# oxalic acid



## loggermike (Jul 23, 2000)

I am skeptical of the claims that varroa are developing resistance to formic and oxalic.More likely it is an application failure as timing and temperature are critical.It would be like developing resistance to getting thrown into a fire,or getting smashed with a hammer.


----------



## Axtmann (Dec 29, 2002)

Bill what do you mean with No the FDA is not likely to approve an acid for human consumption.
If youre talking about Oxalic Acid, do people need approve from the FDA before they eat vegetables in your country? Almost all vegetables have more or less of that acid. 100g/3.5oz of rhubarb has enough acid to tread a colony.

Bill / As I understand it, the insects suction-mouth part, (technical, eh?), is corroded away by the acid resulting in it starving to death.

Your right, go to the website here you will find some pictures I think on the first page. The company must be from your country or so? http://www.members.shaw.ca/orioleln 

Im telling you, loggermike has right..It would be like developing resistance to getting thrown into a fire,or getting smashed with a hammer.

Alfred


----------



## AstroBee (Jan 3, 2003)

Here's a link to 1999 Danish Institute of Agricultural Sciences publication entitled: "Spring treatment with oxalic acid in honeybee colonies as varroa control". In it they address the issue of oxalic acid residues and indicate that they may be minimal; however, more testing was suggested.
http://www.agrsci.dk/plb/cjb/oxal-djf.htm


----------



## loggermike (Jul 23, 2000)

Hello everyone,
In regards to a member being cut off from posting,hey this is the internet,accidental mess -ups happen all the time.I am sure everyones point of view is welcome here.
As for oxalic,there have been lots of studies,all showing great effectiveness when done during the time of year when there is the least amount of brood.This will vary by area and strain of bee used.For example,someone using Carns in Canada would have good success,but running Cordovan Italians in south Texas or California might not.
The commonest method of using oxalic is the dribbling method.More than one treatment doing that apparently has harmful effects on the bees over wintering.
The new method of vaporizing hasnt shown the side effects of the dribbling method and apparently can be done more than once,according to the studies I saw.
It wont be long now till Coumophos has lost its effect in the USA,so everyone who keeps bees seriously needs to be thinking ahead.
Of course the beekeepers on this forum ARE thinking ahead and are on the cutting edge of what will eventually be the common practices.
---Mike


----------



## BWrangler (Aug 14, 2002)

Hello Everyone,

There are two different types of treatment involving oxalic acid that have been used. One treatment involves dribbling an acid solution over the bees and the other uses heat to vaporizes the solid form in the bottom of the hive. Neither have been approved for use in the US.

I have thought that the use of oxalic fumes might provide a short term solution to the varroa mite problem for commercial beekeepers. The use of oxalic acid should not contaiminate the combs or hive products like the current type of chemicals do. Although there are application risks, it should be more user friendly than the chemical stuff and hives can be treated during the winter off season.

Short term solutions are just that. And the same logic that implies that a substance kills the mites but doesn't kill the bees so it's safe was used in the past on every approved chemical. The long term effects of those chemicals however, were always negative and cumulative.

Is oxalic acid a quick fix? Maybe. Is it benign at the levels used during hive treatment? Don't know but it isn't benign to the applicator at those levels. Some of the websites also show the saftey gear needed. What to take a whiff/ :> )

Long term solutions are where everyone will end up. I like small cell. It has worked for me.

Dennis
Thinking the evaporator would eventually end up in the trash like all that other stuff I tried before small cell


----------



## BULLSEYE BILL (Oct 2, 2002)

Thanks Astrobee, I read the WHOLE thing. It had to interesting to keep my attention for THAT long...
They were using an atomizer, not vaporizing. An atomizer would reduce their mixture to tiny dropplets. Vaporizing is heating the dry crystals into a gas. Vapor would find its way into areas that the heavier droplets would not.
The graphs helped explain the study if you can't quite grasp the verbage.
Bill


----------



## Robert Brenchley (Apr 23, 2000)

I've been rather put off oxalic by allegations that it damages the bees. It's applied right at the time when damage is going to be most serious. Does anyone know more? I don't know what the situation is in the States, but you can get it easily enough here.

------------------
Regards,

Robert Brenchley

[email protected]
Birmingham UK


----------



## BULLSEYE BILL (Oct 2, 2002)

It's sold at any hardware store. Dow chemicle sells it as a bleach for lightening the color of wood. A large tub of it is rather cheep. There are other forms of it available also.
Bill


----------



## loggermike (Jul 23, 2000)

>>Long term solutions are where everyone will end up. I like small cell. It has worked for me.

Something I have wondered about.I have some brood combs that have been in use for 30 years.The cells are noticeably smaller from cocoon buildup.So are the bees.Do the 4.9 cells get even smaller over time?That would produce some tiny bees!

>>Dennis
Thinking the evaporator would eventually end up in the trash like all that other stuff I tried before small cell

I sure hope so.Varroa takes up way too much time dealing with it and thinking about it.I still hold out hope that the ultimate answer will be bees that fight off the mite, hopefully without having to convert to 4.9
---Mike


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

I have seen references to the bees chewing out the cocoons when the size is too small to suit them. Sounds like you've already regressed.


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

Hi Bill -

I checked with my source in Sweden and he says there is no official confirmation of acid resitance, but speculations due to the high death rate in Germany. Norberto Milani has, in Apidologie, vol 32, warned against resistance to oxalic, at least enough to make it useless, if oxalic acid was used as sole miticide for several years.

Where is the reference for the mouth part being burnt or corroded away when using oxalic? There are always mites that will survive acid treatments. A bigger percentage than from pesticide treatments. Why do they survive? If moth burning always occurrs, then why is it not 100% effect? Resistance to acid is rare among bugs, but there are cases in history, given in Rachel Carsons "Silent Spring". So it's not impossible. Also these acids used for mites aren't caustic acids, but organic acids, so if the correct enzyme is there the acid could be digested.

Regards,
Barry


----------



## BULLSEYE BILL (Oct 2, 2002)

Barry,
Here is the web site with the pictures of the effects that oxalic acid has on the mites. http://www.members.shaw.ca/orioleln 
There is quite a bit more info on this site as well. They do claim 98% effectivness if applied when there is no brood.
Bill


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

Hi Bill -

First of all, this site is a commercial site and has a vested interest in selling a product. Red flag number one.

Second, it gives no study on it's site showing backup for their claims. They do give one link to a site that has some info on the acid but it is in German and does me no good. I have no way to confirm the numbers they show on their site (99.8% success rate, whatever that means).

This is the last place I would recommend getting our information from. Where are the studies that give us some sound data?

Regards,
Barry


----------



## BULLSEYE BILL (Oct 2, 2002)

In the link above posted by Astrobee...
Bill


----------



## Axtmann (Dec 29, 2002)

There is a link to the site in English also. If youre interested in that treatment you will find the results your looking fore on the internet. <G> 

If not, tell everyone; 

They do give one link to a site that has some info on the acid but it is in German and does me no good.
Look here http://www.mellifera.de/engl2.htm this is I other company. <G>
First of all, this site is a commercial site and has a vested interest in selling a product. 
Red flag number two. <G>
Why do you treat with oil every week? Because it doesnt reach the mites in the brood cell. Same with Oxalic Acid, you can read it on the site with the first Red flag
The problem we have here in Germany is not the resistance against the Oxalic Acid, it is the stupidity from the beekeepers who think, one treatment is enough. Stupid or lazy I dont know how to call it?


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

Hi all -

Like I said before, "where's the beef?" I see a report of a report. Phrases like, "The results have indicated that any doubts about safety can be dispelled" don't do it for me. I want to see the data. Especially since the paragraph just above this says, "Because pure oxalic acid is an unhealthy, toxic and corrosive substance, it is necessary to wear protective glasses, ...."

No where does it say that resistance can not occur from the use of the acid. The resistance part of it is minor to me. I personally wouldn't want to subject the bees to this kind of treatment, once again, stepping in and fighting the mites for the bees instead of letting them do it on their own.

Small cell has worked for my bees now going on 4 years. Others are having the same true for them. Once I get past the 5 year mark, I will have complete confidence in it and won't hesitate to promote it.

Regards,
Barry


----------



## Axtmann (Dec 29, 2002)

Nobody is forcing you to oxalic acid, to oil treatments or whatever. We live in a fee world and I think we all should read and study possible ways to fight the Varroa. 
I wonder why some beekeepers accept no other ways; thinking only there way is the only right one? 
Years ago I worked with Perizin, Apistan, Amitraz, Formic Acid, Lactic Acid, Thymol, Oxalic Acid in liquid form and now I end up with a treatment what is in my opinion the best for my bees because of the result, but Im still open for others. The Russians working with the acid since late 70s because most cant pay the chemicals --- where is the resistant? Remember thats almost 25 years, far over the 5-year mark. Even I have 2002 the best results ever.
Everybody can see what happen, going for only one or two treatments recommended / registered from government. Mites getting resistant  beekeeper be left stranded. Who is interested to register the acid? I can tell you nobody!
The process is very expensive and only worth if you can make money after all the effort. Who wands to go and register vinegar for window cleaner if they ask for? 
When Columbus was ready to sail west even the scientists told him not going to far it would be his end. He didnt listening and thats your luck. None here in Europe would ever hear that your continent exist and now we can buy the Oxalic Vaporizer to treat the Varroa. <Smile>
Hey dont give me the red flag for that.


----------



## BULLSEYE BILL (Oct 2, 2002)

I am rooting for nature and science to hurry along the Darwinian theory. (I wish there was a spell checker here!)
There is a tremendious amount of knowledge in the books that are available to us about beekeeping, but there are subjects that are just not there. Accepted and tried practices in one part of the world are not necesisarly so in another. I am naturaly curious and like to know how things work. I may not ever intend to use dynamite, but I like to know the how and why of it.
I am begining my fifth year as a beekeeper, I haven't seen any sign that I have varroa. Is it there? probably. I use the perscribed chems. in the beekeeping books as directed, I don't like to, espicialy because I don't like to treat for a problem that might not be there, or retard natures natural evolution.
There is a great many things that I do not know about beekeeping, but that is part of why this hobby appeals to me, room for growth. I like to learn from others experiances, most everyone has different results from the same trials. So how best for me to proceed? Filter out the old things that have been given up on and try those things that have the highest probability of success.
I will let the most dedicated beat themselves with the terribaly complicated and try only that which I can handle, I am honest with myself and my limitations.
I can understand that when someone is four years into their experiment that they don't want to hear that they could have gotten there quicker if they had taken a different route. But it's not always the destination, it's the journey that matters.
I am not going to get stuck in any one method, that belies what I want to do with my hobby. Am I going to try oxalic acid? I don't really know yet, but the chances are good that I will, along with fgmo, permacomb, slatted racks top hive entrances, SMR's, NWC's, oils, and a host of other things as they come along.
I still have questions of safety, but in this sue happy world with every manufacturers lawyers trying to cover their collective asses you have to take reason into your own conduct and do what is right for you and take responsibility for your own actions. In my business I am besieged with government intervention, I don't need any more in my life.
It is not my aim to persuade or dissuade anyone, I am here to learn from others and just maybe help someone once in a while.
Bill

"Can't we all just get along?"
Rodney King


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

I know I've said this before in another thread, I have no intention to force any procedure on anyone. If you believe that all "possible ways" to fight varroa should be studied, then do so. I will offer my experience with non-chemical methods and encourage others to do the same. You are free to push the chemicals and acids all you want.

I voiced my concerns about oxalic acid and simply passed on what I heard from a friend in Sweden who I have great respect for. In the spectrum of all the chemicals, oxalic would be one of the mildest, but its use is still not without negatives.

