# Treatment-Free Dilemma



## ElderBombadil (Apr 29, 2013)

Define seeing mites? How are you checking for them?


----------



## Andrew Dewey (Aug 23, 2005)

Going treatment free without using stock already transitioned to treatment free can easily cost you 70% of your hives. If you have to buy bees in the future seek out tf bees. As for what is going on in your situation it is hard to tell. Mites are not necessarily something you can see and by the time you do your hive may be too infested to save. Suggestions? Find someone that is successfully keeping tf bees near you to share notes with and learn as much bee biology as you can. Read.


----------



## merince (Jul 19, 2011)

I have kept treatment-free bees for 4 years, and they have been started from regular commercial stock. However, to keep them treatment free, they supercede in late July/early August (like the MDA splitter method) which gives them a brood break and knocks off the mites.

Also, you need to check your mite levels (I do). Most people don't see mites as the mites are usually on the nurse bees and on their underside. Sounds like you are experiencing a classic mite crash. If you want to do the Bond method (which is similar to what you're doing), which does not involve superceding, you need to have a lot of hives and breed from the survivors. As long as you keep bringing stock in that is not survivor/mite resistant, you will keep experiencing massive die-off unless you start assisting them in some way.

Once the bees start winning against the mites, you will see some honey. Strong hives make honey, not weak limping ones.


----------



## odfrank (May 13, 2002)

1. I have never heard that lemongrass oil is a mite treatment. It is commonly used as a swarm lure and maybe a feed additive. 
2. Foundationless comb and natural cell will have a high amount of drone brood which might elevate your mite numbers. 

3. Set up your dead brood chambers on their stand with a few drops of lemongrass oil inside the entrance on 3/1. You might catch some local bees which might have more staying power. I am getting over 64% treatment free wintering success with trapped bees.


----------



## JRG13 (May 11, 2012)

I would try what merince says and aim for a mid summer brood break or do constant sugar dusting in the summer if you don't consider that a treatment. Although I don't believe sugar dusting to be that effective, with the proper bees I believe it can help keep them as treatment free as you're going to get. I never see a lot of varroa either, if you're seeing them, then you have a high mite count. I'm bringing in various genetics as my main interest is 'breeding'. If you want to try some next year let me know. You can have whatever you want, queen cell/virgin/mated queen. I favor getting ripe queencells to introduce to nucs and let them mate locally myself. I try to stay as treatment free as possible, but in our area it is very difficult as we get all the bees from all over influxing every year for almonds and all the different biotypes of pathogens get to comingle. Personally, I am sure most of my hives would be in better shape if I just treated on a regular basis or when they're broodless but I typically wait til I see them starting to decline to take action. Like merince says, most hives try to deal with the situation on their own, but it leaves them with a smaller population going into fall and w/o feeding or good forage it's a losing proposition, especially if you want to get honey. If you want honey in this area, you need a strong double deep of bees when the flow is on to maximize potential. Coming out of winter with 4-6 frames of bees will not cut it for a spring flow and to get them to proper strength to pull in an excess crop they'll use most of the prime summer flow to build up instead of being able to store excess when the flow hits. I applaud you trying to be treatment free, I aim to be there one day but it takes a lot of work. I lost my first hive to mites, even treating them with hopguard, and I just had a decent hive collapse, and one of my strongest hives is requeening itself right now as I think mite pressure got high and they killed the queen recently to supercede her. I hope the new queen gets mated, she'll emerge in 10 days so I don't have high hopes....


----------



## Rusty Hills Farm (Mar 24, 2010)

> Only on some occasions I used lemongrass essential oil as a prevention method to control Varroa.


The essential oils most effective against varroa are wintergreen and spearmint. I don't think they actually like the wintergreen, so the lemongrass gets added to entice them to take the syrup. 

If you would do either a sugar shake or an ether roll, you would at least know how many mites you have and then you can decide what, if anything, you want to do about them. It's hell to lose hives and not know WHY, so this way you'd get some answers.

