# Why I don't consider using treatments.



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

Long story and I think I’ve covered it all before so feel free to skip it. But if you want to know why I don’t consider treatments anymore, read on.

A recent discussion has brought up what I think now about treatments as opposed to what I used to think. So I’d like to explain how I got to where I am now. These dates are off the top of my head, but I think they are pretty close. Back in 1999, frustrated by losing all my bees for the second time, I was looking for some way to keep them alive. I had not paid much attention to the current discussions in beekeeping magazines for many years. I just kept my bees in the backyard and we got along fine and I couldn’t see that bees changed and it seemed to me the magazines were more about the latest gadget than about beekeeping. 

Once I realized it was Varroa, of course I started researching that, and everything I could find said they would die if I didn’t treat. I was not finding any dissenting voices. So the next year I got more bees and that fall I used Apistan. It was not what I wanted to do, but I didn’t know what else to do. After using it, they were still badly infested, but some of them survived that winter and some died. The next year (2001) while searching for some solution that wouldn’t require treatment I ran into “small cell foundation” in a Brushy Mt. catalog that said that it was “for experienced beekeepers only”. I was thinking, I’ve had bees for 27 years, but I don’t have any idea what I’m supposed to know that would help me use small cell foundation any better than a new beekeeper. So I started searching on line for information about small cell. I found it on Beesource. I read all of Dee Lusby’s writing and all of Eric Osterlund’s writing on the subject and found information on Dave Cushman’s site and Allen Dick’s site. Being a natural skeptic, the idea that bees had been enlarged was documented well enough, but if foundation was the cause of the problem, why not forgo it instead of making them go to 4.9mm? I tried both 4.9mm foundation and starter strips at the time to see what the bees would build. Eventually I decided I needed to discuss things and joined Beesource so I could ask Dee and other small cell people questions. That was about 2002.

The first year I tried natural comb, I was running behind trying to change over and things didn’t go so well. The mites were already pretty populated and I treated with Apistan again only to lose them anyway. The next year I started with some established hives I bought and started regressing those early in the year. When I was seeing natural comb in the 4.6mm range I decided there was nothing unnatural about 4.9mm foundation, but I was really more interested in natural comb. I was concerned about treating while regressing (the skeptic in me) so I used FGMO every week during the year on most of the hives. The bees did pretty well and by the next year (2003) oxalic acid vapor was being discussed on Beesource. I decided I would finish the year out by using the oxalic to see what the mite counts were. Judging by the first week compared to the second week, I concluded that oxalic vapor was very successful at killing mites, but also that small cell had been working and that, while FGMO kept the numbers down somewhat, it was more trouble that the benefit. I was also concerned that FGMO would soften the wax in the long run, and blowing up a hive when the flames ignited the vapors once, was a bit disconcerting. I had been hearing Dee talk about the microbes and how fumidil, terramycin etc. were killing the beneficial microbes. Having never used any treatments from 1975 until 2000 and never having used fumidil this didn’t seem to matter that much to me, but as I looked more into microbes and their effects on the bees, I become more and more concerned about a lot of so-called organic treatments. 

Dean and Ramona did a lot of searching on the research and presenting that research and they got a hold of Gilliam’s studies and made them available and that was some amazing stuff. I began to realize that a lot of the things that helped hives, might actually be because of the microbes and not because of the obvious things like giving them brood. Things like giving a frame of brood to a languishing hive, might just be inoculating them with the microbes from the strong hive. Essential oils were not only disrupting the smells in the hive, but the microbes and the more I observed and read studies, the more convinced that the microbes were very important. As I started raising queens I had already noticed that how well they were fed had more to do with how good they were then their genetics. What if the genetics of the microbes were just as important as the genetics of the queen? So what are the problems with treatments, besides the obvious fact that you can’t breed for bees that do well without treatments if you are treating? You also can’t breed for microbes that keep bees healthy if you keep killing them.

There are over 8,000 microbes that have been identified (source USDA and Martha Gilliam’s research) that live with bees. Of these only a handful are pathogens. The rest either fill a niche in the ecology of the hive (and therefore crowd out pathogens) or they have an actual beneficial effect. Recent studies have shown some of the mechanisms by which these microbes protect the bees from the Nosema, AFB, EFB and chalkbrood and that the preventative treatments for these diseases kill off the very thing that is protecting the bees from those diseases.