> The Russians working with the acid since late 70s because most cant pay the
> chemicals --- where is the resistant?

Are you telling me that the Russians strictly use only oxalic acid and no other treatments for 25 years?

> and now we can buy the Oxalic Vaporizer to treat the Varroa.
> <Smile>
> Hey dont give me the red flag for that.

That's fine for Europe, but it's not acceptable for use in hives in the U.S.

Regards,
Barry


----------



## Axtmann (Dec 29, 2002)

Barry I dont know exacts how long the beekeepers in Russia using Oxalic Acid to tread honeybees. 
We have so many immigrants from Russia, in the 90s approx 200 000 each year. I know 2 beekeepers in our club, from Kazakhstan and Voronezsh. Both never had other treatments for the bees than oxalic acid. They didnt even know thats others available and treated the bees since 78 and 80. 

>>That's fine for Europe, but it's not acceptable for use in hives in the U.S.

Do you think beekeepers in your country have a chance for better treatments we have? Wait till all mites are resistant against the drugs your government aloud to use, whats happen then?? If all beekeepers waiting for the government that means, in one or two year your country has no mites anymore.
And is also FREE from honeybees !!! 
I hope not


----------



## Axtmann (Dec 29, 2002)

This is for loggermike

>>>Something I have wondered about.I have some brood combs that have been in use for 30 years.The cells are noticeably smaller from cocoon buildup.So are the bees.Do the 4.9 cells get even smaller over time?That would produce some tiny bees!<<<

My questions: have you found any Varroa in your hives with 4.9 or smaller cells? Have you ever treated your bees against Varroa, if yes, what kind of treatment?
You know, Im open to every new and successful method to help the bees.

Are there bee inspectors in your country?
We have inspectors and they coming from time to time without appointment. If those guys would find 30 years old brood combs on my bee yard I would receive a fine and had to burn everything. On top of it, I would loose all my honey and the permission to sell honey.

My oldest combs are not older then 4 years. I hold the frame against the sun; if I can see only a shadow from my hand I meld the combs.

Look at the hive enters, after one year the white paint is dark from the bees. Bees are not cleaning there feet before they going in the house like you or myself. 
The bees bringing dust / dirt from plants and trees in the hives and after a while this is on all combs and frames.
Even the cocoons are not clean; do you think the larvas only eat? The Varroa also use a place on the bottom of the cell where they leave the droppings.

Would you sleep in your bed for 30 years without cleaning? Hmmm I hope not. 

Make a test; bring your honey for a detailed analyses and they can tell you how many pollen, what kind of pollen, how many dirt / **** and what kind in your honey is.
I know what your answer is; thats not your god *** business. But think about your customers, they pay for a healthy and clean product from Mother Nature.


----------



## BULLSEYE BILL (Oct 2, 2002)

That's fine for Europe, but it's not acceptable for use in hives in the U.S.

Regards,
Barry

OK, Now I'm feeling WAY below the bell curve on the learning scale. Somebody clue me in. Really.
If I decide that I want to vaporize some vinegar and puff it into my hive, are there some 'Bee Police' out there that are going to jump out of the bushes and tell me what I'm doing is "unacceptable"?
I mean, I can't afford to be cuffed and hauled away...
Bill

P.S. Please forgive me for my flippant tounge in cheek attitude. BUT, I really do have a problem with someone telling me what is and is not acceptable, especially when there is no law or regulation governing what ever it is. I obey the law, work within the regulations, and follow the instructions on the lables. Heck, I even refrain from parting wind in public.
So what makes an acid that is naturaly found in vegetables (and applied in even smaller amounts) 'unacceptable' to smoke and puff up a beehive?
I am trying to learn something here so don't give me a 'yes' or 'no' answer, please?


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

There used to be a lot of "Bee police" and they used to burn a lot of hives. Mostly for AFB.

There are still EPA "police" who fine people for using insectacides improperly. Odds are you won't meet one, but it's possible.

There are FDA "police" who fine people for using chemicals that can end up in food and confiscate all your honey because they think it might be contaminated. 

Odds are you won't meet one of these either. The smaller the operation you have the less likely.


----------



## BULLSEYE BILL (Oct 2, 2002)

I am familar with EPA policy and procedures, from my occupation.
But which of these agencys would be involved with a product that has no offical regulation in the application to livestock?
It doesn't seem to me that the environment is at risk, so nix the EPA.
Perhaps a gross misuse of the product, like pouring some in your bottle of honey, would bring the ire of the FDA. Surely there would have to be a serious offence to bring about regulation.?
Maybe a local county or state health department? But that would have to be based on a larger government guideline.
OK, I am rambling, just searching for answers.
Thanks Michael,
Bill


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

Axtmann: Are there bee inspectors in your country?

Some states have them. Most used to have them when AFB was a big threat. Most no longer have them.

Axtmann: We have inspectors and they coming from time to time without appointment. If those guys would find 30 years old brood combs on my bee yard I would receive a fine and had to burn everything. On top of it, I would loose all my honey and the permission to sell honey.

Why? Are there regulations on how long you can keep brood comb in a hive?

Axtmann: Look at the hive enters, after one year the white paint is dark from the bees. Bees are not cleaning there feet before they going in the house like you or myself. 

They only have propolis and and pollen on them, but yes it stains the combs and the landing board.

Axtmann: The bees bringing dust / dirt from plants and trees in the hives and after a while this is on all combs and frames.

If it was only dust and dirt it would not be so permanantly staining on the wood. Dust blows off, dirt easily washes off in the rain. This is propolis and pollen and maybe some dirt encased in propolis. The bees coate everything with it.

Axtmann: Even the cocoons are not clean; do you think the larvas only eat? The Varroa also use a place on the bottom of the cell where they leave the droppings.

I'm sure everything leaves droppings, but the bees are constanly cleaning out anything they can pick up and they are constanly polishing everything with antimicrobial propolis. If they didn't bees could not survive. AFB and EFB would have wiped them out ages ago.

Axtmann: Would you sleep in your bed for 30 years without cleaning? Hmmm I hope not. 

But the bees are constanly cleaning everything. Put some pollen or some sugar in a hive and the houskeepers will haul it all out in a matter of hours. Put a pile of dust in the back, I'm sure the same thing will happen.

Axtmann: Make a test; bring your honey for a detailed analyses and they can tell you how many pollen, what kind of pollen, how many dirt / **** and what kind in your honey is.

I'm not sure where that kind of service would be available here.

Axtmann: I know what your answer is; thats not your god *** business. But think about your customers, they pay for a healthy and clean product from Mother Nature. 

I don't think bees will make anything except healthy clean product. It's contrary to their methods and contrary to their nature.

The only contaminates that I've ever seen in honey are from the processing of it, or from contaminates introduced in the hive by the beekeeper. Honestly if the bees did not make enzymes that kill microbes it would be a bad thing. The dirty water the bees collect alone would contaminate everything in the hive. Fortunately for the bees and for us they DO make those enzymes.


----------



## Axtmann (Dec 29, 2002)

Well, Michael I think about what you typed. Im almost speechless.

Even a beginner who studied a book will find that the propolis and pollen is not on the feet, its up on the legs in a little tray, baskets.
If dirt is moist how can it blow of.. And inside the hives? 

Bees cleaning everything they cover even a dead snail, buck or mouse inside the hive with propolis. 
Propolis is not dissolvable with water you need alcohol, have you ever put a few old empty frames in a drum with boiling water? Try it, I can tell you the water is dark, even black from 5 year old frames. What do you think this black stuff comes from? 
In nature bees leaving old combs and starting new, its in there nature to build. What do you think why beekeepers buying thousands and thousands of new wax sheets or making the sheets self? 
Try it, put a super only with new sheets and frames on top of a strong hive during the time they collecting honey. After one day most sheets are ready and have honey. 
Sure bees going on dirty water, but why? Study in the book you will find the answer. There are many thinks in the water like minerals and bees need it. Why eating some animals soil and stuff like this, same thing. 
The dirty water goes in the bee stomach not in the cells or honey. Study the anatomy of the honeybee they have two stomachs, one for food and one for honey. http://crsc.calpoly.edu/crsc/Headrick/123Honeybee%20Anatomy_files/frame.htm 
I hope I could help you.


----------



## Axtmann (Dec 29, 2002)

>>>>>OK, Now I'm feeling WAY below the bell curve on the learning scale. Somebody clue me in. Really.
If I decide that I want to vaporize some vinegar and puff it into my hive, are there some 'Bee Police' out there that are going to jump out of the bushes and tell me what I'm doing is "unacceptable"?
I mean, I can't afford to be cuffed and hauled away...
Bill<<<<<

I think your bee police dont even know that this acid is an excellent treatment.

Read this if your interested, your not the only one with questions. Dont worry if your not sure whats going on ask. 
It is a great thing to have this board.

Discussion about Oxalic Acid
At the moment, the up and downs of the values remain without explanation. As measurements were close to the limit of detection, unavoidable tolerances of the analysis could be of importance. With regard to the total surface on which one can expect precipitation after the vaporisation of oxalic acid, the samples that were taken are only spot checks. 
An irregular distribution of the precipitation is possible.
The large scattering of residue levels after the treatment may possibly be explained by a difference in previous contaminations. The apiary Fischermühle has treated with oxalic acid for over 10 years. 
To judge the residue data it has to be taken into account that the worst case was examined, the worst situation with the highest possible previous contamination. 
It could be hypothesised that the wood of the frames is a more or less saturated system. Wood therefore only absorbs a part of the applied oxalic acid.
It is important to mention that the control, consisting of ten samples of non-treated wood of frames, shows a remarkable scattering in the natural content of oxalic acid. 
Up to the forties wood was used for the extraction of oxalic acid, because it naturally contains oxalic acid.
For the toxicological assessment of the results no comparative data of dermatological examinations are known. But from the Austrian Federal Institute for Health Service written information about oxalic acid concentrations in normal trade products is available. 
Very high amounts of oxalic acid are found in hair cosmetics. According to the information of the above mentioned institute, a maximum concentration of 5 % oxalic acid in hair cosmetics is allowed.
Compared to that, the residues in the frames with an insignificant amount of a few micrograms is slightly above the limit of detection.

Oxalic acid µg/cm2
Residues of oxalic acid on 5 frames of one colony
In the organic bounds oxalic acid is a naturally occurring component of our nourishment. It can be found in almost every plant we eat and it is a natural component of honey in quantities of 0,02 to 0,2 grams per kilogram. Oxalic acid consists of hydrogen, carbon and
oxygen (HOOC-COOH).
Rhubarb becomes sour because of 2,6  6,2 grams of oxalic acid that is contained in each kilogram of the fresh plant (Macholz 1989). Some pieces of rhubarb  with the same size as the samples of the wood of the frames  were cut and weighed. The pieces contained on average 1,1 mg oxalic acid per cm2 (calculated on the basis of a content of 4,4 mg/g oxalic acid). 
Therefore, the exposure of a housewife to oxalic acid when cutting rhubarb is ten times higher than the highest value that was measured of the treated frames. In comparison with the average residue of oxalic acid of all examined samples the housewifes exposure to oxalic acid is 25 times higher then the beekeepers.
Furthermore, it can be assumed that the beekeepers hand is not contaminated with the same amount of oxalic acid that was ascertained in the samples. The oxalic acid is not freely
released on the surface of the wood. The above mentioned values of residues refer to the total amount of oxalic acid that was dissolved from the wood in the laboratory within 24 hours. 

