. 
This will be the first year I am trying to overwinter 13 double nucs. We'll see how that goes.


----------



## DanielD

Johno, I couldn't begin to tell you why my bees are still living without a much of treatment. They just are. After 3 + years and spotty treatment, I have only had 10% loss in winter of 16-17. One was a partial freeze out in spring buildup, the fall loss could have been mite related. Springtime may change all that, but I'd be fooling both of us if I told you I knew why they are alive. I am sure there's a strong feral population of bees around here, so it's not isolated. As soon as I hear someone claim a reason, someone else will say it didn't work for them. I would suspect it's a mystery that's going to be hard to figure out. I started natural comb, but went to plastic acorn last summer to have some productive honey time, so there's more foundation than natural. I have done a lot of splitting for growth, till last year, though most of them then have had a split or splits taken or swarmed for a brood break.


----------



## DanielD

gww said:


> Ps Danial, your view is sorta my view.


Should I be scared gww?


----------



## gww

Danial


> Should I be scared gww?


From spencer


> I'd buy the bees, they'd last through the 1st winter but almost always died the 2nd winter.


Looks like I am the one that should be scared.
Cheers
gww


----------



## GregB

Regarding.... 
<dead bees make no honey>

Sure they do.
They die and you take all the honey they left behind.
This is how I get honey.
Still have live bees too.

People here forget - during the old times beekeepers used to KILL bees to get their honey (see skeps or see logs-hives).
That was the norm.
Today, mites kill the weak bees and I keep the honey.
I only wish if they die they do it faster so not to waste the honey.  
Strong bees get to keep their honey to themselves.

Historic beekeeping ways have many answers right in front of us. 

One thing - think of working with the bee population/apiary/yards.
Do NOT think of working a set number of hives. 
Forget the specific hives. They don't matter. 
Local populations do matters and that what we should be thinking about (not the hives).

Old time peasants ran hundreds and thousands of small hives just as a side-business.
By doing so, they ran entire populations of bees in low maintenance mode.
They let them swarm at will, they did not even look at them (no time), and harvested honey once per year by usually killing a number of hives.
Parasites came and went; the bees stayed on.
Something to think about.


----------



## GregB

In fact, I see a beekeeping model as in 1)keeping many small bee propagation hives to just keep the population going and 2)artificially creating few mega-hives just to produce as much honey as possible and just letting these mega-hives fade (IF they choose so). 

Mel Disselkoen pretty much does this model.

This idea of attaching dearly to the specific hives (even giving them names, what not) or sticking to very specific hive numbers creates problems for too many people. 
Need to be fluid and detached.


----------



## Virgil

gww said:


> I watched a vidio that randy oliver was giving either in NZ of germany.


His New Zealand chats are great - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCD1t9KlupoFbGne3ZUsMo3g - well worth peoples time.


----------



## msl

Virgil said:


> What IPM strategies keep my mite levels below 3%?





Virgil said:


> His New Zealand chats are great


Randy out lines several in those videos https://youtu.be/IX3Tz5_uaMc?t=41m2s
The gole of IPM is to reduse the use of cems (some mabye can go cem less) But when thresholds say they are needed, aply them in a way to maxumize the effect.


----------



## spencer

GregV said:


> In fact, I see a beekeeping model as in 1)keeping many small bee propagation hives to just keep the population going and 2)artificially creating few mega-hives just to produce as much honey as possible and just letting these mega-hives fade (IF they choose so).
> 
> Mel Disselkoen pretty much does this model.
> 
> This idea of attaching dearly to the specific hives (even giving them names, what not) or sticking to very specific hive numbers creates problems for too many people.
> Need to be fluid and detached.


Out of all the hives I have there are maybe 5 or 6 that produce like gangbusters. The rest will maybe produce a medium super of honey. I'm ok with only getting 1000 lbs of honey a year at this point in my life.


----------



## Lauri

Oldtimer said:


> Add to that the introduction of 2 effective treatments being Apivar and OAV, meaning people could actually treat and it would work, they would see the results,


That's why I am so enthused about treating. When it's needed, I have the means to keep my bees thriving, when it pertains to mite control


Even when I started with bees and like many beginners, was planning to go TF, I knew from the internet chatter I needed to take the mites seriously and needed to learn how to manage them. 

I wanted to know _what _to use,_ how_ to use it and _when_ to use it...before I need to do so. So I paid close attention to many threads here on beesource. Trying hard to ignore the naysayers on both sides. 

Being proficient in the use of treatments takes some insight, perspective, experience. Like I said in one of my prior posts " If you wait to prepare until there is a problem, it is usually too late"

When I started in 2011, not many safe and effective treatments were legal in my state. As Hopguard came around I tried it, but even as a beginner, I could see it had drawbacks and I didn't think it was worth the risk of using due to some absconding and queen losses I had when I used it. I felt it just happened too much to be a coincidence.

Then Apivar came on the scene. A blessing for hives that were doomed otherwise in a inexperienced bee keepers hands. I used it with caution and still do, in order to keep it effective and long lasting without developing resistance. And frankly to keep from breaking the bank.

Then OAV was approved. I still waited until a better method was developed to apply other than the wand types. Not long after that I saw the Provap and bought one the same day.
With OAV and some attention paid to timing, I feel I have a very affordable, less toxic and less accumulative treatment at my fingertips. I've finally got some real power over the future & security of my apiary..which gives me confidence to invest more into it when the opportunity arises. When you have a lot invested in your apiary and half that is a perishable product...any security over it's health is a big deal.

I'm not satisfied with my proficiency using treatments yet, but work towards that a little more every season. Not just in the use of treatments, but ways to reduce their use when it is practical to do so. Ways to maximize effectiveness with less exposures. 

I am fortunate to have many things on my side, good bees, good location, good climate. They have done well despite my ignorant beginnings with hands on management, when a Hands off approach may have been a little better. But that's how you learn.

It's funny, when your winter losses are very low and you end up year after year with more bees than you really want, you have the freedom to 'fail'
Over the years, I have tried a lot of things that, as a beginner, were very risky. But I wanted to learn. And I had enough bees to experiment on without it hurting me if it didn't work out. I was surprisingly pleased to see that almost all of those colonies ended up thriving. Things I never would have attempted if I only had a couple hives and was scared to death of making a mistake. It was an awesome opportunity to get educated as fast as possible. Since I didn't start with bees until I was in my 50's, I didn't want to wait around for 20 years to get the hang of it. 

There are times I treated when it was not necessary, times I didn't treat when I should have done so. Every year that gap gets smaller and has less impact on my bees. The hindsight that is 20/20 doesn't 'sting' so much, Pardon the pun


----------



## gww

lauri
I liked your post.
gww


----------



## squarepeg

Lauri said:


> There are times I treated when it was not necessary, times I didn't treat when I should have done so. Every year that gap gets smaller and has less impact on my bees.


:thumbsup:

making progress like that sounds like very smart beekeeping to me. 

perhaps you could expand on it as time allows lauri. 

i'm sure i speak for many when i say thanks so much for your contributions to the forum.


----------



## 1102009

Lauri,
great post.
What´s your gut feeling about the carniolans? Or c-hybrids?
And thanks for the pictures. I must follow you more. So interesting!


----------



## squarepeg

aggressive splitting as a means to replace heavy losses and/or keep the mite population at bay is not a strategy that i am using here, (and i agree that for most beekeepers seeking to produce honey doing so is not a viable option).

to the contrary almost all of my hives are managed for swarm prevention and honey production. the acquisition of more drawn comb over the years has helped a lot in that regard and has allowed me to reach about 85% success with swarm prevention for these past two seasons.

this compares to having virtually 100% of my colonies swarming in the first years. i wondered if i would start seeing more mite problems after getting the swarming under control but so far i have not seen any difference.


----------



## Greeny

Treatment Free is a fantastic goal, but I can't see working towards it at the cost of colony after colony, especially when no progress is seen. 
We (humans) sure aren't treatment free. We treat ourselves for lice, bed bugs, fleas, ticks, intestinal parasites, etc. etc. If people or our spaces become infested with just about any pest, we're going to treat, or leave the infested area. Aren't immunizations (flu, measles, TB, smallpox and more) a form of treatment?


----------



## gww

Greeny
However, on people, we don't get rid of our runts, we don't kill our queen, we don't breed for fat gain. It always amazes me when we think about bugs like they are people. Since they are agraculture for profit, it does not amaze me that people protect thier investment. Of course much of this has been disscussed once and so I will (maby) try and not regress to that earlier part of this thread.
Cheers
gww
Ps, In fact, we worry about the poisen that might go in a hive and base the decission on that it wont hurt people as much as wether it will help a bug.


----------



## squarepeg

gww said:


> There are a few studies out there that show that bees with long standing mite pressure have made mites a bit more benign by supressing the mite reproduction. The scientists don't know how they are doing that but do know it is happening.


an example: https://peerj.com/articles/3956/

gww is correct and unfortunately the mechanisms by which certain populations of bees are able to thrive off treatments are poorly understood at this time.

i have consistently acknowledged that i don't know how my bees are doing it but rather just reporting my experience with them.

my hope is to get professional bee researchers interested who might be able to bring their expertise and resources to bear on the how's and why's. 

i'll be meeting with auburn university's dr. geoffrey williams in a couple of weeks to discuss the possibilities, and have exchanged emails recently with dr. robert danke at the baton rouge bee lab as well.

i've also had requests for queens from a couple of commercial breeders so there may be opportunities for further study from them.

in addition to satisfying my curiosity (and yours) as to what mechanisms are at play, my motivation is to be a good steward with what appears to be stock exhibiting natural resistance.

i'll be making a more concerted effort this year to try to get samples into the hands of qualified and willing researchers who might be able to figure out if there is indeed anything special about these bees.

if it turns out there is something special going on my hope is that any discoveries will be exploited for the benefit of the beekeeping community at large.


----------



## gww

Squarepeg
One other trend that I have seen over several studies was the people doing the studies expressing amazement that being able to surpress mites by several differrent mechinizims did not use or take away from other traits. In other words it was easy for the bees and did not effect honey gethering and such. There is a chart around that give percents of things like aggression or honey production and shows how breeding for one take away from some other trait. What is being seen and commented on with amazement is that with mite fighting, it does not seem to be drawing from these other traits. Don't take my word for it but in every study you read, watch for it and you will see it.
Cheers
gww


----------



## johno

Square I would hope some of the researchers will take an interest in your bees so that an answer can be found for the ability of your bees to survive when others bred from ARS do not. I believe Dr Danke believes that the bees from ARS or their semen are already mite resistant but they have not worked for me.
Johno


----------



## GregB

Here is a youtube video (non-english, but just hop about and look how "neglected" bees may look like).

Quick synopses:
* some hobby keeper gave these bees to the video author as not wanting them no more (just wanted to get rid of them)
* the bees have not been touched for 3 years whatsoever (one deep and one medium; Dadant)
* notice the combs' condition in the lower deep - clearly a mess and confirms that these have not been touched forever
* the video author is very critical about the "neglect" the bees have been subjected too (and also how healthy and strong they look despite the "neglect" - that is ironic! haha)
* the author is generally unhappy about getting this project (basically, a mess he did not really want)

* I want to scream - "give me those bees!!! I want them now!!" 
Why this always happens to someone else?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cuwtfkz1Ccg&pbjreload=10


----------



## grozzie2

SiWolKe said:


> What I realize reading this thread is once again the treaters will not change their attitudes if they have no silver bullet. But the mites will not go away and there will never be a silver bullet.


Statements like this are the reason discussions on this subject become polarized, and unproductive. There is an implied slur that I am somehow being lazy and/or a lesser person simply because I choose to provide my livestock with the things I know to be necessary to ensure survival in our location and climate. You are implying my attitude is wrong, and needs 'changing', and I find the 'silver bullet' insinuation insulting.



SiWolKe said:


> And if the discussions come to a more natural beekeeping, why is that not considered on the treater`s side?


As soon as you insist on 'taking sides', this ceases to become a constructive conversation, and can only degrade into an argument, which is historically what happens every time this subject has come up in the past here on BS. I joined the conversation to try provide constructive input, but, that's not going to be possible if we must take sides as if it's an argument.

I will bow out of this thread now, it has run its course, and I can see trying to hold a constructive dialog wont be possible anymore.


----------



## gww

Grozzie
You choice but through out this thread I have seen a couple of things said that might be considered as put downs if taken that way. But I also saw members trying thier best and adding constructive content. If you decide just one comment is more important than all others, nobody can make you participate. I liked reading your long post just like I like reading randys site and still retain my right to not have to like it all but give credit for the parts I do like. 

If one persons comment would make me disregaurd ten other peoples comments, I would never last very long on any topic. So, instead, when I have the energy, I put my counter point out and let all participates decide for themselves after reading mine also.
Good luck
gww
ps Greg, the vidio made me hungry when he lifted the first bar and I saw all that honey.


----------



## squarepeg

grozzie2 said:


> I'm not convinced that complete resistance to any pest or disease can be achieved in a setting where yards of many colonies are kept in close contact with each other.


it is asking a lot isn't it.

before you depart grozzie i was wondering if you are contributing data to beeomics project, and have you tried any queens from the breeders associated with it?


----------



## rwurster

SiWolKe said:


> What I realize reading this thread is once again the treaters will not change their attitudes if they have no silver bullet. But the mites will not go away and there will never be a silver bullet


So the treaters silver bullet bee is a different one than the TFers want, or is it the same one? :s


----------



## Juhani Lunden

JWChesnut said:


> Let's repeat: Commercial stock is more diverse than wild collected bees. It did find that within feral bees the more diverse the allele diversity was, the better your immunocompetence to virus innoculation compared to more impoverished feral diversity. The feral bees showed evidence of a genetic bottleneck and recolonization from domesticated bloodlines.
> 
> This reduced genetic makeup may have allowed local 'resistance' to develop in a process of natural selection aided by the restricted (rather than expanded) diversity. In other words, the paper has encouraging words for both sides of the TF-Treat debate and the role of Bond culling, however the crude argument that feral bees represent some sort of pure survival of "ancestral bees" unsullied by evil commercial breeding is not supported.


Makes sense. "Feral bees" being better is a myth, just like small cells and harmful effects of feeding.

In the environment of Nordic Countries (Norway, Sweden, Finland) development of resistance to varroa mites takes about 10 years. Three similar experiments: Norway (Terje Reinertsen), Sweden (Ingemar Fries in Gotland experiment) and Finland (myself).

You have consistently posted good stuff and tried to correct the biggest frauds on this forum, thanks for that!


----------



## 1102009

grozzie2
I'm sorry that you find me insulting, but just like everyone else here, I have an opinion, and that is that there will not be a definitive solution to the mite problem, not with treatment and not without treatment.
rwurster


> So the treaters silver bullet bee is a different one than the TFers want, or is it the same one?


The tfers are more aware of the difficulties and more open to work on them. Perhaps accepting the disadvantages to money making more. IMO.

Juhani, I've read part of your Buckfast page, the link is in your signature.
Very interesting!
A short sentence, copied out, I used the google translator hope I´ve got it right, if not please correct me:


> All beekeepers that practice varroa resistance breeding must remain aware of their own unique character and their specialties. In the future, maybe 10 years from now, it's time to combine those results to create a bee that has enough power to survive anywhere in the world, capable of delivering enough honey harvest. Resistance costs something and therefore I prophesy that without treatment they will never collect as much honey as treated bees.


----------



## Virgil

squarepeg said:


> [..]the acquisition of more drawn comb over the years has helped a lot[..]


Drawn comb does indeed have superpowers, once you have a supply of it life is way easier.


----------



## 1102009

Dr. Wolfgang Ritter, an experienced beekeeper and researcher who shifted from commercial beekeeping methods to more natural ones, says in this video from 2014, how creating an artificial swarm in summer will work just as good as any treatment but is not done because of fall harvesting.
And he works with development projects in africa right now, trying to prevent modern beekeeping methods from being introduced, because this starts problems which have not been there before, swarm prevention the main one.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSyZzD7itdo


----------



## Oldtimer

Couldn't get the full context of that because of language, but based on what you say he said in the video, I find it an interesting commentary on the importance of location, and how beekeepers can assume that what works, or doesn't work, for them, will be the same everywhere.

Because where I am, creating an artificial swarm in summer will have little effect on mite levels and certainly nothing comparable to a treatment. Yet Dr. Ritter is convinced creating an artificial swarm is as effective as any treatment. So presumably it worked for him. So it would seem he now assumes that what worked for him will be the standard everywhere, and is even trying to apply his beliefs to Africa.


----------



## squarepeg

JWChesnut said:


> http://elsakristen.com/docs/LopezUri...y_immunity.pdf Higher immunocompetence is associated with higher genetic diversity in feral honey bee colonies (Apis mellifera) Margarita M. López-Uribe · R. Holden Appler · Elsa Youngsteadt ·Robert R. Dunn · Steven D. Frank · David R. Tarpy


interesting paper jwchesnut and one that i had not seen yet, thanks for sharing it.



JWChesnut said:


> ...the center of gravity of the TF belief system is found in the catechism postulate that "feral bees" are more diverse (and by implication better) than commercial stock.


most of the discussion that i have seen with respect to the genetic diversity of u.s. commercial stock has put forth by sue cobey and others, rather than anyone associated with treatment free beekeeping. 

tf beekeepers represent a small, disparate and varied fraction of the beekeeping community at large. to suggest there is any generally agreed upon 'belief system' is frankly disingenuous.



JWChesnut said:


> ...the paper has encouraging words for both sides of the TF-Treat debate and the role of Bond culling, however the crude argument that feral bees represent some sort of pure survival of "ancestral bees" unsullied by evil commercial breeding is not supported.


i have described the stock i am working with as 'feral derivatives' because the supplier i acquired them from started with 5 colonies cut out of trees 20 years ago. this is when varroa hit hard here and he noticed that the old tree bees that he had been observing for many years were somehow hanging in there.

over the years he has used no treatments of any kind and grafted from the best of his best and therefore selecting for colonies that thrive off treatments.

beekeeping has been alive and well in my area for many decades. over the years queens have been brought in from a wide variety of sources. there is also likely a remnant of a.m.m. (the old 'german black bee') that deborah dulaney found in her surveys.

given this history, i am 'assuming' that my local feral population is comprised of highly hybridized 'mutts'. hopefully what will come out of the collaboration i am seeking with the bee scientists is whether or not this is the case.


----------



## 1102009

Oldtimer said:


> So it would seem he now assumes that what worked for him will be the standard everywhere, and is even trying to apply his beliefs to Africa.


No, he works with native beekeepers there who use swarmy bees and have an income from them. He does not want them to change this to industrialization because it could happen that they would loose their independancy.


----------



## msl

OT why do you feel it would not give you a similar mite knock down to the researcher ?


----------



## Oldtimer

I don't know but would postulate these possibilities. Location, bee type, mite type, or the Dr is mistaken.

I would lean towards the latter, because according to SiWolKe he is claiming that creating an artificial swarm mid summer is as good as any treatment. Given that the most effective treatments can kill 99% or better of the mites in a hive, I struggle to see how creating a mid summer artificial swarm can be that good. Not saying it can't, just saying I haven't observed that over here, plus can't see the mechanics of how it could work, anywhere. Open minded soul that I am though , I am very ready for someone to enlighten me.


----------



## msl

I agree with the "any" part, it needs to be "some"
not sure of anything with 99% knock mite knock down ,brood on, that you can uses with supers on.... at least here...IIRR you don't have some of the reatiance issues, yet.
swarm gives a 60% or so mite knock down, you get about a 42-43% knock back caging the queen for 25 days or pulling her an letting them raize one 
a OAV is 14-15%, OAD is 22-23%, 1/2 MAQS is 50, full MAQS is 90.


----------



## Oldtimer

msl said:


> swarm gives a 60% or so mite knock down


You think? How does a swarm give any knock down? I can see reproduction being delayed if there is a broodless time, that's about it.


----------



## gww

Oldtimer
I know one position taken by mel deislkoen and I also seen a study that I could not find if I tried that took the position that on the first larva capped when laying begins the mites load the cells up and it kills the larva and the mite. I remember reading some of the ideals behind randy oliver going over what mites leave the hive with a swarm but also would have to look up and refreash to get my stuff strait. I don't know the truth of the matter and so give creedence to others positions on this when I do what I do and if it helps I win and if it doesn't help in the way they say, I wouldn't know cause I am not studying the what comes after and the why but more am just looking at when I did it, did my hive live or die.

If you put creadence in them saying that 40 percent leaves with the swarm and a bunch with the swarm bunch up in the first cells to be capped, it does cover a knock down in both places. I don't know and won't watch close enough on my own to know wether it is true or snake oil.

Throw in that the queen that leaves has no place to lay and a queen being made in the old hive gives a brood break. maby some of the mites die of disiese and old age.

I put the same creadence in your experiances which means in the end, Picking and choosing what others are takeing a closer look at then I am and trying it and seeing what I end up with.

Cheers
gww


----------



## squarepeg

i'm not completely sure about this and sibylle will need to clarify ot, but i'm thinking that with the 'artificial swarm' technique she is talking about all of the brood is culled thereby eliminating whatever mites are not phoretic at the time.


----------



## johno

Many systems will work if you just want to keep bees alive, it is much more difficult to keep them alive and to make a good honey crop. Some of the researches can do wonders with their bees, prevent swarming by replacing their queens while the colony is trying to build in the spring and when asked if that does not interrupt the honey crop the reply is oh we dont do honey, But hell if you want to keep bees with no mite problems keep Mason bees or Green Orchard bees.
Johno


----------



## rwurster

Culling all the brood would definitely give the colony one heck of a brood break which would definitely mimic a swarm. What I don't understand is this >he works with native beekeepers there who use swarmy bees and have an income from them. He does not want them to change this to industrialization because it could happen that they would loose their independancy.

Explain this industrialization and how it contributes to losing ones independence. In this context all the beekeepers I have ever met would be considered "industrialized" and they're all independent, from hobbyist to commercial. 

Johno I originally kept bees for pollination and then for honey production. I do have mason bees, leafcutter bees, had some bumble bees a few seasons, and keep habitat for squash bees. If it werent for the pollination/honey aspect of honeybees I MIGHT and thats a big might, keep 2 hives. I want to say its something in the translation but I don't think that's the case.


----------



## Oldtimer

Yes if she's talking brood removal it's something in the translation.

Re the "industrialisation" of African beekeeping, I have some sympathy for the Dr's position, simple hollow log hives can suit the lifestyle of subsistance farmer / gatherers working aggressive and swarmy bees that are not inclined to store much honey anyway.

However Langstroths are becoming increasingly popular in Africa, but they require investment, and management.

The people of Papua New Guinea have been taught to use Langstroths and this has been so successful they have become an integral part of the life of many villages and other hive styles are going out. Should be said that it has been accompanied by varroa mite problems once the mites were introduced though.


----------



## gww

Johno
I would rather keep bees with mites and make $600 per hive then keep mason bees.

Just so you get me right, That means with or with out treatment. However, looking at what some of these researchers do and cherry picking the things that might help me do the $600 per hive thing makes all of them worth looking at.

Even way back in abby warres day he was a big fan of throwing away the brood right at flow cause the bees would store more honey and his view was that come winter all the cluster would be down to about the same size no matter how big the hive was durring summer. Doolittle in his way did the same thing of getting rid of all the brood during the flow for his production hives and putting it all on the dinks so that in the end both did better. Randy oliver in his article hive build up and decline adds a bit more. 

To many options that might work to take the position that what you learn from something that a use might be found for that knowlage.

I figure you are probly a much more experianced bee keeper then me and may be forever cause expirmenting can go bad where as if you have found stuff that works for you, you don't have to experment. Nothing wrong with looking at what is being said with a critical eye, but automatic negativity unless fact based might allow something good to be missed.

Instead of keeping bees, maby make mason bee traps and homes. I see alot of them for sale on craigs list and then you don't have to worry about anything dieing at all.
Cheers
gww


----------



## rwurster

I've always thought that swarmy bees were a big part of the answer to dropping mite loads. I don't want swarmy bees unless I can catch every swarm and put them in a different box. Swarmy bees are counter productive for most things we keep bees for. For example, if beekeepers took their bees to California for the almonds and 80% of the hives swarmed. Uh oh. We all want what's good for the bees but if that runs counter to what we're using bees for, its a problem. And a problem I think we can all understand. This silver bullet bee may be a bee we in fact don't want and can't "keep".


----------



## Oldtimer

rwurster said:


> Example, beekeepers take their bees to California for the almonds and 80% of the hives swarm.


Really! Well there's a business opportunity right there. Just drive around the orchards looking for swarms, if there's that many, they could be packaged and sold and with little investment, a guy could probably make a years income in a month!


----------



## msl

the 60% is randy's high end...more on that in a bit...
yes the exportion of mites, like a split...devide and counger 
for spit ball fun say a hive has 500 mites, split it equalys, you have knocked the mite back by 50% as each split now has 250 mites the queen less split raises its own queen, that break knocks the mites back 40% or so, now its down to 150. This is what makes OTS work, there may be a bit of the "too many mites in one cell" efect but the numbers say it would work with out factoring it in 

Seeley 2017 says _a swarming event exports about 35% of a colony’s mites; a colony’s workers carry about 50% of the adult mites (Fuchs 1985) and about 70% of a colony’s workers leave in the prime swarm (Rangel and Seeley 2012)._
I am not sure why he is using the 1985 numbers of 50/50 when a more modern look at swarm time says its closer to 70/30
my guess is Randys range of 40-60% is inculding the brood break


----------



## Bee14me

msl said:


> I agree with the "any" part, it needs to be "some"
> not sure of anything with 99% knock mite knock down ,brood on, that you can uses with supers on.... at least here...IIRR you don't have some of the reatiance issues, yet.
> swarm gives a 60% or so mite knock down, you get about a 42-43% knock back caging the queen for 25 days or pulling her an letting them raize one
> a OAV is 14-15%, OAD is 22-23%, 1/2 MAQS is 50, full MAQS is 90.


I am way way over my head here and mean no disrespect to you or anyone on this forum..... that being said I just read the other day of controlled experiment with three yards each containing 30 hives each and of the number broke into 3 separate groups of ten. First set was tf second set was maqs single strip and last group was oav. From what I remember the oav outperformed the maq strip by more than double the knock down on mites. The tf hives had a low mite count as well, but merely do,to,the fact that most of them swarmed...... 
I've attempted to be a good student of Warre and tried my hand at tf. I failed horribly. Not one to want to continue failing and killing bees, because I for one do get attached to my hives and see no gain in the lose of life over that of monetary compensation by the product that they provide, have been trying to figure out a game plan that would allow me to keep healthy happy hives, while being as tf as possible, with a treatment program when it is so called for. I was so eager to read this thread and appreciate all those that contributed. Yet I feel as lost as I did when I read the first page. I've read other research papers that claim x product does this while x product doesn't ect ect only to get a different story elsewhere. I thought Drone culling was the answer until I read the opposite somewhere else. I feel so lost as a new beek, when only a few months ago I was so self assured of my 3 years worth of research. I don't mean to sound like whiny 3 year old. My head is just spinning with all of these theories


----------



## Oldtimer

The issue with that logic is you split the hive, there are still the same number of mites on the same number of bees. the bees then rebuild, but so do the mites.

Removing brood and killing it, along with the mites in it, would achieve a genuine reduction, as the bulk of the mites are in the brood. Merely splitting, less so.


----------



## rwurster

I would definitely be one of the opportunist swarm catchers  trying to keep ODFrank away with a stick and a smoker


----------



## gww

rwurster
I would not argue the point of wether indutrializing make life worse or better for the majority of people but it can have an impact on things that you can do independently. When I was young we raised bucket calves and kept about seven cows and one bull and maby three sows to raise feeder pigs. Back in the late 70s they giant pig farms became really popular (right before a bunch of them went bankrupt) and cut the margins on what could be raised. Pass a couple of laws that require a lagoon and drainage and it was no longer a fair money maker for the little guy.

When we started, the farmes would almost give away the male holsteen calves but later the calves were going for $225 apeice and after you raised them a year or two you would get four hundred something.

It is sorta like all the cheap honey that comes in. It becomes hard to be independant if you can't make enough to make it worth doing.

Most farming now days is done with a million dollars worth of equiptment and if you didn't inherit the land, it takes pretty big money. I can't even get natural eggs as cheap as I can go to the store and buy some for as low a 49cents on sale. 

Again, I am not saying good or bad but saying that there did become a point where raising a few bucket calves became much harder to get anything out of.

I am pretty independant, I made my own sawmill and make my own lumber. I will tell the truth though, I would be scared to add up the real cost of my boards if I had to add the gas to cut and move the logs and the gas to run the mill and the band blades and the space to dry them all on a small scale. I can only do it cause I had an differrent income and the cost come in little peices at a time. I could have made much more money by not retiring and just saving and spending nothing. I like what I am doing better though.

I love where I am and so am not complaining but indusralizing has its plusses and its minuses.
Cheers
gww


----------



## clyderoad

rwurster said:


> Example, beekeepers take their bees to California for the almonds and 80% of the hives swarm. Uh oh.


So all those shook bees sold out of almonds come from the 20% that don't swarm and the extra hives guys had just to provide pollination income
and then unload?
I'd like to hear this from some of the almond pollinators on here, seems hard to believe to me.
Those hives that swarm are probably pulled out of almonds queenless and then most probably need to be requeened somehow. Must be hard to move good hives onto the next job.


----------



## Oldtimer

rwurster said:


> I would definitely be one of the opportunist swarm catchers  trying to keep ODFrank away with a stick and a smoker



Scary


----------



## rwurster

Im just saying, swarmy hives would be counterproductive even if they somehow dumped their mite loads effectively


----------



## gww

Oldtimer
Just for you.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CpXTK0E7Gco

bee14


> My head is just spinning with all of these theories


Me too. Plus I was still lost the first few times I got in the hive. Reading only goes so far.
Cheers
gww


----------



## JWChesnut

Where does this "80% of the hives swarm" factoid come from. Bees come out of the Almonds heavy and very broody. Hives that were pushing the weight limit on the inbound truck run, are split to lighten so the transit back is not overweight. 
There is enormous demand for late March and April queens as the building Almond bees get split into fresh colonies. Almond honey has no value, so the hives are managed to eat back the almond brooding up for actual edible honeys, and that means aggressively splitting them. The Almond colonies go to Oranges, cherries and other orchard crops, and the Ca resident hives move on to wild Sage, before the summer pollination round begins. Many of the west coast colonies move on to Washington State cherries and apples, before starting the mid-west swing.

I think folks are bolstering their pre-formed opinions with "factoids" that have no truth value.


----------



## Bee14me

Has anyone tried natural extracts, like essential oils in vapor forums instead of lab created ones?


----------



## Oldtimer

It has been done.

Nice one GWW


----------



## rwurster

factiod: It was just an example about trying to keep swarmy bees and how it could affect a major beekeeping event

Edit: I edited it for clarity


----------



## Bee14me

I take it no success?


----------



## Oldtimer

Depends who you ask or what factoids you read on the internet.

Let's just say it has not caught on in a big way and there is a reason for that.


----------



## clyderoad

squarepeg said:


> factoid: this thread has averaged 1.17 views per minute since it was started.


Off Topic.


----------



## gww

Clyde and JWC...
You guys may be taking rwursters sentance wrong. He did say uh oh like that might be a bad thing to have happen and not that it does happen. I know he is a big boy and could defend his self but I also know that I missread intent all the time, ask johno in this thread about that. I don't do it on purpose but do know it happens. 
Cheers
gww
Ps how did five guys type and answer before I got mine done? Now I have to admit to being slow along with not being able to read.


----------



## msl

> The issue with that logic is you split the hive, there are still the same number of mites on the same number of bees. the bees then rebuild, but so do the mites.


yes, but the mites grow exponentially and the bees are linear with 2 queens laying you are now producing 2x the brood per mite this is why OTS works... not counting the knock down on the brood break, your producing 4x the brood per mite, eftivly out breeding them, so when you recombine you have a big poopulation of bees, and less mites per bee then if you had left intact the is also said to be an effect on reproduction days, after the lack of brood most of the phoric mites move in to the brood when it becomes available, while they are in the brood very little mites are left to move in the brood as it becomes ready, giving you many days of non reproduction this may or may not be acounted for in people mite models... I have seen a lot of math, not a lot of mite counts


----------



## squarepeg

clyderoad said:


> Off Topic.


deleted.


----------



## clyderoad

the mites increase exponentially whether there is 1 queen or 2 queens laying. more brood cells, more mites.
boomer hives suffer this fate.


----------



## gww

Oldtimer


> The issue with that logic is you split the hive, there are still the same number of mites on the same number of bees. the bees then rebuild, but so do the mites.
> 
> Removing brood and killing it, along with the mites in it, would achieve a genuine reduction, as the bulk of the mites are in the brood. Merely splitting, less so.


I know what you are saying but also know what seeley was saying with the swarm taking 35 percent away. He was saying that those are the hives that happened to lived and the hives that did not swarm every year died. I understand you saying percentage wise the mite load would be the same. I will put my guess out there. The queen with all that laying space from hatched brood out layed the mites and changed the percentage of mites per bee. That ment there were enough healthy bees with the sick bees to still have a healthy winter cluster. Not saying that is what the truth is, just saying when I think about it, it makes sence to me.
Cheers
gww
msl beat me. Clyde antidotal but mel dieslekoen has made up charts showing what he thinks happens with a new queen and empty comb to work with. lauri on this thread has given antidotal evidence on queen changes and randy has numbers. Seeley says hives don't die and lots of other things out there point to something being differrent after splits and swarms and hives living. It seems to add up to something. I do know there is also evidence of "my hive was booming two weeks ago and now it is dead"


----------



## msl

> the mites increase exponentially whether there is 1 queen or 2 queens laying


yes but there increase rate dosen't change weather its 800 in one hive or 200 in 4 hives do to being exponential 

The bee increase, and there for the amount of parisitced brood changes with the amount of laying queens....split 4 ways and its 3/4 less brood damaged by mites.. 

spit ball numbers example
Those 200 mites go in to 200 cells in 4 hives each, those 800 mites go in to 800 cells in one hive a mounth later its 1600 and 400.... a full days worth of the queens egg laying wasited in one hive, 1/4 of it in each of the 4 hives. 2 months is 3200 and 800 

combine 3 of the splits to run for honey and you have a hive with a monster bee pop, 2400 mites vs 3200 in the unsplit, and much less mites per bee do to the bee pop being so huge.. harvest and treat... 

the 4th hive is split 4 ways for nucs/hives to over winter, back down to 200 mites, and gets a brood break that drops that mite number. 

This is how the some of serial splitter TF types make it work, even with normal type stock.

as your self, would having 1/3 less mites let you get your supers off before you need to treat? likly not a replacement for peoples currant program, but could be a great addition, especially given the purported larger honey yeaids


----------



## 1102009

Dr. W. Ritter takes part in:
Our approach to development
We always strive to achieve sustainable change, helping empower*communities so they are*no longer reliant on outside help. To achieve our sustainability goals we apply the following approaches:
•	We promote the use of local resources and we do not send equipment or bees to poor countries.
•	We advise the use of indigenous bees. This allows the maintenance of healthy strains of bees and helps to combat the spread of the bee health problems.
•	We build the capacity of*organisations*in partner countries, so in the long term they can take the lead in the development of their own communities.
•	We know information and knowledge sharing leads to self-reliance and empowerment of the poor and this*is a core focus of our work.
•	We do not advocate one type of bee hive only, because we know the best hive type is one that is appropriate to the local context and local*bees - always taking into account affordability*for beekeepers.
•	We believe incomes can be raised by teaching beekeepers to analyse and understand their local market environment.* *

http://www.beesfordevelopment.org

http://www.beesfortheworld.de

Ritter speaks:
He always said when he was called because there are problems the "African way" was abandoned.
African Way is: putting up small hides, flocking boxes in "swarm trees". The bees swarm freely or leave their nest as soon as the disease pressure is too high, or they are disturbed too often, or because of drought. they move, settle wild in the forest at some point, the empty hives are repopulated by ferals. So there is a cycle and constant exchange between wild and domesticated, from which man harvests. The absconding and swarming is not prevented, why make unnecessary work, eventually bees return by themselves again. There are no problems with illnesses and varroa.
He cited Tanzania as an example, but said "but no matter", because that's what's going on all over africa.

He worked in Ethiopia where "civilized" methods were introduced. My co-worker will study her script about the experiences and I will update.


----------



## clyderoad

> as your self, would having 1/3 less mites let you get your supers off before you need to treat? likly not a replacement for peoples currant program, but could be a great addition, especially given the purported larger honey yeaids


no, supers off already before the need to treat.

splitting my hives 4 ways to control mites according to your suggested method would leave me without a honey crop in the field. splits are not created equal, never mind mites are also not distribute equally, nor are bees. queen right development varies in each split off, weather is a factor in growth rates, failures happen. the theory sounds great to many, in practice it's unaccounted for variables severely limit it's usefulness to a good read.

i have mel's book, i do not utilize his MI methods here.


----------



## Delta Bay

Oldtimer said:


> I would lean towards the latter, because according to SiWolKe he is claiming that creating an artificial swarm mid summer is as good as any treatment.


If you look at Seeley's work on swarming you will see how that works. All though he is working with small colonies it still applies to larger colonies if varroa has not had free rein up to the summer artificial swarm. Splitting a colony early spring with all open brood and the queen in one half on the original stand. The other half, being mostly capped brood and producing it's own queen, will reduce the mite numbers enough. Recombine those after the new queen is laying if you choose. Timing is important and you would have to see if it would give you the desired results in your location. Being this is a TF, treatment discussion, you could use a flash formic or oxalic dribble during the open brood or/broodless period.


----------



## johno

Delta Bay, where do all those mites go, perhaps migrate to another colony? The only way you will reduce mites in the open brood half is if the bees groom them off and most bees do not do a good job of that which I have seen with my own eyes. Those little mites are so mobile that one bee grooming another can not catch the phoretic mite as it scoots away from where the bee is being groomed. Also bear in mind that only a max of 40% of the mites could be phoretic so maybe 20% in each half of the split so the open brood half still has 20% and the other half 80% so what have you really gained unless you treat those hives. The open brood half immediately and the other half after 24 days if there is drone brood.
Johno


----------



## Delta Bay

> Delta Bay, where do all those mites go, perhaps migrate to another colony?


Whether you want to believe it or not mites do have a expected life span. Some will die on their own. The main purpose of the early spring split is to disrupt the mite population to get to the summer artificial swarm. If one half of the split has only open brood all mites are phoretic. The other half with minimal open brood produces a queen from an egg or very young larva which allows all brood to emerge leaving all mites phoretic. even drone brood. Many of those mites will miss their final chance to reproduce because of the length of the brood break.

I've been doing this for over a decade and it works pretty darn good with out chemical treatments. If someone chooses to treat while managing in this way it offers them ideal conditions to use the so called softer treatments like an oxalic dribble or a 24 hour flash formic.


----------



## jim lyon

johno said:


> Delta Bay, where do all those mites go, perhaps migrate to another colony? The only way you will reduce mites in the open brood half is if the bees groom them off and most bees do not do a good job of that which I have seen with my own eyes. Those little mites are so mobile that one bee grooming another can not catch the phoretic mite as it scoots away from where the bee is being groomed. Also bear in mind that only a max of 40% of the mites could be phoretic so maybe 20% in each half of the split so the open brood half still has 20% and the other half 80% so what have you really gained unless you treat those hives. The open brood half immediately and the other half after 24 days if there is drone brood.
> Johno


There is a theory that after a brood break, when the first larvae become mature enough for varroa to infest, that the initial rush tends to overpopulate those first larvae resulting in less than ideal breeding conditions. I cant vouch for this nor have I seen research documenting it but it remains an interesting theory. Perhaps all we really see happen with brood breaks and divisions is that it results in a hive that can outgrow varroa for a number of months. All I know for sure is that splits using cells and a well timed OA treatment results in some wonderfully productive hives with very low varroa numbers and don't believe the notion that OA reduces brood volume in this scenario.


----------



## Delta Bay

> There is a theory that after a brood break, when the first larvae become mature enough for varroa to infest, that the initial rush tends to overpopulate those first larvae resulting in less than ideal breeding conditions.


It is in the literature Jim. I'm surprized you haven't come across it. It states that when brood is infested with multiple foundress mites, they do not mate very well and some appear not to at all. It's the same observation in both worker and drone brood.


----------



## clyderoad

> Perhaps all we really see happen with brood breaks and divisions is that it results in a hive that can outgrow varroa for a number of months.


Yes.
Months being the operative word, which has been left out of the exponential growth rate discussion.
The time variable.


----------



## johno

Most of these theories put forward here are mostly speculation, firstly I do not have mite problems in the early spring. I have mite problems in the late summer at which time I am going to split all my colonies and OAV the half with open brood and the old queen, then give queen cells to the other half of capped brood and OAV them after 24 days and I know I will no longer have mite problems. By the way this is not a TF thread, it is basically a " treating vs not treating opinion thread " I believe there has never been any research done on brood breaks as a means of mite control without treatment of some kind. A swarm from a heavily infested colony would probably have a reduced mite load and therefore multiple swarming will allow bees to survive varoa, as is the case with scutelata when left to their own devices however according to a South American commercial beekeeper they do not thrive multiply and produce much honey unless mites are controlled. My next problem is how am I going to dispose of all those splits in late summer.
Johno


----------



## Lauri

jim lyon said:


> There is a theory that after a brood break, when the first larvae become mature enough for varroa to infest, that the initial rush tends to overpopulate those first larvae resulting in less than ideal breeding conditions. I cant vouch for this nor have I seen research documenting it but it remains an interesting theory. Perhaps all we really see happen with brood breaks and divisions is that it results in a hive that can outgrow varroa for a number of months. All I know for sure is that splits using cells and a well timed OA treatment results in some wonderfully productive hives with very low varroa numbers and don't believe the notion that OA reduces brood volume in this scenario.


When I started beekeeping, I only had one location, so I had to learn to make splits within one yard and allow for flyback. This was just one of the ways I used it to my advantage instead of trying to fight the bees to relocate by confining them, etc.

When I started doing what I call 'fly back' swarms, I'd move an entire colony onto my cart, place a new box on the bottom board in the original location, find the queen and place her on one or two frames of Open brood right in the center. Surrounding that center frame with new undrawn frames and a good interior feeder. (Keep that feeder full of feed while they are drawing new frames) Letting all the foragers fly back to the old location and allowing them to rebuild new comb. It works wonderfully with an older very large overwintered hive early spring.

All mites are phoretic until that frame of open brood is capped. (The reason I use a frame of brood is to keep them from considering absconding) Removing that frame of brood once capped would be a good way to remove a lot of mites from the colony. Using a frame of open DRONE brood for the 'anchor' frame would make some sense and you wouldn't have any problem removing that, opposed to a full frame of worker brood.

Back then OAV was not legal and I'd never tried it with the method. But now, combined with the phoretic period when assembled, it would be amazing way to refreshing an older colony. 
(You take all the frames of brood, feed and bees from that original large overwintered colony and break them up into nucs and give them a queen cell.) 
I loved this method, one of the things I did when I mentioned I had so many hives I had the resources to experiment when I was pretty inexperienced. I have not done it in a couple years because...it results in a LOT of new colonies! I am already selling nucs and spending more time working bees than I intended. Of course you could recombine the hive once the virgin queens have been run through the older frames and they are cleaned up. Harvest your mated queens & Reassemble or combine the nucs right before your main flow for a larger production colony. 
There are other options other than keeping all the nucs separate. 


I did this for a few years without treatments and it worked pretty darn well for me. With an OA hit, it would work beautifully. There is no empty comb to contaminate with the OAV crystals except for the center anchor/bait frame. All the frames are new and not yet drawn. A dribble would also be effective at this point. But those frames will soon be drawn in just a few days with all those bees, an established queen with no where to lay and no brood to feed. If you've never seen a colony grab a gear, be prepared to be amazed.

Here are a couple photos of the process after assembly:
This one was done 4-2-14 from a triple deep hive with 2nd year queen

1/2 hour after separation: 









One hour after separation:








3 hours:









9 days after separation:

















There are particulars you should know about this method I did not mention here, possible imbalance of bee ages for one and how to allow for that, what to expect, etc. You can shake in some nurse bees if your spring temps are not so cool you have to be concerned about chilled brood with the brood frames that are left and broken up into nucs. Once all your bees that were inclined to fly back to the old location have done so ( overnight) you can judge the brood frame/nurse bee population easily before you break them up into nucs. Once all foragers have rebuilt these frames and they are full of brood and feed, they will have worked themselves to death and leave only the queen, brood and newly emerged young bees. There is , what I call, a 'mentor gap' when older bee have died and there are no foragers to pass on information about location of resources, etc. It is interesting to see how much the bees learn from each other and the impact of an imbalance of ages. It's not just the ability to do a job, it's the communication disruption within the whole colony.

If you are not careful, you'll start out with a box of senior citizens and end up with a box of kindergartners with no teachers. It is important to feed them, especially at this point.
If you've timed it right, the very young bees will be maturing right before your main flow when resources are typically scarce, so having few foragers are really not a big issue since there is not much available to collect. If you time it right, your young bees will have matured to foraging age right as your main flow starts. New frames are all drawn, ready to be filled. 

But the mites do take a hard hit. Especially if you combine with a treatment. Thing is, with that broodless window, it is most effective with the least amount of exposures. If you use Apivar, that can mean just a couple days instead of 6-8 weeks of exposure time. That's a big difference.
A big difference in exposures, residual accumulative exposures and over all costs because that Apivar strip can treat several nucs/ colonies instead of just one.

It all sounds complicated, but it's not. It just takes some time. Once you do it, and get your organization down, you'll want to do it to all your large hives early spring especially if they seem inclined to swarm. It stops THAT right in the bud..I call it 'freshening' a hive.

All this also can be done AFTER the main flow when a hive is sitting back doing a whole bunch of nothing, but allowing mites to begin to reproduce late summer. It works great at that time too, maybe even better than spring timing depending on the hives condition coming out of winter .


----------



## JWChesnut

I agree with much of Johno last post. I am hard pressed to find a mite in the spring. In the mid-summer, they are in the drone brood (and do not affect the worker bees). In late August, the drone brood is gone, and the mites migrate into the worker brood (which is also declining in extent). If I do not control mites in August, by October the colony is mite-ridden with weak crawling bees, and the hive crashes. Much of the "triumphal" claims about mite-free colonies is based on the earliest spring inspections. --- Removed a reference to an example of this early spring inspections producing low mite counts --


----------



## gww

lauri
I did your fly back split using a queen cell for the old bees cause I did not have a queen. It is amazing how much honey they put in the hive before the queen was laying. I figured that losing the old bees would not hurt due to all the stores for the young to use untill they became foragers. I know your post was on bee learning but thought you might like to hear my experiance anyway.
Cheers
gww


----------



## msl

johno In deltas example there are no/very few mites in the open brood do to mite live life cycle, they only move in the the brood just before capping so the bulk of the mites are under the capped brood and on the nurse bees

The key here is this split alows you to behaviorally sort the mites. 

The brood break in the side with the capped brood knocks back the mites by 40% or so.. When I did this this year I then broke the capped brood up in to nucs after that side drew cells, and again after they grew out. and then treated the yard 1X broodless OAD, I am not sure if the brood break realistically gives enuff knock down for that side to remain intact and untreated in most areas, but as it will go broodless its prime for a shot of OAV. 

Iin my experiment the queen right side of the split did remove enuf of the mites to remain untreated till Oct, Per Lori's instructions I only moved a comb of very young larve and eggs, this limits the nurse bees moved . Come late fall broodless it had 1/2 the mites of a hive headed by a sister queen that swarmed and its sisters hive that had the queen pulled at the start of the flow and it had 1/3 the mites of hives started with packages. Splits/swarms matter



> splitting my hives 4 ways to control mites according to your suggested method


Not realy suggesting, just showing how splits can lower the load with common example, however I am a huge fan of the above flyback split as it has huge impulactions for bolth sides of the debate. 

such as puting in a vertical excluder by the entrance to restrict the new queen to lay on one frame, when they start to cap that frames let her out, later cull that frame and most of the mites go with it.... OA during the brood break would be faster/more effective but every one wants to mange differently... 

*I see the flyback split as an IPM bridge between the 2 cultures, that can be useful from the guy with 1 hive in the back yard to the sideliner. Bolth sides would do well to develop it further.*
It's funny.... whisper blue shop towel, fogger, or lithium chloride and people line up wanting to try it.... Talk about a simple, easy way to make OA much more effective and or kill mites with out the OA and every turns there nose up, even tho some top beekeepers have recommended it... 
don't take anyone's world for it, try a fly back split this spring and see for your self



> There is a theory that after a brood break, when the first larvae become mature enough for varroa to infest, that the initial rush tends to overpopulate those first larvae resulting in less than ideal breeding conditions


hypothesis not theroy, I haven't see any work on it. when you crunch the numbers based on standard varroa birth and death rates it seems you can acount for most of the effects in the devide and the brood break causing less reproduction days

here is a simple mite model I put together last year before randy's came out. Mites reproduce at rate of 0.03409 and die at a rate of 0.00909 per day giving you a population increase of 0.025 a day when they are reproducing and a pop decrease of 0.00909 when they are not 

It shows what happens with pure division of the mite load and the the breaks causing less reproduction days.. No too many mites per cell, no extra mortality do to longer phoric period (grooming, simple falling off, ageing before reproduction, etc )









edit Lauri and a bunch of outhers posted while I was typing 


> be prepared to be amazed.





> it results in a LOT of new colonies!


Agreed, I had had concerns on the lack of veglin, age of forgers, etc.. I was blown away by the performance. I had planed on cuting strips/grafting last year, but never got around to it as the yard filled up rapidly


----------



## 1102009

Delta Bay said:


> If you look at Seeley's work on swarming you will see how that works. All though he is working with small colonies it still applies to larger colonies if varroa has not had free rein up to the summer artificial swarm. Splitting a colony early spring with all open brood and the queen in one half on the original stand.* The other half, being mostly capped brood and producing it's own queen, will reduce the mite numbers enough.* Recombine those after the new queen is laying if you choose. Timing is important and you would have to see if it would give you the desired results in your location. Being this is a TF, treatment discussion, you could use a flash formic or oxalic dribble during the open brood or/broodless period.


I did this last season and see it´s not sufficient in my location, only the more resistant queen genetics will have success and this means "live and let die" again. But my colony numbers are not high enough to use this strategy. It worked when two colonies superseded after the first virgin was mated and laying. But they shifted the queens so had double brood brake.

So when I do this I still have to cull one or two capped brood combs before winter breeding to bring down the mite numbers. More so if the bees reduce brood frames.



> All mites are phoretic until that frame of open brood is capped. (The reason I use a frame of brood is to keep them from considering absconding) Removing that frame of brood once capped would be a good way to remove a lot of mites from the colony.


Lauri,
we did an artificial strong swarm in spring and culled the first capped comb to give them a good start. This was a local mutt treated hive before I got them. But in late summer when they reduced brood amount the mite numbers suddenly rose. They are not high, so I left them be, but now I think I should have culled a comb once more. They are weak.

So all this differs from location to location and depends on reinvasion through drift or robbing, the more resistant stock ( a breeders queen) will probably only need one culling or one brood brake.
I have a F1 queen of such stock now and her descendants and will have some pure bred queens this year. I´m curious how much impact the genetics have and how much other managements.


----------



## Delta Bay

> When I started doing what I call 'fly back' swarms, I'd move an entire colony onto my cart, place a new box on the bottom board in the original location, find the queen and place her on one or two frames of Open brood right in the center.


This is one of the strategies I use as well other than I only ever use one comb of open brood. Mostly in the summer near the end of my main flow and removal of honey. Sometimes I will remove the comb of brood once it has been capped and place back in the queenless half.


----------



## Delta Bay

SiWolKe said:


> I did this last season and see it´s not sufficient in my location, only the more resistant queen genetics will have success and this means "live and let die" again. But my colony numbers are not high enough to use this strategy. It worked when two colonies superseded after the first virgin was mated and laying. *But they shifted the queens so had double brood brake*.


It seems you miss understood my posts? There are two brood breaks. One in the spring and then again in the summer. If you have bees that have some mite resistance you may be able to get away with a single brood break with or without a single treatment a year using a summer(what Lauri calls a fly back swarm) brood break. Depends on the mite numbers you've got. All bees are not equal.


----------



## Michael Bush

As usual people want to blame the other group for their problems and then they resort to name calling.

>one particularly egregious example of this fraud were the mite counts Michael Bush put on his website, based on May inspections of nucs

You not only accuse me of fraud but of a "particularly egregious example of fraud". Where is the fraud? What about it is "particularly egregious"? The dates are on the inspections. They are not "nucs". I posted them both because I was selling queens and because they are a third party inspecting my hives and I think people may be curious about the results. The University of Nebraska has inspected them for APHIS/BIP in July the last couple of years with similar results. If you wish to respectfully explain what you think those inspections mean, that is one thing. To accuse someone of fraud, is quite another. You might try being respectful rather than insulting. I think you might find people more willing to hear what you have to say. Name calling is not a rational argument.


----------



## msl

delta would you expand more on your management? what box get the supers, etc
I am sure the 1st question will be from many (and rightly so)is how does it impact the honey crop... does it lower it or does freeing up the hive(s) of brood increase your forage work force. 
In Italy its common to create a brood less period after peak flow, (when the egg layed will emerge too late to impact the field force and the hive is curtailing broodrearing anyway to focus on the flow) , pull supers , TX broodless and then the winter bees are razed in very good conditions... but if you cage the queen early season you can loose over 1/2 your crop.


----------



## squarepeg

Delta Bay said:


> It is in the literature Jim...


db, please post some links for us if you have them.


----------



## squarepeg

i sampled a handful colonies for mites using alcohol wash back in the late summers of 2015 and 2016.

the results came in between about 8% and 14% infestation with no outward signs of dwv or crawlers.

those colonies went on to survive winter and produce a good honey crop the next season.

my interpretation was that there may be some 'tolerance' going on as well as 'resistance'.

another possibility is less virulent viruses. samples were sent to dr. martin in england at the end of 2016 as part of the collaboration with randy oliver but we don't have the results back yet.


----------



## baybee

Bee14me said:


> ...I feel so lost as a new beek, when only a few months ago I was so self assured of my 3 years worth of research. I don't mean to sound like whiny 3 year old. My head is just spinning with all of these theories.


 Bee14me, you aren't alone being lost and being ignored! I guess the only theory that should be applied here is The Inevitable Internet Entropy Theory. 

One would expect that this thread starts with the definition of "treatment-free" beekeeping but it hasn't, probably because this isn't the 101 forum.

While (the best book on beekeeping) "Beekeeping for Dummies" doesn't define this term either, it speaks about three approaches to beekeeping: Medicated beekeeping, Natural beekeeping, and Organic beekeeping, which is a good start.

I try to learn more about it, so this is my current (beginner's) summary about "treatment-free" beekeeping:

(a) TF means no treatment whatsoever, not even sugar powder;
(b) TF is not the same as maintenance-free. It's quite opposite;
(c) TF is not for someone with fewer than a dozen or two hives;
(d) TF is not for someone with just one bee yard;
(d) TF is not for a mentor-less beginner;
(e) a TF beekeeper is okay with and expects to be losing 50% or even more (some years 100%) of the hives every fall/winter;
(f) because of losing hives all the time a TF beekeeper has to run a queen raising operation.


----------



## squarepeg

squarepeg said:


> civility remains the rule and personal attacks will be deleted.





JWChesnut said:


> ...one particularly egregious example of this fraud...


before i could get the eraser out the target of this personal attack responded so we'll let it stay as an example of what will not be tolerated.

overall i am seeing a lot of meaningful back and forth so far on what undoubtedly is a topic for which most everyone has a strong opinion about. good job folks.


----------



## spencer

baybee said:


> Bee14me, you aren't alone being lost and being ignored! I guess the only theory that should be applied here is The Inevitable Internet Entropy Theory.
> 
> One would expect that this thread starts with the definition of "treatment-free" beekeeping but it hasn't, probably because this isn't the 101 forum.
> 
> While (the best book on beekeeping) "Beekeeping for Dummies" doesn't define this term either, it speaks about three approaches to beekeeping: Medicated beekeeping, Natural beekeeping, and Organic beekeeping, which is a good start.
> 
> I try to learn more about it, so this is my current summary about "treatment-free" beekeeping:
> 
> (a) TF means no treatment whatsoever, not even sugar powder;
> (b) TF is not the same as maintenance-free. It's quite opposite;
> (c) TF is not for someone with fewer than a dozen or two hives;
> (d) TF is not for someone with just one bee yard;
> (d) TF is not for a mentor-less beginner;
> (e) a TF beekeeper is okay with and expects to be losing 50% or even more (some years 100%) of the hives every fall/winter;
> (f) because of losing hives all the time a TF beekeeper has to run a queen raising operation.


Sounds about right. Although for point f. I just do nucs/splits either with eggs or swarm cells.


----------



## Delta Bay

msl said:


> delta would you expand more on your management? what box get the supers, etc
> I am sure the 1st question will be from many (and rightly so)is how does it impact the honey crop... does it lower it or does freeing up the hive(s) of brood increase your forage work force.
> In Italy its common to create a brood less period after peak flow, (when the egg layed will emerge too late to impact the field force and the hive is curtailing broodrearing anyway to focus on the flow) , pull supers , TX broodless and then the winter bees are razed in very good conditions... but if you cage the queen early season you can loose over 1/2 your crop.


In my location I can do the spring splits as early as the last week in April and the queen half with open brood has until the beginning of our main flow June 1st to June 15th which ends around July 15th. They have enough time to build and be ready for that. Those colonies get filled out with as many drawn combs as I can give them. Honey crop is pretty good(1 super) but hard to tell here as we are not known to have good honey crops here. Other than last year the three previous years were slim for most everyone . 50lbs is supposed to be average.
The queenless half will make less but can still give a few frames of honey. If recombined they can make a couple of supers. The queenless half definitely does not require feeding for winter if not recombined. So a super on each.

squarepeg

If you google Dr Stephen Martin from the UK some of his papers will have that info. As well as a few other researchers that have researched varroa make mention in their papers.

Actually here is one that describes over crowding of drone brood

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Stephen_Martin/publication/8664752_Africanized_bees_have_a_unique_tolerance_to_Varroa_mites/links/59f65882a6fdcc075ec5feb2/Africanized-bees-have-a-unique-tolerance-to-Varroa-mites.pdf


----------



## fieldsofnaturalhoney

Baybee, the best book on beekeeping and your summary:scratch: JWChesnut, Really? Back to the postopcorn:


----------



## msl

Thanks DB, I got that 
I was interested in the late summer use you talked about 


> This is one of the strategies I use as well other than I only ever use one comb of open brood. Mostly in the summer near the end of my main flow and removal of honey.


----------



## johno

Thanks Square for post # 210 this amount of varoa in the colony can only mean no virulent viruses or even perhaps bees that are not affected by viruses. However if the bees are moved will they survive in a hostile environment where virulent viruses are present. That be the $100 question.
Johno


----------



## Delta Bay

msl said:


> Thanks DB, I got that
> I was interested in the late summer use you talked about


Okay, My summer brood breaks are done around July 15th to Aug 1st after harvest. No later as successful queen mating starts to drop off pretty good when those queens are ready and mating at the beginning of Sept. or later. Last week in Aug. is still pretty good, 2nd and 3rd week in Aug is much better for my location.

Good to do a mite wash or sugar shake to see what the numbers are before doing the swarms (fly back swarms with one comb of open brood and the queen on the original stand, all the rest goes on a new stand in the same yard to make a new queen.) as a why of selecting colonies with lower mite counts for next season replacements. Feed as needed and prep for winter. Sell extra over wintered queens as early nucs as per spring manipulation. Mite counts should be taken just before spring manipulations.


----------



## Delta Bay

double post


----------



## Bee14me

Thanks baybee. My collection of books on bee keeping seems to lack that one  
So today I decided to do some reading on varroa specifically and came across, which I am sure is old news to everybody here, heat treatment. Supposedly you can kill mites in at all stages of the game at 104 degrees F. Why has this not caught on? I see a company in Czech Republic has a patent out on a solar hive that advertises 100% destruction of varroa with in the hive after two 2 hour treatments 7-14 days apart. Has anyone tried this on a larger scale? Or even a smaller scale here?


----------



## Bee14me

Most times when I hit send i feel like this guy :lookout: lol


----------



## Oldtimer

Let's be kind to those methods, and say that the methods that come into popular use tend to be ones that either, actually work, do not involve inordinate amounts of time and disruption for small result, or do not involve unsustainable expense.

Just to illustrate how crazy some things can get, a few years ago the internet was all abuzz with a revoltionary new hive that prevented swarming. It did this by using a specially designed brood chamber that slowly rotated, meaning any queen cells built were eventually turned wrong way up and died. So convincing was the speel about this that against my advice, a hobbyist friend of mine actually bought plane tickets and flew to the country they were made to have a look, and buy some. He returned without them, a look at the actual hives had convinced him it was a bad plan, and I've heard nothing about these hives since.

There are always new ideas, but it pays to be a late adopter.


----------



## Bee14me

Being a late adopter would seem silly in a different context...... such as using skeps or bee gums compared to more modern methods of beekeeping.....  I understand what you are conveying old timer ( that would sound really disrespectful if it wasn't already your handle ) it's just the opportunity to cure a hive of an epidemic without the need for flybacks ( no offense, I actually find that quite fascinating ) treating with chemicals, splits, or any of the million other methods of trying to remedy the situation at hand. If this is something that can be done within a two hour period with out the need of hive minipulation why wouldn't everybody be on it? So the tech isn't up to par yet, but the science is there to prove it works, which simply means the best method of application simply has not been put forward yet. It seems more promising then genetics at this point from what I've read so far on this site.


----------



## gww

bee14
You left out part of the equation. Cost and effort. I know a guy on here that uses tweezers and picks mites off. Now if he picks them off, it surly gets rid of the mite but I don't see a bunch of people jumping on the band wagon to also pick the mites off with tweezers. 

I think you missed the point in that it is not a new thing and people know about it and are not doing it and there is probly a reason.
Cheers
gww


----------



## 1102009

Bee14me said:


> Thanks baybee. My collection of books on bee keeping seems to lack that one
> So today I decided to do some reading on varroa specifically and came across, which I am sure is old news to everybody here, heat treatment. Supposedly you can kill mites in at all stages of the game at 104 degrees F. Why has this not caught on? I see a company in Czech Republic has a patent out on a solar hive that advertises 100% destruction of varroa with in the hive after two 2 hour treatments 7-14 days apart. Has anyone tried this on a larger scale? Or even a smaller scale here?


You mean like this?
http://media.repro-mayr.de/86/629986.pdf

Some of my co-workers tested it. You can only put broodframes without bees sitting on them in.
That because the bees will ventilate to cool and die of stress.
The brood frames lost one third of pupa. It was too much work and the machine was too expensive.
Some wax melted if the temperature was too high.

Last thing I heard was the manufacturers still work on it.


----------



## 1102009

I found this article on the heat treatment:
https://www.bienenjournal.de/aktuelles/meldungen/hyperthermie-wunderwaffe-oder-wirkungslos/

Hyperthermia has been used for decades in the treatment of the Varroa mite. When the crowdfunding campaign for the bee sauna started in 2015, the method was again on everyone's lips. But how does the principle work and what successes can you really expect? Five questions to Dr. med. Stefan Berg from the Bees Specialist Center in Veitshöchheim, who has examined various types of hyperthermia devices.

The idea of ​​killing mites with heat was tried out in the 1970s in the Soviet Union and in Japan. Even then it was known that Varroa is more sensitive to heat than the honeybee. The optimal development temperature of the bee brood is 34.5 ° C, whereas the Varroa only 32 ° C. Experiments showed that mites are already damaged at temperatures of 38 ° C. If they are exposed to even higher temperatures over a longer period of time, they can also die off, depending on the duration. However, the ridge on which one moves when mites are killed and bees are spared is narrow.

(Photo: Dr. Stefan Berg)

Hyperthermia: treating whole nations or just the brood combs?

Scientists and beekeepers have already taken advantage of this knowledge and have developed devices that either treat entire bee colonies or just the brood combs with heat and thus try to kill the mites - with the least possible damage to the bees.

Scientists of the Specialist Center Bees in Veitshöchheim - including Dr. med. Stefan Berg - investigated three types of hyperthermia devices: the Varroaeleminator, the Varroa Controller and the Varroa Kill 2.

In the following interview Dr. Stefan Berg from his experiences. A review and background of the bee sauna as well as further detailed information on hyperthermia was available in the January edition of the Bee Journal.

1. What is the practice of hyperthermia devices?

The Varroa controller and Varroaeleminator are devices where you remove the brood combs, hung in a box and heated. After completion of the treatment, the brood combs are placed in mite-free colonies. The third device, the Varroa-Kill 2, is placed in a blank frame on the incubator. The bees are not necessarily treated, the entrance hole remains open.

2. How did the treatment work?

For the first two devices quite good. These two devices had a high efficiency. Between 87 and 97 percent of brood mites were killed by the heat treatment. However, treatment success with Varroa-Kill 2 was worse, at least in the first attempt. It killed only 56 percent of brood mites. A weak point is that the device is used in the mostly poorly insulated beekeeping system of the beekeeper. On the second try, we additionally isolated the hive. With that we had a bigger success.

3. At what temperature do the mites die?

Heating the brood combs for two hours at 41 ° C, the young daughter mites and the males are killed, but the mother mites survive this very well. We plucked brood after the treatment, only ten percent of the mother's mites were damaged. But at three hours and 42 ° C, almost all mother's mites were dead.

4. Do not these temperatures harm the bees?

It depends. If you place a queen in a 42 ° C incubator and leave her there for two hours, she is likely to be damaged afterwards. But that's not how the hyperthermia devices work. They warm the honeycomb or the people slowly and then run for a certain time at the highest operating temperature. In the drone larvae we have found that these two hours at 41 ° C tolerate without problems. However, the resulting drone drones have a reduced sperm count. There is also damage to the worker brood. However, the extent of the damage seems reasonable, at the manufacturer's temperature a maximum of 10 to 15 percent of the pupa were damaged.

5. Can you completely dispense with other treatments if you are treated with heat?

I would rather not make any basic statement about that. The principle works though. I would imagine that hyperthermia can be used very well, especially in spring, when other treatment is not permitted. However, the treatment is definitely a time-consuming story and quite costly.


----------



## Oldtimer

Good analysis SiWolKe .


----------



## Bee14me

Thanks SiWolKe! I thought about trying to mfg a frame that contained circuitry within the foundation that would act as a heating/sensing grid. The rebates that the frames sit on would now contain the contacts for such circuitry which would then carry them outside the box to a water proof connection port. A small microprocessor could control the amperage supplied to the grid alwhile exactly monitoring the temp of the entire frame. Production would be cheap, no need for special boxes, or insulation. Frames could used in normal fashion. A simple 60v dewalt battery would easily power this, or any type of D.C. Power source. Relying on solar power is a hassle, as in the thermal solar hive, but D.C. Power is managable and precise. I think I'm going to peruse this


----------



## shinbone

Oldtimer said:


> Just to illustrate how crazy some things can get, a few years ago the internet was all abuzz with a revolutionary new hive that prevented swarming. It did this by using a specially designed* brood chamber that slowly rotated*, meaning any queen cells built were eventually turned wrong way up and died. So convincing was the speel about this that against my advice, a hobbyist friend of mine actually bought plane tickets and flew to the country they were made to have a look, and buy some. He returned without them, a look at the actual hives had convinced him it was a bad plan, and I've heard nothing about these hives since.


Is this the rotating hive you are talking about?

http://www.biobees.com/library/hive_other/Rotating_Hive.pdf


----------



## jim lyon

Lauri, Nice post and lengthy explanation of your early nucing experience. I've done some similar manipulations but my experience has been that too often the unit you move away lacks sufficient bee cover to take care of all the brood. No doubt the key is doing it late enough in season that the nights are warm and there is a high proportion of newly hatched nurse bees to older field bees. As always, I continue to be amazed at your bee acumen and your rapid progression as a beekeeper.


----------



## Oldtimer

That's the one Shinbone, nice find!

But it's an updated version, back when I looked they were made of wood, the guy who went over to have a look said there were several working models with bees in on display, but they broke down a number of times cos the bees kept gumming things up. He also didn't think the bees looked happy or the hive had the normal happy beehive type vibe, he decided against.

I see with this updated model they are now not only claiming swarm control but also varroa control.


----------



## shinbone

Oldtimer said:


> I see with this updated model they are now not only claiming swarm control but also varroa control.


It sure is a unique twist on hive design.

I can find no reports/reviews of the rotating-frame hive actually being used, though.


----------



## Oldtimer

Neither. Bit dodge for something that won an award back in 2005.


----------



## 1102009

Bee14me said:


> Thanks SiWolKe! I thought about trying to mfg a frame that contained circuitry within the foundation that would act as a heating/sensing grid. The rebates that the frames sit on would now contain the contacts for such circuitry which would then carry them outside the box to a water proof connection port. A small microprocessor could control the amperage supplied to the grid alwhile exactly monitoring the temp of the entire frame. Production would be cheap, no need for special boxes, or insulation. Frames could used in normal fashion. A simple 60v dewalt battery would easily power this, or any type of D.C. Power source. Relying on solar power is a hassle, as in the thermal solar hive, but D.C. Power is managable and precise. I think I'm going to peruse this


You´re welcome.
The difference between the effective temperature and the damaging temperature is very small, so you have to be careful.
Please update if you do such a management.

Rotation hive:


> Rotation does not disturb the bee colony. It makes them reor- ganize the brood daily, which is normally the beekeeper’s job. They take apart the remaining honey wreath, and carry it to the supers or the two side combs.


This is one of the most terrible things to do to bees in my eyes, IMO.


----------



## Lauri

jim lyon said:


> Lauri, Nice post and lengthy explanation of your early nucing experience. I've done some similar manipulations but my experience has been that too often the unit you move away lacks sufficient bee cover to take care of all the brood. No doubt the key is doing it late enough in season that the nights are warm and there is a high proportion of newly hatched nurse bees to older field bees. .


Thanks Jim. Yes, as I said you can shake some nurse bees back into the old location so you have a better balance of ages there, but like you, typically in spring it would leave the removed brood frames too light on bees to avoid chilled brood that time of year.

After I find the queen, suitable frame of open brood and transfer them back to the old location, I reassemble the old hive bodies several feet away with all the brood frames just as they were, all together so the remaining bees will cluster there & cover the brood well overnight. If it was still in a triple deep and the top box was honey I remove it so the brood frames are directly under the insulated lid to retain heat in case they end up a little bee poor. They never do, but there are really no extra bees to shake back to the old queen. It is important NOT to confine this hive, you want any bees that are inclined to to fly back to do so. But you do want to reduce the entrance so again, the remaining bees can keep the brood warm.

My timing is such that they have a good balance of young bees and foragers so the division of population is pretty evenly divided. Too early in spring and you's have too many older bees-too few young bees depending on your climate and stain of bees. Early feeding would help adjust that.

This graph by Randy Oliver shown the natural population lull early spring. That graph would be useful for timing your separation and plans for feeding to alter that if you bees will take up feed when it's early and cool.









Ian recently brought my attention to this graph in one of his videos and it was like another one of the pieces of the puzzle were coming together. 

Over the years, just about the time I started trying to make up early nucs, I would see a big reduction of population and tons of capped brood. Brood heavy, bee poor I called it. The timing sucked for making up those first nucs and I just had to wait to get started. 

The first couple years I wondered if I had a problem of some kind, then finally figured out it was likely the natural die off of the older overwintered bees. 
This graph shows exactly whet I have been seeing that time of year. The white, black dotted area with 217-252 is when I want to start making early sale nucs. inch:

So when doing an early Fly back swarm, this graph can help you prepare so your bees are the right age in the right amounts. Again, early feeding for brood stimulation can change this timing, depending on your climate and strain of bees.

I love feeding too. Like treating, I dislike the labor and the cost, but love the results. 

I can decently control the bees growth and health to conform to all my needs and improve/ assure self sustainability.


----------



## Tristan Eck

jim lyon said:


> All I know for sure is that splits using cells and a well timed OA treatment results in some wonderfully productive hives with very low varroa numbers and don't believe the notion that OA reduces brood volume in this scenario.


Now that I'm raising my own cells I was thinking about this method for the coming year. However by my math there would not be a complete break in the capped brood unless the queen is late mating. How am I wrong? Obviously for the OAV to be fully effective there needs to be no capped brood. Would be curious how you go about it.


----------



## Lauri

Tristan Eck said:


> Now that I'm raising my own cells I was thinking about this method for the coming year. However by my math there would not be a complete break in the capped brood unless the queen is late mating. How am I wrong? Obviously for the OAV to be fully effective there needs to be no capped brood. Would be curious how you go about it.


Use a younger queen cell than one that is due to emerge in less than 24 hours for the first round. They are easy to handle before they are capped, but the cup itself will be very delicate and easy to dent .
You need to be very careful handling at the more delicate developmental stage between capping and a more mature cell. The wax of a recently capped cell at that stage will be tougher, but the developing queen itself can easily be damaged by handling.

Here are a couple cells that were one day from being capped. I occasionally place these cells if I am short of cells, usually because of an occasional batch failure.

















This cell was taken from the same developing graft frame the next day for early placement.









About 48 hours old
















As long as they are well started and the nuc can cover them well and cap them, they will give you the length of brood break you are looking for.