*Essential oils: * Kill a broad spectrum of microbes including yeasts, fungus, bacteria and viruses. They are basically the immune system of the plants they are derived from. Essential oils includes thymol, wintergreen, menthol, lemongrass oil, spearmint, peppermint, neem, tea tree etc.

*Organic acids: * Kill a broad spectrum of microbes including yeasts, fungus, bacteria and viruses. They do so because of a dramatic shift in pH in the hive. Several of these are routinely used as antiseptic solutions in labs including formic and oxalic acids. They also kill off those other 160 some mites that live with bees and probably a lot of insects that have beneficial relationships, such as pseudo scorpions who eat Varroa mites.

*Acaracides: * These are just relabeled insecticides. They have all of the disadvantages of the Organic acid with the addition of building up in the wax and affecting fertility of drones and queens.

*Antibiotics:* It’s obvious these kill microbes (after all that is their purpose). I think the current CCD issues correlate chronologically to when Tylan was first used and fumidil started being used several times a year because of Nosema cerana and the farmers started using a lot more fungicides. All of these conspired to kill microbes at a rate not seen before in beekeeping as well as Tylan being more long lived than Terramycin and the bacteria that had 50 years to build up resistance to Terramycin had no resistance to Tylan.

Another thing I think people in the US and Canada don’t seem to take into account is that most of these 
“recommended” treatments are not only not recommended, but illegal in most of the world. Fumidil, because it causes birth defects. Antibiotics, because they only cover up the presence of AFB and they contaminate the honey. Acracides because they contaminate the wax and the honey. These are, not only, not recommended in other countries, they are illegal. It’s only because people are convinced that the bees can’t survive Varroa without treatment that organic acids are allowed in those countries.

*This brings me to today.* There was a time I considered that treatment for Varroa mites MIGHT be necessary. Now that I’ve had more than a decade of regressed bees, moved to locally adapted stock and learned the value of the microbes and the other fauna of the hive, I think the costs, in terms of possibly losing whole strains of microbes, disrupting the entire ecology of the colony, not to mention propping up genetics I need to weed out, is no longer worth considering.


----------



## fieldsofnaturalhoney (Feb 29, 2012)

:thumbsup:


----------



## Bailey11 (Aug 2, 2011)

Thank you very much for taking the time to share.


----------



## WBVC (Apr 25, 2013)

Thank you for sharing.

How long did it take before you were not having large losses in untreated stock?
Are you well isolated from those who treat their bees?
Do you think it would now take longer to select Varroa hardy stock now that Varroa seems to be universal and so many now have treated colonies?

Thank you for considering these questions


----------



## NewJoe (Jul 1, 2012)

I totally buy into your philosophy. I hope that I can be successful with this way of doing things.


----------



## jmgi (Jan 15, 2009)

I appreciate you taking the time to condense your whole varroa experience down into one very interesting post. I have already experienced years of sickening losses, I hope to have a similar TF success story as you eventually.


----------



## stan.vick (Dec 19, 2010)

Thanks MB for posting your experiences. By the time I started back keeping bees six years ago people like you had already started to reject treatments as an option, and were discussing their opinions with others, so I started as treatment free with the big step forward of using local survivors. This last year I set aside fifteen colonies to be inspected by the state, and per their mandatory instructions I treated those colonies. I had to this in order to be an approved seller of bees. To say the least I am very dissatisfied with the results. The colonies not treated are doing well, I lost 8 percent, whereas I lost thirty three percent of the treated bees.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>How long did it take before you were not having large losses in untreated stock?

Until they were down to 4.9mm in the core of the brood nest.

>Are you well isolated from those who treat their bees?

Probably not. I don't know for sure where all the bees around me are.

>Do you think it would now take longer to select Varroa hardy stock now that Varroa seems to be universal and so many now have treated colonies?

I don't think it was genetics that tipped the scale. But I think genetics probably helps. The genetics of the mites might be just as important.


----------



## jmgi (Jan 15, 2009)

stan.vick, besides using local survivors what else have you done TF, any small cell, natural cell?


----------



## wmsuber (Apr 4, 2011)

Thanks Mr. Bush for restating your thoughts and the timeline of events. I have read your book numerous times, and even now, hearing this again helps my belief shift even further.


