# benign beekeeping?



## LtlWilli (Mar 11, 2008)

While I can say I believe in doing as little outright care as possible so as not to disturb my hives, I must say the bees do reap some definite benefits from being taken care of. They do not starve out during the winter and early spring. They have us to provide assistance with disease and other insect predation. ...I have found, from time to time, the remains of feral colonies that did not make it for reasons we might have prevented.
I will also say that you make a good point about the drawbacks of packing too many hives in a given location. This does lead to competition and conflict. The strongest hive that I ever had was a feral swarm that I captured years ago. They made plenty of honey year after year, until my neglect allowed wax moths to get established in the hive. That's a good example of too little care and poor management. It is embarassing.
LtlWilli


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

Most of the talks I've been giving recently begin with the basic needs of the bees, and then compares the treatment free approaches of Kirk Webster, Dee Lusby, and "the natural model (what the bees would be doing without us).
Everything we do as beekeepers has a cost as well as a benefit. Every gain we make with management (or treatments, for that matter), should be measured against what the bees do without the beekeeper (don't forget, that without a beekeeper, there is no "surplus" honey, as it is never harvested).
Here are some of the slides I've used recently on this topic:


> Dee Lusby:
> Desert Environment
> Unique Genetics
> 90% Genetic Bottleneck
> ...





> Kirk Webster:
> Vermont….Further North
> Aggressive Splitting
> Overwintering Nucs
> ...





> Nature:
> Smaller Colonies
> Foundationless Comb w/ Original Broodnest Intact and “Unexpanded”
> Plenty of drones
> ...


When we are teaching new beekeepers, we first outline the "the bee's needs", then move on to how beekeepers exploit the behavior of bees to redirect their reproductive energy into production of surplus honey. We try not to give a recipe for how to keep bees, but an understanding of what they need and what they are doing....oftentimes one's instinct is to try and stop the bees doing what they are trying to do, when helping them accomplish their goals is often a better option.

deknow


----------



## Goldprospector (May 17, 2012)

I feel that the beekeeper may or may not help the bees. It all depends on the situation. Wild hives are the coveted bees for a lot of beekeepers. So how does it affect the bees when you remove them from a tree or house or where ever after they have been thriving for years?
A fiend got gifted a hive that has been ontouched for 6 years. No manipulation what-so-ever. So it would seem like these bees are genetically gifted. He tried to do splits and other such things to promote the genetics, but he has ended up with two hives with Georgia queens and one that is the original queen. In my opinion, he messes with them too much and may end up killing the hives all together.
Would the hive been fine left as is? Probably so...are they better off in his yard? probably not.

But I have captured a small swarm late in the years that was probably destined to failure...With proper feeding, they turned out to be a prosperous hive.

My ideas are my own, I believe them and have no science to back them up, but I believe that it is over-manipulation, and lack of diverse genetics has been the bee problems in the last several years. I believe too much medication plays a factor in honeybee demise, but does that mean you should not treat them? I don't, but who's to say it is right?

All beekeeping has a learning curve and I would hope that the last twenty years of bees dying would be a lesson for bee keepers.


----------



## Maryland Beekeeper (Nov 1, 2012)

Deknow,

Couple of items in your nature slide I was hoping you could expand upon :

- Smaller colonies - Having watched a ton of videos, (Thankx JP), and done a few myself, I wonder how this conclusion was reached as it has not been my experience.
- No surplus - If surplus is defined as more than they will consume through winter, again, not my experience, I removed several colonies this season that netted honey in the hundreds of #'s. My feeling is that they will pack it away as long as there is space.

Understanding that my experience is strictly anecdotal I am interested in the science.

Cheers,
Drew


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

Maryland Beekeeper said:


> Deknow,
> - Smaller colonies - Having watched a ton of videos, (Thankx JP), and done a few myself, I wonder how this conclusion was reached as it has not been my experience.


If we are to believe the work the Tom Seeley has done, given a choice, a swarm will choose a cavity about the volume of a single 10 frame deep box. In nature, it is very unlikely that this cavity will get any bigger while the bees are in occupation....thus, they will fill the cavity and swarm before they have produced 100lbs of honey....there is no room for it.

Much of this natural habitat (large, hollow trees) don't exist anymore...and instead, bees move into human made structures....which tend to be bigger in volume.....the bees simply don't have a choice in many cases. In a larger cavity, they do build larger colonies, and there may well be honey that is stored for several years.....but this is really because the cavity size they prefer is less available. The goal of a colony is not to live for 3 years or 7 years, it is to reproduce as quickly and as successfully as possible....they prefer a smaller cavity so they can fill it and swarm.