----------



## jim lyon

Tristan Eck said:


> Now that I'm raising my own cells I was thinking about this method for the coming year. However by my math there would not be a complete break in the capped brood unless the queen is late mating. How am I wrong? Obviously for the OAV to be fully effective there needs to be no capped brood. Would be curious how you go about it.


It takes about 2 weeks after hatching for a queen to begin laying and about another week for an egg to develop into a larvae mature enough for a varroa to infest, so there is your 3 weeks. That accounts for the worker brood but not all the drone brood which requires an additional 3 days. As Lauri stated you can "steal" another couple days by placing more immature cells, though that is something I'm a bit hesitant to do because of how fragile they are. If you are just doing a few so that you can give them the proper care I'm sure it would be pretty low risk. I don't like to because I'm doing pretty big numbers and simply don't have the time.


----------



## Tristan Eck

Thanks for those two replies.


----------



## Oldtimer

Re immature cells it's something I've rarely done but couple of months ago, for logistical reasons I had to put 6 day since graft cells in a nuc yard, and when I checked later the bees had destroyed every last one of them. Still haven't figured just why that was or even if it is normal, but I won't be doing it again.


----------



## Lauri

Same reason I use early cells &virgin queens, I prefer to use ripe cells, but there are times I don't have them. 

Both virgins or early cells do have their place for rectifying issues though. There are times they can do the job better than a ripe cell can. I can direct release (DR) a virgin queen in a colony that had build queen cells and she'll go through the hive and tear them all down so I don't have to. A DR virgin will get a queenless nuc & laying worker nuc (LW) back on track _Fast_.
And of course your early queen cells come in handy if your mature cells are scarce at the moment or you need a longer brood break to address mite issues.

I've placed enough of these cells to have confidence in them, but I do always mark the nuc as a 'early cell' so I know what's up and I don't try to collect that mating nuc early if I go by the date of cell placement. I've not seen any increase in failures using these cells and have personally had good results using them. Sure, you can't candle them, but if the quality of the started cell is good, you handle them right & the mating nucs are strong enough to take care of them, I have no issues.

Knowing what to expect when you go into your mating nucs weeks later is a time saver. I use blue painters tape and permanent marker. When I go back to collect and the brood isn't the age it should be, I don't want to stand there gawking for a minute trying to figure out what I did, why the brood is older/younger than it should be and what queen is present (Grafted or self made) There are times I think a mating nuc is queenless only to find they had made their own queen and she was ether out or I missed her when I placed the cell 18 days ago.

View attachment 37181


I always leave the previous tape/previous queen's info under the new one so if that new virgin failed to return, I know what I have in the nuc from the previous queen's brood. After the season is over, I can count the layered pieces of tape to see how many rounds I got from that nuc and how many queens were successfully mated & collected.

View attachment 37182


Below, this nuc had a failed take on the placed cell, made their own queen. I usually catch these as a 1-2 day old virgin since I collect at day 18. Notes say I killed the 'self', there is no brood and the name of the cell I just installed.

View attachment 37183


View attachment 37184


In normal situations queen collection and cell placement is smooth and predictable. There is a percentage of times you have to adjust to accommodate variables. Whether it's preferred or not, the use of virgins or early cells fall into that category.


----------



## Knisely

Lauri:

Can you indicate where/when on Randy Oliver's timeline plot of bee & varroa population changes you begin your preparations to raise your first grafted queens? The availability of well-mated queens will depend on when drones are available in adequate numbers, and I don't have adequate insight to know at what time (for my own local conditions) the task of starting a cell builder could be initiated so as to get queen cells for flyback swarms, etc. Timing seems to be 'everything' (to oversimplify). When do you do it in relation to the '217-252' window? It seems as though by feeding some (?all) colonies, brood production can be accelerated, and I'm trying to conceptualize how that aspect of insect husbandry would interface with your timing for spring flyback swarm management activity. 

We all share a desire to get strong colonies with low mite burdens that will be able to maximize honey collection when peak flows are available. I have further questions about the timing of removal of brood from production colonies (so that all bees can devote themselves to nectar collection), but I don't think I've ever read about you carrying out any manipulations of that sort. It seems to me as though those frames of brood could then be used to generate new nucs (with an early-produced grafted queen cell) to grow the apiary or for sale. 

I hope you (and others) with experience in these activities can help me (and others) begin to integrate what we've learned from reading with what we are observing in our own apiaries so that we will know 'when to do what' and not miss the window of time to carry out the appropriate actions for near-maximal potential success.


----------



## Lauri

I have a huge variety of sizes of overwintering hives every year. Most are double deeps but I have everything from mating nucs to 5 deep- 8 frame equipment out there. 

My biggest hives are the early producers of drones. I feed wet patties ( a couple #) by late Jan-mid Feb.depending on weather. I start grafting the first week in April if weather allows. 

For cell production, I reduce overwintered triples to doubles, then place a queen excluder between the remaining double deeps, one being queenright for my starter/builder combos. I just separate them on occasion to get grafts started, then recombine. 

In late March, due to cool or rainy weather it is hard to even place the excluder to prep them for cell building. The difference between a couple weeks is huge that time of year. Seems impossible one week, suitable 3 weeks later when builders have been prepped, grafts go in and those cells have to come out and be placed. Excellent drone populations by then and enough days with suitable mating weather windows to get the job done.

Not every day is good, not good weather all day long when days are nice, but the queens get out and mated just fine in those windows for the earliest crops. They are actually some of the most impressive queens I rear all season. But I have been lucky with weather. Extremely lucky with timing. I am due for a failed attempt I know and am thankful it's gone so well the last few years.

Pressure drops like a rock on a clear sunny day, and thunder clouds roll in. Virgin queens at the stage where they should all be out. After several minutes, Pelting rain and hail for the sudden storm..Yikes! Then I'm running for cover. There are times it gets so wild I am looking to make sure there isn't a small tornado bearing down on me. I use to sweat it, but I don't anymore. Those queens and bees aren't stupid. When the barometer drops they high tail it back to the hive ASAP. I've never seen a reduction in mated returns after a couple storms that rolled through at the worst possible time.

I also run these frames with partial foundation to encourage drone production which doesn't hurt when trying to produce quality drones early in the season. Overwintered, well fed queens are more than happy to cooperate when these frames are available.

































The blooms on my Asian pear trees tell me when to get those excluders on to prep for cell building. I'll have pollen coming in most of Feb and March if my winter weather is normal. + Supplemental feeding because I want max. performance out of them, supports brood rearing /allows for bad weather if they can't get out for natural foraging and I feel it gives them a better balance of nutrients.


----------



## jim lyon

Lauri said:


> Same reason I use early cells &virgin queens, I prefer to use ripe cells, but there are times I don't have them.
> 
> . I can direct release (DR) a virgin queen in a colony that had build queen cells and she'll go through the hive and tear them all down so I don't have to. A DR virgin will get a queenless nuc & laying worker nuc (LW) back on track _Fast_.
> 
> 
> View attachment 37185


Thats actually a pretty good idea. I've never had the patience to set up a system to cage hatched virgins partly because we have lots of cells coming off daily and partly because the idea of hatching virgins in the cell yard alongside our builder hives just sounds like something that I could figure a way to screw up. I just try to look the other way when I smash and trash them. So what kind of usable "shelf life" do you figure a live virgin has?


----------



## Knisely

Thank you, Laurie. I had to look up the bloom period for Asian pears, and it turns out that they (Pyrus pyrifolia) are the latest blooming of pears. The earliest are the pears that are planted as street trees (Pyrus calleryana--which bloom about the same time as forsythia and redbud), and the European pears (Pyrus communis) are in between. 

I also compared temperatures for Roy, WA and New Haven, CT for March and April and May on Accuweather, and determined that temperatures are generally more moderate in your apiary, but that by the middle of May, we're warmer than you are! On March 15th, your average high and low temperatures are 52 and 40F, and mine are 47 and 31F. By April 15th, those respective temperatures are 64 and 40F for you and 55 and 35F for me. By May 15th, it's 64 and 47F for you, and 68 and 49F for me. 

That makes me think that spring gets going faster (once it gets going) for me, here in coastal southern New England than it does for you. Your actions (for your climate) may not work perfectly well for me, in my climate, because of the slower ramp-up you may have. I've got more information to work with, and that's always helpful.

Finally, I don't have any Asian pears, though I do have a European pear and there are a bunch of the street tree pears in my neighborhood. Can you let me know when that photograph of the pear blossoms with the nucs in the background was taken? It's a pretty picture. I'm surmising it was taken long before you would have thought about making up nucs, because you mention that it's a signal for you to get your queen excluders in to get your cell builders ready to go...


----------



## Lauri

jim lyon said:


> Thats actually a pretty good idea. I've never had the patience to set up a system to cage hatched virgins partly because we have lots of cells coming off daily and partly because the idea of hatching virgins in the cell yard alongside our builder hives just sounds like something that I could figure a way to screw up. I just try to look the other way when I smash and trash them. So what kind of usable "shelf life" do you figure a live virgin has?


All of the cells I use are out of my incubator so I have 2 or 3 days in a climate controlled comfortable environment to manage the cells.









I collect them once, brush off the bees once and place in the incubator. Once they are in there it's a done deal for reliable cells the next few days (No chance of being torn down by rogue virgin) and access to them is simple with no hive to open, no bees to wade through. I love my incubators!









I place as many cells as I can the day before or the day of expected emergence, but I usually have a few I can't place or I reserve a few to get a look at a sample of the crop I just placed. Shrimpy cell size, surplus of cells, cells I couldn't evaluate when candling, lots of reasons I let them emerge in the incubator.

SO what do you do with them then? 

Along with a queenless colony for banking mated queens, I also run a queenless colony for incubator emerged virgins. I put them in JZBZ transport cages and place them in a decent strength colony with lots of healthy nurse bees and feed. They will hold very well for 5-6 days and be very strong and well fed. I have them on hand so when I run across a colony that will be very receptive of a virgin, I have them ready to be placed. 

Also, just in case the next graft batch is torn down or I am a little short on ripe cells, I usually have the a few of the last batch of virgins to back me up or early just started cells to fill in so I can still collect mated queens, fill my orders and have something to replace her with so I can harvest the mated queens out of the mating nucs without leaving them queenless and having to go back later to rectify. By day 9 or 10 if I didn't need the banked virgins I do them in, but I rarely have to do that. But they are there for about week just in case I need them.

I've used virgins enough to be comfortable with handling, holding and successfully introducing. Small details concerning the receiving colony make DR introduction pretty easy if you know what to look for. 

I also ship virgins and always bank them at least overnight. 2 days is perfect. They go from just emerged, docile and blurry eyed-critically dependent on early feed to strong, confident and hardy when placed in the right conditions to mature and harden up. They ship well and from my customer comments, have been accepted very well into receiving colonies.
It's amazing how much I have learned about bee behavior from banking queens. I could write a lot about just that subject.

As shown below, when you bank mated queens (top row) with virgin queens ( bottom row) the virgins are largely ignored and can perish. I bank them separately so the virgins will get full attention from nursebees.









My virgin bank frame is not as large a the mated bank frame. With no mated queens around, the virgins are well attended.









I collect mated queens twice a week. Those collected and banked over the weekend go out for shipped orders on Monday & Tuesdays. Those queens collected early or mid week go to locals that pick up, so nothing is banked for more than 2 or 3 days.

This availability allows me to confirm exactly how many orders I can fill without guessing, give notice to & make sure the customer is ready for their shipment, package the queens in the morning and still make the deadline for USPS.

Also allows me to collect a quick queen late in the evening in my pajamas when someone locally is panicked and needs a queen NOW!  









Here is part of an email from one of my customers about shipped queens he received:

"HI Lauri,

I thought I would give you an update. Checked on all breeders over a week ago, and all 7 were out and laying! 

Thanks for virgin intro tips Lauri. 

I grafted yesterday off the Latshaw/Miller queen you sent me. That queen is doing great (knock on wood! ) in our heat, and has some of the best sheets of brood I have ever come across. Crazy thing is it has been 100+, almost 110 for the past week everyday. The heat doesn't seem to bother them as of now. We are about 2 weeks from our major Star Thistle flow so those breeders should be going nuts soon. All our in singles now.

Checked this morning on the grafts, and it looked like 27 out of 30 took. So excited to get some queens mated from those awesome genetics! 

On the 10 virgins, I direct released one of them, then tried the next one which flew right away! The rest of the virgins I just put in their nucs with them in the candy cage. Checked yesterday and 7 out of 9 were mated. Out of the 2 that weren't mated found a new virgin, and one was definitely queenless. I'm amazed at that return rate for the virgins!

I'm very happy with the queens this year, and wanted to thank you again for your generosity. Your shipping timing was perfect, as it is going to start heating up here very quick."

*******************************

I've explained a little more here for those that are learning.

DO you think you can't do this because you are inexperienced? I did it starting my second year with no experience, no mentor, no lessons. Just the internet for guidance. 
You have to develop your filter for the internet nonsense and learn to pick out the relevant info, but it can be done if you can think for yourself and not just blindly follow the advise of others, especially of you don't know them, they are in another climate with different bees. 

Hands on is the way to go-some of the harshest lessons I've suffered though gave me the best information towards eventual successful efforts.

I am a big fan of the benefits of virgin queen use. If you have decent control over your surrounding drone exposures, If you like your bees but want to keep your hybrid vigor without changing up your line too much, buying summer reared virgin queens from a reputable breeder may be the way to go. I have found the mated queens colony rarely exhibits much of the traits of the lines she was mated with, retains strong traits from the queen herself. 

Gives you time to evaluate the new line over the season/over winter and into spring without contaminating your current lines until drone production gets under way. Then you need to make a choice to keep them or move them out PDQ before she starts producing drones. Those drones can ether screw up or enhance your program _for years_ if you are not careful. 

If you like your current stock and have enough experience to have good perspective on what a good v/s poor bees are like, it may take a number of tries to find compatible stock that is acceptable. That's why the price of virgins is also so appealing. You'll have a broad choice to select the pick of the litter, if you are looking for a new breeder to try. And they are already crossed with your current line for pretty quick results of the new hybrid crosses. Your first generation of daughters will exhibit the cross. 

Virgin queens are usually half the price of mated queens. I usually buy 10 mated queens each year to try and feel lucky if I can select one that is suitable for grafting. You can buy 20 virgins and have twice the selection that is already crossed with your current lines. Selection can take over a year so there is a lot of time and effort invested in producing better stock. I do it to keep my hybrid vigor, but have to be extremely careful no to mess up the purity of what I have now. Separate yards now make it a lot easier to control.

Sorry I wandered off topic! SO many details I can think of...You all just got me started


----------



## Lauri

Knisely said:


> Can you let me know when that photograph of the pear blossoms with the nucs in the background was taken? o...


3-24-16 still fair amount tight budded









3-28-16











2017's spring was so cold they were a full month late. I have photos of every previous spring and they had been like clockwork until last year.
Yes, I waited and started late, followed the signs, not the calendar.

3-6-17








Same tree as shown above 3-17-17


----------



## Bee14me

Lauri, I've learned more from your posts on this thread than I have in most of the books I've read! Thank you so much. My mind is blown and I find myself re-re-reading trying to get ahold on your techniques, seeing as I have very limited experience with the hands on inside the hive manipulations and what have you..... but neverless I hope to be has well grounded as you are with the ins and outs of everyday hive life. Thanks again for sharing!


----------



## Lauri

Thank you Bee14me.

Glad to hear that sharing my experiences may help make your success come faster for you.


----------



## jcase

Lauri said:


> 2017's spring was so cold they were a full month late. I have photos of every previous spring and they had been like clockwork until last year.
> Yes, I waited and started late, followed the signs, not the calendar.


Last year spring SUUUCCCKK here, but the bees were booming once we hit spring.


----------



## Hive5ive

I'm getting so tired of replacing bees too. Lost 90% this winter. Granted, that was nine hives, but very painful. It was a long road and still is trying to recover from some really bad storm damage two years ago just to have them die on me. I haven't used anything but brood breaks for mite treatment up to this point. After reading I've decided to use OAV. The only thing is I am way behind the learning curve. We've started getting some warm days again after that nasty cold snap, wondering when I should treat the surviving hive and should I treat the new packages when I get them 1st week in April.


----------



## 1102009

It´s definitely my opinion that we need an IPM strategy to do tf in an environment that does not allow tf beekeeping as "live and let die" or " I provide my bee yards with catching feral swarms".
To go for this will be my research the coming season.


----------



## Oldtimer

Hive5ive said:


> After reading I've decided to use OAV. The only thing is I am way behind the learning curve.





SiWolKe said:


> It´s definitely my opinion that we need an IPM strategy to do tf in an environment that does not allow tf beekeeping as "live and let die" .


SiWolKe hit the nail on the head. Hive5ive, IPM stands for Integrated Pest Management. The principle of it is understanding our pest control method. IE, if using oxalic acid vapor for mite control, just randomly treating the hive every so often will likely not work. During the learning phase at least, it is necessary to understand how many mites are in the hive via some kind of testing procedure, and also understand their breeding cycle. The OAV should be applied several times, spaced so as to catch any surviving mites before they get a chance to reproduce. At the end of the treatment period there should be another test to see if the treatment has worked.

After a few seasons of success, you will just know what to do and when without necessarily testing, but during the learning phase it helps to know exactly what's going on with the mite population.


----------



## squarepeg

sibylle, i noticed on the german forum that you have been communicating with erik osterlund, and i believe you will have the opportunity to work with him later this year.

erik has several articles posted here on beesource in the 'point of view' section:

http://beesource.com/point-of-view/erik-osterlund/

but these are older articles. 

when you have time can you give us a brief summary of erik's current thinking with respect to mite resistance, the use of treatments, and breeding?

many thanks!


----------



## Adam Foster Collins

I was treatment free for years. I got along. My bees made it through winter most of the time. Then got hammered down with a 75% loss. Treated this year and last year. I've gone round and round so much in my own mind, trying to figure out what the 'right thing' to do is.
I can be a treatment beekeeper, or a treatment free beekeeper. But then a simple thought occurred to me that keeps me thinking...

Whose bee would I rather be?


----------



## gww

Adam
From randy olivers site.


> Before the arrival of varroa (Fig. 3), episodes of sudden colony collapse were not unusual (often called “Disappearing Disease” (Underwood 2007). Beekeeper Andy Nachbaur (1996) wrote about “Seasonal Affective Disorder” and “Bee Immune Deficiency” problems in commercial California operations.


The old time beekeeper all had years of big losses before mites. One thing about nature is that it is a continual war. Cronic wasting disease is hitting out deer pretty hard and before that it was black tougue.

Live things do have problims and right now for people it is the flue being worst in MO.

The good news is the prediction that the worst will be over in ten days.
It is hard to decide which bee I would want to be as a speicies but easyer as an individual bee.
Cheers
gww

I wonder if austrailian bee keepers have years of massive loss every once in a while?


----------



## 1102009

Adam Foster Collins said:


> I can be a treatment beekeeper, or a treatment free beekeeper.


You can be both and try some selection.


----------



## 1102009

squarepeg said:


> when you have time can you give us a brief summary of erik's current thinking with respect to mite resistance, the use of treatments, and breeding?
> 
> many thanks!





> New strategies ( Erik Österlund)
> After considering the six points I have been discussing above, six different strategies formed. I started one in 2014. One in 2015. The rest in 2016.
> 
> A. The first involved one apiary on an isolated place far into the forest. Started in autumn 2014
> 
> B . The second involved one of my regular apiaries that is quite isolated (2 km). Started in autumn 2015
> 
> C . The third involved two small apiaries.
> 
> D. The rest of all my apiaries I would manage as I had done the previous years, treating when seeing more than two crippled winged bees. When seeing one such bee a shaker test would be done and the 3% limit for treating would be valid.
> 
> E. I decided that those colonies I decided in autumn 2015 I would shift queens in, or sell in 2016, I would treat early in the season of 2016 to give the new queens a fresh start and the buyers mite free colonies. It happened to be about 15% of all my colonies after about 10% winter losses.
> 
> F. Splits were only made from the best resistant colonies and placed in the same apiary as their mother colonies, not moved to other apiaries. The splits were allowed to raise their own queens. If that failed, such a split got a ripe grafted queen cell. As before the inferior colonies got their queens shifted with grafted ripe queen cells.


The results you can read here:

http://elgon.es/resistancebreeding.html

scroll down and he gives some project ideas.


----------



## Virgil

Adam Foster Collins said:


> I was treatment free for years. I got along. My bees made it through winter most of the time. Then got hammered down with a 75% loss. Treated this year and last year. I've gone round and round so much in my own mind, trying to figure out what the 'right thing' to do is.
> I can be a treatment beekeeper, or a treatment free beekeeper. But then a simple thought occurred to me that keeps me thinking...
> 
> Whose bee would I rather be?


For me, it comes down to why I keep bees, which is I enjoy working bees.

If I had to restock every year because of preventable losses I'd find that rather depressing. 

So I monitor my mite levels and knowing the epidemiology of colony collapse take measures to maintain those levels where the colony has the best chance of survival. I have noticed that some queens maintain that level without intervention, but, although I raise my own queens - with about 20 hives it would be impossible replicat those traits with any degree of repeatablity. 

I've ended up with a routine that means I have good strong hives in the spring, a stock that is easy to work with and a method that makes it sustainable without having to find new bees every year.

Maybe your question should be 'what would my ideal beekeeping year look like' and work back from there?


----------



## drummerboy

Adam Foster Collins said:


> I was treatment free for years. I got along. My bees made it through winter most of the time. Then got hammered down with a 75% loss. Treated this year and last year. I've gone round and round so much in my own mind, trying to figure out what the 'right thing' to do is.
> I can be a treatment beekeeper, or a treatment free beekeeper. But then a simple thought occurred to me that keeps me thinking...
> 
> Whose bee would I rather be?


That's the question I asked over a decade ago, and it remains the primary reason behind a steadfast regiment of TF. I've had all my bees survive our Winter's and I've had almost all of them perish. 

Historically speaking, that's the same experience beekeepers have had for as long as people have been writing their beekeeping experiences down. Modern day humans just want it all to be perfect (in their minds) IMHO

13 pages of well thought out discussion, I Love it. Great topic!


----------



## squarepeg

thank you sibylle!


----------



## rkereid

SiWolKe said:


> The results you can read here:
> 
> http://elgon.es/resistancebreeding.html
> 
> scroll down and he gives some project ideas.


We had a real nice visit with Erik, his wife, and another beekeeping family in Sweden in November. I've communicated with Erik occasionally about his beekeeping methods. One of the more important takeaways for me this time is his management of colonies with higher mite loads. One of the things he does is mite counts to accurately identify colonies that don't keep mites at a low level. Those are treated and marked for queen replacement as soon as possible. It's also very important to limit drone production in those colonies.

After getting back into bees 10 years ago and expanding every year without any treatments, my home nuc yard crashed this past fall. That yard has been the core of my expansion success so I can always rebound from any losses and also have resources for queenrearing. Obviously there were multiple factors contributing to the crash, mites being a major one. So going forward, I'll be doing a lot of mite counts to get a handle on the colonies that do not have mite resistance. My goal is to identify those colonies so they can be treated before they effect other colonies. I know this is not a new idea, but I was never faced with large losses so I never felt the need to be more proactive. I was more complacent because I could fall back on all those nucs.

One factor contributing was the density of bees in one area. That allowed the mite bomb to spread quickly. If I had my nucs spread out in 2 or 3 yards with fewer in each yard, my losses would have been much less. I'm pretty certain this would be the case as my production yards have had only slightly higher than normal losses in this same timeframe, and others that I have sold nucs and queens to have had relatively low losses. We have had two crappy weather years here in SW VA.

I havent decided if I should take all hives with high mite counts to one yard for treating, or just treat at their existing yard. Not sure yet if that is important as long as I treat on time.

This year will be one of rebuilding, monitoring, and more queenrearing.


----------



## Adam Foster Collins

SiWolKe said:


> You can be both and try some selection.


I realize that, but I also feel that unless you have a pretty significant number of colonies, you're not going to make much progress with open mated queens. I'm totally interested in being treatment free, but getting there by just not treating (which is what I have done for years in the past) doesn't feel like progress to me. And it has meant dealing with a lot of struggling colonies, and sick bees.

To me, it means getting to enough colonies to make a significant difference in the gene pool of a locality, then it means selection over time, sectioning off the best and testing them to see how they do without treatments and working form those that do best.

I don't believe people can make much selection progress (if any) with a small number of colonies unless they are isolated or using II.

Adam


----------



## Oldtimer

Not sure if you will remember Adam, but I recall several years ago exchanging some messages with you, because you were TF and wanting to remain so, but very anguished about how to deal with the mite issues. 

I suggested treating the mites but after some deliberation you got back and said no. You struck me at the time as very principled and sincere in your approach. I'm glad you have arrived at a solution that is allowing full enjoyment of the bees.


----------



## Adam Foster Collins

Oldtimer said:


> Not sure if you will remember Adam, but I recall several years ago exchanging some messages with you, because you were TF and wanting to remain so, but very anguished about how to deal with the mite issues.
> 
> I suggested treating the mites but after some deliberation you got back and said no. You struck me at the time as very principled and sincere in your approach. I'm glad you have arrived at a solution that is allowing full enjoyment of the bees.


Oh I remember, OT. And I remain very principled and sincere. I've been trying to build up numbers, and simply can't handle losing three quarters of my bees to mite damage. Others have pointed out the ups and downs of beekeeping, and I appreciate that, but natural ups and downs are exacerbated immensely when your bees are under heavy stress from mite loads.

The goals remains the same for me. Healthy bees. The question also remains the same.

How to get there?


----------



## 1102009

Our goals are so high!
There must be no path there, success must happen immediately and success is, of course, to have no more losses immediately. An illusion for both sides as I see when I read the treater`s post.

Adam,
I understand exactly how you feel, because I have arrived at this point now.
Since I have the privilege of not having to live on the bees, I am allowed to continue on this fascinating project, as such I see that.

In my opinion, it is very possible to make a selection even with a few hives, even with two, and, in my opinion, it is also promising to select towards resistance, in addition to yield and gentleness, even for those who treat , because fewer treatments also have great advantages , not only for the bees but also for working hours, and costs for the beekeeper.

My current colleague with whom I run the forum has long been keeping treated and untreated colonies in his apiary until he is now finally treatment free.
He always had around 20 hives. The losses were the same, at 30%.
He has always sold a lot of honey from his treated hives and now wants to try that too with his tf bees.

It would not be a problem to work in parallel, but everyone would be involved in the breeding of resilient bees.


----------



## Adam Foster Collins

SiWolKe said:


> Adam,
> ...I have the privilege of not having to live on the bees, I am allowed to continue on this fascinating project, as such I see that.
> 
> ...it is very possible to make a selection even with a few hives, even with two...
> 
> My current colleague... has long been keeping treated and untreated colonies in his apiary until he is now finally treatment free.
> He always had around 20 hives. The losses were the same, at 30%.
> ...


SiWolke,

I absolutely empathize with your positions, as I have held many of them myself over the last 10 years. 

First, I do not depend on the bees for a living at this time either, but while I can go TF and let the non-resistant die, I have come to wonder - is it fair to ask that of the bees? While I feel pretty confident that the work of Seeley in the US and others in Europe have proven that bees can live with mites in the wild, I feel that asking bees to handle mites as well as the demands of honey production and the stresses of a beekeeper may be asking just too much of them to adapt to. Sure, I can see that people in some places do better than others, but I have come to believe that the regional conditions are so unique from one place to another, that our bees really need to be developed locally if they're to find balance. I think the idea that we're going to find that balance internationally - or even nationally is unlikely. So I do support the idea of making local breeding efforts.

Regarding progress in selections with few hives. In my view, one selecting from few hives is really just selecting the best for their requirements from the stock available locally. That's great, and I think you could do that pretty quickly. On the other hand, after that, you are very unlikely to be able to move much, as the stock around you is too much a determining factor in the norm. You select, the bees appear to improve as you 'rise' to the best of the pool you're in. A few years later, someone 2 miles away drops in 50 hives and your stock appears to decline. You select, etc. It goes on and on. You're selecting, but not doing much to determine the state of the pool.

On the other hand, if a person runs 1000 colonies within an hour's drive around each other, that person is doing A LOT to determine the state of the genetic pool in that region. That person's selection process actually can result in a consistency that can build over time and be sustained. A person in that situation can really begin to BREED bees, and is not as easily derailed in their progress by other beekeepers in the region. Your two hives could be right in the middle of this person's area, and have virtually no effect on their program. However, that person will have an extremely determinant effect on yours.

I went along treatment free with around 20 hives at an annual loss rate of around 30% as well. I brought in swarms, did brood breaks, made nucs, etc. I also visited Kirk Webster in the spring of 2015, and thought his bees looked a lot like mine coming out of winter. 

Then I got the chance to go along with Mike Palmer in the early spring of 2016 in late March and early April in Northern VT and NY. At that point we were just checking for dead hives and food supplies. In the first day, we went through 9 yards, during which I myself opened about 75 hives for their first look of the season. I was blown away. Hive after hive after hive was absolutely boiling over with bees. These were mostly 10 frame colonies on two deeps and a medium. You couldn't see the top bars at all on tons of them. And many had bees boiling out of bottom entrances as well. In all my time TF, I had never seen ANY hives that strong in the spring - let alone have it be the norm. In that whole day, I think we found a total of maybe 2 or 3 dead. I came out for another 8 yards or so the following week and it was the same.

At that point, the bar was raised to a whole new level. There is a huge difference between survival and thriving. Huge.

If breeding progress is going to be made, its going to happen through the bigger beekeeping operations. All the hobbyists in the world simply won't change that. I'm certainly interested in working toward better bees myself - but I need a lot more bees first. I know the feeling of being a small beekeeper and wanting to make a difference, but the math is the math. So I build up. I went into winter this year with about 80 really nice looking colonies, but spring will tell the tale and I have my experience with Mike to evaluate them through.

I know that we can all keep bees that survive with mites. In some areas, the specifics of the region will make that easier - in others, harder. But to keep thriving colonies of healthy bees that can stand the stresses of dealing with the demands of people?

Still searching.


----------



## Eduardo Gomes

Adam Foster Collins said:


> First, I do not depend on the bees for a living at this time either, but while I can go TF and let the non-resistant die, I have come to wonder - is it fair to ask that of the bees?


I really enjoyed reading your post Adam.


----------



## 1102009

Adam,
many thanks for the post, I understand and I´m with you. Thanks for explaining your view.

There are tf commercial beekeepers having hives that thrive and these should provide the stock for everyone. 
My future hope is there will be more of these queen breeders.

I will see at the conference in austria how beekeeping will go on and if more people with strategies will take part.

I will not let the non-resistant die. I will treat them and shift the queens. But yes, efforts will be endless.

I think there are not many beekeepers as talented like Michael Palmer, but I have not seen commercial`s hives of a big enterprise to compare.

I have seen sideliner`s though and I have seen brood disease, dwindling colonies in spite of treatments, struggling...perhaps MP has to invite me to change my attitude. 



> I have come to wonder - is it fair to ask that of the bees?


Asking anything of the bees is not only asking them to stay alive and thrive, who knows what an altruistic insect thinks about that? Maybe they don´t want us to rob their honey and eat syrup or soya instead or they would rather die than be treated. A lot of bees must not mean happy bees, it´s our human interpretation.
I wonder how they feel about QC culling or being castrated.
Maybe they hate having bee neighbors...or would want to choose another location...maybe they would want to go extinct in a world full of pesticides.

I want happy fat healthy treatment free bees ferociously fighting the mites. There are such bees in the world. When people let them be this way.


----------



## Virgil

Adam Foster Collins said:


> While I feel pretty confident that the work of Seeley in the US and others in Europe have proven that bees can live with mites in the wild, I feel that asking bees to handle mites as well as the demands of honey production and the stresses of a beekeeper may be asking just too much of them to adapt to..


Managed bees aren't wild bees. 

I know a lot of beekeepers like to think they're undertaking some sort of conservation effort but in reality, keeping managed bees and claiming it is conserving wild bees is akin to keeping chickens and claiming you're helping conserve wildfowl. Feral and wild honey bee populations are already living with varroa. 

When you put bees in a box you fundamentally changed their ecosystem. At that point, it comes down to if you what to manage your livestock. Some don't want to treat, others treat. Both are equally valid, but it's a personal choice based on what you want out of your hobby.

Personally, I wouldn't want to be cleaning hives out on an ongoing basis, so I manage varroa with tools at my disposal. 

You're keeping bees for pleasure, if you wanted to do it for conservation you'd not been keeping bees in a box, you'd be out developing the ecosystem. 

At some point, a breeder will develop a managed bee that is resistant to varroa and manage techniques will change.

Until then do what you think is best for your bees.


----------



## msl

> I don't believe people can make much selection progress (if any) with a small number of colonies unless they are isolated or using II.





> All the hobbyists in the world simply won't change that. I'm certainly interested in working toward better bees myself - but I need a lot more bees first. I know the feeling of being a small beekeeper and wanting to make a difference, but the math is the math


perhaps….. 
but there are thousands of us, with 10s of thousands of hives 
open mating is not the real problem 
#1 issue is The land scape is the problem
permoteing small scale bond creates the package bee tread mill 
the constant influx of out side gentintics (both bee and pathogen) short circuits the “natural” process often talked about… add in migryty bee keeping and it’s a mess…
Point being the TF message is reinforcing what its fighting against… 
TF/TX what most beekeepers (the little guy) is need is a locally adapted stock, to get there keepers need to keep their bees alive, and have some to sell to those that don’t..
pulling a queen late flow 

#2 problem beekeepers are nonconformists… , out there doing there own thing, not working in groups 

if all got along, even at a local/club level and they said hey…mite counts, lets all do a late fall brood less OA TX, (insert agreed management) come next summer lets all run mite counts… pool resources graft from the best next spring and start handing out QCs 

But instead we debate on line things like why C12H22O11 (powdered sugar) in the amount you might put on French toast is somehow better or worce to put on bees then the amount of C2H2O4O(OA) in the volume a vegan mite eat in a salad. 


#3 problem is people have there head in the sand.. If you’re a beekeeper you need to monitor you mites and you need to face the realitys, the concept of some on in the back yard with 2 hives making any progress is silly, and teaching stuff like that needs to be stoped. The back yard keeper is a consumer of gentinic stock, not a producer. 

#4 every one seems to think there stock is better then there nehobors 

What bolth sides need is a strong grounded IPM program that teaches good beekeeping and sustainibuilty 
Nucs are a year one beginner skill, and should be taught as such
Drone trapping should be a standard, not for its handy use removing mites, but to castrate non select stock
sugar rolls/ washes to take monthly counts your TF until your bees tell you outher wize
robbing screens

once you get an areas mite load down TF is easer

Think of the changes if the new beekeeper was taught pull the queen and make a nuc in july, pull the supers and give the hive a shot of OA while its brood less. They go in to the winter with a post solstice queen that will explode come spring. The hive rears a gen or 2 of clean nurce bees with low virus loads to raize a batch of nice fat winter bees. And they now have 2 hives and can with stand 50% losses without buying spring packages. If all make it they can increase or sell the nuc
Next they fly away spit in the spring for swarm control, and make up a nuc with some frames with capped cells. 
They have now bounced back form 50% losses have 2x the amount of colonys they had at this time last year AND have a local nuc to sell to those that took bigger losses.
By the time they go in to there 2nd winter they are decent beekeepers, can sustain them selfs, and have 2 seasons of mite counts so they can judge there bees performance as they move on to advanced skills like TF keeping.

After a few years of this, local adaption/restiance can happen as the flow of imported genetics is slowed, and people have good data to make propagation choices from. The use of a nuc is common so its now easy and cheap for the little guys to buy local QC to bring in gentnic change 

One nuc box per beginner hive and a shift in message and you would start making real change for both sides of the debate. Imagine if local clubs changed there focus from bulk package orders to bulk nuc box orders and taught there members how to use them 



> You select, the bees appear to improve as you 'rise' to the best of the pool you're in. A few years later, someone 2 miles away drops in 50 hives and your stock appears to decline. You select, etc. It goes on and on. You're selecting, but not doing much to determine the state of the pool


Nail on the head! There is a difference between stock selection and breeding and most of us are not in a position to breed. From another thread

_Say the back ground pool is 50/50 black to yellow stock and I want all yellow queens in my 10 hives 
I have 5 hives of each, just like the back ground... I raise 10 queens from the yellow stock for the sake of argument lets say color is tied to drone stock so I l get 50/50, so I now have 10 black and 10 yellow... I pinch all the black queens and install the yellow, I now have 10 hives headed by yellow queens, when a hive replaces a yellow queen with a black one I pinch it and replace the queen with a yellow one I have razed....

I end up with all yellow queens despite the back ground, and have not changed the gene pool of the back ground. 
As such, remove this section pressure and in a few generations my hives would likely be back to 50/50 just as jwchestnut would predict_.

Simply find the 2nd year queen with the lowest mite count in the fall, propagate from her and requeen the poor performing hives in the spring. Next year rince and repeat. In effect hopping from one golden goose to the next. The more hives you have to choose form the better…mite counts make it easy to work together with others(But it gets trickily if the hives aren’t managed the same. ), QCs are cheap and easy to make for local distribution


----------



## Hive5ive

As of today it's no longer a question as to treat or not to treat. I am now at a100% mortality. Luckily I have already ordered an extra dozen packages this spring. It's going to be standard BMP from this point forward. Starting over 2018....


----------



## Oldtimer

OK. But be aware, with all the talk of mites, people can get to thinking that treating for them, or not treating for them, is what beekeeping is all about. But treating is actually easy, and a small thing in the overall picture. Gaining skills in the other areas of beekeeping is harder.

What I would say Hive5ive about your next package bees, is when it comes fall make sure they go into winter with as near zero mite load as you can achieve. BUT, that's not the only thing. Ensure the hives are set up right in terms of the woodware, correct entrances and insulation if that is recommended where you are, and they have plenty of feed, correctly placed in the hive.

Do all that over and above just killing mites, and you have every chance of never having to buy a package again.


----------



## Hive5ive

Old-timer, I appreciate that. We typically don't insulate hives here in eastern Virginia although we had a particularly cold week or so starting out this year. I always make sure they have plenty of honey and I put sugar on the hives just in case. SBB closed, reducers in place with mouse guards and upper ventilation. Gotta be the **** mites from the fall. Oh and I do run 4.9 mm bees. I had one hive that survived the cold and went to check on it yesterday. Now it's dead too.


----------



## johno

Hive5ive, you are about 25 miles south of my location and that cold spell was quite something as we had more than 2 weeks of the temp not getting above freezing and one night time temp of -3F or for Oldtimer -20C which is the coldest I have ever seen in this area. I really feared for my bees but am happy to say all but 2 of 40 colonies are alive and well. By the way I run standard foundation but do treat with OAV.
Johno


----------



## Hive5ive

Johno please pm me, I'd like to have a conversation with you.


----------



## BlueRidgeBee

Can’t say thank you enough to those who posted thoughtfully and kindly, those who shared specifics of what they are doing, how it is working for better or worse, and the rationales behind those decisions. It took me three mornings of before-work reading time to get through 264 posts....while also copying some of the more informative entries for pondering more deeply. Thank you! 

This is my 8th year of chem-free active IPM with a dozen-ish hives and nucs. My isolated location has been a huge blessing. Have focused on brood breaks, selecting my best queens for breeding stock (and trying out new lines) and very quick requeenjng (after a brood break) of any faltering hives. Even though the micro scale breeding/selecting has been my main interest, have managed a sideline of honey and extra nucs plus queen sharing with local bee club members. Have had 80-85% consistent overwintering survival. 

Until this winter when it may be 40% survival at best and the winter isn’t near over. Was a perfect storm in my yard. Was trying out a smaller format for overwintering nucs when we had a week of wind chills 15 below. Then 50s. Then single digits with wind again for another week. Repeat. Lost all but one nuc when before it was rare to lose one. Lesson: going back to two 8frame mediums for winter nucs (about same volume as a deep 5 over 5) which have been very reliable even for past polar vortex spells. 

In the full hives I took a devastating hit to the yard AND my morale. As many dead as alive. 

But when I did the autopsies and started checking records I realized many things, several being beekeeper error. A moisture soaked hive, a drone laying queen is missed in fall... but mainly that while ALL of a new queen line I was trying out — and had been initially impresssed with — died (F1 and F2 daughters were heading those) — hives headed by daughters of my main queen line were still alive at 80-85%! 

So while truly difficult to bear, it’s also been one of the most instructive years I’ve faced: about genetic influence, record keeping, not getting sloppy in the late/summer fall, how to experiment (which is where a lot of the fascination is for me) but also be more cautious about it.... the list goes on. 

After pondering it all —going to continue with this small scale chem-free breeding/selecting experiment to keep working on it and see what happens in the long run since I have the luxury of a day-job vs bees.

For me it’s the day job in a medical field that Also keeps me interested in genetic resistance/tolerance. Being in the hospital daily witnessing antibiotics become less and less effective as the superbugs outrun them....makes me think that bees are going to have to adapt to survive in the long run. I have no idea if anything I’m doing will help one whit toward that, but it feels right to me to put the effort of my obsessive hobby beekeeping in that general direction vs another. 

Thank you again to everyone.


----------



## 1102009

BRB,
will you please start a thread of your experience in the treatment free sub forum?
That´s so interesting! So we can ask you questions without being off topic.
Please tell more about your managements there.
Sibylle


----------



## Richinbama

Any advice on fogger like the black flag propane fogger, I think it's sold also in another name... Not sure at moment. Could you do good o.a. treatments with these. Seem like they are economical, ect... ?


----------



## gww

blueridgebees
I missed your post till now. Thanks for the well writen and long history. I too would like to hear as much as you want to tell. Sorry for the bad year but sounds like you are learning (I am new) and I thank you for sharing as you do.
Cheers
gww


----------



## Oldtimer

BlueRidgeBee said:


> we had a week of wind chills 15 below. Then 50s. Then single digits with wind again for another week. Repeat. Lost all but one nuc when before it was rare to lose one.


Respect to anyone who can get a nuc through something like that!



BlueRidgeBee said:


> For me it’s the day job in a medical field that Also keeps me interested in genetic resistance/tolerance. Being in the hospital daily witnessing antibiotics become less and less effective as the superbugs outrun them....makes me think that bees are going to have to adapt to survive in the long run. I have no idea if anything I’m doing will help one whit toward that, but it feels right to me to put the effort of my obsessive hobby beekeeping in that general direction vs another.


Good points and well put!


----------



## Michael Bush

It's been colder longer this year than it has in many years. It was 6 F (-14 C) this morning here, which isn't that cold, but we have had a lot of it. We has some -30 F (-34 C) a few weeks ago several times. I never count wind chill, though we also get a lot of wind. This sill likely be pretty hard on the bees.


----------



## little_john

BlueRidgeBee said:


> For me it’s the day job in a medical field that Also keeps me interested in genetic resistance/tolerance. Being in the hospital daily witnessing antibiotics become less and less effective as the superbugs outrun them....makes me think that bees are going to have to adapt to survive in the long run. I have no idea if anything I’m doing will help one whit toward that, but it feels right to me to put the effort of my obsessive hobby beekeeping in that general direction vs another.


But do bear in mind that you're comparing apples with oranges: the bugs you're referring to are single-cellular organisms and thus in which genetic adaptation is relatively easy and straightforward. The varroa mite is a much more advanced creature and also a parasite, and is not itself an organism of disease - and so the mechanism of an evolutionary advantage being expressed prior to reproduction (which underpins the whole concept of survivor selection through adaptation) no longer applies.
LJ


----------



## gww

little john


> But do bear in mind that you're comparing apples with oranges: the bugs you're referring to are single-cellular organisms and thus in which genetic adaptation is relatively easy and straightforward. The varroa mite is a much more advanced creature and also a parasite, and is not itself an organism of disease - and so the mechanism of an evolutionary advantage being expressed prior to reproduction (which underpins the whole concept of survivor selection through adaptation) no longer applies.


Though there may be differrances, it still seems that the end results are the same. Antibody resistance with super bugs or mites turning into super bugs against some treatments used against them. Bees not living with mite/virous showing adjustment to handle them better. So there are differrences and yet the results seem to have the same path of getting from point a to point b.

Or, this is what it looks like to a dummy that may not even be smart enough to understand all that I highlighted of what you wrote.
Cheers
gww


----------



## little_john

It's not difficult to understand. If a unicellular 'bug' such as (say) streptococcus encounters a poison (antibiotic) - then if that antibiotic was effective, 99.99% of those bugs should die as a result. As the remaining 0.01% are 'resistant' to that poison, they will then go on to breed and thus sire the next generation of bugs - as a new strain. So what is meant by a 'new strain' ? Simply, some small difference (mutation) in that bug's DNA which has created - for example - some difference perhaps in the proteins which make up the bug's cell wall, and thus rendering it immune to that particular antibiotic. And this cycle will duly repeat itself with any new antibiotic it may subsequently encounter.

But - the only requirement here, is that whatever mutation occurs within that cell's DNA - it does so without killing itself in the process. i.e. a chance mutation either assists that cell to survive - or it kills it. That's a one-step selection process: live or die.

Now let's consider a human being - a multi-cellular (and then some ...) organism. Human beings start off life as being unicellular (i.e. one single fertilised egg), but during the process of subsequent multiplication and embryonic development, not only does this one cell divide to create billions of other cells, it also differentiates into hundreds of different TYPES of cell: nerve, bone, muscle, liver - more types than you can easily shake a stick at. Along with these are countless structural developments which ultimately result in the highly complex bodies we become so familiar with, and which have resulted from thousands of uber-precise steps within it's foetal development.

But unlike the unicellular organism which only undergoes a one-step selection process, a developing human embryo undergoes many hundreds of thousands of such steps - and (this being the key point here) - each one of those steps MUST result in a developmental stage which itself remains viable. Any flaw of significance will result in either a non-viable organism (leading perhaps to a spontaneous abortion), a malformed individual (think King Richard the III's spine), or eventual infertility.

So - in essence - the more complex the organism, the less possibility there is of viable chance mutations occurring with any regularity. And, although the honey bee appears to be significantly less complex than a human, it is far closer to a human being in it's complexity, that it is to a streptococcus.


With regard to the varroa question, I think you'll find that what we're currently seeing is a very persuasive illusion which relies entirely upon beekeeper-selection (rather than Natural Selection) for it's continuance.

If Natural Selection (by some expressed evolutionary advantage) was indeed taking place, then the conferred advantage regarding Varroa tolerance (or even intolerance !) would automatically be spreading 'Varroa-advantageous' genes in preference to those which do not possess that quality - without any beekeeper involvement whatsoever. But this does not appear to be happening.
LJ


----------



## gww

LJ


> If Natural Selection (by some expressed evolutionary advantage) was indeed taking place, then the conferred advantage regarding Varroa tolerance (or even intolerance !) would automatically be spreading 'Varroa-advantageous' genes in preference to those which do not possess that quality - without any beekeeper involvement whatsoever. But this does not appear to be happening.


But some stuff does seem to be happening. Nature is big enough that the cause of things happenning are hard to determine. So in a single cell, it might be easier to track. However in a bee where it can be measured that some hives are suppressing the mite breeding by 30 percent which is enough that the mites and bees survive. They don't know how this is happenning yet. Is it learned, genetic, envoromental? They don't know but can measure that it is so. So the way and what is being effected could be differrent but the end result seems to be the same. I had read that the inventer of antibiotics had warned that it would be short term effective because people would not use enough of it to get all the bugs and that would give the bug the time to build defences. So part might be that one lived and reproduced cause its mutation was already resistant or it could be that the antibiotic could have been given in such a way that nothing would have lived and wasn't. It it was the nothing would have lived and it wasn't, then the pressure for coming up with something as a counter would be done due to pressure. In that part it would be the same as the over all cause and effect with higher things like bees.

I know you have studied and know more then me. I don't put this out as fact but more as a "dumb" laymans thoughts on the subject. I do not mind being corrected as I know I don't know and am just thinking about something I don't know and comming up with what I come up with. Nothing I say is ment to be instructional to others. It is my way of questioning things so I can evolve at whatever rate my inteligents (or lack of) will let me with the time I have to devote to the subject.

I do think something has happened since the arival of mites but also say what little differrance going on has really only had 30 years or so to be going on and so I am not willing to write off the future. I do know some change in this short time is measurable in some bees/places and so am not convinces on the future results.
Thanks
gww


----------



## BlueRidgeBee

Little John, I don’t doubt what you are saying is technically correct. Being a simple kind of person, What I’m saying is I hope that a genetic populations of bees that can tolerate or suppress the mites enough for the colonies to survive (at least in their locale) will arise either via nature or beekeepers or both — like the Russian bees that were sought initially by researchers and like the feral bees described more recently by Seeley.


----------



## BlueRidgeBee

Hope the screenshot above comes through.... it’s from the BIP survey comparing sideliner level beekeepers who treat vs those who do not. 

https://bip2.beeinformed.org/survey/

If you go this link, click on varroa treatment, select sideliner ( which to me indicates a more intermediate level of beekeeping skills) then click on the various years, it is stunning to me that for all the passionate opinions on this thread, it shows a difference of less than 10% survival for virtually every year ( with an even smaller difference in more recent years).

Even though individual experience of loss can vary wildly, overall, that difference in survival is pretty slim to me.


----------



## msl

sample size problem
2017 only 16 sideliners (50+ hives) reported being TF 
When you run the numbers there 83% less TF sideliners in 2017 then in 2011 and a steady yearly trend in there decline. 
you don't get to 50+hives (bip "sideliner") and stay there loosening a bunch of hives, you will likely find those left are in areas the are coundisive to being TF, and the outhers switched to TX 
You can sort the data by years beekeeping, and surprising there is not a statistical difrance in losses


----------



## BlueRidgeBee

Good point msl.

But dang, the bummer that these years of experience don’t seem to matter in the averages. Haha! inch:


----------



## gww

MSL

Off subject but I found it interresting on BIP loss charts is that the years of keeping bees, the guys with 5 years or less did just as good as the guys that were long term bee keepers. Or close enough.
Cheers
gww
Opps. I didn't read your post close enough, that is what you were saying. Not the first thing that I have ever missed but I will leave it so others know that I am mistake prone.


----------



## johno

Yes but don,t forget lots of beekeepers like me have at least 7 years of 1st year beekeeping. All years are not equal.
Johno


----------



## gww

johno


> Yes but don,t forget lots of beekeepers like me have at least 7 years of 1st year beekeeping. All years are not equal.


You made me smile. 
Cheers
gww


----------



## PepperBeeMan

This will be my 4th year. In the beginning, I fought foundation & treatment. I have an uncle who advised a hands-off approach. He's never bought a bee but is quite successful bringing in a honey crop every year. He catches swarms, what he calls, "volunteers," by setting up hives with a little bit of comb and frames. He never treats. He does his inspections, keeps his frames clean and removable, checks to see if feeding is necessary during certain times, and does a little swarm prevention by splitting.

Starting from packages year 1, nucs year 2, packages year 3. I lost my bees to Nosema the 1st year, deadout at Thanksgiving year 2 (probably mites), and I'm happy to report 100% survival so far from year 3.

The year I treated for mites (Apivar at start of Fall before it got cold), my bees lived. So, I will be treating every year, Spring & Fall, alternating treatment methods because it does my conscience no good knowing I allowed a colony to die even though I had access to medicine to cure it. 

IMHO....anti-treatment is akin to anti-vaxxers.


----------



## 1102009

PepperBeeMan said:


> IMHO....anti-treatment is akin to anti-vaxxers.


:scratch: apivar treatments are vaccination? :scratch:


----------



## gww

pepperbeeman
Sounds like both you and your uncle are both happy with your personal decisions. I am going to take it for granted, due to how you posted that your uncle seems to be doing pretty good that your very last sentance is not ment to be a put down to him. Sounds like you both are happy but getting there in a differrent fassion. So far, I am more like your uncle and liking it.
Cheers
gww


----------



## Cyberman

I bought a hive in 2015 from a 90 year old guy who couldn't do it anymore. He told me they were Minnesota Hygienic bees. I wish I could have bought more but couldn't afford it at the time.
Until now I haven't treated them for anything and they have thrived. I split the hive last summer and the split has thrived also. I do put hive beetle blasters in the hives but that is it, besides feeding them. They actually keep the the 5 or 6 hive beetles corralled in a corner on top. I believe we need to find bees that resist pestilence instead of continually treating weak bees to sustain them. But, that is just my opinion because this is an opinion thread, to each his own I guess.


----------



## crgshhn

Lauri said:


> When I started beekeeping, I only had one location, so I had to learn to make splits within one yard and allow for flyback. This was just one of the ways I used it to my advantage instead of trying to fight the bees to relocate by confining them, etc.
> 
> When I started doing what I call 'fly back' swarms, I'd move an entire colony onto my cart, place a new box on the bottom board in the original location, find the queen and place her on one or two frames of Open brood right in the center. Surrounding that center frame with new undrawn frames and a good interior feeder. (Keep that feeder full of feed while they are drawing new frames) Letting all the foragers fly back to the old location and allowing them to rebuild new comb. It works wonderfully with an older very large overwintered hive early spring.
> 
> All mites are phoretic until that frame of open brood is capped. (The reason I use a frame of brood is to keep them from considering absconding) Removing that frame of brood once capped would be a good way to remove a lot of mites from the colony. Using a frame of open DRONE brood for the 'anchor' frame would make some sense and you wouldn't have any problem removing that, opposed to a full frame of worker brood.
> 
> Back then OAV was not legal and I'd never tried it with the method. But now, combined with the phoretic period when assembled, it would be amazing way to refreshing an older colony.
> (You take all the frames of brood, feed and bees from that original large overwintered colony and break them up into nucs and give them a queen cell.)
> I loved this method, one of the things I did when I mentioned I had so many hives I had the resources to experiment when I was pretty inexperienced. I have not done it in a couple years because...it results in a LOT of new colonies! I am already selling nucs and spending more time working bees than I intended. Of course you could recombine the hive once the virgin queens have been run through the older frames and they are cleaned up. Harvest your mated queens & Reassemble or combine the nucs right before your main flow for a larger production colony.
> There are other options other than keeping all the nucs separate.
> 
> 
> I did this for a few years without treatments and it worked pretty darn well for me. With an OA hit, it would work beautifully. There is no empty comb to contaminate with the OAV crystals except for the center anchor/bait frame. All the frames are new and not yet drawn. A dribble would also be effective at this point. But those frames will soon be drawn in just a few days with all those bees, an established queen with no where to lay and no brood to feed. If you've never seen a colony grab a gear, be prepared to be amazed.
> 
> Here are a couple photos of the process after assembly:
> This one was done 4-2-14 from a triple deep hive with 2nd year queen
> 
> 1/2 hour after separation:
> 
> View attachment 37154
> 
> 
> One hour after separation:
> View attachment 37155
> 
> 
> 3 hours:
> 
> View attachment 37156
> 
> 
> 9 days after separation:
> View attachment 37158
> 
> 
> View attachment 37160
> 
> 
> 
> There are particulars you should know about this method I did not mention here, possible imbalance of bee ages for one and how to allow for that, what to expect, etc. You can shake in some nurse bees if your spring temps are not so cool you have to be concerned about chilled brood with the brood frames that are left and broken up into nucs. Once all your bees that were inclined to fly back to the old location have done so ( overnight) you can judge the brood frame/nurse bee population easily before you break them up into nucs. Once all foragers have rebuilt these frames and they are full of brood and feed, they will have worked themselves to death and leave only the queen, brood and newly emerged young bees. There is , what I call, a 'mentor gap' when older bee have died and there are no foragers to pass on information about location of resources, etc. It is interesting to see how much the bees learn from each other and the impact of an imbalance of ages. It's not just the ability to do a job, it's the communication disruption within the whole colony.
> 
> If you are not careful, you'll start out with a box of senior citizens and end up with a box of kindergartners with no teachers. It is important to feed them, especially at this point.
> If you've timed it right, the very young bees will be maturing right before your main flow when resources are typically scarce, so having few foragers are really not a big issue since there is not much available to collect. If you time it right, your young bees will have matured to foraging age right as your main flow starts. New frames are all drawn, ready to be filled.
> 
> But the mites do take a hard hit. Especially if you combine with a treatment. Thing is, with that broodless window, it is most effective with the least amount of exposures. If you use Apivar, that can mean just a couple days instead of 6-8 weeks of exposure time. That's a big difference.
> A big difference in exposures, residual accumulative exposures and over all costs because that Apivar strip can treat several nucs/ colonies instead of just one.
> 
> It all sounds complicated, but it's not. It just takes some time. Once you do it, and get your organization down, you'll want to do it to all your large hives early spring especially if they seem inclined to swarm. It stops THAT right in the bud..I call it 'freshening' a hive.
> 
> All this also can be done AFTER the main flow when a hive is sitting back doing a whole bunch of nothing, but allowing mites to begin to reproduce late summer. It works great at that time too, maybe even better than spring timing depending on the hives condition coming out of winter .


Lauri, thank you so much for this great information. I plan to use this method on some strong overwintered 10 frame double deeps and make up nucs from them. So a couple questions, and if you'd rather put this in a new thread I understand since this isnt really about TF stuff. When you do the split, is it okay to immediately treat the old queen and open brood frame(s) and foundation with OA? When making up nucs from this method, do you provide open brood, capped brood, and frames of food equally to the nucs or do you include any frames of drawn comb and/or foundation in the nucs also? I'll be giving each nuc a ripe queen cell. With that in mind, would a OA treatment of the nucs at approximately 24 days be preferable? Any other tidbits of information regarding making up nucs from this method? Thanks!


----------



## Swarmhunter

Absolutely!!! I treat my honey production hives as needed. My hives that I use for Nuc production get brood breaks, some of them multiple brood breaks. I find this works for me. Hope my cog in the big wheel keeps spinning!


----------



## kilocharlie

Until mite resistant / tolerant traits are present in sufficient % that honeybee colonies have some chance of survival, treatment-free beekeeping practices imposed upon wuss honeybee colonies is akin to animal cruelty.

So far, the most effective trait combination is mite mauling combined with some kind of brood break. Other traits may help, but I personally do not know (other than TF claimants online) anyone who is having thriving success without some degree of these two traits, usually combined with screened bottom board + sticky board monitoring.

Randy Oliver's alcohol wash routine is coming pretty close to a solid method of monitoring mite loads.

Personally, I use IPM program with alcohol wash monitoring, drone comb removal & freezing, and a heavy-duty treatment (formic acid) dealt pretty near to August 15th each year, and various other mite tortures if colonies need it early in the season. Don't let the little bastards get a leg up on my bees!

Best of luck to all


----------



## dvorai

i'm hobbyist and keeping only 12 hives.
treating for mites twice, mid July with Apivar and December OAV series (we have brood in winter).
as intermediate knock back measure i mix essential oils with the syrup when feeding in fall. 
i also destroy drone brood occasionally during the summer in order to keep varroa infestation low until the major treatment in July. but, this also gives me some indication regarding the infestation level. 
i decided to treat heavily due to the small number of hives and limited genetic diversity. i'm not ready to lose most (if not all) of my hives to varroa.
if i had 100 or more hives and wider genetic diversity , perhaps i would consider going for treatment free or at least relying on OAV only.


----------



## squarepeg

a comment by randy oliver in this month's abj:

"The British Columbia Honey Producers Association publishes an excellent quarterly called Bee Scene. In last fall’s issue, an article by beekeeper Kerry Clark caught my eye—“Mutual Respect in the Treatment-Free Debate.” I’m in full agreement, since either side has grounds for making a case. I find closed-minded finger pointing, blaming, and demonization of others to be counterproductive. Although proponents of either side can convincingly rationalize and justify their positions, the truth is that both sides are often right, and both sides are often ill-informed about the biology involved."

abj, july 2018, vol. 158 No. 7, p. 771


----------



## Van from Arkansas

There are some beautiful post here. Understand there is a tendency of breeders of bees to quote examples of other species utilizing the same terminology to defend treatment free of honeybees. Honeybees are unique and can’t be compared to bacteria and bacterial resistance to biotiotics which is a common defense of going treatment free. That is if you treat you will developer resistance mites as defended by TF proponents.

Not even close with oxalic acid which has a dozen modes of action against a mite compared to a given antibiotic with only one mode of action against a bacterium. They just are not comparing apples to apples.

Honey bees are unique, drones have no dads but have a grandfather....... 

Humans have not evolved resistance to ticks in thousands of years. A nymph tick is about the size of a Varroa mite if we as humans cannot resist ticks without chemicals why does a TF person believe a honey bee can accomplish resistance to mites inwhich the size comparison is over a million to one; comparing a bee to a person.

Asking a bee to suddenly developed resistance to a Varroa mite is asking for severe biological changes driven by genetics. Easier to purchase a winning lottery ticket, just so you understand the odds.

In time with our help, the bees will win. With beeks like Lauri the bees will win but it may be a while for the absolute honey bee to develope, if ever.

I treat with OAV as needed, varrox tool. But more power to the TF folks for trying, between the two opposing camps the bees are going to survive.
Blessings


----------



## msl

> oxalic acid which has a dozen modes of action against a mite


do you happen to have a source for that? Last I hurd the mode of action was very much up in the air


----------



## Van from Arkansas

MLS, acids have been around for hundred if years the data is overwhelming. Oxalic acid can kill by altering the ph of a mite, by destroying the enzymes, the feet pads, the sensor of the antenna, burning mouth parts, burning respiratory tract, destroying the chitin integrity, altering the ph of the blood, destroying the gonads, destroying the digestive tract, the leg joints, it’s hard to pin down when there are so many biological systems effected which is actually the mite.

Bees on the other hand love acid, honey is acidic and naturally contains oxalic acid. So we are using a component of honey to kill the mites. I might add most greens such as spinach contain oxalic acid, common in many vegetables.
Blessings


----------



## squarepeg

our member sibylle is away from home at this time and can read but not log in to beesource. 

she asks me to forward a reply she makes to this thread:

"Treatments are normally used to treat when a disease develops and the victims' immune system is not able to overcome this.
With livestock which gives a profit this normal way is often abandoned not to loose income.
Disease can be hold at bay with vaccination or strenghening of the immune System, if you want to avoid the more dangerous way of treating the symptoms.

It would be really easy for beekeepers to develop the resistance by monitoring a threshold and treating only the susceptibles, breeding from the stronger ones, letting the weak genetics go extinct.

The weak colonies, treated constantly and therefore loosing their microorganisms develop brood disease which then must be treated with even more medicine like antibiotiics, and
the weak hives in their Stress are more a target to silent robbing, having not much defense and therefore are mite bombs in your own yards, blame put on the neighbours.

If every beekeeper would try to breed for more resistance, whether to use Bond or Resistance Breeding by a threshold we must not fear reinfestation, we must not fear 100% loss, we must not fear to have more and more work to do with constant treatments done, we must not fear to much money spend on chemicals.

With my apprenticeship right now I See how great a feeling it is to do monitoring for mites and to find most of the 120 colonies of my Mentor not susceptible to mites and their viruses anymore, so no need for Treatments.

In a commercial setting ( without migration ) it needs some years but still, it's possible even without being isolated. 

So, beekeepers, don't try for an excuse pretending it is a benefit for the bees to treat them if they don't need Treatments and that it will not hurt them.

You yourself need digestion acids for surviving but you don' t use them on your skin to fight neurodermitis, for example.
Everything that is provided by creation has its special place to be used and it's probably not us to decide, but the bees."


----------



## squarepeg

Van from Arkansas said:


> There are some beautiful post here...


thanks van and welcome to beesource!

have you had a chance to read randy oliver's series on the subject "The Varroa Problem"?

the series is being published in the american bee journal but is also available for free here:

http://scientificbeekeeping.com/articles-by-publication-date/

if you scroll down that page you'll find the first installment of the series from november 2016.

in my opinion randy's point of view on the topic is about as fair and balanced as i've seen.


----------



## Van from Arkansas

sibylle, thanks for the comment, I can find not fault with your post. Agreed. In fact you raise an important issue, requeen the weak hives, strive to improve the genetics.
Blessings


----------



## GregB

Van from Arkansas said:


> .........
> Bees on the other hand love acid, honey is acidic and naturally contains oxalic acid. So we are using a component of honey to kill the mites. I might add most greens such as spinach contain oxalic acid, common in many vegetables.
> Blessings


Just a reminder - this is ALL about concentrations; not about mere presence of a substance.
Even simple water can kill you - just drink enough of it. 

Abnormally high levels of OA (with unknown side-affects) that should not exist - that the short-term concern. 
Long-term concern - no artificial additives belong in the natural beehive ecosystem at all (outside of what bees create themselves or allow to coexist).
I want to be able to bite into a old brood comb, eat everything in it, and have no concerns whatsoever.
Period.


----------



## Van from Arkansas

Greg, you correct: water can kill a person, one would have to drink gallons. I did not address concentrations, I was trying to make a point.

Being all natural is a good quality, I say good for you, fella.


----------



## trishbookworm

We all want bees that don't need mite treatments to survive. In NE OH, my swarm grandaughters were killed by mites. They didn't die the first year, but they did the second.

I was monitoring for mites about every 6 weeks, using the alcohol wash. In may and june I had like 1 or 2 mites. I figured we should be fine, this is below the threshold... by early August I had 20+ mites in 300 bees. And 3/6 hives died. 

I was managing such that when the "mites got bad", I would treat. I used OAV, and 3 hives were saved. But.... the slope is so darn steep from doing fine to dead!

Look, if your cat had a mild respiratory infection (assuming you're a cat person, and you'd take your cat to the vet - substitute dog or another non-bee option here), and you wanted to avoid antibiotics unless necessary... The cat might get worse, might get skinny from not eating, but you can treat with antibiotics AND feed at ANY time of the year to fatten up a cat (or any other mammal, or avian).

Bees up north have to raise very special brood in August. If the foragers are compromised, if the nurse bees (who should be loafing and getting fat) have to feed little sisters and then forage, then NO amount of feeding will save the colony. And most of the bees will die around the same time. 

How can you tell if your bees have the genetics to "handle" mites, or if they are vulnerable? By the time the mites are showing up in the alcohol wash, it's likely too late, unless you're looking like 2 times a month.

One thing I noticed - I had about 8 frames (well, bars because I'm a top bar beekeeper, but they r the size of a lang frame) with capped brood or eggs. And I had only about 10 frames covered with bees - just barely more than the size of the brood nest.

This was during July and August. 

I should have had at least 2 times as many frames covered with bees. Every frame with brood produces about 2 frames covered with bees, somewhere in that neighborhood. Now I look back and realize this was an early sign of mite predation. Too many foragers were being lost, the queen could barely keep up with the deaths, because the foragers were compromised.

So if you can, log the number of frames with brood and the number of frames covered with bees. If you aren't seeing substantially more frames covered with bees, than there are frames of brood... that may be an early warning sign. 

I really appreciated seeing Squarepeg's journal of hives that survived and amount of honey harvested. When someone talks about their success with treatment free bees - at least south of me, no one talks about it for long in the northern midwest and northeast, that I am seeing - their idea of success may be survival. Mine is survival + splitting + honey. 

If treatment free means small brood nests, and small honey crops - well, the cost/benefit could still work. There is a cost to treating - could kill bees, could think it worked and then it didnt and you let your guard down and they die - and you have to pay for the treatment. It ain't cheap.

I just wish the slope between functioning hive and dead wasn't so steep for people where broodrearing ends in early Oct and doesn't start until late April some winters. We can't just feed once we realize there is a problem - it gets too cold, and there's no brood rearing anyways. We can't just do an emergency treatment in september - the winter bees are already compromised. But other areas are not so limited by our brood break. 

Keep sharing stories folks - it's shining a light on this experience we call beekeeping!


----------



## lharder

I wouldn't boil down this debate to treating or not, but rather if basic ecological principles are used to maintain bee health. From a systems perspective I am interested in mechanisms that regulate population genetics, and creating a stable enough environment to that can be regulated. The talk of managing "livestock" vs "natural bees" vs "pets" is irrelevant. 

For me this is a 2 pronged approach. 

1. Use natural selection as a baseline for survival. The doing additional selection on top of that. Baseline selection is important because anyone can do it. This is the hallmark of a sustainable regulated system. Doing mites counts and treating susceptible colonies will regulate, but it is fraught with error in terms understanding the dynamics of the system. Far better to have a baseline of survival first, then human selection second. 

2. Creating a more stable adaptive environment. This means not bringing in bees from outside my region except in special circumstances and the promotion of local bee self sufficiency. 

The elephant in the room is the fact that beekeeping is the source of most of our problems. There is a reason that TF is possible on the fringes of beekeeping. Its because beekeepers cause pathogenic and genetic chaos by moving bees around and not doing selection. We are terrible at bee health, and really good at spreading every known pest around. This problem is probably scalable. Meaning moving bees between regions will have negative impact as each region probably has its own evolutionary and adaptive path with regards to pathogens. It has probably always been the case, but varroa mites enhance the effects of our bad practices of moving bees. 

The actual health and fitness of bees can be measured by the mite thresholds that cause death. Low thresholds mean that we are affecting the local environment negatively and our collective practices need to change. Another way to measure bee health is keep track of the number and severity of epidemics within bee populations. If proper ecological principles are followed, these should be reduced. At the same time panic should not set in the event of one. In the event of an epidemic, the idea is not to rush in unselected replacements, but to find colonies that do well in the face of the epidemic, and raise queens from them. 

I have been TF for 5 years and the grand daughters of my original stock are doing better than when I first brought them in. It appears there are hives that survive more than 2 years and are productive. So I see no reason to change my overall approach. I don't consider myself out of the woods yet, and expect epidemics to come my way. I don't consider this a problem with my methods, but rather problems brought to my door step by the movement of bees by other beekeepers. But my approach is to still to take survivors and work with them to adapt to the changing environment. 

The current import of bees from chile and new zealand is deplorable. I am waiting for some critter to make an evolutionary jump to take advantage of bees in south america. We will import it before we realize its a problem with our current close the barn door after the horse has left policy. 

There is one reason to bring in bees. If, with sampling, a local population is lacking in a trait, then I would bring in a queen line with it. Not only in terms of mite resistant mechanisms, but also production. The idea is not to discard local genetics, but introduce traits to them. I won't evaluate queen lines, but traits. Then it is up to nature and the beekeeper to select for them in the local population. I have no illusions that my bees would do well in other environments to which they are not adapted to. 

Treatment muddies the waters in evaluating bees and slows down the adaptive process. A hive that needs treatment to appear healthy is not healthy. All producers of queens should be treatment free for that reason. They probably shouldn't be sending them to far off places. Certainly not off continent, but even off region. Queen suppliers should concentrate on local demand.

If mite thresholds are terribly low, I would say the first step to improving that situation is a regional focus on bee self sufficiency. Stabilize the adaptive environment first. Then focus on moving bees to TF. Forget about it if no one cares. No amount of mite counting, bond or other selection measures will solve these problems.


----------



## Juhani Lunden

lharder said:


> I have been TF for 5 years and the grand daughters of my original stock are doing better than when I first brought them in. It appears there are hives that survive more than 2 years and are productive. So I see no reason to change my overall approach.


4 years and 5 summers 

"Overall" approach being what?



lharder said:


> All producers of queens should be treatment free for that reason.
> 
> If mite thresholds are terribly low, I would say the first step to improving that situation is a regional focus on bee self sufficiency. Stabilize the adaptive environment first. Then focus on moving bees to TF. Forget about it if no one cares. No amount of mite counting, bond or other selection measures will solve these problems.


All queen producers should be treatment free. This is a new idea for the transition period to TF beekeeping world. Great!
Wrote in my blog about it just the other day. https://naturebees.wordpress.com/

What do you mean by "stabilize the adaptive environment"?


----------



## johno

there are all sorts of theories and rhetoric in this thread none of which would change the position I have put forth in post #2
Johno


----------



## 1102009

Bet the bees and the mites would :lpf: about this discussion, making the tf approach a religion. Sorry Leroy. I respect you very much and you may be right but it will never work like that.
The world can´t be changed as it is but it can be improved.

Queen breeders providing the location when nobody is interested. Mmh. I know of someone who dominates his area with his bees genetics by spending a lot of money to give away his queens for free in the beginning. Would you?

There are colonies living under the worst circumstances and still surviving and we want to have control about nature 

IMO as long as we don´t let them completely alone we treat them. What you do is treatments. What I do is too. We don´t use chemicals but we influence survivabilty by our managements.


----------



## lharder

Juhani Lunden said:


> 4 years and 5 summers
> 
> "Overall" approach being what?
> 
> 
> 
> All queen producers should be treatment free. This is a new idea for the transition period to TF beekeeping world. Great!
> Wrote in my blog about it just the other day. https://naturebees.wordpress.com/
> 
> What do you mean by "stabilize the adaptive environment"?


My overall approach is to start colonies using daughters from colonies that have survived 2 winters treatment free, are productive and reasonably gentle. I do no brood breaks, sugar dusting or drone brood removal of any kind. Its a black box bottom up approach where I am looking for the kinds of solutions that natural mechanisms will uncover as it does in nature. Over time I am setting up a mating area where my genetics dominate (hopefully) the local area. Next year, this will be inhabited by mostly 2 winter survivor hives. My other sites will be populated by production hives that will produce honey and bees/brood for making nucs. After 2 years of success, the best hives will be moved to my mating site. Along the way I introduce not lines of bees, but bees with certain traits. I introduced a couple of VSH queens from 2 different queen rearers this and last year. Those that survive the first year (I don't get them early enough to make daughter right away), will have daughters made with hopes of integrating those traits into the general population. Over time I will characterize what resistance traits are in my bees and in what frequency they occur in my population and bring in new traits to integrate if they are missing from the local population. I will start doing further selection for bees that show outstanding control of mites and are still productive. In a stable adaptive environment this may not have to be done, but because I can't control the movement of bees into my region, excessive mite control may be of some benefit to deal with new pathogen challenges, even if not optimal in the immediate future. 