----------



## stan.vick (Dec 19, 2010)

Not used any man-made foundation in the six years. They are natural (small) cell. there are not any large beekeepers near me. I know of four with one or two hives within a five mile radius, two of them are foundationless. If there are a lot of beekeepers near you I think it may hamper your ability to go TF, but I really don't know, I'm just a beginner compared to people like MB.


----------



## burns375 (Jul 15, 2013)

Why is the cell size so important and how does it prevent or slow down mites...what is the biological mechanism

I actually sat down for the first time and measured some comb I had around with a vernier caliper. Not easy to do accurately. What i didn't realize is how thick the plastic foundations plasticwalls are.. I measured 10 cells where the start and end points are approximately the center of the cell wall. So 10 cells and 10 walls. 

I really need to study comb found in tear-outs next year

Permadent Foundation	Random Yellow Foundation	Kelley Wax Foundation
10 Cells	53.5 54.75 53.5
Assume 
(.2mm) 
comb wall	5.15 5.275 5.15


----------



## Saltybee (Feb 9, 2012)

I am hoping to hear your observations of the effects of your relocating as they come in. Maybe some light on why it is so difficult to transport TF will result from your observations.


----------



## Roland (Dec 14, 2008)

MB wrote:
The genetics of the mites might be just as important. 

Or more so. The genetics of the mite can change faster than the bee.

We have alot of brood comb that is 30-40 years old. How do you account for the change in cell size with age? The cell size you started with 10 years ago is not the same today. Can any of your observations of success with time be correlated with this change?

Your methods are fine an dandy, mites are not that hard to control without chemicals. When you get CCD(with ALL the symptoms) , I bet you will be singing another tune. Enjoy your good life while you can.

Crazy Roland


----------



## Metropropolis (Feb 15, 2012)

Michael,

Thank you.

Do you have a sense of how many beekeepers there are near you, say within a 2 mile radius? 

Known to be many? Virtually none? Possibly a few?

What is your setting? Urban? Acreage-rural? Sparsely populated rural? Way out in the stix?


----------



## Fusion_power (Jan 14, 2005)

I had similar reasons for going treatment free, just a different approach. I treated for the last time in the winter of 2004/2005. I went with both small cell and genetics. My bees have 8 solid years now with minimal intervention on my part. About the only thing I've done is change out several of the original 4.9 combs from the first 2 years with new 4.9 foundation. I still have 3 colonies with large cell and they are surviving and thriving just as well as the small cell bees. My position is that small cell helps, but that genetics make the most difference. Am I right? Is Michael Bush right? I don't know, but I do know that both of us have bees that do not have to be treated for varroa.

Crazy Roland, There is a very good chance that untreated bees might not be as susceptible as yours. I don't make any claims though, because we just don't know the cause of CCD.


----------



## BernhardHeuvel (Mar 13, 2013)

Would love to see much more videos and pictures of you working the no treatment-apiaries, Michael. It is just too far away from me to travel to you, to see how bees are in such no treatment apiaries. Need the help of pictures to visualize it. If it is not too much to ask. Thanks.

Bernhard


----------



## Saltybee (Feb 9, 2012)

BernhardHeuvel said:


> Need the help of pictures to visualize it. Bernhard


It is simple to say small cell is a method. I also believe as Bernhard indicates, it is more like a component. 

MB uses a small box, matches size to bee volume closely, and appears to believe in leaving them alone when possible. Narrow frames makes a denser cluster.

In my visualization, these combine to keep the brood warm with less than typical effort from the bees. Warmer brood is faster brood. A nurse bee generating heat is using up a tremendous amount of it's potential. It is not grooming, it has not moved on to foraging. Little pieces of a puzzle make a picture.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>Why is the cell size so important and how does it prevent or slow down mites...what is the biological mechanism

If I had time I would experiment more on trying to measure the mechanism. My guess is that it’s not just one. Shorter gestation time is one. I see between 19 and 20 day gestation times with small cell. More grooming behavior seems to be set off by reducing their size. Many small cell people have observed more uncapping of brood and more biting of mites. Male survivorship is one issue. There has been at least one study that showed that male Varroa would get stuck in small cell worker cells and couldn’t mate with the females. But Dee’s pseudo drone theory may be one of the main forces. If the mites act more in small cell like they do in cerana (cerana are smaller cells and the natural host of Varroa) and only infest the drones in large numbers, then the damage to the workers is minimized and the Varroa population curve over the year would shift dramatically to more in the spring (as they are more successful in drones) to less in the fall (as the bees cut back on drone rearing in the summer and stop all together in the fall). It would take some work to sort these out and I have not even had time to keep up with my beekeeping, let alone that much research.