By-products with vaporisation of oxalic acid
In an independent laboratory it was examined which substances arise from the vaporization of oxalic acid. The arising vapours were sucked
into a water bath and the water late analysed. As it cannot be assumed that problematic compounds of higher valency arise they searched for oxalic acid, formic acid, formaldehyde and acetaldehyde. The limit of detection for formaldehyde was at 100 micrograms per gram of vaporised oxalic acid; for acetaldehyde at 80 micrograms per gram oxalic acid.
The amount of formic acid that was found was 1 % of the weight of the vaporised formic acid (10 mg formic acid per gram oxalic acid). Neither formaldehyde nor acetaldehyde were detectable.
By-products 
Limit of detection µg/g presented oxalic acid Found with 1 g vaporised oxalic acid Formic acid 10 mg
Formaldehyde 100 none
Acetaldehyde 80 none
Furthermore, the amount of oxalic acid that is not destroyed through vaporisation but vaporises and precipitates afterwards was examined. With vaporisation of loose oxalic acid crystals, on average 54 % of the used oxalic acid could be found. With vaporisation of oxalic
acid in gelatine capsules the rate of finding oxalic acid again was at 34%. 
Rate of finding oxalic acid after vaporisation
Average Single values
Loose oxalic acid dehydrate 54 % 50,7 %; 52,3 %, 58,5 %
Oxalic acid in gelatine capsules 34 % 26,3 %; 35,2 %; 39,2 %
When heating, about half of the oxalic acid decomposes into harmless carbon dioxide and water. The other half vaporises and forms fine drops and dusts of oxalic acid that precipitates everywhere in the hive. Because of the even distribution of these fine particles the high and
consistent efficacy against the varroa mite is possible. Moreover, it was examined if the acid that was found after vaporisation was really identical with the presented oxalic acid. With this aim in view the FT/IR spectrum of the white precipitation after vaporisation was determined. With the fast fourier transformation with infra-red detection, the so-called Finger-Print-Technique, it could be guaranteed that the
acid that was found again was identical with the presented acid.

It seems legitimate to compare the spray with the vapour leaving the hive. Most of the droplets produced with the spray method have a diameter of a few µm. Mellifera e.V. developed the spray method 4) and performed various tests on it. In the case of the spray
method, the oxalic acid is dissipated as so many small droplets that a surface area of up to 4.5 m² is produced in a cm3 of oxalic acid mist. Due to the enormous surface area, the small particles quickly dry to create oxalic acid dust and high-percentage acid. In contrast, with
vaporisation, it can be assumed that the condensed oxalic acid particles do not remain dry, but rather immediately bond with humidity in the air.
Conclusion
According to the presented research results we assume that the application of the vaporisation method is justifiable because the necessary safety precautions can easily be kept. User safety is in every respect greater than that offered by internationally used and
recommended spray methods. In terms of handling of the acid, it is even safer than the trickling method.Radecki has measured the remnance of oxalic acid in the honey from
12 treated families The remnance in all 12 cases of oxalic acid in
honey is extremely low and under the limits of detection of 25 mg per Kg honey. The acid is insoluble in wax and cannot be detected in wax.


----------



## loggermike (Jul 23, 2000)

I know some who think the same as Axtmann on the old brood combs.I never could accept this as the bees are constantly cleaning and polishing brood combs.If these were as bad as some think,surely the queens would prefer new combs to lay in.My observations over many years show just the opposite,queens will always lay in the old dark combs before the new combs if given a choice.
I never extract honey from the brood nest for two reasons.One,that honey belongs to the bees.Two,why take a chance that residues from previous varroa treatments might still be in the comb.
Before the mites,we would occasionally take some brood nest honey.I dont believe it was any less clean than honey from the supers.I could never detect that it was darker either.
As for culling combs,my opinion is that it is very uneconomical to cull on the basis of color.
---Mike


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

Axtman: What do you think this black stuff comes from? 

Since the "soiling" of combs begins as a yellow color and eventually becomes a brown color and finally a black color I assume that it is from pollen and propolis as I already said.

Axtman: In nature bees leaving old combs and starting new, its in there nature to build.

Yes, and it's also their nature to prefer the old black combs for brood.

I have opened many a feral hive full of both new white comb and old black comb and most of the brood is in the old black comb.

Axtman: Sure bees going on dirty water, but why? 

To put in empty cells to evaporate for cooling. Lot's of dirty water in cells all the time.

Axtman: The dirty water goes in the bee stomach not in the cells or honey. Yes it goes in cells for cooling.

Axtman: Study the anatomy of the honeybee they have two stomachs, one for food and one for honey. 

I have been studying bee anatomy for more than thirty years, but thank you for the refresher.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

Brood Comb:
Axtman had brought up a concept that I have never heard in 30 years of beekeeping. That dark comb is unsterile or dirty. Axtman, is this a common concept in Germany (Deutschland)?

Has anyone else heard this concept? I have heard of culling brood comb, but not for these reasons.


Inspectors:
Also, I mentioned that some states do and don't have inspectors; I will go further and state that in 30 years of beekeeping the only inspector I've ever met was a retired one who was selling bee equipment. None of my hives have ever been inspected by anyone but me.


Oxalic Acid:
Also, on the subject of Oxalic acid: I have no opinion and no experience, and I am all in favor of people trying things to find out. I am only asking and speculating, so please don't anyone take this as an argument.

If Oxalic acid burns the mandibles off of mites, wouldn't it be very likely that it would burn the hair off of bees and possibly other small external things? After all, the mandibles and the hair and other small protuberances on both mites and bees are just keratin. If it dissolves one, I dont see why it wouldnt dissolve the other.

I am wishing everyone luck with all of their mite treatments. I hope they all succeed beyond our wildest expectations. I like to share with people what I've tried and hear what they have tried and I would never try to tell anyone they have to use my method or they can't use theirs.


----------



## Axtmann (Dec 29, 2002)

Brood Comb:
Axtman had brought up a concept that I have never heard in 30 years of beekeeping. That dark comb is unsterile or dirty. Axtman, is this a common concept in Germany (Deutschland)?
http://cgi.ebay.de/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3102357947&category=22407 

Michael I send you a site where you can find a nice Photo. A German beekeeper (pig) was trying to sell his combs, frames and everything. The photo was on ebay and other beekeepers send a note to an inspector. 
There is nothing left from the whole pile and Im sure the combs and frames are not 30 years old!!!!!


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

Axtman, so you are saying it is not only a commonly held belief that black comb is dirty but a governmentally enforced one?

I'd still like to hear if anyone else has heard or not heard this concept before. I had not. Culling brood comb was always because it gets too much drone, or because the cells were smaller from the cocoons or it got wax moths in it. I have always thought everyone left the bees in charge of sanitation.


----------



## Axtmann (Dec 29, 2002)

Well government enforce or not, it is because honey and pollen are food and must be absolute clean. 
Its same with beer, we have only natural ingredient in our beer, = hop, malt, sugar and water. Compare to the US beer, and brewery are proud of their magic formulas with 100 ingredients and more. Who want drink this here even if they all food great products?? 
Thats the reason why we have no permission to use FMGO legal. They found here in tests oil remainder in pollen after one year of fogging. 
In wax also, but thats is no problem its useful for candle. I have no idea what happen if wax get load with oil year after year, beekeeper sell the wax and they making new foundation from it. Other beekeepers buying that wax and have no idea what is in it. Do you think thats OK? Healthy or not, thats beside the point.


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

Hello Bill -

Wow, I can't keep up with this group. Gone a day or two and one is left in the dust! Something I've been meaning to reply to that is now "way back there."

you wrote:
> I am naturaly curious and like to know how things work. I may not ever intend > to use dynamite, but I like to know the how and why of it.
<snip>
> I haven't seen any sign that I have varroa. Is it there? probably. I use the
> perscribed chems. in the beekeeping books as directed, I don't like to,
> espicialy because I don't like to treat for a problem that might not be there,
> or retard natures natural evolution.

No offense intended, but it is this kind of thinking that I have a hard time understanding. If you don't know if there are mites in your hives or not, why do you go ahead and put chemicals into them? This wholesale approach to using chemicals has only made it more difficult for the bees and the other beekeepers to deal with the mites.

If you were naturally curious, would you not be looking closely at your bees, determining what the mite situation actually is? The beekeeping books are giving you information that comes from the party line for the most part, especially when it comes to pests and diseases and how to deal with them.

> I will let the most dedicated beat themselves with the terribaly complicated
> and try only that which I can handle, I am honest with myself and my
> limitations.

No matter what method you settle on for dealing with varroa, you must understand what you are doing and know the consequences. To not do so is harmful to the bees, to yourself, and to other beekeepers.

> I can understand that when someone is four years into their experiment that
> they don't want to hear that they could have gotten there quicker if they had
> taken a different route. But it's not always the destination, it's the journey
> that matters.

Sorry, but there is NO shortcut to bees living in a chemical and drug free hive where the wax is also clean. IT IS the journey that matters! We have choices as to which journey to take. The short journey is often the one with the greatest negative consequences down the road. I am not sorry for switching journeys 4 years ago. Gone are the days of measuring, mixing, applying, counting, storing, buying, disposing, ... all part of the chemical and drug routine.

This was written by Allen Dick on BEE-L last week and it applies well here.

"At the ABF meeting, Laurence Cutts and Tom Rinderer mentioned 'Monster
Mites'. Apparently, the varroa in Florida are now tolerant to fluvalinate, coumaphos and Amitraz.

<snip>

The day of just adding strips and trusting fate are long over. The only
beekeepers left standing in a few years will either be in very isolated
areas, or using mite-tolerant stock and testing regularly for mite
levels."

We also discussed the issue that oxalic is not an approved substance here in the states, this should give you some concern:

Bob Harrison wrote on BEE-L:
"We were told at the ABF convention in K.C. that the FDA has placed honey on
a three year *watch* list.

One Kansas City producer has already been called and asked for a jar of his
honey for testing."

Regards,
Barry

[This message has been edited by Barry (edited January 20, 2003).]


----------



## BULLSEYE BILL (Oct 2, 2002)

No offense intended, but it is this kind of thinking that I have a hard time understanding. If you don't know if there are mites in your hives or not, why do you go ahead and put chemicals into them? 

My reply;
I have been told by every beekeeper and supply house in this area that wheather or not I see them, they ARE there. I have assumed that my not seeing them ment that I have been succesful with the chemical treatments in reducing their numbers to a very low level.

Barry;
This wholesale approach to using chemicals has only made it more difficult for the bees and the other beekeepers to deal with the mites.

My response;
Did I not say that I did not like the use of unnatural remedies? I would rather see nature cure our problems rather than playing god ourselves and making mutations (downsizing) of our bees, or worse yet, ruining their natural ability to resist their preditors.

Barry:
If you were naturally curious, would you not be looking closely at your bees, determining what the mite situation actually is? The beekeeping books are giving you information that comes from the party line for the most part, especially when it comes to pests and diseases and how to deal with them.


My response;
Looking closely requires good eyesight. With the eyesight I have, I see no varroa. I have aquired an optivisor for use this year, perhaps I will still see no mites still. One thing that may make a difference this year is pulling drone larva to examine, I did not know to do that last year. As to reading, I have spent many hours doing just that, and find many contradictions on the same subject. I can only try the most reasonable and find that what works for me.


Barry;
No matter what method you settle on for dealing with varroa, you must understand what you are doing and know the consequences. To not do so is harmful to the bees, to yourself, and to other beekeepers.


Me;
My point exactly... take responsibility for your own actions.


Barry;
Sorry, but there is NO shortcut to bees living in a chemical and drug free hive where the wax is also clean. IT IS the journey that matters! We have choices as to which journey to take. The short journey is often the one with the greatest negative consequences down the road. I am not sorry for switching journeys 4 years ago. Gone are the days of measuring, mixing, applying, counting, storing, buying, disposing, ... all part of the chemical and drug routine.