I have got to where I am without any control of my mating area, so I presume because I am on a bit of a backwater without migratory keepers, that things are stable enough for this approach to work. By reasonably stable I mean that the bees are not forced to continually adapt to new pathogen challenges continually introduced as a result of bee movement. There are limits to what natural (and human) selection can deal with. Genetic systems are ideally suited to deal with some change, and some new challenges, but if they happen too fast and too frequently, then they are overcome. I read a fair amount of complexity theory which is interested in these kinds of scenarios. There are some simple models you can search for on the internet for illustration. Look up "adaptive landscapes". Look term management of bee health is probably dependent on understanding the adaptive landscapes for bees and how we affect them. Now we just react ad hoc without understanding the system at all.


----------



## Dave1

has anyone used icing sugar 
i did and no more varroa mites
knocked some off the frames into a bucket of icing sugar poured them back into hive with icing sugar,got rid of the mites
my mentor did an experiment he marked some drones his mate 2 mile away did the same with a different colour some of the drones ended up in each others hives about 7 mile away yes 7 mile away they ended up in other hives 
the theory is they were hive hopping well that keeps incest away but they also carry mites


----------



## msl

Mortensen, Ashley N., Cameron J. Jack, and James D. Ellis. 
"The discovery of Varroa destructor on drone honey bees, Apis mellifera, at drone congregation areas." 
Parasitology Research (2018): 1-3.
2.73 Varroa/100 drones away for managed apiarys, 0.42 Varroa/100 close to them.. I would argue 27-4 mites per thousand drones in not a significant source of infection, transferred pathogens perhaps..

sugar drops about 50% of the phroic mites.. might be usfull during a brood break , but when the hive is brooded up... not so much 
if you going to treat your hives with organic compounds, use an efive one


----------



## Michael Bush

>if we as humans cannot resist ticks without chemicals why does a TF person believe a honey bee can accomplish resistance to mites inwhich the size comparison is over a million to one; comparing a bee to a person.

But I do resist ticks without chemicals, and my bees resist Varroa. I've never used chemicals for ticks on me and I'm not covered in ticks...

Here is the samples of eight hives done by the University of Nebraska, Lincoln, July 25, 2018, during their APHIS survey of one of my beeyards doing sugar shakes (correctly) on 300 bees:

1. 0 Varroa
2. 0 Varroa
3. 1 Varroa
4. 0 Varroa
5. 1 Varroa
6. 0 Varroa
7. 2 Varroa
8. 2 Varroa


----------



## squarepeg

outstanding michael. thanks for sharing your numbers.


----------



## little_john

Michael Bush said:


> I've never used chemicals for ticks on me and I'm not covered in ticks...


So you've never showered or bathed using soap, never washed your clothes with soap or detergent ? Try living as they did during the Middle Ages (just like modern-day tramps do) - and as some folks were compelled to do in war-torn countries during WWII - and then check-out whether you have body lice or not. One of the first steps US forces did when relieving a formally-occupied European town was to dust the survivors with DDT.

In first-world countries we've been living hygienically for so long now that we've completely forgotten that this lifestyle is based on the continuous use of chemicals.
LJ


----------



## Juhani Lunden

Michael Bush said:


> Here is the samples of eight hives done by the University of Nebraska, Lincoln, July 25, 2018, during their APHIS survey of one of my beeyards doing sugar shakes (correctly) on 300 bees:
> 
> 1. 0 Varroa
> 2. 0 Varroa
> 3. 1 Varroa
> 4. 0 Varroa
> 5. 1 Varroa
> 6. 0 Varroa
> 7. 2 Varroa
> 8. 2 Varroa



Impressive, can´t say more.

Are the results part of some kind of public survey, maybe published some day?


----------



## trishbookworm

treating vs not treating for lice - possibly a fabulous analogy. If you are in an area with no lice load, and you don't wash at all.... you'll be fine. This may be what happens for people with successful treatment-free hives in some areas - there aren't incoming mites, and there are few in each hive, and... If you are exposed to a few lice, and you DO wash... then you'll be fine. If your bees are experiencing a low mite load, because they are somewhat resistant, or due to non-chemical treatments like splits and drone culling...well, the analogy holds.

And if your bees are resistant, but you're surrounded by beekeepers whose might loads are very high, then your bees can get overrun with mites in the winter and then you open the hive in January and there's a mite on the queen's back. It was a gentle VSH queen. Minimal mite frass in the combs, so those suckers were not home grown. Yes it was my hive. 

The problems is detecting whether you live in a mite-free zone, AND if your bees are resistant. I use alcohol washes for that. If I find the mite count in an alcohol wash per 300 bees in August is below 4, and in Sept is below 6 - that is a tolerable level of home-grown mite load. But.... either I need to check in November for any imported mites, or treat pre-emptively with OAV, or kiss the bees that went robbing a mite-crashing hive goodbye. I'd rather find out about their high mite load due to robbing an infected hive through a spike in their mite counts in November compared to Sept, or from the mite drop post- OAV treatment, and not use those queens for breeding the following year - but save the bees and future brood and honey-making for my benefit. ;/


----------



## msl

> outstanding michael. thanks for sharing your numbers.


indeed
MB were those unsplit full on production hives?


----------



## LAlldredge

I started in May and this much I know. I'm in charge of 1) pest management 2) housing & 3) nutrition as needed. I use a sticky board under a screened varroa trap over a solid bottom board. I consider that an essential tool to know my mite levels. After monitoring daily since June i noticed one of my hives gaining in mite levels over my tolerance of 10 per day in early August. I immediately started an oxalic acid dribble in stages. (5 X 5) Mite levels are down to just a few a day and I'm ready to do more if necessary.

I do as little as necessary and as much as required. I have a full bandwidth of options available and will do what I need to keep my bees alive. It starts with breeding, cultivating a healthy colony and finally doing what's necessary to aid the bees in what they do best. For me it's not about extremes, but rather doing what's necessary to keep bees alive. One day our bees will be able to catch up genetically to what was imposed on them through unnatural means. Until then I will help them bridge the gap.


----------



## lharder

trishbookworm said:


> treating vs not treating for lice - possibly a fabulous analogy. If you are in an area with no lice load, and you don't wash at all.... you'll be fine. This may be what happens for people with successful treatment-free hives in some areas - there aren't incoming mites, and there are few in each hive, and... If you are exposed to a few lice, and you DO wash... then you'll be fine. If your bees are experiencing a low mite load, because they are somewhat resistant, or due to non-chemical treatments like splits and drone culling...well, the analogy holds.
> 
> And if your bees are resistant, but you're surrounded by beekeepers whose might loads are very high, then your bees can get overrun with mites in the winter and then you open the hive in January and there's a mite on the queen's back. It was a gentle VSH queen. Minimal mite frass in the combs, so those suckers were not home grown. Yes it was my hive.
> 
> The problems is detecting whether you live in a mite-free zone, AND if your bees are resistant. I use alcohol washes for that. If I find the mite count in an alcohol wash per 300 bees in August is below 4, and in Sept is below 6 - that is a tolerable level of home-grown mite load. But.... either I need to check in November for any imported mites, or treat pre-emptively with OAV, or kiss the bees that went robbing a mite-crashing hive goodbye. I'd rather find out about their high mite load due to robbing an infected hive through a spike in their mite counts in November compared to Sept, or from the mite drop post- OAV treatment, and not use those queens for breeding the following year - but save the bees and future brood and honey-making for my benefit. ;/


Did you do brood assays? Things change quickly at the end of summer with changes in the brood nest, population and mite numbers go up. 

I think VSH alone is not quite enough. We should also be interested in virus tolerance and mite mauling. Virus tolerance is needed so bees have the energy to do their house cleaning, mite mauling and VSH catches mites in conjunction deals with both mites in brood and phoretic mites. Bringing in a VSH queen doesn't mean she can deal with the local viral environment so any hiccup (a few extra mites) can bring a hive down. But which bees are virus tolerant? We can only stop treating and find out, then try to encorporate other resistance traits in these bees.

Again, the responsibility is for all beekeepers to have mite tolerant bees to avoid mite bombs. Treating is not enough as there are too many potential gaps. We also need to understand that a few eggs need to be broken to make an omelette.


----------



## msl

> One day our bees will be able to catch up genetically to what was imposed on them through unnatural means.


Every thing we has seen suggests that may not be the case, the mites adapt faster. 


> mite mauling


the expected adaption would the mites would spend less time phoretic and lmit the effect of the behavor.. There are hard core TF types that suggest this has already occurred do to phoretic acting treatments aplyed repeatable while hives are actively brood rearing. While I haven't see any study to back that up, the advrage reported phoretic period as drop form 6 to 4.5 days. 
_Several studies focusing on the phoretic phase have shown that it seemed to have no aim for the parasite other than providing transport between reproduction sites [11]. Therefore, it could be suppressed without having any visible impact on the mite reproduction in natural conditions [12]. The phoretic mites are more attracted to nurse than forager bees probably because they carry them to their reproduction site [13,14], but the type of bee hosts during the phoretic phase could further influence the mite life cycle by impacting its reproduction. In addition, as the phoretic mites stay on adult bees for a variable amount of time, from one to ten days or more [15], the possible impact of the length of the phoretic phase on nurse bees is of great interest.
_ Piou et al 2016



> the responsibility is for all beekeepers to have mite tolerant bees to avoid mite bombs. Treating is not enough as there are too many potential gaps


then it is the responsibility of all beekeepers to monitor mites and head off mite bombs with treatments. Genetics are not enough as there are too many potential gaps. especially in commercial operations

We can see this clearly In the Keffus operation, so lets talk about the elephant in the TF room, the colaspe of the Kefuss stock.


----------



## mischief

Technically, I am a treatment free wannabe.
I say technically, because my original goal was to have a hive or two/three that were part of my organic micro climate/eco system, not just whether or not it was treated with chemicals.

Until I stumbled upon the Biobees forum, beekeeping was never a happening thing.
A neck injury as a child and back injury as a adult, meant I simply could not lift even a box full of shallow deep honey frames. i know because I tried twice, ten years apart.
Now a whole world of possibilities opened up- Horizontal hives, just in time for an almost civil war in the beekeeping community here in NZ.
On one side it Had to be frames cos that was the letter of the law, on the other, top bars are inspectable. 
The govt. stepped in and stated 'you must be able to inspect both sides of the comb for possible disease', civil war over.
I chose frames for my own reasons.

I didnt rush into getting a hive, in fact three years after doing Risk analysis and subsequent R&D, I realised I was in danger of becoming just another arm chair expert....Time to get bees.

I set a goal- healthy bees that are part of my eco system.
It is my personal belief that any lifeform that must be medicated JUST to stay alive, is not healthy.

I take heart that others say they have achieved the level of health in their bees that I have set as my goal.

For now, I keep my bees alive as best I can using at first the softest treatments I can, while I learn.
I dont have an IPM as my strategy, I have a Integrated management strategy, base on a risk analysis, backed up by a list of items on which I needed to do R&D.
This means that my strategy is not set in stone but ever changing based on my reading as well as my observations of my hive.

So part of my transition has been at first to use the softest treatments I could- fogging with FGMO and then with wintergreen oil. That went fine, until my first spring where I had a serious DWV problem.
In my first spring, I needed to do sometime alittle more extreme- I wound up buying an essential oil treatment by mistake, but it kept them going, so I continued with it up until recently.

I dont think its good idea to use essential oil treatments in spring- or until the hive has a good number of foragers/drones/capped and uncapped larvae. Knowing that my hive has mites, I feel that this is NOT the time to be using any essential oil treatments due to the overwhelming stench of them, upsetting the Queen scent.
I bought OA and have done two vapour treatments.

I spend probably way too much time watching the entrance of the hive- no point in watching through the window, they are on the sunside of the hive/entrance side, so there is nothing to see.
I was told to do more, but didnt want to. My bees are building up very well and I want to give them every opportunity to deal with things themselves.

I also started introducing plastic small cell frames that did not have their shoulders shaved down, as summer as part of my IMS.
This year, I want to change these out with those that have been shaved down to the 32...or 31mm.

I am an organic gardener, but having said that, I'm not a purist in that either.
this year, I had a serious rodent problem, I felt I just had to use toxic rat bait to resolve this and did so.
Last month, for the first time ever, I have skinks,(small type of lizard), living in the garden in my courtyard.

I do not like plastic at all, but here I am using it.
I do not like using chemicals/drugs at all but I am using them....short term, and lightly with an end goal of not ever having to use them again.

I think this is called....being in transition.


----------



## 1102009

mischief said:


> Technically, I am a treatment free wannabe.
> 
> I think this is called....being in transition.


Respect for that post and all the best!


----------



## little_john

A question about something which continues to puzzle me: why have mites been singled out as a special case for the 'Treatment-Free' approach ? Just curious to know why the same laissez-faire and/or survivor strategies are not being extended to the Foul Brood diseases and the Small Hive Beetle problem.
LJ


----------



## mischief

Probably because this pest kills hives faster than the others at this time.


----------



## little_john

Yes - I too suspect that speed of colony-kill is the primary reason.
LJ


----------



## gww

LJ


> A question about something which continues to puzzle me: why have mites been singled out as a special case for the 'Treatment-Free' approach ? Just curious to know why the same laissez-faire and/or survivor strategies are not being extended to the Foul Brood diseases and the Small Hive Beetle problem.


Why try and make this case? Allowing the bees to adjust to other things has been done. Tracheal mite and chalk brood are done with queen changes as well as EFB and strong hives and full sun help with hive beetle. Many have handled these types of problems with out treating with chemicals and I see the point you are trying to make but varroa is not the only thing bees are being allowed to handle by some.

Cheers
gww


----------



## GregB

little_john said:


> A question about something which continues to puzzle me: why have mites been singled out as a special case for the 'Treatment-Free' approach ?......LJ


But maybe not LJ.

Some smart people pretend to understand something (to only find out sooner or later they were partially or totally wrong; over and over and over again.... we even talking of some fundamental physics here, not just some mite).

I say - toss all of that speculation out the window.
For all practical purposes, use the black-box approach and call it done.
Academics can continue digging - that's their paycheck.

The only definitive way forward is to keep those that survive; let everyone else die off (for any old reason).


----------



## 1102009

little_john said:


> A question about something which continues to puzzle me: why have mites been singled out as a special case for the 'Treatment-Free' approach ? Just curious to know why the same laissez-faire and/or survivor strategies are not being extended to the Foul Brood diseases and the Small Hive Beetle problem.
> LJ


A very good question.

The SHB we have not, so I don´t know what I would do.
A trap seems to me ok, it´s not chemical. Restrict the hive , so defense is good. 

We are not permitted to use antobiotics so there is only the possibility to kill the brood and desinfect the boxes in case of AFB. EFB means feeding and propagating the hive, but no antibiotics ( if you go by law).
It´s only done with an outbreak, though in the restriction area all colonies are controlled by sending a sample to the laboratory. But spores are everywhere and healthy looking hives are only watched and obliged not to leave the area and be migrated.
It´s not chemical too and so you maybe can call it tf. This tf IPM is done by tf and t beekeepers and in case of AFB you are obliged by law to save only the bees if possible.


----------



## little_john

SiWolKe said:


> The SHB we have not, so I don´t know what I would do.
> A trap seems to me ok, it´s not chemical. Restrict the hive , so defense is good.


Luckily we don't have SHB either - nasty little beasts. So for yourself TF equates to chemical-free ? That then raises the old chestnut of "what does TF mean, exactly ?" - an issue I've tried to raise before, but it's not an issue that people seem to want to engage with. Personally, I think it's important - but apparently others don't.

The reason I chose to mention the Foul Broods and SHB is that, like Varroa, they're all highly 'contagious' in the sense of spreading like wildfire, thus creating widespread economic losses.

In Britain, although in theory one can treat EFB with veterinary-prescribed antibiotics, in practice either of the Foul Broods is invariably dealt with by killing and torching the affected colony following notification to the authorities (a legal requirement which I personally agree with), so genetic survival for these diseases will never occur.

With regard to the speed of colony-kill - the irony here is that the faster the fatal effects of a disease (or those of a parasite/pest) the better - in that with a much shorter time-frame being involved, any survivor stock will be identified relatively quickly. One of the problems with Varroa, it seems to me, is that a colony can harbour the parasite for several seasons before finally succumbing - thus creating a false indicator of Varroa-tolerance whilst continuing to spread the problem to other hives. If there was a more immediate colony-kill, then the spread of the parasite would be more quickly arrested, as the parasite would tend to die alongside it's unfortunate host. 

It's a problem.
LJ


----------



## Juhani Lunden

little_john said:


> With regard to the speed of colony-kill - the irony here is that the faster the fatal effects of a disease (or those of a parasite/pest) the better - in that with a much shorter time-frame being involved, any survivor stock will be identified relatively quickly. One of the problems with Varroa, it seems to me, is that a colony can harbour the parasite for several seasons before finally succumbing - thus creating a false indicator of Varroa-tolerance whilst continuing to spread the problem to other hives. If there was a more immediate colony-kill, then the spread of the parasite would be more quickly arrested, as the parasite would tend to die alongside it's unfortunate host.


I agree 
and have been taking the same principle against AFB as varroa, no treatments, just shaking of bees to new frames. However this shaking is done only after major part of the capped brood present has hatched, even if there is bad smell and serious infection visible. And sometimes even after a longer time period. I don´t remember ever seeing other hives in near by getting infected. 


Just today spoke to Kari Pirhonen (the one who makes his own insemination gear). Kari insists that his nucleus hives (6 nucs in one Langstroth box) got cured from a bad AFB problem after he put daughters of my queens to these nucs.


----------



## Michael Bush

I've been not treating for anything for most of 44 years. That greatly predates Varroa mites and Tracheal mites. I've been not treating for Nosema and AFB etc. etc. etc. Why would you assume that being treatment free is only about Varroa?


----------



## GregB

little_john said:


> .. the irony here is that the faster the fatal effects of a disease (or those of a parasite/pest) the better...LJ


Exactly.
All it takes - one season of not-treating for the majority of the keepers.
That quick. Try and see how quick your turn over will be.

I immediately started in that direction. 
Most of the bees dropped off like flies. 
Good riddance.

Got more bees than I can handle again at the moment.
We'll see how the weeding out will work this season.

Treating what turns a quick death and quick weeding out into multi-year agony with unclear results.


----------



## msl

centurys of TF (becuse of no choice) "natural selection" didn't help with foulbrood.
_""By 1650 nearly all farms in New England are reported to have had a colony or two of bees. However, the number of bees managed by these colonists rapidly declined after 1670, presumably because of AFB. Substantive documentation of AFB’s presence in the new world, however, did not occur until more than a century later, by the late 1800s and early 1900s. Then, AFB and EFB were a ‘veritable scourge’ in many parts of the country resulting in the passage of many state bee laws and implementation of state apiary inspection programs. "_ vanEngelsdorp Et al 2010.

LJ the TF focus on mites is likely do to the fact that pre varroa it was reasonable for the person with a few hives to buy some package bees, be TF ,and have a good amount of success, now not so such


----------



## mischief

Michael Bush said:


> I've been not treating for anything for most of 44 years. That greatly predates Varroa mites and Tracheal mites. I've been not treating for Nosema and AFB etc. etc. etc. Why would you assume that being treatment free is only about Varroa?


I take heart in this and appreciate people like you who have been more than willing to share their personal learning curve.
Thank you


----------



## Michael Bush

> "natural selection" didn't help with foulbrood.

Resistance to foulbrood is all about genetics. Why would you assume that natural selection doesn't select for hygienic behavior? Bees did not become extinct with no treatments, they thrived and spread. Then by selecting for perfect brood patterns we bred against hygienic behavior, and by selecting against propolis we bred against the bees' natural defenses.


----------



## GregB

msl said:


> centurys of TF (becuse of no choice) "natural selection" didn't help with foulbrood...


And yet centuries later, in 1950s and 60s, my Dad still kept bees someplace in Eastern Europe.
Then they ALL died (I recall talks of Nosema or the like).
Then he caught a swarm and started all over again.
Then Dad passed and the some bees swarmed away, some died, and the rest my Mom sold.

Our family moved on, and yet someone kept the bees and still keep bees.

So, there were always bees in our village, and villages nearby, and villages farther away (regardless of few dead hives here and there).
Now that is strange granted the foul-brood wiped out the bees many times over and should be nothing left anywhere forever and ever.

PS: one issue (in the US at least) is that people want immediate gratification, a good story to hear (be it a fake story - unimportant), and immediate fix for everything; 
they want a magic pill that provides an immediate cure for any decease (be it mites or cancer);
Well - things do not work that way.


----------



## 1102009

Even in skep times the beekeepers migrated and exploited all honey.
Could be this makes a difference in defense against foulbrood disease IMO propagating it.

While harvesting, they killed the brood and the bees started new after being combined to strong colonies.
Could be this held the foulbrood at bay IMO.

Strange is that among all those I work with and who are tf they never had a case of foulbrood. Not EFB, not AFB, despite being near restriction areas ( I was 5km distance myself), despite mite crashs.
We have in common that we don´t migrate, we don´t move combs between apiaries, we don´t feed if possible, we harvest only surplus , we never harvest or take propolis, we try not to disturb broodnests.

Over the border in switzerland some km distance they have a big problem. They migrate much more, density of colonies is higher, they treated often with medicaments which are still permitted, yes advised.
Not anymore, only illegally. They try to change the susceptability to foulbrood. Foulbrood there is a much bigger problem than mites, the magazines say.


----------



## msl

MB while it sounds good... 
Yes they didn't go extinct, much like mites foulbrood is a threat to beekeepers not bees as a species, it was wiping out apairys long before movable frames and the selection you suggest weakend the bees 



> Now that is strange granted the foul-brood wiped out the bees many times over and should be nothing left anywhere forever and ever.


Then by TF let them die theory, only resistant bees should be left, but that's not what happened. 
Hygienic behavior is said to be combination of two recessive genes one to uncap, one to remove (some newer research that says maybe 7 genes). Both parents need to carry both traits it to work, or the queen carry bolth and mates with drones of each. 
An outbreak comes and goes, only hygienic bees are left.. Thats great!...
hold on... its only great for a bit 
why?
Drones are not clones of the queen, they are a random 1/2 of her genetics (16 out of 32 chromosomes)and different from each other. 
So for the drone to pass the trait on it needs the right 2, out of the 4 out the 32 chromosomes that have the 2 genes needed (the queen has 2 sets of each ) I will let you run the odds, long story short, a lot of non hygienic drones coming out of hygienic survivor hives, and the non hygienic population once again fills the area... not to mention the colonys that for what ever reason just didn't catch the foulbrood filling the air with drones

same old story with bees, let up on heavey selection pressure and the traits drift fast.



JWChesnut said:


> The queen's eggs, if unfertilized, produce drones. The queens eggs are produced by meiosis- the division of the normally doubled chromosome pairs into separate single strands. The queen has, in turn, inherited one of the chromosomes from *her* mother, and one from the mate of her mother. The drone, then, is mostly a copy of *his grandfather* *or* one-half the alleles of his *grandmother*.
> 
> A important complication is recombination. Recombination occurs in the intial (Prophase I) of meiosis. Recombination is the exchange of whole segments of chromosomes from one of a pair to its corresponding element. Recombination occurs when the chromosomes (normally unorganized and loose) pair up in Prophase, and strictly align. Enzymes snip the chromosomes and exchange segments to the other arm. The snip points are termed chiasma, and in later phases the chromosomes tangle at these points and can actually be observed with a light microscope.
> 
> Bees have the highest rate of recombination observed. The recombination rate is 100x the rate observed in humans.
> 
> A fundamental paper speculates that this high rate is due to the very small effective population for bees in mating. The queen can only fly so far, and hives are thinly spread over the landscape. Hence inbreeding (in the natural state) is always a risk, and a high recombination rate mitigates that effect by scrambling the genes to each and every unique drone.


----------



## lharder

Yet the Arnot bees quickly adapted to mites. Another theory skewered by fact.


----------



## msl

> Another theory skewered by fact.


not at all
80% of the Arnot queens are culled by nature a year..

in a stable wild population what is the yearly loss rate?
50% if the hives issue only one swarm one swarm a year, if they throw 2 swarms its 66%
unlike AFB outbreaks that come and go, mites provide constant selective pressure. and say VHS, is a additive trait not ressive, the more you have the more its expressed, breed a queen that has none of it with a drone that has it, its expresed, not left lying dormant like hygienic

look at Kefuss Et al 2015 _"After 2002, no more selection for hygienic behavior was made until 2008 when a significant reduction in hygienic behavior at 48 h was observed "_
with out strong selection pressure the traite fades quickly 

now take tracheal mite resistance...that trait is dominant, so it quickly came to prevalence and stayed
current work is showing the gotland population's mite resistance is dominant, so there is hope|. The question is do bees on this side of the pond have the right tool kit...
the German darks that used to be the domanat ferals didn't... and they didn't have it for EFB either.. 
there was a drop in foulbrood cases when the more efb resistant Itailans were imported... but it maybe that it was then lost to breeding/outcrossing as MB suggests....


----------



## lharder

Parameters such as hygienic behaviour gets tuned by selection. It didn't go away in Keufus' case, but got tuned to a lower level as it isn't needed to that degree. 

The big picture is that Arnot bees underwent a queen line bottle neck with the arrival of mites, then recovered quickly to how they were before, more or less. They did move genetically to deal with a new problem.

In our situations, we can select for more extreme cases of mite resistance or hygienic behavior. But we push it outside of where it would be tuned to in nature and will drift back to a more optimal range if left to its own devices. That range could vary depending. These extremes may be important where we make the adaptive environment more unstable through continual new introduction of pathogen variants. 

We don't actually know long term brood disease dynamics in relatively isolated feral populations. Are they stable or are there episodic events on ongoing basis? Besides mites (tracheal and varroa), I haven't heard that much besides statements that the bees in the Arnot are in good brood health generally. But that I think was a snapshot observation.


----------



## msl

your spot on every trait has a cost, if its not an advantage, its a disadvantage. Once the outbreak burns out and no longer provides pressure the traits drift back
looking at " relatively isolated feral populations" is useless, we don't keep bees that way, haven't for thousands of years.
the points I was trying to make was 
#1 all those thousands of years going TF hasn't removed foulbrood as a big problem for beekeepers, the recessive trait makes it a bugger. 
#2 In those first few hundred years the bees in North America didn't have the "tool kit"" in there genes to adapt, the later imported Italian stock did, much like they had resistance when Tracheal mites hit buckfast and AMM didn't. But the AMM were the domait feral here till recently ... there tool kit worked well in nature, till "something" took them out 
#3 do to recombination traits drift fast with out strong selection pressure.. So a few years down the road you a get a bunch nonrestiacnt stock that dies off when a new foulbrood epidemic hits. Don't get me wrong, this is a problem of our own making, keeping stocks in high dencenticys, but its silly to think nature is going to fix it now 

be it the hand of the beekeeper grafting highly select stock and re queening, or the hand of nature culling 50-75% of the queens, it takes strong pressure to matain a trait.
in nature 80% (or 75% depending on whose number you use) of swarms die before there 1st spring... only the most fit make it to reproduce. 
loosing 80% of our splits on a yearly basics would be devastating, so we give them crutches and care for them, this removes selective pressure. 
To put pressure back on, We need to cellbuild, re queen, and drone cull so that only the most fit reproduce..
bees are like apples, they cast wide genetic net and see what works (every seed in an apple tree is different, even in the same apple) and then nature prunes back what dosen't. Great for survival in nature and it alows it to adapt to changes very quickly, but not so good if you want to plant an orchard.
Nature will not reliably give us an apple tree we want, and has not reliably given us a bee hive we want. In both cases we may select something special nature has given us and propagate it and work with it.


----------



## Beerz

mdohertyjr;Before Thanksgiving all 11 hives crashed and died...
We now treat.[/QUOTE said:


> No shame in taking a chance... Sometimes, folks have to learn for themselves. But if you have been a member of this site for long enough, it is all to predicatable. You see the exact same thing year after year. The new beekeeper who tells us all how they aren't going to treat because medication is bad. And the exact same beekeeper in February asking why their colonies have died. I normally never, ever, comment here. But I truly appreciate your willingness to share your unfortunate experience. All I can say is, "Welcome to the club"...


----------



## gww

msl


> in nature 80% (or 75% depending on whose number you use) of swarms die before there 1st spring... only the most fit make it to reproduce.


I don't see this as a fair representation of managed hives. It would be more fair to take the original hives that the swarm came from as a more representative example of a managed hive. Some of the Arnet Forrest hives survived 7 years unmanaged.

I will tell you come spring how I am doing. Going into winter 3 with ten untreated hives. I am expecting most to make it but will know for sure come spring.

It is hard to put the right picture on things using other things, cause nothing is ever done exactly the same. 75 percent of swarms leaving a hive and dying is not reflective of making a split and the bees only living if they swarm is not reflective of honey producers that don't let their bees swarm. 75 percent of forrest bees also died before mites. If I have a bad year, this should be it, as 7 of my hives did not get the brood break that a swarm would have provided. The forrest bees live better if they had swarmed. 

What the arnet forrest does show is that there is some adjustment made by bees left to their own defenses. It shows that it is possible for adjustment but not how much adjustment may be possible. They have evolved to an equilibrium for their environment and it may be that 75 percent death rate is needed to keep equilibrium. That does not mean that that is all the adjustment that is possible. Knock on wood, I have not lost 75 percent but I may not be making as much honey as might be possible either. Come spring, I may have no bees but the past does not make me think that now. I will tell come spring.

Examples to make a point are just examples that show potential cause only doing every thing exactly the same over and over shows proof and we do not keep bees like the bees are kept in the forrest. Even small changes in forage changes things.

I read one time that rabbits have more babies when they are under high predatory conditions. I only bring this up to point out that a 75 percent die off of swarms may be part of natures plan to keep everything in check. Just like wolfs are territorial and only have so many in a pack and kill interluders.

I think the bees in the forrest rebounding back to their origional numbers and their life span being the same as before mites shows adjustment to mites. Who knows what is possible for managed bees? So far so good.
Cheers
gww


----------



## msl

> I only bring this up to point out that a 75 percent die off of swarms may be part of natures plan to keep everything in check.


GWW your hitting the nail on the head. 

as you note selection pressure keeps everything in check, when human intervention happens genetics that would have died are past on... ie the vast magorty of caught swarms live and don't share the fate of there wild brethern, now they are spreading thier sub par drones. This weakens the stock over all.

the swarm is not the baby, its the parent, the old hive changes over 50% of its genetics, mating only with survivor stock. The high death rate of wild swarms is what culls the genetics to the strong, witch in turn is what gives established colony's there longevity, they are started by the top 20% 

glad to see your back around again!


----------



## gww

msl


> glad to see your back around again!​


I have been reading everyday but too lazy to type much.
Thank You
gww


----------



## squarepeg

interesting food for thought:

"In the USA, the Bee Informed Partnership publishes on the internet annual survey statistics on beekeeping practices and colony losses.14 Using data for all states/operations/years, treaters lost 33% of colonies, non- treaters 42%. In purely percentage terms it means there is only a 9% difference in the potential bee traffic, the 'blame' lying more heavily on the side of non-treaters. But when you look at colony numbers a different picture emerges. Still considering all data, 2,710,692 colonies were treated and 293,608 were not treated. This means that 894,528 treated colonies failed, and 123,315 untreated colonies, i.e. over seven times more treated colonies potentially sent mites into the surroundings than untreated colonies. To assess absolute levels of mite flows we would need to know average phoretic mite counts in failing colonies or for bees drifting from them, data that may be hard to come by. But we can be pretty sure that treaters do not have zero mite levels in their failing colonies as no acaricides are 100% effective. If their mite levels were as low as one seventh those of non-treaters the mite flow on bees drifting from failed colonies would be about balanced between treaters and non-treaters."

"First published in Natural Bee Husbandry, Issue 4, August 2017, pages 8-10"

from: http://www.bee-friendly.co.uk

(scroll down to: Dealing with Varroa - Natural selection or artificial selection?)

i'm not sure which bip survey heaf is referencing. i do find it interesting that at least with respect to those responding to the survey treated colonies outnumber untreated colonies by about 10:1.


----------



## little_john

The assumption inherent in the above is that ALL colony losses were due to mites - no allowance being made for losses due to other reasons: defective or lost queens, starvation, hypothermia, SHB etc.

And - as usual - 'treatment' is considered to be a synonym for acaricide.
LJ


----------



## msl

"all years" and "treatment" and sizes dosent tell the whole story 
on the 5 year for "back yard" (under 50 hives)
TF lost 48.2%
those who treated with Amitraz only took 25.4% losses 
those who treated with hopguard lost 42.6%
Thymol was 33.5%
MAQS was 34.7

Those who used sticky boards lost 40.3%
powered sugar lost 42.7 %
Alcohol Wash lost 30.7%

you can't just say "treater" as there is a range of effectiveness in peoples beekeeping methods... there a reason the advrage commercial losses are 26% 
on the 5 year it about 93% of the hives being treated
when they started tracking in 2011 it was more like 80%
the last 2 years is around 97% of them being treated


There has been a steady decline every year in the number of TF hives, operations , and number of hives per operation.
2011 it was 68% or so of the keepers and 18% of the hives were TF with an advrage of 20.9 hives 
2017 is 28% of the keepers and 3% of the hives were TF with an advrage of 7.3 hives

natural selection at work it seems


----------



## Oldtimer

Other than what has been mentioned in other posts, there is another couple of factors that cause discrepancy in this data. 

Which are, firstly, that of the smaller, and the newer beekeepers, a lot of them want to not treat their hives. So they don't. Until they open it one day and find it on deaths door, clearly sick, and mites running around. So, they treat it. Too late though, the hive dies. Then they fill in the survey and their hive is entered as treated, but died.

The way to circumvent this discrepency is to look at losses of commercial beekeepers, who presumably have the experience to (for the most part), treat *before* it is too late. 

The second issue is people using treatments that are just never going to work. Such as, apistan on mites who are resistant to it, or powdered sugar, etc. The mites are not killed, but again the hive is entered in the survey as treated, but died. this discrepency can be circumvented by again looking at experienced beekeepers, or, looking at treatment types that do actually kill the mites, such as amitraz.


----------



## gww

Oldtimer
When it comes to voluntary data. It depends on how you count on what you put down as happening. If you had ten hives and made six nucs and you lose 5 over winter and you have 11 hives in spring, do you count it as a 30 percent loss when you end up with more this spring then you had last spring? If you start with six hundred hives sent to almunds and lose two hundred and then make four hundred splits and sell two hundred and go into winter with six hundred. Then lose 100 hives over winter, is that a 20 percent loss compared to the guy that had 20 hives and loses 30 percent which he makes up in spring by splitting?

How were the 200 nucs that were sold counted?

As far as data, crap in and crap out. I think is is fairly fair to break it down to used a product or did not use a product as both have skill levels all over the board and all kinds of different things not mite related being involved. The truth be known, if you look at the numbers being 7 times different on how many bees are kept. You would think the treating commercials would be way down on death compared to the fewer bees being kept by treatment free. Just the bigness of their operations and like you say, the skill of treating that many bees in those big operations, treatment free should not even be close in death rate if variables are what make the difference. Treating 2000 hives properly should really tilt the scales by your calculations of variables. 

If you add from the same BIP survey numbers where it is showing that there is very little difference in death rate based on years of experience. This should really bring it home that the treatment free death numbers are pretty impressive looked at in big picture.

In the end, the survey numbers are hard to make mean a whole lot due to all the variables of what might be entered.

If you look at only side liners in the studies, the loss rate spread is even lower between the treatment and treatment free crowd. 
Cheers
gww

Ps msl I see your arguments but just by that many more bees being kept properly, the spread should be much wider then it is even with those threw in that don't treat properly. I think you look at the numbers wrong when putting the whole picture together. Said with love.


----------



## msl

> Just the bigness of their operations and like you say, the skill of treating that many bees in those big operations, treatment free should not even be close in death rate if variables are what make the difference


its not even close.... the big guys are loosing 26% not 40+


> If you add from the same BIP survey numbers where it is showing that there is very little difference in death rate based on years of experience.


what is being shown is most backyard and side liners don't learn from there mistakes or improve
like most things BIP you have to break it down as far as you can to gain much menanfull info
the commercials start at the same general range as every one else 
@ 1-5 years is 
38% commercial
35.2% sideliner
39.8 back yard
but when they hit the 5-10 year range (21%) the commercials are taking almost 1/2 (21%)the losses when they hit the 5-10 year range 
they either figer it out, or go out of business. 
overwinter survival isn't just about mite control, arguably the mites are the easy part and just because a hive overwintered doesn't mean its in shape to make you a profit.


----------



## gww

Msl
That is the point. It is being said that the treaters numbers are being saddled with other things then the perfect treatment. Not all treatment free bee keepers are losing 40 percent either. When it comes to being saddled, 2000 proper treated hives should tilt the over all number much lower when there are 7 time more treated bees over all. 

When you break it down to the numbers reported for side liners and jump to the possible conclusion that side liners indicate more general similar circumstance and experience, the spread between the two are even closer.

At some point, you get to where if you survey all pepsi drinkers and all coke drinkers and find that there are 5 more coke drinkers that have cancer, does that mean that coke causes cancer. The numbers are close enough to work with to do other things to make up for the difference.

A better measure might be location and if there are trends where it is impossible or more likely to work.

Even in some states for treaters only, the numbers can show it pretty hard to raise bees there. It is all thrown together and so only the widest and smallest credence can be given to the numbers at all. One side saying all these things effect these numbers can be said by both sides. 

Cheers
gww


----------



## Oldtimer

gww said:


> Oldtimer
> When it comes to voluntary data. It depends on how you count on what you put down as happening. If you had ten hives and made six nucs and you lose 5 over winter and you have 11 hives in spring, do you count it as a 30 percent loss when you end up with more this spring then you had last spring? If you start with six hundred hives sent to almunds and lose two hundred and then make four hundred splits and sell two hundred and go into winter with six hundred. Then lose 100 hives over winter, is that a 20 percent loss compared to the guy that had 20 hives and loses 30 percent which he makes up in spring by splitting?


Excellent point GWW. Obviously I've not done the USA survey, but was emailed a link to a local one here, when I went to do it the questions were so ambiguous or at least open to interpretation, that i realised the result of the survey was not going to be of much value. Yet the results of this survey are now the official figures disseminated by a NZ government department.

Re interpretation of the BIP survey, for whatever reason, i feel the results are misleading. So, I have tried to get a feel for it by instead of looking at exact numbers, looking for trends. But even then, the numbers do jump around from one year to another, although some trends do show. The reason I feel the results are misleading is that I wondered about the 30% loss figure that used to be bandied around quite a bit, so a few years ago I asked a bunch of the commercial beekeepers that used to talk here about their losses. They just about all said around 10% and said they never have anything approaching the 30% often quoted. Some were less with Michael Palmer having near zero losses.

But a big misleading thing about the survey is it shows Tf losses at a particular number and treating losses at a particular number (depending what year or area you are looking at), and the difference can seem quite small. But the inference often taken from that, is that the treaters should just stop treating because their losses would only increase 50%, or whatever it is depending which data. In real life this would not be true. The TF people include successful ones like say, Squarepeg, and others moderately successful, which is why they remain TF. But the treaters include people who know that if they didn't treat, they would lose every bee they have got. Which is why they treat. They cannot simply stop treating and all get the same results as the Tf people who have remained TF.



gww said:


> Said with love.


Never seen that on Beesource before, gotta love it.


----------



## jim lyon

Oldtimer said:


> Excellent point GWW. Obviously I've not done the USA survey, but was emailed a link to a local one here, when I went to do it the questions were so ambiguous or at least open to interpretation, that i realised the result of the survey was not going to be of much value. Yet the results of this survey are now the official figures disseminated by a NZ government department.
> 
> Re interpretation of the BIP survey, for whatever reason, i feel the results are misleading. So, I have tried to get a feel for it by instead of looking at exact numbers, looking for trends. But even then, the numbers do jump around from one year to another, although some trends do show. The reason I feel the results are misleading is that I wondered about the 30% loss figure that used to be bandied around quite a bit, so a few years ago I asked a bunch of the commercial beekeepers that used to talk here about their losses. They just about all said around 10% and said they never have anything approaching the 30% often quoted. Some were less with Michael Palmer having near zero losses.
> 
> But a big misleading thing about the survey is it shows Tf losses at a particular number and treating losses at a particular number (depending what year or area you are looking at), and the difference can seem quite small. But the inference often taken from that, is that the treaters should just stop treating because their losses would only increase 50%, or whatever it is depending which data. In real life this would not be true. The TF people include successful ones like say, Squarepeg, and others moderately successful, which is why they remain TF. But the treaters include people who know that if they didn't treat, they would lose every bee they have got. Which is why they treat. They cannot simply stop treating and all get the same results as the Tf people who have remained TF.
> 
> Never seen that on Beesource before, gotta love it.


I totally agree. The ambiguity of the questions and how differently they are interpreted by everyone has made me quit doing these surveys entirely. Interpreted one way, I could say our year over year losses are zero or sometimes even a positive number. Interpreted in another way I could claim significant losses of up to 40% in some years. We refill our own equipment each year with our own bees, some years we have more bees than we need, some years we have to stretch supplies by making our nucs a bit smaller but my mid summer all the hives we choose to operate are full of bees. 
I do know unequivocally that the years we fail to meet treatment goals in a timely manner are the years we struggle to refill all our hives though the other major contributing factor is how good the season has been and how much late summer nectar and pollen was available. I don't make that statement as a knock on those who choose to operate bees free of treatments just as a simple statement of fact.


----------



## johno

I did the BIP survey for a couple of years listing my losses at 10% or less and was getting their figures back of 35 to 40% losses and that all was unsustainable. They also did not take into account that I was increasing my colony count more than 100% per year and was supplying these bees locally to other beekeepers, most of whom lose their bees year after year. So I decided not to waste my time with any further surveys that seem to be surveying a bunch of losers, besides I was treating with a substance that was only good for treating broodless colonies. At present I am struggling to get to 25 colonies, I am at 40 at the moment managing to get down from 50 in 2016 when all around not many other keeps can keep their colonies alive. Must be doing it all wrong.
Johno


----------



## jim lyon

Yes, love that term "unsustainable" as it relates to beekeeping. Somehow managed hive numbers have continued to increase over the past decade.....at least according to surveys.  Hive numbers are more about how much splitting you choose to do and the decision one might make as to whether you choose to split more and forego a honey crop this year in hopes of having more production hives next year. Personally I don't think about next year, any nucs I make up I do so with the intention of getting a crop from them THIS year. But I'm migratory and that's my management plan certainly it dosent work for everyone and thats the problem with these surveys. They are trying to generalize results from a myriad of management scenarios. Some are looking for income others are backyard beekeepers who aren't, some rely on honey production, some pollination, some bee and queen sales and some a combination of the three.


----------



## psm1212

Dr. Robyn Underwood of Penn State is embarking on a study of 300 hives, managed side-by-side, by different criteria. My understanding is that there will be three management styles represented: Treatment-Free (on small cell), IPM with organic acids, and traditional treatment (Amitraz and miticides). She is also partnering with a researcher from West Virginia that is using up to 1000 hives. The grant is currently for 2 years, but she hopes to extend it much longer. 

While I am certain that the study will not satisfy everyone's ideas on these three criteria, I think it will be far more enlightening than the self-reported data we get from BIP.

Here is a you-tube link to a presentation she gave at a treatment-free seminar https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C9MCeEIJ80o.


----------



## gww

jim


> Yes, love that term "unsustainable" as it relates to beekeeping. Somehow managed hive numbers have continued to increase over the past decade.....at least according to surveys.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hive numbers are more about how much splitting you choose to do and the decision one might make as to whether you choose to split more and forego a honey crop this year in hopes of having more production hives next year. Personally I don't think about next year, any nucs I make up I do so with the intention of getting a crop from them THIS year. But I'm migratory and that's my management plan certainly it dosent work for everyone and thats the problem with these surveys. They are trying to generalize results from a myriad of management scenarios. Some are looking for income others are backyard beekeepers who aren't, some rely on honey production, some pollination, some bee and queen sales and some a combination of the three.​


:thumbsup:
gww


----------



## Oldtimer

psm1212 said:


> Dr. Robyn Underwood of Penn State is embarking on a study of 300 hives, managed side-by-side, by different criteria. My understanding is that there will be three management styles represented:
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C9MCeEIJ80o.


This is an awesome idea, but it takes one hour and fifty two minutes for her to explain it to me? Phew!! inch:

If anyone does actually watch this video in it's entirety, could you please write up a summary for the rest of us!


----------



## gww

Oldtimer
Like you, I made it about a third of the way through the video. I am usually able to finish even the slow ones but not this time. I too will be interested in what actually happens in the two year period though.
Cheers
gww


----------



## msl

> But a big misleading thing about the survey is it shows Tf losses at a particular number and treating losses at a particular number (depending what year or area you are looking at), and the difference can seem quite small.


The problem is the number people use doesn't show losses, it shows advrage losses per keeper ... skewed by a large number of people with a hive or 2 doing poorly... 
ie 100 people with 2 hives each losing 50% and 8 people with 100 hives each losing 16% would be advrage loses of 47%
but the total hives lost is only 178 out of a thousand.... 17.8%
that data isn't as easy accessible you have to dig in the outer areas, or pay attention to the different groups and the amount of colony each manges
that's why its important to break the data down to the smallest grouping 
you see this again and again when people look at the App
montering mites has no effect on survival if that's all you clickl... there was a post about it here a bit back, with a why bother if it dosent work attatude
But it does work if you go deaper and compare methods alone... getting the chatter clear by remove things like stikey boards, and looking for mites on the bees etc... once you use methods that work, it has a very strong effect. ye old "I didn't see any mites on my bees" skews the over all

DR underwood cliff notes 
https://lopezuribelab.com/comb/

I will have to give the video a watch at some point... I have made a habbit of putting youtube on the TV and whatching a Solamon Parker video while I work out... the aggravation is a great motivator


----------



## Oldtimer

msl said:


> The problem is the number people use doesn't show losses, it shows advrage losses per keeper ... skewed by a large number of people with a hive or 2 doing poorly...
> ie 100 people with 2 hives each losing 50% and 8 people with 100 hives each losing 16% would be advrage loses of 47%
> but the total hives lost is only 178 out of a thousand.... 17.8%


Oh I didn't know that, seems like a poor way to do things, basically skews results towards those of small beekeepers, instead of the real overall per hive result.
If they really feel they have to do it that way, perhaps they could publish results in both formats, with an explanation.



gww said:


> Like you, I made it about a third of the way through the video. I am usually able to finish even the slow ones but not this time.


LOL. Gotta hand it to attendees of TF conferences, for stamina.


----------



## msl

> perhaps they could publish results in both formats


https://bip2.beeinformed.org/loss-map/ alows you to toggle between the 2 caluctions... 
Ie colorado had an advrage loss of 42.6, but a total of 12.6


----------



## squarepeg

excellent exchange of information going on here, many thanks to all for contributing!


----------



## Oldtimer

Thanks MSL that throws a new light on things.


----------



## gww

Msl
Do you have info that they keep the math that way? Counting the same for 2000 hives as they were for 2 hives? I would think they would be taking the total bees and subtracting the ones that were lost and not the total bee keepers numbers and then dividing by the number of bee keepers. I don't know what they do but think that even they would think that as a skewed picture.

I don't know, do you?
https://beeinformed.org/wp-content/...rage-Losses-Were-Calculated-and-Presented.pdf
Cheers
gww


----------



## johno

A skeptic might say that the counting method that points to a crisis is a better fund raising set up.
Johno


----------



## msl

> Do you have info that they keep the math that way


the link I sent OT to shows the numbers run each way...
one only has to look at the main page that every one refrances to see its true... but no one breaks down the data...or reads labels
the lable on the data every one keeps using reads Average Winter Loss per Beekeeper
as your link reads _Average Loss (AL) is the mean % of the total colony loss experienced by respondents in a defined group
over a defined period of time_
ie 2017 Average Winter Loss per Beekeeper was 44.5% (for all beekeepers put in a single defined group)... people hit that, and its were they stop

but lets break down the data by group, loss, and number of hives 
4820 backyard beekeepers had 35,018 hives and lost 45.2% 15,828 hives dead
201 side liners had 26,243 hives and lost 37.2% 9,762 hives dead
93 commercials had 446,116 hives and lost 25.6% 114,205 hives dead 
total hives 507,377
total losses 139,795
total percent of hives in the survey lost = 27.55%

next lets tease out TF, as people often use the "Average Winter Loss per Beekeeper" to misrepresent 
16 TF side liners with 1969 hives lost 44% 866 hives dead
1176	TF BYBKs with 6718 hives lost 52.2, 3506 hives dead...
8750 tf hives 4372 lost 
all right so we pull out the tf numbers from the whole totals....
498,627 Tx hives 135,423 lost

that gives us 
49.96% total loss for TF
and 27.1 % total loss for TX


The data dosn't say that TF and TX are close, not at all, even tho people keep wanting it to
It does say that the advrage BYBK is not very skilled at keeping bees, As I have noted in my IMP thread.... it doesn't matter tx/tf, we need better beekeepers, we need local sustainability.

now I am sure there is some one saying "well that's not what I am seeing!!" 
why would it be? the US is a darn big place.. We can jam the data down to state level as well... but I will leave that up to you to see if your above or below you local


----------



## crofter

Thank you msl.


----------



## gww

msl


> now I am sure there is some one saying "well that's not what I am seeing!!"
> why would it be? the US is a darn big place.. We can jam the data down to state level as well... but I will leave that up to you to see if your above or below you local


I doubt I break anything down. I read the link I posted three times and never did figure out what it was saying and I was trying.

I looked at what you just typed and get confused and math was my best subject in school (shows I did not have too many good subjects in school, huh!).

Cheers
gww


----------



## msl

Gww try it another way...
BYBK make up 95% of beekeepers, but only 7% of the hives so if you counting by beekeeper there numbers show
but if your counting by hives, BYBKs losses are just a blip on the radar. 
you have 95 penneys and 5 $1000 bills, how many pieces of US currency do you have? 100.... whats the advrage value per peice $50.0095, is a penny worth any were near that? no
you could spend 95 of you pieces and still have 5,000.
it all depends if your counting numbers of items or dollars 

I think think johno hits the nail on the head


----------



## jonsl

I'm suspicious of any statistics that are self reported.


----------



## gww

CategoryResponsesTotal Winter Colony LossManaged Colonies mean95% confidence intervaltotalmeanstd. dev. Used Varroa Treatment13829.0%28.7% to 29.4%17318125.590.4Did Not Use Varroa Treatment3335.7%34.7% to 36.7%3968120.288.4

From the bee informed partnership for side liners only in all states for 2016. total colony loss tab pushed. This should be a more apple to apple comparison. How do you break this chart down to make it different then what it says.

Granted, I do not trust what might be put on the forms when the surveys are completed. 
Cheers
gww


----------



## msl

***facepalm****:lpf::lpf::lpf:
don't know how I missed it

https://bip2.beeinformed.org/survey/
bottom left, below "Queen Management" you can toggle between the 2 options 


> Average Beekeeper Loss: This is the default calculation method. This method treats all beekeepers equally regardless of how many colonies they actually managed. This method is most appropriate when comparing backyard and sideline beekeepers.
> 
> Total Colony Loss: This method takes the number of colonies each beekeeper managed into account. So beekeepers with large operations will have more impact on the overall loss than smaller operations. This method is most appropriate when comparing just commercial beekeepers or all beekeepers.


They put total winter losses for 2017 at 21.4%TX and TF at 47.1% 
there you go, we have found the easy button!!


----------



## gww

msl
However, that same chart when putting all the years together and not just 2017 shows the numbers to be 25.1 percent for treaters and 32.0 pecent for non treaters. Seems like 2017 must have been a bad year for treatment free but that the average over all is that that is not the trend.
Cheers
gww

Ps for commercial only the threatment free beekeepers won with a better over all number though it was basically a tie. For the all year included average.


----------



## Oldtimer

gww said:


> I looked at what you just typed and get confused and math was my best subject in school


GWW. Saying this with love .

When we see the truth, but it conflicts with our core beliefs, we get confused.

The average *per beekeeper*, is different to the average. Let's try a very simple example using just 2 fictitious beekeepers, who between them have a total of 100 hives. One has 10 hives, another has 90. The 10 hive beekeeper loses 5 hives, or 50%. The 90 hive beekeeper loses 9 hives, or 10%. 

So if we take the average *per beekeeper*, we average 50% and 10%, and come out with an average *per beekeeper* loss of 30%.

But of the 100 hives the 2 beekeepers owned between them, were 30% *really* lost? No. 14 hives were lost, or, 14%. Which is the average. Being the real average, not the per beekeeper average.

So, using the same figures we get an average *per beekeeper* loss of 30%, or a *real* average loss of 14%

That is where things are running amok with the BIP survey, for people who do not realise there is a difference.


----------



## gww

Oldtimer
That is what I get for dropping out of high school and joining the army. Still, you may want to look at the charts. I might get it better then you think though I still say that there are so many management practices that how such a survey is filled out with something meaning the same to everybody seem impossible to me. So I still get the crap in and crap out but know that those numbers that are there are not totally against me and over all, 7 to 10 percent is still seven to ten percent.
Cheers
gww


----------



## msl

yes I was using 2017 because when I was doing it by hand it was too much work to run a bunch of years
I tend to look at the 5 year.. looking at losses from 5+ or 10 years ago matters little.... TF used to be much easier, the world has changed alot 
steady trend of increased losses 
if you need a laugh look at 2013 for some reason 113,639 TF commercial hives show up and screw all the stats...
2012 comersical TF keepers reporting 1.6% losses :scratch:..... got to love those self reported stats



> When we see the truth, but it conflicts with our core beliefs, we get confused.


well put, been there, its now why I try to base my core on data....I still fail.... but its far easier to argue over data then beliefs and stay freindily 

GWW if you want to look at trends, break it down in to maby 3 year blocks. just be mind full of spoilers such as I noted above, and thinks like 1/3

arguably what maters more then anything is weather or not TF commercials submit a report for a given year...


----------



## jim lyon

We get the forms towards the end of each quarter but follow up calls asking for hard numbers begin before the reporting deadline even arrives (yes, on September 25th you will get a request for October 1st hive numbers). When I try to explain that its impossible for me to give numbers with any degree of accuracy because we haven't been to many of our locations in weeks their response was "can't you just make a good guess?" Huh? The thing those people sitting at their desks just don't get is most commercials producing honey like myself know their numbers pretty accurately after nucing is done late in the spring, and again after everything wraps up in the fall but the rest of the summer and early fall (when the main shrink begins) is a pretty fluid situation. Heck, I wish I knew what our numbers were every day but there is simply no way to come up with reliable numbers. So believe commercial numbers at your own risk because I suspect many times the ones patient enough to answer just throw out a number to satisfy the person on the other end of the phone. If they just weren't so darned stuck on these quarterly Julian calendar dates we might actually learn something.


----------



## gww

Jim
You are a better man then me. You at least tried for a little while to take the survey. I just look up what others have did cause I don't want to be bothered with messing with them. My view is what happens to me is what the truth is at the time no matter what happened around me. If I could remember the bee club date and was not to busy, I could ask more questions around me and know more about the big picture but I am to lazy or selfish with my time or just not curious enough.

I enjoy these conversations and try and learn a little and love it when I really need help and answers and some help me with good advice but these brain exercises using mass produced numbers don't really give enough to hang a hat on. I more like oldtimers view on the surveys. They leave out what he knows in his area cause he has played enough to know for himself with out others numbers.

This is still fun when there is a free moment to banter back and forth.
Cheers
gww
ps oldtimer, the last numbers I was posting was on colony loss and not bee keeper loss.


----------



## msl

> My view is what happens to me is what the truth is at the time no matter what happened around me


well put!


----------



## couesbro

Oldtimer said:


> GWW. Saying this with love .
> 
> When we see the truth, but it conflicts with our core beliefs, we get confused.
> 
> The average *per beekeeper*, is different to the average. Let's try a very simple example using just 2 fictitious beekeepers, who between them have a total of 100 hives. One has 10 hives, another has 90. The 10 hive beekeeper loses 5 hives, or 50%. The 90 hive beekeeper loses 9 hives, or 10%.
> 
> So if we take the average *per beekeeper*, we average 50% and 10%, and come out with an average *per beekeeper* loss of 30%.
> 
> But of the 100 hives the 2 beekeepers owned between them, were 30% *really* lost? No. 14 hives were lost, or, 14%. Which is the average. Being the real average, not the per beekeeper average.
> 
> So, using the same figures we get an average *per beekeeper* loss of 30%, or a *real* average loss of 14%
> 
> That is where things are running amok with the BIP survey, for people who do not realise there is a difference.


This is how my statistics professor explained averages to me. If you have a beekeeper that is barefooted and has one foot in a 5 gallon bucket of boiling water at 212*F and the other foot in a 5 gallon bucket of dry ice at -16*F the average temperature will be 98*F and the beekeeper should be reasonably comfortable if one just looks at the average temperature. In the real world I doubt that he will be real comfortable.


----------



## msl

> There are three kinds of lies: lies, ****ed lies, and statistics."- some one famous, repeated by mark twain


The problem with the BIP is it made data more assailable, with out a firm understanding on how to processes, it gets miss quoted.
and unlike a study, the gathering can be suspect, and we don't have year to year tracking... its one thing to report in that your 2 TF hives overwintered the 1st winter, then the next year they die and you don't report in, its another to report in for 5 years.
so lets turn to study's... and see what the loss rates are when treatments are removed, more in the morning


----------



## Oldtimer

That was pretty funny Couesbro, I had a good chuckle over that one!


----------



## squarepeg

september 2018 update on the 'comb' project:

https://lopezuribelab.com/2018/09/11/comb-project-september-2018/

pretty cool project, thanks for bringing it to our attention psalm1212.


----------



## little_john

gww said:


> ... How do you break this chart down to make it different then what it says.



There's little point running percentages to decimal point accuracy when the basic argument itself is meaningless. Not only is 'treatment' a vague and woolly term (the old chestnut) - which is frequently assumed to mean a miticide - but there's no distinction being made here between methodology, efficiency, or timing of such applications.

So - I could squirt some Oxalic Acid Vapour into a hive long after the Varroa mite has done it's damage, with what's left of it's moribund colony tightly clustered, and with the hive's mesh floor wide open ... but ... I've "treated for Varroa", and thus my ensuing colony collapse can therefore be added to the statistics.

This is nothing less than a case of 'Smoke and Mirrors' being used to support an ideology.
LJ


----------



## msl

comb should be fun to watch... especially the impact of treatments on microbes that may or may not be beneficial to the bees 
btw the nov up date is here https://lopezuribelab.com/2018/12/11/comb/

there protacalls are odd indeed, and it all ready feels like stacking the deck
stated purpus is " Penn State research aimed at enhancing sustainable, organic beekeeping methods and increasing economic returns for beekeepers."
don't get me wrong I a firm believer in organic IMP, plenty of large beekeepers like Randy Oliver have show it works 

but come on, no pollen patties, no liquid feed, no hive body reversal, medium boxes, and screened bottom boards for "conventional" management? 
mean while "organic" gets all of that and a sold bottom board, some drone culling ? 

I would argue that liquid feed, sold boards, pollen patties, hive reversal, and deep boxes is very much conventional management, and things like sugar blocks and all mediums are the minority.

3.5 mites per hundred in Oct on a bunch of packages bees? sounds off to me, maby they did a tx at install to normalize things?
thier thresholds seems off to to me.... any one hive rolls 1 mite per 100 and the whole yard gets treated... make it hard to compare treatments... witch is there gole? 

The other nice thing is this will be one of the few(or only) long term small cell trails, not a beleaver in SC myself, but alwasy open to new data. 
going to follow it, but from the start it seems like organic is set to have a leg up 

but $1,000,000... thats a heck of a grant to run 288 hives for a few years...


----------



## Juhani Lunden

msl said:


> ... make it hard to compare treatments... witch is there gole?
> 
> The other nice thing is this will be one of the few(or only) long term small cell trails, not a beleaver in SC myself, but alwasy open to new data.
> going to follow it, but from the start it seems like organic is set to have a leg up


Quote:
"Our main goals with this project are to both (1) monitor the health of colonies under the different management practices, and (2) assess the economic impacts of each system in terms of inputs (costs) and honey production (revenue)."

I wonder what is the reason to use different hive structure in Chemical free group? https://lopezuribelab.com/comb/ 
I don´t even know what these (Wintering cover/ Duck cloth cover) look like, but in my view it makes one unnecessary variable


----------



## msl

LOL sorry... "treatments" as in an experimental conditio" ... ie a control group and a treatmentgroup in a study. I chose that one poorly :lpf:




> I wonder what is the reason to use different hive structure in Chemical free group?


_Our long-term goals are (1) to provide beekeepers with scientific information that helps them make informed decisions about their beekeeping practices, and (2) create standardized protocols for organic beekeeping management, which can support the development of a new market for organic honey bee products in the United States._
they have made there mine up, and are running a trial with the gole to prove it, not to find out witch is best.... 
why would they put IMP boards on the conventional and not the IMP group.?.. 
my only thought is they are going to leave them open to degrade the conventionals spring build up, while the organics get liquid feed and pollen sub..
top it off with not doing standard swarm management on the conventional hives

Poof look how much better the "organic imp bees" are, there are certainly more of them and they made more honey


----------



## msl

*Re: Latest in Darwinian Beekeeping*

while I applaud you heading off a mite bomb:applause:
If you feel its less damaging to a bee hive to *kill it* instead of to treat it and re queen with more resistant stock, I feel [this is] whats wrong with the TF movement. Not meant as a personal attack, just an observation about the waist full ways of some TF programs 

You killed $600+ in live stock over the need of $2 in medicine.


----------



## squarepeg

*Re: Latest in Darwinian Beekeeping*

i'll make a deal with you msl. if i should ever end up with a colony in the late season that is heavily mite infested and has dwindled so small that there is no chance for surviving winter, i'll sell it to you for $398, you can apply the $2 treatment, and resell for $600. an easy $200 for you, right? 

i've been lucky in that winter has done all the euthanizing for me so far. i did have a colony several years ago that got down to a couple handful of bees by late fall and alcohol wash revealed there were more mites than bees in the hive. i shook them out, but later regretted not placing them in the freezer.

if one buys into the idea that there is a selection process taking place with the mites and the viruses as well as the bees, (and i do), then euthanizing makes good sense as it causes a genetic dead end to the colony collapsing mites and viruses as well as the bees.

in the treatment free context, by the time a colony reaches the point of being a candidate for euthanizing it's way too late to consider a treatment. it is what i will do going forward if i ever find a colony like the one described above.

kathleen, another option is plugging up the entrance and placing the hive in a deep freeze for a few nights. remove the top after the first night.


----------



## msl

*Re: Latest in Darwinian Beekeeping*



> i'll make a deal with you msl.


we both know that is a complete miss characterization of the intent of my post
a few grams of prevention vs a drown of cure (pun intended)


----------



## squarepeg

*Re: Latest in Darwinian Beekeeping*



msl said:


> we both know that is a complete miss characterization of the intent of my post
> a few grams of prevention vs a drown of cure (pun intended)


yes, as we both know the expressed intent of this subforum and understand the unique forum rules associated with it from which i quote:

"This forum is for those who wish to discuss Treatment-Free Beekeeping, not for them to be required to defend it."

i've been more tolerant of opposing opinions than previous moderators have been msl, but your 'few grams of prevention' is technically off topic here, and the 'what's wrong with' and 'wasteful ways' are pejorative and basically are debating the merits of the tf approach.

we tf beekeepers aren't looking to be mollycoddled here on the subforum. on the other the hand founders realized without some guidelines the whole thing breaks down into a peeing contest and a hugh waste of time and energy.


----------



## msl

*Re: Latest in Darwinian Beekeeping*

again a miss characterization
The point was its fairy easy to track the trajectory of mite growth and if you chose head it off before a hive is past the point of no return would seem to be in line with the forum rules


> Any post advocating the use of treatments, according to the forum definition of treatment will be considered off topic and shall be moved to another forum or deleted by a moderator, unless it is employed as part of a plan in becoming treatment free."


I did inculde the concept of selling them off as way to get resorces ($$) out of them and avoid the issue of contamated combs in the rest of the operation. As I have noted in the past this is how the Aintbitioc free meat industry functions (large animal) 


> in the treatment free context, by the time a colony reaches the point of being a candidate for euthanizing it's way too late to consider a treatment.


That is not treatment free context, that is bond context, and arugbuly the TF movement cuting off there nose to spite there face.The whole "it might make it" stance is silly, long before a hive hits the point of no return it has shown you its not going to be breeding stock, and even if it lives you should be pinching that queen so it doesn't throw drones 

No were do I ask any one to defend TF, gentninic resistance is our future.

I do challenge archaic, outdated, ineffective, and unwise methods that are not backed with science and/or a track record of success 

The Purdue MBB, have been TF for quite a few years, but they needed to be at the start.. despite coming for a long line of survivor stocks going back to 97
VHS and Russtian stock followed the same path to success
" _IPM procedures to support the full expression of resistant phenotypes would move us more quickly toward ending reliance on acaricides._"
Danka, Spivak, Rinderer, Kefuss 2013 Comments on: "Varroa destructor: Research avenues towards sustainable
control"
unlike other methods/lines, the VHS, Russtian and MBB lines seem to maintain there traits much better when moved. The MBB saw 45% losses vs commercial queen losses of 78% when they were distributed for TF trials.
sounds like a heck of a base stock to start with, yet the forum is still full of "breed it your self" not "hey were do I get theses"... another mistake 
there not bomb proof, and will need to be readjusted to your area.. You want to get to a good population of F3 queens so you have a wide swath of deveristy to select form for what works in your area. That F-2 you save that caught a mite bomb mite put out the F-3 your going to need.

keep in mind(assuming a yearly queen change over) and a hevey out put of drones you need 2-3 years to reap the befits of the drones you throw 
year one those queens your drones mated with make drones with 100% there genetics
year 2 there daughter queens are throwing some 50/50 drones
to get max beneficent you need f-2s alive.. that means keeping the F-1 alive and as many f-2s that show any sort of the trait.


I think the hang up is the difference between the simple act of withholding treatments and instantly being a TF beekeeper.
VS
The reality of what it takes to develop resistance in a stock if it doesn't come by it naturally in your area, and or if you not in a mostly isolated location.

The successful fokes we here from tend to be the latter, the lottery winners keeping in a mostly isolated area with a good feral base stock, people like SP, The BIP supports the success of TF in there area, no one is calling them lairs. 

But we see time and time again their methods and stocks are not exportable 
Solomon Parker's experience moving from AR were the 5 year TF loss rate is only 28.3% to CO were its 43.2% (where he got crushed) and then to WA were TF losses advrage 51.7% Despite him saying he was a commercial beekeeper who made his living selling bees, he hadn't sold any sense leaving AR(bolth from his videos and web site last year).. And while claiming a 5% loss rate, catching swarms, and grafting, he puts his stock count at "about 2 dozen"year after year (with no sales).. He now calls him self a hobiest, not a commercial beekeeper in his latest videos. His experience followed a predicable and common trend 

His stock and his methods have fallen flat when placed outside of a TF sweet spot.

The VSH,MBB, and Russian lines have shown us a clear path how to develop resistant stock that is exportable. 
We are at the 40th anveristy of the arrival of varroa on US soil. We have been "breeding" from survivors for decades with out much progress do the the lack of selective pressure.

Seeleys Darwin approach stems from his research that swarming lowers mites, this is coming from when he put the "magic feral" bees in dubble deeps they showed NO resistance to mites... 
but were do those mites go? Into the trees with your (other wise) mite sustibul stocks.
Its a cultural IMP measure, propping up, and worse propagating and spreading weak stocks.. for some one who just wants to try to keep bees off cemicals It may be fine, but on the land scape scale its damaging.


----------



## gww

*Re: Latest in Darwinian Beekeeping*

msl
You base your theory on studies and thinking about how to accomplish a goal. The problem is that there may be more then one way to skin a cat and you only speak of one way. What is more the truth or my take of reading the same type of material that you do is that more is involved in what is not known then what is known. That is why nobody can say they are right. 

What you suggest as the right way and only way leaves out something like squarepeg getting fall mite counts in the double digits and his hives still surviving. You advocate stopping it way before then and so you really would not know the possibilities cause you never push to the limit.

You mention seeley and swarming being the answer and both you seeley and oliver mention propping up weak stock brings it all down but yet what happened was in the bond being studied, life was the deciding factor. 

You take the position that it is faster and that keeping the genetics of only the strongest works best and so change the queens. In the places where bees did not do more then go by life, the change seemed to be faster then where it was trying to be managed, IE: seeley, russian, african bees. That is why those bees mechanisms are the ones being studied for clues and no human did that.

I wonder if it is not areas and not bees that are being worked on in nature? Then the question is why and how. It is clear we do not know all the possibilities or every one would be doing at least as well as where the bees have been able to do it on their own. 

I agree on the lottery winner comparison. The question might should be, why are there lottery winners if nobody did IPM and breeding to make those areas? Was it done hard bond while no one was looking.

This is not to say you are wrong in the pursuit in the fashion you advocate or that it would not also work well for your situation. I still think some things are missing in our knowledge to say other ways do not work better. It might work better with me having some sick bees that are going to die and that exposes the other bees. You can no be sure that is not the case.

Polio seemed to become epidemic when our sewer systems became better.

I do not say what you say is bad. Just that it may not be proven best and it might be also someday. There is a case for it now but then again, the bees that were important enough to notice they needed study, were not done that way.

I am still just watching it all and seeing if I learn more.
Cheers
gww


----------



## msl

*Re: Latest in Darwinian Beekeeping*

GWW if other methods or the lottery winners had a track record of being exportable it would be a different story

sence my post was about selection, and why Seeleys Darwin beekeeping idea is problematic and was aimed at that thread but moved , it was not TF vs Tx so I see no further point in contuning it here


----------



## squarepeg

*Re: Latest in Darwinian Beekeeping*



msl said:


> The point was its fairy easy to track the trajectory of mite growth and if you chose head it off before a hive is past the point of no return ...


how so, using mite counts? what few late season counts i've taken and found as high as 14% were not predictive of a colony's ability to overwinter and be productive the following season.

i have one colony right now that was spitting out dwv and crawlers by late summer that may not make it, but at this point is looking like it will just as handfuls of others doing that have in prior seasons.

it may not make intuitive sense, but it's not as straightforward as being able to tell in advance which colonies will survive and which will not.




msl said:


> I do challenge archaic, outdated, ineffective, and unwise methods that are not backed with science and/or a track record of success


the few examples that have undergone scientific study describe outcomes specific to those bees in those locations. extending those results across the board is something i'm pretty certain even the scientists would be guarded about.

track records of success are more meaningful in my opinion, but even those have to be taken in the context of where and how that is happening. my goal with the tf subforum is to have as many who are willing to report their actual experiences. 




msl said:


> I think the hang up is the difference between the simple act of withholding treatments and instantly being a TF beekeeper.


on this we agree and i have a history of posting my view that tf may or may not be possible for some, and should likely be avoided when circumstances dictate. i.e. i believe most agree it's foolish for someone to start beekeeping with packages that come with a history of being treated and expect them to do well if treatments are withheld.

msl, it's clear that you invested a lot of time in the literature and have developed a good grasp of the subject. i don't agree with some of the hard and fast conclusions you have drawn from your review of that material, but they are you conclusions to make and i respect that. i sense you don't really mean to be defamatory but that's how it comes off. this is the thread to levy your complaints. i for one am happy to engage you over them.

there is plenty of room for your point of view on here beesource. the spirit behind the unique forum rules is to avoid the derailing debates about the merits of the approach. there is much less of that these days compared to what it used to be, and for that i am very appreciative to the membership at large for the etiquette observed.


----------



## msl

*Re: Latest in Darwinian Beekeeping*



> the spirit behind the unique forum rules is to avoid the derailing debates about the merits of the approach


that is the problem, if you only debate the merits, and not the down falls of an approach its becomes worthless echo chamber. We are then left with what we have... people who took 80%+ losses providing "expert" overwintering advice etc 


> i sense you don't really mean to be defamatory but that's how it comes off


I too have noticed a growing unintended "tone" in my posts and have been bowing out of more and more threads


> this is the thread to levy your complaints. i for one am happy to engage you over them.


As you wish, I withdraw from any comment in the TF forum outside of that bonding bees and spiting the leftovers is the only way forward.

As the mods in the main forum refuse to moderate against posts suggesting illegal pesticide abuse, I see no reason to spend a lot of time there.
Earlier this week at the local level I was hearing from people saying that it took 4+ OAV treatments, broodless with homemade bandheater vaporizers to stop massive mite drops on stickey boards..
OA resistance? High speed varporaistion causing break down... the vape heads in the main forum don't want here this either 
I am proud of the opponents I have made on both sides, but it leaves me little room in the middle


----------



## squarepeg

*Re: Latest in Darwinian Beekeeping*

i think most would agree there's not much 'echoing' going on there these days.

i'm soliciting first hand accounts be they good, bad, or anything in between.

this is the information i sense the membership at large is most interested in and from which we can all learn the most.

keeping the atmosphere 'user friendly' is an important part of getting that type of participation, and with a hotbed topic such as this that's easier said than done.

i mean no offense and we may have to agree to disagree on this one.


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Latest in Darwinian Beekeeping*

In the links they refer to ApiVar. Apivar is not spelled with a capital V. Got to wonder if by ApiVar they mean Apivar, or ApiLifeVar. Two very different products, one effective, one not so much.