>I actually sat down for the first time and measured some comb I had around with a vernier caliper. Not easy to do accurately. What i didn't realize is how thick the plastic foundations plasticwalls are.. I measured 10 cells where the start and end points are approximately the center of the cell wall. So 10 cells and 10 walls. 

Not sure I follow. Unless it’s PermaComb or Honey Super Cell, the walls do not extend all the way up, so the bees build the walls their thickness, which is about .06mm. So you measure across ten cells including the walls. If it’s plastic and the walls are thick, then start to the left of the first wall and end to the left of the last wall (same as center to center).

>I really need to study comb found in tear-outs next year

Excellent plan.

>Permadent Foundation Random Yellow Foundation Kelley Wax Foundation
10 Cells 53.5 54.75 53.5
Assume 
(.2mm) 
comb wall 5.15 5.275 5.15 

But the bees will not draw the cell walls .2mm, they will draw them .06mm, same as natural comb. Cell size is measured across ten cells and cell walls are ignored because they are assumed to all be the same, 0.6mm. Unless they go all the way as in PermaComb or Honey Super Cell.

>I am hoping to hear your observations of the effects of your relocating as they come in. Maybe some light on why it is so difficult to transport TF will result from your observations.

I’m not sure I understand “why it is so difficult to transport TF”? What do you mean?

>We have alot of brood comb that is 30-40 years old. How do you account for the change in cell size with age?

Grout did a lot of research on the topic. His conclusion was that they get somewhat smaller but that the bees chew them out when they fall below some threshold. So with large cell many more cocoons accumulate before that happens and the difference in cell size of old and new comb is more dramatic.

> The cell size you started with 10 years ago is not the same today. 

Correct.

>Can any of your observations of success with time be correlated with this change?

I’m not sure I see success “with time.” Once the bees were down to 4.9mm in the core of the brood nest, it was sufficient to deal with Varroa. That was not “with time”. I wax coated a bunch of PermaComb, put the large cell bees on it and I was there.

>Your methods are fine an dandy, mites are not that hard to control without chemicals. When you get CCD(with ALL the symptoms) , I bet you will be singing another tune. Enjoy your good life while you can.

I am certainly not going to claim that I can’t get CCD, but my guess is it’s caused by wiping out all the microbes which is probably a combination of fungicides (which I can’t control) and antibiotics put in the hive (which I don’t do) and organic acids put in the hive (which I don’t do). I am not expecting to see CCD.

>Do you have a sense of how many beekeepers there are near you, say within a 2 mile radius? 

I don’t know of any but there are definitely feral bees in a 2 mile radius and there are certainly other beekeepers in the general area.

>What is your setting? Urban? Acreage-rural? Sparsely populated rural? Way out in the stix?

I have seven yards right now. Most are on farms. The usual corn, soybeans and alfalfa. My new house, where I have the main yard, is at the edge of a small town. So I have town to my east and corn farming to the North, South and West. My old house, where I had the main yard, was six miles from four different towns, depending on which direction you take. I have had hives in the city, but don’t currently. 

>Would love to see much more videos and pictures of you working the no treatment-apiaries
I wish I could find more time and some way to get pictures. It’s difficult enough to find time just to work the bees and no one at my house has ever taken an interest. So trying to work them and take pictures at the same time has always been a problem. Videos would be a similar problem. Maybe I will get someone who wants to hang out and video for me someday.


----------



## BernhardHeuvel (Mar 13, 2013)

Michael Bush said:


> Maybe I will get someone who wants to hang out and video for me someday.


Found it troublesome myself. Just bought a GoPro Hero cam. It has a chest strap and can be mounted in front of your chest. So you can videotape while you work with both hands free! I will report how it works, but I already know from other beekeepers that it works very well. And you see the view of the beekeeper. Beekeeper's view. FullHD of course.