HTH

Rusty


----------



## David LaFerney (Jan 14, 2009)

Not trying to be difficult here but if you are treating for mites with essential oils then how are you treatment free? Even if it doesn't work? If you are going to treat a little bit then why would you do it with something with no proven efficacy instead of another naturally occurring mitacide which does? I'm in no way telling you that you should or should not treat, but how is it better to use foreign substances that probably don't serve the desired purpose. I don't understand this line of reasoning.


----------



## Beregondo (Jun 21, 2011)

As to your question, 
_"For how long should this situation perpetuate and me not being able to exit this critical point of not advancing?"_

If you buy bees or replace lost hives with bees that haven't been produced treatment free, you will continue to have these heave losses for as long as you continue to source your replacements from a source that doesn't manage its apiary without treatments.

My experience has been that I have best sucess with colonies I get from cutouts where the bees have continually been in the space I'm cutting them form for 2 or more years.

My next best success is from swarms captured in areas where there are few beekeepers and most of the coloies in the area have been "in the tree" and untreated for generations.

I've had good success with queens and nucs purchased fom local treatment free beeks as well.

I've had poor success with queens and bees purchased from reputable commercial sources that aren't treatment free, but manage for mites and disease in the t=conventional way.

Learning to raise your own queens, and/or making walkaway splits form the hives that are doing well is a much better way to replace hives.

Keeping nucs split from your best hives in order to have a replacement colony already started if it is needed is even better.

There's a pair of vids on vimeo.com of a talk, "The Sustainable Apiary" given by Michael Palmer to the Prince William Regional Beekeepers Assn. that might be helpful to you.

The link to the first one is here: https://vimeo.com/23178333

(They're free to watch, but if it is helpful, putting some appreciation in the "Tip Jar" will help them continue to post such great resources)


----------



## Rusty Hills Farm (Mar 24, 2010)

> Not trying to be difficult here but if you are treating for mites with essential oils then how are you treatment free? Even if it doesn't work?


Not everybody jumps in with both feet. Some people ease in as they read and learn and make choices. I don't think it is fair to bust anybody's chops for not being treatment-free ENOUGH. It's a process. Some folks are still figuring out how to get there and still have live bees.

JMO


Rusty


----------



## David LaFerney (Jan 14, 2009)

I agree completely. The point I was trying to make was that when one decides they need to treat why would you not just use something that has a track record of working? Especially since there are a couple of EOs that are known to at least have some substantial mitacide properties why would you use one of the hundreds that don't?


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

The rules of the tf forum are pretty clear, you either are or you aren't. For the purposes of this forum those of us who use any of the much safer naturally based products that are available and do so even once a year (though time frames have never been established) are still lumped together with the most egregious abusers of hard chemicals as "treaters". Calbee is a "treater" under the rules of the forum.


----------



## RiodeLobo (Oct 11, 2010)

Welcome to the club. 

If you cannot find local TX free bees, the next best is TX free queens from a comparable environment. This is what I have done this season after a 88% die off last winter (mite induced weakness leading to starving with honey in the hive). Next spring I will see how successful the genetics I brought in have been.


----------



## JWChesnut (Jul 31, 2013)

This is the second iteration of CalBee's cry for help following the September collapse of his apiary. CalBee has *not* provided much clear data (images, standard mite counts, weights). 

I see two primary and competing hypothesis at this time:
Assumption 1. Hives are exhibiting a classic late season collapse.
Assumption 2. Hives are "Russian" and are undergoing the radical shrinkage in the cluster characteristic of that strain in the autumn.

Some images, history, counts would resolve these radically different possibilties.

I think the mite-collapse is most likely. My own, continuing experience with California bees tell me that hives collapse in September if you do not manage them for mites. All the smoke-and-mirrors about regressed small cells and feral "survivor" races does not matter a wit in California in my *controlled* tests. I had three years of relatively, good experience with the now-unavailable Glenn Hygenic Queens, so imported exotic genetics are a possible route forward. Hygenic genetics *must* constantly be renewed, it *will not* persist in a wild outcrossing population.