----------



## gww

*Re: Latest in Darwinian Beekeeping*

msl


> I am proud of the opponents I have made on both sides, but it leaves me little room in the middle


I am only your opponent in that I enjoy our back and forth and learn from the links you provide (though I may not learn the same thing you do from them).

I think the last few years have been healthy in discussion and I have appreciated it. Don't take offence if I keep it up.
Keeps me thinking.
Cheers
gww


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Latest in Darwinian Beekeeping*

If i may comment on that, (GWW and MSL), you both started on similar paths, having read the same literature and formed similar ideas about how to run your hives.

I read MSL when he was new, and he sounded much like you GWW.

But the different circumstances provided by location, bees, and mites, eventually took you both down slightly different paths. That's all.

IMHO of course


----------



## gww

*Re: Latest in Darwinian Beekeeping*

Oldtimer
I am not sure my path won't change, time will tell. I am not even smart enough to know if I am doing good or bad yet. I do say that ambition differences may put a different perspective on the objectives being discussed.

I do remember the thread where it was a hot topic that a person would buy a package in spring and shake them out in fall and take everything.

Some looked at it from their perspective and thought, man what a waste and some looked at the money to see if it was profitable and some just looked at it as cruelty.

Almost every study paper can be cherry picked for stuff that supports all sides.

Most, myself included, look for the parts that support or show the possibilities of their position. 

In the end, I have no doubt of your experiences, I don't question msl's experiences and I don't doubt my experiences up to now. Since all those experiences have happened and are not the exact same, it shows the possibilities. Having possibility does not guarantee success, I probably will not become an astronaut even though it is theoretically possible. 

I do not question msl's dedication to the subject matter. In fact, I rely upon it and have seen more myself due to his resource gathering and our discussions. However, I like to argue and discuss and ask more if "I" don't understand it as presented. I know of no other way to get to know more.

Since we here do discuss bee keeping which is done everywhere, being too solid that it only works one way discounts the possibilities. On the other hand, I can not see into the future. I am not set that I will always be where I am now. I don't even want to be where I am now cause improvement sounds good and I also know it can get worse even if it was good for a while. Just like life, I will have it easy and then my sewer will back up and I will have a flat tire and drop the tire iron on my foot when changing it. That has been my experience in life anyway.

I have been helped here as far as bees go and honestly as far as life goes.
I like you guys.
Cheers
gww

Ps Since we are here and what we write can be seen by all locations, as long as we tell the truth about what we see in our location, the people reading can decide by watching what their experience will be in their location. It may be possible and it may not and so every one can be wrong some and right some depending on who is reading.


----------



## vtbeeguy

I have to say what i think would be MOST beneficial would be at minimum monthly mite counts from the tf beeks for at least a year, 2 would be even better since we see a lot of colonies crash in their second fall untreated. Over time we might be able to figure out how the mite/bee populations are fluctuating throughout the season. Maybe help us understand all the factors that go into a colony being successful tf. 
But for some reason most seem to come up with endless excuses and its never done leaving us lacking the precious DATA


----------



## squarepeg

vtbeeguy said:


> ...Maybe help us understand all the factors that go into a colony being successful tf.


i agree. so far lharder's work is the closest thing we have to that. i have been able to coax reports of survival rates and honey production out of a few for the forum, while others have not been so willing to share that information.

my endless excuse will be no more starting in 2020 if all goes well with my retirement plans. at that time i'll be seeking assistance from the entomology department at our state's leading agricultural university as well as collaborating with folks like randy oliver, making my apiaries available for sampling and data collection.

it should be a straightforward task to determine the mite resistance 'r' value for my bees and compare that to other know populations. i think it would also be interesting and i hope we get to do things like analyze pollen samples, do virology studies, examine the microbial flora, analyze the propolis, look at the genetics, ect.

there's likely not anyone more than i who desires to understand the how's and why's. i really hope we can identify the mechanism(s), and hope even more that any knowledge gleaned will benefit beekeeping at large.

from the tf side, i think it would be most beneficial if treating beekeepers would acknowledge the importance of this work in terms of moving the ball forward or being 'part of the solution' as randy puts it.

that said, it has to be understood that keeping bees off treatments does not come with any less responsibility than treating beekeepers have in terms of becoming a source for the spread of diseases and pests to neighboring colonies. i'll even concede that tf beekeepers should be exercising an extra degree of vigilance if they are practicing a hard bond approach.


----------



## gww

Vtguy


> But for some reason most seem to come up with endless excuses and its never done leaving us lacking the precious DATA


Collecting data is fine but it is also work. I read lots of studies. I try to read every single one that I find. I do this cause I don't want to be the one that does the study, I just want to use the results and see how it pertains to me.

It is hard for a person who is happy with what he is getting to try and get the details for everyone else. I always see as a put down to treatment free keepers that if your bees are so good then why don't you make a bunch of queens and get them out so others can see. I don't want to make more queens then I can use.

I understand and look up to people that have the ability to collaborate with others. Some are not into bees to save the world and are into bees so they can find enjoyment while staying home and away from the public.

I don't count mites and have no want to count them but I love reading about those that do. If I ever did start treating cause the bees decided to make me do so, I am sure I would be a calendar treater and would still not count mites. Only if I was having success no other way would I count mites. However, I love reading what other people who are counting come up with.

I still think that my experience is real to this point and am always willing to tell the truth (good or bad) about my bees on the things I do do.

I understand the want for knowledge but do not want the responsibility of me doing more then I am to get those answers. Nobody can do it all and so I look at all that every one "is" doing and try to put it together for my selfish reasons.

I retired from my first job so I could do this.
Cheers
gww


----------



## vtbeeguy

I know the work of having to do the counts is definitely one of the reasons it's not done more. maybe if there were a few other local beeks interested in extracting the data you could work together on it and make it more feasible time wise. There has to be something interesting happening with the bee/mite population dynamics in squares hives. If we could figure out what it is and how it's happening could be very useful knowledge.


----------



## squarepeg

vtbeeguy said:


> There has to be something interesting happening with the bee/mite population dynamics in squares hives. If we could figure out what it is and how it's happening could be very useful knowledge.


fusion_power has been tf since 2005 and my friend who supplied most of my original stock has been tf since 1996. there are a few others tf that i know of in my area and collectively we account for about 100 colonies. there are likely still others tf that i am not aware of as of now but plan to seek them out as part of my data collection project.

so far none of us have experienced a seasonal wipe out like has been described happening to other tf operations. on average we are experiencing between 10 and 20 percent overwintering losses.

i wouldn't say our bees are bullet proof. i experienced my first mite bomb at an outyard in the fall of 2017. i ended up losing 5 out of 8 colonies in that yard over the winter, while only 2 out of 12 at the homeyard the same year. 

that got my attention and heightened my vigilance in terms of reducing the entrances more, observing entrance behavior more often, and using robber screens when dwv and crawlers are seen.

at least half of my losses look a lot more like queen failure than varroasis. one adjustment i plan to make is a version of taking my losses in the fall, which will take the form of identifying colonies having queen issues during the fall brood up and requeening them.

the bip survey asks the question that goes something like 'what is an acceptable loss rate for you?'. for my operation and considering i'm looking to get a decent return on investment of time and money, i've felt like 30% would be about the most that could be tolerated and still be in the black.

my cumulative loss rate since starting and through last winter is 19.1% with 136 hive years. i've shared my production records on my thread, and they are not great compared to some of you reporting here, but production meets or exceeds my state average.

so what we have here is anecdotal reporting of what appears to be a metapopulation of bees coexisting with mites having good survival and yielding decent honey crops. nothing more, nothing less. maybe we can figure out the how's and the why's, maybe not. we'll see.


----------



## clyderoad

squarepeg said:


> from the tf side, i think it would be most beneficial if treating beekeepers would acknowledge the importance of this work in terms of moving the ball forward or being 'part of the solution' as randy puts it.


What do you mean here?


----------



## squarepeg

clyderoad said:


> What do you mean here?


just responding to vtbeeguy:



vtbeeguy said:


> I have to say what i think would be MOST beneficial would be at minimum monthly mite counts from the tf beeks for at least a year...


a good exchange of views from either side of the approach, no?

perhaps you don't agree with randy oliver's admonition that _*we*_ need to get busy on this?


----------



## clyderoad

That was the response to vtbeeguy's post you linked too?
OK :scratch:


----------



## jim lyon

squarepeg said:


> at least half of my losses look a lot more like queen failure than varroasis.


I really believe a large part of queen failure is, in fact, varroa/virus related. It's really the only rational theory I can come up with when I see an unacceptably high rate of first year queen failures among queens that I felt pretty confident were well mated queens, at least based on what I knew about the mating conditions at the time. Well fed cells, lots of drones, good mating conditions, initial mating success in the 85 to 90% range, beautiful initial laying patterns then they just flame out.....or something.


----------



## Flyer Jim

jim lyon said:


> I really believe a large part of queen failure is, in fact, varroa/virus related. It's really the only rational theory I can come up with when I see an unacceptably high rate of first year queen failures among queens that I felt pretty confident were well mated queens, at least based on what I knew about the mating conditions at the time. Well fed cells, lots of drones, good mating conditions, initial mating success in the 85 to 90% range, beautiful initial laying patterns then they just flame out.....or something.


Like opps no like button


----------



## squarepeg

jim lyon said:


> I really believe a large part of queen failure is, in fact, varroa/virus related.


thanks for the reply jim. i've considered that and mentioned in older posts that the queen failure may be secondary to a high viral load. it makes sense in light of the finding of viral damage to the ovarioles:

https://www.researchgate.net/public...arian_Degeneration_in_Apis_mellifera_L_Queens

although the authors qualify with this statement:

"Since very high viral titres could be recorded in the ovaries and abdomens of both functional and deficient queens, no significant correlation could be made between viral titre and ovarian degeneration or egg-laying deficiency among the wider population of queens. Although our data suggest that DWV and VDV-1 have a role in extreme cases of ovarian degeneration, infection of the ovaries by these viruses does not necessarily result in ovarian degeneration, even at high titres, and additional factors are likely to be involved in this pathology."

when i say 'looks like queen failure' i mean i'll find signs like no brood at all or capped drone brood in worker cells, very little or no mite frass, just a few hundred dead bees as would be expected with attrition due to aging, ect.

on the other hand i've seen collapse that had all the hallmark signs of varroasis leaving no doubt...

the three 'queen failures' so far this winter have in common that the new queens were mated either very early or very late in the season, and not when there were tons of drones flying.


----------



## psm1212

jim lyon said:


> I really believe a large part of queen failure is, in fact, varroa/virus related. It's really the only rational theory I can come up with when I see an unacceptably high rate of first year queen failures among queens that I felt pretty confident were well mated queens, at least based on what I knew about the mating conditions at the time. Well fed cells, lots of drones, good mating conditions, initial mating success in the 85 to 90% range, beautiful initial laying patterns then they just flame out.....or something.


Queenlessness is my biggest hive killer. I shook out about 5 hives last year that went queenless and got laying workers established in them. At our state annual meetings, there has been a lot of talk recently about "what is going on with queens?" with no one being able to put their finger on why our queens keep crapping out mid-season. I don't know what it could be. Mites and viruses seem to be the best guess. I don't know.


----------



## Oldtimer

squarepeg said:


> from the tf side, i think it would be most beneficial if treating beekeepers would acknowledge the importance of this work in terms of moving the ball forward.


And some of us do SP. Not all of us are beer swilling, *******, bee poisoning psychopaths you know. 

Some, maybe. But not all.


----------



## vtbeeguy

In your opinion square, what things should us beeks who treat be doing to help move the ball forward? I'm just curious are you referring to things like breeding our own queens from our best, trying to identify which ones seem to be having more luck surviving with the mites? I agree that it's an issue that is going to need all of us working together to solve.
I'm simply unwilling to add extra risks into my overwintering colonies at this point like attempting to go without treating. Last winter I learned what happens when you're late on treatments and your winter bees get raised in a weakened state.. they weren't able to make it the 5 months I needed them to in winter. That said eventually I hope to try and succeed at having some colonies off treatments but currently am working on rapid expansion and don't want to sacrifice any of my ladies or have their vigor and buildup impeded in any way (like a high mite load would).


----------



## Oldtimer

jim lyon said:


> I really believe a large part of queen failure is, in fact, varroa/virus related.


I am certain of that. Pre varroa, the guy I worked for requeened every second year. An insignificantly small number of queens ever died on us, they all made 2 good years other than a small number that got superseded successfully.

Now a lot of failing queens don't even get superseded, instead the hive goes hopelessly queenless in winter. I think it is because bees in their natural state can recognise a queen at risk of failing and will supersede in fall while there are still drones around. But since mites and super high virus levels even in treated hives, it adds a new dynamic to queen failure and how fast they can fail, one that the bees may not even recognise till it's too late.

Another observation is how fast queens can get old looking now. Used to be a second year queen was definately second year looking, but still vigorous and good for another season. Now some of them go from big healthy looking queens, to run down looking sad specimens by second season, and you know they will not make the season.

I have also noticed that the better i control mites, the less of these issues the queens in my hives have.


----------



## jim lyon

I'm old enough to remember pre-varroa and I'm just not remembering anything like the type of thing we routinely see now where it's not unusual to see 10 to 20% of first year queens failing. Perhaps its conjecture to say they are failing as you don't often see drone layers as much as you see hives that are hopelessly queen less and have gone laying worker. Why there is no longer a queen present the majority of the time I really don't know but its rare to spot a queen in one of those hives.


----------



## squarepeg

Oldtimer said:


> And some of us do SP...


:lpf:

so many thanks for that ot, great timing and much needed!


----------



## squarepeg

vtbeeguy said:


> In your opinion square, what things should us beeks who treat be doing to help move the ball forward?


that's a great question. to be honest i haven't really thought about it, but i will. 

also to be honest i appreciate your side of it and don't blame you for not wanting to risk your colonies.

i appreciate you being in agreement that we all need to work together.


----------



## gww

oldtimer


> Now a lot of failing queens don't even get superseded, instead the hive goes hopelessly queenless in winter.


In Doolittles book back at the turn of the century, he seemed convinced that it was how the queen was made that made them forget how to superceed.

He was not a fan of emergency queens where you just remove the queen.
Cheers
gww


----------



## Oldtimer

What did he think? That emergency raised queens would not get superseded when the time came?


----------



## squarepeg

jim lyon said:


> Why there is no longer a queen present the majority of the time I really don't know but its rare to spot a queen in one of those hives.


yes, i typically find no queen with these jim.


----------



## gww

Oldtimer
Yes that is what Doolittle was saying though he did not consider brood over a queen excluder on a queen-rite hive to be an emergency queen.
Cheers
gww


----------



## Oldtimer

Not sure I fully understand what he is saying. Is it online somewhere?


----------



## gww

I am not sure if this is the copy I read but it is in here. I did not look hard enough to find the few passages on our subject to copy and paste but it is in there.
http://www.bushfarms.com/beesdoolittle.htm

Cheers
gww


----------



## gww

oldtimer


> In trying this the next time, I simply took the Queen away from the colony I wished to breed from, at a time when there was plenty of honey and pollen in the fields, for by this time some were opposing the plan of rearing Queens in nucleus boxes, and also claiming that the only proper time for rearing Queens was when plenty of honey and pollen were to be had by the bees, as it was natural for the bees to rear Queens only at such times. I succeeded in getting a fine lot of cells from which some extra-nice Queens were obtained-as I then considered them.This caused the Queen-Rearing "fever" to run high, which, together with my procuring some Italians, caused me to work at it many times during the summer, although I determined not to spoil my prospects of a crop of honey, by using too many colonies in the business. Although using Italian bees for Queen-Rearing, (as it was then claimed that black nurses would contaminate the young Queens) yet, during this summer, I succeeded in getting as high as 157 queen-cells built on one comb, while the usual number built by one colony would be only from three to twenty, on all of the combs in a hive. If I could have had the Syrian bees at that time, the number of cells might not have been so much of a wonderment to me. I thought this a great achievement, and something well worth being proud of, so I told my neighbors about it, and gave it to some of the bee-papers also.
> All went on "swimingly" till the spring of 1873, when, without any cause, as far as I could see, one-half of all the Queens that I had in the apiary died, leaving the apiary in poor condition for the honey season, which caused me to meditate a little on what could be the reason of such a wholesale death of my beautiful Queens. A careful looking into the matter revealed that of all the Queens that had died, two-thirds were those which had been reared the previous season, while not one had died from those that had been reared by natural swarming.
> What seems strange to me now, in looking back over the past, is, that all of these Queens died so suddenly and the bees made no effort at superseding them. They all had brood in abundance for the time of year, and the first I knew that all was not right, was when I would find them dead at the entrances of the hives. After this I began to try other plans of Queen-Rearing, none of which pleased me any better than the one I had been using.


Cheers
gww


----------



## Oldtimer

So was his method to get the bees to raise emergency cells?


----------



## gww

Oldtimer
I think his method was grafting over a queen rite hive but my memory is fading. I know he started by just putting open brood above a queen excluder. If my memory is correct or if I can really read english, he thought the best cells were swarm cells or superceedure cells due to the bees planning for them to be made and spending all their energy on them.

Cheers
gww


----------



## Oldtimer

Ok thanks, i've never read the guy but agree, pre planned cells are usually the best.


----------



## gww

Oldtimer
I think that doolittle thought his greatest achievement was to invent an artificial queen cup that the bees would actually use. Not that that has anything to do with our current subject matter.
Cheers
gww


----------



## little_john

gww said:


> I know he started by just putting open brood above a queen excluder.


That's my recollection (rightly or wrongly) too - which, due to the reduction in 'Queen Pheromone' as opposed to it's absence - would most likely produce supersedure cells rather than emergency cells. The differences between these being primarily those of the numbers of cells started, and the degree of urgency involved in the initial selection of those larvae.

What I find odd is that whatever method was employed in the case in question - Doolittle reports zero problems with that method until that one year - which I find a tad suspicious. Maybe there was another cause ?
LJ


----------



## gww

LJ


> What I find odd is that whatever method was employed in the case in question - Doolittle reports zero problems with that method until that one year - which I find a tad suspicious. Maybe there was another cause ?


One thing for sure, he was promoting a queen rearing method that he was proud of and justifying as best.

I find the same thing when reading abby warre's book or langstroths book. They all point out the differences of why their way is the best compared to other ways.

Cheers
gww


----------



## squarepeg

vtbeeguy said:


> In your opinion square, what things should us beeks who treat be doing to help move the ball forward?





squarepeg said:


> that's a great question. to be honest i haven't really thought about it, but i will.


so after mulling this over for awhile the answer is i don't know. i try my best not to offer up advice on things i don't have experience with. i was lucky to start with tf bees and have a thriving wild-type or feral population in my area, so for me i didn't have to do anything in particular.

moving the ball forward or 'being part of the solution' as randy oliver likes to put it is one of those 'easier said than done' propositions. i guess if was as straightforward as just doing it would have already been done.

in randy's series of articles he mentions over and again that the beekeeping public needs to put pressure on the large scale breeders and demand they produce bees with better mite resistance. he has detailed how he is going about doing that with his own breeding program. in a nutshell, this means taking lots of mite counts, selecting breeder queens from colonies exhibiting the lowest counts, and flooding the mating yards with those colonies. i believe he is also giving away free queens to anyone in his county who will take them.

most of us posting here are likely included in the 95% of all beekeepers being smaller scale and accounting for only 5% of all colonies. i doubt that we would have much influence on the breeders who are likely catering to the other 5% of all beekeepers that account for the remaining 95% of all colonies. those folks are more likely driving the industry, are almost going to have to treat given the large number of hives kept in close proximity and the rigors of migratory pollination. they are most likely interested in traits that drive productivity which may run counter to mite resistance.

there has been some discussion here in other threads about working together with neighboring beekeepers in an effort to flood a local area with desirable genetics. i think that could work, but the problem i see with it is getting that level of cooperation among a group of folks who almost by definition aren't amenable to being agreeable when it comes to all things beekeeping.

what i usually recommend to folks desiring to be tf is to locate if possible someone in their area having success with it and obtain bees and advice from them. i've had the pleasure of starting a handful of new beekeepers with my stock and everyone is having pretty much the same experience as me. others like fusion_power and riverderwent were able to collect swarms and/or cut outs from survivor type bees and have started successful tf apiaries that way.

perhaps randy will offer more suggestions as he works his way through the process, especially if he finds he can 'move the ball forward'. in the mean time i think it boils down to how much of a priority working toward mite resistant bees is for the individual, and how much or how little one is willing to invest to work toward that end.


----------



## drummerboy

squarepeg; You are awesome Man. Admitting when one doesn't know something is sadly lacking these days when everyone can be an expert...simply by saying they're an expert.

I also love RO's writing and advise and will continue to follow his wisdom (to a point), however as a commercial, migratory beekeeper he is also part of the problem, a fact he rarely touches on.

If it's true that 'small scale' Beeks also make up the majority (95%?) of Beeks, then we small scale beeks have more power than we know or are willing to use imho. After all, bees don't vote and they sure don't have money to buy more bees when they need more bees. 

Unless and until Beeks (of all size operations) begin demanding mite resistance from suppliers the cycle will continue unabated. There's just too much money to be made, selling 'sick' bees. That is the advise I've gathered from Randy Oliver.

Local Beeks working together, sharing queens, bees and ideas is what will eventually save honeybees, if they are meant to be saved at all. 

Insects in general are declining around the globe, so perhaps we are all digging a proverbial rabbit hole...AKA Living an unsustainable existence.

I don't know.


----------



## BigBlackBirds

squarepeg said:


> s
> 
> 
> there has been some discussion here in other threads about working together with neighboring beekeepers in an effort to flood a local area with desirable genetics. i think that could work, but the problem i see with it is getting that level of cooperation among a group of folks who almost by definition aren't amenable to being agreeable when it comes to all things beekeeping.



Hey squarepeg
I tend to listen to things Randy says and think he's on track often. The concept of a "beekeeping cooperative" has been around awhile and think it was copied from Europe. In fact, if you do some searching, you will find that the current US mite resistant stock made its way to the USDA by way of cooperative adventure primarily from a group of michigan beekeepers over the course of over a decade of work. BUT you did hit the nail on the head regarding getting such cooperation. Even though VSH as its known today is a product of that process, the group itself was unable to maintain a respectful working relationship and disappeared. Too many competing priorities from hobby to commercial within a group of very opinionated, strong willed and independant folks. 

Not that it isnt worth a try but very hard to do. I'm in close proximity to a fellow that has decent bees and tries to maintain strong genetics with as little treatment as possible. My queens regularly mate with his but I dont really like his stock and I know he isnt a fan of mine due to lack of any gentleness. Its just really difficult


----------



## Gray Goose

jim lyon said:


> I really believe a large part of queen failure is, in fact, varroa/virus related. It's really the only rational theory I can come up with when I see an unacceptably high rate of first year queen failures among queens that I felt pretty confident were well mated queens, at least based on what I knew about the mating conditions at the time. Well fed cells, lots of drones, good mating conditions, initial mating success in the 85 to 90% range, beautiful initial laying patterns then they just flame out.....or something.


Well we know drones are the "target" of the mites, and Queens mate with 12-18 drones. I also read that the Virus are/can be passed in fluids AKA semen.
So if the Queen is healthy and gets 12-18 fluid injections and 1 or 2 or 3 have a virus, maybe the youth and vigor of a young queen can handle the virus only for 5-11 months or something.
Seems early queen failure could easily be Virus caused. Maybe a single virus can be tolerated by the drone but 2 or 3 togather over time cause the queen to fail. there are like 11 different virus now vectored by the varroa. 
early dieing queens would need "an Autopsy" to be sure again hardware the smaller Beeks do not have.
GG


----------



## johno

When ever I hear " we all know that mites prefer drone brood to worker brood" a little alarm bell rings cause " we all know varoa live off of bees heamolymph" which was around for about 30 years untill some whippersnapper did some real research. I feel that this drone brood story comes about as the mites breed only in the drone brood of the Eastern bee however they still try to breed in the worker brood but the larvae dies when punctured by the mite so there is no increase in mites from worker brood of Apis Cerana as the foundress mite also dies with the larvae. This is not the case with Apis Milifera hence the problem. But I have not seen any research which comes to the conclusion that mites prefer drone brood and I would guess it depends on the nurse bee as to which cell it gets into.


----------



## Michael Bush

>When ever I hear " we all know that mites prefer drone brood to worker brood" a little alarm bell rings cause " 

Try uncaping a bunch of drones and a bunch of workers in the same hive. There are always more mites in the drone pupae than the worker pupae.


----------



## mischief

I did that this year and was surprised to find only one mite in one drone cell. I chose the frame that had the smallest amount of capped brood on it due to almost having lost the hive and wanted to check but not stress them out too much.
I did have to let a Apivar strip get put in because they looked so bad, so that may be why I had a low count then.

Unlike last year my natural mite count has stayed at almost nothing all year. I am hoping that this is because I have put in frames with the shoulders shaved down.
I'd love to not have to treat- thats the end goal, but for now I did my late summer/autumn treatments first with the Apilife-19 mites over two days, then almost nothing with an occasional 4. This time I put a second strip in...nada.

After having almost lost the hive I was worried that the strips may have been damaged from being in the freezer or ineffective even though they hadnt gone past the expiry date, so I did OAVs 4 days apart....nothing or next to nothing.

For now they are on their own while I just watch. i turned the hive around so I could see them through the window over winter- the window is now on the sunny side so they should cluster where I can see them.

I have all fingers and toes crossed.........


----------



## Alex Madsen

Michael Bush said:


> >When ever I hear " we all know that mites prefer drone brood to worker brood" a little alarm bell rings cause "


Apis cerana that evolved the varroa is very hygienic with worker brood uncaping infected cell, but the alow capped drone with infected with verroa to develop. That is one of the reasons varroa have evolved a preference for drone brood.


----------



## johno

This is again not clear. we know that Apis Cerana breed only in drone cells because they die when they try to breed in the worker brood so this does not mean that they do not try to breed in the worker brood and thus do not multiply as in the western honey bee. Has anyone seen any research in this area or it just another urban legend handed down from year to year as in mites eat the blood of the bee and screened bottom boards kill mites. I must admit I am a bit of a skeptic with some of this stuff, remember when mites came on to the scene they were classified as jacobinsai and many years later some one pointed out that they were not the same shape as Jacobinsai.


----------



## Oldtimer

Mischief it is near impossible that your hive only had 19 mites in it. Api Life Var is not a very effective treatment and in my view should not even be sold. It is more likely there are more mites in your hive, but the ALV didn't get them. 

You say you next put a strip in, was that Apivar?


----------



## mischief

Nope, another Apilife. It worked last spring, they bounced back only for me to mess up again in late summer/autumn thanks to Dan they scraped through for another year.

Then I wondered if they were duds so did OAV every 4 days for i think, a month again with little dropping. I wondered if somehow I wasnt doing it right so went back to the person I bought my gear from to see how they do this through mesh floors and what they see.

Hopefully, the weather will clear up by Thursday, so Dan can have a look at them for me.


----------



## mischief

Well!
The inspection went really well.
No CBPV.
Ton of pollen as well as capped stores and open nectar.
No brood disease.

He said they had obviously had a brood break and now there was a frame that had one side with a large amount of eggs.

The only advise was that if I am using OAV, to do it every week over winter and mid winter, on a nice warm-13c day, inspect.
Also to cycle out the frame of drone brood, which he said looked wonky.

Overall, he was pleased with how well they had bounced back.

I've turned the hive around so they are now using the circular entrance on the end wall rather than the one on the long side. This means they should cluster on the window side where I can keep a better watch on them, now that this side is on the sun side.

So, quietly excited, just need to get through winter and into spring so I can re start on phase two- getting them onto all shaved down SC frames.

Hopefully, this will be the last time I Have to use a chem treatment and hopefully, not too far away from not having to use any at all.


----------



## Oldtimer

Good you have found a mentor you can trust.


----------



## mischief

I wish.
As you know, Alastair, he is just too busy to be a mentor running beekeeping courses up and down the country, dealing with his own hives and a young family. I am just very thankful that he has been willing to make time for me when he can.
I do however, trust him to be completely honest in regards to my bees and have learnt a number of things from him over the last couple of years....i even got to teach him a new trick this year, which surprised me.

My take on my hives current situation is that due to such a severe knock back= 2 inch diameter capped brood on each side of one seam.....cant get much worse than that! 
It was a 'reset' year, ie, back to year one. Most of you old hands would have ditched it as a dog. i didnt simply because i knew i messed up and felt that they have the right to a proper fair go at making it.

So after one week of a nasty chem treatment going in I had 180 mites on the board...then nothing. for months, which isnt all that surprising when you consider where my bees are and how small they were.

I do have at least 6 hives in my area based on watching where foragers fly off to From my property and do have a small apiary about a K or so down the road, there may be more but they are not close.
My major problems with the hive were 1. me and 2, Wasps which I did help them with when I could.

I am thrilled that they had a brood break this (late) summer, I see that as a very good step forward, they didnt do this for the last two summers.

So, they are now looking good going into winter and show no reason why they should not make it through spring, seeing as our winters are not as severe as the northern hemisphere winters are.


----------



## little_john

There's something about the last couple of posts I find puzzling ...



> So after one week of a nasty chem treatment going in I had 180 mites on the board...then nothing. for months [...] I do have at least 6 hives in my area based on watching where foragers fly off to From my property and do have a small apiary about a K or so down the road, there may be more but they are not close.





> Hopefully, this will be the last time I Have to use a chem treatment and hopefully, not too far away from not having to use any at all.


So chemicals you describe as 'nasty' actually saved the day, and yet you appear to be considering a total avoidance of such treatments in the future. 

Question. Where do you think those mites came from ? And why assume that more mites won't arrive from the same, or a similar source ?

I guess what I'm really saying here is that viewing your recent 'near-death experience' as an unfortunate one-off (never to be repeated ?) may be somewhat over-optimistic - so don't sell-off your VOA equipment just yet ...  
LJ


----------



## Oldtimer

Exactly.

Mischief and i been talking a while now. She started out an idealist and when people recommended treating we were told we were "quite mad". Straight after that Dan paid a visit and saved the almost dead hive with apivar. Dose of reality, Mischief is still an idealist but getting a bit of real also. Another couple years experience and she will be more real than idealist.


----------



## mischief

little_john said:


> There's something about the last couple of posts I find puzzling ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So chemicals you describe as 'nasty' actually saved the day, and yet you appear to be considering a total avoidance of such treatments in the future.
> 
> Question. Where do you think those mites came from ? And why assume that more mites won't arrive from the same, or a similar source ?
> 
> I guess what I'm really saying here is that viewing your recent 'near-death experience' as an unfortunate one-off (never to be repeated ?) may be somewhat over-optimistic - so don't sell-off your VOA equipment just yet ...
> LJ


Yes I did call them nasty, much the same as I would about Having to take Penicillin to combat an aggressive infection. My stance has always been that there is something not right with having to continuously treat any lifeform Just to keep it alive.
I have also said, that I am treating my bees in the same way I also treat myself and the same way I did with my kids- softer approaches first but willing to bring in the big guns when needed.

If I knew where the mites came from, I would then have The solution and hence become a millionaire,lol. 
I assume they came in with visiting drones, but I suspect that there is always mites in hives and if at low levels, may not wind up falling on the sticky boards to be counted.

The near death experience was a result of stupidity over winter, by not using my OAV and by not fully understanding how to use the sticky board to understand what is going on in the hive.
We live and learn.....more from or mistakes than our successes.
The hive is now going into its third winter, so.....so far, I am at least 51% right in what I have been doing so far.
I have made changes that will hopefully insure I dont mess up so badly again. If I get it right this winter, they should still be there come spring.

I hold firm in the believe that it will be possible to get TF bees at some point once I get the basics in properly and somehow get all the requirements needed. Probably not wording that very well.
That there are so many people out there who are TF gives me hope that one day, I can too.
I suspect it is also a matter of gaining enough experience to 'be at one' with the hive/s and get to the point where I will know instinctively how to respond to a given situation. 
It appears that those who are saying that they have been TF or are mostly, are experienced Beeks, not newbies.


----------



## mischief

Oldtimer said:


> Exactly.
> 
> Mischief and i been talking a while now. She started out an idealist and when people recommended treating we were told we were "quite mad". Straight after that Dan paid a visit and saved the almost dead hive with apivar. Dose of reality, Mischief is still an idealist but getting a bit of real also. Another couple years experience and she will be more real than idealist.


Big Fat sigh,
C'mon OT, you got pulled up for trolling me at the other forum for pretty much what you are doing now, massaging and misrepresenting facts. 
I was going to suggest we take this to the "Enter at your own risk", but it appears to be closed.
The implication we talk often is also misleading. I still have all 9 PM's if anybody can be bothered with this.

I dont see why a perfectly good thread should be derailed any further.


----------



## Juhani Lunden

mischief said:


> It was a 'reset' year, ie, back to year one.





mischief said:


> The hive is now going into its third winter, so.....


Either, not both.

If you accuse others for misrepresenting facts...


----------



## mischief

No, not misrepresenting facts.
The hive is now going into its third year- same colony in the same hive body, a supersedure Queen from last summer.

Reset year, in that, due to its very small size at the start of spring, I have treated....cross that out; dealt with it as if it is a new hive.
Are we done with this yet?
Can we get back to the topic now please.


----------



## Oldtimer

Pulled up for trolling you? Please explain.

What i said a few posts up was because you still don't get what is happening and has happened in your own hive, and the picture you have painted to others is not quite the reality, even though you probably think it is. 

Re the pm's, I'm now wondering why i even took the time and courtesy to reply to the questions you pm'ed to me. I tried to be nothing but helpful, but now you appear to imply there is something dark about the "all 9 PM's". Threatening to share them makes it appear there is something wrong in them. Rather than imply that, please go ahead and publish them. All of them, including your own.

I don't like this dirty aspersion that I've been doing something wrong by PM.


----------



## mischief

I'm over this. I see now why Sybille left.
taking a holiday from stupid.


----------



## Juhani Lunden

mischief said:


> No, not misrepresenting facts.
> 
> Can we get back to the topic now please.


Which is: "treating vs. not treating for mites: opinion thread"

If you write "The hive is now going into its third winter, so....."

I would suspect that to mean going as TF into its third winter. 

Otherwise that would make no sense.


----------



## mischief

Juhani Lunden said:


> Which is: "treating vs. not treating for mites: opinion thread"
> 
> If you write "The hive is now going into its third winter, so....."
> 
> I would suspect that to mean going as TF into its third winter.
> 
> Otherwise that would make no sense.


And why would you suspect that? That is not what I said at all.
Congrats!
Holiday over.
I'm out of here. Toxic bunch of jerks.


----------



## Juhani Lunden

mischief said:


> Toxic bunch of jerks.


Vow, thanks. 

And you?


----------



## JWPalmer

What happened to civility? This is an opinion thread, by it's very nature there will be disagreement. But that is an opportunity to learn and examine your own beliefs when they are challanged. Is there really a right or wrong? Ok, yes, if your bees die every year, something is wrong, but if you learn from it and do not keep repeating the same mistakes, then a person becomes a better beekeeper. And that is what this forum is all about. It is shame Sybille left because I enjoyed reading her posts, even though I did not agree with her methods. Who are we to judge?


----------



## Oldtimer

The user name might explain something.


----------



## jim lyon

Hmmmm, a bit of deja vu from a few years back. As a commercial guy who treats, I regularly read but don't often get involved with much of the tf discussion. Thankfully it has been taken over by some pretty good beekeepers that understand the reality of all views in this realm. I enjoy hearing real life experiences much more than the theoretical views of those relatively new to beekeeping. Rock on Juhani, Squarepeg and a number of others who "walk the walk" and are willing to share their experiences with civility.


----------



## trishbookworm

I was TF my first year. I was thinking that I could select for breeder queens in my (very tiny) op by seeing how they handled mites on their own. Well... what I was seeing was my bee populations were covering about the same number of bars (but same size as frames) as I had capped brood. However... when a frame of brood emerges, they cover twice the area - resulting in 2 frames covered with bees. (try it with your fingers - oriented as brood vs oriented as bees walking on frame). If I was seeing so few bars covered... if I wasn't seeing twice as many frames covered with bees as I had brood... that meant they are dying faster than they are being reproduced. Keep in mind I was comparing between 6 hives at that point... I had mite counts of 20+/300, alcohol wash, come Sept. The mite counts were 1-3/300, alcohol wash, in spring. Only 3/6 hives survived, after 5 or so fall-early winter OAV treatments.

I found that the slope between a hive that is handling mites and a hive that will die of mites is too steep. I found that an alcohol wash of anything more than 0 may-july (when there is a lot of capped brood) is bad news. 

Now I go with the "clean slate" approach - during broodless periods, I aim for a mite drop post OAV of 20 or less. THis way, I don't have to do OAV again until fall. Mite pops stay very low during the summer. But I am not evaluating mite fighting ability with the queens, either.

I am convinced that there are areas that can be TF successfully. I don't think that area is here, where we have winter.


----------



## gww

Jim Lyon
Didn't you post a real life experience where you sorta left twenty hives behind un-managed and in the end they all died? Or, am I confused with some one else?
Either way, I am new but so far my experience has been positive. I don't predict the future though. I am a cheap guy and this is only a hobby but I have enjoyed foundationless also.

I may not march to the same drum but I have always enjoyed your out look on things as you relate them in post made on this site.

Cheers
gww


----------



## jim lyon

gww said:


> Jim Lyon
> Didn't you post a real life experience where you sorta left twenty hives behind un-managed and in the end they all died? Or, am I confused with some one else?
> Either way, I am new but so far my experience has been positive. I don't predict the future though. I am a cheap guy and this is only a hobby but I have enjoyed foundationless also.
> 
> I may not march to the same drum but I have always enjoyed your out look on things as you relate them in post made on this site.
> 
> Cheers
> gww


Yes, I am migratory but had maybe 10 hives or so that wouldn't fit on the last load. They were untreated for a year previous plus an additional summer in Texas. When I returned that fall, they had benefited from a tallow flow with 3 still living and one actually looked impressive enough that I decided to do some grafting off of it but lost track of how those particular hives did. By the end of the spring they were all faltering from high mite loads. 
My big experiment in the late 90's was a disaster. We had a load of 512 story and a half hives off the almonds that looked really nice. They returned late as we were wrapping up our spring nucing and because we didnt need to pull any brood to get our numbers back we decided to just check them and rebuild anything dead or queenless and ship them north a little early. We put them on some promising clover locations, and supered them up confident that bees that looked this nice would surely be fine through the summer. We pulled a nice honey crop late in the summer but noticed that hive populations and brood patterns did not look good at all. By the time they were ready to be shipped south in October the only living bees out of the original 500+ hives were a few pathetic little mite infested clusters. 500+ hives now nothing more than a truckload of empty equipment. I remember my father who had recently retired and had never experienced varroa either just shook his head and asked "where in the heck are all the bees that made this honey". 
It was just a couple of years after varroa initially hit our operation and it was a real learning experience for me to say the least. Had we not treated the rest of our hives that spring I have no doubt that we would have literally been out of business at that point. So, I guess, when I hear people tell me that I haven't had any experience with tf beekeeping I like to tell them that that's not exactly true.


----------



## Oldtimer

jim lyon said:


> just shook his head and asked "where in the heck are all the bees that made this honey".


LOL, great story Jim. He would not be the only beekeeper who ever said that.


----------



## gww

Jim
I agree with old timer, great story though probably not so much at the time.
I expect it for myself and when it happens, I will be glad the number is ten and not five hundred. To tell the truth, I am glad that I don't have five hundred. I don't want to work that hard when they do good either.
Thanks for letting me know my memory is only mostly bad but that over all I got the concept of what happened kinda right. 
Cheers
gww


----------



## jim lyon

I think bees are a bit more resistant than when varroa first impacted but I also think think bee health is impacted more than ever by viruses even when mite levels are relatively low. I don't come on here to knock tf beekeepers as I think everyone (including commercials) who are working towards more resistant stock should be respected for their efforts.


----------



## gww

jim
I don't want to shut down learning of what other do and have success with. If nobody says what their actual experiences are, I can not cherry pick the parts I want to steal from them for myself.
Cheers
gww


----------



## crofter

There have been more than a few demonstrations of people who seem to have many *eureka* moments and shortly afterwards change of thought taking them in _opposite directions with equal conviction_. They get very combative when questioned about their objectivity and powers of observation.

There is no question about their enthusiasm, but their lack of any bit of humility can get a bit irritating. I think it might make better discussion if they would lead in with, or end their statements with more suggestion that their observations could possibly be flawed, rather than divine revelation.


----------



## Cyberman

If you want treatment free bees read this thread.
https://www.beesource.com/forums/showthread.php?342006-My-experience-with-Minnesota-Hygienic-bees

A lot of people post there and want to argue, even though they have no experience with MHs and go by stories and rumors.

I've had the same stock for several years and never treated for mites. They are thriving and the mites are not.


----------



## lharder

jim lyon said:


> I think bees are a bit more resistant than when varroa first impacted but I also think think bee health is impacted more than ever by viruses even when mite levels are relatively low. I don't come on here to knock tf beekeepers as I think everyone (including commercials) who are working towards more resistant stock should be respected for their efforts.


I think the ever lowering mite thresholds should be a top concern. If we understood that and managed for it, then mite thresholds should be stable over time or even increase a bit without impacting vulnerability of viruses. For my tf bees, fall mite thresholds for strong colonies in spring would be very high compared to your standards. Mite distribution curves have shifted to lower mites (and I will shift further with extra selection) , but I think what also is happening is that there is some selection for virus resistance as well, at least the local ones. On a practical level how else can we do that? That may be the biggest benefit of tf beekeeping and is why it is we need to be looking closely at these stocks and unravel what is happening in terms of viruses.


----------



## mischief

JWPalmer said:


> What happened to civility? This is an opinion thread, by it's very nature there will be disagreement. But that is an opportunity to learn and examine your own beliefs when they are challanged. Is there really a right or wrong? Ok, yes, if your bees die every year, something is wrong, but if you learn from it and do not keep repeating the same mistakes, then a person becomes a better beekeeper. And that is what this forum is all about. It is shame Sybille left because I enjoyed reading her posts, even though I did not agree with her methods. Who are we to judge?



You are right.
I apologise for lowering the tone of the forum.


----------



## Sickdog5

As humans we think we can fix anything and in the end usually do more damage by trying to fix things. Instead of just letting mother nature fix it. After all we r the ones who started the problem. Maybe if humans never treated the bee's through evolution would learn to live and deal with mites. Saw a video about a beek in New Zealand, i think thats were he was from. He put the mites from hives under a microscope and saw scratches on them from the bees removing them from one another. Wish i could remember were i saw it. My hives are not TF but they are chemical free. I run screened bottom boards all year long. Overwinter single brood box with one full honey super. Only way i treat them is during times of high mite loads i dump confectioners sugar on bees and they clean each other and mites fall off. Personally i think pesticides and lack of good forage is harder on bee's then mites. In nature the strong survive. But i could be wrong.


----------



## Gray Goose

vtbeeguy said:


> In my humble opinion
> If treatment free is truly doable why don't some of the major "pushers" of said philosophy open the books on their apiary? How many hives do you have? How many splits did you make? How many queens you produce each year? #s of honey produced and total losses for the year? If it can be done and is something that you believe repeatable shouldn't be a problem providing some proof of it.


not so Humble Opinion, IMO, but fine your opinion is as valid as anyone. So IF I ever found the secret sauce I would likely either patent and sell it or not say a word. I do not owe any one to open my books. I have a right to privacy, read the constitution. the expectation that someone who spends most of their life and time and funds to find the path to treasure and then they publish it is a fantasy. Is the formula for the Stradivarius violin published?, is the typical rare thing all typed up and easy to find, not likely. I believe, Push on with your effort and do what works for you. read the lines and in between the lines. there is much knowledge out there today with translated books and websites. If newbies want to they can learn the ropes. There is little room today for ignorance. More likely to much information, and overwhelm. I had 1 book and trial and error. if the person wants to they can be a keeper today. And the only pushers I tend to see are pushing "treatment" So in summary, to each their own, until that freedom is taken away. I believe some sort of "Air space rights" similar to mineral rights would help with the over saturation of bees, bought, sold ,traded whatever. If we expect to be able to keep as we see fit then we also cannot "imply " others do it our way.


----------



## Ode1891

As I reasoned it out, my hives have mites. They all do. It just depends on the colony strength as to the damage they cause--or so it seems. So I quit trying to count mites. Since I can't count bees, the number of mites seemed irrelevant. 20 mites off a mason jar full of bees means different things in my mind based on the size of the colony and where the bees came from--were they foragers in their last week or nurse bees, is the hive 50,000 or 25,000? So I gave up and simply treat in the spring and fall. Moving my hives to an uncultivated/cropped location had more positive impact than treating mites. Just my opinion and approach. Since relocating the 6 colonies I've only lost one hive per winter due to poor management on my part, so its working for me. Poor management sounds judgmental, so let me rephrase that. It was due to me not being willing to commit the necessary time and effort for better management and inspections and feeding--poor management yes, but a conscience decision


----------



## rkereid

Ode1891 said:


> As I reasoned it out, my hives have mites. They all do. It just depends on the colony strength as to the damage they cause--or so it seems. So I quit trying to count mites. Since I can't count bees, the number of mites seemed irrelevant. 20 mites off a mason jar full of bees means different things in my mind based on the size of the colony and where the bees came from--were they foragers in their last week or nurse bees, is the hive 50,000 or 25,000? So I gave up and simply treat in the spring and fall.


if you always do the same size sample (eg- 1/3 cup, or 1/2 cup) you can establish a baseline for the number of bees you're sampling. 

Also, it is generally accepted that samples be taken from the broodnest where you have a higher percentage of young nurse bees (all with a similar exposure to mites in the hive). If you put the initial collection into a white plastic washtub, some bees will fly. Those are generally older bees. What is left is generally nurse bees. You have the added bonus of the queen being easier to spot. Some people get in a hurry at this stage because bees fly out, but if you take your time, you can more easily find a queen, and get mostly nurse bees.

Having a baseline on mite population is really valuable, especially if you have a year when mite populations spike. It help explains an important change that impacts the health of your hive. Alcohol washes can take as little as 45 secs to 2 min to do. You get faster over time.

You're not trying to get a total population, but rather a percentage of infestation on the bees in the broodnest.


----------



## JWPalmer

I have 25 hives. Do I really need to kill nearly 2-1/2 # of bees to establish a baseline? I think, um, no. Since I treat with OAV, using the number of mites that I kill establishes a different baseline, one that tells me how many more applications are necessary to obtain effective control. I am a lot more concerned with how many mites are in the hive as opposed to how many per hundred bees which to me is quite meaningless since you are sampling a subset of bees shown to have a disproportionate number of the total mite load in the first place. Sampling error in selecting the bees or operator error in an incorrectly done wash can skew the results dramatically. However, if I do an OAV treatment and obtain say 200 dead mites on the bottom board, not only have I not killed any bees in the process, I have killed 200 mites. Using the 80/20 ratio of mites under cappings to so called phoretic mites, I can determine there were approximately 1000 mites in the hive. Now I have a good idea how many more I need to kill. Of course, if you are treatment free, you do need to monitor somehow to know when an intervention such as drone brood culling or a brood break is needed.


----------



## Ode1891

rkereid said:


> if you always do the same size sample (eg- 1/3 cup, or 1/2 cup) you can establish a baseline for the number of bees you're sampling.
> 
> Also, it is generally accepted that samples be taken from the broodnest where you have a higher percentage of young nurse bees (all with a similar exposure to mites in the hive). If you put the initial collection into a white plastic washtub, some bees will fly. Those are generally older bees. What is left is generally nurse bees. You have the added bonus of the queen being easier to spot. Some people get in a hurry at this stage because bees fly out, but if you take your time, you can more easily find a queen, and get mostly nurse bees.
> 
> Having a baseline on mite population is really valuable, especially if you have a year when mite populations spike. It help explains an important change that impacts the health of your hive. Alcohol washes can take as little as 45 secs to 2 min to do. You get faster over time.
> 
> You're not trying to get a total population, but rather a percentage of infestation on the bees in the broodnest.


Yep, I get all that


----------



## Magyar Apiary

What do you find most effective in treating? We've run the gamut and seem to have a losing battle from time to time.


----------



## psm1212

Magyar Apiary said:


> What do you find most effective in treating? We've run the gamut and seem to have a losing battle from time to time.


The treatment I find most effective, by far, is Apivar. I also use OAV at different times of the year. I have used Apiguard and MAQS in the past.

But from my experience, Apivar is by far the most *effective*.

This does not consider costs, ease of use, desire not to place synthetic miticides in hives, etc. I am only speaking to effectiveness.


----------



## johno

Quite frankly I have used only OAV for the past 6 years or so, and my losses are below 10 % from year to year. I am also ashamed to say that most of my losses are starvation related with a queen loss in mid winter here and there and occasionally the cluster separated form stores over a prolonged cold spell. But each of my 40 odd colonies gets at least 12 treatments a year so it is time consuming and reasonably cheap. I am past my 3rd treatment of 5 that are 5 days apart and an observation hive that I keep track of in my house has not dropped a single mite over the last 3 treatments but none the less I will continue with the treatments. If one is isolated enough I wonder if you could become mite free?


----------



## trishbookworm

I'm using OAV exclusively, and I call it the "clean slate" approach. In Sept, Oct, Nov, and Dec, the bees get an OAV every 2-4 weeks, depending on how many fly days. More fly days, more like every 2 weeks. I've found that bees in my area can go rob during a fly day post-frost, bring back honey... and a whole lot more. And a low-mite colony (low alcohol wash in Sept, low mite frass in brood combs in deadout) can end up with 60 mites/300 bees and dead in 2 months from robbing the wrong colony.

So.... I am at the point where I have low mite counts through Aug. Like 2/300 in Aug. Or 0. But... since there is minimal mite pressure, there is minimal visible mite tolerance. I can't tell who can take the heat effectively.

I'm focusing my breeding efforts on 1) no swarming; 2) winter survival; 3) honey production (which also means drawing comb); and 4) acceptable temperament. It's hard to fault the girls if a full-sized colony gets pissy when I inspect on a sunny 90+ degree day and I am crushing some bees (unintentionally!). 

When I feel my stock is acceptable in those areas, I will start to compare how they handle NOT fall/winter treating. The great thing about OAV is that I can do a treatment at almost any month. So I can start comparing a few colonies, down the road.

I will say that there is talk here and there about the punishing effect viruses have on bee colonies - that for me is a great reason to keep mite levels low.


----------



## Oldtimer

Trish i suspect some of those high mite levels may be caused by other than robbing.

An OAV treatment once every 2 - 4 weeks just isn't going to have more than a small effect. It is considered that at any one time, 80% of mites are within the brood. This would leave 20% phoretic and available to exposure to the OAV. The 2 - 4 week interval between treatments is plenty of time for the other 80% of mites to emerge and complete another breeding cycle, or maybe 2 breeding cycles if they emerged soon after treatment.

When I experimented with OAV, at first i went with the (then) recommended interval of 5 - 7 days between treatments. Even that did not get an effective enough result, i experimented with time frames and eventually got good results at a treatment every 3 days, 7 times.

The OA itself was very cheap, and i think it's a great idea, but as a commercial operator this had me tied up for weeks just going around OAV'ing hives and i could not afford the time, had to give it up. But for a hobbyist it would be viable.


----------



## Kamon A. Reynolds

I agree with Oldtimer. We also have found that it takes a OAV treatment every 3-4 days for 3 weeks to make the mite populations drop down where they need to be. Very laborious on hundreds of colonies or more.


----------



## trishbookworm

I also agree - that if you are starting from a position where there are 400+ mites in the colony to begin with, then it is like pushing a boulder uphill to get the mite levels down. But what if you only had 10-20 mites in the colony in January? Try it out....

As for the 2 occasions where I have seen deadouts, examined them for mite frass, and had alcohol wash info on them from the fall, here are some numbers. 
Deadout 2016: 2/300 in Sept, saw them go robbing on a fly day Nov 1, dead by Jan, incredible numbers of mites in the hive. One was on the queen. Minimal (2%) of cells in brood comb had mite frass.
Deadout 2018: 9/300 in Sept, 60+/300 in Dec. Again minimal mite frass - it was hard to find. 

More info about mite frass (never just take some poster's word for it): 
https://articles.extension.org/pages/65450/varroa-mite-reproductive-biology
https://www.beeculture.com/a-closer-look-varroa-mite-reproduction/
https://beeinformed.org/2018/07/24/2018-northern-california-update/mitefrass20180402_143955/
http://scientificbeekeeping.com/tag/beekeeping-in-california/ - scroll down a lot here
http://entnemdept.ufl.edu/creatures/misc/bees/varroa_mite.htm lots of words, if you like that kind of thing.

I played with the randy oliver mite model - available here: http://scientificbeekeeping.com/randys-varroa-model/
THis is an elaborate calculator where you can set a starting point for number of mites in the hive, set the kind of region and how mite resistant the bees are, and see how the number of mites changes over the year. And of course what you would see with an alcohol wash (or your mite drop). 

With this Excel model (you have to download it and make friends with it; worth paying for a class in Excel to do so), it is clear that even if the colony had 9/300 in Sept, there is no way to get past 30 or so by Dec. Well, I had to change the "hive died" setting to see that, but it's worth playing with!

Anyways, I would ask all with deadouts this winter to do 2 things: 1) alcohol wash on the dead bees. It's not the same as a mite count when they are alive, because the mites preferentially stay on live bees, and they probably don't distribute evenly once most of the bees are dead. And 2) look for mite frass on the combs that are in the center of the hive, where the bees were hanging out. Count a 7x7 grid, count how many with mite frass, multiply by 2: that's the percent of brood infected with mites from the round that generated the winter bees. 

Those 2 postmortem skills have resulted in this past year having 0% mortality over winter, and currently mite levels with alcohol wash are at 0/300. I have 6 full strength hives, with substantial capped brood, that has had time to emerge (and get re-laid in, and then capped...). 

So. Clean slate approach. If you get a broodless period, try it!


----------



## Oldtimer

trishbookworm said:


> try it!


Up your dosing schedule drastically. Try that!


----------



## Litsinger

*Re: squarepeg 2015-2019 treatment free experience*



Oldtimer said:


> Agree also that in theory anyway, non treatment should favor less viralent diseases, and treatment plus management favour more viralent.


For what it is worth, my 'day job' is working in the design/construction of commercial and institutional facilities. As part of this, I try to stay abreast of the construction-related trends emerging in various industries. 

On thing germane to this discussion is that hospital infectious control is beginning to really consider how, _"Antibiotic resistance can develop when bacteria undergo genetic changes promoted by the environment."_ https://www.health.harvard.edu/newsletter_article/Combating_MRSA_The_drug-resistant_superbug

As such, some of the tenants the healthcare community is beginning to recognize:

_"Bacterial genetics. To survive and reproduce, microbes must adapt to their environment. When that includes an antibiotic, a bacterium is more likely to survive if it undergoes a genetic mutation that helps it resist the drug. (Such a mutation is said to be "selected for.") Some mutations make enzymes that deactivate the antibiotic; others eliminate the site where the antibiotic would normally enter the cell; still others cause the bacteria to pump out the antibiotic before it can do any harm. These genes are passed on as the bacteria multiply, quickly establishing an entire population that is resistant to that drug.

Medical practices. By killing some bacteria, antibiotics can promote the growth of other, drug-resistant ones, that is, the ones that have developed genetic mutations. The process speeds up if doctors prescribe antibiotics unnecessarily — for example, giving them to patients who have viral illnesses such as colds and the flu, for which they are ineffective. And critically ill hospital patients often receive multiple antibiotics; this increases the survival odds of the most resistant bacteria, which may then be transferred among patients in close quarters.

Agricultural practices. More than half of the antibiotics produced in the United States are used in agriculture. Some are mixed into animal feed to prevent the spread of disease and promote growth. This can cause resistant strains of bacteria to develop and be passed to people who eat undercooked meat or raw eggs. Antibiotics sprayed on fruit trees may lead to selection of resistant bacteria. Residues left on unwashed fruits may eradicate some of the good bacteria in our intestinal tracts and select for more virulent strains."_

This idea of beneficial colonization seems to be becoming more embraced in both the medical and agricultural/horticultural industries:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4402713/

I recall reading the following article where the author relates:

_"This is why more than one microbiologist concerned about these super-infections has mused (only partly tongue in cheek) that the best thing to happen in major hospitals might be to dump truckloads of germ-laden dirt into the corridors, rather than keep on applying more and more chemicals in a never-ending ‘arms race’ against the bacteria. In other words, stop using the antibiotics (which of course is hardly feasible), and all this ‘evolution’ will reverse itself, as the bacterial populations shift back again to favour the more hardy, less resistant varieties."_

https://creation.com/superbugs-not-super-after-all


----------



## JWChesnut

*Re: squarepeg 2015-2019 treatment free experience*

The "fixed idea" that diseases will naturally evolve to "less virulent" forms is a fundamental error.

Dr. Stephen Martin has shown, in the case of DWV transmitted by Varroa, the **exact opposite*** is true. In horizontally transmitted diseases, the inertia in the system is to evolve to **more virulent** forms.

Human Cholera is a horizontally transmitted disease, par excellence, and research paper on the outbreak in Haiti demonstrate that the most virulent form was evolutionarily selected on that island.

I work, professionally, on rare plant evolution and extinction. The idea that "nature returns to balance" is called the "peaceable kingdom" fallacy after the famous 18th century depictions of a supposed return to the Garden of Eden.

The sooner this treatment-free crowd dissuades itself of the notion that "everything returns to the Garden", the sooner it will be able to get on with successful beekeeping.


----------



## Gray Goose

*Re: squarepeg 2015-2019 treatment free experience*

Hi JWChesnut, your comment "The sooner this treatment-free crowd dissuades itself of the notion that "everything returns to the Garden", the sooner it will be able to get on with successful beekeeping."

If your belief it to "treat" as the treatment free crowd has it wrong, How do you dismiss the fact that as different treatments are being used for Varroa the bug is getting immune to them and getting stronger? Since you reference the Human disease, here we are talking about the treatment resistant STREP/STAFF type situation. Also the ample evidence in northern Europe where treatment is not used has shown great strides in getting bees past Varroa.

And my other mental delimea is for 100,000 + years the bees were not treated and they survived, Now as we are "treating" them we have issues.
Is it your opinion if Humans were to be "wiped out" Say by Cholera, the bees and the anamials we are now treating would die out? I can understand your stance, I respectfully do Disagree. IMO what we have created is a "strain" of bees needing drugs to stay alive, Hopefully in the "Garden" there are strains not messed with yet by Humans. 

As well do the upper great Lakes region have a Peaceable Kingdom? It was scraped into Ohio 2 times by Glaciers so Nature will reclaim areas if allowed
GG


----------



## GregB

*Re: squarepeg 2015-2019 treatment free experience*



JWChesnut said:


> ....
> I work, professionally, on rare plant evolution and extinction.
> .


Then I am curious - what is fundamental difference between successful species that colonized the entire planet along with the human species (e.g. Norway rats, English sparrows, European starlings, *Honey bees*, Canada Thistle, etc) and not so successful species (not successful - due to the species's own properties, NOT the direct human impact)? 

No difference at all?

Sounds like you just equated them ALL and state "there is no difference".

Meanwhile, the "successful" species continue to spread (no matter how much resources are spent into eradicating them).
At the same time, the fragile "unsuccessful" species will be trampled in and fade away (no matter how much resources will be spent to save and prop them up). 
There are few exceptions (few sexy mammals and few others are saved, just for the now) - otherwise, we are loosing XXXX distinct species annually.

Just one hint of many - how about generalists vs. specialists?

Lucky for the Honey bee - it is on the "successful" species list.


----------



## JWChesnut

*Re: squarepeg 2015-2019 treatment free experience*

One important characteristic of the genus Apis to remember is that it is a microscopic branch of the order Hymenoptera. True social insects are exceptionally rare, and have no evolutionary history of diversification. In evolutionary terms, "social insects gathering nectar" is a dead-end, a box the bees will never climb out of. An experiment that never produced a vast array of forms.

This is the sine-qua-non of honeybees, the genus Apis haven't diversified because their success **requires** them not to. They are generalists, and if they began evolving into different forms, their ability to "encourage" flowers to remain "general" would be lost. They would become just another specialist pollinator (a la Orchid bees) that is entirely dependent on the uncertain fate of single plant species.

Treatment free ideology is rooted in the idea that humans can force bees to "evolve" in a single season. This is utter madness.


----------



## GregB

*Re: squarepeg 2015-2019 treatment free experience*



JWChesnut said:


> One important characteristic of the genus Apis to remember is that it is *a microscopic branch of the order Hymenoptera. True social insects are exceptionally rare, and have no evolutionary history of diversification.* In evolutionary terms, "social insects gathering nectar" is a dead-end, a box the bees will never climb out of. An experiment that never produced a vast array of forms.
> 
> This is the sine-qua-non of honeybees, the genus Apis haven't diversified because their success **requires** them not to. They are generalists, and if they began evolving into different forms, their ability to "encourage" flowers to remain "general" would be lost. They would become just another specialist pollinator (a la Orchid bees) that is entirely dependent on the uncertain fate of single plant species.
> 
> Treatment free ideology is rooted in the idea that humans can force bees to "evolve" in a single season. This is utter madness.



*Microscopic *- in terms of formal genera definition (a tool invented by the humans trying to approximately describe what is going on - as if things are static in place and time).
*Very large* - in terms of numbers of distinct specimens spread across large and distinct territories.
This is a significant point.
Large number of specimens spread across various eco-systems always diverging into new distinct populations and sub-species and new species and on

No one is here saying - a single season evolution.
No one is even saying - evolution.
What?
Who said this?
Back to this E-word again.

The big E is not even required.
There is plenty of generic survival mechanisms built-in into the current Honey bees species as we speak. 
Just use what is present - here and now - takes some short-term weeding out in some places (by removal of artificial propping) - in other places, the weeding part has been done already and over with.


----------



## JWChesnut

*Re: squarepeg 2015-2019 treatment free experience*

I don't permit myself to engage in endless online debates. So I will end it here.
Selection of traits **is** evolutionary change. The important perspective to notice, is bees are loathe to form new species. This is a marked contrast to other successful lineages. Practically, this means the selection of lineages submerge themselves back into the general population of bees rapidly. Change doesn't come quickly to honeybees, and the reason is intrinsic to the habit of the bee.


----------



## Fusion_power

*Re: squarepeg 2015-2019 treatment free experience*



> Treatment free ideology is rooted in the idea that humans can force bees to "evolve" in a single season. This is utter madness.


 Change occurs incrementally with honeybees. It is not in a single season, but in less than 30 generations. Your statements ignore that honeybees are under extremely strong selective pressure from diseases and pests. Strong selective pressure will cause one of two things to happen. Either the genetics will change or the honeybee will go extinct. Since my bees are very much alive and very much untreated for varroa for the last 14 years, I submit that the genetics must have changed. Couch this from knowing that I lost every colony I had in 1993 when varroa first hit.


----------



## GregB

*Re: squarepeg 2015-2019 treatment free experience*



Fusion_power said:


> .......Since my bees are very much alive and very much untreated for varroa for the last 14 years, I submit that the genetics must have changed. Couch this from knowing that I lost every colony I had in 1993 when varroa first hit.


FP, apparently your case does not exist.
Not to some people.

I don't know.
It does exist to me.


----------



## WesternWilson

*Re: squarepeg 2015-2019 treatment free experience*

I have been beekeeping for about 12 years. In that time no one has demonstrated a reliable/replicable line of Varroa-proof bees. They have not come to market, and anyone I know who runs treatment free actually practices a host of management techniques that I would call treatments (brood breaks, the IPM strategies, frequent splitting to reduce mite load per colony, boosting small colonies with purchased bees). My TF aquaintances call this success in spite of high annual losses and poor honey harvests.

Our area is bee-dense and hosts mobile pollination bees in spring. Running treatment free here results in dead colonies within two years...yes, some limp through their first year but crash in their second. Maybe those who are isolated and not constantly reinfested via drift bees and/or robbing can, once they get their mite population eradicated, run treatment free. But in our locale, with lots of bees around, with our limited honey flows and cold winters, no way.

There is a lot of misinformed, self serving warping of genetic theory out there amongst the proponents of letting bees die from Varroasis. They gloss over the fact that bees thrived for centuries, even in the New World where they were introduced in pilgrim days, perfectly fit until we accidentally infested them with Varroa. 

There is nothing wrong or weak in the bee genome. But it is not designed to deal with Varroa. Mercifully some great tech is now coming online that can deal with the Varroa (rather than the bee genome)...gene silencing and gene editing will, I think, ultimately be the answer. Ditto for small hive beetle.

Until then, vigilance and treatments with the relatively non toxic organic acids. Treatment allows my bees to stay healthy, which locally means reliable honey harvests, and increase. In a decent year I can double my apiary. In anything like a good year I can triple. And get a good honey harvest.


----------



## Juhani Lunden

*Re: squarepeg 2015-2019 treatment free experience*

https://naturebees.wordpress.com/2019/07/09/visit-to-terje-reinertsen/

Scientificlly proven varroa resistant bees, arisen with free mating.


----------



## squarepeg

WesternWilson said:


> There is nothing wrong or weak in the bee genome. But it is not designed to deal with Varroa.



i share the view with others that the bees have likely encountered similar threats over the millennia and very likely encoded in the genome are the defenses necessary to deal with varroa. that we see documented populations co-existing with varroa supports that view. 

the evolution of the viruses is another matter, and the evolution of beekeeping practices is yet another. randy oliver makes the case very well that our practices are contributing as much or more to the problem than anything in nature.

selection for traits on the broad scale is geared toward fecundity and production, which favors the varroa/virus complex. this along with very high hive densities makes it almost impossible to let adaption for resistance play out in the managed bee population.

not really very different in practice than with chickens, pigs, and cows which also need to be treated against pests and diseases when crowded in together for production's sake.


----------



## JWChesnut

EFB is classically considered a disease that manifests itself in weak and compromised hives, and often resolves spontaneously when hive nutrition improves and the underlying cause of the weakness is controlled.

When an apiary succumbs to EFB, my first assumption is the colonies have been weakened and compromised by the typical Varroa associated insults.

Folk that are vociferous that they have 'magic bees' often lose whole apiaries, like Solomon Parker did in the fall of 2018. All those years of "resistance breeding" are down the tubes.


----------



## msl

> i share the view with others that the bees have likely encountered similar threats over the millennia and very likely encoded in the genome are the defenses necessary to deal with varroa.


The problem is we/they are hijacking behaviors for outher pests.. VSH comes from hygienic behavior witch targets baticra and grooming likely comes from the bee louse. 
3 of Dr. Keith Delaplane's lectures from the July Texas Beekeepers Association meeting can be found here
https://vimeo.com/344216049
He covers a lot of good stuff about why its been so hard and why progress has bee so slow compared to other trait's and pests.. Ie our bees (in the past) had contact with SHB, had contact with tracheal mites etc. and why its so easy to select for temperament and honey production vs other traits.....

and there is a lot of good general info on the realitys of selection and breeding, in plane language. I highly sujest it for anyone who is serious about shifting traits in their stock


----------



## SeaCucumber

I am trying to be TF (treatment free). I am using treatments so that I can place an early order for TF queens, and have hives to put them in next year. TF bees are hard to buy. Swarms are rare. They should be considered for breeding. 
Assuming that we cannot get affordable, sustainable bees from a similar hardiness zone, us beginners should treat. This gives us time and resources to obtain and breed local TF. Treatments should be few and thorough. Once TF, I will still have a mite threshold. If met, I'm willing to selectively treat that year.

Preventing the sudden fall disappearance: I'm treating hives with high mites and DWV bees right before they make winter bees. I will treat during the winter broodless time.

Queens should be bred from low mite untreated hives. Excluders can contain bad drones so they don't mate. Beekeeping is difficult. Making queens is easy. Obtain and breed good bees before going treatment free.

Threads:
OAV treating: I use a $9 immersion heater.
going TF


----------



## GregB

squarepeg said:


> i share the view with others that the bees have likely encountered similar threats over the millennia and very likely encoded in the genome are the defenses necessary to deal with varroa......


+1 

As I stated my view - bees are a successful generalist species.
One attribute of good generalist species - they develop generic ways to deal with generic parasites/infections (not creating very special ways to handle every special parasite/infection).
While the generic methods may be less efficient in short term and the situation may even appear as a disaster - in the long term the generic methods work very well despite short-term set backs.
Very basic swarming/absconding is a very generic and yet effective tool as one example of these (the proverbial sledge hammer that gets the job done, despite of not doing gracefully maybe).

Sky is not falling.
The real issue is - human consumerism and desire for immediate satisfaction with the least possible effort (I want the magic fix right here and right now - now give it to me!).
Whatever....


----------



## squarepeg

JWChesnut said:


> When an apiary succumbs to EFB, my first assumption is the colonies have been weakened and compromised by the typical Varroa associated insults.


see:

https://www.beesource.com/forums/showthread.php?354293-EFB-options&p=1744397#post1744397


----------



## Litsinger

msl said:


> 3 of Dr. Keith Delaplane's lectures from the July Texas Beekeepers Association meeting can be found here
> https://vimeo.com/344216049
> He covers a lot of good stuff about why its been so hard and why progress has bee so slow compared to other trait's and pests.. Ie our bees (in the past) had contact with SHB, had contact with tracheal mites etc. and why its so easy to select for temperament and honey production vs other traits.....
> 
> and there is a lot of good general info on the realitys of selection and breeding, in plane language. I highly sujest it for anyone who is serious about shifting traits in their stock


MSL:

Great video- thank you for sharing. I learned a lot from his talk.

Russ


----------



## msl

don't forgert the watch the outher 2... good stuff!


----------



## squarepeg

*Re: squarepeg 2015-2019 treatment free experience*



JWChesnut said:


> Treatment free ideology is rooted in the idea that humans can force bees to "evolve" in a single season. This is utter madness.


not according to dr. keith delaplane. note his comment at 51:48 here:

https://vimeo.com/344216049?cjevent=285717e7b0b511e98001032a0a24060e

he is referencing this publication:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5089174/

from which is quoted:

"Thus, there may be more within-apiary and local allelic diversity than expected and potentially less diversity at larger scales."

and:

"This variation may help explain how a species with such low genetic diversity can nevertheless evolve acaricide resistance and spread rapidly wherever it has been introduced."


----------



## Litsinger

msl said:


> don't forgert the watch the outher 2... good stuff!


Thanks, MSL. Please forgive my tech illiteracy- how do you get to the other two lectures?

Thank you for your help!

Russ


----------



## msl

Click on the user name ( honkinggoose media) and it takes you to there uploads
https://vimeo.com/user5981710

on the subject in this one
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=txZtQrMTeag he suggest we realy haven't been breeding, details the failure of his program, and suggests that a true and working TF production queen should be worth $100 when/if it comes around


----------



## Litsinger

msl said:


> Click on the user name ( honkinggoose media) and it takes you to there uploads
> https://vimeo.com/user5981710
> 
> on the subject in this one
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=txZtQrMTeag he suggest we realy haven't been breeding, details the failure of his program, and suggests that a true and working TF production queen should be worth $100 when/if it comes around


MSL:

I apologize for the delay in my reply as I wanted to watch all four videos before responding. In short, that was excellent information, and I really appreciate you posting all of it. There was a lot of excellent information that was presented which helped flesh-out some basic genetic realities that I understood conceptually but now better understand practically. Four things stood out to me:

1. The idea that supercedure is likely a 'step backward' from the perspective of overall benefit to the super-organism. I would not have taken as a given that the queen decides what eggs to lay in swarm cells and that the workers decide what eggs to develop into supercedure cells. I suppose the implication here is that from a natural selection perspective, annual swarming is a net benefit to overall species health and our efforts to thwart it in a managed setting at least run the risk of negatively selecting for traits like productivity.

2. Related to (1), this idea that parasitism is a higher level of biological order. I am still chewing on this one...

3. The intimation that at least part of the Russian bees ability to withstand varroa is as a direct result of their genetic diversity. I think I might have previously conceptualized the idea of polyandry and genetic heterozygosity being at the foundation of colony resiliency, but it is interesting to think how differently this concept is in reality versus how Russian genetics are marketed (i.e. color phenotype, etc.).

4. The suggestion that the beekeeping community at-large should be plying in the trade of paternal lines (i.e. Drone Co-Ops) as a means to promote this hybrid vigor rather than focusing so much on the maternal side of the equation- this idea makes a lot of sense to me conceptually.

Thanks again for posting the video links. I appreciated the education.

Russ


----------



## msl

psm1212 said:


> Dr. Robyn Underwood of Penn State is embarking on a study of 300 hives, managed side-by-side, by different criteria. My understanding is that there will be three management styles represented: Treatment-Free (on small cell), IPM with organic acids, and traditional treatment (Amitraz and miticides).


So far, and no suprize, small cell is lacking... 64% losses vs sub 20% 








from: https://lopezuribelab.com/comb/


----------



## John_M

I listened to Robyn speak and she has a good project going.

My personal take on the original intent of the thread is this;
Heritible traits, VSH and Biting can give a colony an advantage but even the best genetics won't survive the impact of a heavy mite load. They may have increased survivability under noirmal levels of infestation, but a heavy infestation will bring them down. And in the process being 100% treatment free means you have lost some fine genetics and get to start over trying to find good stock. Whereas treatment based on testing for mite loads allows you to intervene when things are too bad for them to handle.