I've done removals in Florida....although you do find large colonies in walls, there are more small colonies in water meter boxes (built into the ground...a bit bigger than a nuc box), and in telephone pedestals (a small cavity in PVC pipe).

We tend to see larger colonies in removal videos because they are more dramatic. It is very (very) common to find empty spray cans of pesticide at the site of a removal (an effort to kill the bees without calling a beekeeper or exterminator).....large colonies tend to survive this, and an expert is called...a small colony is probably more likely to succumb to the spray, and an expert is never called.

deknow


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

many thanks to all for these excellent replies, and i agree with all that has been said here so far.

it's hard not to acknowledge that we put our bees at somewhat of a disadvantage as compared to their feral cousins. but at the same time we do offer some advantages through sound husbandry.

dean, i am absolutely intrigued by your approach to teaching beginners! i wish we had something like your course around here. i have been playing with the idea of teaching intro to beekeeping at our local community college. may i borrow from you?


----------



## Joes_bees (Jul 9, 2012)

I think you touched on one of the biggest things people have done to affect the average bee colony.

Transportation.

Nature has a balance and part of that balance is maintained by the proximity something can travel. Humans have designed all kinds of crazy ways to travel around the world far faster than our legs would ever take us. As we did that, we brought honeybees with us, with the honeybees came with their diseases and pests. As a result we have hives that are coming in contact with diseases and pests from all around the world. Nature never intended to cause that kind of burden on one hive.

non intervention beekeeping has always sounded to me like "We screwed up, Mother Nature, can you fix it?"


----------



## Joes_bees (Jul 9, 2012)

Beekeeping is a compromise between the honeybees and the beekeeper.

I think it is obvious that bees are kept in less than their ideal conditions so we are able to benefit from their hard work.
I think it's important we all keep asking ourselves these questions squarepeg poses so that as we can make beekeeping less of a compromise for the bees and still be fortunate enough to share in the fruits of their labor.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

Joes_bees said:


> non intervention beekeeping has always sounded to me like "We screwed up, Mother Nature, can you fix it?"


Mother nature will fix it but the fix could be extinction followed by something to replace it. The unknown is how long will the replacement take? There are very few beekeepers that are not looking for something in return. In most cases it is not for the bees benefit.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

squarepeg said:


> i am interested in your opinion as to how much or how little man keeping bees in a hive affects the colony.


It affects them in a number of ways of which I will explain a few, and many ways I will not or that we have no knowledge of. It's kind of like quantum theory, if you observe it, you have changed the outcome (this is a simplistic understanding of course).

We decrease reproduction, perhaps slowing adaptation, but certain genetic lines we expand far far beyond what is possible in nature, therefore we influence the genetics of the population.

We prop up many hives that would die normally, leading to more of the above. I don't know if it is true, but I've heard it said that 90% of swarms die their first winter. Swarms we catch, we try to coddle at least through their first winter, significantly increasing that survival rate.

We keep hives in much closer proximity to other hives than found in nature, possibly leading to increased disease spread. Good for adaptation, but not so much if you treat.

We move hives perhaps thousands of miles, which I have found is extremely stressful, leading to dieoffs. On the other hand, if the bees are moved the same places every year, the effect may be minimized.

Hives are routinely requeened. To my eye, if it's been requeened, it's not the same hive. It interrupts any adaptation that might have been achieved with successive generations of the same family line.

That's all I have for now, perhaps I will chime in again later with more.

What's the opposite of benign beekeeping, malignant beekeeping?:lpf:


----------



## Andrew Dewey (Aug 23, 2005)

This thread is starting to feel like we are hearing religious statements as opposed to statements about practical beekeeping.

On my own land I "get" that quality habit and forage are of prime importance. I have a field of wild blueberries somewhere between 5 and 10 acres and I think it important to have it be a healthy place for my bees to visit and good habitat for native pollinators. But (you knew there was a but coming) desiring balance is not the same thing as achieving it. The Blueberry field is slowly being taken over by sweet fern, wild roses, goldenrod, white pine, tamarack and alder. Biannual mowing isn't keeping the field free of these plants. Burning may be an option if I can be assured that it won't cause difficulties for the native pollinators.

At my local club meeting last night more than a few people were singing the praises of roundup. I don't want to go there but obviously I know it is available.

My point is that if I am determined to keep natural succession from happening and the field productive (as a blueberry field), I need to take action. To me it is the same as beekeeping. I like having honey to sell and in this climate if a hive swarms it generally does not have the population necessary to make surplus honey for me to harvest. So I do things - like open up the brood nest - to try and discourage swarming.