See this video as an example: (not mine)


----------



## Saltybee (Feb 9, 2012)

I’m not sure I understand “why it is so difficult to transport TF”? What do you mean?

Refering to the reports of buying a TF nuc or a TF queen and not having the same results as the parent location. The questions of do you need to be free of contaminated treated bees? Is it a different mite at the TF location? Is it better forage?


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

Thanks. That looks very intriguing, albeit a bit expensive... but probably worth it.


----------



## philip.devos (Aug 10, 2013)

Consistent with what you covered in your book! Like bees we humans have a lot of beneficial organisms that keep us generally healthy. I hate having to take general antibiotics (sometime it IS necessary), but they make me feel generally yucky.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>Refering to the reports of buying a TF nuc or a TF queen and not having the same results as the parent location. The questions of do you need to be free of contaminated treated bees? Is it a different mite at the TF location? Is it better forage? 

I can speculate. 

I often hear of people who decide to go TF but think cell size doesn't matter. I was treatment free for about 25 years and then Varroa showed up. They all died. Being treatment free did not protect them from Varroa.

Bees drift a lot. If you have a lot of bees with a lot of Varroa around you, this may have an impact. If you put your TF bees in the middle of an apiary being treated, you get a lot of mites from hives that have super mites and wimpy bees, not to mention a lot of those "wimpy" bees move in.

Of course, every location is different and any stress can result in problems of one sort or another. Not all losses are from Varroa, some are from bitter cold weather, a poor fall flow with not enough young bees etc.

Many of the so called "treatment free" bees are actually being treated with essential oils or other "organic" treatments which are propping them up artificially as well as wiping out the microbes before you get them.

Many of the people who now have these treatment free bees are treating them with essential oils or other "organic" treatments which are wiping out the microbes.


----------



## merince (Jul 19, 2011)

Michael Bush,

I did stumble upon your website and posts 5 years ago. I got 2 packages and let them build natural comb. I still have those lines now, 5 years later. I do use foundationless frames to expand the brood nest much to the displeasure of the bee inspector. New foundationless frames need more careful handling until the bees get the chance to attach them properly.

Every once in a while, I will get lured by "efficiency" such as buying foundation, so the bees draw "better" comb, only to end up in disaster. Your methods work very well for me. Thank you!


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

> I still have those lines now, 5 years later.

Someone apparently forgot to tell your bees they were supposed to die in two years from Varroa...

> Just bought a GoPro Hero cam.

I just did too. Now after it gets here, I just have to remember to use it...


----------



## merince (Jul 19, 2011)

Michael Bush said:


> > I still have those lines now, 5 years later.
> 
> Someone apparently forgot to tell your bees they were supposed to die in two years from Varroa...
> 
> ...


:shhhh:, don't tell them, please! 

I would love to see your videos!


----------



## Paul McCarty (Mar 30, 2011)

MB, I like your comparison with the "wimpy" bees moving in to your "stronger" bee hives. It echoes my feelings on the importation of bees from outside a specific region - in particular if the bees in that region appear to be hardy survivors.

My oldest hive is 4 1/2 by the way, still working on getting to the same level as you.


----------



## D Semple (Jun 18, 2010)

Michael Bush said:


> >>Would love to see much more videos and pictures of you working the no treatment-apiaries
> I wish I could find more time and some way to get pictures. It’s difficult enough to find time just to work the bees and no one at my house has ever taken an interest. So trying to work them and take pictures at the same time has always been a problem. Videos would be a similar problem. Maybe I will get someone who wants to hang out and video for me someday.




I can read your books, instead of bee videos how about some recordings of your guitar playing?


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>I can read your books, instead of bee videos how about some recordings of your guitar playing? 

There do seem to be a lot of people interested in such things. I've always viewed the web site as being about bees, so I've never even put a picture of me there unless I was in a bee suit... but maybe I should make another page for such things.


----------



## mountainbeek (Oct 5, 2013)

Michael Bush said:


> *Essential oils: * Kill a broad spectrum of microbes including yeasts, fungus, bacteria and viruses. They are basically the immune system of the plants they are derived from. Essential oils includes thymol, wintergreen, menthol, lemongrass oil, spearmint, peppermint, neem, tea tree etc.