Nature can and will find a way, it may crash colony numbers down to a level that causes some pollinated species to go extinct from lack of pollination. But hey mother nature is patient, she's played this game countless times. She has time, we don't. As long as we have migratory beekeepers going through our area, import bees from completly different climate zones, stress our bees with more and more aggressive chemical agriculture to make up for an unwillingness to learn from past mistakes then we will have to sometimes treat or face complete loss of our colonies. My own choice is a combined approach of organic acids, drone brood bait/cull, breaks in brood cycle, and in the future maybe enhanced CO2 levels during overwintering ( hoping for more research and guidelines on that front soon). I also try to isolate yards from migratory and hands off beekeepers and heavy agro-chem users. Fortunately the later is resonably easy, the lets try beekeeping folks are harder to isolate from. They are well intentioned, often amusing, and a simple fact of life. I try to dissuade people from hive types that are harder to inspect and manage like top bar and lehrens hives. I recently watched a few videos of the promoter of lehrens hives inspecting colonies and omg, he is so slow and so incomplete in his inspections that a problem could easily be missed. And he's supposed to be the authority on them, how the hell could a new beekeeper do a good job. If I took that long to inspect, my gentlest colony would be rabid by the time I did a complete inspection. Thats no fun for an experienced bee keeper, how the hell is a newb supposed to find this an enjoyable pasttime.


----------



## Gino45

John_M said:


> I listened to Robyn speak and she has a good project going.
> 
> My personal take on the original intent of the thread is this;
> Heritible traits, VSH and Biting can give a colony an advantage but even the best genetics won't survive the impact of a heavy mite load. Theymay have increased survivability under noirmal levels of infestation, but a heavy infestation will bring them down. And in the process being 100% treatment free means you have lost some fine genetics and get to start over trying to find good stock. Whereas treatment based on testing for mite loads allows you to intervene when things are too bad for them to handle.
> 
> Well stated. I agree 100%.
> 
> Quote: I recently watched a few videos of the promoter of lehrens hives inspecting colonies and omg, he is so slow and so incomplete in his inspections that a problem could easily be missed.
> 
> I have no idea what a lehrens hive is; however, I will say that I do my inspections using very slow movements while finishing quickly. That is because there are certain things that I am checking and need only to see a very few frames to know the hive's condition. Slow movements...quick inspection. In fact, one can tell a lot just by opening and viewing the brood nest from above.
> 
> I agree that at certain times of year, like right now, it's a great idea to be extra vigilant as regards queen failure and the little nasties that can quickly do in a hive.


----------



## John_M

Gino, I think you misunderstand me. I mean this guy is slooooooooooow. Not talking about the normal delibirate working that I try to do, I mean painfully agonizingly slow. And yes I agree to not taking a colony apart completly at each inspection. If I just need to see tha a colony is expanding and doesn't need help I will just look inside without pulling frames, swarm prep tip boxes and look underneath, queenright and a good queen just pull one frame of emerging brood and look for eggs. But other times I need more, or at least think I need more.


----------



## Litsinger

msl said:


> So far, and no suprize, small cell is lacking... 64% losses vs sub 20%
> View attachment 50879


MSL:

Thank you for the update. I had been curious how this project was progressing.


----------



## squarepeg

msl, please provide a reference for the graph in post #507.


----------



## GregB

Me too - what is exactly "lehrens hive"?
What video about "lehrens hive"?
Google did not find it.
I am all ears.


----------



## JWPalmer

I am sure John M meant to say Layens and we all know who the authority is on these types of hives. Personally, I think I would choose this style over a regular topbar or a Warre hive.


----------



## John_M

Yeah, as we get old the eyes are the first to go with the mind following shortly after. 

And yes I agree I would definately go with a layens over a top bar. I would even agree that the deeper frames might have some advantages over a langstroth deep. About the only place I would really consider a top bar is in a mating nuc and I'm a bit sketchy on them even there, but they are expedient.


----------



## msl

squarepeg said:


> msl, please provide a reference for the graph in post #507.


https://lopezuribelab.com/comb/


----------



## squarepeg

(thank you msl, added it to your post)


----------



## GregB

John_M said:


> ...
> And yes I agree I would definately go with a *layens *over a top bar. .....


Aha!
I did honestly look for "lehren hive" and found one reference to it (whatever that reference means):
https://books.google.com/books?id=u...AEwD3oECAcQAQ#v=onepage&q=lehren hive&f=false

Well then one needs not to be flipping through the entire hive UNLESS you need to grab/mark the queen (which is NOT a typical mid-season/late operation in a booming hive).
I have not looked inside main resource hives (16-framer and 20-framer Layens) since about July 4th weekend (when I did the fly-back splits on them).
No need. 
I just checked/fixed/stole some honey combs from the side.
I also flipped few outer frames to get to the beginning of the brood (to be sure that there is brood). 
All it is.

When you really need to work them (say the start of the season), you have to flip through only 5-10 frames.


----------



## little_john

GregV said:


> Aha!
> I did honestly look for "lehren hive" and found one reference to it (whatever that reference means): [...]


FWIW - 'lehren' is a German word meaning 'teaching'/ 'teachings'/ 'lessons' etc. So, for example "The teachings of master beekeepers" - becomes - "Die *Lehren* der Imkermeister".

But - I'm also sure the person actually meant 'Layens Hive' 
LJ


----------



## JWPalmer

Yeah, when I first saw it, I thought it might have been a reference to a teaching hive or what we call an observation hive. But that was out of context with the rest of the post.

But speaking of the Layens hive, I think building a few would be a good winter project. Especially if I can scrounge some 2 x 10s from a jobsite dumpster.


----------



## Oldtimer

squarepeg said:


> msl, please provide a reference for the graph in post #507.


Thanks for asking for that Squarepeg. 

In this internet age of over information, when stuff is shared, it really does need a reference, to enable proper scrutiny of both context, and source. 

A reputable information sharing site like Beesource could do well to put more emphasis on requiring refences to be supplied with certain types of data.


----------



## Gray Goose

msl said:


> So far, and no suprize, small cell is lacking... 64% losses vs sub 20%
> View attachment 50879
> 
> 
> from: https://lopezuribelab.com/comb/


This is of course My Opinion, This study is not really all that meaningful to me.
1) Show me who keeps bees like this , 3 ways to manage 300 hives in one apairy, IE not really a snapshot of the typical set up.
2) Let me pick where the 100 of each hive come from and I "can" make the results be what ever I want. Ok so some small cell is doing good some is not, some treated can do good some loose all thier hives, so again, when we go out and "pick" 100 hives it matters from where they come. Who treated them last and with what for how long.
3) some of these management types do very well on thier own, when you merge all 3 in 1 "side by side" place you create and "environment" that really does not occur naturally.
4) who is "checking, brood breaking, treating, etc. does the watcher/tester have the same level of skills in each management type.
5) who is "funding" the study, looks to me so far, not funded by a small cell foundation manufacturer, follow the money.
6) the 3 styles, who are the 3 people and how many hives have each "managed" are they equal in talent and experience?

I find the excersize interesting but I would rather see 30 10 hive blocks in their own environment, managed by the same person who have been manageing for the last 5 years. that would have the hive where is was and the keeper still in place... And we all know keeping is local. so for example If i did the test I would get 100 treated hives from Florida and bring them to Michigan State University Apairy, and test them against the "local" stock, gee who would win?? Or I could take 100 hives from Michigan to Florida to test there, so where the hives come from we know matters. 

Sorry to be a Skeptic, but the hives selected , previous health and management style, and the 300 hive Apairy , and the managers, have lots of interaction that will not make it to the test results data. IMO and from what I have read,, at 50 hives you start to need to look at carrying capacity of the Apairy. Are we feeding, is there a dearth? A dearth may result in robbing which may impact what bugs flow to which hives. I am all for collecting data, But here by the size and place of the Apairy, what hives made it into the Apairy, and Who cracks the lid and when, IMO you are "creating" data.
Again most folks manage an Apairy all the same, so is this a valid mix of methods, will all methods when Jamed together with other methods still maintain the same results.
GG

If the test is repeated in 3 or 4 different states would the results be the same?
IMO this test is "these hive we selected, managed in the manner we chose, in the same Apairy, produced the following results" so if you were to have an Apairy very near there and do the same thing you to could have the same results.
GG


----------



## JWChesnut

Gray Goose said:


> Sorry to be a Skeptic,


I suggest you read the protocol and first year report, rather than just shotgunning objections. 
For instance: 
1) Apiaries were in two states and many locations, 2) hives were among 27 participating beekeepers.

The result is consistent will all other controlled studies. TF beekeeping results in horrendous losses. 

Some of the TF preachers have morphed the track record of these losses into a "benefit" believing they are "culling the herd".
Honeybee genetics does not support that formulation, however.


----------



## Gray Goose

JWChesnut said:


> I suggest you read the protocol and first year report, rather than just shotgunning objections.
> For instance:
> 1) Apiaries were in two states and many locations, 2) hives were among 27 participating beekeepers.
> 
> The result is consistent will all other controlled studies. TF beekeeping results in horrendous losses.
> 
> Some of the TF preachers have morphed the track record of these losses into a "benefit" believing they are "culling the herd".
> Honeybee genetics does not support that formulation, however.


JW
Ok read the study, so then they are not "side by side" some are in a different states, really that is considered Equal. Duck cloth vrs winter cover, is that the same?

So any 1 or 2 year study should show the bees getting the dope will live longer than the dope free. I am not really surprised, Are you? Now do this for 10 years re make the numbers from the survivors and see what shakes out in year 5 or 7 or 10. In countries where they did not treat, the Mite are almost not a problem any longer. I still do not see the big reveal here. Thanks for the remind to read before you post. Sorry will do better in the future.
I still submit if your bees need the dope they always will, "looking for a way out of that is not a bad idea" What about in 7 years the mites will be immune to the Amitraz maybe, the dopers seem to swerve from that fact as well. Short enough test to prevent the Immune response of the Mite. Again, not sure for me this is "News" Run the test for 20 years, My Bet is the dopers have to switch to a New Drug or loose. Again, I had a fair amount of training in Statistics, tell me what you want to hear I and I can make a test to prove it. Short 2 or 3 year "trial" keeps the mite immunity to the drug out of the picture and the bees genetics catching up. Pick any drug you want research the time to be Immune for the mites cut the test down to be done before that an Bam you have a winner. Make the test 20 -50 years and I am sure the mites would be immune and Bam it "fails" Sit in a pond and count the ducks flying in, your being there Affects the count, in time no duck will fly there. So are they flaming the tools between hive visits, the "looking" can spread the EFB, on tools. So no measurement occurs in a vacuum.
I personally am glad there are 2 or 3 sides to this debate, I wish there were 5, the more options the better. The more folks trying the more likely we stumble on a break thru.
I trust no test to be flawless, period. not even my own. It is all data, some created , some Skewed , but it is unlikely any measurement can be done in A Vacuum. I also see the Word "Package" I bet 1/2 the folks on this forum do not use packages, and can tell you why they are inconsistent to say the best of them. If you put packages on 4.9 comb then really, that is valid. Every Small Cell person I have talked to regress in stages, first regress, second etc. If they put SC packages on the SC them maybe that works but is that Side By Side then.... Again the starting point matters.
Fun to think about, Have a great Day JW
GG


----------



## msl

> Duck cloth vrs winter cover, is that the same?


No, but as I under stand it the winter covers had plastics aka "chemicals" in it, so natural cotton duck was used. 
The one "rule" breaker they did was plastic small cell foundation as they could not find small cell wax foundation, then then covered the foundtion with chemical free wax from Dee Lusby.(They were so anti plastic for this group they cut the foundation out of plastic frames and refit it in wood ones) It was felt by the TF focus group that as the hives were being tested for honey production that going foundationless would have a negative impact and won't not be a "fair" test. Robin's earlier controlled trails had showed foundation being drawn significantly faster.


----------



## JWChesnut

Gray Goose said:


> JW
> Ok read the study, so then they are not "side by side" some are in a different states, really that is considered Equal. Duck cloth vrs winter cover, is that the same?











Please. Each apiary had sets of 12 hives, sets of 4 each in each of the 3 treatments. Please don't confound your ignorance in your rush to slag on science.

All colonies were requeened with queens raised from the same graft mother in mid-August. The original packages were historic small cell for "small cell foundation/ no treatment" and the packages for the conventional and IPM bees were from a conventional source.


Cite: https://lopezuribelab.com/2018/09/11/comb-project-september-2018/


----------



## Oldtimer

Coincidentally, i watched a very interesting 1 hour TV doco on cults last night.

One of the main interviewees was a highly intelligent woman who had been a member of the cult for just over 10 years, then had left it 6 months ago. She was now amazed at herself, looking from the outside, at how bizzare it all seemed now, and how she had actually been drawn into the ever deeper levels of it. 

A psychologist said that once a person is drawn into a belief system and it becomes ingrained, once they are confronted with reality that contradicts the belief system, it forces them to make a choice. The psychologist said that more than half of people will withdraw deeper into the belief system, because it is an easier choice.


----------



## GregB

Oldtimer said:


> .......The psychologist said that more than half of people *will withdraw deeper into the belief system,* because it is an easier choice.


Which works in any application - a generic idea.
I may have read a recent article, linked to that exact video.

In all, a single SC parameter here substituted as if a complete TF-system is ....eh, a scam? 
Cult? 
Can we move away from the foundation customized for the AHB-specific usage already?
I personally would not dwell on SC any longer.


----------



## Oldtimer

A slight aside but in case anyone is wondering, the cult featured on the program was Nxivm, started out as a plausable sounding self improvement thing where you paid big bucks to attend seminars, then gradually became more bizzare.


----------



## msl

> In all, a single SC parameter here substituted as if a complete TF-system is ....eh, a scam?


no, a trial...but sure call it a TF system if you like but rember the discalimer "Please note that these systems should not be considered best management practices. Instead, they are common management practices among beekeepers ranging from hobbyists to commercial practices"

But it sure wasn't all the boogy men some talk about.... it wasn't "contaminated wax from treatments" killing the hives, it wasn't large cells killing the hives and it wasn't treatments killing the good microbes and then killing the hives 
Admittedly I would have loved to have seen a 4th group of chemical free on standard foundation... but that study has been done......over and over and over and over!

Berry, J. A., Owens, W. B., & Delaplane, K. S. (2010). Small-cell comb foundation does not impede Varroa mite population growth in honey bee colonies *. Apidologie, 41(1), 40–44.

Coffey, M. F., Breen, J., Brown, M. J. F., & McMullan, J. B. (2010). Brood-cell size has no influence on the population dynamics of Varroa destructor mites in the native western honey bee , Apis mellifera mellifera *. Apidologie, 41(5), 522–530.

Ellis, A. M., Hayes, G. W., & Ellis, J. D. (2009). The efficacy of small cell foundation as a varroa mite (Varroa destructor) control. Experimental and Applied Acarology, (47), 311–316. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10493-008-9221-3
.

Martin, S. J., & Kryger, P. (2002). Reproduction of Varroa destructor in South African honey bees : does cell space influence Varroa male survivorship ? Apidologie, 33, 51–61. https://doi.org/10.1051/apido

McMullan, J. B., & Brown, M. J. F. (2006). The influence of small-cell brood combs on the morphometry of honeybees ( Apis mellifera )*. Apidologie, 37, 665–672.

Medina, L. M., & Martin, S. J. (1999). A comparative study of Varroa jacobsoni reproduction in worker cells of honey bees ( Apis mellifera ) in England and Africanized bees in Yucatan , Mexico, (September 1994), 659–667.

Seeley, T., Griffin, S., Seeley, T., & Griffin, S. (2011). Small-cell comb does not control Varroa mites in colonies of honeybees of European origin Small-cell comb does not control V arroa mites in colonies of honeybees of European origin. Apidologie, (42), 526–532. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13592-011-0054-4

Taylor, M. A., Goodwin, R. M., McBrydie, H. M., & Cox, H. M. (2008). The effect of honey bee worker brood cell size on Varroa destructor infestation and reproduction. Journal of Apicultural Research.

the small cell "debate" reminds me of all the OA in a fogger talk....(yes both sides can get sucked in to cult like thinking, FGMO still haunts us) but the long an short is IF it was so simple as going with SC foundation it would be main stream and every one would be using it


----------



## GregB

msl said:


> ........ IF it was so simple as going with SC foundation it would be main stream and every one would be using it


Agreed.

SC is THE fix - wrong.
SC is NOT the fix - wrong too.
SC is really only partially relevant IF AT ALL relevant; a tangent (among many other tangents). 

Naturally LC Bashkortostan bees probably just as resistant by now to the mites.... (Added: still alive and well without much management - 50 years later after the mites flooded the area; ......what? ...how is that possible?..).
OK, where is the research on that? 
Don't these researchers read BS?

Naturally LC to MC Far Eastern Russians...
Now what is wrong with them NOT fitting the SC teachings?
Don't these researchers read BS?

Starting anew from literally observing and documenting how the feral bees actually work in natural setting (in many alternative environments - in parallel) is probably a good start.
For one, if someone went to the FP and SP homes, tracked down several feral trees down there, and documented them for several years - that would be a good start.
Don't these researchers read BS?


----------



## Gray Goose

JWChesnut said:


> View attachment 50975
> 
> 
> Please. Each apiary had sets of 12 hives, sets of 4 each in each of the 3 treatments. Please don't confound your ignorance in your rush to slag on science.
> 
> All colonies were requeened with queens raised from the same graft mother in mid-August. The original packages were historic small cell for "small cell foundation/ no treatment" and the packages for the conventional and IPM bees were from a conventional source.
> 
> 
> Cite: https://lopezuribelab.com/2018/09/11/comb-project-september-2018/


Hey JW, I guess the facts are the facts, I would not stoop to calling someone Ignorant due to them not cow towing to your belief system.

So here is another detail "All colonies were requeened with queens raised from the same graft mother in mid-August."

So where is a SC TF apairy that has "ALL" F1 daughters of any queen. Hmmm there is none, TF and Small Cell in general use several lines.

So from all the data the study had and you have kindly provided. Here is the "thesis they proved......
F1 daughters (288) of Said Queen XYZ, when placed into hive from packages show 62 -65 % 1st winter survival WHEn the package was drizzeled with OA, VRS 31% survival for the Queen F1s of Mother XYZ placed into packages Not drizzled with OA at the package point. As the time length and Genetics we kept constant one Vairiable really changed was if the package was drizzeled/treated or not. Another way of stating the same Thesis 65% of Packages not drizzeled with OA did not make the first winter with Genitics held constant VRS 35% of packages that had OA Drizzel aapplied. So what we see is 60 some percent of packages left untreated contain enough Mites to fail surviving the first winter. Says a lot to me about packages, not so much about SC. Was the Mother of all Queens from A VRS line or grooming line? If not expecting her daughters to "be" resistant is not science it is reality.
Again Interesting experiment. I believe there is learning from it, whole sale proof , not so much. IMO your moniker for "science" is a little more liberal than mine. Did not we do Science and say coffee is good for you, no its bad for you, no its good for you. I recall the Butter -Margarine thing went similar. And some of us "could" weigh in on Man Made Global Warming,  I think for commercial keeping you typically treat to stay profitable/predictable. For some folks not treating is the only option for them. I am glad we still have the freedom to choose, the camp I am in today may not suite me in the future. hence my interest in everyones camp. O BTW I do not think any of them are Ignorant either. 
GG
properly done Science can show almost what you wish it to.


----------



## GregB

Gray Goose said:


> ..... Did not we do Science and say coffee is good for you, no its bad for you, no its good for you. I recall the Butter -Margarine thing went similar.......


Eggs are bad for you.
Eggs are actually terrible for you.
Eggs may not be bad for you.
Eggs are good for you...
What is in the news today?

PS: my folks never knew of the egg problem or cholesterol problem; 
lard and eggs were our staple and no one ever cared

no one in the village had weight problem or heart problem or diabetes problem - because no corporation was invested into any of that - so to flood the news with anti-egg/anti-cholesterol propaganda;
there were no sugar vs. fat wars to fight, since it ALL was government monopoly - maybe a good thing;

folks did have alcoholism problem, however; 
alcohol was government monopoly - maybe a bad thing.


----------



## crofter

"properly done Science can show almost what you wish it to." 

That would be my description of a process that definitely was *not* "scientific"!

It is all to easy to find studies that masquerade as scientific and hold them up to suggest that "scientific" process is not reliable. Plenty of examples where this becomes the persons identity.

One of the long dead Greek philosophers said something to the effect of, "We argue, not that I may triumph over you, or you over me, but that by discussion we may arrive at a more perfect truth"


----------



## Litsinger

crofter said:


> One of the long dead Greek philosophers said something to the effect of, "We argue, not that I may triumph over you, or you over me, but that by discussion we may arrive at a more perfect truth"


Well said (or quoted), Frank.


----------



## Gray Goose

crofter said:


> "properly done Science can show almost what you wish it to."
> 
> That would be my description of a process that definitely was *not* "scientific"!
> 
> It is all to easy to find studies that masquerade as scientific and hold them up to suggest that "scientific" process is not reliable. Plenty of examples where this becomes the persons identity.
> 
> One of the long dead Greek philosophers said something to the effect of, "We argue, not that I may triumph over you, or you over me, but that by discussion we may arrive at a more perfect truth"


I agree Crofter. We all here IMO want to get at the "best truth" It seems "Science" today, Is used to bam folks over the head to make them form up in a certain way. Pure Science is getting rare today, the "funding" of the study often needs to happen so the Scientist can get paid or get the needed stuff for the study. When needing funding comes into the fray there are the needs of the funding arm, so we often, have studies trying to prove or dispel things to offer benefit to one group or another. The classic example for today is Man Made Global warming. Many on both sides, each lobbing for their power or freedom. Toss on top of that the polling, and make news, and it become a blur to make sense of. Classic poll issue for the times is "every poll had Hillary winning the 2016 race" So unfortunately my starting stance is if you hear it on TV is is likely "make news", if a study is done, Show me who funded it and the Assumptions and variables. I like pure science, just hard to find much of it any more.
GG


----------



## crofter

I agree with the BS meter in regard to television. We threw out the television set about 25 years ago. Much of the content is professionally "spun". Full of emotional grabs and a whole list of tactics tuned to peoples conditioned responses.

It is up to the individual to apply critical thinking. Much of the cultural innuendo we have been exposed to deliberately conditions us to believe the incredible. That is not science!

Science is alive and well; one has to be critical, but to automatically slag *everything* that has any appearance of science, exposes us to the foibles of folklore and wishful thinking.

Critical thinking takes too much energy for many folks and those with agendas take advantage of their mental laziness and gullibility!

*Caveate emptor*


----------



## msl

COMB presentation at Apimondia 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZW3-xL7ZG_Y


----------



## Michael Bush

It's basically impossible to please everyone and it's basically impossible to make everything equal. The conventional and organic groups got the benefit of bees that were selected by using no treatments. That's a nice head start.


----------



## LAlldredge

I’m a pragmatist. This is not an us versus them thing. Will genetics hold the key? Yes. Would I rather have bees resistant to varroa? Of course. The answer for me at this juncture is a blend of prevention and genetics followed by a course of escalating alternatives. I don’t need or care about a honey crop. Keeping small colonies would actually be a preference. I’m also in a ideal place to allow some swarming because I’m at the edge of a forest.

Do I treat? Yes. If I need to. I don’t like colonies dying when I can do something about it.

Ian Steggler A Canadian Beekeepers Blog is having to take immediate action in one of his out yards that is within 2 miles of other yards. He is washing 5% as opposed to less than 1% in his interior yards. He can’t wait for his normal OAV in mid-October. So he is dropping Amitraz strips on those outer yards now. I’m sure he’d rather not. But to protect these colonies he is responding in a way that is proportionate to the threat.


----------



## msl

Michael Bush said:


> The conventional and organic groups got the benefit of bees that were selected by using no treatments. That's a nice head start.


 a head start over what?


----------



## JWChesnut

The COMB presentation at Apimondia updated the status of the remaining Treatment Free hives in 2019. After suffering the 80% loss overwinter, the participants were unable to rebuild the TF cohort fully, and are running at 50% of the original design ( the conventional and organic treatments are fully stocked).

The source of the August 2018 queens was documented in the presentation -- all daughters of a local (Jim Thorpe, PA) survivor colony with 7 years of TF history.

Mite counts were updated, and the 2019 counts in the TF "Death Cult" hives are running significantly above the 2018 counts. This predicts an autumn mite crash in the remaining TF hives greater in severity than the 2018 80% wipeout.


Dr. Underwood did not present the 2018 and 2019 data simultaneously, but I mashed up the two charts to create the attached graph.


----------



## Gray Goose

JWChesnut said:


> The COMB presentation at Apimondia updated the status of the remaining Treatment Free hives in 2019. After suffering the 80% loss overwinter, the participants were unable to rebuild the TF cohort fully, and are running at 50% of the original design ( the conventional and organic treatments are fully stocked).
> 
> The source of the August 2018 queens was documented in the presentation -- all daughters of a local (Jim Thorpe, PA) survivor colony with 7 years of TF history.
> 
> Mite counts were updated, and the 2019 counts in the TF "Death Cult" hives are running significantly above the 2018 counts. This predicts an autumn mite crash in the remaining TF hives greater in severity than the 2018 80% wipeout.
> 
> 
> Dr. Underwood did not present the 2018 and 2019 data simultaneously, but I mashed up the two charts to create the attached graph.
> 
> View attachment 51545


Ok trying to understand this.
Is this suggesting that the Daughters did not mate with TF Drones? Assuming the 7year "survivor" was in fact true. Or what is the "consensus" of this data?
GG


----------



## Michael Bush

>a head start over what?

Typical commercial queens.


----------



## JWChesnut

Gray Goose said:


> Ok trying to understand this.
> Is this suggesting that the Daughters did not mate with TF Drones? Assuming the 7year "survivor" was in fact true. Or what is the "consensus" of this data?
> GG


Are you desperate to find a reason to dismiss the utter failure of the TF cohort or what ??? 

The researcher, Dr. Underwood, desperately wishes the TF cohort will succeed. It is not from lack or her trying to meet every step the TF partisans are requiring.

Mated TF queens were provided by Devon Paderewski of Greenway Apiary for all hives in all treatments. I believe the video (linked above) says they were living in a soffit of a house for 4 years and moved out to hives for three.

You could have watched the linked video and know this already.


----------



## JWChesnut

Michael Bush said:


> >a head start over what?
> 
> Typical commercial queens.


Research in Canada indicates this blithely dismissed "typical commercial queens" have greater genetic resilience than "feral" bees, which by in large (in the Canadian data) are compromised and depauperate.


In the bozo TF religion world, up is down and sick is health.


----------



## Gray Goose

JWChesnut said:


> Are you desperate to find a reason to dismiss the utter failure of the TF cohort or what ???
> 
> The researcher, Dr. Underwood, desperately wishes the TF cohort will succeed. It is not from lack or her trying to meet every step the TF partisans are requiring.
> 
> Mated TF queens were provided by Devon Paderewski of Greenway Apiary for all hives in all treatments. I believe the video (linked above) says they were living in a soffit of a house for 4 years and moved out to hives for three.
> 
> You could have watched the linked video and know this already.
> 
> View attachment 51547


JWC So where does the attack come from, Are you desperate to avoid common sense questions? So it was stated TF for 7 years, Tf Daughters, 80% fail in the second year suspect 80% more this year. To the point of not having enough hives to keep the test going. this statement "The source of the August 2018 queens was documented in the presentation -- all daughters of a local (Jim Thorpe, PA) survivor colony with 7 years of TF history.

Mite counts were updated, and the 2019 counts in the TF "Death Cult" hives are running significantly above the 2018 counts. This predicts an autumn mite crash in the remaining TF hives greater in severity than the 2018 80% wipeout.

So intuitively the Daughters do not have the same "TF" stuff as did the moma. Or some other explanation . I am SURE some folks in the TF area of BeeSource will order TF queens to reQueen their "package" I did,, so it cannot be to far from an option, for others as well. One area I wondered was the Drones mating the TF Daughters, obvious also cannot be the same drones as the Momas baby daddys are dead. So In an attempt to understand I asked the question. Sorry I I got under you skin, It seems to have some thin spots. I tried the link it did not work for me, Another reason I asked.
I'll try not to be too inquisitive, if it offends folks
GG


----------



## Riverderwent

squarepeg said:


> randy oliver makes the case very well that our practices are contributing as much or more to the problem than anything in nature.
> 
> selection for traits on the broad scale is geared toward fecundity and production, which favors the varroa/virus complex. this along with very high hive densities makes it almost impossible to let adaption for resistance play out in the managed bee population.


I really don’t think that my practices are contributing to the problem. The limiting factor in our operation is the amount of honey that my buddy, our two wives, and I can comfortably extract and bottle on two days a year (one around Memorial Day and the other around Labor Day) using our backs and very good Maxant equipment. That amounts to twelve or so relatively small production hives that produce around sixty-five pounds of honey each per year. If we wanted more honey, we’d add more hives. Our hives are divided among four conveniently located and relatively thinly populated beeyards. We don’t requeen. We trap a few likely feral or untreated managed swarms, sell some nucs, and keep a few building hives to cover any losses. From about the Ides of March until All Hallows’ Eve, we keep queen excluders over the third eight frame medium box and do not harvest honey from those bottom three boxes. 

We tend to use foundationless frames below the excluder and don’t argue with our feral mutts about what size cells they should build in those three boxes. In the honey supers above those bottom three boxes, we mostly keep standard large cell plastic foundation because it extracts better than foundationless or small cell.

We don’t treat or feed, and we do very little work other than adding empty supers during flows and pulling honey. 

To convince me that treatment free doesn’t work in our location, you will first need to convince the bees that live in my hives.


----------



## Michael Bush

>Research in Canada indicates this blithely dismissed "typical commercial queens" have greater genetic resilience than "feral" bees, which by in large (in the Canadian data) are compromised and depauperate.

Funny, since most of the beekeeping world is having trouble with the quality of queens. Articles in the bee magazines adress the issue from time to time because it's an issue. One I haven't had so much since going to feral survivors. I'm not sure what the measure of "greater genetic resilence" is, but Dr. Steve Sheppard's research shows a decided lack of genetic diversity in commercial queens.

https://www.researchgate.net/profil...honey_bees/links/575d643308aed884621639a9.pdf

http://entomology.ucdavis.edu/News/...neticist_Susan_Cobey_in_Newly_Published_Book/
http://www.uoguelph.ca/canpolin/Publications/Discovery Magazine Oct09.pdf
https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4450/8/2/48


----------



## Riverderwent

Michael Bush said:


> >Research in Canada indicates this blithely dismissed "typical commercial queens" have greater genetic resilience than "feral" bees, which by in large (in the Canadian data) are compromised and depauperate.
> 
> Funny, since most of the beekeeping world is having trouble with the quality of queens. Articles in the bee magazines adress the issue from time to time because it's an issue. One I haven't had so much since going to feral survivors. I'm not sure what the measure of "greater genetic resilence" is, but Dr. Steve Sheppard's research shows a decided lack of genetic diversity in commercial queens.
> 
> https://www.researchgate.net/profil...honey_bees/links/575d643308aed884621639a9.pdf
> 
> http://entomology.ucdavis.edu/News/...neticist_Susan_Cobey_in_Newly_Published_Book/
> http://www.uoguelph.ca/canpolin/Publications/Discovery Magazine Oct09.pdf
> https://www.mdpi.com/2075-4450/8/2/48


That there are unmanaged and untreated honeybees in Canada that are genetically distinct from commercial bees is fascinating to me. Local adaptation tends to cause the gene pool to congregate toward alleles that contribute to survival with a few wonderful residual crickets that don’t chirp.


----------



## JWChesnut

Nothing illustrates the "Have your cake and eat it too" contradictory nature of so-called Treatment Free theory, than the mutually exclusive and competing claims that 1) Feral bees are better because they are undergoing rapid positive and negative selection of alleles, or 2) Feral bees are better because they represent enormous genetic variance in a single population. You can have one, but you cannot have both. 

The contradictory simultaneous claims indicate the "theory" is not based on science, but is based on wishful thinking.


----------



## Michael Bush

Both feral and commercial bees are being selected. It's a question of what they are selected for. And all those pockets of surviving ferals represent gene pools scattered all over that are additional to the commercial lines of genes. That is more diversity than just commercial genetics.


----------



## Oldtimer

Michael Bush said:


> Funny, since most of the beekeeping world is having trouble with the quality of queens.


Best i can tell this issue is confined to two countries, being the USA, and Canada.

When we see people on Beesource complaining about the quality of their queens, typically they are saying their package came with a drone layer, the queen failed after 3 weeks, that type of thing.

The issue is the customer expecting to buy queens for 15 or 20 bucks. To me, a good queen can only be guaranteed if she is hatched into a reasonably strong 4 frame nuc and allowed to lay for at least 3 weeks so laying pattern can be assessed. Can that be done for 20 bucks? No. Not even close.

Instead, they are hatched into mini nucs with 250 grams of bees, and caged as soon as they are laying. Many of them will be good queens, but the poor ones slip through undetected. That is the issue. Not the breeder selection process.

The selection process is actually done rather well, with breeders being selected, or artificially constructed via II, for the qualities commercial beekeepers want. This can be demonstrated by the fact that despite all the supposed quality issues, commercial beekeepers routinely install packages with commercially produced queens, and go on to produce enormous honey crops the same season.

TF beekeepers need to buy TF queens, but supply is sketchy at best. I believe they can be bought from Weavers with reasonable reliability, but those bees have attributes that some beekeepers just don't want to deal with.


----------



## Riverderwent

Oldtimer said:


> TF beekeepers need to buy TF queens, but supply is sketchy at best. I believe they can be bought from Weavers with reasonable reliability, but those bees have attributes that some beekeepers just don't want to deal with.


www.beesource.com/forums/showthread.php?335203-Frost-Apiary


----------



## Juhani Lunden

msl said:


> COMB presentation at Apimondia
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZW3-xL7ZG_Y


Couple remarks:
- 7 years TF bees used in the experiment is obviously not good enough, it seems 10 years is needed for adaptation
- the unsuitability of the TF bee material is seen in the rapid increase of mites during summer, for instance in Terje Reinertsen TF material the levels of mites go up to sometimes even near 10% and then come naturally down in the end of summer (personal information from Terje, there are actually two "shakedowns" in the end of June and August) 
- 3-4 % infestation is not very much and should not cause problems if the bee material is truly adapted

I had difficulties hearing what Dr Underwood said. Was there an explanation why the TF group had initial higher infestation?


----------



## GregB

Oldtimer said:


> ....
> TF beekeepers need to buy TF queens, but supply is sketchy at best. I believe they can be bought from Weavers with reasonable reliability, but those bees have attributes that some beekeepers just don't want to deal with.


Beekeepers have been spoiled rotten by the pop-culture beekeeping images.
People are even too lazy to throw on a jacket anymore (forget the smoke - a common rehash on the BS).
People want to work the bees in the flops and with open belly.
Then the complaints.

Really, the Weavers are not that bad (the real issue are the people - using the Weavers queens for production-size hives and such - then the complaints).

You get your Weavers queen and you DON'T create a mega-hive with her (with ALL the potential issues).
The Weavers queen is to be run in a manageable resource nuc and used for immediate new-queen generation (which in turn also need be managed accordingly for your apiary re-stocking, not honey production).


----------



## gnor

mdohertyjr said:


> In my first year, we did not treat. In our second year, we were able to split to 11 hives. Those 11 hives were not treated. Before Thanksgiving all 11 hives crashed and died.
> 
> Crawling bee's, mite droppings, deformed wings, prove that mites killed all 11 hives.
> 
> We now treat.


The key for me right now is an Integrated Pest Management program where I have graduated treatment options. I haven't had to use it yet, but I save my Sunday punch for when I really need it. For me the key is to test, test, test, and treat when you need it. Even if the bees are fine, mites can boil up out of nowhere and decimate a colony. (Disclaimer: I lost all 4 hives a couple of years ago because I got ****y)
For me, there are traits I want first, before I select for Varroa resistance. I need bees that can over Winter 5-6 months without flowers. I need gentle bees. I like 90-100 lb of honey/hive. I need bees that will build up fast in Spring to take advantage of our best flow. In return, I can help them manage Varroa until I get there.


----------



## Gray Goose

gnor said:


> The key for me right now is an Integrated Pest Management program where I have graduated treatment options. I haven't had to use it yet, but I save my Sunday punch for when I really need it. For me the key is to test, test, test, and treat when you need it. Even if the bees are fine, mites can boil up out of nowhere and decimate a colony. (Disclaimer: I lost all 4 hives a couple of years ago because I got ****y)
> For me, there are traits I want first, before I select for Varroa resistance. I need bees that can over Winter 5-6 months without flowers. I need gentle bees. I like 90-100 lb of honey/hive. I need bees that will build up fast in Spring to take advantage of our best flow. In return, I can help them manage Varroa until I get there.


Not to get in the weeds here , but what Hive type do you have? any wrappings or shelter for the Hives over winter?
GG


----------



## msl

Juhani Lunden said:


> Was there an explanation why the TF group had initial higher infestation?


The packages for the TF group were small cell bees from a different source


----------



## Gray Goose

msl said:


> The packages for the TF group were small cell bees from a different source


Hmm If the source of the bees can swing the study/test that far, then would the test even be repeatable, with different bee sources?
MSL do you know if the suspicion was "Mites" in the packages or the "local mites were more virulent" or the bees less tolerant to the mites?
Also there is the "learned" behavior, Biting etc. the package contained learned traits "could" have more influence that we originally thought.
GG


----------



## GregB

....wrong post.....


----------



## msl

> Hmm If the source of the bees can swing the study/test that far, then would the test even be repeatable, with different bee sources?


sure thats why they re queened every hive in every group with sister queens from 7 year survivor stock..

Rember they are testing management systems. 
They did what would be considered best management in the C and O groups.. Hit the brood-less packages with OA 3 days after install. 

But you don't test chemical free management by starting off with a chemical treatment as thats not what is done by its practitioners... And if they had taken large cell bees and put them on small cell foundation that would not likly be a good test either


----------



## Oldtimer

GregV said:


> Beekeepers have been spoiled rotten by the pop-culture beekeeping images.
> People are even too lazy to throw on a jacket anymore (forget the smoke - a common rehash on the BS).
> People want to work the bees in the flops and with open belly.


Well not the smoke i use plenty of that, but otherwise your description sounds like me. . Why would i not want gentle bees?


----------



## Gray Goose

msl said:


> sure thats why they re queened every hive in every group with sister queens from 7 year survivor stock..
> 
> Rember they are testing management systems.
> They did what would be considered best management in the C and O groups.. Hit the brood-less packages with OA 3 days after install.
> 
> But you don't test chemical free management by starting off with a chemical treatment as thats not what is done by its practitioners... And if they had taken large cell bees and put them on small cell foundation that would not likly be a good test either


Right MSL, But what If one package source has Learned behavior like biting and zero mites to start with, the other package source has not only has 100 Mites in the package with the bees the bees have no learned behavior. Sister queens do not matter , management really can only work if you blast the package for mites, up front, so the test is way over shadowed by the deviation in the starting points. And not really repeatable, So some "known, confirmed" starting point, is necessary. 
GG


----------



## Oldtimer

Based on the assumption that TF bees really do learn to bite mites by watching other bees.

Probably the bees should have been homogenised prior to the experiment, which would also have homogenised the mites plus any assumed learned behavior, the experiment could then have started out with a clean and equal slate.


----------



## msl

> management really can only work if you blast the package for mites, up front, so the test is way over shadowed by the deviation in the starting points. And not really repeatable, So some "known, confirmed" starting point, is necessary


so the only way to test treatment free is to treat? 



> Probably the bees should have been homogenised prior to the experiment, which would also have homogenised the mites plus any assumed learned behavior, the experiment could then have started out with a clean and equal slate.


mixing large and small cell bees defeats the purpus 

rember we are talking about a advrage 0.5% mite load, on a package no less.... Its a very light infection rate that people are complaining about, and one that could have been skewed by a few of packages coming out of a heavy infected hive, we don't know as we don't have the full data. but a year later the advrage was 1% on the survivors 
Don't forget the resulstion on a wash is 0.33% you either find one mite or you don't at that level and there is some magin of error do to chance


----------



## GregB

> So some "known, confirmed" starting point, is necessary


GG, +100.
Maybe you and I sound TOO engineer-minded, but that is exactly I would do also.
In my profession you live and die with the baselines.
No baseline - there is nothing to talk about.



msl said:


> so the only way to test treatment free is to treat?


Yes.
One time as the proper test configuration.
Treating the TF bees will not change anything (they will still bite the mites, etc), but it will setup the test baseline correctly.

The baseline should be ~0 mites in ALL test targets by treating them ALL.
Then inoculate ALL test targets with X mites consistently.
That would be the goal baseline of the proper test.
Else this test is... unsure what it is. 
Just a zillion of uncontrollable variables jumping up and down.

PS: if anyone needs mites for experiments, I may just sell some next summer; 
pretty easy to run a mite-farm in your kitchen and sell them by a dozen, haha!
Seriously, it is easy. I even had a pet mite by the name Vic for about a week.


----------



## msl

well I don't know of a single TF practitioner that treats their swarms and packages. Real world is bees show up with mites and this is a real world test. 
Treated packages are going to have less mites then untreated ones.. It realy didn't matter what the mite numbers were +- even 2.00-3.00% infection as 3 days after the 1st wash the hives were hit with OA while still brood less and would be knocked below the washes resolution. 

long and short is if being +- a 00.5% on the mite load makes or breaks TF, its all ready broken.


----------



## GregB

msl said:


> well I don't know of a single TF practitioner that treats their swarms and packages......


The experiment setter should treat them ALL (TF and non-TF).
The source status does not matter.
Then infect back.
Simple and consistent.


----------



## Gray Goose

msl said:


> well I don't know of a single TF practitioner that treats their swarms and packages. Real world is bees show up with mites and this is a real world test.
> Treated packages are going to have less mites then untreated ones.. It realy didn't matter what the mite numbers were +- even 2.00-3.00% infection as 3 days after the 1st wash the hives were hit with OA while still brood less and would be knocked below the washes resolution.
> 
> long and short is if being +- a 00.5% on the mite load makes or breaks TF, its all ready broken.


Well really most of them do. I would think when the mite infested bees are pulled from the Almonds, they are treated, hauled some where and sold, shook into a box. "Most" of the folks selling bees want to not have them die before they can get 35 Bucks a pound for them. Real world is 1 world, doing a test you plan to write a paper on is not real world, it is a scientific experiment. Greg and My points are the "start" is an unmitigated disaster. Pooling all the bees per old timer suggestion would have helped. Total mite kill ,then introduce 12 per hive is another good idea. I know some "TF" types and they in their real world do not buy packages. they do splits make nucs etc. its their "own" stock , split up. so learned behavior is still there. BTW I am all to aware bees show up with Mites, I Lost 6 for 6, 2 winters ago from well know package bee place in CA. the only bees in this area were my new bees, the only place they could have come from was the packages. 
Bottom line IF you plan a test and write it up, taking the steps to level the playing field is incumbent on the tester. Interesting test, but do the results "really" tell the whole story. the % likely did not matter, how many virus they were vectoring maybe did. if one mite source have 3 virus per mite and the other has 13 virus per mite then that is not a level playing field. Ok start with packages, requeen as they did treat the first year. THEN randomly pick 1 for TF one for the Chem treatments, from 1st year survivors, eny meany miny moe. then offer a write up a year for 10 or 15 years. I get where you are coming from. But we see the "did you test for that" and what are the counts" this is science. so then play it that way. not sure it matters much in a few years the bees and the mites will be different, so we are debating a snapshot in time any way. And the test is not likely to sway any one any way. I do both by the way so I do treat packages and then maybe not treat the next year. Have to kill the junk off that shipped with the bees first IMO. Or they just die.
GG


----------



## msl

it sounds like people are saying the chemical free hives died of mites because they didn't have chemicals used on them to kill mites :ws: 

your points are fine for comparing resistant stock head to head... just not so much for systems of management. 

You don't trial chemical free management using chemicals that will not be used in the management. Yes the other 2 systems get an advantage by being treated, that's why most people treat their bees.

if they had treated the CF hives people would instead be saying they contaminated the hives and kill off the microbes and thats why they died.. Rember they went so far as to buy wax from Dee lusby to insure the chemical free hives didn't have contaminated wax painted on the SC foundation 

either way the 2019 mite counts are about 2x the 2018 ones so the bees aren't holding back the mites... They have cerntily slowed them, but they have not brought them back to the 2018 low, and if you cant bring the mites back to that starting number, you start with more mites (and hence end with more) year after year till you fail


----------



## Oldtimer

msl said:


> mixing large and small cell bees defeats the purpus


Did think of that, but it's the comb that's important. When I was running small cell I could dump a package of LC bees into a box of SC comb, long as it was black comb that was too hard for them to alter they would just start using it.


----------



## gnor

Read a series of articles in _American Bee Journal_ by a successful TF beek, and he didn't start off by not treating. Here are some takeaways:
a) he didn't start off by denying treatment.
b) he had enough colonies that he could make a meaningful selection
c) he developed a stringent evaluation program for both queens and colonies that looked at other traits besides mite resistance.
d) he selected his breeding stock based these evaluations.
e) he treated the colonies that didn't measure up, and limited drone production to the best colonies
f) the project took several years to develop TF stock, because the traits need to spread throughout the neighborhood.
g) not treating doesn't mean not testing for mites.


----------



## Gray Goose

msl said:


> it sounds like people are saying the chemical free hives died of mites because they didn't have chemicals used on them to kill mites :ws:
> 
> your points are fine for comparing resistant stock head to head... just not so much for systems of management.
> 
> You don't trial chemical free management using chemicals that will not be used in the management. Yes the other 2 systems get an advantage by being treated, that's why most people treat their bees.
> 
> if they had treated the CF hives people would instead be saying they contaminated the hives and kill off the microbes and thats why they died.. Rember they went so far as to buy wax from Dee lusby to insure the chemical free hives didn't have contaminated wax painted on the SC foundation
> 
> either way the 2019 mite counts are about 2x the 2018 ones so the bees aren't holding back the mites... They have cerntily slowed them, but they have not brought them back to the 2018 low, and if you cant bring the mites back to that starting number, you start with more mites (and hence end with more) year after year till you fail


Hi MSL, I guess we have to agree to disagree. IMO the starting point of the packages was more relevant to the outcome than the "System of management" Again good test , did have some data. but to different folks it means different things. Yes if you have more mites year after year you fail.
Have a great day.
GG


----------



## Robert Holcombe

Well put! I have one hive, a mutt queen, that show serious signs of some form of resistance - very low mite counts; other 8 hives are typical. I may consider moving the hive in the Spring to an area with very few neighbors.


----------



## Robert Holcombe

Well put! I have one hive, a mutt queen, that show serious signs of some form of resistance - very low mite counts; other 8 hives are typical. I may consider moving the hive in the Spring to an area with very few neighbors.


----------



## Gypsi

I'm treating. I see mite drop on the sticky, California queen in 1, mutt in another, 2 nucs with beeweaver queens. I may not treat the nucs, no mites on the sticky, but my big hives are getting oav tomorrow


----------



## JWChesnut

The U of P bee lab posted a social media image of mites washed out of a "Chemical Free" hive in the COMB Project this autumn.

This should make it patently obvious that the at least one of the "Chem Free" replicates is experiencing a mite explosion.

As mite drift from affected to unaffected hives is now documented by the Peck and Seeley paper, I wonder how have these sources of sick hives will affect the other hives in the side-by-side design.

Cite: https://twitter.com/mmlopezu/status/1182327729707986944


----------



## Litsinger

JWChesnut said:


> The U of P bee lab posted a social media image of mites washed out of a "Chemical Free" hive in the COMB Project this autumn.
> 
> This should make it patently obvious that the at least one of the "Chem Free" replicates is experiencing a mite explosion.


Good information. Thank you for posting, JW.


----------



## Robert Holcombe

"As mite drift from affected to unaffected hives is now documented by the Peck and Seeley paper, " : I live in an suburban-ocean-farming area. Apparently the area contains no-treat or unknowing novice beekeepers like me once upon a time. Now I have stopped building Varroa Bombs (or lures). I have been able to build up a small apiary and have a stabilizing IPM program. The primary varroa issue I have is the Fall "Invasion" as I like to call it. I have seen it for three years in a row via post-treatment dead drop counts on a sticky board. 

This year 7 strong colonies plus one now grown up nuc and a resurgent intensive care colony produced greater than 13,337 Varroa mites, so far. I guesstimate 2500 were native borne. I estimate this via a forced brood-less and OAV test of one large hive in late September. 291 dead drop count for a 40 - 50,000 honey bee hive is a 0.6 to 0.7% total infection which seems like a low number. The result supports my winter treatment with OAV and drone brood monitoring and some removal approach all the way to mid-September. Early to mid-October I killed 9,000+ over a 15 day period - the invasion. The battle still goes on even after it has snowed and below freezing for a few days.

Obviously my apiary has some strong robbers, one hive appears to not rob or fends off drifting or is a strong VSH queen (NWC) or all of these characteristics. A sample of one is not a strong data base but 3 years of repetitious robbing commencing with the Fall dearth suggest failing hives around me - year after year. There appear to be no feral hives around me, possibly failing unattended recent feral swarms but more likely poorly treated or no-treat hives around me. I know of one well intentioned no-treat beekeeper who buys packages year after year.

I support the no-treat concept while I treat but I am really conflicted. There has to be a better way of introducing and managing the no-treat concept on a large scale. Keeping the pressure on genetic evolution via no-treaters, treaters and random chaos should work. I hope to live long enough to see it happen. ( yes I will breed "her" if I can. "One small step"  ).


----------



## Juhani Lunden

JWChesnut said:


> The U of P bee lab posted a social media image of mites washed out of a "Chemical Free" hive in the COMB Project this autumn.
> 
> Cite: https://twitter.com/mmlopezu/status/1182327729707986944


Gave her some info, via Twitter, and contact information of BartJan Fernhaut, who has bred 100% VSH bees in Hawaii. Maybe they could use proper TF stock next time. She agreed that the bees in CF group were not resistant. 

https://twitter.com/mmlopezu/status/1182327729707986944


----------



## Oldtimer

LOL. If they use non resistant bees, the results are a forgone conclusion, why even run the trial.

I didn't know Juhani, that someone in Hawaii had bred 100% VSH bees. How heritable is that down the generations, and does it translate into bees that are long term survivors?


----------



## Juhani Lunden

Oldtimer said:


> LOL. If they use non resistant bees, the results are a forgone conclusion, why even run the trial.
> 
> I didn't know Juhani, that someone in Hawaii had bred 100% VSH bees. How heritable is that down the generations, and does it translate into bees that are long term survivors?


BartJan started here in Europe, Arista Reseach, but the big plyers and money are elsewhere...

Varroa resistance is an additive trait. Free mating with unsuitable drones and it drops to 50%. The transition to TF beekeeping must take place in remote areas, drone congregation or inseminations.


----------



## GregB

Juhani Lunden said:


> ...
> 
> Varroa resistance is an additive trait. Free mating with unsuitable drones and it drops to 50%. ....


Or a deductive trait.
The unsuitable drones should be prevented from ever appearing (by terminating their source colonies before they produce any drones). 
In theory.

About this: 


> Free mating with unsuitable drones and it drops to 50%.


I assume this 50% is just for the purposes of demonstration as I am yet to hear a definitive, quantified definition as in - "the resistance is...... blah".
What is X% resistant?
What does it mean?
Maybe I should read up on something?

Did anyone ever measure the % of resistant bees in the colony - the sufficient # (either absolute or relative - whichever) so to qualify the entire colony as "resistant"?
This is a very important practical number (for those of us, the CF people, who lurk in the hostile "free mating" environments).


----------



## Juhani Lunden

GregV said:


> What is X% resistant?
> What does it mean?
> Maybe I should read up on something?
> 
> Did anyone ever measure the % of resistant bees in the colony - the sufficient # (either absolute or relative - whichever) so to qualify the entire colony as "resistant"?


Sorry, I meant the way they count the VSH factor. 

Treated bees + artifical contamination with known number of mites in the moment when new queen (one drone insemination) has her first open brood frame ready for capping. When the brood is capped (or in winter) cells are opened untill sufficiently many mites have been found. Mites fall into two categories: with offspring and without offspring. 

VSH %= varroa resistance = mites found without offspring x 100/ total number of mites found.


----------



## GregB

Juhani Lunden said:


> Sorry, I meant the way they count the VSH factor.
> 
> Treated bees + artifical contamination with known number of mites in the moment when new queen (one drone insemination) has her first open brood frame ready for capping. When the brood is capped (or in winter) cells are opened untill sufficiently many mites have been found. Mites fall into two categories: with offspring and without offspring.
> 
> VSH %= varroa resistance = mites found without offspring x 100/ total number of mites found.


OK, thanks.
Unsure this is absolutely true, however.
Partially true - very much likely.


> VSH %= varroa resistance = mites found without offspring x 100/ total number of mites found


The VR (varroa resistance) is really a multi-variable function with the appropriate coefficients attached to each variable.
But this is only my educated intuition, obviously.


----------



## Juhani Lunden

GregV said:


> Unsure this is absolutely true, however.


Not sure either.
And that is why I have been urging the Arista Group to start real life survival tests. 



Something may be happening, but I cannot tell...


----------



## Fusion_power

This is just practical experience and not scientifically proven. My experience is that around 10% of the bees in a colony have to exhibit mite resistance traits for the entire hive to be classed as resistant. For a colony to be classed as highly resistant, it would need close to 100% of the bees expressing resistance. A resistant colony would survive for years with minimal damage from mites, but would always have significant numbers of mites infesting the colony. A highly resistant colony would survive for years but would have very few mites at any given time.

When we finally determine the traits involved in mite resistance, I expect to find at least one is that mite resistant bees have enhanced smell receptors and can smell the stressed larvae being fed on by mites.

As Juhani suggests, the only way to highly concentrate mite resistance is with single drone inseminations followed by screening for resistance.

I have some raw breeding material that shows significant resistance. It is just a matter of putting in the time and effort to get them to the highly resistant state.


----------



## odfrank

*Re: squarepeg 2015-2019 treatment free experience*

Those numbers remind of my apiaries before I gave up on "treatment free". My last year of soft treatments, OAD, I had 60%+ losses. Thanks to Charlie I have a big bucket of Mann Lake Terra Patty and it does a great job of cleaning up EFB, which has become a problem here for the last ten years or so. EFB is a stress disease and I see little evidence that it is contagious from infected combs. We had a case at several of our 30 apiaries. One or two doses of the Terra Patty and the hives rebound. I feel mite stress and weak populations is what makes the EFB pop up. 
Three years ago I went to Apivaring every hive upon harvest. This reduced winter losses to below 10% but like local treatment free beeks, we have an increase in summer losses. This seems due to bleak spring weather during swarm queen mating. All residents of our community are required to vaccinate their children who attend public schools. Many of these parents get flu shots. If I get cancer I will likely elect to get radiation and chemo therapy to prolong my life. I would love to be a natural treatment free beekeeper but my business depends on having producing hives. The world around me is a toxic mess and I feel if I do the best I can to survive and at the same time not pollute, I have the done the best I can in this pollution saturated era. 

I laud all of you who stick to your guns and continue to follow being treatment free. This leaves the fields so much more open for me. Because of having some alive hives remaining due to receiving treatments and rearing some of our own queens, I just had a fabulous week of honey sales. I sold a $1006 order of squeeze bottles to a corporate cafeteria, I sold a $1000 order to a produce market, I sold a 262 pound order of comb honey in frames to a local bee and honey supplier, I sold a $462 order to a local grocery store, I had various sales out of my self serve cabinet. I was invited to sell at a corporate Christmas sale. If I had remained treatment free I would still just be crying over dead hives. Not only are my honey sales doing well, this week I also got another apiary client due to my growing reputation of supplying my apiary clients with big honey crops and helping them to "save the bees". I could do none of this with dead untreated hives.

Best of all, my success due to treating gives me all this to brag about, which will irritate Charlie to no end. I will forward a link of this post to him right now.






squarepeg said:


> it's been awhile since updating the thread, mostly because there hasn't been anything noteworthy to share.
> 
> today was once of those warm (mid-sixties) days we see here just before the passing of a strong cold front along with it's associated storms and big drop in temps on the backside.
> 
> the three (of 12) remaining colonies at the home yard were bringing mostly a chocolate brown pollen with the occasional bright yellow. i've no clue what plants are producing those.
> 
> the outyard has 0 of 9 colonies remaining, the overflow yard has 2 of 3 remaining, and i have a single colonies placed one each at two new locations.
> 
> this puts me at a total of 7 survivors at this point (down from a hive count of 28) with all of winter still to go, along with the promise of receiving one of fusion_power's spares.
> 
> it is interesting to note that the strongest of the colonies at present is a caught swarm that was given almost 2 deep supers worth of drawn comb that was washed and bleached after being recovered from efb infected hives.
> 
> the plan is to see what is left if anything coming out of winter, destroy any colonies and equipment in which efb shows up, and split agressively in an attempt fill up all the empty boxes taking up space in my garage and carport.
> 
> i'll likely ramp up the swarm trapping next spring as well. i'd like to end up with 10 - 15 strong colonies (20 would be nice) spread out between 4 - 5 yards to take into next winter. i'm not expecting much of a honey crop for 2020.


----------



## JWPalmer

*Re: squarepeg 2015-2019 treatment free experience*

Ollie, remember this is the treatment free sub-forum. One of the unique rules reads:



> Any post advocating the use of treatments, according to the forum definition of treatment will be considered off topic and shall be moved to another forum or deleted by a moderator, unless it is employed as part of a plan in becoming treatment free


----------



## odfrank

OH NO!! If me and my post are deemed obnoxious by all means the monitor should remove it. No hard feelings. Just telling of my experiences.



JWPalmer said:


> Ollie, remember this is the treatment free sub-forum. One of the unique rules reads:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Any post advocating the use of treatments, according to the forum definition of treatment will be considered off topic and shall be moved to another forum or deleted by a moderator, unless it is employed as part of a plan in becoming treatment free
Click to expand...


----------



## JWPalmer

*Re: squarepeg 2015-2019 treatment free experience*

Actually, I did not find it obnoxious at all, just a bit on the edge of this sub forum's rules. I let it stand, but this is not a path we want to walk on a TF thread.:lookout:


----------



## squarepeg

no need to remove ollie's good post. congrats on your success.


----------



## odfrank

Thank you. My thoughts come after 25 years of premite beekeeping, then Apistan, then Checkmite, then 25 years of treatment free beekeeping, 13 years of post " CCD" beekeeping and literally many hundreds of dead untreated colonies over those years. I want to be a beekeeper and support my employee and the expense of being a beekeeper by having honey to sell and paying apiary clients who pay me to keep alive hives at their properties. The day I can do that treatment free I will revert to how we did it 1970 - 1995. I do my best to produce uncontaminated honey but fully understand those practices might not be 100% effective. At the same time we all know fully well the store bought food we eat and the air we breath is not uncontaminated also. The oceans are filthy, our president is lowering pollution standards weekly.... it is the era we live in. We can only do our best to not make it worse. 




squarepeg said:


> no need to remove ollie's good post. congrats on your success.


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: squarepeg 2015-2019 treatment free experience*



odfrank said:


> EFB is a stress disease and I see little evidence that it is contagious from infected combs. We had a case at several of our 30 apiaries. One or two doses of the Terra Patty and the hives rebound. I feel mite stress and weak populations is what makes the EFB pop up.


It depends what you are calling EFB. The genuine article is very contagious. Where i am down under we have a disease that looks like EFB exactly, and cannot be positively distinguished by eye, but a lab can determine there is no EFB infection, the disease is called half moon disease and appears to be caused by a faulty queen.

The varying experiences of some in the USA over the last 40 years leads me to think there are probably different strains with different effects, or even ailments that mimic EFB but are not.


----------



## Charlie B

odfrank said:


> Thank you. My thoughts come after 25 years of premite beekeeping, then Apistan, then Checkmite, then 25 years of treatment free beekeeping, 13 years of post " CCD" beekeeping and literally many hundreds of dead untreated colonies over those years. I want to be a beekeeper and support my employee and the expense of being a beekeeper by having honey to sell and paying apiary clients who pay me to keep alive hives at their properties. The day I can do that treatment free I will revert to how we did it 1970 - 1995. I do my best to produce uncontaminated honey but fully understand those practices might not be 100% effective. At the same time we all know fully well the store bought food we eat and the air we breath is not uncontaminated also. The oceans are filthy, our president is lowering pollution standards weekly.... it is the era we live in. We can only do our best to not make it worse.


I was treatment free for three years so I think this entitles me to at least one post. So, it only took me those three years to go from 55 hives to 12. I learned from Oliver and began using Apivar strips two years ago. Now I have more hives than I really want.

I wish I could still be treatment free and would never criticize anyone for that decision. Hopefully we’ll get a handle on mites soon and we can all be treatment free.


----------



## msl

> Maybe they could use proper TF stock next time. She agreed that the bees in CF group were not resistant.


It wasn't given a fair shake..... re queening in Aug with resistant stocks after the hive sat all year untreated and with non resistant queens building a mite load would seem a sure way to fail, hive could be bombing out before any resistant workers emerge, and those that do emerge are very likly not in great shape.


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: squarepeg 2015-2019 treatment free experience*



JWPalmer said:


> Ollie, remember this is the treatment free sub-forum. One of the unique rules reads:


Well um, no it isn't the treatment free forum. This thread is for open discussion and the opinions of Oddfrank and Ollie were right on the topic.

Having said that though I think the thread title itself is something of an oxymoron. It is "treating vs. not treating for mites: opinion thread". For many, wether or not they treat is not a matter of opinion, it's a matter of the facts on the ground, what will or will not work for their bees in their area, and opinion may not change that fact.


----------



## JWPalmer

*Re: squarepeg 2015-2019 treatment free experience*

Um, OT, note the title under which this was first posted. That post and several follow-up posts were later moved to the appropriate sub forum according to the rules. Odfranks comments were on target for this opinion thread.


----------



## GregB

Removed. 
Changed my mind.


----------



## crofter

*Re: squarepeg 2015-2019 treatment free experience*



Oldtimer said:


> It depends what you are calling EFB. The genuine article is very contagious. Where i am down under we have a disease that looks like EFB exactly, and cannot be positively distinguished by eye, but a lab can determine there is no EFB infection, the disease is called half moon disease and appears to be caused by a faulty queen.
> 
> The varying experiences of some in the USA over the last 40 years leads me to think there are probably different strains with different effects, or even ailments that mimic EFB but are not.


It is now established that there are many variants. An excerpt from a 2014 study in Britain.

_ "We detected 15 different sequence types (STs), which were resolved by eBURST and phylogenetic analysis into three clonal complexes (CCs) 3, 12 and 13. Single and double locus variants within CC3 were the most abundant and widespread genotypes, accounting for 85% of the cases. In contrast, CCs 12 and 13 were rarer and predominantly found in geographical regions of high sampling intensity, consistent with a more recent introduction and localised spread. K-function analysis and interpoint distance tests revealed significant geographical clustering in five common STs, but pointed to different dispersal patterns between STs. We noted that CCs appeared to vary in pathogenicity and that infection caused by the more pathogenic variants is more likely to lead to honey bee colony destruction, as opposed to treatment."_

I believe more recent studies point to even larger numbers of variants including some with antibiotic resistance.


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: squarepeg 2015-2019 treatment free experience*

Thanks Crofter very interesting.

That study would go some way to explaining the variations we get in anecdotal reports of the disease, and public perceptions.


----------



## crofter

*Re: squarepeg 2015-2019 treatment free experience*

I think it may have been Squarepeg that dug up the bit about there being multiple sub strains. Some are much easier to eradicate than others and oxytet resistance is showing up in some types. I may have just got lucky with a fairly easy type that I managed to stop in one season with ~ 50% losses. 

Some people are still convinced that EFB is little worse than a bad case of chilled brood but others from their experience have found it to be an enemy not to sniff at!

From shadowing the NZ forum I sense that beekeepers there have a much tougher time than on this continent.


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: squarepeg 2015-2019 treatment free experience*

Yes it has all gone to custard over here, the boom is over and now it's the hard times, very hard. Not because of EFB though we don't have that.


----------



## Riverderwent

*Re: squarepeg 2015-2019 treatment free experience*



Oldtimer said:


> Yes it has all gone to custard over here, the boom is over and now it's the hard times, very hard.


Wherefore?


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: squarepeg 2015-2019 treatment free experience*

OK Riverderwent, this is off topic so others not interested in NZ situation be warned not to read. 

Our problems go back to a little after Y2K, when manuka honey started creeping up in price. At that time there were around 200,000 kept beehives in the country. It was an industry in decline with low profit margins, and a lot of beekeepers were old and wanting to retire, but few new players coming in to buy their businesses. Most different honey varieties were priced similarly so there was little point misrepresenting what type your honey was and there were no rules around that.

Then manuka became valuable, and i am talking BIG bucks. They say money is the root of all evils. Honey packers were selling manuka for a lot of money, and found that if it was diluted 50/50 with some other honey, you could still call it manuka, who would be to know, and now have 2 highly priced jars instead of one. 

The competition between packers to buy non manuka honey of types suitable for blending forced up the price of all honey, and soon all beekeepers were creaming it, making big dollars regardless what kind of honey they were producing. Guys who had for years been on the bones of their butt, found themselves becoming millionaires overnight.

All this money attracted new players to the industry, and the number of hives has crept up to now around a million, in a country the size of just one American State. But trouble started to brew as our overseas customers started becoming aware that not all the manuka honey they were paying huge dollars for, was the pure article.

To protect our reputation and our customer base, the government stepped in and had tests designed to determine the purity of manuka honey, all exported manuka honey must now be laboratory tested first. This has overnight dropped demand for non manuka honey massively, and with all those extra hives, we now have massive oversupply.

Result, most beekeepers are now being forced to sell their last seasons non manuka crop for less than the cost of production, or in fact, most beekeepers can't even sell it. Some outfits are folding, and many more will fold.

Even the manuka producers are doing less well. Because the only option now is try to make manuka, meaning anywhere with a stick of manuka is being bombed by massive numbers of hives owned by desperate beekeepers. Per hive production is way down.

Classic agricultural boom / bust cycle, only in this instance, sadly, of our own making, caused by greed and short sightedness.

The people affected the worst are the newcomers to the industry, they bought hives when they were priced like gold, borrowed heavily, are not experienced beekeepers, and are now being paid peanuts for their crop. There has been tears, and there will be more tears.

What I can say though to anyone contemplating buying some manuka honey, is that you can now be assured that the jar you buy that says manuka honey on the label, will be the genuine article, provided it was packed into that jar in New Zealand. Don't buy manuka honey if it was packed anywhere else, it is not covered by our regulations, and fraud is highly likely.


----------



## clyderoad

*Re: squarepeg 2015-2019 treatment free experience*

Thank you OT for your perspective. 
Lots of lessons for folks to consider, no matter their location.
All the best to you.


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: squarepeg 2015-2019 treatment free experience*

Thank you Clyde . My own situation is OK, beekeeping is little more than a retirement hobby for me now, plus unlike the new crop of beekeepers here my own education was back when beekeeping was a financially tough industry to be in. When the boom happened i knew it would not last, and have always run my operation on the smell of an oily rag, regardless of income.

All beekeepers here are suffering, but most of the pre boom established ones who did not rush out and borrow money for glamour projects will survive. As to the rest, there are a growing number of abandoned apiaries laying around in the countryside. Balance will eventually be restored.


----------



## Riverderwent

*Re: squarepeg 2015-2019 treatment free experience*



Oldtimer said:


> OK Riverderwent, ... .


Thank you for that explanation. That is a sad tale very well told by you.


----------



## Gray Goose

*Re: squarepeg 2015-2019 treatment free experience*



Oldtimer said:


> Thank you Clyde . My own situation is OK, beekeeping is little more than a retirement hobby for me now, plus unlike the new crop of beekeepers here my own education was back when beekeeping was a financially tough industry to be in. When the boom happened i knew it would not last, and have always run my operation on the smell of an oily rag, regardless of income.
> 
> All beekeepers here are suffering, but most of the pre boom established ones who did not rush out and borrow money for glamour projects will survive. As to the rest, there are a growing number of abandoned apiaries laying around in the countryside. Balance will eventually be restored.


OT,, may be some good Wooden ware available cheap or free coming to your area. not much of a silver lining but better than nothing.
GG


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: squarepeg 2015-2019 treatment free experience*

Yes, the bee supply vendors are certainly suffering and have laid off staff.

Anyhow this little aside is totally off topic, back to treating vs not.


----------



## Robert Holcombe

Has anyone in the TF or treatment community noticed a trait whereby the colony appears to not participate in robbing? The effect I have noticed is a very low Varroa count measured by counting dead Varroa on a sticky board post OAV treatment. The counts were very low, <100 in September and rising slightly during robbing season while neighbors were inundated with Varroa. Seemingly the result of simple hive to hive drone and worker bee migration or is this a clear sign of VSH genetics only?


----------



## Gray Goose

*Re: squarepeg 2015-2019 treatment free experience*



Oldtimer said:


> Yes, the bee supply vendors are certainly suffering and have laid off staff.
> 
> Anyhow this little aside is totally off topic, back to treating vs not.


Ok then,

from a treating VRS not treating point of view. Some of these "abandoned" Apiaries, may be interesting to "sift" thru in 18-24 months, post abandonment.
The "needing treatment" hives should be dead by then and the few left alive could be some stock to "obtain" Obtain could mean setting bait hives 300 yards from the Apiary, could mean talking to the land owner and if the keeper is bank-rupt the "Apiary" would need cleaned up at some point. Clean up could be re use of the good dead out materials and understanding and propagating the survivors. For example a 50 hive abandoned Apiary, may have 2 or 3 hives alive, those would spark my curiosity. IMO closely look at this Lemon and make lemon-aid. There is likely some good sites, some good stock, and some good wooden ware. Some of those places would be good candidates for an out yard to be treatment free using the already there survivors.
Again sorry for the setback in your area, but sounds like you did not over expand. Some expansion into this vacuum now may be prudent if you have the time or a mentee who wants to do some work for setting up his own sites.


----------



## Gray Goose

Robert Holcombe said:


> Has anyone in the TF or treatment community noticed a trait whereby the colony appears to not participate in robbing? The effect I have noticed is a very low Varroa count measured by counting dead Varroa on a sticky board post OAV treatment. The counts were very low, <100 in September and rising slightly during robbing season while neighbors were inundated with Varroa. Seemingly the result of simple hive to hive drone and worker bee migration or is this a clear sign of VSH genetics only?


I have read and heard from other keepers that a declining hive , for example fall queenless hive, bees will leave and join other hives, this also can have an impact, if the weekend hive was weakened from Varroa, and the "joining" bees have mites. Robbing and letting in stray bees, I would think both effect the issue you describe.


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: squarepeg 2015-2019 treatment free experience*



Gray Goose said:


> Ok then,
> 
> from a treating VRS not treating point of view. Some of these "abandoned" Apiaries, may be interesting to "sift" thru in 18-24 months, post abandonment.....


Yes good point Grey Goose and the same thought has been running through my mind also.

There are some different dynamics here, we do not have some of the advantages that have worked in your favor in the US. One being that in the US you have much more land than our little country, and this meant that after the initial varroa invasion and wipeout of your feral hives, there were wide open spaces so that the very few ferals that found a way to survive, were in some cases not surrounded by lots of other hives with different drones to dilute the trait back out of them, and were eventually able to establish as a race of "local survivors". Here, even with the reduced hive numbers that we will have in the next few years, most likely there will be few isolated areas. Not impossible though and the subject has certainly been discussed.

There has also been discussions about organising some way to deal with abandoned apiaries because of the fear they may become "AFB factories". IE, there may be infected hives that die, and are robbed by nearby kept hives. But are then re stocked by swarms, repeating the cycle and creating AFB dead zones. Because this is a real possibility and in fact a virtual certainty, some beekeepers are initiating "search and destroy" missions to protect their own hives, I already partook in one such mission myself, the apiary involved did not have AFB so the gear was recycled. But another abandoned apiary owned by the same former beekeper did have AFB and the entire thing was heaped up and burned.

Anyhow, as to wether the situation may give rise to some "survivors", time will tell.......


----------



## Robert Holcombe

Yet this colony, one of nine, stands out when when counting dead varroa. Eight hives showed the significant impact of fall migration, peaks >500 per treatment, including one that had a brood break and OAV treatment. This hive barely showed a bump-up during the Fall Varroa Bomb migration season; 452 dead varroa for the year, peak treatment value of 104, last two treatments resulted in a DDC of 3 and zero. This is a clear non-traditional behavior for my location over 5 years. I cold interpret that 50-70% came from bee and drone migration bringing Varroa in but robbing would result in hindreds more Varroa infestation during that robbing time frame.


----------



## Juhani Lunden

Robert Holcombe said:


> Has anyone in the TF or treatment community noticed a trait whereby the colony appears to not participate in robbing?


I have reported that I seldom witness robbing. Usually when it happens, it is a situation when actually allready dead hive (couple hundred bees left) is robbed.


----------



## Riverderwent

Robert Holcombe said:


> Has anyone in the TF or treatment community noticed a trait whereby the colony appears to not participate in robbing?