I would urge CalBees to do his *own* investigation. When he gets healthy hives again: Divide his apiary in two. In one half: treat with a "soft" fumigant such as MAQS, thymol, or the Oxalic Acid dribble. In the other half, proceed with a Merince-style brood break (and sugar dust during the broodless period). 

CalBees is also going to need to manage for the brief honey flow in California -- he will need to make his crop from April - June, and pull the honey off by the forth of July. He will need to feed the hive (or find a local nectar supply) for the remainder of the year. He will need to plan ahead on splits and divides, so that he has a honey-surplus capable hive on track in April. A young nuc building up (and using all the nectar for brood) will not make a crop. This is the main issue in California with the divide and conquer approach to mites-- you depopulate the hives, so they are not conditioned to make honey, and late summer splits are in dearth and incapable of expansion without supplemental feeding (or a sought after local nectar supply). 

By comparing his own tests, side-by-side, he can avoid the absorption of downright ludicrous and erroneous "information" from the internet.


----------



## David LaFerney (Jan 14, 2009)

jim lyon said:


> The rules of the tf forum are pretty clear, you either are or you aren't. For the purposes of this forum those of us who use any of the much safer naturally based products that are available and do so even once a year (though time frames have never been established) are still lumped together with the most egregious abusers of hard chemicals as "treaters". Calbee is a "treater" under the rules of the forum.


Actually I think that has been more or less officially relaxed to include people who want to be treatment free, but just aren't quite there yet. I forget which thread it was.


----------



## merince (Jul 19, 2011)

I am with JWChesnut - CalBee, you really need to pick a method and stick to it. Counting mites is essential in this day and age even if you plan on being treatment free. Your final goal is treatment free, and you need a strategy to help your bees to get there.

Keep in mind that it takes 42 days (+/- 7 days) for a hive to produce foragers. In order to make a crop, your hive needs to be going full speed a month and a half before your main flow. I am talking 8-10 frames of brood. A good book on the subject is G. M. Doolittle's "Management of out-apiaries". I recently did a two part summary and included my schedule (including the timing of the superceding after the main flow or alternative mite treatments). You can use it, but you'll have to map your flows. You can find part I here and part II here.

I hope this helps.


----------



## mike bispham (May 23, 2009)

Rusty Hills Farm said:


> Not everybody jumps in with both feet. Some people ease in as they read and learn and make choices. I don't think it is fair to bust anybody's chops for not being treatment-free ENOUGH. It's a process. Some folks are still figuring out how to get there and still have live bees.


That's fair enough. Lets have it laid out clearly then.

The fundamental thing to understand is that treatment free beekeeping necessarily goes hand in hand with a breeding program. You have to continually make new colonies from your best - and only from your best - to maintain and improve the health of your stock (so you need to figure out how 'best' is to be measured, and to be able to tell which are best...). 

This is what animal husbandry is, and always has been founded upon. If you don't do husbandry properly, you will be bound to failure. Its that simple.

The ideal program is: 

1) Source mite resistant bees

2) Locate them where the likelihood of mating with feral survivors is high, and the likelihood of mating with treated bees is low

3) Continually raise more stocks than you need to replace the failure/poor performers, and to give rise to better and better genetic combination (more and more mite resistant and improved general healthy and vitality - giving good crops.

4) Aim to dominate the local drone population

Unless you are lucky enough to be within an established thriving survivor/tf locality, you have to establish not just a tf hive, or a tf apiary, but a tf breeding pool. 

Anything less will be bound to fail. That's how it works. That's how its always worked.

Raising new stocks from what you have carefully established to be your best is the total of the hands-on part. Anything else, try to leave to the bees to sort out for themselves. That way you'll get bees that can take care of themself. 

Be aware: nothing will frustrate the process of raising health faster than treating! It is fatally addictive. The sole exception is to preserve, or prepare a colony for requeening with what will hopefully be better genetics. Work to minimise drone output from such 'hospital' colonies.