I don't think opening the brood nest to prevent swarming is evil although I wouldn't be surprised if some who have contributed to this thread think it is.

I try to be a good steward of my bees. Sometimes that means taking action (medicating) to keep them from dieing. Sometimes it means sliding a box back to provide additional ventilation and another entrance.

I can't think of any beekeepers who enjoy using miticides and other medications on their bees. We'd all like to be completely treatment free - but there is the age old quandary - bees in a hive represent an investment: I can either keep livestock, or I can look at deadstock (and cry.)


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

Andrew Dewey said:


> My point is that if I am determined to keep natural succession from happening and the field productive (as a blueberry field), I need to take action.


Logic would suggest that you wouldn't keep bees. You would mulch up the blueberries and hire someone to bring in bees to pollinate. That is how they are doing it in my area. Blueberries tend to attract bears, another issue with cultivating blueberries and bees.
Also, between the rows they nicely mow so people can come pick the berries easily.


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

In the late 60’s, long before varroa reached the US, Tom Seeley studied new feral bee colonies. As I remember it, he determined that new colonies, the product of feral swarms had about a 25% chance of surviving until the next season. 75% failed….and this was *before* mites! My point is that feral bees live a pretty precarious existence in the best of times..


----------



## Joes_bees (Jul 9, 2012)

Andrew Dewey said:


> This thread is starting to feel like we are hearing religious statements as opposed to statements about practical beekeeping.


We are not talking about a religion, I don't think people are even trying to deem things "evil" in this thread. As far as statements about practical beekeeping I don't think that's the subject either. It's more about comparing "beekeeping" to... bees being bees?

And in case anyone else didn't pick up the (groans) I doubt he wanted to start another treatment vs non-treatment thread.


----------



## LtlWilli (Mar 11, 2008)

That is so true---we do NOT need another pro and con debate. Thus far, I have to say that this has been a most congenial disposition. It is good to read such well-written responses with civil tones being the main discourse coloring. We have all maybe gone past the argumentative state and dwell now upon well stated points thoughout . I applaud your reluctance to argue vigorously.
LtlWilli


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

:applause::applause::applause:


----------



## psfred (Jul 16, 2011)

I see beekeeping as a system of providing the bees conditions conducive to the production of honey and wax while propagating hives I like and not propagating hives I don't.

This requires considerable knowledge of what the bees are doing, why they do it, and of what is required to get them to store honey rather than swarm. 

Obviously the less they are disturbed the better, but it's necessary to both understand how a hive works and reproduces and to intervene when "bad" things are happening (disease, unwanted swarming, etc). I've heard stories of people doing deep inspections several times week all summer, which I think would be rather deleterious to the hive (so say nothing of the risk of squishing a queen!), but never inspecting is also bad, since you are likely to miss something that needs intervention.

Regular checks for space, proper brood production, good health, and hive pests with whatever action is necessary to keep the bees "happy" is what I prescribe -- might be a simple as lifting the top cover to see if the supers are full, might be as much as a full frame by frame inspection if the hive isn't behaving properly. Hard to give an exact schedule, but I left mine pretty much alone this year. I'll need to fix some bad comb next spring (they didn't draw some foundationless frames well, lots of bridge comb as a result) but otherwise no major problems. I'll be removing one frame from one hive because the foundation bulged badly, I've fixed that since all brood frames are now cross-wired. 

I do NOT recommend tossing some bees in a box and waiting to collect honey, though -- "bee having" ain't the same thing as beekeeping, and everyone I know who's tried the "hands off, bees know what they are doing" style of beekeeping in this area has been severely disappointed. It's a real struggle for new hives to get through the summer dearth without help, and hive losses due to starvation are a real problem if the hive doesn't take off really fast in the spring. All that dry weather in July, August, and September (and occasionally into November) results in no stores for winter if one does not feed, and at least two of my friends have quit beekeeping due to starvation losses several years running. Never did persuade them bees can starve on their own....

Peter


----------



## jbeshearse (Oct 7, 2009)

deknow said:


> I've done removals in Florida....although you do find large colonies in walls, there are more small colonies in water meter boxes (built into the ground...a bit bigger than a nuc box), and in telephone pedestals (a small cavity in PVC pipe).
> 
> deknow


My calls for cutouts in NW Florida are usually for medium size colonys. Anything from bees in walls, under trailer floors, etc. I did have three water meter calls this year. Had one in a 12" x 16" x 12" block. All were first year colonys. Did not recieve any calls for colonies that had been present for multiple years. The larger ones were usually underneath a floor (crawlspace, etc) These interestingly enough always seemed to be combs about the length and depth of normal deep frames. Makes me think that Langstroth had his dimensions about right. None had more than about 30 pounds of honey stored, not surplus be total stored.