Yes. “Appears” being the operative word. Early on in my modest beekeeping experience when I had high born Italian queens and pretty yellow bees, I would see robbing of my own hives whenever I was less than careful about leaving hives open too long or having honey dripping around. Now, of course, I am reflexively more careful, but I notice when I am harvesting or otherwise doing things that would have triggered robbing in the past, the bees from the same yard don’t go into robbing frenzies. I don’t use robbing screens and don’t need to. My weak hives don’t get immediately plundered. I just don’t see robbing and wrestling or the after effects of dead bees. This is partly because I’m not fiddling with them as often and partly because it’s not happening. Maybe the barely managed and untreated bees in my beeyards and their untreated feral neighbors who had robbing tendencies haven’t survived well enough to pass on their genes to the current residents of my wooden boxes and their closely related feral neighbors.

But do not make important decisions based on anecdotal reports like this. Serious decisions involving significant investments need to be based on reliable, peer reviewed, repeatable, evidence based practices.


----------



## Oldtimer

If a non robbing bee could be produced, or located, it would certainly solve a lot of 21st century beekeeping problems right there.


----------



## AR1

*Re: squarepeg 2015-2019 treatment free experience*



Gray Goose said:


> OT,, may be some good Wooden ware available cheap or free coming to your area. not much of a silver lining but better than nothing.
> GG


All those abandoned apiaries? Just call it an extended BOND experiment. Unlikely, but maybe something useful will show up that survives. 
I seem to recall some NZ beek here (OT?) saying NZ bees don't seem to show much if any resistance to mites, maybe due to low genetic variety in the founding stock? Sad if true, but here is one more natural experiment to prove it.

(Oops. I see this was already addressed. I should read all recent comments before posting!)


----------



## BernhardHeuvel

*Re: Alternative way to keep (have?) bees.*

What is the actual damage varroa does to bees? And what consequences derive from the damage?


----------



## Gray Goose

*Re: Alternative way to keep (have?) bees.*



BernhardHeuvel said:


> What is the actual damage varroa does to bees? And what consequences derive from the damage?


Bernhard, One can search the net for what the Varroa does.

The Varroa, attaches to the bee in the cell when brood is capped, drawing Hemolymph/fluids from the bee as it is growing. Similar size wize to a Squirrel on your neck sucking blood.
The Varroa can vector up to 13 or so different Virus, Similar to the mosquito delivering Mallarira. The bite is less bad than the virus. However Any fluid loss is taking vigor from the bee, less trips affield, less payload, less lifespan.
Consequences, shorter bee life, less vigor and eventual colony spirals down and dies. Bees get old and die faster, so young bees need to be feild bees sooner, less nurse bees is less brood.
Some Know Virus can be directly transmitted by Varroa mites, such as: DWV, those in the acute bee paralysis virus complex, and slow bee paralysis virus


----------



## BernhardHeuvel

*Re: Alternative way to keep (have?) bees.*



Gray Goose said:


> Bernhard, One can search the net for what the Varroa does.


Oh, I surely know that. But I wanted to know what our treatment-free community knows about it. I mean, that are basics! I would have guessed!


Let me correct and add some things to your list.

First of all, varroa mites do not suck hemolymph liquids. They directly consume the fat body of a bee. 

See: 
*Varroa destructor feeds primarily on honey bee fat body tissue and not hemolymph*

Samuel D. Ramsey, Ronald Ochoa, Gary Bauchan, Connor Gulbronson, View ORCID ProfileJoseph D. Mowery, Allen Cohen, David Lim, Judith Joklik, Joseph M. Cicero, James D. Ellis, David Hawthorne, and Dennis vanEngelsdorp
PNAS January 29, 2019 116 (5) 1792-1801; first published January 15, 2019 https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1818371116

Story behind it: 
https://entomologytoday.org/2019/02/21/inside-look-how-varroa-mite-diet-discovered/



So what that means?

You gotta look what the fat body is for the honey bee. It is a most important organ in the honeybee body. If not the most important.

An extract from my new book.

*The liver of the bees*
Because proteins are so important for living things, proteins are also stored in the body. In humans, proteins are primarily kept in the plasma, in the muscles and in the liver. The bees also have such a memory: this is the so-called fat body.

The fat body is a very important organ in bees. The fat body swims in the hemolymph, the "blood" of the bees. The fat body works like a liver and detoxifies the hemolymph, freeing it of toxins (e.g. pollen) but also of pesticides.

But the fat body can do even more: there the building blocks of the body are put together, peptides and antibodies are formed, with which the bee body defends itself against pathogens like bacteria or viruses. The fat body is the bee's immune system.
And the fat body stores proteins. Proteins, with the help of which the brood juice and the royal jelly or the wax scales are subsequently produced.

The fully developed fat body is also a prerequisite for long-term bees, i.e. swarm or winter bees that live longer than the "thin" bees.

The varroa mites do not suck the bees' hemolymph, they are not bloodsuckers. Rather, they feed directly on the fat body. It is also more logical because, as living beings, they also need proteins. And they can be found abundantly in the fat body. If the bees cannot develop fat bodies due to sucking varroa, they have the problems: reduced longevity, reduced feed juice production, reduced immune system, reduced detoxification - and no brood in winter due to a lack of fat bodies.

The impact on bees that are preparing for wintering is particularly fatal. Bees don't just need the fat body to make them long-lasting. The bees also need the intact fat body to produce the first brood series in the middle of winter. The time of the generation change in spring, from old to young bees, is significantly shifted back to spring without fat. And this extends the most sensitive phase in the bee year. Bee colonies build up much more slowly, are more susceptible to all other diseases and recover very slowly from the delayed start to the year.


So what practical conclusions to draw out of this as a treatment-free beekeeper?

Make your bees fat again. 

Understand the underlying consequences of that damage. 

Why are bee colonies under varroa stress so small? Because they are withering away because their inner organ, the liver, the fat body is eliminated. not funny.


----------



## Gray Goose

*Re: Alternative way to keep (have?) bees.*



BernhardHeuvel said:


> Oh, I surely know that. But I wanted to know what our treatment-free community knows about it. I mean, that are basics! I would have guessed!
> 
> 
> Let me correct and add some things to your list.
> 
> First of all, varroa mites do not suck hemolymph liquids. They directly consume the fat body of a bee.
> 
> See:
> *Varroa destructor feeds primarily on honey bee fat body tissue and not hemolymph*
> 
> Samuel D. Ramsey, Ronald Ochoa, Gary Bauchan, Connor Gulbronson, View ORCID ProfileJoseph D. Mowery, Allen Cohen, David Lim, Judith Joklik, Joseph M. Cicero, James D. Ellis, David Hawthorne, and Dennis vanEngelsdorp
> PNAS January 29, 2019 116 (5) 1792-1801; first published January 15, 2019 https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1818371116
> 
> Story behind it:
> https://entomologytoday.org/2019/02/21/inside-look-how-varroa-mite-diet-discovered/
> 
> 
> 
> So what that means?
> 
> You gotta look what the fat body is for the honey bee. It is a most important organ in the honeybee body. If not the most important.
> 
> An extract from my new book.
> 
> *The liver of the bees*
> Because proteins are so important for living things, proteins are also stored in the body. In humans, proteins are primarily kept in the plasma, in the muscles and in the liver. The bees also have such a memory: this is the so-called fat body.
> 
> The fat body is a very important organ in bees. The fat body swims in the hemolymph, the "blood" of the bees. The fat body works like a liver and detoxifies the hemolymph, freeing it of toxins (e.g. pollen) but also of pesticides.
> 
> But the fat body can do even more: there the building blocks of the body are put together, peptides and antibodies are formed, with which the bee body defends itself against pathogens like bacteria or viruses. The fat body is the bee's immune system.
> And the fat body stores proteins. Proteins, with the help of which the brood juice and the royal jelly or the wax scales are subsequently produced.
> 
> The fully developed fat body is also a prerequisite for long-term bees, i.e. swarm or winter bees that live longer than the "thin" bees.
> 
> The varroa mites do not suck the bees' hemolymph, they are not bloodsuckers. Rather, they feed directly on the fat body. It is also more logical because, as living beings, they also need proteins. And they can be found abundantly in the fat body. If the bees cannot develop fat bodies due to sucking varroa, they have the problems: reduced longevity, reduced feed juice production, reduced immune system, reduced detoxification - and no brood in winter due to a lack of fat bodies.
> 
> The impact on bees that are preparing for wintering is particularly fatal. Bees don't just need the fat body to make them long-lasting. The bees also need the intact fat body to produce the first brood series in the middle of winter. The time of the generation change in spring, from old to young bees, is significantly shifted back to spring without fat. And this extends the most sensitive phase in the bee year. Bee colonies build up much more slowly, are more susceptible to all other diseases and recover very slowly from the delayed start to the year.
> 
> 
> So what practical conclusions to draw out of this as a treatment-free beekeeper?
> 
> Make your bees fat again.
> 
> Understand the underlying consequences of that damage.
> 
> Why are bee colonies under varroa stress so small? Because they are withering away because their inner organ, the liver, the fat body is eliminated. not funny.


Ok So you ask a question you know the answer to ?? why not just state your information. Seems an odd way to initiate a conversation.
Sorry I took the time to answer you.:scratch:


----------



## Oldtimer

*Re: Alternative way to keep (have?) bees.*

You wrote a book Bernhard! Is there an English version and where can it be purchaed?


----------



## JWPalmer

*Re: Alternative way to keep (have?) bees.*

GG, don't be sorry. Bernhard asked the question the same way a teacher would ask a question of a class, to provoke thought and discussion. These concepts are important to remember and are still new to some people. Dr. Ramsey's ground breaking research paper was first published just what, two years ago? Thanks to a Beesource member, many of us became aware of Dr. Ramsey and his research while he was still a grad student at U of Maryland. It helped me define when I treat and feed in preparation for winter and why.


----------



## gww

*Re: Alternative way to keep (have?) bees.*

bernhard


> Make your bees fat again.


This does bring up an interesting thinking point on cause and effect. I read one study that said that it did not seem that the mite did as well in unhealthy colony's where bees fat bodies were not robust. If I have it right, the premise was bees were living due to not being healthy rather then dying even under mite pressure. 

I read another study where the mite was being changed when in hives that were not dying due to them being there. It has been insinuated in places that bees were adjusting to living with mites faster (by whatever mechanism with the mechanisms being different in different areas) When left with pressure then they were with breeding programs.

If a goal was to keep bees and not treat, the question becomes, which cause and effects are most important and are we judging them correctly. Also, is the best route to work on only the bees leaving the possible change in mite out of the question?
Cheers
gww


----------



## psfred

*Re: Alternative way to keep (have?) bees.*

If you don't treat, you can expect around 50% hive loss every winter. Ditto if your treatment isn't effective. We tried oxalic acid/glycerol on paper towels, didn't work. The bees promptly propolised the paper towels so the oxalic acid had no effect. Lost half my hives.

Varroa mites, as noted, both damage the bees and are vectors for several wing paralytic diseases -- good sign you have excessive mites is the presence of "crawlers" -- new bees that cannot fly on their first orientation flight and crawl around on the ground in front of the hive trying to fly. Those bees cannot generate heat in the winter by vibrating their wing muscles as the muscles don't work, so the hive freezes out early on.

I use formic acid pads -- nasty, runs the risk of doing the queen in, but highly effective for me with a single treatment last summer/early fall.


----------



## gww

*Re: Alternative way to keep (have?) bees.*

psfred


> If you don't treat, you can expect around 50% hive loss every winter.


I do not doubt that this is true in some areas and maybe even worse. It is not true in every case though. This has not been my experience. 

Maybe I should change my above statement to make your statement more true. I do "expect" total loss every year. So far, knock on wood, my bees have a different view and have refuse to die at any rate close to that. This does not mean that I don't expect ebbs and flows. This is my worst year at about 20 percent so far and the year is not over. Still, the three years before were about 95 percent survival average. So four winters averaged out are right at ten percent. I don't know the future yet, only the past.
Cheers
gww


----------



## psfred

*Re: Alternative way to keep (have?) bees.*

This is the first year I've had zero losses. Quite nice, but I don't really expect that every year. Back in the day, before varroa and hive beetles, 10 to 20 percent was normal, and that's what I get when I treat.

Every once in a while you have a queen that doesn't make it through the winter or turns into a drone layer from poor mating and a lack of pollen stores often results in the cluster freezing out in late winter. All but poorly mated queens can be avoided most of the time.

Mite load and effects on hives are indeed variable, just like everything else in beekeeping. I've become convinced that the hive lose due to mites has a lot more to do with the viruses vectored by mites that direct mite damage, so if the mites in an area do not carry many of those viruses, early winter losses will be lower.

I suspect that bees are becoming much more resistant to mites as well -- after all, bees that aren't affected so much will propagate more. One of the reasons I like to collect swarms. They are produced by healthy, well stocked hives generally, weak ones usually don't swarm much--or at least I hope so!

With your loss rate I'd say you are a pretty decent beekeeper -- after all, our job is to keep them fat and happy so they can make us lots of honey!


----------



## gww

*Re: Alternative way to keep (have?) bees.*

psfred
I would say I am more lucky so far then a good bee keeper. I feel totally lost at all times. I do believe that each person has to find what does work where they are and change if something makes them to stay successful. 

I do worry about when it goes bad cause just like all life, things come and go. Right now the deer population is dealing with chronic wasting disease in certain areas. Before that it was black tongue. What is good today can be bad and what is bad can clear up. Finding ways to react in a way to help is the interesting part. I doubt I am a good bee keeper but the hobby has been much better to me then my chickens have, so far.

I have read good bee keepers that were treating that lost 70 percent in one year and that didn't happen the years before or the years after but something bad came through one year.

Only time will tell how things will go over all. I read a lot and then get in the hives with preconditioned ideal of what I will find only to be confused when I actually look. I have enjoyed this endeavor so far. I love swarms but only trap a few a year even trying. Last year only one with 16 traps.
Thanks for posting your comments.
Cheers
gww


----------



## Riverderwent

*Re: Alternative way to keep (have?) bees.*



gww said:


> I love swarms but only trap a few a year even trying. Last year only one with 16 traps.
> Thanks for posting your comments.
> Cheers
> gww


GWW, are there some woodlands along a waterway nearby where you can place some traps?


----------



## gww

*Re: Alternative way to keep (have?) bees.*

David
Depends on what you call water way. Mom and dad have a little creek that always has water though it doesn't always run. I did catch one by a lake last year. I have not had consistent luck with any trap. One place by a tiny pond has given me two over the years. 
I have traps over a thirty mile radius and have found no pattern I can trust but I have also gotten lazier over the years. I leave the traps out all year. I used to clean them out and make sure they has a bit of old comb in them though sometimes only a two inch square. Now I just put lemon grass oil in them every year and everything still seems about the same. Get one or two a year.
Cheers
gww


----------



## Riverderwent

*Re: Alternative way to keep (have?) bees.*

Are you using foundationless frames in the traps?


----------



## gww

*Re: Alternative way to keep (have?) bees.*

david
Yes on the foundationless frames.
Cheers
gww

ps I use medium foundationless frames in deep sized traps.


----------



## solarharvey79

Has anyone tried hyperthermia treatment? The science is very sound. As a disclaimer, I did invent a hive that uses hyperthermia for treating. You can check it out at www.hyperhyve.com


----------



## HeadofMeadow

Ha! Has anybody tried the product I’m selling but haven’t actually sold yet?


----------



## jim lyon

HeadofMeadow said:


> Ha! Has anybody tried the product I’m selling but haven’t actually sold yet?


Nor offered any proof of efficacy. We have had some years with brutal summer heat waves and I can personally vouch for the fact that varroa dosent seem to mind the heat at all. There are plenty of bees that summer in the extreme heat of an Arizona summer, I’m not aware that any of them think it lowers mite numbers.


----------



## solarharvey79

Not true. 3 hrs at 105 kills 95-100% of mites. These are in plenty of papers that show mites cannot survive those temps but the bees and brood can. There are some mild side effects but far less worse than the chemical and acid treatment side effects. Do you know what temps your hives are at? Likely never get above 95-98 inside the hive. Your Andy Rooney quote is interesting.


----------



## BernhardHeuvel

solarharvey79 said:


> Has anyone tried hyperthermia treatment?


In Europe for more than a decade or even longer. 

Results haven't been very impressive. It never made into serious beekeeping.


----------



## BernhardHeuvel

What's the temperature range honeybee sperm gets killed/damaged?


----------



## JWPalmer

Good point Bernhard. I think the folks using the MMK and other similar devices now realize it is best to remove the queen to a holding nuc before doing a thermal treatment.


----------



## BernhardHeuvel

Characterizing effectiveness of and obstacles to best beekeeping management practices

Honey bees (Apis mellifera, L.) provide critical pollination services to many US crops, but decades of high colony loss rates have strained beekeepers’ ability to provide sufficient colonies for crop production. In a national survey of colony losses for the 2015-2016 season, beekeepers reported losses averaging at 37.4%, and that the parasitic mite Varroa destructor was a leading cause of mortality. Survey results were used to create empirical best management practices (BMPs) to reduce colony loss rates. Best practices were the top four practices which correlated to significant reductions in winter colony loss. This set of BMPs was tested on 140 colonies in 7 locations across the US, compared to average beekeeping practices. At the end of 3 years, apiaries managed according to BMPs exhibited reduced Varroa loads, which resulted in reduced fall viral loads and reduced winter mortality. However, colony loss rates still exceeded rates that beekeepers have deemed acceptable. A prominent factor affecting colony health and mortality in the BMP study was Varroa. After identifying Varroa treatment as a preventative measure, the effects of Varroa management were evaluated in non-experimental apiaries. Citizen scientist beekeepers participating in the Sentinel Apiary Program provided Varroa samples and Varroa management information. Out of 192 Varroa treatments applied to 155 apiaries over 2 years, only 45 treatments resulted in reduced Varroa loads. Common hypotheses of factors affecting Varroa population growth failed to explain the rapid increases in Varroa loads experienced by beekeepers in critical fall months. Finally, a more novel explanation for rapid increases in Varroa load was explored: horizontal transmission of mites between apiaries. Colonies that were visited by non-natal bees experienced larger increases in Varroa loads than unvisited colonies, but not as a result of visitation to or from high mite colonies. High mite colonies in the landscape represent a threat to nearby colonies, and cooperative Varroa management is likely to mediate colony losses resulting from Varroa. This dissertation supports the critical need for proactive, cooperative Varroa management to improve colony health and reduce mortality.

https://drum.lib.umd.edu/handle/1903/26089
http://hdl.handle.net/1903/26089


----------



## Earthboy

Hope this thread is not dead. Here is the recent post re. Treatment Free:



LISTSERV - BEE-L Archives - COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM


----------



## johno

Earthboy said:


> Hope this thread is not dead. Here is the recent post re. Treatment Free:
> 
> 
> 
> LISTSERV - BEE-L Archives - COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM


Also from Bee-l regarding african bees and their resistance to varoa.










*BEE-L Archives*
*Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology*


*[email protected]*




*Options:*Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers
*Message:*[<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]*Topic:*[<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]*Author:*[<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]




*Subject:*From Mike Allsopp, South Africa, 2001*From:*Jose Villa <[email protected]>*Reply To:*Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[email protected]>*Date:*Thu, 18 Mar 2021 08:51:45 -0600*Content-Type:*text/plain*Parts/Attachments:*text/plain (77 lines)
 Note that he describes clear problems with varroa (and need for
treatment by commercial beekeepers) in both scutellata and capensis
colonies back in 2001. Observations like this indicate that
African/Africanized bees are not necessarily preadapted to deal with
varroa mites.
Dear All

What with all the messages about South African bees and pests, I
thought I had best comment, and in some cases set the record
straight. I am not, in this message, supporting the conclusions with
published references or data, but they available (in most cases):

(1) The development time for both Cape bees (capensis) and
African bees (scutellata) is just about 19 days. I guess it is not
known as to why this is shorter than in European bees, but it
probably relates to differences in larval feeding. The critical
component is that the post-capping period in these bees (when
varroa can reproduce) is much shorter than in European bees,
about 10.5 days.

(2) Researchers in Europe have been looking at the short post-
capping period of capensis as a possible means for varroa
tolerance for almost two decades (and are still working on it). It
certainly reduces the capacity of varroa to reproduce in worker
brood, but does not eliminate it.

(3) The varroa mite is clearly causing real problems to both
capensis and scutellata in South Africa. How severe these are is
hard to say, but severe enough for many beekeepers to use
varroacides on all their colonies (the wallet test). As varroa has
only been in SA since about 1995/6, it is only now reaching some
parts of the country. Hence, in many areas the wild population
remains varroa-free and, if varroa is present, it is too soon for it to
be causing a problem. In areas of the country (both capensis and
scutellata) where varroa has been with us for 4-5 years, we are
seeing varroa causing colony mortality.

(4) One of the projects of our Varroa Research Programme has
been to continually remove drone brood from colonies, and to
monitor mite reproduction in these drone-brood-free colonies. The
mite population continued to increase, albeit slowly, and the
colonies collapsed. Conclusion: varroa reproduces okay in Cape
worker brood.

(5) There is lots of data to show that the natural cell size in "fresh"
capensis and scutellata colonies (wild colonies) is pretty constant
around 4.85-4.90 mm. Cell size and the bees get smaller in older
combs.

(6) The Large Hive Beetle is a very minor problem in SA.
Occasionally, however, they are very destructive, and you can find
20-100 of them in a colony. The bees have no defence against
large numbers of beetles, and the beetles destroy the colonies.
The bees defence seems to be primarily behavioural: they limit
beetle accessw to the colony by building very think propolis
shields, with holes big enough for bees but not beetles. It should
be noted that these beetles are incidental pests of bee hives, and
not obligate pests like small hive beetles. I guess that, as in the
case of small hive beetles, it would be wise not to get large hive
beetles to the USA.

(7) At present (in Cape bees) we are not finding any good evidence
of (traditional) "hygienic" behaviour having any influence on
tolerance to the varroa mite.

I hope that clarifies certain issues.

best regards

Mike Allsopp
Stellenbosch

*****
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html




ATOM RSS1 RSS2



COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM


----------



## crofter

The Gotland bee / varroa mite experiment needs deep and up to date examination to weigh its implications to profitable beekeeping.
Sometimes the boundary lines between science, philosophy and theology get blurry. Cherry picking can show whatever floats ones boat.


----------



## johno

crofter said:


> The Gotland bee / varroa mite experiment needs deep and up to date examination to weigh its implications to profitable beekeeping.
> Sometimes the boundary lines between science, philosophy and theology get blurry. Cherry picking can show whatever floats ones boat.


Also regarding the thermal treatment for mites, Randy Oliver did some tests with this method and the results were not very impressive.


----------



## msl

crofter said:


> The Gotland bee / varroa mite experiment needs deep and up to date examination to weigh its implications to profitable beekeeping.


Well it did from the start..
but let's start with current day, when isolation was lost, it failed



> The Gotland population comprised 20 to 30 colonies in 2015 (Locke, 2016). It is still monitored for
> research purposes, although it is not used commercially. Due to the increasing density of non-
> resistant colonies in the surrounding environment, the experimental population recently
> experienced increasing infestation levels and,  from 2017 onwards, it was treated as a
> precautionary measure in order to decrease the risk of losing a stock of such scientific
> importance (Dietemann and Locke, 2019).











(PDF) Three Decades of Selecting Honey Bees that Survive Infestations by the Parasitic Mite Varroa destructor: Outcomes, Limitations and Strategy


PDF | Despite the implementation of control strategies, the invasive parasitic mite Varroa destructor remains one of the principal causes of honey bee... | Find, read and cite all the research you need on ResearchGate




www.researchgate.net


----------



## squarepeg

a recently published paper on the topic:


----------



## crofter

Interesting article SP; 
I have seen the cell perforations and pulling of larvae and pupae but did not know to look for the recapping/ repair. Something to look for. I take the position that having to treat mites is inevitable for me and I do it successfully, but that really is not long range thinking, is it!

The necessary concerted effort to harness such possibilites makes it a daunting task. Who shall bell the cat?


----------



## GregB

msl said:


> when isolation was lost, it failed


Lack of isolation and/or lack of critical mass will doom pretty much any effort.

So the 1)isolation and/or 2)rapid creation and maintenance of the critical mass and the local dominance are the pre-requisites for TF.


----------



## Earthboy

GregV said:


> Lack of isolation and/or lack of critical mass will doom pretty much any effort.
> 
> So the 1)isolation and/or 2)rapid creation and maintenance of the critical mass and the local dominance are the pre-requisites for TF.


That explains the need for this:



LISTSERV - BEE-L Archives - COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM


----------



## msl

GregV said:


> or lack of critical mass will doom pretty much any effort.


Yet, there mass was small and stayed small dropping to 7 and eventually growing to 20-30 colonies when they started splitting and stopped relying on swarms 



Earthboy said:


> That explains the need for this:


I am not sure what eradicating honey bees form a national park and banning beekeeping within 50 miles will accomplish for beekeepers

But its been done... Channel Islands National Park was made honey bee free by the introduction of varroa for the express purpose of the removal of the non native and invasive honey bees, turning it into a pollinator sanctuary the
Svalbard Global Seed Vault would be proud of


----------



## johno

msl said:


> Yet, there mass was small and stayed small dropping to 7 and eventually growing to 20-30 colonies when they started splitting and stopped relying on swarms
> 
> 
> I am not sure what eradicating honey bees form a national park and banning beekeeping within 50 miles will accomplish for beekeepers
> 
> But its been done... Channel Islands National Park was made honey bee free by the introduction of varroa for the express purpose of the removal of the non native and invasive honey bees, turning it into a pollinator sanctuary the
> Svalbard Global Seed Vault would be proud of


MSL this sounds like Agenda 21 oops now Agenda 2030, besides no honey bees 50 miles away will just delay the bees moving in for a few years unless they will actively eradicate any bees in the 50 mile area.


----------



## Earthboy

msl said:


> Yet, there mass was small and stayed small dropping to 7 and eventually growing to 20-30 colonies when they started splitting and stopped relying on swarms
> 
> 
> I am not sure what eradicating honey bees form a national park and banning beekeeping within 50 miles will accomplish for beekeepers
> 
> But its been done... Channel Islands National Park was made honey bee free by the introduction of varroa for the express purpose of the removal of the non native and invasive honey bees, turning it into a pollinator sanctuary the
> Svalbard Global Seed Vault would be proud of


So, what are the results if they are done with this experiment?


----------



## GregB

Earthboy said:


> So, what are the results if they are done with this experiment?


Why, did you not read the PDF?
It is there, in front of you.



> Conclusions
> We found no evidence that the selection strategies performed over the last few decades, whether relying on selective breeding or natural selection, resulted in large-scale solutions for tackling the detrimental effects of V. destructor. ............ Read on.........


Basically, they say - need to re-eval the past approaches as mostly not-working.
Regroup, using the data and experience accumulated.

This is not to say that new/modified approaches will not work - this is IMO (not the PDF).


----------



## msl

Earthboy said:


> So, what are the results if they are done with this experiment?


Here is the "success" people rave about


https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/file/index/docid/892212/filename/hal-00892212.pdf










6 years in and only 5 were left alive from the 150 and they had managed to "breed" a grand total of 4 surviving hives.

so you need to let 30 die for each hive you want to have alive and producing "survivor" bees, but those hives are doing soo poorly only 1/2 of them are strong enough to swam....

Who in their right mind promotes this as a beeking success and suggests hobbyists copy this in their backyard ?
Even starting at 5 hives a peice.. they can split all they want, only 1 in 6 of them will get the gentnics needed to succeed.. and when you toss out isolation.. that number becomes small indeed..
This was 22 years ago... It didn't work then then when the viruses were not so bad and hives lasted longer untreated.


----------



## GregB

msl said:


> Who in their right mind promotes this as a beeking success and* suggests hobbyists copy this in their backyard ?*


A new hobbyists in their backyard with 3 hives of "almond bees" doing the TF - that is the inherent problem.
At my current position I would ask all the per-annual bee-buying hobbyists around me to just *treat *AND do a good job at it (so I can keep experimenting with the IPM).
This way I at least have a chance for some improvements.
Otherwise it is a total disaster for everyone at my location (TF or non-TF - we all burn the same).


I will paste this local conversation quote again because it is indicative of the problem.
These "natural beeking" books indeed cause some harm.


> ...........
> I prefer to leave them alone most of the summer, per Fedor Lazutin's book, Keeping Bees with a Smile. (A vision and practice of natural apiculture)...........


----------



## msl

GregV said:


> At my current position I would ask all the per-annual bee-buying hobbyists around me to just *treat *AND do a good job at it (so I can keep experimenting with the IPM).
> This way I at least have a chance for some improvements.


hmmm (and I am saying this with a smile, no insult ment)

What is the difference between per annual buying imported almond bees vs your per annual swarm catching of said imported bees?

It sounds like your saying you couldn't pull off treatment free because your neighbors weren't treating enuf, but if they did treat enuff that you could go TF or Low Treatment/ IMP while your using the same stock you say they need to soldy treat to keep their mites from hurting your bees ?

So in a roundabout way your saying if they keep bees the ways you want to, it will impact your ability to keep bees in the way you want to.

Have you considered your neighbors might really like it if YOU would just *treat *AND do a good job at it? 😉


----------



## GregB

msl said:


> What is the difference between per annual buying imported almond bees vs your per annual swarm catching of said imported bees?


I repeated many times - my swarm catching is community service.
Either I catch them OR someone else will OR the bees enter someone's barn.
So that is that.
People loose swarms and I catch them on my back porch.
Why ask this again rhetorically?

Maybe I should just sell these swarms right back out. How do you like that idea?

Why I don't treat?
Like I stated I am switching to IPM - I laid out my plans and you know them.
I said I need to change my own management to be sustainable - because it is not now.
So that is that.

Meanwhile, people around me are "keeping bees with a smile" as I documented OR carpet-treat their bees in October (which is same as NOT treating). 
I know of live-cases where people lost 80-100% around me while they still treated.

So I want to learn IPM and become good at as I see no other way forward.
I also prefer the others do that same OR just treat and become good at it.


----------



## Earthboy

GregV said:


> I repeated many times - my swarm catching is community service.
> Either I catch them OR someone else will OR the bees enter someone's barn.
> So that is that.
> People loose swarms and I catch them on my back porch.
> Why ask this again rhetorically?
> 
> Maybe I should just sell these swarms right back out. How do you like that idea?
> 
> Why I don't treat?
> Like I stated I am switching to IPM - I laid out my plans and you know them.
> I said I need to change my own management to be sustainable - because it is not now.
> So that is that.
> 
> Meanwhile, people around me are "keeping bees with a smile" as I documented OR carpet-treat their bees in October (which is same as NOT treating).
> I know of live-cases where people lost 80-100% around me while they still treated.
> 
> So I want to learn IPM and become good at as I see no other way forward.
> I also prefer the others do that same OR just treat and become good at it.


First of all, thank you for not treating bees. I have advocated non-treatment around year 2000 on Bee-L and got burned many a time. You do not explain why you do not treat to anyone since, to me, the answer is just too obvious: all kept bees die left alone in nature. They are kept in the bubble of ICU. No offense, but I do not even do IPM. The only treatment for me is placing wiper cloth to trap SHB. That's all. And I have not treated my bees for the past 20 or more years. How possible is that? All the commercial beekeepers are skeptical and understandably so: the more bees you have, the harder it gets because you are bringing varying degree of immunity in the population, let alone the fact your kind neighbor may have been treating his or hers.

Like you, I have been rescuing feral population to affect mite and SHB resistance. Here is my FB:









Facebook — Выполните вход или зарегистрируйтесь


Войдите на Facebook, чтобы общаться с друзьями, родственниками и знакомыми.




www.facebook.com





Again, I am grateful for what you do, and I do not see why you have to apologize or explain what you do as I admire people doing the right thing and not doing things right because others do.


----------



## Earthboy

Earthboy said:


> First of all, thank you for not treating bees. I have advocated non-treatment around year 2000 on Bee-L and got burned many a time. You do not have to explain why you do not treat to anyone since, to me, the answer is just too obvious: all kept bees die left alone in nature. And I do not want to live in or inherit such environment to futurity. They are kept in the bubble of ICU demanding nearly 24/7 care, counting mites, an anal retentive chore. Where is the fun in that? No offense, but I do not even do IPM. The only treatment for me is placing wiper cloth to trap SHB. That's all. And I have not treated my bees for the past 20 or more years. How possible is that? All the commercial beekeepers are skeptical and understandably so: the more bees you have, the harder it gets because you are bringing varying degree of immunity in the population, let alone the fact your kind neighbor may have been treating his or hers.
> 
> Like you, I have been rescuing feral population to affect mite and SHB resistance. Here is my FB:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Facebook — Выполните вход или зарегистрируйтесь
> 
> 
> Войдите на Facebook, чтобы общаться с друзьями, родственниками и знакомыми.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.facebook.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again, I am grateful for what you do, and I do not see why you have to apologize or explain what you do as I admire people doing the right thing and not doing things right because others do.


 I came back to Bee-L after decades of sabbatical only to find out nothing much has changed.

Best,

Earthboy


----------



## crofter

Being "right" is of course mostly a matter of ones opinion; even the so called "truths" of today, become the fallacies of tomorrow!


----------



## Earthboy

crofter said:


> Being "right" is of course mostly a matter of ones opinion; even the so called "truths" of today, become the fallacies of tomorrow!


I dare not speak about "truth" but facts. To paraphrase Eric Fromm (The Sane Society), the fact that millions people practice the same thing year in and year out does not prove what they are doing is right. Consider the Nazis.


----------



## AHudd

Earthboy said:


> Consider the Nazis.


Are you talking about their use of propaganda or their parasitic effect on the human race?
Should we have let them alone until they reached a symbiotic relationship with society? I'm sorry, I do not understand your analogy.
If you assume TF is correct and TX is wrong, absolutely, aren't you making the same mistake? 

Alex


----------



## LAlldredge

TF or Treat requires skill as GregV mentions. I would never want to start beekeeping without learning how to treat first (and know how). Even if you treat but do your OAV too late and only do a series of 3 you can still lose your apiary. VinoFarm on YouTube just did that and lost 13 or 14. He's devastated. For my location I use Apivar in the spring (because of brood) and an OAV series in August, late fall and a single at the winter solstice. 

I'm entering my 4th year and even after overwintering with 100% success the last two years I consider myself an advanced beginner. There are a few hard core full stop skills that are a "die on the hill" skillset. These are 1) start with great stock 2) treating for mites properly 3) treating for mites in a chemical free way- advanced skills 4) nutrition and feeding 5) over wintering 6) swarming. 

You can get by and not do any of this and that is your choice. It is a more difficult road. There are also people who believe their colonies are disposable. There are also commercial operations who follow that business model. For my part- it's just not in my makeup to see something die that I had a hand in. Every one has to take responsibility for their own choices. But if you are near someone else trying to learn this hobby you have a responsibility to them as well. We all know about mite bombs, drifting and drones going where they please. This should not be a casual choice.


----------



## crofter

AHudd said:


> Are you talking about their use of propaganda or their parasitic effect on the human race?
> Should we have let them alone until they reached a symbiotic relationship with society? I'm sorry, I do not understand your analogy.
> If you assume TF is correct and TX is wrong, absolutely, aren't you making the same mistake?
> 
> Alex


I agree. This is going off into a fruitless discussion of a claimed supremacy of an idiology. This is Facebook stuff. Bee- L has a bit higher ratio of signal to noise and I would hope that Beesource would at least be somewhere in the middle. 

We do have Tailgater forum though where facts are optional!


----------



## EuroBee

I am a beekeeper for over 40 years both in France and now Wales UK.
When Varroa hit us in France we had very bad losses, not just in the apiaries, but in the wild as well.
We had no choice when we were hit. There was no medication available. The bigger the hive, the worse the problems, so we went back to skeps, we increased the number of colonies we captured and removed as many stresses from the bees as possible. This seemed to work to the extent that we had far less losses than when the bees were in hives.
In the wild the bees recovered within 10 years or so and as we only took our bees from the forest, we found we survived at home as well.
We started keeping the bees in the skeps till they got to the 2nd year. This showed us which swarms would be worth keeping and once transferred was a better line that seemed to prolong the colony till at least a new queen was reared and the hive became what we called 'honey production'. With the addition of the supers on top of the Layens, we stopped interfering with the 'nest' and the bees did even better.
When treatment became available we gambled and we did not change. We found we did not need to.
So the process was: Capture swarm, house in skep for one winter, transfer to hive in 2nd year (bees kept in forest some way from production areas.).
In the end we had almost twice the number of hives than before varroa to collect the same amount of product. But this was of little consequence as the bees were free!
I can not talk about what treating is like; we have never done it. Why start something you don't need to do?


----------



## gww

Eurobee


> In the end we had almost twice the number of hives than before varroa to collect the same amount of product. But this was of little consequence as the bees were free!
> I can not talk about what treating is like; we have never done it. Why start something you don't need to do?


I have only been at it going into my 6th year but this is how I roll also.
Welcome to the forum.
Cheers
gww


----------



## Earthboy

AHudd said:


> Are you talking about their use of propaganda or their parasitic effect on the human race?
> Should we have let them alone until they reached a symbiotic relationship with society? I'm sorry, I do not understand your analogy.
> If you assume TF is correct and TX is wrong, absolutely, aren't you making the same mistake?
> 
> Alex


Sorry, I should have made my point clear: I was trying to show how nearly 100% Germans under the Nazis believed in Aryan superiority and practiced to maintain that--without question if what they are doing is right or wrong. Just as globally nearly all commercial outfits now use OA for mites.


----------



## Earthboy

Earthboy said:


> Sorry, I should have made my point clear: I was trying to show how nearly 100% Germans under the Nazis believed in Aryan superiority and practiced to maintain that--without question if what they are doing is right or wrong. Just as globally nearly all commercial outfits now use OA for mites with seemingly little consideration for long term effects. The simple issue here is this: If bees are healthy or healthier than ever, how come they cannot survive in nature left alone??????


----------



## Earthboy

EuroBee said:


> I am a beekeeper for over 40 years both in France and now Wales UK.
> When Varroa hit us in France we had very bad losses, not just in the apiaries, but in the wild as well.
> We had no choice when we were hit. There was no medication available. The bigger the hive, the worse the problems, so we went back to skeps, we increased the number of colonies we captured and removed as many stresses from the bees as possible. This seemed to work to the extent that we had far less losses than when the bees were in hives.
> In the wild the bees recovered within 10 years or so and as we only took our bees from the forest, we found we survived at home as well.
> We started keeping the bees in the skeps till they got to the 2nd year. This showed us which swarms would be worth keeping and once transferred was a better line that seemed to prolong the colony till at least a new queen was reared and the hive became what we called 'honey production'. With the addition of the supers on top of the Layens, we stopped interfering with the 'nest' and the bees did even better.
> When treatment became available we gambled and we did not change. We found we did not need to.
> So the process was: Capture swarm, house in skep for one winter, transfer to hive in 2nd year (bees kept in forest some way from production areas.).
> In the end we had almost twice the number of hives than before varroa to collect the same amount of product. But this was of little consequence as the bees were free!
> I can not talk about what treating is like; we have never done it. Why start something you don't need to do?


This is precisely what I have been doing for the past 20 years in the people's democratic Republic of Oklahoma.









Facebook — Выполните вход или зарегистрируйтесь


Войдите на Facebook, чтобы общаться с друзьями, родственниками и знакомыми.




www.facebook.com





Earthboy

You can nay-say, but if your bees are so healthy with treatment, how come they cannot survive by themselves in nature? Is it wrong for them to thrive in nature alone? If they cannot survive by themselves alone, what does it say about your expert beekeeping?


----------



## Earthboy

EuroBee said:


> I am a beekeeper for over 40 years both in France and now Wales UK.
> When Varroa hit us in France we had very bad losses, not just in the apiaries, but in the wild as well.
> We had no choice when we were hit. There was no medication available. The bigger the hive, the worse the problems, so we went back to skeps, we increased the number of colonies we captured and removed as many stresses from the bees as possible. This seemed to work to the extent that we had far less losses than when the bees were in hives.
> In the wild the bees recovered within 10 years or so and as we only took our bees from the forest, we found we survived at home as well.
> We started keeping the bees in the skeps till they got to the 2nd year. This showed us which swarms would be worth keeping and once transferred was a better line that seemed to prolong the colony till at least a new queen was reared and the hive became what we called 'honey production'. With the addition of the supers on top of the Layens, we stopped interfering with the 'nest' and the bees did even better.
> When treatment became available we gambled and we did not change. We found we did not need to.
> So the process was: Capture swarm, house in skep for one winter, transfer to hive in 2nd year (bees kept in forest some way from production areas.).
> In the end we had almost twice the number of hives than before varroa to collect the same amount of product. But this was of little consequence as the bees were free!
> I can not talk about what treating is like; we have never done it. Why start something you don't need to do?


Eurobee, I am also on UK Forum, as well. Meet me, if you like:









Beekeeping & Apiculture Forum


Beekeeping/apiculture forum & beekeeping classifieds for International & United Kingdom. Bee keeping forums for beehive building, for sale, queen, nucs, honey.




beekeepingforum.co.uk


----------



## msl

LAlldredge said:


> TF or Treat requires skill as GregV mentions.


Were seems to be more important than how in most cases


LAlldredge said:


> . Even if you treat but do your OAV too late and only do a series of 3 you can still lose your apiary. VinoFarm on YouTube just did that and lost 13 or 14.


I had caught that, he gave a bunch of other excuses, but your assessment is what came to my mind... one thing that became obvious with the amount of mites on dead bees is he didn't do a brood less OAV inthe winter... failure to do that last winter may have led to his failure this year. I have seen this in a growing trend... youtubers in clean white bee suits advocating 2 or 3 course of treatment doing the growing season, and not doing a broodless winter TX....bad info



AHudd said:


> If you assume TF is correct and TX is wrong,


To me neither is right or wrong.. Who here would NOT want to be a successful TF beekeeper?

But unless you are in isolation, its wrong not to manage your mites and damage others hives...

Be it by chemicals, genetics, or biotech methods they do need managed, and if one management strategy is failing, you need the next one in the pipe line to end the threat.
If drone culling, a screened BB, and genetics is failing maybe that's weekly sugar dusting and a induced brood break, or OA, or for some of the extremists, euthanize the hive.. Ie I burned my 1st few EFB hives rather then use antibiotics, I didn't want to them, and it was wrong to leave a threat to my apiary and those with in flight range.

The 2 big failings of the TF movement are
1 The complete denial (verging on flat earthers ) of the very damaging effect mite bombs have on others... witch is funny as they holed Seeley up as a TF hero, yet completely ignore his mite bomb work were he showed one mite bomb could easily kill 2 other hives, even at great distance.

2 the belief that by some how not treating the 2 hives in your backyard and watching them die you are some how "helping" the bees... Gotland let over 170 die so that 7 would live, and yet has had no effect on helping the bees.



> You can nay-say, but if your bees are so healthy with treatment, how come they cannot survive by themselves in nature?


well, neither can a sheep, turning a Holstein out in the TX desert won't work out so well either..

If you really want to talk about what you have been doing and what worked for you, please go start a thread in the TF section.. There is currently a dearth of success stories and it would be fun to hear one
what surprised me most about you operation was importing queens form CA and FL, for many here that has been met with failure.

honestly I can't believe the problems you have been having with SHB, loseing 20 nucs must be horbull.. get those swiffer pads out of your hives ASAP, the sooner you stop treating for SHB the faster your bees will get strong and learn to deal with them, and stop importing those CA queens, your program will develop much faster that way !!

I have had zero issues with SHB for the last 10 years, you should do what I did and never treat for SHB

but.... no one in my area has issues with SHB, they do poorly here, and my success likely has little to do with my management
as you note in one of your furry of bee L posts


> In the south, SHB is far worse than mites or any other bee diseases so much so that it is nearly impossible to make splits in the fall because of SHB.


So I treat the pest that gives me problems (varroa) you treat the pest that gives you problems (SHB)

And that's the rub when some one starts to get all preachy about thier success
They often miss the influence of location... if we could just by queens for CA and be fine with out treatments.. we would do just that!!!! many many have tried, few succeeded. IE you talk about grafting off AHB stock this year... Few will argue AHB can't take care of varroa... but its not a solution for those of us to the north, and its not a solution for areas close to people 


Its almost like the gold rush, sounded like a great idea but most did poorly and few were successful, turns out no mater hard you dig you don't get far with out a good piece of ground, and despite all the failures the few success, the ones who found a good spot, become ledgens


----------



## gww

mls
The one thing you left out is what counts as success to an individual doing the work. It may not be the same for all and some may only count getting every drop possible as success. Second is the value of the bee. Does your value system demand you save every bee if you can get what you want with out it. Any one who keeps bees can point the finger at others but most can never be pure when the goal is to use bees as a tool and not a pet. Some use them in ways others would not. So regardless of the bees, can it please the guy doing the work.

There will always be a mite bomb if from feral bees if no where else yet people that watch their own bees and have a way of managing them seem to survive this with little adverse effect. Jim loyn said it the best I ever saw. Basically, he did not worry about others mite bombs cause he took care of his own bees. No excuses. Many seem to do well by watching their own bees with out controlling everything around them which is impossible.

Some would hate to have two hives giving 50 lbs each if they could have one give 100. This is an interesting math problem depending on which is more work to who and the how of it.
One mans lead might be another's gold.
Cheers
gww
Ps I do agree on location though even location can be changed and ebbs and flows. You have to do what you have to do in your location with your bee to get what you want whether that is a lot or a little. Recognizing what you need might be the hard part that makes it an art of keeping bees to meet your own needs.


----------



## JWPalmer

Earthboy, Thank you for posting the link to your FB page. Now I know who you are. At least here on Beesource, as opposed to BEE-L, you can freely discuss your beekeeping style, especially on the TF sub-forum, without others haranguing you. Discussions in other sub-forums can get lively though!


----------



## msl

gww said:


> Jim loyn said it the best I ever saw. Basically, he did not worry about others mite bombs cause he took care of his own bees. No excuses.


I disagree.. but I keep in a different place then Jim, so his problems may not be like mine.
Just like I don't have earthboys SHB problems, Jim may not have my bomb problems..
main yard, I had my mites under control.. pulled nucs and requeened the yard with cells.. broodless dribble in mid aug.. mid sept rolls showed 0 mites..
best guess the neighbor's (100') 20+ started collapsing mid Oct...
by mid Nov when he showed up to do his 1st mite treatment of the year just 2 were left...
at this point mine were showing impacts as the summer bees died off.. 2 down, one failing.. 4 rounds of OAV done but knowing the damage was done to the winter bees at this point

so far 4 out of 24 left alive in that yard... despite sold treatment regime, despite most of the queens in that yard being grafted off a Sam Comfort TF queen ( F-2 VP queens VSH) the yard failed under the mite pressure

Losses in the 5 other yards with the same protocol ... one single that was a post flow split that failed to thrive form the start, one mite killed nuc.

My take is the only thing that could have saved that yard was a prophylactic long release synthetic miticide treatment dropped in mid sept when the washes were showing 0 mites and against all the rules
But locally we saw a large up tick in apaivar failures this year.. so maybe not

I got nothing here...
A yard I have 0.5 miles away did fine, weak, but fine, as did a OB hive at a school 0.47m (treated with apaivar) 

dude killed my bees, that's my story, and I am sticking to it.. be 0.5+ miles a way 
Seeley shows a 1-2 kill rate with mite bombs, I have not issue believing my 1 to 1 loses (plus the 2 single hive yards close prox dyeing) to be in speck


----------



## Josiah Garber

I think not treating success is highly dependent on cell size. Since it takes a couple generations of bees to regress down to normal cell size, it may make sense to treat till you regress to the smaller size. 

I've been trying no treatment for many years, but often with heavy losses. I decided to measure my brood comb one day and realized I was only halfway to the target 4.9mm cell size. 

I decided to treat my hives once last fall with OAV. So far out of 5 hives all are alive except a small nuc from a late swarm that I wasn't expecting to make it.

Hopefully this year I can have the bees draw out new brood comb that will be close to 4.9mm. I run foundationless frames. After catching a swarm or installing a package, the first generation of brood comb is in between 5.4mm and 4.9mm


----------



## little_john

Earthboy said:


> Sorry, I should have made my point clear: I was trying to show how* nearly 100% Germans* under the Nazis believed in Aryan superiority and practiced to maintain that--without question if what they are doing is right or wrong. Just as globally* nearly all commercial outfits* now use OA for mites.


You appear to be criticising beekeepers who treat Varroa for not being critical in their thinking - and yet you write " ... *nearly 100% Germans* ..., and ... *nearly all commercial outfits* ..., that sounds to me very much like the absolutist thinking which indicates the mindset of A True Believer.

One of the difficulties which TF beekeepers face in trying to persuade others to risk livestock by joining their ranks is this:
If, by avoiding treatment for Varroa, a 'super-bee' were to emerge which was capable of co-existing happily with the Varroa mite (and at the same time not fall prey to the various viruses which that mite is known to carry), then that highly significant genetic advantage - if indeed it were a true advantage - would proceed to spread itself throughout the honey-bee population of a country, without any human involvement. This would occur 'in the background', so to speak, and would be completely indifferent to whether or not those colonies were being treated for mites or not.
Admittedly, that spread would be far slower in those areas dominated by human selection, but would become enhanced wherever feral populations and natural swarming were allowed to occur.

The fact that this has not yet happened, and at the moment shows no sign of occurring is - I would suggest - significant. And so what are beekeepers supposed to do in the meantime ? I learned the rudiments of beekeeping as a schoolboy back in '59, and when I returned to the hobby following early retirement, I'd never heard of Varroa mites and so acquired some bees in complete ignorance of them - and the bees died. Of course they died.

I quickly learned about mites and varroacides, and chose to use Oxalic Acid, and now they don't die. I haven't lost a colony to mites since that time. I almost lost a colony mid-season to DWV, but a quick dose of VOA stopped that dead in it's tracks. It's not the mites which bother me so much, they're a bloody nuisance right enough, it's the viruses they carry which have the potential to wreak havoc - those are my main concern.
LJ


----------



## Earthboy

JWPalmer said:


> Earthboy, Thank you for posting the link to your FB page. Now I know who you are. At least here on Beesource, as opposed to BEE-L, you can freely discuss your beekeeping style, especially on the TF sub-forum, without others haranguing you. Discussions in other sub-forums can get lively though!


Thank you, JP. Incidentally, I am familiar with MP (Vermont) too. Like Barry, I was sick of Bee-L and exiled to Beesource (2007), but increasingly I have found the latter sounds like Bee-L I was especially alarmed by beeks and others here supporting big pharma, which made me wander off, on and off.

My basic stance is simple: all the "healthy" treated bees die, left alone in nature. Nobody disagrees with this. 1. If they are healthy, why do they die? 2. Does it not then question our beekeeping practice?

The fact that millions of beekeeper are treating bees does not necessarily mean what they are doing right. They may be right in short term, but not in long, sustainable terms.

JP, Thank you for being an open-minded, fair moderator.

Earthboy


----------



## LAlldredge

I have listened to Sam Comfort in podcasts. He will often say "treatment free but not stupid". My other fave podcaster is Leigh at Five Apple Farm. She's treatment free but lives on farmland well away from other people. She knows what she's doing and so does he. Hey, if someone can do that successfully more power to them. We can learn from each other. As I've said before treatment/chemical free is an advanced skill if you do it properly. 

But these decisions are not made in a vacuum. What I choose to do is to know my neighbor within flight range and work cooperatively. We are all connected.

Already there are queen breeders who are doing outstanding varroa resistant work. We all want the same thing- a day when the viruses will not be as persistent. This is the long game of genetics. Progress is undeniable. We have moved beyond a panic stage. Now it's a nuisance but a workable one.


----------



## AHudd

Earthboy said:


> My basic stance is simple: all the "healthy" treated bees die, left alone in nature. Nobody disagrees with this. 1. If they are healthy, why do they die? 2. Does it not then question our beekeeping practice
> 
> Earthboy




I don't disagree with this statement, I do, however think it is hyperbole. One could just as easily say, with the same certainty, _all_ Honey bees die if left alone in nature. The survivors are the swarms cast off by the hives that will succumb to the viruses that are vectored by Varroa. And the swarms that do survive past the second Winter did not find an abandoned nest with drawn comb. Isn't splitting one of the core tenants of TF?

If your bees can survive in nature without you then I will be looking forward to their inevitable spread to my area by way of swarms as I am only a hundred miles away. That is, unless you become dependent on Africanized bees. 
I also think that colonies don't die from SHB or Wax Moths, but that they are a symptom of dying colonies that were probably weakened by mites.

I also believe that successful TF is highly dependent on location. 

If I had it to do over again, I still would buy VSH packages, but I would treat them heavily for Varroa from day one. I mean every day for at least three days, probably more. The beauty of hindsight.

One thing I think we all can agree on is that the definition of success is as subjective as work. 

By the way, what does your State Inspector think about your use of skeps?

Alex


----------



## gww

msl
One of my points is control and what your influence is. You did not influence your neighbor. If somebody decided to drop 150 hives by you even as a short term staging and during swarm season and they treated and managed for swarms but still lost 15 percent to swarming, the impact on environment would be the same. You would still not be able to control it and by your standard could not point a finger at bad management. So you have to respond to what you control and with in your comfort zone on what you spend and do while your bees are living living in that environment.

Many good bee keepers understand this and keep bees quite well based on what their goals from their bees are. They do very well recognizing what they have control over and responding accordingly. Some body may not like something they are doing for some other reason and put into perspective, nobody can not be criticized for some practice that would not show hypocrisy of position if only pure impact to bees was looked at.
People keep bees for what they can get from the bee.

They may not really be criticized if their truck broke down or if they got put on overtime at work and had to prioritize something over the bees short term or just made the conscious decision that enough was enough but the impact would be the same. So in the real world you have to do what you have to do to accomplish your goals.

These are the things that make bee keeping and art and like all artist, some are better artist than others. It is the guy doing the work who gets to decide what to try and make the picture look like.
Cheers
gww


----------



## msl

Earthboy said:


> xiled to Beesource (2007), but increasingly I have found the latter sounds like Bee-L I was especially alarmed by beeks and others here supporting big pharma


wow... that's got to be the nicest thing I have ever hurd any one say about beesource!!
Sorry your don't like what has been done with the place. A few of us are quite happy with how things turned out.. it took a bit of work
yes there is a lot more "fact" based beekeeping dissuction happing, the army of hobbyists who were towing the party line and henpecking those who practiced standard management and dwindled to but a few (and the ones left are much more amiably to the reality's of beekeeping) as the action of natural selection (that they talked so much about) thinned their numbers as their losses became unsustainable... in the end most were gone, out had turned to TX (much like I did)

Just look at the TF section... there is a LOT of data, detailed records of success/failure, discussion of the impact of studies and programs etc
Far less hyperbole and out right lies (I only lose 5%, TF bees have less losses then treated bees, etc) and the pushing of long failed strategy's.

As I said before... if you want to soap box...meh
If you want to share your success and methods, head over to the TF section and start a thread, many of us would love to hear it 



AHudd said:


> One thing I think we all can agree on is that the definition of success is as subjective as work.


I prefer to use sustainable as the "success" metric
Either your a consumer of bees and importing packages/swarms/nucs in to your operation
or your neutral and siting static
or your an exporter, growing your operation numbers and or selling bees
that way its simple... if your an importer, your not being a successful beekeeper, as your not keeping them, your losing them.




gww said:


> One of my points is control and what your influence is. You did not influence your neighbor. If somebody decided to drop 150 hives by you even as a short term staging and during swarm season and they treated and managed for swarms but still lost 15 percent to swarming, the impact on environment would be the same


not in the least... those swarms and going to be hard pressed to find a place to live... "natural" density is set by the areas carrying capacity, the limiting factor on carrying capacity is the avaibulty of nest sites, witch is why swarm trapping works so well, many more swarms then nest sites. 
so those swarms would have next to no impact on me as the number of nest sites in flight range of me hasn't changed, and they will be filled come spring any way with or with out these new swarms. If you look at Seely's work and the records for the old skep keepers it looks like only about 25% of swarms find a suitable home do to this 

I may not control my neighbor or other beekeepers, but I CAN influence them, kind of the whole point in posting it, spreading the word and what not.


----------



## gww

Msl
Agreed, You can try and influence. The guy doing it will decide in the end and it will still be hard to question with out being questioned back with merit of impact similarities being able to be pointed out on all sides based on perspective. However, bee keeping may be self regulating if your position that you mention all the time plays out. You say many have tried and now many are gone or changed. If this is true then you have a short term problem and bee keeping and life is about addressing problems. You don't have problems every day but work through the ones you do have until it has passed. 

To the 25 percent swarms only finding a home. I guess this comes down to the problem and who has it. "Maybe" this has less impact on your specific apiary (which I doubt) but fills more neighborhood chimneys and so does not relieve impact or guilt but more of who is impacted.

There is no way to keep bees and have no impact and so the person doing it picks his poison and sows and reaps based on his needs from bees.

The fact of impact from all does not make the walking in certain shoes more right for one than for the other as all have some effect that can be correlated based on objective.

Finding stuff that works for you consistently regardless of others is what many successful bee keepers do everyday. Not always by choice but by necessity. I am sure many would like to decide the rules but lots adjust to what the rule are and still excel. 

I am sure that all bee keepers have similar experiences and there are many that are successful and many that are not. Some are consistently successful. Some that try and copy them may still fail and not know why. That said, a good place to start would be copying somebody successful.
That said also, I do see many ways to get to many objectives that seem to work for individuals that do not all get there the same exact way.
Cheers
gww


----------



## GregB

Earthboy said:


> First of all, thank you for not treating bees. ...........
> 
> Again, I am grateful for what you do, and I do not see why you have to apologize or explain what you do as I admire people doing the right thing and not doing things right because others do.


Sorry, but this praise is mis-placed.

I am trying to figure out what is possible and what is most useful (while still having something in return).
Not fanatical about TF, just to clarify - as the TF at *my particular circumstance* is a non-productive and non-sustainable dead end I concluded.
I am just trying to be open and honest about it (and don't really like disinformation/misinformation and unsupported story-telling either way - for or against).

Importantly - this is not to say TF is impossible.
Double-importantly - exact circumstances of each particular successful TF example need to be put out and understood and learned from (without assumption that the same is the global truth).
For this people should be honest and educated and forthcoming.

My own 5-year wintering survival records while being 100% chem-free - pathetic and unsustainable:


> ---------------------
> 2016/2017 - 1/2 (50%)
> 2017/2018 - 2/11 (18%)
> 2018/2019 - 4/13 (31%)
> 2019/2020 - 0/19 (0%)
> 2020/2021 - 2/15 (13%)
> ...........................
> *Conclusion: expected 5 year TF survival probability at my place is 15%*.


The original post:








GregV's Alternative way to keep (have?) bees.


And for the fun of it - here is a sample of the real Primorsky bees in the compatible format. Just mutts of mostly C-lineage - like the mutts I posted above - pretty much the C-lineage mixed in with the O-lineage in various proportions. Don't get me started about the "pure Russians" or "pure...




www.beesource.com


----------



## JWPalmer

I believe the road to TF is not to be totally TF, but to be reduced treatment. A new term, RT Beekeeping. This is the stategy I adopted last year. As I have previously posted, I allowed my most susceptible hives to die out last year to get their genetics out if my yard. I treated with OAV twice, not two rounds, two applications. After the initial losses, pre any treatments, I was left with 11 hives and two nucs. One nuc and a hive died to starvation, and another has gone laying worker. This has left me with nine strong colonies coming out of winter. They will get a Spring treatment of OAV to see what their current mite load is, but I do not plan to treat again until fall, if the bee gods are willing. But, if the loads are high, I do not intend to sacrifice these bees chasing an idea. They will get treated and then we will see what Autumn brings.


----------



## gww

jw
No criticism of your method from me. If you have a real good hive and a few that your counts might say you could let die with out loss and some extra time. You might make a queen cell with the good brood over a queen excluder and crunch just the queen on the bad ones. I do not do this cause I am too lazy and I also do not evaluate my hive performance but when splitting just pick one and split. I have no real ambition but if I did, I might do a little re-queening and save resources. If you are counting mites anyway, it might be a fun project.
Cheers
gww


----------



## GregB

JWPalmer said:


> I believe the road to TF is not to be totally TF, but to be *reduced treatment*. A new term, RT Beekeeping. ........


+1
Reduced treatment (RT) - I can subscribe to this.
At some circumstances the RT can be reduced to 0 - this is an inclusive term (not binary yes/no).


----------



## msl

JWPalmer said:


> I believe the road to TF is not to be totally TF, but to be reduced treatment. A new term, RT Beekeeping.


really its not new
its IPM
a term/method that is often miss under stood by both partisan groups
The better living threw chemistry types think its sugar dusting, The bonders scream its treatments..

What it truly is, is a scaled response starting with mite resistant stock, and when sampling that stock shows mite growth to the point you can reasonably predict a negative impact, you go up a layer switching form prevention to intervention.

Sense you didn't blanket treat, you have the data to know next spring which to pinch (no need for the hive to die, just the queen) and witch to graft off (much stronger positive selection then splitting) or witch supplier worked for you.

This allows the selecting for resistance (or knowing what sources were better) in a situation were the traits may fail a survival test, but are still better then imported almond bees and are likely worth protecting so that progress can be made instead of lost

In a nut shell you set things up for the best chance for being TF and then only treat if the sampling tells you need to, and if you don't need to, you don't treat

hope for the best, plan for the worst


----------



## William Bagwell

Would thermal be down in 'Physical - Mechanical'?


----------



## LAlldredge

I like the idea of IPM but there are factors that change from year to year. Two reasons- (1) weather producing (2) pressure from new beekeepers or ones that change treatments. We had a drought last year. I noticed more mite pressure last year even on my mite resistant hives. That's not a coincidence. Plus, also wondered if mites could transport easier because there was no rain to wash them off the host flowers they are waiting on.


----------



## Gray Goose

LAlldredge said:


> I like the idea of IPM but there are factors that change from year to year. Two reasons- (1) weather producing (2) pressure from new beekeepers or ones that change treatments. We had a drought last year. I noticed more mite pressure last year even on my mite resistant hives. That's not a coincidence. Plus, also wondered if mites could transport easier because there was no rain to wash them off the host flowers they are waiting on.


LA,
Maybe in a drought the "water hole" is the mite transfer spot, where bees rub wing tips.
no drought there is lots of water holes, so less bee to bee contact.

wild guess

Good discussion, I would think I fall in the RT clan.

Main yard at home is treated with OA, So I have bees to work with. F1s go to the production yard, this winter loss of 6 out of 7 in the production yard. That queen comes back, and will be given drone comb for breeding reasons. will make 6-8 more F1s this spring, and take to the production yard , wash rinse repeat. So far second year queens and large hives die of mites in the production yard, So I do not have a line I can share.

beginning to wonder if the 1 or 2 that make it are just lucky as the trend is not changing. 

GG


----------



## LAlldredge

Gray Goose said:


> LA,
> Maybe in a drought the "water hole" is the mite transfer spot, where bees rub wing tips.
> no drought there is lots of water holes, so less bee to bee contact.
> 
> wild guess
> 
> Good discussion, I would think I fall in the RT clan.
> 
> Main yard at home is treated with OA, So I have bees to work with. F1s go to the production yard, this winter loss of 6 out of 7 in the production yard. That queen comes back, and will be given drone comb for breeding reasons. will make 6-8 more F1s this spring, and take to the production yard , wash rinse repeat. So far second year queens and large hives die of mites in the production yard, So I do not have a line I can share.
> 
> beginning to wonder if the 1 or 2 that make it are just lucky as the trend is not changing.
> 
> GG


Hey Gray so glad you are here. You single handedly kept me from making some really poor decisions and I thank you. I guess the gist of my post is this- we need a flexible lens to look at our apiaries through. This is not a "one and done" exercise. There are influences on our yard that change. Better genetics, weather, other beekeepers etc. We need eyes wide open every year to evaluate and respond.

I especially dislike the idea of removing drone brood. Yeah, you want to mess up the genetics of your yard just do that... I personally am a big fan of drones. They are the other half of the equation.


----------



## Gray Goose

LAlldredge said:


> Hey Gray so glad you are here. You single handedly kept me from making some really poor decisions and I thank you. I guess the gist of my post is this- we need a flexible lens to look at our apiaries through. This is not a "one and done" exercise. There are influences on our yard that change. Better genetics, weather, other beekeepers etc. We need eyes wide open every year to evaluate and respond.
> 
> I especially dislike the idea of removing drone brood. Yeah, you want to mess up the genetics of your yard just do that... I personally am a big fan of drones. They are the other half of the equation.


thanks for the reply.

as I have made too many poor decisions, I am hoping to keep others from making a few.
Keeping is really changing, in the last 10 years or so.
Odd each location (I now have bees at 6) is different from the others.
one yard goes hot, one gets mite bombed, one almost has not surplus honey but winters well.
IMO location is a big input on how folks do, just looking at the differences I see in those 6 places.
My 6 inner selves often argue about which yard is the better one. 

big yes to the flexible lens. Glad you are gaining traction on your efforts.

GG


----------



## LAlldredge

Gray Goose said:


> thanks for the reply.
> 
> as I have made too many poor decisions, I am hoping to keep others from making a few.
> Keeping is really changing, in the last 10 years or so.
> Odd each location (I now have bees at 6) is different from the others.
> one yard goes hot, one gets mite bombed, one almost has not surplus honey but winters well.
> IMO location is a big input on how folks do, just looking at the differences I see in those 6 places.
> My 6 inner selves often argue about which yard is the better one.
> 
> big yes to the flexible lens. Glad you are gaining traction on your efforts.
> 
> GG


Traction is nice but I remain humble. My allegiance is to my colonies and they tell me what to do if I listen well. I really wonder about the idea of mites being worse in a drought. It really had an impact here. They are quite nimble but at the end of the day they still need transportation rendezvous. I wonder if anyone has researched the effects of rain on mite persistence?


----------



## LAlldredge

PS Gray- I'm a fan of all of your separate personalities. Being flexible is a virtue and takes into account the many variables that go into successful apiaries.


----------



## gww

LAll........
I have only seen one study and not sure how it correlates to your situation but the study showed that mites do not reproduce as well in humid conditions. It was very recently brought up in one of the BeeL comments but I did not reread the study.
Cheers
gww


----------



## msl

LAlldredge said:


> I like the idea of IPM but there are factors that change from year to year.





LAlldredge said:


> This is not a "one and done" exercise. There are influences on our yard that change. Better genetics, weather, other beekeepers etc. We need eyes wide open every year to evaluate and respond


Yes, that's why you sample.. to keep your eyes open and allow you to adapt to the changes.




LAlldredge said:


> I especially dislike the idea of removing drone brood. Yeah, you want to mess up the genetics of your yard just do that...


I disagree, if your big enough to influence you mating's (most are not) you need to be as selective of your drone mothers as your queen mothers




William Bagwell said:


> Would thermal be down in 'Physical - Mechanical'?


yes




> So far second year queens and large hives die of mites in the production yard, So I do not have a line I can share.
> 
> beginning to wonder if the 1 or 2 that make it are just lucky as the trend is not changing.


yep.. its a big problem




in a different video he talks about bonding out 1,000 hives to get 7 survivors.. and most of the survivors were just "lucky" so he bounded out another 1,000

beyond "luck" there is a hertailbuilty problem... Meghan Milbrath only grafts from hives that have survived TF, but the resulting bees arnt restiacnt enuff to be TF (but some are)
in Chile Kefus was grafting only form TF breeders and drone flooding form TF breeders.. but the (4,000) production hives still needed treated

We see the same in Randy Oliver's work as well, were he has been exclusively grafting off TF hives and all of his queens have a TF mother for years, yet only 7% of them have become TF hives (up from under 1% over 5 years)

We have daughters of TF hives flooding the areas with drones to mate the next gen of TF queens and the proses is moving along very, very slowly.

think about it.... if only 7% are TF and you want 7 TF hives you need to run 100 hives to find them, and next year you need to run 100 more to fined the replacement queens

this is why split what lives fails (out side of areas of "good" locations) ... too many of the splits don't have enough reissuance, and (in many locations) you don't have resources alive to make euff splits to find enuff of those restacant ones


----------



## Gino45

Earthboy said:


> Sorry, I should have made my point clear: I was trying to show how nearly 100% Germans under the Nazis believed in Aryan superiority and practiced to maintain that--without question if what they are doing is right or wrong. Just as globally nearly all commercial outfits now use OA for mites.


I don't know why you were not challenged on this statement about 'Germans'. Perhaps it is because it has nothing to do with beekeeping.

My opinion is that a large percentage of the German people were scared '[email protected]$&ess' of the Nazis in their midst and conformed, not because of their belief in Aryan superiority, but rather because they feared for their own lives.

It's great for those of you who are able to gather swarms annually to help make up for your losses. I can't do that as swarms are basically nonexistent here. We do have varroa and hive beetles year round, which is a deadly combination.

FWIW, I treat not as often as I should, lose some hives every fall and winter, and basically make up for it each spring with splits made from hives that are approaching swarm strength.


----------



## gww

gino


> FWIW, I treat not as often as I should, lose some hives every fall and winter, and basically make up for it each spring with splits made from hives that are approaching swarm strength.


Just throwing and ideal out there for the heck of it. I think for honey production michael palmer does it a little different. He does graft from his best. The bee resources he uses for his splits after looking at his hives are the ones he is sure will not get big enough to produce honey. These are the ones he uses for splitting and does so with his best queens.
I am sure you know this too but thought I would mention it just in case it might matter to someone cause it sorta fits your path.
Cheers
gww


----------



## Gino45

gww said:


> gino
> 
> Just throwing and ideal out there for the heck of it. I think for honey production michael palmer does it a little different. He does graft from his best. The bee resources he uses for his splits after looking at his hives are the ones he is sure will not get big enough to produce honey. These are the ones he uses for splitting and does so with his best queens.
> I am sure you know this too but thought I would mention it just in case it might matter to someone cause it sorta fits your path.
> Cheers
> gww


I should have said that I make nucs from my strongest hives . I include 1 or 2 frames of brood in the nucs and to these I add a 'ripe' queen cell raised from selected hives. Later on, with the mated queens I make splits or newspaper combines depending on the situation. I do not do queenless splits other than to use for queen production.


----------



## gww

gino
I got that you were using your strongest hives. I was trying but not very well to point out that michael saves his strongest hives for honey production and makes splits with his weakest hives. Again, I am not nosy and apparently not a clear communicator. I just thought it was in interesting fact that kind of fit what you do with a different twist.

But I do see you can end up in the same position with combines also.
Cheers
gww


----------



## Gray Goose

gww said:


> gino
> I got that you were using your strongest hives. I was trying but not very well to point out that michael saves his strongest hives for honey production and makes splits with his weakest hives. Again, I am not nosy and apparently not a clear communicator. I just thought it was in interesting fact that kind of fit what you do with a different twist.
> 
> But I do see you can end up in the same position with combines also.
> Cheers
> gww


gww
I also break up my strongest hives for NUC creation.
Last year I did a 6 way split on a 3 deep.
IMO the micro biome and learned behavior also has an impact on the overall health of the hive.
BTW 5 of the 6 splits made the winter. my favorite F1 is again a 3 deep, and the old queen is in a 4 deep. 
moving QCs is a gene only save, the split is a biome and learned behavior save.
you can put the best QCs in a dink hive, IF the only issue is genetics then you make that work but if not then....

GG


----------



## little_john

Gino45 said:


> *I don't know why you were not challenged on this statement about 'Germans'.* Perhaps it is because it has nothing to do with beekeeping.


He was - see #679 



> My opinion is that a large percentage of the German people were scared '[email protected]$&ess' of the Nazis in their midst and conformed, not because of their belief in Aryan superiority, but rather because they feared for their own lives.


Of course. Just as large numbers were conscripted into the armed forces and obeyed orders for exactly the same reason. Some would have bought-in to the political rhetoric/ brain-washing/ propaganda of course, but not all.

There's a brilliant film, 'Das Boot', which tells the story of one U-boat mission from the German perspective. Amongst the crew, there's just one 'Party Member' on board - the rest are just so many guys doing the job they were trained for.
A film well-worth seeing, imo.
LJ
Back to bees ....


----------



## Earthboy

First of all, I would like to thank you for your treatment free efforts. 

I started TF around year 2003 and never looked back. That's nearly 20 years ago. In fact, that is when Bee-L ostracized me to exile to Beesource along with Barry. My article entitled "Think Twice Before You Treat Twice" was, in fact, posted here for a while on this forum around then. My simple premise for TF is/was this:

Nearly all "treated healthy" bees die, left alone, in nature. Nobody disputes that. Why is that? That made me wonder if they are really "healthy." In fact, it struck me they are UNhealthy. Or perhaps whatever we as beekeepers are doing to them was/is wrong. Otherwise, they should thrive, kept or not, as they have done for eons.

So I started collecting ferals. South African, Puerto Rico, Sweden studies--all indicate that it takes about a decade or more for the bees to develop resistance, and v. mites have been with us nearly 30 years, long enough for the bees to develop resistance or cope with mites. In the south (I am in Oklahoma), there was an infusion of AHB, known to pick mites, just like its original host Apis Cerana in Asia. My bees have been doing just fine treatment free as I lost most to SHB now. To say the obvious, it would be suicidal for mites to wipe out all the bees, their host. They both must come to an armistice of sort to coexist.

Here is my recent musing on posted on Bee-L:



> V. destructor, originally restricted to the Asian continent, has a non-lethal relationship with its natural host,


the eastern honey bee, Apis cerana10. However, due to the transportation and introduction of A. mellifera in Asia,
the mite managed to switch host and has successfully established itself as a harmful parasite in A. mellifera honeybee colonies11. Without a long-term coadaptive evolution, as is shared between the mite and its natural host, A.
mellifera colonies are ill-equiped to cope with this new invasive parasite.