Mike (UK)


----------



## mike bispham (May 23, 2009)

JWChesnut said:


> My own, continuing experience with California bees tell me that hives collapse in September if you do not manage them for mites.


You are generalising from your own failure to the whole of your state. There are no grounds for doing so. What didn't work for you (for any number of reasons) might well work for somebody else.



JWChesnut said:


> All the smoke-and-mirrors about regressed small cells and feral "survivor" races does not matter a wit in California in my *controlled* tests.


What do you mean by 'smoke and mirrors'? And in what ways were your tests 'controlled'? Would 'closely monitored - where monitoring could be done' be a better description? 



JWChesnut said:


> Hygenic genetics *must* constantly be renewed, it *will not* persist in a wild outcrossing population.


That depends entirely on the qualities of the wild/feral population. 

You need to be much more careful about extrapolating from your own experience to make general statements. Lots of people have, like you, failed to achieve highly productive t/f bees. But lots of others have. They are standing proof of the inadequacy of your logic.

Mike (UK)


----------



## JWChesnut (Jul 31, 2013)

mike bispham said:


> And in what ways were your tests 'controlled'?


I have an experimental TF apiary on a north facing mountain ridge surounded by State Park land where I hive feral swarms. I have a paired apiary on a ridge similarly situated about 2 miles distant. I control this pair group with similar equipment, numbers and manipulation, but use one of the "soft" fumigants on the Treated apiary. I have been doing this for more than a decade (since returning from Costa Rica). Recently, I run natural comb on Deep + (x) Medium boxes over screen boards.

My *treated* mountain apiary has the same production, high survival and low rate of supersedure as the other out-yards I maintain, it is statistically inseparable from my larger collection of apiaries. The TF apiary has poor survival and poor production, and a supersedure-failed queen syndrome. I have multiple years of paired data where the TF is statistically different than the (much) larger T collection of out-yards, and statistically different from its Treated pair on its own mountain. The T and TF pair are identical in a measures of mite growth and expression during the late-spring and summer period when/if I withhold treatment on the T hives with honey supers on.



mike bispham said:


> Hygenics -- That depends entirely on the qualities of the wild/feral population.


I agree -- so the first test anyone should do -- a unbiased estimate of hygenics and/or the intangible "survivor fitness".
Instead, the classic decision for TF is a philosophical one -- a person with experience growing organic tomatoes, and concludes that raising bees is just like tomatoes -- add a lot of compost, pick a TMVF resistant strain, and bingo, lots of salsa. The decision is made "a priori" and never evaluated.

Minnesota Hygenics or the Louisiana bees are not going to persist in the wild --- these are very highly selected, and hence fragile genotypes, these will revert very rapidly to the background bee. The much simpler and robust adaptation to Varroa is constant swarming. This adaptation is likely to become dominant in a wild population, and will introgress into a domesticated strain. These are called AHB in California, and they have certain drawbacks.



mike bispham said:


> You are generalising from your own failure to the whole of your state. There are no grounds for doing so.
> Lots of people have, like you, failed to achieve highly productive t/f bees. But lots of others have. They are standing proof of the inadequacy of your logic.


Since I have been keeping bees since 1975 (except for 1992 when the original Varroa invasion killed by apiary), I have no insecurity that I know how to husband the little insects. What I have not seen in my own experience is *anyone* in my county who has kept TF hives thrifty and productive. Some manage in the "expansion model" which means their hives are constantly small and young. Small young hives do not produce surplus in California. Small young hives cannot be marketed for pollination. They are garden ornaments.

I have been regaled with tales of TF bees in California, but on closer inspection -- the tales have proven just that - Walter Mitty dreams of newly-minted armchair experts, Ganga-smoke dazzled fantasies of intuitive believers, fisherman lies and marketing hype of trust-fund hipsters, or patent hazards of Africanized swarms.