Me,
I am glad we agree on that.


Barry:
We also discussed the issue that oxalic is not an approved substance here in the states, this should give you some concern:

Me;
Was there any discussion that oxalic was specifically disallowed? And if so by whom?


Regards,
Bill

[This message has been edited by Admin (edited January 21, 2003).]


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>I would rather see nature cure our problems rather than playing god ourselves and making mutations (downsizing) of our bees, or worse yet, ruining their natural ability to resist their preditors.

Just so you understand, downsizing is unrelated to genetics. Mutations ARE gentetics. Downsizing is simply letting the bees do what they always did, and make bees the size they did before our interference. No one is trying to change to a genetically smaller bee.


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

Hi Michael -

> I would rather see nature cure our problems rather than playing god ourselves
> and making mutations (downsizing) of our bees, or worse yet, ruining their
> natural ability to resist their preditors.

You responded to this, as will I.

If we desire a situation where we stop playing God with our bees and let nature handle its own problem, then we must be committed to returning our bees to what was natural for them, as much as possible, before we started playing God. I'm glad you pointed out the differences between downsizing and mutations. The two are not related. What does treating with chemicals do, if not ruin a bees natural ability to co-exist with its predator in a healthy balance? We become the "determinator" of what the balance should be when we choose chemicals.

I think one misconception among beekeepers when they think of treating for varroa is an idea or goal to kill or eliminate as close to 100 percent of the mites as possible. This is a very unnatural scenario and one that has no balance. We should desire a situation with our bees that allows for a certain level of mites to co-exist with them. Small cell embraces this attitude and says mites are allowed, we do not seek to do away with them, we provide a balance in the hive that allows the bees to keep the mites in check.

This dynamic was explained very well by a friend when he wrote:

"The question is, why hasn't Varroa adapted to the small cells in Apis cerana. The answer is because if it did, then the host would perish and Varroa would perish as well. So, in the Apis cerana/Varroa case we have a classic example of symbiosis, with an equilibrium. I thought that this is what we are trying to do with the small cells in Apis mellifera, to get a kind of equilibrium where the Varroa populations stay at a low level and don't do economic damage to the production colonies. After all we know that we cannot hope to ever rid the colonies of all the Varroa mite, no matter how many chemicals we pour into them."

My hope is that beekeepers will see the profound limitations of chemicals and that it has been a disservice to the industry to spend so much time and money on the pest instead of focusing on the bee and the whole hive concept.

Regards,
Barry


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

I think the misconception on small cell bees here, is that it is a genetic thing. I think there are a lot of people with this misunderstanding.

Most people's bees are large, not because of genetics, but because of the cell they were raised in. Small cell bees are small because of the cell they were raised in.

Whether it is the answer to the problem or not, I can't say. I see the logic in it, I've seen the studies, and I've heard of successes. But I won't be preaching it until I've seen it succeed. I'm only on my first regression and am not there yet.

I was not trying to sell the idea, just correct the "genetic" misconception.


----------



## BULLSEYE BILL (Oct 2, 2002)

Barry wrote;
I think one misconception among beekeepers when they think of treating for varroa is an idea or goal to kill or eliminate as close to 100 percent of the mites as possible.

reply;
This is exactly what Dr. Pedro R. is trying to do with FGMO.

Barry;
This is a very unnatural scenario and one that has no balance. We should desire a situation with our bees that allows for a certain level of mites to co-exist with them. 

Reply;
Was it unnatural that our bees did not have varroa until just a few years ago? I think that they did just fine without them. When they can be bred to be hygenic enough to clean the varroa out of their hives themselves we will all be better off.
Bill


----------



## BULLSEYE BILL (Oct 2, 2002)

Michael wrote;
A lot of treatments fall into the category of having not been approved as a pesticide. I spray soapy water on my potato bugs, but soapy water is not an approved pesticide. It's ok to wash my potatoes though, and if the bugs die, oh well.
FMGO is approved as a food additive. You could put a little in your honey and the government would not consider it tainted in any way. However it is is not approved as a pesticide. As has been pointed out before, however, who is going to enforce this? I can spray FGMO in my hive and if the mites die, oh well.

There are many other substances such as wintergreen oil that are being used. This is more complicated, because small amounts of wintergreen oil are approved as a food additive. However high concentrations are toxic. This is a more complicated leagal issue.

But the bottom line is if there is none in your honey, no one will care. The FGMO studies have shown none in the honey. If you feed wintergreen oil only when there are no supers and you don't extract the brood chamber for honey, then there is none in your honey.

If you were to use the Oxalic acid and the amounts in your honey were within the limits of what normally occurs in honey, no one would notice.

The bigger risk is if you are a commercial beekeeper and someone notifies the government and someone there takes it upon themselves to remedy something. But if you are a small beekeeper, no one will care.

Axtman. I am not disagreeing with you. 
But there is a distinct difference between something that has been specifically outlawed, and something that simply has not been even considered or approved. 

Technically, as you say, anything used as a pesticide needs approval. Even if you use powdered sugar (known to dislodge mites) and a SSB this is not an approved method of mite control. However, you could say you were feeding the bees and the SBB is for ventilation and it would not be illegal to do either one or both unless your purpose was mite control. It is a technicality.

No one has passed a law against FGMO or Oxalic acid or Wintergreen syrup, but they have not been considered or approved as a method of pest control.

Thank you Michael. This is the definative answer that I was looking for, well said.

I was speaking to a local beekeeper last night who had an interesting theory. His observations were that after a bee yard is destroyed by varroa which has become resistant to the chemicals, that they soon die off from the lack of hosts and completely dissapear.
It was his opinion that a new bee yard could be installed in the same area and the varroa that would eventuly appear would again be suceptable (sp) to treatment.
We also talked about using a different approach to treatment, a revolving array that would not have the tendency to build up tolerance. The treatment would utilize FGMO fogging and cords through the summer, oxalic in the dead of winter, and powdered sugar/garlic in the spring until the flow starts. And at all times keeping a grease pattie on that he has used for many years and has had great luck with. It is a rare occasion that he loses a colony.
I believe that it is getting too late for me to get the equipment to try oxalic yet this winter, but I will try the FGMO, cords, and Joe's special grease patties, except I may try using FGMO instead of Crisco. I think that it would be much akin to making FGMO emulision (sp sorry again) in a pattie form. I may run that past Dr. R...
Anyway, thanks again Michael.


----------



## dharbert (Jun 13, 2002)

I don't see how the mites could ever develop a resistance to FGMO because it doesn't have any kind of miticide in it. That is what the mites become resistant too. Am I correct that FGMO simply strangles the mites with no chemical reaction involved? I have been using FGMO this last year and didn't have many mites when I checked in late fall.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

I will preface this by saying what I am NOT saying. I am NOT saying that mites develop or do not develop resistance to FGMO or anything in particular.

The basic concept that any creature "develops resistance" to any form or poison or other form of control is a misnomer. In reality what occurs is that there is a natural variation within the species. Some of them can survive certain things and some of them cannot.

When we say there are "Apistan resistant mites" what has happened is that all of the mites that were susceptible to the Apistan died. Only a few had the ability to survive it, but they pass that ability on to some of their offspring. After a while the distribution of the offspring, which used to be mostly susceptible to Apistan are now mostly not susceptible. This was "selective breeding" not development of new traits.

If some mites can survive FGMO and some cannot, then the ones that can will and they will reproduce and, if their survival was due to some genetic trait, pass this trait on to their offspring.

I don't know if the ones that survive FGMO treatment are just the lucky ones with less exposure, in which case they have nothing special to pass on to their descendants, or if they have a larger trachea and therefore didn't suffocate or if they have some hairs over their mouths that catch the FGMO. (This is all hypothetical here, I am not purporting that any of these anatomical anomolies occur).

If it is something genetic that allows them to survive, they will pass it on.


----------



## BULLSEYE BILL (Oct 2, 2002)

The concept that my friend Joe was proposing was that when the host (bees) were eleminated from an area by a preditor (varroa) that there is no life support for the varroa and therefore the varroa strain that had survived the bombardment of WHATEVER the beekeeper used against them would dissapeer.
Therefore when new bees were introduced, the newly arriving mites would not have the same ability to fend off that beekeepers methods for quite awhile.
I agree with dharbert, I doubt that resistance is likely with FGMO, or oxalic, but they probaly thought that about formic acid at one time too.
If as michael says some of the mites can survive the FGMO, might that be a good reason to mix the treatments with other methods to further reduce the survivors?
Bill


----------



## Axtmann (Dec 29, 2002)

There are several different possibilities to get rid of the Varroa and everyone has to find his own way.
As I sad before, I treat my colonies with Oxalic Acid Crystals since beginning 80th and the treatment still works without any complications. 
We send all year samples from our honey to a lab and the oxalic level is always the same like beekeepers have with other treatments. When the acid is vaporized half of them goes in water, (1% into formic acid) and the other half in a fine fog and works approx 10 days. 
I treat my bees in spring (March / April) depending on the weather 4 times 7 days apart. Brood cycle is 21 day so I kill all hatching Varroa and all Varroa on the bees. This is enough for the whole year and in the brood free wintertime I also treat my colonies 3 times 7 days apart and thats it all and I never lost a colony because of the Varroa for over 10 years. A swarm or new colonies (nuc) also getting the same 3 treatments right in the beginning and nothing more till the brood is gone.


----------



## newguy (Dec 18, 2002)

So we go to all these lengths to try and kill off varroa mites. We do this, that, and the other thing, only to find out that now, instead of varroa, we have something that eats the honey and decreases our profits. Not that I know of something that does that, but that could happen.
Has anyone asked the question I have to ask? That question is, "Why?"
Why is it that only recently have we had to worry about varroa? How much do you hear about AFB anymore? Not much. I have a book that was written in '84 and the author says that the main problem at that time was AFB. There was no mention of mites. What have we done that has made mites such a big problem? And are there any natural cures? Michael keeps saying, "Small cell," but all the companies say,"Small cell is only for experienced beekeepers." I'm not an experienced beekeeper. I am a beginner whose customers would not like it if I sprayed my hives weekly. Everyone says, "They do it to vegetables," but you wash vegetables before cooking them. Who wants to wash honey?


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>So we go to all these lengths to try and kill off varroa mites. We do this, that, and the other thing, only to find out that now, instead of varroa, we have something that eats the honey and decreases our profits. 

Small hive beetle.

>Not that I know of something that does that, but that could happen.

Already did. Small Hive Beetle.

>Has anyone asked the question I have to ask? That question is, "Why?"
Why is it that only recently have we had to worry about varroa?

One theory is they just weren't here on this continent.

One of the people asking this question is Dee Lusby. Her quest was for a more natural system of rasing bees.

>How much do you hear about AFB anymore? Not much. I have a book that was written in '84 and the author says that the main problem at that time was AFB. There was no mention of mites.

I'd been hearing about mites for a long time before I ever saw any. But when I started beekeeping the main concern was AFB. AFB has not gone away. One of the problems at the time was the mindset that we would "eradicate" AFB. This resulted in many hives being burned and bees destroyed. Now most people treat all their hives with Teramiycin if there's an outbreak and it usually gets it under control. I don't think there is so much less of it, but there is less over reaction to it.

>What have we done that has made mites such a big problem? And are there any natural cures?

Dee Lusby is the only one that seems to have a theory on what WE have done. What she discovered is that we have enlarged the cells on the foundation we give the bees which enlarges the bees. (see POV on this site) Our foundation is the thing that most affects the physiology of the bee and the organization of the frames in the hive. (see also Housel Positioning under the news)

To be more accurate. Here is a list of the interferences we invoke on our charges the bees:

What we feed them.
The size of their brood cells.
The orientation of the combs.
The genetics of the queens by selective breeding.
What they live in. (but this is pretty much like a hollow tree and they live all sorts of places)

I don't know of any "cures", but I'm experimenting with some of what some people are saying is working for them.