The word origin of "analogy" means "against logic," literally. But I cannot help but think of this analogy as to how Covid-19 to humans and V-mites to mellifera looks identical. Covid-19 is a "novel" virus to humans just as V. mites are a "novel" pathogen to bees. Respectively, both humans and bees have never experienced these two, ever. Hence, a huge swath of devastation on both.

Then again there are those who recovered from Covid-19 _naturally_ (forget how long their immunity may last); just as there are honeybees that have figured out how to defeat V. mites on their own, as well. In a sweeping generalization, most of us carry the gene that had once defeated the Black Plague long time ago. I do not claim I have any "answers." What I know is this:

We are survivors. 

You can (this is not an ad) find lots of pics of my saving ferals here, documenting my arduous journey, searching for survivors:









Facebook — Выполните вход или зарегистрируйтесь


Войдите на Facebook, чтобы общаться с друзьями, родственниками и знакомыми.




www.facebook.com





Again, I would like to thank all of you TF folks out there as a citizen army of caring beeks who are concerned about *a long term and sustainable beekeeping--even if TF might hurt my wallet now temporarily. *Remember we are what we do, and civilization is individual.

Respectfully,

Earthboy


----------



## little_john

Earthboy said:


> I cannot help but think of this analogy as to how Covid-19 to humans and V-mites to mellifera looks identical. * Covid-19 is a "novel" virus to humans just as V. mites are a "novel" pathogen to bees.* Respectively, both humans and bees have never experienced these two, ever. Hence, a huge swath of devastation on both.
> 
> Then again there are those who recovered from Covid-19 _naturally_ (forget how long their immunity may last); just as there are honeybees that have figured out how to defeat V. mites on their own, as well. In a sweeping generalization, most of us carry the gene that had once defeated the Black Plague long time ago. I do not claim I have any "answers." What I know is this:
> 
> We are survivors.


You are making a HUGE mistake. Viruses, bacteria etc are indeed pathogens - but* the Varroa mite is NOT a pathogen - it's a parasite which frequently carries pathogens *- and there's a world of difference. We humans are no more immune from parasites such as tape-worms, scabies etc. than our forefathers or their forefathers before them.

Plague - often referred to as The Black Death - wasn't caused by rats, or even the fleas they carried - but by the bacterium _yersinia pestis_, a bacterium carried by the flea certainly, but which also spreads very easily from human to human - indeed that mode of transmission is now thought far more likely to have occurred than from flea to human. What has defeated the Black Death long-term is NOT genetic immunity, but vastly improved human hygiene. It still breaks out from time to time, within unhygienic areas of the world.

Don't feel too bad about this - scores of TF people frequently make a totally erroneous comparison between survivor-ship post-parasite, and survivor-ship post-disease, where in the latter case there may well have been genetic changes which account for survival. If a disease causes death, then even a single survivor has value. BUT - surviving a parasite means little or nothing - the best you can hope for is some behavioural change which might possibly have tilted the balance - but such changes are invariably short-lived, and unlikely to be passed-on to a new generation.
Wish it were otherwise.

Something upon which you may care to ponder ...
In order for any organism to pass on a genetic advantage to it's offspring, that advantage MUST be expressed prior to reproduction. This lies at the very heart of Darwinian theory. Also - an advantage is only expressed as an advantage by virtue of other organisms being disadvantaged in comparison. Although we frequently talk of 'survival of the fittest' - it is easy to forget that such survival only occurs by less-fit organisms failing to survive.
In the case of a honeybee colony either surviving or failing to survive by virtue of a Varroa infestation - this apparent selection will occur long AFTER any reproduction may have taken place, and so such a 'selection' can play no part in the performance of subsequent generations.
Again - wish it were otherwise.
LJ


----------



## johno

little_john said:


> You are making a HUGE mistake. Viruses, bacteria etc are indeed pathogens - but* the Varroa mite is NOT a pathogen - it's a parasite which frequently carries pathogens *- and there's a world of difference. We humans are no more immune from parasites such as tape-worms, scabies etc. than our forefathers or their forefathers before them.
> 
> Plague - often referred to as The Black Death - wasn't caused by rats, or even the fleas they carried - but by the bacterium _yersinia pestis_, a bacterium carried by the flea certainly, but which also spreads very easily from human to human - indeed that mode of transmission is now thought far more likely to have occurred than from flea to human. What has defeated the Black Death long-term is NOT genetic immunity, but vastly improved human hygiene. It still breaks out from time to time, within unhygienic areas of the world.
> 
> Don't feel too bad about this - scores of TF people frequently make a totally erroneous comparison between survivor-ship post-parasite, and survivor-ship post-disease, where in the latter case there may well have been genetic changes which account for survival. If a disease causes death, then even a single survivor has value. BUT - surviving a parasite means little or nothing - the best you can hope for is some behavioural change which might possibly have tilted the balance - but such changes are invariably short-lived, and unlikely to be passed-on to a new generation.
> Wish it were otherwise.
> 
> Something upon which you may care to ponder ...
> In order for any organism to pass on a genetic advantage to it's offspring, that advantage MUST be expressed prior to reproduction. This lies at the very heart of Darwinian theory. Also - an advantage is only expressed as an advantage by virtue of other organisms being disadvantaged in comparison. Although we frequently talk of 'survival of the fittest' - it is easy to forget that such survival only occurs by less-fit organisms failing to survive.
> In the case of a honeybee colony either surviving or failing to survive by virtue of a Varroa infestation - this apparent selection will occur long AFTER any reproduction may have taken place, and so such a 'selection' can play no part in the performance of subsequent generations.
> Again - wish it were otherwise.
> LJ


Amen LJ, it is better to keep your feet on the ground than to keep searching for that pie in the sky.


----------



## Earthboy

little_john said:


> You are making a HUGE mistake. Viruses, bacteria etc are indeed pathogens - but* the Varroa mite is NOT a pathogen - it's a parasite which frequently carries pathogens *- and there's a world of difference. We humans are no more immune from parasites such as tape-worms, scabies etc. than our forefathers or their forefathers before them.
> 
> Plague - often referred to as The Black Death - wasn't caused by rats, or even the fleas they carried - but by the bacterium _yersinia pestis_, a bacterium carried by the flea certainly, but which also spreads very easily from human to human - indeed that mode of transmission is now thought far more likely to have occurred than from flea to human. What has defeated the Black Death long-term is NOT genetic immunity, but vastly improved human hygiene. It still breaks out from time to time, within unhygienic areas of the world.
> 
> Don't feel too bad about this - scores of TF people frequently make a totally erroneous comparison between survivor-ship post-parasite, and survivor-ship post-disease, where in the latter case there may well have been genetic changes which account for survival. If a disease causes death, then even a single survivor has value. BUT - surviving a parasite means little or nothing - the best you can hope for is some behavioural change which might possibly have tilted the balance - but such changes are invariably short-lived, and unlikely to be passed-on to a new generation.
> Wish it were otherwise.
> 
> Something upon which you may care to ponder ...
> In order for any organism to pass on a genetic advantage to it's offspring, that advantage MUST be expressed prior to reproduction. This lies at the very heart of Darwinian theory. Also - an advantage is only expressed as an advantage by virtue of other organisms being disadvantaged in comparison. Although we frequently talk of 'survival of the fittest' - it is easy to forget that such survival only occurs by less-fit organisms failing to survive.
> In the case of a honeybee colony either surviving or failing to survive by virtue of a Varroa infestation - this apparent selection will occur long AFTER any reproduction may have taken place, and so such a 'selection' can play no part in the performance of subsequent generations.
> Again - wish it were otherwise.
> LJ


Great argument, you win!


----------



## Earthboy

Earthboy said:


> Great argument, you win! Would you kindly apply all these to your bees in you daily practice please? How many, when, where, how, what, why? Share with the rest your results, do yo mind? What kind of bees you keep would also help a lot. Have you kept any AHB strains by any chance? All these quesitons applied in your daily beekeeping _practice_ will help us a lot to be convinced.
> 
> Earthboy


----------



## AHudd

I


little_john said:


> You are making a HUGE mistake. Viruses, bacteria etc are indeed pathogens - but* the Varroa mite is NOT a pathogen - it's a parasite which frequently carries pathogens *- and there's a world of difference. We humans are no more immune from parasites such as tape-worms, scabies etc. than our forefathers or their forefathers before them.
> 
> Plague - often referred to as The Black Death - wasn't caused by rats, or even the fleas they carried - but by the bacterium _yersinia pestis_, a bacterium carried by the flea certainly, but which also spreads very easily from human to human - indeed that mode of transmission is now thought far more likely to have occurred than from flea to human. What has defeated the Black Death long-term is NOT genetic immunity, but vastly improved human hygiene. It still breaks out from time to time, within unhygienic areas of the world.
> 
> Don't feel too bad about this - scores of TF people frequently make a totally erroneous comparison between survivor-ship post-parasite, and survivor-ship post-disease, where in the latter case there may well have been genetic changes which account for survival. If a disease causes death, then even a single survivor has value. BUT - surviving a parasite means little or nothing - the best you can hope for is some behavioural change which might possibly have tilted the balance - but such changes are invariably short-lived, and unlikely to be passed-on to a new generation.
> Wish it were otherwise.
> 
> Something upon which you may care to ponder ...
> In order for any organism to pass on a genetic advantage to it's offspring, that advantage MUST be expressed prior to reproduction. This lies at the very heart of Darwinian theory. Also - an advantage is only expressed as an advantage by virtue of other organisms being disadvantaged in comparison. Although we frequently talk of 'survival of the fittest' - it is easy to forget that such survival only occurs by less-fit organisms failing to survive.
> In the case of a honeybee colony either surviving or failing to survive by virtue of a Varroa infestation - this apparent selection will occur long AFTER any reproduction may have taken place, and so such a 'selection' can play no part in the performance of subsequent generations.
> Again - wish it were otherwise.
> LJ


That makes sense to me.
If I am understanding this, if I father a child, contract and survive a disease, I will only pass on whatever immunity I gained to my subsequent children.
Would it then follow that a mite infested Drone would not win the race to the DCA or be able to catch the Queen to mate with her in order to pass on this acquired ability to survive being fed on by mites? 

Alex


----------



## msl

Earthboy said:


> In a sweeping generalization, most of us carry the gene that had once defeated the Black Plague long time ago.


but that's not true, and not what happened...
only 10% of the pop of US and Europe carry it, far less in other areas.. and only the 1% who are homozygotes are protected.

Genetic immunity didn't stop the plague quarantine, modern medicine, and sanitation did... Take out the rats and you have removed the vector.
one only need to look at the 3rd bubonic place pandemic (1855 -1960) to see what stopped it. The Australian response 1900-1925 is a good case study

Once Thompson, Armstrong and Tidswell's research showed that it was the fleas off the rats, not human to human contact, the tide changed



AHudd said:


> Would it then follow that a mite infested Drone would not win the race to the DCA or be able to catch the Queen to mate


yes
one reason when on the untreated land scape scale resistance can spread quickly, mostly its drones from low mite colonies that are successful...
but the inverse is true.. despite TF claims of "health", their drones are often not as completive as ones from treated hives


----------



## LarryBud

msl said:


> Once Thompson, Armstrong and Tidswell's research showed that it was the fleas off the rats, not human to human contact, the tide changed


 Same as malaria - drain the swamp and the mosquitos were gone. Great point!


----------



## little_john

AHudd said:


> I
> 
> That makes sense to me.
> If I am understanding this, if I father a child, contract and survive a disease, I will only pass on whatever immunity I gained to my subsequent children.


Hi Alex. If such immunity *can* indeed be passed on (as this doesn't *always* happen) - then yes.



> Would it then follow that a mite infested Drone would not win the race to the DCA or be able to catch the Queen to mate with her in order to pass on this acquired ability to survive being fed on by mites?


I'm sure you're right about such a drone being sufficiently handicapped by Varroa to fail miserably, but "the acquired ability to survive being fed on by mites" is probably a short-term behavioural adaptation - whether such acquired characteristics can be passed-on in the same way as genetic changes (i.e. equivalent to altered-DNA) is debatable. Lamarkists thought this could happen, but then their theories became discredited in favour of Darwinism. Modern-day epigeneticists might argue that it's possible. Personally, I have doubts. On balance, I'd say the jury's out on that one ...
'best
LJ


----------



## Earthboy

This thread is getting a bit old and stale for me, so I posted my pics here to avoid cross posting:









What's your Treatment Free Survivability?


Thank you, I kind of hijacked my own thread. I would like to start picking up some hard data on treatment free. Screwed the pooch on this one. I am on the fence with any hard bond. Our plan is to keep the hive grouping in groups of 4 or so therefore allowing for a weekly alcohol wash of one...




www.beesource.com


----------



## Earthboy

Earthboy said:


> This thread is getting a bit old and stale for me, so I posted a pic of UNTREATED hive here to avoid cross posting:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What's your Treatment Free Survivability?
> 
> 
> Thank you, I kind of hijacked my own thread. I would like to start picking up some hard data on treatment free. Screwed the pooch on this one. I am on the fence with any hard bond. Our plan is to keep the hive grouping in groups of 4 or so therefore allowing for a weekly alcohol wash of one...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.beesource.com


----------



## johno

Looks like it got twice as old Earthbow.


----------



## Earthboy

johno said:


> Looks like it got twice as old Earthbow.





johno said:


> Looks like it got twice as old Earthbow.


Agreed, given that you joined this forum 2011 and me? 2007. Five years is a long time.


----------



## Earthboy

Earthboy said:


> Agreed, given that you joined this forum 2011 and me? 2007. Four years is a long time.


----------



## LAlldredge

Division and fighting with your brother is an old habit that we're moving beyond. The way forward is believing in our nature which is love. We have a lot to learn from nature and each other. If our hobby teaches us any one thing it's this. We are stronger as one.


----------



## Earthboy

LAlldredge said:


> Division and fighting with your brother is an old habit that we're moving beyond. The way forward is believing in our nature which is love. We have a lot to learn from nature and each other. If our hobby teaches us any one thing it's this. We are stronger as one.


Well said, and couldn't agree more! I welcome anyone who has done TF and their input anytime. if you have nothing constructive to add, and throw one sling shot at people, we are not going any where.


----------



## Varroa Apiary

The video uses excerpts (quote use for education) from:
1. a lecture by ecologist and evolutionary biologist Prof. Stephen C. Stearns of Yale University on the mechanism of natural selection and evolution of adaptation.
2. the audiobook "River of Genes" by biologist and zoologist Prof. Richard Dawkins, published by Orion Publishing Group, as narrated by the author. 
3. the academic textbook for ecologists "Life and Evolution of the Biosphere" by the ecologist and biologist Prof. January Weiner.

As the eminent evolutionist Prof. Feodosiy Grigoryevich Dobzhansky said, "Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution," so the question must be asked whether biological evolution works for the good or in the interest of any species? Or does evolution work for the good of individuals themselves, increasing their welfare? Are natural selection involves organisms trying to adapt or gives organisms what they need? Is there any such observed mechanism?

Such claims can often be found in publications and conversations of conventional beekeepers, so called "natural" beekeepers, "darwinian", treatment-free beekeepers, lovers of various bees or those who preach the idea of returning to specifically understood "nature".

Examples of activists of so called "natural" beekeeping propagating the idea that natural selection or even the whole evolution, excluding human activity, works in the interest of the honey bee species:
Torben Schiffer: https://beenature-project.com/WebRo...95-9e8c-00453bab9a49/MediaGallery/Article.pdf
David Heaf: Dealing With Varroa - David Heaf


----------



## Earthboy

*SURVIVOR STOCK PROVIDERS IN THE AMERICAS (other than myself)*









UNTREATED STOCK PROVIDERS | Bee Mindful


Listing of untreated survivor stock providers across the US (treatment-free, TF stock)




www.bee-mindful.com





Earthboy









Facebook — Выполните вход или зарегистрируйтесь


Войдите на Facebook, чтобы общаться с друзьями, родственниками и знакомыми.




www.facebook.com


----------



## GregB

Earthboy said:


> *SURVIVOR STOCK PROVIDERS IN THE AMERICAS (other than myself)*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> UNTREATED STOCK PROVIDERS | Bee Mindful
> 
> 
> Listing of untreated survivor stock providers across the US (treatment-free, TF stock)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.bee-mindful.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Earthboy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Facebook — Выполните вход или зарегистрируйтесь
> 
> 
> Войдите на Facebook, чтобы общаться с друзьями, родственниками и знакомыми.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.facebook.com


Earthboy,
This list is not accurate.
I don't know how close to the reality it is if at all.
If course I checked a place near me - it is a false hit and is sufficient to make the entire list a suspect.
There are no TF queen sellers here - commercial-level TF (e.g. selling TF-grade local queens) is not sustainable in my county as I reported already.


----------



## Earthboy

GregV said:


> Earthboy,
> This is list is not accurate.
> I don't know how close to the reality it is if at all.
> If course I checked a place near me - it is a false hit and is sufficient to make the entire list a suspect.
> There are no TF queen sellers here - commercial TF (e.g. selling TF-grade local queens) is not sustainable in my county as I reported already.


*Caveat Emptor*: I got this information from across the pond today and I am just passing the url along from a *"Zoom lectures today at the British Bee Keepers' spring meeting." *

Please report the inaccurate information specific to *your county *to the* list provider* then. Thanks for the report.


----------



## msl

more guru gibberish trying to pretend success is common not a rair thing
The list is total joke
1st one I clicked on








Happy Hollow Bees & Honey


honey and honey bees



www.happyhollowhoney.com






> Happy Hollow Honey is concentrating on the propagation of varroa mite tolerant honey bees. Varroa mites and the associated, vectored viruses are the biggest problems honey bees face in today's world. Many years our results have been positive with good survival rates, but in the winter of 2017-18 we had heavy losses. Because of these losses we have changed our management to follow an IPM path. We now do mite counts regularly on our production hives. Those with high mite counts (over 3%) get a treatment and requeening from a mite tolerant line. Depending on the time of year, we are using one of the organic acids/essential oils (oxalic, formic, or thymol).


2nd click Log in or sign up to view


> Managed with NO man made chemicals


3rd click sends me to the city's home page 🤣








Arthur Illinois Main - Arthur Illinois - The Heart of Illinois Amish Country


Arthur, Illinois



arthuril.com





4th is www.anarchyapiaries.org sam comfort... who it the real thing, but often buys cells from treated hives to raize as queens to sell..Not that VSH carny cells for a VP breed are a bad way to go!!!





5 Our Survivor Queen Bees Chosen by Beekeepers for Beekeepers | Zia Queenbee Company she has a good program, but treats with essential oils

6 is a teacher, no bees for sale (allways a bad sign) Wild Everlasting Farm on the River
7 is Soloman... talks a good game, never any bees for sale, but you can buy his bumper sticker https://parkerbees.square.site/

moveing thew CA we have 7 and 8
sweetbeeremoval.com
Home - Girl Next Door Honey
bolth teachers, no bees for sale

we hit a bunch of phone numbers/email address only.. mostly swarm catchers 
then Brown's Bee Removal who apears to be a real deal.... but if you primary servace is swarm catching and cut outs.... yoiu breeding program ins't up to snuf

a few more phone numbers and then Mite Resistant Honeybee Breeding stock/ Stevens Bee Company they are the real thing!
then over to a FB pag that hasn't bee up dated sence 2017 https://www.facebook.com/CrossPlainsHoneyWI
a gone web site http://www.huroncitybeeco.com/
then we hit https://angelaroell.com ang is the real deal... but has to go to FL for the winter to keep expansion up, not a bad system

http://nhbeekeeper.com/ troy is the real thing followed by Webster
and then beverlybees.com witch is removals and candles 

so out of 21... maybe 3-4 I would order stock form 

like TF in general the list if full of fluff, want a bees and gurus... With just a few real deal types who regularly have extra to sell


----------



## clyderoad

One only need to watch the videos of all the enlightened beekeepers and watch how they handle their bees and work the colony to see who can only try and talk bees and who actually knows the bees. The difference is glaringly obvious and nearly immediate. 

Recently I saw a video of a vocal (media), involved beekeeper in the yard "working" a colony in a queen cell/rearing- how to- and immediately thought how a simple video can expose the ignorance for all to see.


----------



## Trin

For myself treatment free is not an option. To throw out a curve ball....I wish the emerald ash borer had never been imported from China, So I question the cost/benefit of "free trade". The Cost of the Emerald Ash Borer Infestation - Emerald Ash Borer - Forest Disturbance Processes - Northern Research Station - USDA Forest Service

Open society comes at a cost . I lost all 3 hives more to my neglect caused by dealing with a late Summer ruptured disc. So I have improved my equipment.(thank you Johno) Am reducing hive size to 8 frames and NUC's and Planning on nuking mites with OAV. (plus some other more natural controls) At least it is a more natural control. I can say that post mortem examinations revealed 2 lessons learned; Mites/viruses killed the bees and one hive had zero pollen stores. This was sad because they were the last colony to die in January. They had a 2-3 inch brood pattern on 3 frames. So they were trying to survive but the boss failed to notice the lack of pollen stores. Bad landlord. These were from a swarm catch so.....? Will be harvesting 350 lbs. of honey. 

I wonder what the dead out rate is with killer bees? Not that I want to investigate, but I doubt they are getting any charity mite treatments.

Treatment free is theoretically possible, but for me it doesn't make economic sense at this time. I applaud those trying to do so. Maybe we will benefit from it some day....but it reminds me of tilting with windmills.


----------



## AR1

Treatment free is like organic farming...done at a large cost in time and work, and at higher risk. Treatment free is not 'leave them alone' beekeeping. It's constantly managing beekeeping.


----------



## Gray Goose

In some locations GregV, comes to mind TF is an Uphill slog. I did TF for many years, then Varroa came, Had large losses like 80 % in some yards. IF you have a place where it works, then great news go for you. IF your locale has "challenges" then you somewhat need to decide if the time investment for TF is what you want/like to do, if not then some combination of Tf/IPM/Requeening/treatment is needed.

I have had yard with 100% survival one year and 100% loss the next.
At some point some Neighbor, may get bees ,from somewhere that have mites. your whole bee world then changes.
BTW When I treat packages and NUCs I almost always get mite drop, so they come in with the bees today.

IMO you at least need to do counts, if low or 0 then go forward with what ever plan you wish TF even.
However if the counts go up then either plan for dead outs or plan for treatment. NOT planning is also an option with predicable results.

When a TF line is established , I would think they are sold out for several years, and we hear about them from several sources. that Secret will likely not stay secret.

IMO TF is more about location than the race of bee, today, Isolation is great, if you can find it.
I do hope we somehow get to the race of bee mattering as well.
I get the theory, breed from your survivors and in time they all survive.
Well the mite is doing its "surviving" as well so we need to factor that into the equation as well.

restrictions on moving bees and some sort of "lease" on air space could help to mitigate the problems, but neither of those is likely to happen soon.

GG


----------



## Vance G

I think if I dont brush my teeth, they will evolve to defeat the decay.


----------



## msl

AR1 said:


> Treatment free is like organic farming...done at a large cost in time and work, and at higher risk.


Very true..lots of simulartys 
unless you can get a premium price for the product its not worth it 
It is often easy for the 1st few years till the pest build up

the issue is bees are more similar to ranching... 
If you run an organic beef outfit and you have a sick cow you don't let it die in the feild while is spreds dezise to the rest of the hurd. 

you treat it, tag it, and sell it to the normal beef market


----------



## rdimanin

Trin said:


> For myself treatment free is not an option. To throw out a curve ball....I wish the emerald ash borer had never been imported from China, So I question the cost/benefit of "free trade". The Cost of the Emerald Ash Borer Infestation - Emerald Ash Borer - Forest Disturbance Processes - Northern Research Station - USDA Forest Service
> 
> Open society comes at a cost . I lost all 3 hives more to my neglect caused by dealing with a late Summer ruptured disc. So I have improved my equipment.(thank you Johno) Am reducing hive size to 8 frames and NUC's and Planning on nuking mites with OAV. (plus some other more natural controls) At least it is a more natural control. I can say that post mortem examinations revealed 2 lessons learned; Mites/viruses killed the bees and one hive had zero pollen stores. This was sad because they were the last colony to die in January. They had a 2-3 inch brood pattern on 3 frames. So they were trying to survive but the boss failed to notice the lack of pollen stores. Bad landlord. These were from a swarm catch so.....? Will be harvesting 350 lbs. of honey.
> 
> I wonder what the dead out rate is with killer bees? Not that I want to investigate, but I doubt they are getting any charity mite treatments.
> 
> Treatment free is theoretically possible, but for me it doesn't make economic sense at this time. I applaud those trying to do so. Maybe we will benefit from it some day....but it reminds me of tilting with windmills.


Agree with you 100%. I can't raise TF bees because I live in an urban area with many backyard beeks who don't manage varroa at all, causing mite bombs in the fall when they crash. Not treating bees for mites is analogous to letting fleas eat your dog's skin without doing anything about it. Most of all, it's expensive (and stupid) to let most of your stock die every year & make splits to regain hive numbers. We won't see any evolution in honey bees re mites in our lifetime & then some. I treat as much as necessary & when viral loads get high, I give them a quart or 2 of 1% reishi mushroom extract in sugar water per Paul Stamets'/Washington State University 2018 study. This has stopped DWV from affecting my bees. I've done this for 2 seasons now with no adverse affects noted on brood, queen or workers.


----------



## AHudd

My treatment free experience ended badly even though I live in a rural, isolated area and starting with expensive, " Throw away your chemicals, beekeeping the way it used to be," bees. 
I was not a newbee, either.

Alex


----------



## grady

It's easy to be skeptical of treating when you see BIP numbers that claim beekeepers lost 43% of their hives in 2019. BIP numbers are undoubtedly skewed higher as their commercial partners are often experiencing loss issues and searching for answers. 

As the OP stated, so much of mite treatment comes down to timing. We used to begin fall treatments shortly after Labor Day and consistently experienced 30% winter losses and subpar bees going into almonds. Our area is saturated with neighbor bees that may or may not have excessive mites every year. We now start treating August 15 and our losses are consistently around 10% while the bees going into almonds look much better. Previously starting treatments that late in our part of the country more or less made us treatment free in the fall because the damage was already done. Of course there's a lot of other work that goes into good bees, but stay ahead of the mites and you're a long way towards to being successful.


----------



## rinkevichjm

AR1 said:


> Treatment free is like organic farming...done at a large cost in time and work, and at higher risk. Treatment free is not 'leave them alone' beekeeping. It's constantly managing beekeeping.


Then by this definition “treatment free” is not treatment free. Each management task is a treatment.


----------



## solarharvey79

Maybe, but doing nothing should be management free. And treatment free, should be no chemical or substances used in managing. Just my opinion.


----------



## gww

I am with you solarharvey, I have moved more to management free but think the discussion on this site fits the treatment free definition given for the subtitle forum section titled treatment free beekeeping.
Cheers
gww


----------



## GregB

rinkevichjm said:


> Then by this definition “treatment free” is not treatment free. Each management task is a treatment.


Treatment free == chemical treatment free.
That is the default context.


----------



## Gray Goose

GregV said:


> Treatment free == chemical treatment free.
> That is the default context.


just curious, if I give water H2O a compound of 2 things or sugar C12H22O11 of 3 things.
is those "treatments" what about heat as in the mittey mite killer.
Essential oils?

so where are the lines typically drawn?

Just wondering

GG


----------



## Litsinger

Gray Goose said:


> so where are the lines typically drawn?


GG:

You may be asking the question in a Socratic manner, but for those who are unaware of the consensus definition outlined in the TF sub forum, here it is:









Unique Forum Rules


Welcome to the Treatment-Free Beekeeping forum. This is the place to discuss and promote all topics related to treatment free beekeeping. Please read all forum rules. The main forum rules mention that each topical forum may have unique rules. These are those rules. The purpose of these rules...




www.beesource.com


----------



## Gray Goose

Litsinger said:


> GG:
> 
> You may be asking the question in a Socratic manner, but for those who are unaware of the consensus definition outlined in the TF sub forum, here it is:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unique Forum Rules
> 
> 
> Welcome to the Treatment-Free Beekeeping forum. This is the place to discuss and promote all topics related to treatment free beekeeping. Please read all forum rules. The main forum rules mention that each topical forum may have unique rules. These are those rules. The purpose of these rules...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.beesource.com


Hi Russ
Yes it was in a Socratic ish manner.
Just wondering if there is a list of "substances"/ practices, that in general go 1 way or the other.
we can all agree on some items, but where is the big picture ish plan.

to get there, (TF) I somewhat need to know where "there is",, correct?

for example if I cannot for what ever reason eat, And I fall down weak, and end up in the Hospital with a feeding tube, down my neck, In My mind that is a treatment. If a hive is too low on stores to make the winter and I give 3 or 4 gallons of Syrup, to keep them alive, does that fall in which camp and is there uniform agreement?

I was sincerely wondering if there is a master list somewhere. or who the TF police were to ask.

GG


----------



## gww

gg
One thing is for sure, sugar water don't kill mites and heat is not a chemical.
Since you can have any view right or wrong, it is nice that it is spelled out in what russ posted so that most people here discuss with a general understanding of what we are talking about. Doesn't mean a person might not question changing or not agreeing with the guide line but should give a starting point of view unless that is what is being questioned, which would be the question, rather then, what is the general reference here when having discussions.

Not saying those discussions should never be had but it is nice that every one has general reference of what is being discussed like in the guide lines rather then coming to a discussions from different references that would happen with out guide lines.

Start with the same facts and go from there.
Cheers
gww


----------



## gww

I stand a bit corrected as I just read the rules again and I might be taking them a bit far though that is still my view that normal management is not a chemical treatment for disease or mite. Have these rules changed since the forum was changed in ownership?
Cheers
gww


----------



## Litsinger

Gray Goose said:


> we can all agree on some items, but where is the big picture ish plan.


Understood, GG. Good question. Per the post above the original consensus definition put forth was:

*Treatment: A substance introduced by the beekeeper into the hive with the intent of killing, repelling, or inhibiting a pest or disease afflicting the bees.*

To which Squarepeg wisely (in my view) added:

_'tf 'mindset' has been brought up in another thread. to some, this mindset is seen to include being prepared to allow colonies to perish as part of the tf process. i see nothing wrong with this, and i have always felt that all beekeepers should be able to make their own management decisions as they so feel moved to do so, (within the constraints of applicable laws and in a way that doesn't threaten nearby colonies kept by others and/or feral colonies).

what often appears to be the case is that beginning beekeepers have made the decision to go tf without understanding that this may involve losing colonies in what can potentially become a disappointing and expensive process.

it makes perfect sense to me for someone to do whatever is necessary to save a colony in the short term and while attempting to come up with measures that will lead to their bees being able to be kept off treatments, but to the hard core this 'mindset' flys against theirs and they dismiss it.

bottom line: don't be constrained by this or that definition and make your choices based on what it is you feel is appropriate for you, your circumstances, and your goals.'_


----------



## gww

Russ
Thanks for helping me keep my foot out of my mouth.
Cheers
gww


----------



## Gray Goose

Litsinger said:


> Understood, GG. Good question. Per the post above the original consensus definition put forth was:
> 
> *Treatment: A substance introduced by the beekeeper into the hive with the intent of killing, repelling, or inhibiting a pest or disease afflicting the bees.*
> 
> To which Squarepeg wisely (in my view) added:
> 
> _'tf 'mindset' has been brought up in another thread. to some, this mindset is seen to include being prepared to allow colonies to perish as part of the tf process. i see nothing wrong with this, and i have always felt that all beekeepers should be able to make their own management decisions as they so feel moved to do so, (within the constraints of applicable laws and in a way that doesn't threaten nearby colonies kept by others and/or feral colonies).
> 
> what often appears to be the case is that beginning beekeepers have made the decision to go tf without understanding that this may involve losing colonies in what can potentially become a disappointing and expensive process.
> 
> it makes perfect sense to me for someone to do whatever is necessary to save a colony in the short term and while attempting to come up with measures that will lead to their bees being able to be kept off treatments, but to the hard core this 'mindset' flys against theirs and they dismiss it.
> 
> bottom line: don't be constrained by this or that definition and make your choices based on what it is you feel is appropriate for you, your circumstances, and your goals.'_


Thanks Russ
so a "Substance" for the killing of mites, that helps a lot.

so then feeding , heating, splitting, requeeing, any other manipulations are not treatments.

I was thinking of the heat treatment for the mite killer and did not want to invest and go down that path if it was not TF as,, I still see TF on my Horizon.

the best

GG


----------



## lharder

There are a number of potential goals for tf keepers. Some will be more important than others depending on what one is trying to accomplish. Here are some of mine. 

1. Create a pure a product as possible. We are immersed in environments with toxic chemicals with potential negative health outcomes (ie cancer, auto immune disorders, even mental health). Overall I think we need to clean up our environment. 

2. I am interested in bees that can deal with local challenges including mites. I hope to achieve this with a mix of natural and beekeeper selection. 

3. Understand the colony system to give bees the best possible chance of success. I can see that some things I did probably had a negative effect on bee success with losing some babies, not just the bathwater. The best bees may not overcome incompetent beekeeping. 

4. Understand the broader system, regional and interregional. We don't respect local systems nearly enough. We may be wrecking local adaption by the constant moving of bees as well as their associated pathogens.

5. Mitigation of failures. Have done this in the past with the use of robbing screens. I have started doing brood breaks/brood removal for hives with high mites. I must do this in a way as to not interfere with goal number 2. I am also forced to do this because there are not enough local keepers doing the selection they should be doing.


----------



## William Bagwell

Gray Goose said:


> Thanks Russ
> so a "Substance" for the killing of mites, that helps a lot.
> 
> so then feeding , heating, splitting, requeeing, any other manipulations are not treatments.
> 
> I was thinking of the heat treatment for the mite killer and did not want to invest and go down that path if it was not TF as,, I still see TF on my Horizon.
> 
> the best
> 
> GG


Thermal was not widely available when those rules were written. Was also told by a moderator that it is in fact a treatment. 

My personal opinion is thermal is the best back up plan for (or bridge to) TF. Leaves no residue, and while it likely disrupts the hive biota a bit. Willing to bet it does so less than any other except perhaps powdered sugar. 

Bad news is the MMK is still not back in production. Think the Victor and the one from Europe still are... Wisely foresaw supply chain issues and bought one not only before the lock down. Bought it before I even had bees


----------



## Gray Goose

lharder said:


> There are a number of potential goals for tf keepers. Some will be more important than others depending on what one is trying to accomplish. Here are some of mine.
> 
> 1. Create a pure a product as possible. We are immersed in environments with toxic chemicals with potential negative health outcomes (ie cancer, auto immune disorders, even mental health). Overall I think we need to clean up our environment. of course we all wish for pure product for our consumption
> 
> 2. I am interested in bees that can deal with local challenges including mites. I hope to achieve this with a mix of natural and beekeeper selection. so what if swarms, NUCs, Packages, and several queen lines tried, seems to mite out after a year or 3?
> 
> 3. Understand the colony system to give bees the best possible chance of success. I can see that some things I did probably had a negative effect on bee success with losing some babies, not just the bathwater. The best bees may not overcome incompetent beekeeping.  agree have had bees since 78 so I think I understand the big picture
> 
> 4. Understand the broader system, regional and interregional. We don't respect local systems nearly enough. We may be wrecking local adaption by the constant moving of bees as well as their associated pathogens.  also agree if king for a day I would create 1 to 3 state areas and forbid bees moving across with out significant inspections , etc, Similar to the boarders of US and Canada.
> 
> 5. Mitigation of failures. Have done this in the past with the use of robbing screens. I have started doing brood breaks/brood removal for hives with high mites. I must do this in a way as to not interfere with goal number 2. I am also forced to do this because there are not enough local keepers doing the selection they should be doing. This is a slippery slope, If I need to remove brood sequester the queen , use heat, or a freezer, or do other "manipulations", IMO this is no different than treatment of some other sort. and would derail #2 the local challenges.


lharder
comments in line

I was what I would consider TF from 77 to 02, then it became clear I either shake the bees in the snow, and take all honey, get replacement packages in spring or deal with 50-80 percent winter losses. If possible I would be TF still, I really do not have the time or inclination to treat with anything, However I like having dead bees even less. Be nice to have a thread IMO of bees genetics tried in various Zips codes and TF survival rates. Some claim to be TF but do not offer where they got stock from, some just do thier own thing etc.. All ways seem to happen. I know there are good bees in the south , not likely to work for me in the north etc. several new beeks have tracked me down and wanted help as they have had die outs every winter. I guess having honey to sell for 30 years gets around. Mostly they have poor practices and poor stock, so I am always looking for good info on stock or practices.

later
GG

GG


----------



## Litsinger

Gray Goose said:


> so then feeding , heating, splitting, requeeing, any other manipulations are not treatments.


GG:

I personally appreciate the way in which you are diligently working to find the approach that both meets your needs/goals and is mindful of trying to minimize the pest/disease intervention required.

Ultimately, I think this is a goal we all generally share- as I have yet to meet a fellow beekeeper who wouldn't prefer to be 'treatment free' if the realities of their particular situation would support it.

Also, I do appreciate the stated purpose of the TF sub-forum which states that:

_'Everyone keeps their hives however they like and no one is setting rules as to how anyone can keep their bees. The Treatment-Free Beekeeping Forum is not a standard or a certification program or a benchmark. It is a forum with the stated purpose of discussing how to keep bees by letting them cope with disease on their own _(emphasis mine)_.'_

Thus, (for me at least) it is less about treating or not treating and more about what I understood the ethos of LHarder's post is- a diligent study and exchange of information into the mechanisms helping to confer resistance to hopefully collectively move us all further down the road to an environment where 'treatment-free' might be an attainable reality for most of us- and possibly 'treatment-lite' for the rest.


----------



## Gray Goose

Litsinger said:


> GG:
> 
> I personally appreciate the way in which you are diligently working to find the approach that both meets your needs/goals and is mindful of trying to minimize the pest/disease intervention required.
> 
> Ultimately, I think this is a goal we all generally share- as I have yet to meet a fellow beekeeper who wouldn't prefer to be 'treatment free' if the realities of their particular situation would support it.
> 
> Also, I do appreciate the stated purpose of the TF sub-forum which states that:
> 
> _'Everyone keeps their hives however they like and no one is setting rules as to how anyone can keep their bees. The Treatment-Free Beekeeping Forum is not a standard or a certification program or a benchmark. It is a forum with the stated purpose of discussing how to keep bees by letting them cope with disease on their own _(emphasis mine)_.'_
> 
> Thus, (for me at least) it is less about treating or not treating and more about what I understood the ethos of LHarder's post is- a diligent study and exchange of information into the mechanisms helping to confer resistance to hopefully collectively move us all further down the road to an environment where 'treatment-free' might be an attainable reality for most of us- and possibly 'treatment-lite' for the rest.


Understood

GG


----------



## trishbookworm

There are 2 ways mites kill a colony. The first way is what we think of automatically, with the mite population blooming over time due to bees being unable to keep that in check. This is the avenue pursued by breeding for bees which uncap-recap to disrupt mite reproduction, bees that bite mites AKA ankle biters, or bees that just don't end up with high mite counts over time, as Randy Oliver is selecting for mite tolerant bees. 

When someone buys a VSH queen or whatever, which performs well by all measures in producing bees that keep mite populations in check, that trait is diluted the following generation. Presumably this could be offset by having a lot of colonies in one's yard and at the 4 corners of the compass from your yard that had the same genetics. Drones matter, people!!!! Because those TF drones could in theory be a continuous source of TF genetics over time... if the population they come from are sustainable. 

But. There is another way that mites kill a colony - they can be imported in huge numbers at the end of the year (in my neck of the woods - northeast OH, real winter but not epic Alaska/Siberia winter). By huge numbers, I mean when I treated my colonies with OAV (yes, I treat, can't afford TF right now), I had mite drops in Oct and Nov of a couple thousand for 2 sequential treatments for a couple colonies. They were sitting right next to similarly large colonies with very low mite drops for 10 months no treatment - 250-400 mites fell dead in Oct, which is assumed to be 90% or so of all the phoretic mites and a majority of the total mites as brood is not at max in Oct. BTW both sets made it thru winter fine and gave me a nice spring crop, so the short-lived high-mite visit was not deleterious to their health.

So. Here is another trait that could be selected for - no robbing IF another colony nearby is dying of mites. To select for this behavior, a colony must exist near flight distance that is dying of mites. If one has too few hives nearby dying of mites in fall, it is not possible to select for this minimal-robbing trait. 

I am interested in selecting for this with my 20+ backyard colonies, but I am not in a position to spend the time on it that it deserves. I'd want a mite donor colony in fall, which also helps kill off the ferals with uncontrolled genetics btw. I'd love to select for low-robbing colonies!


----------



## Litsinger

trishbookworm said:


> I'd love to select for low-robbing colonies!


Good post, Trish. Glad to see you back on the boards!


----------



## rinkevichjm

GregV said:


> Treatment free == chemical treatment free.
> That is the default context.


Thermal is chemical free too and less devasting.


----------



## GregB

rinkevichjm said:


> Thermal is chemical free too and less devasting.


Thermal is too advanced for the very most, too labor intensive and does not scale to bother with it.
But sure go for it - it is chem free.


----------



## rdimanin

rinkevichjm said:


> Thermal is chemical free too and less devasting.


Read Randy Oliver's testing of thermal treatment & varroa mite kill. The figures aren't that impressive & it can sure do a lot of damage to brood & nurse bees. IMO, this isn't the answer.


----------



## GregB

rdimanin said:


> Read Randy Oliver's testing of thermal treatment & varroa mite kill. The figures aren't that impressive & it can sure do a lot of damage to brood & nurse bees. IMO, this isn't the answer.


To be sure - one applies thermal treatment to a brood-less colony.
Ideally the thermal process is done in late fall after the brooding has been shut down.

But anyway, the thermal treatment is for those who certainly have lots of time on their hands.
For example here a monastic apiary does this with good results and on some serious scale (the time, equipment, and labor are all a non-issue for them):


----------



## rinkevichjm

GregV said:


> To be sure - one applies thermal treatment to a brood-less colony.
> Ideally the thermal process is done in late fall after the brooding has been shut down.
> 
> But anyway, the thermal treatment is for those who certainly have lots of time on their hands.
> For example here a monastic apiary does this with good results and on some serious scale (the time, equipment, and labor are all a non-issue for them.


Randy has a known bias against thermal and failed to mention that mites become infertile at 40C. It doesn’t appear he did any testing of his own as he wants a free thermal unit. He doesn’t have either a solar thermal hive nor a mighty mite thermal unit (I don’t think he has the other brand either). But look at figure 2 of his part 2 article. That is what happens when the mites are rendered infertile.
No brood break is required.
The mighty mite thermal consists of a ~300W electric thermal heating mat, one sensor on the bottom of the bottom frames and one at the top and electronics that turn on the mat and keep it on until a sensor read above 45C and turn it back on when it cools to ~40.5C and continues ensuring both sensors read above 40C for 2 hours. In temps much below 20C it requires an insulated hive (it comes with insulated part for placing above the brood frames as a thermal lid with ventilation.) I believe you could duplicate this with
Arduino board
2 thermal sensors
1 120V power relay
1 rubberized thermal heating pad of about 12x14.
several LEDs for status display
software for the Arduino to control the power relay and indicate state While read the sensors at about a 1-2 Hz rate. You probably want to inhibit switching that relay more than every 2-10s.


----------



## GregB

rinkevichjm said:


> Randy has a known bias against thermal and failed to mention that mites become infertile at 40C. It doesn’t appear he did any testing of his own as he wants a free thermal unit. He doesn’t have either a solar thermal hive nor a mighty mite thermal unit (I don’t think he has the other brand either). But look at figure 2 of his part 2 article. That is what happens when the mites are rendered infertile.
> No brood break is required.
> The mighty mite thermal consists of a ~300W electric thermal heating mat, one sensor on the bottom of the bottom frames and one at the top and electronics that turn on the mat and keep it on until a sensor read above 45C and turn it back on when it cools to ~40.5C and continues ensuring both sensors read above 40C for 2 hours. In temps much below 20C it requires an insulated hive (it comes with insulated part for placing above the brood frames as a thermal lid with ventilation.) I believe you could duplicate this with
> Arduino board
> 2 thermal sensors
> 1 120V power relay
> 1 rubberized thermal heating pad of about 12x14.
> several LEDs for status display
> software for the Arduino to control the power relay and indicate state While read the sensors at about a 1-2 Hz rate. You probably want to inhibit switching that relay more than every 2-10s.


Like I said - this does not scale.
Enough said.
Busy work for someone with lots of time, money, enough expertise, and looking for something to do.


----------



## rinkevichjm

GregV said:


> Like I said - this does not scale.
> Enough said.
> Busy work for someone with lots of time, money, enough expertise, and looking for something to do.


False. Just buy more units. A 25 hive yard can be completed in a day with a single generator and 5 units. With OAV you need to replace your mask filter each time that is 4 or 5 filters per treatment and takes 12 days.


----------



## William Bagwell

GregV said:


> To be sure - one applies thermal treatment to a brood-less colony.
> Ideally the thermal process is done in late fall after the brooding has been shut down.


What is your source for this? Every thing I have read recommends three treatments per year (Four in Florida) with capped brood present. Since the capped mites are the ones killed near 100%. 

Agree with you on not scaling well. Could not imagine myself doing 36 three hour treatments this year with all the mandatory over time I have had. Just for the record, treated one hive one time total. Partiality out of curiosity but mostly because I was anticipating a few new queens and wanted at least one clean hive to split.


----------



## rinkevichjm

William Bagwell said:


> What is your source for this? Every thing I have read recommends three treatments per year (Four in Florida) with capped brood present. Since the capped mites are the ones killed near 100%.
> 
> Agree with you on not scaling well. Could not imagine myself doing 36 three hour treatments this year with all the mandatory over time I have had. Just for the record, treated one hive one time total. Partiality out of curiosity but mostly because I was anticipating a few new queens and wanted at least one clean hive to split.


OA is only good for three days. Drone brood are capped for 15 days, worker brood 12 days. A 3 fold treatment misses way too many. This has been known for quite a while.
and you should be doing them at least every 3 months more in late fall if there is a dearth and robbing induces imported varroa.


----------



## William Bagwell

rinkevichjm said:


> Randy has a known bias against thermal and failed to mention that mites become infertile at 40C. It doesn’t appear he did any testing of his own as he wants a free thermal unit.


While I was extremely disappointed in Randy's results do not think that indicates a "known bias". Remember that he is in a very dry climate and multiple others in humid climates have failed to duplicate his success with the shop towel (now sponge) method. But yes would love to see a followup thermal test continued over a much longer period!

Just looked and Randy used a unit loaned by Bill Hurd for his test. Do not know the current situation but recall a long ago post by Lynn Williams complaining about how many MMK's he had furnished to 'researchers' over several years with absolutely no feedback good or bad.


----------



## William Bagwell

rinkevichjm said:


> OA is only good for three days. Drone brood are capped for 15 days, worker brood 12 days. A 3 fold treatment misses way too many. This has been known for quite a while.
> and you should be doing them at least every 3 months more in late fall if there is a dearth and robbing induces imported varroa.


OA? GregV and I are both discussing thermal treatment. Thought you were as well?


----------



## rinkevichjm

William Bagwell said:


> While I was extremely disappointed in Randy's results do not think that indicates a "known bias". Remember that he is in a very dry climate and multiple others in humid climates have failed to duplicate his success with the shop towel (now sponge) method. But yes would love to see a followup thermal test continued over a much longer period!
> 
> Just looked and Randy used a unit loaned by Bill Hurd for his test. Do not know the current situation but recall a long ago post by Lynn Williams complaining about how many MMK's he had furnished to 'researchers' over several years with absolutely no feedback good or bad.


I actually had an email conversation with Randy a couple of years ago. And the owner of BHTI maker of the mighty mite unit has had similar conversations. He does have a somewhat of a negative bias that the USDA mite researchers don‘t have.


----------



## AHudd

rinkevichjm said:


> With OAV you need to replace your mask filter each time that is 4 or 5 filters per treatment and takes 12 days.


This is news to me.

Alex


----------



## GregB

rinkevichjm said:


> False.* Just buy more units*. A 25 hive yard can be completed in a day with a single generator and 5 units. With OAV you need to replace your mask filter each time that is 4 or 5 filters per treatment and takes 12 days.


You are seriously pulling some legs, IMO.
Right - buy, buy, buy more units.
Are you selling?

For my projects using OAD the cost is $10 for the OA and $5 for the bottle sprayer.
The entire investment is $15 - that is right.
Should last me the next year, and the year after.

25 hives takes a whole day?
Kidding me?
Who has time for this exactly?
LOL


----------



## GregB

William Bagwell said:


> What is your source for this? Every thing I have read recommends three treatments per year (Four in Florida) with capped brood present. Since the capped mites are the ones killed near 100%.


My sources are from East Euro.
Some people do this pretty routinely at the and of the season.
It is post-brood.
That same YT video above is just one sample.


----------



## GregB

rinkevichjm said:


> OA is only good for three days.


OAD is supposed to work up to 7 days. (GV: edit, per MSL, it is 14 days, not 7 days - I just forgot).
For brood-less application - plenty.
And no respirator is needed.


----------



## William Bagwell

GregV said:


> My sources are from East Euro.
> Some people do this pretty routinely at the and of the season.
> It is post-brood.
> That same YT video above is just one sample.


Will watch the video... Interesting! Now clear why that one differs so much. Way too labor intensive for me.

@ rinkevichjm What is BHTI?


----------



## GregB

William Bagwell said:


> Will watch the video... Interesting! Now clear why that one differs so much. Way too labor intensive for me.


Right.
Process and equipment are similar to this:


----------



## P.Dosen

FreeBee said:


> Sorry if I missed one of the 1,650 different topics under this forum but I can’t help but see so many people confounded about treatment free beekeeping. I rarely see anyone using methods by those individuals who are easy to find and have excellent documented success not treating in anyway to include artificially feeding your bees.
> 
> If you aren’t regressing your bees to bring them back to a natural size found in the wild then there isn’t even a reason for you to go treatment free.
> 
> • Regressing your bees to at least true 4.9mm foundation or smaller.
> 
> • Use Housel positioning of frames
> 
> • Give them an insulated hive just like your boy L. L. Langstroth told you to do. He also said, “Such is the passion of the American people for cheapness in the first cost of an article, even at the evident expense of dearness in the end, that many, I doubt not, will continue to lodge their bees in thin hives in spite of their conviction of the folly of doing..."
> 
> • Or just go horizontal hives. It doesn’t get any cheaper than a tbh! If you aren’t a commercial beek and don’t plan on moving your hives then there really is no point. Most commercial beeks don’t over winter their hives anyways as they are always on the move when fall comes to some place warmer ready to pollinate something. Even dumping them to sell and never making it back home. Even if you do plan on moving hives you could still go horizontal. Wayatt Mangum (top bar hive master bar none and professor of biology and statistics at University of Mary Washington) owns over 200 tbh and moves them by himself with a small pickup truck easier then anyone could with a regular Lang. He offers pollination services and doesn’t use any tool or machinery outside of a small pickup with no trailer to move a thing.
> 
> The concept of success to a commercial beek is dollar signs. Requeeing ever year to every two years, varroa treatments, pollination services, contaminated honey & wax extractions, selling of contaminated honey and wax, selling artificially sized bees and queens living in a pesticide filled home ready for you to buy = weaker immune system and shorter life span. This has been proven.
> 
> There is a reason why the cosmetic industry only gets their wax from Africa. They are all about the money too and they obviously know something about contaminated wax and the chemicals used in treatments. Being about the money they will avoid any attempts of a lawsuit from someone applying lipstick then having an allergic reaction to some bug spray chemical used to kill mites.
> 
> When the varroa came to Africa they had a meeting on what to do. They looked at the rest of the world treating and said, “If we don’t do anything the issue will solve itself in a year or two.” They don’t use foundation and their bees aren’t artificially huge. They have no problems.
> 
> The scientific mentality that humans can consume small amounts of poisons (examples: fluoride, pesticides, aluminum, etc) and they will do no harm should not be the same mentality towards your bees. They obviously do harm no matter the amount. It’s all about the effects. If they show no effects then it does no harm but surely long term effects aren’t ever studied beyond a few years.
> 
> Spain, nearly the size of Texas has such an epidemic with varroa that they have become resistant to all treatments except checkmite. That’s a sad story.
> 
> So then why is it that with 30 years of resistant bee breeding we still haven’t got anywhere yet those who truely have success in treatment free beekeeing never went the route of mixing genetic stock to get some VSH behaviored stock bees?
> 
> It’s all in the small cell sizes. Smaller cells are more compact which naturally keeps the brood warmer. Which causes less work for the bees to fluctuate the temperature.
> 
> Is is proven that varroa naturally seek the larger drone brood due to the longer incubation period and their ability to mate prolifically with such a longer incubation time is what leads to a hive being over run. Therefore when you are using jumbo sized foundation or foundation less but your bees are making jumbo foundation because that’s all they've ever known, every single cell becomes a drone cell to the varroa.
> 
> Small cells shorten the incubation period for worker brood by a full day which ruins the varroas day.
> 
> Then you have VSH behavior. Why? It’s not because of genetic breeding for resistance because feral swarms aren’t artificially inseminated yet exist and are also smaller and build smaller cell sizes. Also, so many people are quick to requeen their hives when they see checkerboard brood. They assume, because they’ve been told, that the queen isn’t a prolific layer and needs to be replaced. If you have VSH behavior in your hive then you will have that checkerboard effect. Do not kill your queen. Just leave your queens be. Your hive will replace her and kill her themselves when it’s time.
> 
> VSH has to do with more bees for the same amount of work. Contrary to what anyone may think I’ve seen one hive clean out deformed wing virus brood which triggered every hive in the apiary to do the exact same thing. In a week it was over and it looked like a gravesite outside each hive and every hive is fine and thriving. It would appear as if the bees have the ability to learn the behavior from each other regardless of genetic makeup.
> 
> • Small cells warmer compact brood nest
> 
> • smaller bees proven to live longer by weeks
> 
> • 7000 large cells on regular Lang frame vs 8600 small cells.
> 
> • smaller bees are able to reach more flowers
> 
> • larger population
> 
> • more bees for the same amount of work = VSH
> 
> It’s strength in numbers not strength in bee size and the more numbers the better.
> 
> 100 years ago a man decided bigger bees means more honey and farther flights. Then came the new standardization of large foundation. That was fine and dandy but now we have varroa and we’d have to look at why certain people and certain places in the world aren’t having trouble. It comes down to cell size.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dee Lusby, Michael Bush, more than enough European scientist and plenty of European beeks have done enough of their own research with their own experiences to make sure you don’t have to go through what they did to get where they are today. It’s much easier because you have all the answers on what they did. With the exception of the first paragraph and these last two, none of these words are mine. They are from those who have had the most success and came forth about it and to them I say thank you for all your hard work and to let you know there are beeks who truely take what you say and apply it.
> 
> You may never completely get rid of varroa, you may have losses in the beginning but overall the amount of stress to your bees will be greatly reduced and it would appear as if nothing can stop them. I digress and apologize if any of you take offense. The majority of beeks who learned everything from looking through the eyes of a commercial beek laugh at treatment free beekeeping. So prove them wrong, study and apply. These people aren’t just lucky. They all use the same methods. I leave you with the most, in my opinion, informative video jam packed with reused information from Michael Bush and Dee Lusby from an Austrian beek. We are lucky to have someone kind enough to voice it over in English. It may seem slow and its an old video which should be a testament to how long its been working for him.


Where are the real treatment free beekeepers you ask? There are none, other than in places like Australia and Newfoundland Canada, anywhere there are mites, there are no real treatment free beekeepers just complaisant ones, who choose, with their faith-based beekeeping philosophy that mites, as long as you ignore them, are no longer an issue. This type of mentality is exactly why we have the problems we have within our industry. When a bee scientist or researcher conducts a treatment free study, after the study is completed the Monday morning quarterbacks arrive at the scene with their pet theories as to why the experiment failed, pointing fingers exclusively at the researchers for having some sort of hidden agenda, an agenda which panders to the "chemical companies" which of course are all conspiring to kill us all as well as the bees, in an attempt to make their millions and leave us all for dead. This delusional orientated worldview I believe was inspired by a beekeeper down in Arizona by the name of Dee Lusby who has said on more then one occasion that both her and her late husband Ed were nearly killed for having small cell bees, suggesting that there is some worldwide conspiracy plot against all those who choose to keep their bees in a treatment free manner, whoever goes against conventional beekeeping practices should be fearing for their lives. A little; okay perhaps more than a little over the top if you ask me. I am not saying that an individual does not have the right to keep their bees the way they wish, I am simply asking that those who choose to do so, present their findings in a scientific manner, prove that small cell, in conjunction with the appropriate amount of drone comb can keep varroa levels below threshold without the use of any chemical treatments, synthetic or otherwise. I don't hear that being done, all I hear and observe are a whole lot of excuses for why their mite levels are high, with no scientific evidence as to why that should be or how this benefits the bees in any way, shape or form. If there was no benefit to treating then why would a beekeeper with 2000 or more colonies bother doing it, if the results were comparable with those who didn't treat? Lastly, treatment free beekeeping has proven to be a major flop but sadly there are plenty who are still practicing it without any concern for the well-being of the bees or the industry as a whole. If having lots of honey is your objective, then use the 200 bucks that you would use to buy a nuc to support a local beekeeper and buy 200 dollars worth of liquid gold, you'd be doing yourself, the bees and the beekeepers around you a favour. Why make it harder for those who are trying to keep their bees healthy?


----------



## crofter

Thunder Bay Ontario has had an interesting story in regard to varroa mites. At one time it was a varro free area. Kind of an island in a vast area of rocks and trees with no feral bees. Perhaps P.Dosen could fill us in with some history. I understand that the varroa free status no longer exists there. Might give some notion of where he is coming from in regard to these posts.

It is about 10 hours of steady driving north and west from where i live.


----------



## clong

P.Dosen said:


> Where are the real treatment free beekeepers you ask? There are none, other than in places like Australia and Newfoundland Canada, anywhere there are mites, there are no real treatment free beekeepers just complaisant ones, who choose, with their faith-based beekeeping philosophy that mites, as long as you ignore them, are no longer an issue. This type of mentality is exactly why we have the problems we have within our industry. When a bee scientist or researcher conducts a treatment free study, after the study is completed the Monday morning quarterbacks arrive at the scene with their pet theories as to why the experiment failed, pointing fingers exclusively at the researchers for having some sort of hidden agenda, an agenda which panders to the "chemical companies" which of course are all conspiring to kill us all as well as the bees, in an attempt to make their millions and leave us all for dead. This delusional orientated worldview I believe was inspired by a beekeeper down in Arizona by the name of Dee Lusby who has said on more then one occasion that both her and her late husband Ed were nearly killed for having small cell bees, suggesting that there is some worldwide conspiracy plot against all those who choose to keep their bees in a treatment free manner, whoever goes against conventional beekeeping practices should be fearing for their lives. A little; okay perhaps more than a little over the top if you ask me. I am not saying that an individual does not have the right to keep their bees the way they wish, I am simply asking that those who choose to do so, present their findings in a scientific manner, prove that small cell, in conjunction with the appropriate amount of drone comb can keep varroa levels below threshold without the use of any chemical treatments, synthetic or otherwise. I don't hear that being done, all I hear and observe are a whole lot of excuses for why their mite levels are high, with no scientific evidence as to why that should be or how this benefits the bees in any way, shape or form. If there was no benefit to treating then why would a beekeeper with 2000 or more colonies bother doing it, if the results were comparable with those who didn't treat? Lastly, treatment free beekeeping has proven to be a major flop but sadly there are plenty who are still practicing it without any concern for the well-being of the bees or the industry as a whole. If having lots of honey is your objective, then use the 200 bucks that you would use to buy a nuc to support a local beekeeper and buy 200 dollars worth of liquid gold, you'd be doing yourself, the bees and the beekeepers around you a favour. Why make it harder for those who are trying to keep their bees healthy?


PDosen,

I am treatment free. I know of at least 3 others in my area (Richmond, VA) that are treatment free. One of the TF guys in my area has had 70-80% winter survival rates a few years in a row. I've had a terrible winter or two, but this year is looking pretty good.

Bees can be kept treatment free, in some areas, at least. Did you know that at the time of Louis Pasteur there was another germ theory proposed by a scientist by the name of Beauchamp? His theory is sometimes called the Terrain theory. The idea being that microbial health is maintained by crowding out the bad bacteria/viruses with the good, instead of trying to nuke the bad ones, thereby killing off the good/nonharmful ones. It may be that varroa mites and their vectored diseases can be withstood by creating a good microbial environment. I'm not really sure exactly how to achieve that, but as for me and my beeyard, we just try to maintain a healthy environment for the colonies, and let the bees do the rest. I can give you a real-world illustration of this idea in action, if you like.

Incidentally, I have tried narrow 1.25 frames, and small cell. I've given up on the narrow frames, but I'm still keeping some of the small cell frames in rotation. Other than that, I just let the bees make their comb as they see fit.


----------



## GregB

clong said:


> PDosen,
> 
> I am treatment free.


Exactly.

A same uniformed (TF or otherwise) approach does not work for everyone everywhere.
Granted, IF the TF does not cause persistent prohibitive losses - why not do it (especially if it makes practical and economical sense)?

Makes sense to practice a sustainable (logistically and economically), working, *location-dependent* approach whatever it maybe.


----------



## JWChesnut

clong said:


> proposed by a scientist by the name of Beauchamp? His theory is sometimes called the Terrain theory.


Nothing epitomizes the intellectual bankruptcy of the TF religion better than their current, sudden championing of "Germ Theory Denialism".
If you are exposed to this utter nonsense by a 19th century "bitter crank", I suggest some corrective reading is in order.








Germ theory denial: A major strain in “alt-med” thought


As hard as it is for most physicians today to believe it, germ theory denial is a major strain of belief underlying disturbingly large swaths of alternative medicine, as well as antivaccine beliefs. Y



sciencebasedmedicine.org


----------



## Oldtimer

clong said:


> The idea being that microbial health is maintained by crowding out the bad bacteria/viruses with the good, instead of trying to nuke the bad ones, thereby killing off the good/nonharmful ones. It may be that varroa mites and their vectored diseases can be withstood by creating a good microbial environment.


That is certainly true in relation to bacteria populations, but in relation to varroa mites it is overthinking it, in my opinion.

Understanding varroa mite dynamics IMHO is simple. They are a parasite, and do best in a healthy bee colony because that supplies them with plenty of food. Of course they can turn the colony into an unhealthy one, but that comes later, and to the ultimate demise of the mites also.

The other thing to realise is that they are not in balance with EHB. They were introduced to EHB from other bee species, and EHB were unprepared for them.

Kind of like way back in time when North and South America were seperated by water. Each had their own animal species including some very scary predators such as sabre tooth cats, terror birds, etc. And some very unique species such as Megatherium. A land bridge eventually happened between the two continents resulting in the animals crossing into territories occupied by other species that had no experience of them. Mass extinction events followed.


----------



## clong

JWChesnut said:


> Nothing epitomizes the intellectual bankruptcy of the TF religion better than their current, sudden championing of "Germ Theory Denialism".
> If you are exposed to this utter nonsense by a 19th century "bitter crank", I suggest some corrective reading is in order.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Germ theory denial: A major strain in “alt-med” thought
> 
> 
> As hard as it is for most physicians today to believe it, germ theory denial is a major strain of belief underlying disturbingly large swaths of alternative medicine, as well as antivaccine beliefs. Y
> 
> 
> 
> sciencebasedmedicine.org


JWChestnut,

Thanks for the corrective reading. Incidentally, the author did acknowledge that there is a a tiny bit of merit in the Terrain theory:

"On the other hand, there is a grain of truth in Béchamp’s ideas. Specifically, it is true that the condition of the “terrain” (the body) does matter when it comes to infectious disease. Debilitated people do not resist the invasion of microorganisms as well as strong, healthy people. "


----------



## P.Dosen

Hello All,

Just had a quick but rather perplexing question for all of you. When Michael Bush describes his journey towards going treatment free, he paints this rather interesting picture of how all his colonies bit the dust while he was treating, which made him believe they died due to treatment. Solomon Parker also illustrated this very interesting idea when he said treating pushing bees to the edge, the bees protest this by dying. 

Furthermore, why would Michael assume that it was the treatment that killed his bees and not his general lack of understanding? Meaning, Apistan was pretty much finished as a miticide back in late 1999 early 2000, around the time that he started. So making the assumption Apistan didn't work would be correct, because it didn't work as the mites developed resistance to it. But then why would he assume that no treatment worked claiming that the bees are better off without them? All treatments have side effects, you take antibiotics for an ear infection and before you know it you're farting all around the house, I'd rather do that than have the infection spread. Any mite treatment has side effects but all side effects are temporary, the side effects from having high mite levels are unfortunately perminant and will, kill your colonies.

I'm just saying that I wouldn't have made that assumption, that no treatments work if I were in his shoes 22 years ago, I would have simply moved on to another product that worked and called it a day. 

Any thoughts or opinions are welcome.

Paul


----------



## joebeewhisperer

It’s possible you are oversimplifying a very complex and costly process over several decades and hours of a beek life. Context of statements is critical.

Mr. Bush is a member and May chime in himself. But if 2 million words of yours or mine are in print, it would be quite easy to pick out a paragraph to dispute. I’m not suggesting we don’t ask questions, but arguing over the premise of treatment vs treatment-free is like trying to get a consensus on solid vs screened bottom boards.

edit: I don’t know Mr. Bush. But to your main point: Two weeks ago I did an OAV treatment on a very tiny cluster of bees. Two days later I had a 2-3 cups of dead bees in the bottom of a large hive full of stores, with a dean queen and attendants high up in the hive. No obvious mite signs. Did they need the treatment? Couldn’t say. Would they have perished before spring regardless? Maybe, might even say probably. Am I blaming OA, the device, the world? Absolutely not. Can you kill off a colony with a fairly benign method of treatment? Absolutely, I just did.


----------



## P.Dosen

joebeewhisperer said:


> It’s possible you are oversimplifying a very complex and costly process over several decades and hours of a beek life. Context of statements is critical.
> 
> Mr. Bush is a member and May chime in himself. But if 2 million words of yours or mine are in print, it would be quite easy to pick out a paragraph to dispute. I’m not suggesting we don’t ask questions, but arguing over the premise of treatment vs treatment-free is like trying to get a consensus on solid vs screened bottom boards.
> 
> edit: I don’t know Mr. Bush. But to your main point: Two weeks ago I did an OAV treatment on a very tiny cluster of bees. Two days later I had a 2-3 cups of dead bees in the bottom of a large hive full of stores, with a dean queen and attendants high up in the hive. No obvious mite signs. Did they need the treatment? Couldn’t say. Would they have perished before spring regardless? Maybe, might even say probably. Am I blaming OA, the device, the world? Absolutely not. Can you kill off a colony with a fairly benign method of treatment? Absolutely, I just did.


I may be over-simplifying an issue much like treatment free beekeepers over-simplify the complex process of natural selection and evolution. However I'm just questioning his logic, nothing more and would appreciate if those that possess a similar mindset enlighten me as I've tried for the last 10 years to understand it, but haven't been able to.


----------



## joebeewhisperer

P.Dosen said:


> I may be over-simplifying an issue much like treatment free beekeepers over-simplify the complex process of natural selection and evolution. However I'm just questioning his logic, nothing more and would appreciate if those that possess a similar mindset enlighten me as I've tried for the last 10 years to understand it, but haven't been able to.


I totally agree that folks who are completely TF, running a few or many hives, and self-sustaining are employing a level of complexity far beyond what I understand.

I switched stocks to keep from getting on a mite-obsession. But coming out of the second full winter with some losses tells me they are not bullet-proof.


----------



## GregB

joebeewhisperer said:


> But coming out of the second full winter with some losses tells me they are not bullet-proof.


JBW,
Do you have specific survival numbers?
Would be interesting and useful.


----------



## Litsinger

Paul:

I am not sure if this is the type of information you are looking for, but here are a few good contemporary research papers which attempt to answer what is currently known about the nature of resistance:

Rapid parallel evolution overcomes global honey bee parasite

Honey bee survival mechanisms against the parasite Varroa destructor: a systematic review of phenotypic and genomic research efforts

Parallel evolution of Varroa resistance in honey bees: a common mechanism across continents?


----------



## P.Dosen

P.Dosen said:


> I may be over-simplifying an issue much like treatment free beekeepers over-simplify the complex process of natural selection and evolution. However I'm just questioning his logic, nothing more and would appreciate if those that possess a similar mindset enlighten me as I've tried for the last 10 years to understand it, but haven't been able to.


That doesn't answer my question Joe. I got bit by varroa hard several years ago, ever since then I've never taken my eyes off of varroa and as a result they have not been an issue for me as I constantly monitor their populations and lower their populations when they're about to become an issue; which is when they reach that 2% threshold or 10 mites on stickyboard in 24 hours. What perplexes me is why would someone continue making the same mistakes over and over again rather than dealing with them? When mites crashed my operation I could have easily decided to not treat as treating didn't work; but I found out through research and education that when I treat is just as important, if not more important than what I treat with, for reasons I will not go into as you should all know those reasons by now. 


It's not a complex thing to allow your livestock to die from a parasite you could have easily controlled, which is exactly what Mr. Bush decided to do it would seem, I'm just asking, why? Why, when there is so much research out there that clearly states why that is a bad idea and what exactly happens when you do nothing to manage and control the number 1 killer of honeybees worldwide, the varroa mite. Apistan didn't work when he went to use it back in 1999, fair enough, why not make the switch to another miticide that did work? If he would have used formic for example, according to label instructions of course would it have worked? Would monitoring mite levels and treating accordingly have worked?


----------



## joebeewhisperer

GregB said:


> JBW,
> Do you have specific survival numbers?
> Would be interesting and useful.


Absolutely. At this point, counting a combine that I expected was queenless (pretty sure), I’m at 5 of 22-23. I’ll have more detail later. Additionally, it’s 24F here so winter is not over.


P.Dosen said:


> It's not a complex thing to allow your livestock to die from a parasite you could have easily controlled, which is exactly what Mr. Bush decided to do it would seem, I'm just asking, why?


Click your profile pic in the upper right. Go to conversations, start a DM and ask Mr Bush. That is my suggestion.


----------



## GregB

joebeewhisperer said:


> Absolutely. At this point, counting a combine that I expected was queenless (pretty sure), I’m at 5 of 22-23. I’ll have more detail later. Additionally, it’s 24F here so winter is not over.


So - the treatment free survival so far is 17/22 = 77%. 
Is this correct?


----------



## joebeewhisperer

GregB said:


> So - the treatment free survival so far is 17/22 = 77%.
> Is this correct?


No, approx 1/2 were treated with Apivar last fall, year before (2020) I did an OA dribble in Nov, then another in Dec. This is the first year I’m taking an active TF interest. So I’ll try and compile something that makes sense soon. Thanks


----------



## GregB

joebeewhisperer said:


> No, approx 1/2 were treated with Apivar last fall, year before (2020) I did an OA dribble in Nov, then another in Dec. This is the first year I’m taking an active TF interest. So I’ll try and compile something that makes sense soon. Thanks


OK then.
You need better accounting going on in that note book. 
Who is treated/who is not treated/who died.... 
Hard to talk otherwise of anything conclusive.


----------



## P.Dosen

GregB said:


> So - the treatment free survival so far is 17/22 = 77%.
> Is this correct?


Sounds about right. I'd ask Mr. Bush, however I think he has more on his plate than he knows what to do with at this point in time as he was stabbed in the back by an individual whose name we will not mention, which is why I am asking you, Joebeewhisperer. Just admit it, it isn't a rational move on his part, allow me to give you yet another example sir. Let's say you cook a fantastic pork roast for dinner and invite a buntch people over to partake. You don't cook it fully because you didn't monitor it's temperature to determine weather or not it was cooked and as a result, you and all your guests fall ill due to food poisoning. 6 months later you invite them over again, and repeat the same mistake because you believe that if you undercook it the second time around no one will get sick. Killing the bacteria is the problem sir, killing mites in Michael's case was the problem. If I ignore the issue and continue undercooking the pork roast, will the problem go away on its own? If Michael continues ignoring mites in his colonies will they go away on their own?

I didn't treat the bacteria, people got sick. Why would I continue not treating the bacteria?

His colonies died from mites because the miticide he used no longer worked. What's the difference between using an ineffective miticide and not treating at all sir?


----------



## GregB

P.Dosen said:


> I'm just asking, why?


Because everyone would love to get away without treating.

BUT - such work should be done systemically and credibly, not a cowboy style where one can not even recite their survival rates for the last winter (let alone how many hives they have).
That quickly loses the confidence, as it should.


----------



## crofter

Why? People have some pretty convoluted ways of rationalizing things to themselves. Others are drawn to conclusions supported more by faith and hope than by a clear chain of factuality. Heck I have even read that one famous debater claimed that the more incongruous the story you could accept, the stronger was the measure of ones faith.


----------



## johno

Just had a beekeeper tell me she lost 6 out of 8 colonies treated with Apivar this fall. Makes me think Apivar is not what it once was or perhaps the treatments in fall come too late, Joe you could go down in history as the first to kill a colony with OAV


----------



## Gray Goose

P.Dosen said:


> Apistan didn't work when he went to use it* back in 1999*, fair enough, why not make the switch to another miticide that did work?





P.Dosen said:


> Just had a quick but *rather perplexing question for all of you*.