A few years ago Marla Spivak from the University of Minnesota and Michael D. Simone-Finstrom from the North Carolina State University published a paper called, "Increased Resin Collection after Parasite Challenge: A Case of Self-Medication in Honey Bees?" where they found that bees would increase resin collection after being exposed to the harmful, brood attracted, fungal infection of chalk brood, but there was only a slight increase when exposed to American Foul Brood. 

After this paper was published, many questions remain unanswered and more investigation is needed involving self medication. Their thoughts on the mixed results from the paper are that, "_A host of questions still exist concerning resin collection and use by honey bees, as well as resin use across the animal kingdom in general. Its role as a mechanism of social immunity in bees and ants is likely quite complex, involving direct effects against parasites and more indirect effects on individual immunity. The sequestering of resins and secondary plant metabolites appears to be a relatively widespread trait, and many species may utilize these plant defenses as a mechanism of defense against various parasites and predators. While we have some evidence that resin collection by honey bees may be a novel case of pharmacophorous self-medication in an insect, it is possible that this phenomenon is more widespread than previously thought._"

Acebird posted a topic linking to a small article written about the paper and abstract, but didn't receive quite the response. I'm not sure why, perhaps beesource was still in infancy form.

I don't think Mr. Bush is descrediting plant oils all together. There are a lot of medicinal plants that one can plant in their neighborhood like those of the Oglala Sioux tribe or even using pine resin around the hive by harvesting it directly from the tree. 

We as bee keepers should encourage our neighbors to plant more bee friendly plants that provide nectar and pollen throughout the year even those that bloom in winter time. 

With times of drought, there are many drought tolerant medicinal herbs and plants that can be planted on farms with bees in mind that can provide a medicine cabinet for the bees when thinking about ideas to help the plight of the bee keepers in the almond fields or when finalizing a pollinator contract.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

Yes, the bees borrow the immune system of the plants in the form of propolis and then apply it where they think it's needed. This is much different than dosing their food with essential oils (also the immune system of the plants) or evaporating them (like thymol).


----------



## burns375 (Jul 15, 2013)

Thank you very much for you response. Just to clarify I measured draw comb, I had problems accurately measuring the wall thickness. At .06 kelley wax and permadent is 5.29, 8% larger than 4.9mm.

Comb Pic

I wonder how cell size varies across different types of bees. German vs italian, etc. 

How does one identify chewed mites.....are there legs torn off...nearly all the mites I find on my inspection board are already dead, maybe 5% alive


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

The actual cell walls will be drawn by the bees, so what is on the foundation is irrelevant. They will all be about .06mm and we simply ignore that because that is consistent. Cell sizes vary somewhat, but not that much between Caucasian, Carniolan, Italian etc. They are all Apis mellifera.


----------



## MikeTheBeekeeper (May 18, 2011)

I'm wondering just how effective small cell + genetics will be in a migratory operation. 

I have about 40 hives now which I'm planning to introduce small cell to their brood chambers this spring as I make Nucs/splits. I'm also making preparations for making queens out of my best "survivor" (my oldest hive, 3 years old) and setting up a mating yard with a few other hives that made it through the winter strong.

I'm sending my hives to almonds now for February-March and am looking to place them in other crops as I grow my operation later in the year. 

Not sure I can do all that treatment free.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>I'm wondering just how effective small cell + genetics will be in a migratory operation.

I have not attempted it. Les Crowder used to but gave up because of all the spraying.


----------



## Roland (Dec 14, 2008)

Fusionpower wrote:

Crazy Roland, There is a very good chance that untreated bees might not be as susceptible as yours. I don't make any claims though, because we just don't know the cause of CCD.

What??? I do not use any miticides. Maybe you don't know the cause of CCD.

Mr. Bush, it is fairly proven by Hackenburg in around 2007 that CCD is a pathogen. When he irradiated half of a group of bee equipment, and after restocking, only the irradiated hives survived.


Crazy Roland


----------



## Kamon A. Reynolds (Apr 15, 2012)

If it was a pathogen you think they would have found it by now.