>Michael keeps saying, "Small cell,"

Actually I have not been a proponent of any method. I have responded to questions about small cell because I am in the process of regressing and I think I have a little grasp of the concept of small cell. I have not gotten any of my hives totally regressed yet, so I cannot say I have any personal experience with the success of failure of small cell. It requires having your bees on 4.9mm and I am still only on my first regression, which is about 5.15mm. I do wonder if we just used starter strips of either blank foundation or 4.9mm foundation and let the bees build what they want, how much would our problems go away? This would not require any amount of experience to do.

Small cell seems to be the most reasonable answer to the question of what have we done. Bees naturally build brood cells about 4.6mm to 5.1mm with most of them falling around 4.84 or so. If that's what they build then why do we give them foundation to make them build 5.4mm brood cells? How many of our problems are from this? I don't know the answers but it's the only theory that is asking the question, "What have we done?"

>but all the companies say,"Small cell is only for experienced beekeepers." I'm not an experienced beekeeper.

Doing shakedowns to regress quickly is the kind of thing that requires some experience. Dee Lusby's philosphy is that she will not use chemicals. This basiclly puts you in a race with survival. You have to regress before they all die, if you won't use any chemical methods. She also doesn't use FGMO or essential oils.

>I am a beginner whose customers would not like it if I sprayed my hives weekly. Everyone says, "They do it to vegetables," but you wash vegetables before cooking them. Who wants to wash honey?

Most of the beekeepers I know tend toward the "organic" view of things. They find spraying chemicals offensive. It's hard not to feel that way when other people's insectacides kill your bees and any upset in the ecology affects your bees. It is the problem we all face right now.

Of course if you buy apples at the store they have parafin on them that won't wash off. It's inert and is just to make the apple look nice. The parafin is just a slightly longer carbon chain than the FMGO which is also inert. According to the studies by Dr. Pedro Rodriguez there is no residue of it in the honey anyway.

I would assume the "washing honey" question is obviously rethorical.


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

As I was archiving messages from BioBee List, I came across a post I had been looking for. I add it here for further discussion and consideration.

---------
From: [email protected]
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2002 02:34:58 EDT
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Resistant mites to Oxalic/Formic acids?

Peter wrote:
> One section mentions the onset of signs of mites becoming resistant to
> Oxalic and Formic acids.
> Would you fill in with the details that you have on this topic.

Hi Peter,
I was recently asking a number of experts about this topic. All publications about organic acids that I know of clearly state that resistance by mites is impossible. The reason is that acids are not so specific and act on various levels, unlike drugs like Fluvalinate that attack very specific targets. This impossibility of resistance is advertised to be one of the major advantages of organic acids. Acids are currently very popular in central Europe.

Five years ago, many beekeepers used two or three FA treatments and the job was done. Presently, most of them use about five FA + one or two OA treatments and still suffer losses. Lower efficiency due to resistance? There might be a lot of other explanations, but one shouldn't neglect this possibility.

I have the impression that our bee scientists are so convinced that resistance is impossible that they simply don't search for possible resistance. Also, I have the impression that they have little knowledge about biochemistry. They always consider FA a caustic acid, nothing else. To cope with a caustic acid, you have to buffer or neutralize it which is admittedly impossible for mites. But organic acids are also substances that can be metabolized. Many bacteria can oxidize Formic acid to harmless CO2. Why not the mites, too? Also: Bees ARE somewhat resistant to acids, otherwise they would be killed by the treatment. Why not the mites, too?

Now when I asked all these specialists about possible resistance to acids, most of them answered that buffering or neutralization is impossible. When I asked back about oxidation, they either became silent or admitted "OK, nothing is impossible".
Nevertheless, there is no proof of mites resistant to formic acid yet.

It is different with oxalic acid: One expert, Rosenkranz, clearly stated that he considers OA resistance possible and warned from constant and exclusive use. Another info about that comes from Erik: In Apidologie vol 32 (2001) there was an article by Norberto Milani from Italy in which he warns for extensive and sole use of Oxalic acid as it according to his findings is an acid that easily can be developed resistance to, enough resistance for it to be useless.

Acids are good to avoid residues in the hives. But they harm the bees considerably. And they are surely not the fial solution! IMPOV, the final solution is to select the bees instead of the mites.

Best regards,
Thomas


----------



## Les (Jan 15, 2003)

Good Morning Fellow Beeekeepers. I have come upon this conversation at the very tail end, some very intersting ideas. As it has been said many times already,I have no problem with any of your beekeeping techniques, that is unless I am going to use your hive products. 
I would not even consider using a chemical in my hives with surplus honey supers on,irrespective of how well it appears to work or how long it has been used. If we were really smart about chemicals we would not need a Federal Super cleanup fund to clean up past mistakes from our misuse of chemicals.
With no surplus honey supers on I rotate the use of Checkite and Apistan , I put on sticky boards at the sme time I put on strips. If I do not get a proper drop count within 24-36 hours I remove the strips. I also use Drone foundation as part of my IPM along with screened bottom boards and Crisco patties. I keep Crisco patties on year round. 
In checking for varroa I open capped Drone cells any time I have reason to be in the hives. I also do occasional ether rolls. 
Old brood comb. I will quote from The Hive and The Honey Bee , third printing, page 736." Keeping comb for long periods of tiem is now questionable. There is evidence tht perodic brood comb renovation improves the bees inviroment. Brood comb becomes narrower with time , producing smaller bees. Old wax comb, loaded with impurities over the years , has been associated with increase in disease like chalkbrood, nosema and foulbrood. Once the organisms responsible for these diseases becomes establisshed, the comb becomes a constant source of re-infection. Finally, wax comb is a "sink," that overtime can accumulate toxic levels of air polutant particulates like lead and mercury, and pesticides. I read somewhere else recently that five years is the average age of brood comb, check by the time honored method of holding it up to the sunlight. I date my frames on the top bar. I also read that the equivelate of eightpounds of honey is required to draw comb for one brood frame, all the more reason to protect the good comb you have in your hives.
Those of you using essential oils in your hives may wish to read the extensive reserch work done by The West Virginia University. Their site is http://www.wvu.edu/~agexten/ipm/insects/pollinat/varroa/oils.htm . 
I have purchased the materials to do FGMO treatments starting in the spring, I will do this method on two, two brood chamber hives and keep a constant check on mite drop, I hope this no chemical, labor intense method will work well enough to keep the mites below the damage threshold.
Have a super day.
Les in SC


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

The "dirty" brood comb concept is still new to me. I have a copy of "The Hive and the Honey Bee" and have not been able to find your reference. You probably have a different revision than mine.

I have heard of people who put dates on their frames having frames of brood comb that were 50 years old. They were not having problems.

I do believe that the cocoons will make successively smaller brood cells until they are too small and then the workers will chew them out. But there is evidence that smaller is probably better for dealing with the mites.

As far as accumulating toxins, I think this is even more of a concern when using toxins in the hive. It may be that old brood comb could accumulate enough residues from the mite treatments etc. to become toxic to the bees. I have heard of people who have trouble raising queens because of this.


----------



## Les (Jan 15, 2003)

Michael: Sorry I should have given you the complete reference. It is the Hive and the Honey Bee, Extensively Revise 1992, Third printing 1997. page 736, first sentence at top of page. One can also find some thoughts on old brood comb in Elbert R. Jaycox's writing in his book published 1975-1981 titled "Beekeeping Tips and Topics", go to page 10 near the bottom of the page paragraph titled "comb foundation - Are we using enough ". Mr Jaycox writes about the Europeans using a great deal more foundation than US Beekeepers and goes into some great detail about why and finishes with his thoughts on old brood comb by simply saying that more research is needed.
If you have the February issue of the ABJ laying around and havent yet found time to finish reading it please go to page 139. Mr Carl Wenning has a great article on "Comb Management" he makes a good case (in my opinion)for scheduled replacement of brood comb. 
I would suggest that those beekeepers using 25-30-50 year old brood comb do have problems and are just aware of them. I do wonder though if they have had unexplained colony loses.
SC is receiving some much needed rain, we are still 24-38 inches behind according to which part of the state. With the winter moister we have had I am looking forward to a good bee year.
Have fun.
Les in SC


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

My "The Hive and The Honey Bee" is the 1975 extensively revised edition. I can't find that reference in it.

I have heard of culling combs becaus they are misdrawn. Also the "small bees" issue, but that is simply because it gradually regresses to the size the bees want and then they will chew it back out.

The sanitation aspect is a new one to me, but obviously according to Axtman it is a big issue in Europe.

I still think that now the toxicity issue is even more important.


----------



## loggermike (Jul 23, 2000)

>>I would suggest that those beekeepers using 25-30-50 year old brood comb do have problems and are just aware of them. I do wonder though if they have had unexplained colony loses.

Cant speak for anyone else,but my colony losses are due to varroa plain and simple,nothing unexplained.I have mostly combs less than 10 years old,mixed in with an occasional really old(20 or 30 year) comb.The problems arrived with the mites,and there is no correlation with the age of the combs.Hives on all brand new combs are just as likely to break down as hives with much older combs.Its an interesting theory that has been around for awhile,but in actual practice just doesnt fly.I have read all the literature on this,but never was convinced that culling brood comb on the basis of age alone was economical or even beneficial.But make up your own mind.
----Mike


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

I don't see anyone swapping out old comb in a feral hive, other than the wax moths. Some of them are still surviving. I've lost a lot of hives that were on brand new comb and kept a lot that were on older comb. I don't think I've ever had any on comb over 5 or 6 years old though. Not because I made an effort not to, it just seems to work out that way.


----------



## Les (Jan 15, 2003)

Michael, Mike: You validate my position on Federal funded research grants , there should be none. I also voted to close three of the four USDA labs,they are duplicates . Most of the real scientific research work is done in the independent beekeepers lab in his bee yard. 
Having lived in Germany on the economy for four years taught me that those folks do little that has not been well reasoned.
Have fun, play hard. 
Les in SC


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

I guess I'm not against the USDA bee labs, but I think they should be testing the promising things that people in the field are using with success. That testing should carefully try to duplicate precisely what people are using that is succeeding and try to validate or invalidate the method. 

Unfortunately this is not the case. If they bother to test it at all, they fail to even understand what it is they are testing and don't follow the procedures that are succeeding, instead doing something that only vaguely resembles it and then declaring that it doesn't work.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

I'm not sure why you would think that a bee lab in Baton Rouge, LA one in Madison WI and one in Laramie WY are redundant. The climates in these three places are dramatically different and anything tested in one place may work differently in another.