Also responded to a call where the hive had succumbed to SHB and was being robbed out. We may be seeing a AHB type adjustment in colony size and absconds due to SHB pressure. Also had three open air hives this year, they also seem to be around more often. 

So I tend to agree with deknow, natural hives tend to be small to medium size. But colnies that have been there for years may be larger.

Here are a few examples from this year: http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/sets/72157632017442629/


----------



## Joes_bees (Jul 9, 2012)

Beekeeping takes control of the reproduction aspect of a hive. The most obvious way is by preventing swarms and producing splits at a convenient time for the beekeeper.

Another way the beekeeper does this is by using foundation which promotes worker sized cells and deters drone production. This natural ratio of workers to drones is necessary for a hive that is trying to increase it's presence in the gene pool based on it's success.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Solomon Parker said:


> We move hives perhaps thousands of miles, which I have found is extremely stressful, leading to dieoffs.
> 
> What's the opposite of benign beekeeping, malignant beekeeping?:lpf:


I don't recall ever reading anything you ever wrote about moving bees thousands of miles. When did you do that and what were your observations?

The opposite of benign beekeeping could be benign neglect.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

squarepeg said:


> any thoughts?


One effect of humans keeping bees in beehives is that humans have been able to take honeybees w/ them whenever humans have expanded their territory beyond their original place of residence. And, the tgransportation of those beehives has given you who read this your bees.

Now maybe if you really want to practice benign beekeeping you will simply give me all of your bees. From where I sit, the only way to be a benign beekeeper is to not tend to any bees, don't move them, don't have anymore than one per every ten acres, and keep them up in a tree 10 to 15 feet off of the ground, facing S or SSE, and don't ever work them.


----------



## Lburou (May 13, 2012)

jbeshearse said:


> ...snip...Also responded to a call where the hive had succumbed to SHB and was being robbed out. We may be seeing a AHB type adjustment in colony size and absconds due to SHB pressure...snip..


Wouldn't hives out in the sun have fewer small hive beetles than the natural tree cavity? At least on that count, the bees are better off in a hive and an open apiary.


----------



## buzz abbott (Mar 6, 2012)

About 5 years ago I responded to a craigslist post wherein a man was giving away all his boxes and frames. I brought them home with the intention of one day taking the equipment to the county (I'm in the big city). I stacked the equipment in 4 stacks in my backyard and forgot about them. Several years later I took a look and found that I had bees in all 4 stacks.
At this point I was still not ready to move the equipment to the country and the city did not allow beekeeping, so I just let them 'do their thing'.
Jan 2011 the city passed an ordinance allowing 2 hives. In late spring the city code enforcement guy came around and told me to get those bees registered and legal. So I became a beekeeper. Being required to reduce the number of hives to 2 I gave 2 to my neighbor. We moved 2 of the stacks to his house and I began actually taking care of my 2.
When I opened the hives for the first time, I found some comb that was messed up the the majority was built onto the frames that were in the boxes.
These bees were doing just fine without any help. They have been through some trauma since I intervened, but have bounced back and are again doing fine.
Were they better off before me? I can't say, but do know that before I took a hand in their lives, they had more honey they could keep.
Thus far I have not done anything to or for them other than try to give them the space I think they need. When I did the last mite drop I counted 3.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

sqkcrk said:


> From where I sit, the only way to be a benign beekeeper is to not tend to any bees, don't move them, don't have anymore than one per every ten acres, and keep them up in a tree 10 to 15 feet off of the ground, facing S or SSE, and don't ever work them.


Oh, now Mark what fun is that?


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

Lburou said:


> Wouldn't hives out in the sun have fewer small hive beetles than the natural tree cavity?


I am not sure about that. Because the beetle returns to the ground it may be an advantage having the hive in close proximity to the ground. Could be a negative.


----------



## Daniel Y (Sep 12, 2011)

I begin with the basic premise that comparing bees from an apiary with feral bees is like comparing a dog with a wolf. This difference if it exists would be solely the result of man keeping bees.

The above point does bring into the frame the issue of "Are bees domesticated"? In past conversations that I have seen on this subject directly. It is fairly well argued that they are not. Yet very few beekeepers would hesitate to admit bees do not stand much of a chance of survival if you don't care for them. If domestication is defined as an animals dependance on mans care. then it is hard to argue that bees have not become domesticated. Not all bees any more than all Canine have become domesticated.