----------



## mike bispham (May 23, 2009)

JWChesnut said:


> I have an experimental TF apiary on a north facing mountain ridge surounded by State Park land where I hive feral swarms. I have a paired apiary on a ridge similarly situated about 2 miles distant. I control this pair group with similar equipment, numbers and manipulation, but use one of the "soft" fumigants on the Treated apiary.


1st: how do you know the swarms you hive are feral survivors? How far have they come, and in what sort of isolation? Is feral surviving far along at that place?

What I'm asking after is: detail of intial genetics.

2nd: 2 miles distant is no distance at all for mating. What steps did you take to increase the levels of resistant drones for mating purposes?

3rd: How many colonies were held at each site? At that distance, if the treated outnumber the untreateds heavily you'll have constant genetic downgrading in each generation.

4th: How much breeding did you do (of the untreateds)? Were you breeding actively, or just 'bonding' the caught swarms?

5th: (Assuming you were breeding actively: how were you evaluating for selection purposes? To what degree were you re-queening?

Without knowing the answers to these - and probably a few more - questions, it isn't possible to form a view as to the likely causes of failure.

Mike (UK)


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Interesting list of questions Mike. Could you answer even question one for yourself, describing how you know the swarms you collect are feral survivors, and detailing initial genetics? How are your own hives coming along?


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

Please read the current forum rules concerning ignore list.

http://www.beesource.com/forums/showthread.php?226194-Forum-Rules


----------



## David LaFerney (Jan 14, 2009)

OK, How *do *you know if a swarm is feral or not?


----------



## Delta Bay (Dec 4, 2009)

David LaFerney said:


> OK, How *do *you know if a swarm is feral or not?


Apparently there is genetic differences. Deborah Delaney has done some work on feral bees that is interesting. The whole video is worth viewing or you can jump to 30 min in.


----------



## mike bispham (May 23, 2009)

David LaFerney said:


> OK, How *do *you know if a swarm is feral or not?


Great video, thanks!

It varies according all sorts of factors. You have to try to get yourself in a position where you can make educated estimates of the likelihood that they are feral. Sometimes a combination of factors will lead you to feel pretty much 100% certain - lack of commercial and sideliner apiaries nearby, many reports of wild bee colonies in the vicinity, good year-round forage, personal testimony of continuous long-term habitation. Its pretty common-sense stuff.

According to the film most US ferals are Amm. So look for their features.

Mike (UK)


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

mike bispham said:


> You have to try to get yourself in a position where you can make educated estimates of the likelihood that they are feral.


Well JWChestnut sounds pretty educated to me, so by those standards looks like problem solved.

Regards AMM, they were common in fact a problem in my country until varroa arrived, which wiped them out I haven't seen one in years. They are pretty much extinct in your country also Mike after mites arrived, as you might be aware. They are not the stuff of feral survivors, tough and hardy as they may be (or were) they cannot withstand mites.

Many of the claimed AMM I hear of now are reported as gentle AMM's. I do not believe they are actually AMM's, gentleness was certainly not one of their traits.


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

mike bispham said:


> According to the film most US ferals are Amm. So look for their features.
> 
> Mike (UK)


I didn't get that impression. Some are mellifera mellifera, but they are a minority. What I found interesting was the fact that ferals in general are genetically distinct from managed populations. And also that the researcher talked about the benefits of local adaptation.

Another interesting element she brought out was the bottleneck of commercial queen breeders. She said four or five hundred breeder queens are used to breed a million daughters for sale. That's a very narrow genetic base.

She also talked about how hobbyists and smalltimers are more inclined to catch swarms rather than buying commercial stock. When she said that, I wondered if that might account for some of the difference in results between smalltimers and commercial beekeepers who try to reduce reliance on chemical mite treatments.


----------



## mike bispham (May 23, 2009)

rhaldridge said:


> I didn't get that impression. Some are mellifera mellifera, but they are a minority.