----------



## loggermike (Jul 23, 2000)

I am against closing any of the labs.The cost is just a drop in the bucket compared to most gov. spending.Most people dont know the true value of what bees contribute to our economy(mostly for free),and also dont understand just how serious the problems we face are.We need as many intelligent people working on these problems as we can get.
---Mike


----------



## mark williams (Jan 19, 2003)

I'm with you Mike, on the issue of the Lab's .I wonder if it was'nt for the lab's where would we stand with the mite problems.there is not many beekeepers at least that I know , that's got the money & time for all of the research that went in the mite problem alone.much less all the other things were faced with.beside's I feel better knowing my tax dollars is spent on that. then spending it on crap like why is a gold fish gold.just my 2 cent's Mark


----------



## mark williams (Jan 19, 2003)

also, I was watching my bees one day after I feed them in one of my yard.(10)hives as i watched I seen a bee come in with a varra mite on her back,As I watched I seen 3 bee's come out of the hive at first I thought they was fighting the bee with the mite , but as I watched I noticed they seemed to be after the mite& not the bee this went on for afew min's then the bee flew off.I have never had any problem with them, But i placed sticky boards under three hive's for 24 hr's & found 2 mites.I don't treat much at less as much as a lot do.2 or 3 days later my A.B.j. came in & read about some guys bees fighting mites.do you think nature is starting to take a hold now that we've got the mite's down.Well may all your honey supers over flow mark


----------



## Les (Jan 15, 2003)

Michael and Mike: I will apoligize for my tongue in cheek remarks about grant funding and bee lab closing. I had no idea that I would be taken seriously, I was trying to make the point the you folks have now made, let professionals do the research and the back yard beekeeper labs be closed. Utilize the results of scientific research and be thankful for it. 
I would also not close the labs in S Tx and AZ. If you have followed the recent reorginization of the USDA bee labs you will know that elimination of duplication was the essence of the effort.
I am lucky enough to live close to and associate weekly with a retired USDA bee scientist who writes a monthly article for the ABJ and who shares his wealth of bee knowledge gained from more than 60 years in beekeeping and research, Queen rearing was and is his specialty.
In the future I will keep my tongue in cheek remarks to myself.
Have a nice day
Les in SC


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

On the other hand, "backyard beekeepers" like Rev. L.L. Lanstroth changed beekkeeping as we know it, and a lot of people's work would not be considered "real" research because they lacked the educational credentails, such as A.I. Root, Charles Dadant, Julius Hoffman and all the other fathers of modern beekeeping.

I think it's more likely that any real advances will come from the beekeeping community, not the researchers. I do think we need researchers to validate the results, but only if they actually try to duplicate the experiments.


----------



## loggermike (Jul 23, 2000)

Hey Les,Keep the comments coming ,tongue in cheek or not.Your queen breeder/scientist friend is exactly the kind of person I am talking about.(I think I read about everything he wrote over the years)We need these bright people doing research and getting well paid for it.Unfortunately,the bee industry is too small and shaky financially to pay these guys.So the taxpayers should pick up the tab,being as how they benefit(even though they dont know that they do)Not all gov. programs are total crap,but a lot are!
And the backyard beekeepers can help too.Even a blind sow finds an occasional acorn.


----------



## Les (Jan 15, 2003)

Michael: we could be talking apples and oranges. I will try to make myself clear. I view apriculture (beekeeping) and bee biology (research) seperately , this seperation in your opinion may or may not be proper. In the seperation I realize of course that the two can be practiced by the same person, it is not unsual to find a scientist who practice apriculture. I do believe however that few if any apriculturist are scientist. 
Of the fathers of beekeeping you mentioned. The Rev. Langstroth who discovered bee space and the top opening hive both have served us well and he deserves the recognition,there does seems to be some controversy about the credit he has received for his discovery of removable frames. It appears that he may have gotten the idea from a 1838 book by Munn. See TH&HB third printing 1997 ,page 13 first para. 
Mr J Hoffman gave us the frame containing the automatic bee space feature, he rightly deserves reconiginitioin for his work, even though many beekeepers choose not to use the feature.
Both Rev. Langstroth and Mr. Hoffman were beekeepers , their work falls into my definition of apriculture. I can find no evidence that Mr. Root or Mr Dadent fall into either catagory.
Mr Root and the French jeweler Mr Dadant have made major contributions to beekeeping through their editing and publishing of other peoples work and by supplying beekeeping equipment, if someone has evidence contradicting this please feel free to correct me. 
The people just mentioned were not trained scientist and to my knowledge did no research, but did make major contributions to beekeeping. As for being the fathers of beekeeping I don't know I guess I will leave that to the historians. 
My comments are intended to make clear my thoughts on what is to me apriculture and research , not to suggest in any way what a beekeeper should or should not do with his bees. I do advocate the use of information generated from the scientific community and suggest that the information be used exactely as prescribed. I have been into hives that had two sets of strips in them, these new strip would be the third set. 
You mentioned that if the scientist would work to verify/validate facts found by beekeepers they would be doing the right thing. Could you give us an example of what you mean?. I honestly believe that there are people at the USDA labs. who would love to have your inputs. 
It is said that a good beekeeper does the right thing at the right time, now if I just knew what and when.
I without reservation urge you to leave bee biology research to the scientist.
Have a fun day 
Les in SC


----------



## Les (Jan 15, 2003)

Dale or Ann
If you are out there please e-mail me your address I am having trouble with your e-mail address. 
Les in SC


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>Michael: we could be talking apples and oranges. I will try to make myself clear. I view apriculture (beekeeping) and bee biology (research) seperately , this seperation in your opinion may or may not be proper. In the seperation I realize of course that the two can be practiced by the same person, it is not unsual to find a scientist who practice apriculture. I do believe however that few if any apriculturist are scientist. 

Most beekeepers I have known have a keen interest in the little details of what is the best to do for their bees. This often leads to experiments. Some of this experimentation is not very scientific and some of it is. In the long run, though, methods that require a lot of effort with little return are rejected. Methods that give noticeably better results for reasonable effort are retained. Methods that require little effort, but seemed at one point to help, may also be retained or skipped. The point is that not only have beekeepers innovated all of the useful techniques of beekeeping but also in the big wide world of lots of bees and lots of hives the reality of things gets tested.

Many drugs have been carefully researched with careful scientific studies only to be released into the wild and find out that in that thing we call reality there were things that did not show up in the research. I can give hundreds of life devastating examples if you insist, but Phen-Phen should suffice for a recent one.

As the truckers say, this is where the rubber meets the road.

Can you name some useful beekeeping innovations, other than a few stopgap poisons for mites that came from official scientist? I dont know of any. AI has had little effect on my life as a beekeeper; in fact Im not so sure it hasnt caused more problems. If we let the bees that survive breed, we would be better off.

>Of the fathers of beekeeping you mentioned. The Rev. Langstroth who discovered bee space and the top opening hive both have served us well and he deserves the recognition,there does seems to be some controversy about the credit he has received for his discovery of removable frames. It appears that he may have gotten the idea from a 1838 book by Munn. See TH&HB third printing 1997 ,page 13 first para. 

Im quite certain that Rev. Langstroth didnt discover bee space any more than Columbus discovered that the world was round. Columbus had read what the Greeks and Romans had said on the subject and merely convinced people it was true. But he still changed the world as he knew it. Certainly the Greeks were building moveable combs (top bars) for centuries and Huber had built a moveable comb hive, perhaps not commercially useful, but the concept was already there. Langstroth made a practical one and got people to use it.

Huber, one of the great bee researchers, was a beekeeper and is only respected as a scientist because he acted as one, not because of his credentials. 

>Both Rev. Langstroth and Mr. Hoffman were beekeepers , their work falls into my definition of apriculture. I can find no evidence that Mr. Root or Mr Dadent fall into either catagory.

Many of these men came up with small contributions that made beekeeping more commercially viable or less labor intensive. Mr. Dadant did many experiments on what was the correct depth of a frame and he was probably correct but no one uses them. He wrote numerous articles on the details of beekeeping and the science of beekeeping. A.I. Root was a researcher who compiled the then available scientific knowledge of beekeeping into not only a book, but one of the journals of beekeeping. He was careful to site sources and tried to make sure what he presented was known as a fact and not just folklore. He often wrote for the magazine of experiments or discoveries that he and other beekeepers had come up with.

>I do advocate the use of information generated from the scientific community and suggest that the information be used exactely as prescribed. I have been into hives that had two sets of strips in them, these new strip would be the third set. 

I agree many beekeepers do not follow directions. Sometimes it is an attempt to save money and a lack of understanding of the principles involved. A lot of beekeepers would follow the directions better if they understood that there was a reason. But I see many scientific studies on methods being purported by beekeepers as being useful against mites and these trained scientists not only do not follow the beekeepers procedures exactly, but obviously have not even bothered to understand the concepts involved.

Also most scientific studies I see on bees are not large enough to be statistically valid nor are they for an entire year to see what effects it has through the seasons, let alone over a longer period of time. A queen may live at least a couple of years and anything that could cause an accumulative effect on her can cause problems in the hive. Any study of anything should run for a couple of years to see what the long-term effects are. Most scientific studies of bees I see published last a month or less.

>You mentioned that if the scientist would work to verify/validate facts found by beekeepers they would be doing the right thing. Could you give us an example of what you mean?. I honestly believe that there are people at the USDA labs. who would love to have your inputs. 

There are many alternative mite treatments being used by beekeepers. Many are working at least for some people in some circumstances. Most are not researched at all. When they are researched, the methods are questionable at best. Rather than rehash that I will refer you to my rantings on that: http://www.beesource.com/ubb/Forum13/HTML/000052.html 

>It is said that a good beekeeper does the right thing at the right time, now if I just knew what and when. I without reservation urge you to leave bee biology research to the scientist.

No thanks.


[This message has been edited by Michael Bush (edited February 21, 2003).]


----------



## BWrangler (Aug 14, 2002)

Hello Everyone,

I have found a need to raise and maintain some large cell hives. Unlike my small cell hives, these hives will require mite treatments. Fuming with oxalic acid seems like a good choice. It's non-contaiminating, relatively benign to the bees and very easy to apply.

So, I have built a webpage describing my oxalic acid evaporators. Check it out at:
http://bwrangler.litarium.com/oxalic-acid-vaporizer/ 


A limited use of oxalic could be an integral step in a much easier and painless way to 'regress' bees to small cell. And for $10 you can throw your own evaporator away.

Still thinking, no whiffing allowed and no 100lb bags of oxalic needed:> )

But if I had regressing to do over again and knew then what I have learned from my top bar hive, I wouldn't lose any of my hives to mites hoping that the survivors would somehow be superior. I would treat those bees with oxalic fumes and gradually replace the core area of the broodnest with small cell comb. 

I have trashed most of my ideas about regression but know how important both large and small cell sizes are to the bees. It might not take very much small cell comb in a hive to gain mite tolerance, if it is in the right place. And this could be easily done, maybe in a single season, without loosing any colonies!

Thanks Bullseye for the point to this forum. With so many different bee lists its hard for me to remember just where I posted what.

And if you follow my tracks be sure to avoid all those bogs I fell into :> ) If you miss a even one of them, you'll be way ahead of me!

Best Regards
Dennis


[This message has been edited by BWrangler (edited September 09, 2003).]


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

I like the design. I like the price.


----------



## BWrangler (Aug 14, 2002)

Hello Everyone,

Hi Everyone,

Axtmann, noted that my top hive evaporator could pose a problem. The vapors coming off the evaporator can be very hot. It these vapors were to blast directly on the bees, they would be killed. He suggests at least about 2' of tubing is needed to cool the vapors.

I watched the initial application of the hive top evaporator through my plexiglass inner cover. The bees moved back from the immediate area as the evaporator was being heated and before the oxalic vaporized. No bees were killed in test applications.

It could be the configuration of my hives that help disperse the blast of fumes. The 3/4" hole is directly in front of a frame end bar which would deflect the blast sides ways. 

If the hole was directly in front of the open space between the frame end bars, I could see where a problem could develop.

Thanks, Axtmann. I will re-evaluate the situation.

Regards
Dennis


----------



## BWrangler (Aug 14, 2002)

Hi Everybody,

I conducted a test to see how hot the oxalic vapor are when using my hive top evaporator.

I took an empty deep super. Put two shallow frames into it. Placed the gap between the frames directly in front of the 3/4" vent hole. Spread the frames apart about 3/8". Then set a thermocouple just inside the end bar and directly in front of the vent hole. Ambient temp was 58 degrees F. This test was designed to represent a worse case scenario for blasting bees with oxalic fumes, a direct shot at bees on the comb.