I Have a perplexing question for you P.Dosen.
why the Unusual Fixation of what someone did 22 to 23 years ago?
And asking us who were not there, watching his activities.

do what you want with your bees.
Let MB do what he wants with his bees.
LET IT GO
What possible gain to any one here would what "really" happened 22 years ago Have? Crap I may not even remember why I did this or that that long ago.
It Is Obvious you and he do a different process with bees. Accept it and live with your plan , I am confident he is living his.

good luck with your bees this spring.

GG


----------



## LarryBud

johno said:


> Just had a beekeeper tell me she lost 6 out of 8 colonies treated with Apivar this fall. Makes me think Apivar is not what it once was or perhaps the treatments in fall come too late, Joe you could go down in history as the first to kill a colony with OAV


I would think anyone paying attention is probably moving Apivar as a last resort treatment.


----------



## crofter

It did go flat years ago, probably with abuse in the form of off label overdosing and failure to rotate. I wonder if that is a factor in its present trajectory. It certainly was convenient but invited using without rotations with less convenient products. I think there will be pressure for approval of the oxalic glycerin contact method


----------



## JustBees

Realistically we might be allowed 2 grams OAV per box, next year maybe.
It will take millions of dollars and some luck to get anything approved, even if it works perfectly.....


----------



## joebeewhisperer

johno said:


> Just had a beekeeper tell me she lost 6 out of 8 colonies treated with Apivar this fall. Makes me think Apivar is not what it once was or perhaps the treatments in fall come too late, Joe you could go down in history as the first to kill a colony with OAV


No sir, I do not wish to go down in history for anything. 😂

Completely my bad for heavily fogging a tiny colony that had other stressors. No reflection on the process.

I jumped in here as someone had begged the question, “Why did Mr X assume Y”. I believe these questions are best posed to Mr X, in cases where Mr X is not deceased, or has not taken over a small island nation.

At the time Mr. X’s name was in the title of the thread. The moderators quickly and rightfully moved the discussion into this thread where I darest not tread. 😃

I’m tinkering for a more resistant bee. I’m not all in on either side, and my record-keeping is inadequate to draw any conclusions, so I offer none.

I will now fall back on my Swiss heritage and bow out. 😃🇨🇭🧀 Peace out ya’ll.


----------



## CCBEES

P.Dosen said:


> Sounds about right. I'd ask Mr. Bush, however I think he has more on his plate than he knows what to do with at this point in time as he was stabbed in the back by an individual whose name we will not mention, which is why I am asking you, Joebeewhisperer. Just admit it, it isn't a rational move on his part, allow me to give you yet another example sir. Let's say you cook a fantastic pork roast for dinner and invite a buntch people over to partake. You don't cook it fully because you didn't monitor it's temperature to determine weather or not it was cooked and as a result, you and all your guests fall ill due to food poisoning. 6 months later you invite them over again, and repeat the same mistake because you believe that if you undercook it the second time around no one will get sick. Killing the bacteria is the problem sir, killing mites in Michael's case was the problem. If I ignore the issue and continue undercooking the pork roast, will the problem go away on its own? If Michael continues ignoring mites in his colonies will they go away on their own?
> 
> I didn't treat the bacteria, people got sick. Why would I continue not treating the bacteria?
> 
> His colonies died from mites because the miticide he used no longer worked. What's the difference between using an ineffective miticide and not treating at all sir?


Good afternoon. I am a newbee 3rd year beekeeper so I normally just keep my thoughts to myself and try to learn, but.... I am not so sure why you are fixated on Mr. Bush's reasoning for going treatment free, when the important thing, if you are really interested in analyzing treatment free beekeeping, is asking how has he done treatment free for the past 20 years. To me it is kind of funny also that you chose cooking pork as your example of something similar to treating bees for Varroa. First, it is a parasite people worry about in pork, not bacteria, and you really don't have to overcook pork to kill the parasite. Freezing the meat kills it just fine in commercial pork. Most people would refuse to eat a piece of rare pork, but they really don't know why, or that it can be perfectly safe to do so. Bringing it full circle back to treatment vs treatment free beekeeping, most people believe very strongly, as you apparently do, that the only possible way to keep bees is to treat. That is fine, for you. There are others that have found other ways to have their bees survive without treatment, which is a fact and is also fine for them. In answer to your last question, the difference is that treating with an ineffective miticide may actually cause active harm to the hive, whereas not treating at all doesn't.


----------



## crofter

I think that a lot of innocents have been taken advantage of by allowing them to _*deceive themselves*_ about the real odds of success for an absolute beginner to keep bees without treating for mites. In reality the odds are not very good regardless of the T or TF question if the entrant is not up to speed. Media hype does pump up the visions of success and minimises the hundreds of hours study necessary to be reasonably prepared.

I do think that some of the drummers are functionally if not intentionally somewhat predatory. I think their is some responsibility to protect the innocent from their numerically unrealistic expectations! Cruel to do otherwise.


----------



## johno

All of the beekeepers in my area who do not treat their bees lose their bees, I have been watching this for the past 10 years or so. Even some who treat their bees with different products at the wrong time lose their bees. It then becomes a matter of treating bees at the correct times for your geographical area that counts and that normally comes from experience. So in my opinion it is better to try and fail than not try at all and fail, Never tried freezing my bees though maybe that be Mr Bushes secret.


----------



## SeaCucumber

For now, I'll treat and requeen with TF. I'd like to eventually have 1-4 TF hives. Randy Oliver was at 10% last year. I was thinking of using just OAV and thymol. My plan is to try to have brood breaks for OAV. I'll treat any swarm or package once it has 2 day larvae. When the flow peaks in late spring, I'll split hives to expose mites for OAV. Half will have the queen and no old brood. The other half will have 1 young brood frame to make a queen. I'll do 4 OAV at the right times. Then, I have to decide on how many and which summer and fall treatments to do. At least one will be Apiguard thymol. If I do OAV then, I'll cage the queen, so there's a brood break for OAV. Then, I'll do 2 rounds of winter broodless OAV. Generally, I'll try to do strong OAV on consecutive days. The brood break ideas were Randy Oliver's. I don't want to do anything very original, so I have to see what others do. I heard amitraz is more effective in spring than fall.


----------



## crofter

SeaCucumber said:


> For now, I'll treat and requeen with TF. I'd like to eventually have 1-4 TF hives. Randy Oliver was at 10% last year. I was thinking of using just OAV and thymol. My plan is to try to have brood breaks for OAV. I'll treat any swarm or package once it has 2 day larvae. When the flow peaks in late spring, I'll split hives to expose mites for OAV. Half will have the queen and no old brood. The other half will have 1 young brood frame to make a queen. I'll do 4 OAV at the right times. Then, I have to decide on how many and which summer and fall treatments to do. At least one will be Apiguard thymol. If I do OAV then, I'll cage the queen, so there's a brood break for OAV. Then, I'll do 2 rounds of winter broodless OAV. Generally, I'll try to do strong OAV on consecutive days. The brood break ideas were Randy Oliver's. I don't want to do anything very original, so I have to see what others do. I heard amitraz is more effective in spring than fall.


Sounds like a logistical nightmare! I suggest reality will set in! _*Best laid plans of mice and men gang oft a gley!*_


----------



## AR1

crofter said:


> Sounds like a logistical nightmare! I suggest reality will set in! _*Best laid plans of mice and men gang oft a gley!*_


Tough if more than a handful of hives.


----------



## The_Sealed_Nectar

True, we in South Africa also dont treat for mites. The bees usually handle them fine and they not a huge problem yet.


----------



## AR1

The_Sealed_Nectar said:


> True, we in South Africa also dont treat for mites. The bees usually handle them fine and they not a huge problem yet.


Hope you post some of your experiences and observations. Nice to see how it's done in other places.


----------



## GregB

The_Sealed_Nectar said:


> True, we in South Africa also dont treat for mites. The bees usually handle them fine and *they not a huge problem yet.*


As I understand, the South Africa *already *resolved this issue.


----------



## Jadeguppy

Fwiw, one the backend of this thread I notice a lot of advice that seems regionally specific that newbies may not realize are regionally specific. Example, in my area we don't usually get a winter brood break. Occasionally it will get hit enough and dry enough for a short summer slow down. I was using splits for management when I only had a few hives, as I got into double digits, I added oav in the fall, multiple rounds. One of the issues with larger numbers, which I'm not sure if it was mentioned, is that crashing hives can have a cascading effect. That includes nearby hives coming into yours. Crashed hive bees tend to move into other hives and bring high mite loads with them. Then the dominoes/hives start to fall. Also, really strong hives during the flow season are at higher risk as they trim down and mite numbers are concentrated on fewer bees. Distance from others, density of your own hive numbers, other pest loads, etc. have a big impact. I've also noticed a sun vs. shade difference. No scientific research, just interesting observation. Possible things for a newbie to look into as they decide which method to go with.


----------



## tsmullins

squarepeg said:


> the title says it all.
> 
> civility remains the rule and personal attacks will be deleted.
> 
> this thread has been started as the place to have the debate in order to keep threads on other topics from becoming derailed or side tracked.
> 
> posts appearing in other threads that are more appropriate for this one will get moved here.
> 
> so have at it but be nice.


We are 11 years treatment free. 

Shane


----------



## tsmullins

JWChesnut said:


> I consider TF beekeeping a pure fraud.


We are treatment free for 11 years now. I see plenty of feral bees on various hikes.


----------



## GregB

Jadeguppy said:


> a lot of advice that seems regionally specific that newbies may not realize are regionally specific.


+1
Most newbies don't understand (hopefully yet) - what regionally-specific means. 
To them it is all the same.


----------



## AR1

GregB said:


> +1
> Most newbies don't understand (hopefully yet) - what regionally-specific means.
> To them it is all the same.


And, you don't really know what your 'region' is until you have been at it a few years. Region can be as small as one mile. My suburban bees need treatment. My bees on the farm 4 miles away may not. Took me a few years to understand that.


----------



## thill

I have a few friends who have chosen treatment free... 

One loses all of his bees every year, but he only has 2-3 hives.. He just asked me about OAV. I think he's getting tired of buying bees.
One loses most of his bees and does survivor splits only to lose most of them again. Some years are better than others, but no trackable immunity that he can see... yet.
One lives in the James River valley where there is a large feral population. He does minimal bee keeping, catches numerous swarms every year and does cut comb or crush and strain honey. (He doesn't get much) He says he has no idea how many of his hives die, because other bees take over the old hives. He feels that his way is natural and organic. I think he has about 25 boxes of bees. Recently, when he called, he asked me if OAV is organic, and he is considering seeing how it works on a few test hives. I think he wants to actually have a honey crop.
My first OAV treatment back in 2020 had crazy mite drops, but all hives survived well. Not many mites fell in 2021, and they all survived well. Very few have fallen in 2022 with no drops at all in most of my hives. I treat in late winter, mid-summer and in the fall with OAV. Have only used OAV, and nothing else. Has been very effective for me here in central VA.

I would love to go treatment free, but I'm too chicken to do what Igor is doing, trying to breed immunity/resistance into them. If he has success, I might buy a queen from him and experiment, while still treating my other hives. I don't know. After buying Johno's Easy Vap, I don't mind treating nearly as much. Not an issue anymore.


----------



## A Novice

When and if treatments are needed, and what treatments are needed, appears to me to be highly variable.

People who treat typically have pretty good survival, once they figure out how to treat for their area.

People who don't treat have highly variable results, based on what people say. However, the majority of people who try treatment free appear to me to mostly fail miserably.

No one treats because they want to.

Treatment free does not appear to me to be morally or ethically superior, but it is easier.

When my dad kept bees, nobody treated. That was much better. But it isn't like that any more.

The notion that treatment free will breed resistant bees appears to me to be ignorant regarding adaptation and selection. It doesn't work that way. If it did, we would have resistant bees already. I can discuss this at length, this is just a summary conclusion. 

The "Bond Method" of making splits from the few colonies that survive treatment free is doomed to failure, because it is an experiment with a sample size of 1, and no controls. There is no basis for concluding the ones that survive are better than the ones that die. Randomness rules. People who don't understand statistics are doomed to design futile experiments that generate spurious results.

The mites aren't the problem. It is the diseases which the mites carry that are the problem. These can vary a lot from one location to another. A lot of the variability of results has nothing to do with the bees. It has to do with the diseases the local mites carry. Just like white footed deer mice are found pretty much everywhere, but people only seem to catch hantavirus from them in Arizona.

Selectively breeding for resistance runs the risk of narrowing the gene pool, which could result in domesticated bees. Personally, I like having feral bees, and don't want to screw that up.

So I recommend just mucking along. Treat if necessary. Thank God if you don't need to.
Some people need to take medicines to remain in good health. Some don't.
It is obviously better not to need those medications, but it isn't morally superior. 
Let the bees work it out.
In 5, or 500, or 500000 years, the bees will adapt.
Probably faster if you treat, as that will preserve the genetic diversity needed for adaptation.

Just my thoughts.

Jon


----------



## squarepeg

nobody has taken control over the dna footprint in their selection program like randy oliver has. he is slogging through it however and doing everything possible that he can take control over. still, progress has come slowly and he's still not sure he can fix the trait of mite resistance.

the hardest part of keeping bees treatment free is not having control over and being subject to the genetic footprint (bees and mites) that invariably influences one's attempts at tf despite the best of intentions and ambitious pipedreams.


----------



## Litsinger

I suppose the most disappointing aspect of this for me personally is how little has changed in terms of advancing the discussion here on the forum since I've been a part.

I recognize there is a lot of water under the proverbial bridge in this area, with much of it hammered-out here on the forum before my time, but I had hoped there would be some continued interest in exploring TF prospects in the intermediate term.

That said, I suppose if I were convinced that there was not a genetic solution possible within my lifetime, I would likely be less open to exploring the possibilities. It does however lend a somewhat fruitless aspect to continued discussions about whether to treat or not on the pages of Beesource.


----------



## squarepeg

Litsinger said:


> I suppose the most disappointing aspect of this for me personally is how little has changed in terms of advancing the discussion here on the forum since I've been a part.
> 
> I recognize there is a lot of water under the proverbial bridge in this area, with much of it hammered-out here on the forum before my time, but I had hoped there would be some continued interest in exploring TF prospects in the intermediate term.
> 
> That said, I suppose if I were convinced that there was not a genetic solution possible within my lifetime, I would likely be less open to exploring the possibilities. It does however lend a somewhat fruitless aspect to continued discussions about whether to treat or not on the pages of Beesource.


i believe we have more to be hopeful for and less to be disappointed about russ.

what has changed since you began contributing are the several years worth of experiences on both sides of the management and selection strategies. your tf story and others having willingness to share their tf stories no small part. many thanks.

what is it that moves you to believe there isn't continued interest in exploring tf prospects? i believe most folks regardless of management strategy are interested, and aren't laughing at randy oliver for example.

i would ask you as a friend to reconisder your feeling of fruitlessness when it comes to the discussions that have surfaced on this 'opinion' thread.

this has been and i hope will continue to be a place where we can have a civil and informed venue to express one's strategies and not have to worry about getting trolled.

clarifying my use of 'pipedream' in my previous post:

jmho, for the sake of discussion let's assume the 'typical' beekeeper', defined as...

just starting or having less than 3 seasons beekeeping, only bees available for purchase coming from commercial bee farms, multiple beekeepers having similar profiles within flying distance of the apiary.


from a genetic foot print standpoint - this is as bad as it gets. also, from transportation of communicable bee diseases and pests standpoint - again, bad as it gets.

so i would have share with my 'typical' beekeeper friend that tf for him/her would be a pipedream.


----------



## Litsinger

I am hopeful too, SP. Maybe just less eager to expend the energy to argue the merits of TF unless there is an openness to explore.


----------



## squarepeg

yes. i feel the discussion is moving past arguing merits and towards understanding all the variables. any energy expended arguing merits is wasted.


----------



## Litsinger

squarepeg said:


> any energy expended arguing merits is wasted.


I think I know where you are coming from, SP. My point- if TF is adjudged by the reader to have no merits, then you're not even yet in a position to discuss variables.

I hate to sound pessimistic, but there are no regular contributors left on the forum that share about their considerations of evaluating TF as a viable strategy any longer - so why bother arguing whether we should treat or not? What do we hope to gain from the discussion that helps us become better beekeepers?


----------



## Gray Goose

Litsinger said:


> Maybe just less eager to expend the energy to argue the merits of TF


Russ,
the merit is obvious, most folks would rather not threat.
I look for the "how to" part of TF
and Obviously some folks are doing it fine so then then in their spot the "why".
As these data pile up IMO repeatability becomes easier.
the emulate step is easier than the create step.
And IMO we are almost there, pockets of folks are doing TF with good results.
The "why" in their spot is what I feel needs the clarity.

GG


----------



## Litsinger

Gray Goose said:


> ... the merit is obvious, most folks would rather not threat.


In my humble opinion the merit question is even more basic- is it possible?

If one judges it is not, then it is not likely they are open to discussing the variables that make it possible.


----------



## Gray Goose

Litsinger said:


> In my humble opinion the merit question is even more basic- is it possible?
> 
> If one judges it is not, then it is not likely they are open to discussing the variables that make it possible.


several here are doing it so it is possible.
as far as the discussion, at some point your doing it, they say it cannot be done. I am not going to prove it to them they are convinced already.
there are better things to do that argue on the laptop, about a position you are living, deemed impossible.

those than can will, as more data comes out and more do, maybe we see a break thru.

the wild card IMO is all the feral hives are TF, so that is a bunch of hives churning on the issue.
I lost a couple swarms this year as did you, so that bunch of hives is a "put and take" pile, here they are gaining ground.
and there in KY they are not loosing ground, so sure optimism is not unwarranted.

the time line is the thing we cannot wrap out minds around, may take longer than out lifetimes'

GG


----------



## johno

Litsinger, It has to be bourne in mind that most folks playing with bees are doing so to produce a crop of honey, or for the hobby to pay for itself in some way or another. In the honey production sector gains keep being made by those who keep their bees alive. Now if you are keeping bees just for scientific reasons that becomes a different story, and in this sector gains have not rally been forthcoming. I could say that among breeders using AI, gains could be made that do not seem to persist. Most of us during the years have tried different lines of queens but have not seen any appreciable Gains and so to continue keeping our bees alive we treat. Perhaps I am mid way between the 2 camps as I treat solely with OAV and the experts will tell you that OAV does not work unless the colonies are broodless, so maybe I am still allowing some mite pressure but not enough to overcome the hives. But rest assured that when someone finds a way to keep bees without having to work at destroying mites I will most certainly be interested. But at this time I must have some sort of return on my time and financial investment or I would soon be making another financial investment in maintenance payments to a soon to be ex wife.


----------



## squarepeg

Litsinger said:


> I think I know where you are coming from, SP. My point- if TF is adjudged by the reader to have no merits, then you're not even yet in a position to discuss variables.
> 
> I hate to sound pessimistic, but there are no regular contributors left on the forum that share about their considerations of evaluating TF as a viable strategy any longer - so why bother arguing whether we should treat or not? What do we hope to gain from the discussion that helps us become better beekeepers?


i also understand where you are coming from russ. that's what's great about forums like this, on the one hand, and also what's tricky about them on the other.

each one here is coming from their own unique point of view, no two alike.

there are enough of us you included that are documenting that tf has been, is and will likely remain a viable strategy relative to our experiences, but subject to environmental factors beyond our control. this forms our point of view.

choosing a management strategy is one of the more daunting tasks facing beekeepers today. the reasons are multifactorial. getting bogged down in the middle of cyber turf war isn't helpful.

we shouldn't be arguing about whether one should treat or not. we should be exploring the question with informed and open minds. the question will generate different answers that are dependent on variables that were unique to our 'typical' beekeeper for example.

or said in another way:

tf is possible (you are living proof), and tf is not possible (for our 'typical' beekeeper). it's another not either/or but both/and consideration.


----------



## squarepeg

but i agree russ, in the end it's up to each reader. if they decide to not lend their ear to what we have to say that's their option to excercise as well.

i'm not convinced the readership at large here is working on the assumption that tf is not possible nor has any merits.

i actually kinda like this crew.


----------



## Litsinger

johno said:


> It has to be bourne in mind that most folks playing with bees are doing so to produce a crop of honey, or for the hobby to pay for itself in some way or another. In the honey production sector gains keep being made by those who keep their bees alive.


Good feedback, Johno. I appreciate it. I suppose I am not taking umbrage with whether to treat or not, but more generally are we still collectively interested in exploring TF or not. As new scholarship comes out regarding the nature of resistance factors or there is progress made in the VSH breeding arena are we as a community open to better understanding these factors or have we heard enough and are thus convinced that there will not be a viable solution in the foreseeable future?


----------



## Litsinger

squarepeg said:


> it's another not either/or but both/and consideration.


Thanks, SP. FWIW- I agree with you.


squarepeg said:


> i actually kinda like this crew.


Me too!



squarepeg said:


> getting bogged down in the middle of cyber turf war isn't helpful.


I suppose this is my point- this thread is 'To Treat or Not' and in my opinion it has offered relatively little in terms of measured substance concerning the prospective merits to both approaches and relatively more critiquing of the other side- is it furthering discussion and respect for each other's viewpoints?


----------



## ruthiesbees

Just finished alcohol washes on 5 colonies as part of my homework assigned for the Penn State EPIQ queen rearing program that I am part of for the next 2 years. Been beekeeping since 2013, started with topbar hives. Love them. Using lots of IPM methods. Up until this year would do sugar rolls, which I know are not as effective in getting mite numbers. Had to do the alcohol washes as part of the program. Added more Langstroth multi-storied hives this year as I bought an inseminate breeder queen and was making lots of queen cells in a Lang starter-finisher. I typically fair OK with overwintering all the hives with my IPM methods but I really believe there is some difference in effectiveness in a single story topbar hive vs. multi-storied Lang. I also find myself inspecting the Langs less as I don't feel like unstacking them, etc. Bees are not quite as friendly as in the topbar hives. I've also brought in a few different VSH lines over the years. This year, was Cory Stevens virgins in May. Last year was Harbo VSH F1 virgins. Both are significantly spicier than what I like to run but their mite counts were within the acceptable range of 2/300 in an alcohol wash whereas the non-VSH hives are not. However, those bees are too spicy for me to keep in a backyard apiary, so that isn't an answer for me. It might be an answer for sideliners or someone with lots of property away from neighbors but until I find a "nice" VSH line, it's a no-go here. (I do plan to swap queens between the high mite load hives and the VSH ones so they can clean house before winter and will do a few more controversial things like weekly sugar shakes to encourage more grooming as the capped brood emerges to get things under control).

Litsinger, please keep up your posts. I like to see all the articles that you are finding.


----------



## squarepeg

Litsinger said:


> I suppose this is my point- this thread is 'To Treat or Not' and in my opinion it has offered relatively little in terms of measured substance concerning the prospective merits to both approaches and relatively more critiquing of the other side- is it furthering discussion and respect for each other's viewpoints?


 

i understand your point (of view) russ. substance is in the mind of the beholder. for better or for worse, this thread is one of the better attempts i've seen at a civil and informed discussion of its kind.

ymmv, and that's ok too.


----------



## crofter

When considering possibilities of a given venture I look at cost vs. benefits and a big part of the answer to that must include time frame. Also what is the statistical likelihood of success. Probably with myself and likely johnno, our age makes us less likely to invest our time and energy in long term, sketchy probablility pursuits.

I have access to queens from respected breeders that are doing the trial and error legwork and I would be delusional to think I could move the needle further than they are.

I do think that it is actually *cruel* to encourage entry beekeepers to go down that treatment free road as the dominant directive. If the directive were to be, as Greg proposes, to assess the local conditions for success probability indicators and then move toward TF gradually after you have established the skill to keep bees alive _with treatments_, then I would not find the rhetoric to have shades of being predatory.

Agree with SP about substance being in the mind of the beholder. Each one of us will assign different weighting to each of the factors in our cost / benefit / probability calculations. That does not make the other fellows assessment right or wrong.

I admit though to not finding much positive to say about some of the _guru's_ virtue signalling rhetoric.


----------



## Litsinger

crofter said:


> I would not find the rhetoric to have shades of being predatory.





crofter said:


> I admit though to not finding much positive to say about some of the _guru's_ virtue signalling rhetoric.


Thanks for the feedback, Frank. Would you characterize the TF discussions here on the forum as having a predatory or guru mindset?


----------



## Litsinger

squarepeg said:


> ... this thread is one of the better attempts i've seen at a civil and informed discussion of its kind.


You're probably right, SP. Thank you for the reality check.


----------



## crofter

Litsinger said:


> Thanks for the feedback, Frank. Would you characterize the TF discussions here on the forum as having a predatory or guru mindset?


Generally not: I recall having the feeling though on a few occasions where we were visited by some who _would be_ the guru. If there is not some move to temper their unrealistic ebullience with caution that seems to be taken as approval. 

If the neophyte can internalize the idea that no amount of positive thinking alone will make treatment free beekeeping possible *everywhere, *then meaningful discourse can take place. Someone, somewhere has instilled the infallibility conviction and it can be terribly blinding.

Our corporate model of the vast majority of colonies in the US engaging in mega crop pollination with resulting mixing and transporting bees nation wide with zero effective isolation or disease control; no geological isolation, heck even continental isolation has been removed! This destroys one of natures main weapons against disease. I am not sure that any bee is up to the task of achieving and maintaining such a novel ability. Mankind is not doing such a great job of it himself.


----------



## Litsinger

ruthiesbees said:


> This year, was Cory Stevens virgins in May. Last year was Harbo VSH F1 virgins.


@ruthiesbees:

Great feedback. I appreciate you sharing. Did you happen to try pinching any of these queens to see if their progeny proved to be any less aggressive?

I've often wondered if one of the challenges of buying VSH virgins is the unpredictable traits of the colony when these open mate- but that is just speculation on my part.


----------



## Litsinger

crofter said:


> I am not sure that any bee is up to the task of achieving and maintaining such a novel ability.


Thanks, Frank. I appreciate the perspective. I do wonder if the average backyard beekeeper in a non-migratory setting might not do o.k. by bringing in VSH queens and pursue an effectively closed model whereby the queens are routinely replaced and drones are raised that hopefully help to shore up the genetic landscape.

We might not yet have the answer for commercial migratory use, but we might be far enough down the road to move hobbyists a good way down the road toward reduced treatments.


----------



## crofter

_This season_ it appears there is only _one_ existing colony within flying distance of me. (it is also from one of my queen sources; bonus!) There is Zero for ferals up here. So far I have not found a single mite on the sticky board I have for a tattle tale under one colony. Plan to do a mite count via an OA vaporization shortly. The surroundings not the bees is a big part of that equation. The Buckfast from Ferguson Apiaries are dominant in my genetics now: He does hygienic uncapping assessments of his queens. In this situation it would be very likely possible to have them survive TF.

Where my son lives, some 30 miles from our capital city, there would not be a prayer of even approaching a TF existence. They are also rather nasty bees. Full suit and tape the ankles! No chance of maintaining genetics there. 

It is the premise that TF should be doable anywhere that I find disgusting entrapment of neophyte beekeepers.

T


----------



## Litsinger

crofter said:


> It is the premise that TF should be doable anywhere that I find disgusting entrapment of neophyte beekeepers.


Thanks, Frank. In my opinion I think beekeepers in more urban and muddled-up genetic landscapes might be able to give TF a go, but it might mean utilizing a closed model that relies on regular importation of pedigreed genetics. 

No guarantees, but then again what in beekeeping (and indeed life in general) comes with one?


----------



## johno

I would also add that before any new beekeeper goes down the TF trail he should at least gain a few years experience in keeping his bees alive, and this itself is not easy for new beekeepers. One must also bear in mind that the breeding of traits such as allowing bees to overcome a preditor is a little simillar to breeding a sheep that will overcome a wolf. Then at the end the mite is not the preditor as it is the virus. I have often wondered how Apis Cerana is not affected by these virusses but thinking about that I would guess that only the drones would be affected and as there are many of them and their usefullness is limitted to catching virgin queens for a short while so does not make a great deal of difference and so believe that Apis Cerana hold the key and breeding should go in the direction of larvae sacrificing themselves once bitten by the foundress mite. Somehow I don't even see that on the horizen.


----------



## Litsinger

johno said:


> One must also bear in mind that the breeding of traits such as allowing bees to overcome a preditor is a little simillar to breeding a sheep that will overcome a wolf.


@johno:

Good points- I think Frank articulated the point well in suggesting it is likely prudent for the average backyard beekeeper to employ pedigreed resistant stock as the foundation for their efforts rather than trying their hand at selecting from local genetics of unknown provenance.

And there is no doubt that resistance breeding is an effort that requires a great deal of skill and care- but I am convinced it can be done.

As Dr. Friedrich Ruttner pointed out after seeing the results of Dr. Kefuss' work, “_...it turns out that sheep can be bred against wolves.”_


----------



## jtgoral

Litsinger said:


> Thanks, Frank. In my opinion I think beekeepers in more urban and muddled-up genetic landscapes might be able to give TF a go, but it might mean utilizing a closed model that relies on regular importation of pedigreed genetics.
> 
> No guarantees, but then again what in beekeeping (and indeed life in general) comes with one?


I rather buy OA and raise my own queens in Chicagoland then the other way around.


----------



## Litsinger

jtgoral said:


> I rather buy OA and raise my own queens in Chicagoland then the other way around.


Understood, @jtgoral. I should clarify that my comment was not to suggest that folks should import genetics and eschew treatments, but simply offering a potential option for those in tougher genetic environments who are interested in exploring TF.


----------



## crofter

Maintaining any genetic benefits in the face of overwhelming dilution by the background genetics _could_ be aided by importing more resistant genetics from a sequestered stock somewhere, but it does not diminish the background population of mites with their viral and bacterial payload. Dont overlook in doing the feasibility study that the mite host and its vectored diseases are all actively doing their own genetic fitness experiments. Two of the bee maladies that I have experienced and researched somewhat show that their is ongoing development of numerous variants; EFB and Sacbrood. There are more than 30 viral diseases of bees and I dont know how many bacterial and fungal.

Presupposing only best case scenarios does not effective forecasting make. It takes a different mindset and toolkit to make a successful loans manager compared to that required to manage a research and development fund acquisition entity.


----------



## Litsinger

crofter said:


> Presupposing only best case scenarios does not effective forecasting make. It takes a different mindset and toolkit to make a successful loans manager compared to that required to manage a research and development fund acquisition entity.


No doubt, Frank. Not saying it would be easy, only that it might be possible.

It might involve the selective treatment of colonies above threshold a la Soft Bond and the judicious use of robbing screens, but one might be able to pull it off:









Robbing screens as an IPM tool lower mite loads


This study suggests putting a robbing screen on a hive significantly cut the fall mite growth by blocking incoming mites https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-86558-8 Direct measures of Varroa infestation on adult bees from alcohol wash samples showed receiver colonies with and without...




www.beesource.com


----------



## JWChesnut

--


----------



## johno

Litsinger, most of what you say is true, but this type of disciplane you describe is not for beginners. It will require very experienced beekeepers who will have to be dedicated to following strickt guidlines to make any headway if any headway can be made. At this time here in the States the only one I know who is trying to make this work is Randy Oliver. Now he has a commercial undertaking being run mostly by his sons I believe while he also receives funding from others while he tries to enlarge his small successes. For the rest of us it is just wait and see. Bearing in mind that years of work in this direction can be totally wiped out in a season. There are just so many uncontrolable variables that make this task so difficult that I just don't see any easy progress.


----------



## Litsinger

johno said:


> There are just so many uncontrolable variables that make this task so difficult that I just don't see any easy progress.


Understood, @johno. I suppose the larger interest for me is that there are some paths that a serious hobbyist might consider going down if they are interested in exploring TF, leveraging the work that serious resistance breeders are doing. If we can't make appreciable change to our genetic landscape, one at least has the opportunity to import the skill and resources of others, with the understanding that it might come with limitations (i.e. closed model) and might require developing some boundaries (i.e. robbing screens) around the investment.

And if one is already treating, considering the importation of resistant genetics and a more nuanced treatment approach based on thresholds might push the market needle more in the direction of resistant genetics becoming more available from those seriously engaged in bee breeding and propagation.


----------



## johno

Once again, this is not a route for beginners. I feel that in some cases beginners are encouraged to begin the TF route just to swell the numbers, this then ends up swelling the numbers of new beekeepers that fail. For new beekeepers it is hard enough to succeed even when treating because most do not even do that properly.


----------



## crofter

Russ you have the interest, skills and the information gathering / processing ability that makes you so much better equipped than the entry level beekeeper who is drawn into the pursuit with only unfounded dreams of certain success. _The comparison borders ridiculous! _ Dont you agree with the latter?

I think johno post #849 is not too far from the mark.


----------



## Litsinger

Thanks, @johno and @crofter. No arguments from me- my message and dialogue is not aimed toward the beginner, but rather the savvy readership of Beesource, who I imagine based on their participation and engagement in these important discussions are a cut above the average entry-level beekeeper. As Dr. Buchler opines (paraphrasing), 'It will likely be the serious hobbyiest who will lead us into new heights in our pursuit of large-scale resistance.'


----------



## clyderoad

Litsinger said:


> And if one is already treating, considering the importation of resistant genetics and a more nuanced treatment approach based on thresholds might push the market needle more in the direction of resistant genetics becoming more available from those seriously engaged in bee breeding and propagation.



Is this to imply that demand for resistant genetics is lacking or not sufficient and that is what has limited availability? Or that a further increase in demand is needed to accelerate the potential development and availability of resistant genetics?

I have been under the impression that treatment approaches, including monitoring, methodology and choice of product, have been in a constant state of flux (nuanced to the nth degree) for better than a decade now. The trend has been less towards the synthetic, long lived and contaminating products and towards the more simple, short lived and non contaminating products. Much work has gone into understanding the varroa mite and it's interaction with the honey bees in addition to the search for the "perfect" acaricides.

Consider for a moment that the demand needle is solidly pointing to resistant genetics (it's one of the hopes of beekeeping I'd say) but that the current product available does not meet the standards desired by even the most reasonable and seasoned beekeepers.

Have I missed the point?


----------



## crofter

Litsinger said:


> Thanks, @johno and @crofter. No arguments from me- my message and dialogue is not aimed toward the beginner, but rather the savvy readership of Beesource, who I imagine based on their participation and engagement in these important discussions are a cut above the average entry-level beekeeper. As Dr. Buchler opines (paraphrasing), 'It will likely be the serious hobbyiest who will lead us into new heights in our pursuit of large-scale resistance.'


Sometimes a bit of caution is necessary to protect the innocent from themselves even though not the intended target. Jumping in with totally unwarranted expectations and experiencing the highly likely failure rate is not, in my mind the best way of creating the serious and effective hobbyist experimenter. Some do hang in there, persevere and make some progress but I think the drop out numbers do not support that model being the most efficient recruitment method for the future Randy Olivers. 

If they were told that it is very difficult but possible in some circumstances the challenge might be taken by candidates with higher potential. Abject failures do not foster development.


----------



## Litsinger

clyderoad said:


> … the current product available does not meet the standards desired by even the most reasonable and seasoned beekeepers.


@clyderoad:

I think that is a fair critique, at least of the market as a whole.

On the other hand, there’s not much incentive to invest in resistant breeding at present, maybe in no small measure due to inconsistent past results and/or unfounded promises.

As an anecdote, Cory Stevens can sell all the VSH queens he can produce at $10 each but has little incentive to increase his output because it won’t support a full-time gig.

So it’s kind of chicken-or-egg and begs the question- are beekeepers interested in a product that provides incremental gains from what we currently have and are we willing to pay a premium for it?


----------



## Litsinger

crofter said:


> If they were told that it is very difficult but possible in some circumstances the challenge might be taken by candidates with higher potential. Abject failures do not foster development.


Hopefully that is the message they are getting here on our forum.


----------



## William Bagwell

Litsinger said:


> Hopefully that is the message they are getting here on our forum.


Think I did. Incidentally, reading this thread from the beginning and just getting to stuff that looks familiar around page 17. Odd in that I did not lurk that long before joining, nor do I recall ever starting a thread from the middle.


----------



## Litsinger

Asking the line of inquiry from another angle:

Are we still interested in looking for resistance?

Are we interested in investing in its development?


----------



## Gino45

Litsinger said:


> @johno:
> And there is no doubt that resistance breeding is an effort that requires a great deal of skill and care- but I am convinced it can be done.
> 
> As Dr. Friedrich Ruttner pointed out after seeing the results of Dr. Kefuss' work, “_...it turns out that sheep can be bred against wolves.”_


My opinion is that one can select for resistance from the stock that has survived up to that point in time. My reality suggests that unless one is in isolation from other beekeepers and their bees, one will never get bees that do not require some kind of treatment re varroa.


----------



## ruthiesbees

Litsinger said:


> @ruthiesbees:
> 
> Great feedback. I appreciate you sharing. Did you happen to try pinching any of these queens to see if their progeny proved to be any less aggressive?
> 
> I've often wondered if one of the challenges of buying VSH virgins is the unpredictable traits of the colony when these open mate- but that is just speculation on my part.


I have an F2 in another colony from one of these. She's just as spicy and controlling the mites just as good as the F1's.


----------



## Litsinger

Gino45 said:


> My reality suggests that unless one is in isolation from other beekeepers and their bees, one will never get bees that do not require some kind of treatment re varroa.


Thank you for your feedback, @Gino45. I appreciate your perspective- does this position lead you to conclude that there is not a genetic solution to varroa?


----------



## Litsinger

ruthiesbees said:


> I have an F2 in another colony from one of these. She's just as spicy and controlling the mites just as good as the F1's.


Very interesting, @ruthiesbees. Based on the defensiveness issue, do you have a ‘Plan B’ of what you plan on trying next?


----------



## clyderoad

Litsinger said:


> @clyderoad:
> 
> I think that is a fair critique, at least of the market as a whole.
> 
> On the other hand, there’s not much incentive to invest in resistant breeding at present, maybe in no small measure due to inconsistent past results and/or unfounded promises.
> 
> As an anecdote, Cory Stevens can sell all the VSH queens he can produce at $10 each but has little incentive to increase his output because it won’t support a full-time gig.
> 
> So it’s kind of chicken-or-egg and begs the question- are beekeepers interested in a product that provides incremental gains from what we currently have and are we willing to pay a premium for it?


It sounds as if the answer to my question above is the belief that the demand for resistant genetics is lacking or not sufficient and that is what has limited availability. Hard to give much credence to this outlook in the present golden age of bee keeping where public and private and gov't and academic interests are all working on the "better bee" issue, granted for differing objectives many times, and the money is out there and made available to do so like no other time I can recall. This in many countries around the world. 

The interest for resistance to varroa is loud and clear and has been constant. It is not so loud for incremental resistance. 
R&D is mostly a low profile, boring thankless affair and does not often offer itself as a gainful business model for long without tangible and measurable results. Those skilled in the craft of beekeeping rightly question whether the effort producing only incremental gains by others is more beneficial than their own individual effort has been. 
"Are beekeepers interested in a product that provides incremental gains from what we currently have and are we willing to pay a premium for it?" Interested, yes. Willing to pay a premium, not unless there are tangible and measurable benefits. 
This incremental gain and research is mostly the province of the above mentioned entities for good reason as few are capable or have the funding to make valuable contributions.

Having no knowledge of Cory Stevens or his business there are a slew of reasons a part time business fails to be able to become a full time business.


----------



## Litsinger

clyderoad said:


> Those skilled in the craft of beekeeping rightly question whether the effort producing only incremental gains by others is more beneficial than their own individual effort has been.


I think I see where you’re coming from on this @clyderoad. It is a multi-faceted issue that defies easy answers.

My initial question was a bit more basic and framed from this premise- is the Beesource community still invested in exploring a genetic solution to the varroa question- and if so, what are we willing to invest to further these aims?


----------



## ursa_minor

Litsinger said:


> As an anecdote, Cory Stevens can sell all the VSH queens he can produce at $10 each but has little incentive to increase his output because it won’t support a full-time gig.


Wow!!! I would snap those queens up at that price. The lowest price going up here for your regular queen, not VSH, is $50, delivery extra.


----------



## Litsinger

ursa_minor said:


> Wow!!! I would snap those queens up at that price.


You can get on his list for next year here:









Shop | Stevens Bee Company LLC | Bloomfield


Check out the queens in our web store! We offer mite resistant VSH breeder queens and their daughters, shipped next day air to the lower 48.




www.stevensbeeco.com


----------



## Gray Goose

Litsinger said:


> You can get on his list for next year here:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shop | Stevens Bee Company LLC | Bloomfield
> 
> 
> Check out the queens in our web store! We offer mite resistant VSH breeder queens and their daughters, shipped next day air to the lower 48.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.stevensbeeco.com


Russ
per the web site the cells look to be 15 and the Virgins 20, not sure about the math to get the price down.
still cost effective as a queen replacement.

you bring up "investment" in several of your posts.
The next Investment I would stand in for is a "community matting yard"
one could stock it with many VSH queen mothers and allow bringing of virgins to mate.
IMO it would need to be break even, so charge each mating a small "stud fee", else, at some point the originator runs out of money. there is the space (land costs) there is the surrounding space cleaned of other genetics, and there is the day to day trafic of bees in and bees out. IMO almost a full time gig for someone.

my beekeeping model has me raising "most" of my own queens from my over wintered stock.
I do have at the moment 12 of Corys queen, you know the expense I went thru to pull this off.
It is good to hear from several folks the F1s have the same or similar resistance.
my biggest investment this year was these queens. If they winter I am open to getting more.
I am a 40 to 50 hive "hobby keeper" so some queen investment is in order each year. In the past I have added 4 to 6 queens a year as a default. most of the time , bees I still have.

the best "way" IMO is to get the NUC builders to use the VSH queens, as they get to par with others on performance and calmness. this would help spread the work of the Cory's of the world. the brand new do not know what they do not know. and they are often the ones who get bit the worse by the mites. my next years plan is to sell F1 VSH queen NUCs and IMO this will do the best to get the genetics out there, and reduce the puppy mill queen use to zero. Expecting the brand new to push this boundary is not going to bear much fruit. those that know can fold in the VSH traits to the NUCs as a starting point.

keep up the fight, maybe pace your self for the long haul, VRS the short one.

GG


----------



## Litsinger

Gray Goose said:


> per the web site the cells look to be 15 and the Virgins 20, not sure about the math to get the price down.


Good post, GG. I appreciate your feedback and the fact-check. You are right on the pricing, I was underselling Cory (and a good reminder I should never rely on my memory).



Gray Goose said:


> those that know can fold in the VSH traits to the NUCs as a starting point.


In my very humble view, you might really be on to something here. When I am describing 'investment' I suppose I am describing the investment of time, resources and know-how to help move us collectively down the road toward resistant bees.

I could not agree more that this is likely not a task for the beginner, but rather for those who have already invested a lot of time and energy in learning all they can about bee biology and varroa mite reproduction and are already proficient at both evaluating and propagating stock, and applying timely and appropriate treatments when necessary.


----------



## Gray Goose

Litsinger said:


> (and a good reminder I should never rely on my memory).


I totally get that
at my age, I often think of last decades price and am also a bit off.



Litsinger said:


> I am describing the investment of time, resources and know-how to help move us collectively down the road toward resistant bees.


Right but I need a queen for a NUC any way why not VSH F1s if I have them.
then the drones are out there, and some of the new beeks can also allow a swarm more often.
part of this is a math game and critical mass. you eat an elephant 1 bite at a time....
can also get the VSH out there 1 queen at a time, my goal is "at least 10" queens out there next year.
If I can keep that up and 33% swarm the math looks like
year 1 13
year 2 26
year 3 39
year 4 >50

and that counts zero for the swarms that swarm and drone effect (vsh drone mates virgin and the 1 in 18 of her daughters carrying the trait)

and by the end of year 3 my 50 are all requeened with VSH and my mentees will be (12 more) if they are winter able here. and I know my mentees bees swarm , he pings me each time and laments. 

GG


----------



## squarepeg

excellent job gg!


----------



## Litsinger

Gray Goose said:


> part of this is a math game and critical mass. you eat an elephant 1 bite at a time....


Good stuff, GG. I think you're hitting on the crux of my message. You've got the skills and the know-how to discover what works and what doesn't and the willingness to look for opportunities to tip the scales in favor of resistance. I will look very much forward to seeing what things look like this coming Spring.


----------



## ruthiesbees

Litsinger said:


> Very interesting, @ruthiesbees. Based on the defensiveness issue, do you have a ‘Plan B’ of what you plan on trying next?


I still need to check the one other VSH F1 mama that is in another location to see if she is also defensive. They are controlling the mites far better than the non-VSH but they are no fun to work. I did just order some VSH Pol-line and will give them a try. Another beekeeper in the area mentioned he had not found a VSH strain that was fun to work so he gave up. I'd still like to see if there is a happy medium. Say a VSH virgin queen surrounded by Buckfast drone. And I do have experience with Cory's stock. Great for controlling the mites. A commercial guy about 50 miles from me has gone completely treatment free with his numerous hives and purchased a breeder queen from Cory. The trick to running them might be the controlled insemination to make nice bees. IDK.


----------



## Litsinger

ruthiesbees said:


> I did just order some VSH Pol-line and will give them a try.


I will be very interested to hear how they work out for you.

In digging around a bit on VSH breeders, I found that many of them participate in the 'Harbo Bee Cooperative'. While I can't find out much about it online, the idea is to promote vitality and genetic diversity in VSH stocks- but could also lead to a bit more aggression. Hopefully your VSH daughters will get calmer with each generation.


----------



## ursa_minor

My concern is when man meddles with genetics, trying to change the behaviours of a species that took millennia to get to this point are we decreasing the gene pool, are we selecting for other traits that might not be desirable, are we controlling and manipulating the species for our own gain and to their detriment?

I just don't know, but it makes me slightly uneasy. Sure bee genetics is vast and varied but will it stay that way if we meddle, there is no guarantee that we might not create a problem we did not foresee.


----------



## Litsinger

ursa_minor said:


> I just don't know, but it makes me slightly uneasy. Sure bee genetics is vast and varied but will it stay that way if we meddle, there is no guarantee that we might create a problem we did not foresee.


That is an interesting question, @ursa_minor. Something to think deeply about.

The reality is, even if we do the same thing we are currently doing, we are applying selective pressure upon the population at-large. Whether it is migration, treating (or not), selecting for traits we like (or against those we don't), importing genetics or any of the myriad factors we impress upon bees due to our management or lack thereof, we are selecting.

I like how Mr. Tom Glenn describes bee breeding as a pack of playing cards:

_'An interesting property emerges at the level of population. In a large interbreeding population, the frequencies of the genes tend to remain stable. The entire science of population genetics is built around the simple but counterintuitive fact that gene frequencies stay the same except under the influence of selection, migration, mutation, or random drift. Likewise for the entire deck of cards, though they get shuffled around, all the cards stay the same.

If we wanted to improve our chances of getting good poker hands, we might think about stacking the deck with extra aces. And if we want to improve the chances of getting better colonies, we can stack the gene pool with the genes that produce the traits that we want in the bees.

Individuals and colonies are temporary, but it's at the level of population that lasting changes can be made. But the population is made up of colonies, and colonies are composed of individuals. It is at the level of individual, the queen and the drones she mates with, that all the work must start at.'_

So it is with resistance breeding- we are not looking to fundamentally replace the population at-large, but rather insert several more aces into the deck so our prospect of a successful hand improves.


----------



## ursa_minor

Litsinger said:


> So it is with resistance breeding- we are not looking to fundamentally replace the population at-large, but rather insert several more aces into the deck so our prospect of a successful hand improves.


This totally makes sense. I do think, however, that we might get what we do not intend when adding those aces. The trade off could be more aggressive bees, bees that cannot turn off their OCD in removing varroa so they start removing healthy brood, or a myriad of other behaviours which, when introduced to the drone gene pool, may become an unwanted dominant trait. 

The resistant breeding right now, IMO, has limited opportunity to flood the gene pool, but I do hope these breeders are looking at how they are changing bee behaviour while searching for their magic varroa resistant bee. Because you can bet your boots that if they find one it will be mass produced and sold on a grand commercial scale.


----------



## squarepeg

ursa_minor said:


> My concern is when man meddles with genetics, trying to change the behaviours of a species that took millennia to get to this point are we decreasing the gene pool, are we selecting for other traits that might not be desirable, are we controlling and manipulating the species for our own gain and to their detriment?


just like with cows, chickens, and pigs... this is what is already taking place with commercial bee production.

since the big customers are the migratory operations, almond pollinators in particular, the selection that has been taken place for many years caters to operations more interested in bees making bees than bees making honey.

fecundity is the trait most sought after. bees that brood like crazy regardless of environmental factors best get the job done in that context.

for example, bees like that generally don't take brood breaks during the summer dearth we experience here. i've heard reports from other beekeepers using package bees, that their colonies keep brooding like crazy during our summer dearth eating their way through a super or two of stored spring honey in the process...

not only wiping out the year's honey harvest, but becoming very productive mite factories in the process, because mites reproduce in brood, right?

my hunch is that my bees are mite resistant because of the brood break they take, along with allogrooming and most likely mite biting as well. these survivor traits however are antithetical to what migratory bee keepers and package bee producers need to be profitable.


----------



## Litsinger

ursa_minor said:


> The trade off could be more aggressive bees, bees that cannot turn off their OCD in removing varroa so they start removing healthy brood, or a myriad of other behaviours which, when introduced to the drone gene pool, may become an unwanted dominant trait.


You're certainly on to something here, IMHO. I think the safeguard is found, as Brother Adam describes as:



Litsinger said:


> “…the Achilles heel of the honeybee.”





ursa_minor said:


> Because you can bet your boots that if they find one it will be mass produced and sold on a grand commercial scale.


Your post made me smile when I read this- because it is so true!


----------



## ursa_minor

squarepeg said:


> my hunch is that my bees are mite resistant because of the brood break they take, along with allogrooming and most likely mite biting as well. these survivor traits however are antithetical to what migratory bee keepers and package bee producers need to be profitable.


I am hoping mine will be resistant as well, I won't know unless I take the plunge and this fall, if all 4 are doing well going into winter I will try at least one, possibly 2, TF hives. 

I guess I am talking about the large commercial bee breeders and where they can take this if they see a profit, not your average garden variety.


----------



## Litsinger

ursa_minor said:


> I guess I am talking about the large commercial bee breeders and where they can take this if they see a profit, not your average garden variety.


Here is an interesting business model along the lines of what @Gray Goose is talking about, albeit at a large commercial scale- a business consortium producing VSH queens and supplying nucs to both Northern and Southern beekeepers (don't ask me how these are all tied together- I haven't figured that one out):









VSH Queen Bees | VSH Queen Bees for Sale | The B Farm


The B Farm offers VSH queen bees for sale. Read more about Varroa mite–resistant bees in this article reprinted from Bee Culture’s September 2019 issue.



thebfarm.com






https://mvabeepunchers.com/nucs/




Queens – Evergreen Honey Company





ursa_minor said:


> I will try at least one, possibly 2, TF hives.


Given your mite assays, I am optimistic you are going to meet with some success. I will look very much forward to reading how this goes for you!


----------



## squarepeg

i forget where i saw it, but something like only 5% of the 2.5 million bee colonies in the u.s. are owned and managed by hobbiests and sideliners. the industry by default has to cater to the larger customer base.


----------



## crofter

squarepeg said:


> just like with cows, chickens, and pigs... this is what is already taking place with commercial bee production.
> 
> since the big customers are the migratory operations, almond pollinators in particular, the selection that has been taken place for many years caters to operations more interested in bees making bees than bees making honey.
> 
> fecundity is the trait most sought after. bees that brood like crazy regardless of environmental factors best get the job done in that context.
> 
> for example, bees like that generally don't take brood breaks during the summer dearth we experience here. i've heard reports from other beekeepers using package bees, that their colonies keep brooding like crazy during our summer dearth eating their way through a super or two of stored spring honey in the process...not only wiping out the year's honey harvest, but becoming very productive mite factories in the process, because mites reproduce in brood, right?
> 
> my hunch is that my bees are mite resistant because of the brood break they take, along with allogrooming and most likely mite biting as well. these survivor traits however are antithetical to what migratory bee keepers and package bee producers need to be profitable.


Lots of key points above. Aside from the mite issue (which is being handled as a tax deductable expense of course) the fecundity of the dominant bees is what is presently driving the industry. Some breeders already have different bees that are better at niche environments.

The drawbacks mentioned for small honey focused hobbiests in areas with summer dearths are exactly the scenario that made one previous BS member from Ohio quit. That bee type is also not the best for different reasons in cold climates and need workarounds.

The one best bee is probably as much a fantasy, in my mind, as trying to develop the one best cow breed: if these properties have to come in separate flavors to fit different use patterns, how then are they to be kept from blending back? Is it a _Fools Errand ?_

Concentrate on inserting deleterious genetics into the mites and less emphasis on quasi utopian fixes for the bees. 

I could certainly be accused of seeing only drawbacks but darn it, I swear that some proponents are wearing forward looking bridles and see no possibilities of negative outcomes.


----------



## Litsinger

crofter said:


> ... if these properties have to come in separate flavors to fit different use patterns, how then are they to be kept from blending back? Is it a _Fools Errand ?_


Thanks for the feedback, Frank. In my mind I think we first have to unpack the genetic mechanism(s) at work that confer resistance. Is it a dominant or recessive trait? Is it the result of homozygosity? Is it even classically genetic at all or does it have a component of epigenetic or phenotypic expression?

I believe this is why many serious folks are focused on the VSH trait- it appears to be additive in its expression, it can be selected for in a straightforward manner and queens which are homozygous for the trait pass it along in a predictable fashion to their offspring.

As to the local adaptation issue- Dr. Harbo speaks to this, observing:

_'A valuable feature of VSH is that bees will express a high level of mite resistance when a colony contains as little as 50% of the alleles for VSH. A simple way to produce such a colony is to raise daughter queens from a VSH breeder and allow the daughters to naturally mate. This is good news for queen producers. They can rear VSH queens, mate them to any drones, and those queens will produce colonies that require no chemical control for varroa. Another benefit is that beekeepers can have mite resistant colonies without destroying their existing bee populations --populations which may be well adapted to certain locales or have desirable beekeeping qualities.' _ 

So while I hesitate to speak for Dr. Harbo, I think he shares Tom Glenn's perspective that it is not necessary (or even likely) that we change the population-level genetics- we are rather aiming to insert the beneficial alleles that help move the population at large further in the direction of resistance.


----------



## ursa_minor

crofter said:


> Concentrate on inserting deleterious genetics into the mites and less emphasis on quasi utopian fixes for the bees.


Are there some studies doing this? Maybe we need a focus on the reproducibility of the mites, or has that been done already.


----------



## Litsinger

ursa_minor said:


> Are there some studies doing this? Maybe we need a focus on the reproducibility of the mites, or has that been done already.


@ursa_minor:

This one is the best I've found to-date:

Descriptive Analysis of the Varroa Non-Reproduction Trait in Honey Bee Colonies and Association with Other Traits Related to Varroa Resistance

In it, they describe what they see as two distinct mite non-reproduction functions:

Mite Non-Reproduction (MNR) and Varroa Sensitive Hygiene (VSH)

This paper is a companion to:

Honey bee survival mechanisms against the parasite Varroa destructor: a systematic review of phenotypic and genomic research efforts

Which sets out to define these terms as well as many others utilized in the resistance breeding scene (attached).


----------



## Gino45

Litsinger said:


> Thank you for your feedback, @Gino45. I appreciate your perspective- does this position lead you to conclude that there is not a genetic solution to varroa?


I annually select new breeder queens from the best of the yes colonies. I treat fewer times than recommended, so my hives do experience varroa buildup during the year after hopefully being at a very low varroa count to begin the year. During the year, some, probably too many for most beeks, die off primarily due to varroa. So I'm left with bees that have survived and prospered with less treatments than used by the pros. My experience is, over time, even these survivors left untreated will succumb. That's my experience. I select from the best and yet the bees still need a varroa knockdown.
I have a hard time with treatments because I sell honey and try to be ethical about what I'm selling, IOW I do what I can to sell clean rather than contaminated honey while having a long honey season. It's not easy.
There are folks here claiming not to treat. I know one of their methods is the screen bottom board, while I use a solid 'bottom board. It is claimed that helps. Another is brood breaks. But if some imperfect drones come along, the bees will no longer have that perfection of not needing treatment. That's an impossible situation for me.
I'm not critical of trying to improve the bees, as I've said I make my effort to do so myself. But for me it's unrealistic to keep bees productively with zero treatments. I'm hopeful that this can change . Perhaps with genetic engineering it can be done to our mellifera bees. Otherwise, I remain a skeptic.


----------



## Litsinger

Gino45 said:


> hat's my experience. I select from the best and yet the bees still need a varroa knockdown.


@Gino45:

Great feedback. I sincerely appreciate you taking the time to describe your approach and experience.

I applaud you doing what you can to move your local population down the road- and I readily concede that stable and commercially-viable populations which require no treatment may be a ways down the road and may indeed be near impossible to sustain in areas suffering from frequent importation of non-resistant stock

Have you tried importation of purpose-bred resistant stocks? If so, what has been your impression of them?


----------



## jtgoral

Just released :


----------



## Litsinger

jtgoral said:


> Just released :


I really respect Dr. Ellis. If you haven't heard the following 'Two Bees and a Podcast', it is well worth the listen IMHO:



Litsinger said:


> Great interview on the ‘Two Bees in a Podcast’ between Dr. Jamie Ellis and Ms. Amy Vu with the University of Florida Research and Extension Lab and Dr. Ralph Büchler, Director of Bee Research at the Kirchhain Bee Institute.
> 
> The first 12 1/2 minutes outline a biographical sketch of how Dr. Büchler found his way into bee research and some of his goals, aspirations and approaches to his efforts based on his life experiences.
> 
> Following, there is a very detailed outline of research in Suppressed Mite Reproduction (SMR), and at the 25 minute mark, Amy asks, _How do you select for SMR in your bee population?_
> 
> At the 30 minute mark, Dr. Ellis asks, _Where do you see all this heading?_
> 
> At the 32:35 minute mark, Dr. Ellis follows-up, _Do you feel that our defeat of varroa is eminent?_


----------



## jtgoral

Litsinger said:


> I really respect Dr. Ellis. If you haven't heard the following 'Two Bees and a Podcast', it is well worth the listen IMHO:


What is the episode number? The link does not go there.


----------



## Litsinger

jtgoral said:


> What is the episode number? The link does not go there.


Episode 66: European Honey Bees + Sting Management


----------



## jtgoral

Litsinger said:


> Episode 66: European Honey Bees + Sting Management


Got it, I clicked on Listen on Spotify


----------



## Litsinger

Litsinger said:


> Dr. Ellis


A recent question posed by Mr. David Papke to Dr. Jamie Ellis in the most recent ABJ (attached) helps distill some of the competing perspectives / priorities when it comes to resistance selection and propagation.

For reference, David recently published a two-part article series in the ABJ entitled 'Regenerative Beekeeping', linked and discussed below:









Regenerative Beekeeping


I am looking forward to Part II of David's article in next month's ABJ.




www.beesource.com


----------



## Litsinger

Here is a good interview between Cory Stevens and Garret Dodds, USDA ARS discussing VSH, the Pol-Line and Hilo breeding programs and a long discussion about the finer points of II.

The whole video is worth the watch, but a few segments in particular touch on many of the discussions that have been ongoing on Beesource over the past several years. In particular:

@ 0:16 - 0:18:30 they discuss the Harbo Model of introducing the VSH trait into an existing population and discuss the distinction between traits and stocks.

@ 0:18:30 - 0:22 they discuss the Pol-Line program.

@ 0:34 - 0:36:30 they discuss the Hilo program.

@ 0:44 - 1:33:20 they begin with a discussion of TF and transition into a discussion about the both the opportunities and difficulties of bee breeding with an emphasis on resistance.

@ 2:36:15 - 2:58:35 they discuss the distinction between general hygienic behavior and VSH and move to a discussion about host resistance and it's implications in bee breeding.


----------



## nailbender0259

A little light reading


Scientists breed honey bees to fight deadly parasite


----------



## Litsinger

Great interview w/ Cory Stevens and our own @Duck River Honey. Nice work!


----------



## Gino45

Litsinger said:


> @Gino45:
> 
> Great feedback. I sincerely appreciate you taking the time to describe your approach and experience.
> 
> I applaud you doing what you can to move your local population down the road- and I readily concede that stable and commercially-viable populations which require no treatment may be a ways down the road and may indeed be near impossible to sustain in areas suffering from frequent importation of non-resistant stock
> 
> Have you tried importation of purpose-bred resistant stocks? If so, what has been your impression of them?


Importation of queen bees or packages is not allowed in my state. I've been told it has always been this way; however, many years ago I did bring in queens via the US mail. I'm certain the government would stop it now. The local queen breeders used artificial insemination to upgrade the local stock. Then the varroa
arrived and wiped out the ferals. Thus we now have very domesticated bees in Hawaii. If only they were able to survive m
without treatment. Some claim they has such bees, but mine will eventually succumb without treatment.


----------



## Gino45

squarepeg said:


> since the big customers are the migratory operations, almond pollinators in particular, the selection that has been taken place for many years caters to operations more interested in bees making bees than bees making honey.
> 
> fecundity is the trait most sought after. bees that brood like crazy regardless of environmental factors best get the job done in that context.
> 
> for example, bees like that generally don't take brood breaks during the summer dearth we experience here. i've heard reports from other beekeepers using package bees, that their colonies keep brooding like crazy during our summer dearth eating their way through a super or two of stored spring honey in the process...
> 
> My observations of this fecundity issue are maybe a little different. The darker bee races tend to be conservative with their stores and brood production. They want long and increasing day length to signal that they should be producing much more brood. They focus on storing more honey rather than making more bees.
> The yellow bees we call italian are more willing to raise brood regardless of day length provided they have the stores with which to raise that brood. So the net result is they will continue with the brood if you leave the honey on the hive or feed them to stimulate their growth. On the other hand, they will cut back lacking the stores of honey and pollen.
> In the end, when (if) that big flow comes, this kind of bee may outproduce the more conservative dark bees.
> This is my experience, fwiw.


----------



## Litsinger

Gino45 said:


> Importation of queen bees or packages is not allowed in my state.


Have you looked into giving the Hilo bees a whirl?









Hilo Bee FAQs


Frequently asked questions about Varroa resistant Hilo Bees



www.hilobees.com









__





Microsoft Forms







forms.office.com


----------



## squarepeg

Gino45 said:


> In the end, when (if) that big flow comes, this kind of bee may outproduce the more conservative dark bees. This is my experience, fwiw.


thanks g45, and yes, and this honey productivity in part is what the commercially produced bees are selected for.

although when expressed to its extreme in our location, such bees will eat right through the nice honey crop they put up in the spring only to keep on brooding through our summer dearth. a friend of mine had this happen a couple of years ago, and not only lost his honey crop, but had to feed syrup to prevent starvation.

i guess the trick with those type of bees in a location like here is to make sure you pull the honey prior to the summer dearth before they start consuming it.

randy oliver refers to bees having this trait "mite factories". i can't imagine being able to keep bees like that sans treatments.

coincidentally, i went to harvest honey from a single hive i keep at an outyard yesterday. this tf colony is in it's fourth year, has been successfully requeening itself, and has been a good honey producer until this year. i know for a fact that there several beekeepers nearby using commercially produced bees, and their bees are likely contributing the bulk of drones this colony depends on at mating time.

what i found was pretty eye opening. i've never seen a more yellow queen than this. there was the equivilent of 6-7 deep frames of brood even though we are just now coming out of a couple of months of dearth. it was crazy. this looked more like what i see at my homeyard just prior to swarm preps as our main spring flow is kicking in. stupid bees. should they survive winter i'll be pinching the queen and no longer use queens mated at that location.

regarding the harvest from this outyard hive, there was less than one super of honey, and some of that is what was left for them to overwinter on from last year. this compares to more like 3 supers of harvestable honey that my splits and caught swarms produced for me this season before they took their brood break. smart bees.

at least for here, with our bimodal nectar flow seperated by a long summer dearth, our locally adapted survivor (sans treatment) stock ends up being more productive. back when i had time for checkerboarding and when successful at swarm prevention i was approaching 200 lb. harvests from my several of my good colonies.

i feel like this brood breaking along with allogrooming and perhaps some mite biting is how we are able to skip the mite treatments here.

i can see how this experience may be different for hawaii and other locations where the flow patterns and feral bee populations are not like ours.


----------



## Gino45

These days every 'feral' hive I see here is usually a recently escaped domestic hive. In fact, swarms, rare as they are, are bees that have moved on trying to escape what's going on in their hive, IOW, varroa and small hive beetle.
I just looked at a hive in the base of a tree. In close up photos mites on the back and head of the workers were apparent. I'm keeping an eye on it, but I don't think that hive has long to live.
Prior to varroa, large populations of feral bees of mixed genetic backgrounds existed. It was rare to see one that matched the description of any one group such as Italian or Caucasian. IOW, they tended to be mutts and had many undesirable characteristics as to temperment, reluctance to swarm, and productivity. The domestics outperformed them in almost every way. Now there are no real ferals to my knowledge and domestics need treatments to survive.


----------



## AR1

Gino45 said:


> Prior to varroa, large populations of feral bees of mixed genetic backgrounds existed.
> 
> Now there are no real ferals to my knowledge and domestics need treatments to survive.


It's been literally 50 years since I have seen a feral bee colony around here, N Illinois. I have lost a couple of swarms that I know of, and probably more I missed. Who knows where they went or what happened to them. I wish them the best of luck.


----------



## squarepeg

Gino45 said:


> These days every 'feral' hive I see here is usually a recently escaped domestic hive.





AR1 said:


> It's been literally 50 years since I have seen a feral bee colony around here, N Illinois.


jmho, but i believe the somewhat rare populations of feral survivors in the u.s. are being displaced over time. this due to decreasing habitat along the ingress of commercially produced bee strains, and the latter due to the ever increasing number of beekeepers importing package bees. that's what appears to be happening here.

to the degree possible, i will attempt a randy oliver style flooding of my immediate area with queens and drones from what little survivor stock i have left after the 2019 efb wipe out. only time will tell whether this along with genetic contributions from good folks like fusion_power will be enough to stem the tide.


----------



## Litsinger

From the October 2022 Bee Culture


----------



## squarepeg

is it just me, or does miller seem a little down on tf?


----------



## William Bagwell

squarepeg said:


> is it just me, or does miller seem a little down on tf?


Not so sure, he might be a budding guru since he knows what "corn seed" treatments are.

I certainly have no clue?


----------



## NUBE

Lol. I like how Hopguard was all “YES! Place our ad right there!”

Wish people would understand that extremism of a subject, even on the side that history may eventually show to have been correct, rarely wins people over.

Thanks for the post Litsinger. Reminds me of why I don’t spend money on publications very often. Too much proselytizing.


----------



## crofter

squarepeg said:


> is it just me, or does miller seem a little down on tf?


Just a wee teensy bit!  I have seen a few examples though, that do substantiate his position. I think it takes far more skill and effort to be successfully TF than to manage with treatments. If someone within flying distance has a fair number of hives that are succumbing to mite collapse, you will have poor odds of being successful without treatments.


----------



## squarepeg

russ, we may want to consider merging this with the 'opinion thread', in order to be fair to those on the other side of the management philosophy who may want to chime in without breaking the 'perjorative rule' in this subforum.


----------



## Litsinger

You da boss


----------



## squarepeg

thanks russ, and thanks for sharing the article.

wrt to guru-ing, and while i can't speak for local clubs, it's my observation that we haven't had much of that going on here at beesource for quite some time. this is especially true since a certain vocal former moderator of the tf subforum packed up his toys and moved on.

on the contrary, the tf voices here on the forum these days are quite moderate in comparison. the advice i have always given to beginners wanting to start out tf has been to find a beekeeper nearby doing it, acquire bees from them, and mirror their management practices. this has proved successful for the handful of folks i help get started with bees, but the reality is that there aren't many locations new beekeepers are going to blessed with that option.

reading between the lines it appears that miller is migratory to almonds. he's operating in a different universe than you and i are russ.


----------



## Gray Goose

squarepeg said:


> reading between the lines it appears that miller is migratory to almonds. he's operating in a different universe than you and i are russ.


the sandbox you play in makes a difference.

Good advice SP on follow the leader if you wish a TF start.

odd folks blaze trails, when I have yet to explore 1/2 of those already blazed.
now with @GregB's Euro trails, I may never be finished.

GG


----------



## AR1

Litsinger said:


> From the October 2022 Bee Culture


Okay. That was just weird. When he is being cogent, I pretty much agree with him. But put down the pipe and take a few breaths of clean air before starting to type next time!


----------



## crofter

AR1 said:


> Okay. That was just weird. When he is being cogent, I pretty much agree with him. But put down the pipe and take a few breaths of clean air before starting to type next time!


I think there is a fair bit of substance there but overstating your case is not the best way of getting the message across.


----------



## AHudd

This is as good of a place to add this as any, I suppose.
The 300 acre property adjoining ours was purchased by a cow/calf operation. They are clearing 12 feet on both sides all the way around. 
I spoke to the equipment operators about giving me a call if they find any bee trees. 
He said he has pushed over 3 bee trees and 1 tree with 2 bear Cubs. 
I assured them I did not intend to stop them from working, I just want to examine the comb and catch the bees if possible.
He told me the locations of the ones he had already pushed over but the comb had already been destroyed by bears or varmints, but the cavities were fairly small as far as I could tell.
All I have learned from this is there are bees in the trees of unknown origins.

Alex


----------



## AR1

AHudd said:


> He said he has pushed over 3 bee trees and 1 tree with 2 bear Cubs.
> 
> Alex


That's a lot of bee trees on just a 300 acre plot!


----------



## AHudd

AR1 said:


> That's a lot of bee trees on just a 300 acre plot!


I was surprised there were any, especially considering that is only around the perimeter. 
There have been a few ice storms over the past few decades creating many cavities where large branches broke away from the trunks. There are many large oaks. 
There may be hope for unmanaged bees after all. I sure would like to get a look at some of that brood comb.

Alex


----------



## Litsinger

AHudd said:


> ... but the cavities were fairly small as far as I could tell.


The last two feral colonies I have trapped-out here in Western Kentucky were occupying cavities no larger than a volleyball.


----------



## jtgoral

Litsinger said:


> The last two feral colonies I have trapped-out here in Western Kentucky were occupying cavities no larger than a volleyball.


Smaller then a soccer ball? Must be a springboard and you prevented it


----------



## Litsinger

jtgoral said:


> Smaller then a soccer ball?


Here is one from 2019. This colony is still in my yard, and a photo of the cavity is attached to the post:



Litsinger said:


> With the very capable help of my lovely wife, I was able to get the trap-out successfully relocated last night to the home yard. They were christened #1912.
> 
> It was interesting to study the tree cavity devoid of bees and recognize that it might have only been the equivalent of 10 - 15 liters in volume.


----------



## jtgoral

Litsinger said:


> Here is one from 2019. This colony is still in my yard, and a photo of the cavity is attached to the post:


So you prevented the colony from looking for a better place to settle. I like it. Its 3 years now and you have local bees like we all should...
I call *local* every colony with the queen I reared myself.


----------



## Litsinger

And here's one from 2018 in a catalpa- if anything, this volume was smaller than the red cedar void in the previous post:



Litsinger said:


> I also installed a trap-out rig on the hive at my office based on the good advice of Cleo. Hogan- we'll see what happens...


----------



## Litsinger

jtgoral said:


> So you prevented the colony from looking for a better place to settle.


I'm not itching for an argument- just offering a personal observation based on Alex's recent post about small cavity volumes.


----------



## AHudd

Litsinger said:


> I'm not itching for an argument- just offering a personal observation based on Alex's recent post about small cavity volumes.


The limb with the cavity is still where it was left. 
I have gone back a few times to look for bees, so I will take a photo. 

Alex


----------



## Litsinger

Litsinger said:


> From the October 2022 Bee Culture


And in reply in the November 2022 Bee Culture - some things never change...


----------



## squarepeg

from wrisley's rebuttal:

"I have heard it said that ignorance and arrogance go together. I see both in Mr. Miller’s article."

😆


----------



## JWChesnut

I submit the *inverse* scenario is more likely: The TF survivors in your home yard are the stochastic (random) colonies left behind after a vibrant, diverse community was decimated by piss-poor beekeeping. The only thing keeping this rump, and impoverished, base alive is the regular introgression of selected, pedigreed breeding stock from outside your control.
Spreading poor genetics into the wider community will only accelerate the catastrophe.

There is no way of telling if this scenario is true, but in my extensive tours of the TF partisan yards, I have discovered enormous reservior of "self-delusion" among the TF promoters. They are literally "red is blue" fantasists.


----------



## bkpr1154

JWChesnut said:


> I submit the *inverse* scenario is more likely: The TF survivors in your home yard are the stochastic (random) colonies left behind after a vibrant, diverse community was decimated by piss-poor beekeeping. The only thing keeping this rump, and impoverished, base alive is the regular introgression of selected, pedigreed breeding stock from outside your control.
> Spreading poor genetics into the wider community will only accelerate the catastrophe.
> 
> There is no way of telling if this scenario is true, but in my extensive tours of the TF partisan yards, I have discovered enormous reservior of "self-delusion" among the TF promoters. They are literally "red is blue" fantasists.


This is a good example of the type of beekeeper that I hope *not* to attract, inspire or assist. Thank you for revealing yourself.


----------



## thill

Poll: Treat or not treating?

I choose to treat, but use gentle OAV, and it's been very successful in my case. I'm new to beekeeping, but havent's lost any hives over the two winters I have under my belt. Now I'm in my third, so we will see how that goes.


----------



## Litsinger

Here is a humorous bit of satire from this month's Bee Culture- this seemed like the best place to hang it:


----------