You're probably right - I did struggle to hear her at times, and I only watched from the 30min point. But I'd value another opinion on this matter. It would be useful (for you in the US) to know more about ways of identifying ferals.





rhaldridge said:


> What I found interesting was the fact that ferals in general are genetically distinct from managed populations.


Yes, she spoke about two distinct populations, the commercial and the feral, and a possible mechanism of separation: different breeding periods. I find this a fascinating aspect, prompting thoughts about how the ferals have adapted not just to the introduced predators like varroa, but also to the corrosive commercial population.



rhaldridge said:


> And also that the researcher talked about the benefits of local adaptation.


Again, yes. Bees _do_ adapt to local conditions (JW take note)



rhaldridge said:


> Another interesting element she brought out was the bottleneck of commercial queen breeders. She said four or five hundred breeder queens are used to breed a million daughters for sale. That's a very narrow genetic base.


Highly damaging, as she says. But she also emphasised that not all commercial breeders are so irresponsible.



rhaldridge said:


> She also talked about how hobbyists and smalltimers are more inclined to catch swarms rather than buying commercial stock. When she said that, I wondered if that might account for some of the difference in results between smalltimers and commercial beekeepers who try to reduce reliance on chemical mite treatments.


I'm sure it makes the world of difference. The worst possible starting stock for tf must be a population that has been conditioned to a 'no parasite threat' state. Any parasite control behaviours will have been minimised. 

Good commentry, thanks, 

Mike


----------



## mike bispham (May 23, 2009)

rhaldridge said:


> I didn't get that impression. Some are mellifera mellifera, but they are a minority.


Little follow up from a thesis written under Dr. Delany's supervision:

"In the 1600’s, settlers successfully delivered a limited number of honey
bee colonies across the ocean. The first subspecies reported to make the over-sea
journey was A. m. mellifera. There are no known records indicating the arrival or
importation of any additional subspecies of Apis mellifera until the mid-1800’s
(Sheppard 1989). Apis m. mellifera had greater than two centuries to proliferate and
establish a feral honey bee population in the forested regions of eastern North
America.

In the period between 1859 and 1922, there was an increase of importation
as beekeepers experimented with different subspecies. Seven additional subspecies
were brought into North America and tried as potential breeding stock for a
developing beekeeping industry (Sheppard 1989). The US Honeybee Act of 1922
halted further importation in response to honey bee losses on the Isle of Wight. This
mysterious bee die off was linked to the identification of the honey bee parasite,
Acarapis woodi (Rennie) in Europe (Needham et al. 1988). The importation of adult
honey bees into the United States is still prohibited;

The unique importation history of Apis 
mellifera into North America has led to the creation of two genetically differentiated
honey bee populations: the feral honey bee population, composed of a higher
percentage of bees representative of A. m. mellifera, and the commercial or managed
honey bee population, largely controlled by queen breeders and composed of bees
representative of A. m. ligustica and A. m. carnica (Sheppard 1989)."

http://udspace.udel.edu/bitstream/handle/19716/12667/Katherine_Darger_thesis.pdf?sequence=1

The language isn't clear, but I can't read it any way other than ... 'Amm genes form the basis of US ferals', or something of that sort.

Mike (UK)


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Perhaps now some folks will stop saying that these ferals are all swarms that got away from local beekeepers.

They're not the same as the usual Italians and Carnies.


----------



## clyderoad (Jun 10, 2012)

> The unique importation history of Apis
> mellifera into North America has led to the creation of two genetically differentiated
> honey bee populations: the feral honey bee population, composed of a higher
> percentage of bees representative of A. m. mellifera, and the commercial or managed
> ...





> Perhaps now some folks will stop saying that these ferals are all swarms that got away from local beekeepers.
> 
> They're not the same as the usual Italians and Carnies.


Notice >Sheppard 1989< 
Much has changed in 24 years.

Perhaps when referencing the above, the most accurate way to comment may be " in 1989, now 24 years ago, ............"


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Some of this is a little over simplistic.

First off, the video was looking at wild hives in a small forrest.