I charged the evaporator and test fired it while watching both the action of the vapor and the temperature. 

First minute of heating. Temps were the same no sign of vapor.

Second minute of heating. Minor amount of vapor appears. Temps spike to 98 degrees F at end of second minute and vapor begins to flow steady like an idling cigarette. Little horizontal force with the vapor.

Third minute of heating. Vapor flow increases to about like an gently exhaled breath and remains very low pressure. Horizontal movement restricted with 4 inches of the vent hole. Temps steady at about 99 degrees and then spike to 132 degrees at the end of minute 3.

Minute 4. Vapor flow rapidly decreases to to cigarette like flow and temps rapidly decrease to about 100 degrees. Continued heating would have kept the temps at about 100 degrees regardless of the presence of oxalic powder in the magazine.

Examining the frame end bars after running the evaporator showed the typical white oxalic acid deposits. There were no signs of melted wax or propolis on the end bars, combs or in the gaps between them. A very small amount of propolis stuck to the thermocouple which was directly in front of the vent hole.

The sudden blast or surge that occurs with the bottom board evaporator was greatly modified by the larger diameter delivery tube in the hive top evaporator.

The vapor is hot but its effects are limited by it's lack of lateral movement and the time it takes for the temps to spike.

This confirmed what I saw in my hives using the plex cover and with the evaporator directly in front of a end bar. The bees would have time to move back from the immediate area of influence of the vapor before it became hot enough to do them in.

I didn't use any bees in this test and would advise watching bees if the vent hole would allow vapors to blast directly between the combs. But this test indicates that the results would probably be minimal as the temps are not as hot as I thought they would be and are quickly moderated.

Axtmann, thanks again for the caution. It's something I had not though of. 

Regards
Dennis
Not wanting to burn up anyones bees with oxalic fumes


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

A good hot sauna is 220 degrees F.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

You don't need a sauna in New Mexico. Just walk outside! Then when you're done run inside and roll in the carpet in the air-conditioning.


----------



## Taliesin (Aug 31, 2003)

LoggerMike wrote 
>Something I have wondered about.I have some brood combs that have been in use for 30 years.The cells are noticeably smaller from cocoon buildup.So are the bees.Do the 4.9 cells get even smaller over time?That would produce some tiny bees!

If you have been using combs that long, that in its self would be bringing on greater risks to the bees health. No matter how the bees clean broodcells, there is always things beeing embedded by the cocoons. This is an open invitation to the bees health-problmizers. I always rotate combs so that brood-combs never get used more that 2 seasons in the broodchambers. After that they get to serve in the supers as combs for heather-honey which demands strong combs in order not to break down during extracting because of its vicousity.

My experience after 23 years with the little girls, are that they like having a young mother, and clean and fresh living and working enviroments in order to stay happy and productive.


----------



## loggermike (Jul 23, 2000)

Actually,I have only a very tiny number of these old combs still in use.I only cull brood combs when they get what I consider an excessive amount of drone comb or are otherwise defective.To take perfect brood combs out of production just because they are dark is unneccessary and actually counter-productive .This seems to be a common procedure in Europe but I dont think too many commercial beekeepers here would consider it practical.
I agree with you on keeping young queens in the hives .I think that is a very important part of keeping hives healthy.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>Something I have wondered about.I have some brood combs that have been in use for 30 years.The cells are noticeably smaller from cocoon buildup.So are the bees.Do the 4.9 cells get even smaller over time?That would produce some tiny bees!

Studies have shown that after the cells get as small as the bees desire they start chewing out the cocoons to keep them the size they want.

I would guess you would end up with a lot of 4.8mm bees.


----------



## BULLSEYE BILL (Oct 2, 2002)

Bwrangler-
After re-reading your web site posting of your trials with the vaporizer I discovered that this is a more simplistic porcess than I was making it out to be.

I thought that your appiance was in addition to a vaporizer







, I was confused... I am glad to finally understand that it is a very easy to construct piece of equipment.

My question to you is, do you think there is a need for an air pump? From your article I would think not. Thanks for saving me a LOT of money, I WAS going to buy one, but now I know how to make my own.

You have obviously been using it this summer, what frequency of application do you plan to use it? I have installed the strips for a midterm control and thought that an application this January would be good timing, your thoughts please?

Thanks again, Bill


----------



## hollowlog (Jan 22, 2003)

I have used acid and am quite pleased with the results. I was told not to use it when brood was present because it is highly toxic to brood. I only fog in the winter when no brood is there. I was wondering if some of you that do it in the summer have checked the brood a week later and seen any negative results.


----------



## loggermike (Jul 23, 2000)

The reason for using it when there is little brood is simply to get the mites that are normally in the brood so as to avoid repeat treatments.I know some of the research was done when there was brood present and there was no mention of any ill effects.


----------



## Axtmann (Dec 29, 2002)

Hello Bill I used a Vaporizer without airflow and the effect is in my opinion 15%  20% less effective. I would say you need at last two more treatments to get the same result. 
I put a glass on top of the frames last year and could see how the oxalic acid works on the bees. If bees in a cluster there was almost no movement when I fogged with the regular system. All bees on the outside from the cluster had a white color from acid fog and it takes very long for them to bring the acid inside the cluster to the other bees.
With a light warm air stream the bees open the cluster a little bit and the fog can reach much more (almost all) bees. Thats why you should not treat the colonies below the freezing point. After approx an hour bees was in cluster again and no harm to the whole colony.
The Swiss research people have the same experience with there electric vaporizers. The heat inside the colonies open the cluster and the treatment is much more effective.


----------



## BWrangler (Aug 14, 2002)

Hi Bullseye and Everyone,

I have setup three large cell hives this summer and have tested the effects of the evaporator on them. If a person must treat, I think oxalic is the best choice. Very little disruption occurs in the colony. I didn't see any impact on brood rearing or behavior.

I also fumed one small cell hive initially to check for it's efficiency. This small cell hive naturally dropped about 1 mite/week before treatment. It dropped about 15 mites in two weeks after the treatment. No evidence of any mites was found on the bees themselves. The mite load was just too low. But the oxalic was effective even at these low levels of infestation.

I couldn't see any difference in growth or behavior between the untreated small cell hives and the treated one.

I had used powdered sugar dusting on large cell hives before trying oxalic. The dusting is very disruptive and labor intensive. 

I don't have any experience with an air pump. Injecting the fumes at the top of the hive works very well when the bees are not clustered.

I don't have any experience treating clustered bees. I think clustered bees would be very hard to treat effectively.

I would like to add just one note of caution. The oxalic acid fumes don't bother the bees very much. BUT THEY ARE VERY TOXIC TO THE BEEKEEPER. DON'T BREATH THEM IN NO MATTER WHAT! A small volume can contaminate a large area and they are hard to see once diluted in the air.

Be Careful. These fumes are not like sugar dust, essential oils or fgmo which are probably not good in the lungs! Oxalic fumes can eliminate beekeepers as well as mites. If you have handled hazadous material, very caustic chemicals or worked in a lab you won't have any problem. But if not, read the msds and follow the instructions.

Regards
Dennis
Wanting everyone to know harmless to bees doesn't always equate to harmless to beekeepers

[This message has been edited by BWrangler (edited September 19, 2003).]


----------



## BULLSEYE BILL (Oct 2, 2002)

Bwrangler,
What type of protective equipment do you use? Would you recomend a resperator with replaceable filters?

Bill


----------



## BWrangler (Aug 14, 2002)

Hello Everyone,

The best advice I can give is to enter 'oxalic acid powder material data safety sheet' in your favorite search engine.

The types of respirators required depend upon the particulate concentration. I think any respirator with an organic filter would be sufficient for most situations.

But fuming a hive or two on a windy location would be alot different than fuming 800 of them in a holding yard on a very calm day.

Everyone must evaluate their own situation.

Be exta cautious. If you smell or sense the slightest trace of combustion products or even the faintest hint of caustics, it's time to back off.

It may just be from old habit, but I always charge up my lungs with air before just before heating the evaporator. And maintain 
a very slow exhale during the heating. I never let my air get low enough to require a major inhalation. When I inhale, it is very slow and shallow, testing, by taste and smell, the incoming air all the way.

If anything happens, like a strap breaking on a mask or a poor fit, it's easy to back out without needing lots of air.

If a person's out of breath and something happens, it's all too easy to inhale.

Axtmann, what do you guys do for safety in Germany? Any advice? My experience is limited with treating just a few hives. What do you guys do in a beehouse or a large yard?

Regards
Dennis

[This message has been edited by BWrangler (edited September 19, 2003).]


----------



## BWrangler (Aug 14, 2002)

Hi Coyote,

In a building full of fumes, a scott airpac would be the ticket. But the volume of oxalic fumes is very small and is usually contained in the hive. It's about like the volume a cigarette smoker would exhale with a deep draw. 

With your H2S training you will have no problem with oxalic. The amount of vapor generated and released for a single hive would be about like the amounts of H2S you were probably exposed to in the simulations during training.

It's not Plutonium! But it's not finger-licking good motor oil. It can't be used to flavor lolipops or dust the tops of donuts. :> ))

But it appears to be a highly effective, easily applied, non-contaiminating mite treatment. I think it has great commercial potential. It can be applied safely when nothing else can. All the risk is with the beekeeper and none of it is passed to the honey consumer.

My fear is that someone will build an evaporator. Buy the chems and not bother reading the MSDS. Fire up the torch without any protection and treat a hive with the dog, children etc standing around watching. Out pops the evaporator and lots of deeply inhaling people run back and forth through the vapor in their excitement. I had not thought of this when I posted my information.

Or someone builds one and decided to test it inside his garage.

An evaporator is the essence of simplicity. But it's certianly not a toy and it's not for everyone.

Beekeepers who have experience with formic will have no problems with oxalic. In many ways oxalic is alot safer. But if formic makes a beekeeper nervous, he should stay away from oxalic.

Regards
Dennis


----------



## dickm (May 19, 2002)

In all of this I see no mention of Oxamite strips. It's a new way to dose the hive similar to the use of other strips. I am trying them this year on some hives. 2 strips for 5 weeks. I may have missed the better (warmer) days, but we'll see. Anyone else tried them? They're at the same website that sells the other equipment.  
Dickm

[This message has been edited by dickm (edited September 30, 2003).]

[This message has been edited by dickm (edited September 30, 2003).]


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

I think I prefer the vaporizer that Bwrangler came up with. I don't have to open the hive up and dig down to the brood chamber to put the strips in. And I don't have to dig down to the brood chamber to take them out. Just vaporize from the top. I'm lazy.


----------



## WineMan (May 16, 2003)

Formic makes me cautious enough to wear a respirator. Havent worked with oxalic so cant say but I would speculate that I would want one too if I was doing any number of hives.


----------



## Axtmann (Dec 29, 2002)

Dickm I had the Oxamite strips in my nucs and used it during the summer with good success. I also had the strips in two swarms and the bees shredded that stuff in almost 4 weeks. 
The Oxamite is for a spring and summer treatment only. Its a long-term treatment because oxalic acid doesnt penetrate the closed cells and with the strips you can kill more mites over a longer time. 

Now in fall bees starting and put propolis on the strips instead shredding, remove the strips and save them for the next spring. 

This time of the year you should vaporize the colonies instead using the strips. Control your hives and you can see it, the winter bees are not working on the strips like the summer bees.
I put Oxamite in my hives again next year in March when bees starting to clean the hives from the winter.


----------



## BULLSEYE BILL (Oct 2, 2002)

Last weekend I was going through the last of my hives taking out the empty queen boxes and replacing the frames I removed to make room for the QB's.