----------



## Barry Digman (May 21, 2003)

Roland said:


> Mr. Bush, it is fairly proven by Hackenburg in around 2007 that CCD is a pathogen. When he irradiated half of a group of bee equipment, and after restocking, only the irradiated hives survived.
> Crazy Roland


Well, not exactly:



> WASHINGTON — The devastation of American honeybee colonies is the result of a complex stew of factors, including pesticides, parasites, poor nutrition and a lack of genetic diversity, according to a comprehensive federal study published on Thursday. The problems affect pollination of American agricultural products worth tens of billions of dollars a year.
> http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/03/s...ix-of-factors-in-death-of-honeybees.html?_r=0


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>What??? I do not use any miticides. Maybe you don't know the cause of CCD.

Last I heard, no one knows the cause of CCD.

>Mr. Bush, it is fairly proven by Hackenburg in around 2007 that CCD is a pathogen. When he irradiated half of a group of bee equipment, and after restocking, only the irradiated hives survived.

That certainly seems to point to a pathogen, and yet the scientists have yet to find that pathogen. Maybe it's just that the balance of the microbes is totally messed up by some combination of organic acids, antibiotics and fungicides and irradiating it sets them all back to zero so they can possibly get a balance going again. Or maybe it's more complicated even, than that.


----------



## merince (Jul 19, 2011)

MikeTheBeekeeper said:


> I'm wondering just how effective small cell + genetics will be in a migratory operation.


Looks like there is at least one: Chris Baldwin http://southbeekota.com/RussianBees.html


----------



## MikeTheBeekeeper (May 18, 2011)

merince said:


> Looks like there is at least one: Chris Baldwin http://southbeekota.com/RussianBees.html


Thanks for the link. Too bad he doesn't ship his queens.


----------



## merince (Jul 19, 2011)

I am bummed about it, too. I wanted to add some different lines to my apiary. Still, he is a lot closer to you than to me


----------



## Roland (Dec 14, 2008)

The scientists have figured out CCD, but not in this country. I presented the CCD info from a peer review journal to a State Entomologist, and she refused it. If she acknowledged it, her grant money would disappear. Open your eyes. Hackenburg is still in business, he has found he answer, because his livelihood depends on it. The American researchers livelihoods depends on NOT finding an answer. 

The answer is actually quite simple. Once you have lived with , and conquered CCD, it is all quite logical. Now many other things can cause some of the CCD symptoms, but Hackenberg was right, it is a pathogen.

That is why we sterilize all old supers annually.

Crazy Roland


----------



## wanderyr (Feb 11, 2012)

That's really interesting, Roland. I haven't heard of this before, and I'll start looking into it. Thanks for the heads-up.

-wanderyr


----------



## snl (Nov 20, 2009)

Roland said:


> The answer is actually quite simple. Once you have lived with , and conquered CCD, it is all quite logical. Now many other things can cause some of the CCD symptoms, but Hackenberg was right, it is a pathogen.
> 
> That is why we sterilize all old supers annually. Crazy Roland


What's your method of sterilizing?


----------



## Daniel Y (Sep 12, 2011)

Beter yet, What methods would be adequate to destroy the CCD Pathogen.


----------



## Barry Digman (May 21, 2003)

Roland said:


> Open your eyes. Hackenburg is still in business, he has found he answer, because his livelihood depends on it. The American researchers livelihoods depends on NOT finding an answer...
> ... Now many other things can cause some of the CCD symptoms, but Hackenberg was right, it is a pathogen.



I went to David Hackenberg's website to check out the claim that he had "found the answer". 

If he has, he isn't revealing it on the site.  There's nothing there to indicate that he's found the answer and that it's a single pathogen. Maybe I missed it? 

What I did find was a description of the problem, his statement that the cause _*hasn't*_ been found, and a link to the USDA page which contains much of the latest research indicating that CCD.




> In 2006, Hackenberg Apiaries lost 80% of their hives due to Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD). CCD is a highly unusual hive condition where the adult honey bee population becomes low or non-existent, with a live queen in the hive, and no trace of dead honey bees. The cause of this strange condition has yet to be discovered.
> 
> To learn more about the CCD phenomenon from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, click here. http://www.ars.usda.gov/News/docs.htm?docid=15572
> 
> http://hackenbergapiaries.org/index.php?page=hackenberg-apiaries-bee-education


Perhaps someone has a link to something in which Mr. Hackenberg is claiming that he has, in fact, found the answer to CCD and that it is, in fact, a pathogen?