Secondly, the claims as to AMM ancestry were based on mitochondrial DNA, not nucleus DNA. It is the nucleus DNA that makes the bee. Mitochondrial DNA is passed from mother to daughter but is outside the nucleus and plays little part in the makeup of the bee. So hives in a forrest that years ago were AMM, could have mated with Italian drones for many generations until they resemble Italians, but still have AMM mitochondrial DNA because the bees in the forrest are descended from a line of mothers ( matriarchal line) that was origionally AMM. But it is really a misnomer to call them AMM if physically they are not. Even though the bees are essentially Italian or some other breed, the matriarchal line as represented in the mitochondria is AMM.

I did notice how excited she got about one particular wild hive she found that did actually physically resemble AMM. She said how lucky it was the guys in the tractor helped her get that one. Which indicates this was a somewhat rare thing for her.

Don't really like to disagree with someone with a lot of knowledge and letters to her name, but to say the breeds do not mix because they have drones at different times of the year is well, nonsense. Italians, Carniolans, and AMM's, all have drones throughout the season. AMM's start drone production a bit later, but when AMM's were prevalent in my country contamination of pure Italian breeding stock by AMM genetics was constant, and likewise near pure AMM's would quickly get diluted by Italian genetics. I was a bee breeder during those years and trying to keep bees pure was a never ending battle and took a lot of work.

What I can say from working with these species, is that when we had large numbers of AMM's in our country, cross breeding was a major problem the breeds could not be kept pure it was a constant battle. Then came varroa, and within a short time AMM's based on physical characteristics of the bees, were extinct. But I would hazard to guess that a mitochondrial DNA test would still find hives showing a matriarchal descent from AMM ancestors as evidenced by mitochondrial DNA. But the nucleic DNA and physical characteristics of the bees would be Italian or Carniolan.

Some AMM genetics do live on in my country and occasionally it will all come together in a bee, there will be a hive that looks a bit AMM'ish, and is extremely aggressive. We would be naive to think every last bit of AMM genetics has been eradicated. But here anyway it's a rare thing.


----------



## Mr_Clean (Aug 31, 2013)

CALBEE: My sympathies for the loss of your bees. Also, my sympathies for the lack of civility of some of the posters. I am a new beekeeper and understand how frustrating it must be and then to see some of the responses likely added to the frustration. It is a difficult task to transition bees from treatment to treatment-free. I suggested (like other posters) to get bees from a treatment free source to increase your chances of success in being treatment free. I believe natural sizing is an important part of the key to being treatment free. I also believe another major factor is good genetics, which obtaining bees from treatment free supplier would help with. Getting bees from the same beekeeper will not change your bees' genetics. Bees have survived in nature for thousands of years without human intervention, so it is very possible for them to live treatment free. Keep up the good fight!


----------



## mike bispham (May 23, 2009)

WLC said:


> Perhaps now some folks will stop saying that these ferals are all swarms that got away from local beekeepers.
> 
> They're not the same as the usual Italians and Carnies.


This conversation is converging with one on another thread, and is probably worth a new thread of its own, but I'll post this here.

It seems clear that our feral denialists are losing out to those who claim a viable feral population. The science is in. The discussion now cannot be whether there are viable feral populations, but what their qualities are, whether what it is that enables them to survive makes them useless for commercial purposes, how it is that they are different everywhere and suchlike. Its becoming ever clearer that the recommendation of locating 'survivors' for tf breeding purposes has been right all along. Nevertheless we can expect continuing resistance from the feral/resisistance/tf denialists.

It would be good to try to learn more about the US ferals, and to this end I have made a list of a few papers that might help. I haven't yet tried getting hold of any, and its likely that some are behind academic firewalls. My suggestion is we team up and try to winkle some of them out, to get at the facts of US feral genetics, and form a reading list for those who want to access them.

If we can't get hold of Dr Delaney's key paper, perhaps we could team up to make a detailed summary of her filmed lecture. Perhaps it would be a good idea if someone copied it in case it suddenly disappears. 