I opened one of the hives and found that they made their own replacement comb for the one PC I had removed. It was beautiful, they made one complete frame sized comb and filled it in seven days. Fresh white comb and the prettiest golden brown honey you had ever seen, it must be goldenrod, perhaps a little soy and alfalfa too.

I couldn't wait to taste goldenrod honey. I took it home to show the family and announced that I was providing desert that evening.

Well during the half time of the game, (GO CHIEFS!) I couldn't wait any longer and carved off a nice chunk about 1 x 2 inch square and poped it in my mouth and felt the sweetness ozzing over my taste buds and the pure joy of fresh honey, it was delightful!

Then the thought crossed my mind. When I requeened, didn't I place an essential oil towel and a grease patty in too? Well it was just one little bite, OH MY GOD, what about the oxalic strip!







oh,oh...

I feel like a canidate for the Darwin award. Oh well, I'm not dead yet, however if you don't hear from me for a while...

My strips have been in for two weeks and show that they have been chewed on. I will probably take them out after four weeks or the first nice weekend after that and then go to the vaporizer. So far I don't seem to be having much mite drop. I have only seen up to five mites on the trays after a week.

Bill


----------



## kimberjim (Oct 8, 2002)

Hi Fellas....I have been following this thread with considerable interest and have found your posts about oxalic acid rather encouraging.
I came out of winter with 49 hives and want to increase to at least 90 by the end of the season.At the moment I am using Apistan and have tried FGMO but it is very labour intensive.Oxalic vapour may just be the go....

Because of my sub-tropical location,I have brood and drones present in my hives 12 mths of the year and don't have a brood free period over the winter.From what I have read this shouldn't be a problem...I hope.

This being so,would you guys recommend the oxalic vapour as a spring or fall treatment.Any ideas on how many aplications would be needed.

Thanks in advance....

jim


----------



## Axtmann (Dec 29, 2002)

Hi jim
I use the oxalic vaporizer the whole year, no problem to bees or queens. My trouble is I have lots of lazy beekeepers round here high reification for my colonies.

In the brood free time there only two treatments necessary to kill all mites in a hive but when bees have brood you should treat them at least 4 times 7 days apart to reach an whole brood cycle.

One thing you can do, make a cage from mesh wire round one brood frame and lock the queen in for 20 days enough space so the queen can lay eggs. During this time all bees hatching and there is no way for mites to breed, only in the cage frame where the queen is. After 20 days let the queen go and put the whole comb with closed brood for a day in the freezer. Than let the comb warm up and bring it back into the hive (not the frozen comb). Bees will clean the comb in a few days. You also can melt the dead brood in a solar smelter. Its better to loose one frame than the whole colony. 90% of the mites sitting in this brood frame and when you release the queen vaporize the colony with oxalic acid and you will kill almost 100% from the mites on the bees.
Now your bees can live without ANY treatment for at least 11 month when there is no reification from your neighbors.


----------



## Curry (Sep 22, 2003)

I am all for trying new methods in beekeeping, but I have a problem with Heilyser Tech(http://www.members.shaw.ca/orioleln). Their home page shows a photo of "varroa proboscis before oxalic acid treatment" and another photo of "varroa proboscis after oxalic acid treatment". The after photo is missing hairs that are in the first photo- making it appear very effective. The funny thing is, it's the exact SAME photograph, just altered using photo doctoring software. If I were going to go through that much effort to try to trick someone, I would have at least come up with another photograph. Which brings me to my point... can I trust someone who is clearly trying to trick me? Lucky for me, I don't have to worry about it. I use russian bees with screened bottom boards (and no treatments), and for four years haven't lost a hive to mites (lastest 24 hour counts average 2 mite falls per hive).


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>Their home page shows a photo of "varroa proboscis before oxalic acid treatment" and another photo of "varroa proboscis after oxalic acid treatment". The after photo is missing hairs that are in the first photo- making it appear very effective. The funny thing is, it's the exact SAME photograph, just altered using photo doctoring software.

Now that you mention it, they are identical in every way except the hairs. Exact same angle exact same everything. You can set one on top of the other and everything that is still there registers. Hmmmm.... makes you wonder how honest they are otherwise.


----------



## Axtmann (Dec 29, 2002)

Yes your right but on the second picture is a word illustration. What dos it that mean have they no originals photo and tell this with that note? What ever they like to say I got my orders shipping free. Has anybody been cheated?
Send a message and tell them to change the pictures. I think it is a feeler or an antenna from the mite and not the mouth.


----------



## dickm (May 19, 2002)

Thanks guys for the replies. Axtmann, Am I to understand that the bees have to eat the strips for them to have an effect? I thought they woud just slowly gas off the acid and it went through the air. I guess it needs warm temperatures to work? I fear I'm too late to use them.Do they really need to be over the brood nest? Why not in the top super and let the vapors go down. Bear with me, I haven't got the principle yet. 

Dickm

Dickm


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

I think the principle of the strips is the same as the principle of the FGMO cords. The bees try to tear them up and in the process get coated with the essential ingrediant. In this case, Oxalic acid.


----------



## MIKI (Aug 15, 2003)

Hi Everyone,
Yes I'm going to try this without the caps lock key on. (joke from another thread). I want to try to clarify or act as a bridge between cultures. (If I may be so bold!) To try to help the group understand European attitudes toward the environment, having lived here 6 years now. First I want to say Europeans are light years ahead of us when it comes to protecting the environment. They go to great lengths to protect everything from mice to trees to wild flowers. This is a trait I admire because I know my children will see what I see. The water and air are clean and healthy. This is a result of hard laws and tough enforcment, but it is not an inconvience and rights are respected. I give you an example; My grandfather just joked with my wife the other day about being an environment killer for driving with her headlights on during the day time. You are probably saying to yourself "I don't get it" dont feel bad I did not either untill my wife explained to me engines burn more gas operating lights, air conditioners etc. One more example and I'll quit rambeling; While training on an Army base in the feild in the middle of a mock fire fight the German equviliant of a forest ranger kicked us out of the woods because a endangered type of plant grew there and I thought I saw it all! 

Now having said all that....questions.

1. is there a central place where data which could be helpful to everyone is stored?

2. Is there an organization that has enough power to lobby on bee keepers behalf for the legalization of the chemicals in the U.S.?

3. If not, why not form one looks like a good start right here?

AND NOW I TURN MY CAPS LOCK ON SO I DON'T SCREW UP MY REPORTS!!!!!!!!!

EVERYONE HAVE A GREAT DAY!!!!
MIKI


----------



## wishthecuttlefish (Jun 24, 2003)

Here is a description of the vaporizor I built and just used for the first time, using Bwranglers template. I have two hives, both started this past spring. I just saw my first mites on a 3 day sticky board test. The first hive had about 20 mites and the second had about 12. There is minimal nectar flow and brood rearing going on right now in MD, so I decided to treat.

I modified Bwranglers method slightly. I did not want to drill holes in my supers to accept the vaporizor tube end. So, instead, I took an empty deep, drilled a hole in it, and threaded in a 1/2" male, 3/8" female bushing. This accepted the 3/8" tube, L, and cap and could be screwed on and unscrewed easily.

I then removed the top cover and inner cover from the hive, placed this empty super contraption on top, replaced the top cover over this, and weighed it down with three bricks. I used paper towels to clog up the entrances. I wore an organic grade gas mask, goggles, bee veil, and latex gloves.

As I heated it with a torch I looked for wisps of oxalic acid vapor, but saw nothing, so I assume that most of it stayed in the hive and precipitated down between the frames.

After a two minutes, I stopped heating the end cap and let the hive sit for about 10 minutes before opening the entrances and removing the super gas chamber.

If anyone has any suggestions on how I might improve this method, please let me know. I put a sticky board in each hive for the treatment and left them there. I will report back on mite counts after 3 days.

Kai



[This message has been edited by wishthecuttlefish (edited July 27, 2004).]


----------



## mattoleriver (Sep 20, 2003)

Kai,
I did it about the same way you did except I made a frame of 1X2 instead of using a super. I have an old sheet of lexan that I use as a cover, I think it helps to be able to see the fog issuing from the vaporizer. If I didn't already have the lexan (or glass) I probably wouldn't worry about it.
George


----------



## magnet-man (Jul 10, 2004)

Here is a web site with an interesting tool for applying oxalic acid. Use http://babelfish.altavista.com/ to translate it to English. http://www.alfranseder.de/ 

[This message has been edited by magnet-man (edited July 28, 2004).]


----------



## chemistbert (Mar 4, 2004)

They have a english version. No need to translate. Press the british flag for the english text.


----------



## magnet-man (Jul 10, 2004)

I had a brain fart.


----------



## wishthecuttlefish (Jun 24, 2003)

I have heard various people say that you can use oxalic acid vaporization with honey supers on, and that it does not increase the OA content of the honey. Does anyone have more information about this? 

Thanks,
Kai


----------



## Axtmann (Dec 29, 2002)

Go to the page http://www.mellifera.de/engl2.htm 
and look under 

Solubility of wax and residues in honey


----------



## ox (May 15, 2004)

I must have missed it. Where does one purchase oxalic acid? Is there a brand name?

------------------
the ~ox-{ at www.singingfalls.com


----------



## wishthecuttlefish (Jun 24, 2003)

I purchased mine for $6.00 at Lowes in the wood stripping, staining section. It comes in a small plastic pail, powdered form and labled "Wood Bleach". I don't recall the brand name. Home depot has a different kind of wood bleach that comes in liquid form and is NOT oxalic acid.

Kai


----------



## magnet-man (Jul 10, 2004)

You can get oxalic acid from a photographic supply house. It may be more expensive but I would think the purity would be better.


----------



## chemistbert (Mar 4, 2004)

To a great extent purity is not relevant. What really is the difference between 99.9 and 98%? Not much when it comes to food type applications. OA is naturally extracted so any adulterants would be present in nature and not likely to hurt anything. They would most likely only include oxides anyways, which are for the most part inert. One would think that food grade chemicals are of high purity but in reality they are some of the least purified. Compare the cost of reagent grade NaCl to table salt sometime, it costs about 100 times more and is 10 times more pure.


----------



## ox (May 15, 2004)

This is really kind of funny. I went to the best hardware store near here and also the farmers co-op and nobody could get me oxalic acid! Never even heard of it! Thanks for the input. To Lowes I go.

------------------
the ~ox-{ at www.singingfalls.com


----------



## mattoleriver (Sep 20, 2003)

Ox,
mine is a DAP product from the paint section at the local True Value Hardware store. I think that if you ask for wood bleach you'll have better results than if you ask for oxalic acid. Some wood bleaches are not oxalic acid, so read the fine print! A friend of mine gets oxalic acid at the pharmacy---probably better not to ask for wood bleach there.
I'm sure I've been through Tiller but I don't recall it. Do you have anything resembling a hardware store there? Where do you shop for big items, Roseburg?...Medford?
George


----------



## ox (May 15, 2004)

Well I finally managed to acquire some oxalic acid in Medford. Lowes in Medford does not sell it any longer. Went here and there and my last effort to Ace Hardware 2 minutes before closing was successful







Felt like purchasing a case just in case!
mattoleriver: There's a post office, a school and one small market in Tiller. That's it. Shady Cove used to have a hardware store but it went belly up. I'm 1 1/2 hours from either Roseburg or Medford in Umpqua National Forest. Maps to my place can be seen here: http://www.singingfalls.com/findus.html#Maps 

------------------
the ~ox-{ at www.singingfalls.com


----------



## loggermike (Jul 23, 2000)

http://www.chemistrystore.com/oxalic_acid.htm


----------