----------



## oldforte (Jul 17, 2009)

saying CCD is caused by a pathogen is akind to saying the common cold is caused by a bug ....or a pathogen


----------



## Roland (Dec 14, 2008)

Sometimes you have to read between the lines. 

The irradiated hives thrived. What more do you need? 

Crazy Roland


----------



## tsmullins (Feb 17, 2011)

Roland said:


> That is why we sterilize all old supers annually.


What process do you use to sterilize your supers? Would not it be better to swap out the brood boxes and sterilize them as well? 

Thanks
Shane


----------



## Michael Palmer (Dec 29, 2006)

Roland said:


> Hackenburg is still in business, he has found he answer, because his livelihood depends on it.
> 
> The answer is actually quite simple. Once you have lived with , and conquered CCD, it is all quite logical. Now many other things can cause some of the CCD symptoms, but Hackenberg was right, it is a pathogen.


In October, Jeff Pettis said there have been no positive cases of CCD in the last two years. I don't think Hackenburg has conquered anything. CCD has run its course just like so many other maladies in the past. Look back in history and see the incidents of similar colony collapses. The cause for those events was never discovered either, and they, too disappeared.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Here in the U.S., researchers investigating CCD have linked it to IAPV and immune suppression.
I was able to find a sequence in the original IAPV strain (DVE Penn.) that could knock down (Ago2) Honeybee immunity.

That being said, I would agree that CCD has burned itself out, for now.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

Michael Bush said:


> Maybe I will get someone who wants to hang out and video for me someday.


Say the word Mike. Next time you are in upstate NY I got the camera and software to make video. Maybe it could be a "what not to do video".


----------



## Dominic (Jul 12, 2013)

Roland said:


> Sometimes you have to read between the lines.
> 
> The irradiated hives thrived. What more do you need?
> 
> Crazy Roland


German researchers shared the results of a study they did, back in Apimondia in Québec City a few years back, where they ended up realizing that the irradiated hives actually performed worse than the controls. I don't recall what they were originally testing for, but the irradiated hives fared worse to it than the other groups.


----------



## Roland (Dec 14, 2008)

If my memory is correct, not comparable studies. Hackenberg had CCD, I believe the other attributed irradiation damage to the pollen flora , and therefore reduce nutrition, to the poor performance of irradiated hives.

Crazy Roland


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

> I believe the other attributed irradiation damage to the pollen flora , and therefore reduce nutrition, to the poor performance of irradiated hives.

And that would make perfect sense...


----------



## Bob J (Feb 25, 2013)

Great thread and discussion.... Much appreciate you posting your experience and observations Michael....:thumbsup:


----------



## jonathan (Nov 3, 2009)

Michael Palmer said:


> In October, Jeff Pettis said there have been no positive cases of CCD in the last two years.


Hi Michael: Did he say that during a presentation or is it in print somewhere?
If it is in print somewhere it would be a nice quotation to drop into a powerpoint on bee losses I am working on at the moment.


----------



## shinbone (Jul 5, 2011)

Question on cell size:

Is "small cell" the same as "natural cell"?

I have always assumed that "small cell" is when the bees are _forced_ to a smaller-than-naturaul cell size by using small cell foundation, and "natural cell" was where the bees were allowed to build a cell size of their choosing by using no foundation.

If there is a difference between "small cell" and "natural cell", is one preferred over the other to help against varroa?


----------



## Paul McCarty (Mar 30, 2011)

I use natural. Seems to work just great.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>Is "small cell" the same as "natural cell"?

Technically no. But the concept of "why" is similar. "Natural cell" will be smaller than "large cell."

>I have always assumed that "small cell" is when the bees are forced to a smaller-than-naturaul cell size by using small cell foundation

Since I've seen natural comb that was as small as 4.4mm and since small cell is 4.9mm I would say "small cell" forces them to be smaller than "large cell" and bigger than "natural cell."

> and "natural cell" was where the bees were allowed to build a cell size of their choosing by using no foundation.

Of course.

>If there is a difference between "small cell" and "natural cell", is one preferred over the other to help against varroa? 

They both work fine in my experience. The advantage of "natural cell" is less contaminates in the wax and IF a variety of sizes of bees serves some purpose you'll get that too...


----------