Mike (UK)


■Cobey, S. W., D. Tarpy, and W.S. Sheppard. 2011. Breeding Practices and Genetic Diversity in US Honey Bees, in Honey Bee Colony Health Issues, D. Sammataro, editor, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL 302pp.

■Delaney, D.A., Meixner, N.M. Schiff., and W. S. Sheppard. 2009. Genetic characterization of commercial honey bee (Hymenoptera: Apidae) populations in the United States by using mitochondrial and microsatellite markers. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Amer. 102: 666-673. (also published in Genetics 102(4): 666-673.)

■Strange, J.P., L.Garnery, and W.Sheppard. 2008. Morphological and molecular characterization of the Landes honey bee (Apis mellifera L.) ecotype for genetic conservation. J. Insect Conservation. 12: 527-537.

■Strange, J.P, L, Garnery and W.S. Sheppard. 2007. Persistence of the Les Landes ecotype of Apis mellifera. mellifera in southwest France: confirmation of a locally adaptive annual brood cycle. Apidologie. 38:259-267.

■Arias, M.C, T. E. Rinderer and W. S. Sheppard. 2006. Further characterization of honey bees from the Iberian Peninsula by allozyme, morphometric and mtDNA haplotype analyses. Journal of Apicultural Research and Bee World. 45:188-196.

■Sheppard, W.S. 2002. Diversity of Africanized honey bees in the United States and the utility of mitochondrial DNA origins. In Africanized honey bees and bee mites II. ed. by E. Erickson. Westview Press pp 60-64.

■Loper, G.R., J. Fewell, E. Erickson, W.S. Sheppard. 2000. Impact of mites on, and the introgression of Africanized bees into a feral population of honey bees. Hoopingarner Roger and Conner, Lawrence J. (editors) Cheshire: Wicwas Press, UC pp. 47-51.

■Schiff, N.M., Sheppard, W.S., Loper, G.R., and H. Shimanuki. 1994. Genetic diversity of feral honey bee (Hymenoptera: Apidae) populations in the Southern United States. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Amer. 87:842-848.

Washington State University CAHNRS – Department of EntomologyAPIS Molecular Systematics Laboratory Publications

http://entomology.wsu.edu/apis/publications/

Also:
Delaney, D.A. 2008. Genetic characterization of U.S. honey bee populations. Doctor
of Philosophy thesis at Washington State University.

DETERMINING LOW LEVELS OF AFRICANIZATION IN UNMANAGED HONEY BEE COLONIES USING THREE DIAGNOSTIC TECHNIQUES
by Katherine Darger
A Masters Thesis
http://udspace.udel.edu/bitstream/handle/19716/12667/Katherine_Darger_thesis.pdf?sequence=1


----------



## Michael Palmer (Dec 29, 2006)

I for one know Jamie Strange and his work on the local bees in Provence, France. A fantastic presentation, but it has nothing to do with feral bees. The work shows the local bees have a brood spike just before the lavender flow...in anticipation if you will. The imported Buckfast strain has a brood spike as a result of the lavender flow.

This, to me shows that there can be local bee, but nothing about the presence or lack of feral bees.


----------



## mike bispham (May 23, 2009)

Michael Palmer said:


> I for one know Jamie Strange and his work on the local bees in Provence, France. [...] The work shows the local bees have a brood spike just before the lavender flow...in anticipation if you will. The imported Buckfast strain has a brood spike as a result of the lavender flow.
> 
> This, to me shows that there can be local bee [...]


Its the sort of local attunement seen in probably every species of living thing that ever lived... but which is denied as impossible by some in honeybees... "where is the local knowedge held" from JWChestnut recently for example. 

That living populations attune themselves to local conditions is just plain obvious to anyone with a working understanding of natural selection. It couldn't be otherwise. 

That it makes a difference in beekeeping runs against the interests of those who want sell packages and queens. That about tells the story.

Mike


----------