In addition I believe that mans intervention has drastically altered the life of the honey bee. and in doing so has impacted the well being of the honey be. IT is very unlikely that man with his intentions has impacted the be in a positive way. We consider excess honey production a good thing. since we think it is good. we also tend to think it is good for the bees. it is not. it is a complete removal and unintentional behavior from what a honey bee should be. It is inefficient which that alone is a radical departure from any other behavior associated with bees.

This and many other differences keeping bees makes are not only significant. they are most likely harmful to the bees. I cannot even begin to make a complete list of impacts. but here are a few. many of which have already been mentioned.

Interruption of the hive. not only frequently or not frequently. but at all ever. This introduces conditions and stresses that the bees are in no way naturally equipped for. In nature colonies that get invaded are killed. It is the result of poor colony location skills and is eliminated by natures selection process.

Limited genetic pool. This one is probably fr more devastating than it is given credit for.

Frequent replacement of queens. Tampering with an already poor genetic pool.

Selection of traits that we consider beneficial, and even worse making the mistake of thinking what we consider beneficial is good for the bees. This then lends to the likelihood that beekeepers will breed their bees straight into the jaws of disaster, eyes wide open, thinking all is well.

I have seen it mentioned in several places that bees will naturally select a cavity roughly the size of a 10 frame deep. In reality bees seldom get to choose optimum anything. In fact always having the optimum woudl be a negative. a huge negative. natural selection thrives on diversity. Colonies that range anywhere from baseball size cavities to small sheds is what makes mother natures way work out. that man is locked into the best way to do anything, always, is one of the primary reasons he impacts everything around him negatively. Nature does not have maximization as a goal. never has. Survival in as many various conditions as possible. and it will try them all. Most will fail.

Nature created the AHB. And we think she got it wrong. nearly completely and utterly wrong.

We on the other hand strive to make puppy dogs of the honey bee. Necessary. yes for our purposes. but int eh process we have caused a lot of damage. we have caused a highly dependent bee. and we cannot like our dogs. pen them in and protect them from an environment they are no longer suitable to survive in. It would be comparable turning your dog loose to run with wolves. But to some degree I think that is exactly what we have done. We breed dogs that must run with wolves. We are seeing the results.

Bees that cannot resist parasites that infest them.
bees that cannot survive diseases that they are subjected to.
Bees that cannot survive winter.
Bees that do not take optimal advantage of their environment.
On the issue of an apiary and colonies that are located to close together. I tend to look at them as a single mega colony with multiple queens. What sort of impact is that having. Sort of like subjecting bees to living in projects. A getto evolves. Still necessary.

I don't think beekeepers should stop keeping bees any more than I think people should stop keeping dogs as pets. But I do think that beekeepers need to be far more clear in just what they are keeping, and what is necessary for it's care. If feeding and treatment are necessary. then that is the result of making dogs out of wolves.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

sqkcrk said:


> I don't recall ever reading anything you ever wrote about moving bees thousands of miles. When did you do that and what were your observations?


I moved six hives from Oregon to Arkansas in 2008. They could not survive temperatures of 0 F, twenty degrees lower than to what they were accustomed. Five of the six died within two years. The sixth is my hive that has survived almost ten years treatment-free with natural succession of queens. It is also the mother to about half my other hives.

That was a case of moving a hive permanently, whereas most commercial beekeepers to my knowledge stay in the same places at the same times of the year.


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

Solomon Parker said:


> I moved six hives from Oregon to Arkansas in 2008. They could not survive temperatures of 0 F, twenty degrees lower than to what they were accustomed. Five of the six died within two years. The sixth is my hive that has survived almost ten years treatment-free with natural succession of queens. It is also the mother to about half my other hives.
> 
> That was a case of moving a hive permanently, whereas most commercial beekeepers to my knowledge stay in the same places at the same times of the year.


I have no idea why your 5 hives died but I suggest there were a myriad of variables involved. What made you decide on temperature as the sole cause of death?


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

jim lyon said:


> I have no idea why your 5 hives died but I suggest there were a myriad of variables involved.


Why don't you come look at my hives and then you can tell me what they died of. 



jim lyon said:


> What made you decide on temperature as the sole cause of death?


Cold starvation. The cluster gets too cold to move and starves on the comb. Plenty of honey, no sign of disease or mites.


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

Solomon Parker said:


> I moved six hives from Oregon to Arkansas in 2008. They could not survive temperatures of 0 F, twenty degrees lower than to what they were accustomed. Five of the six died within two years.


I moved 12 nucs from Arizona to Illinois and they all survived.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

>>Cold starvation. The cluster gets too cold to move and starves on the comb. Plenty of honey, no sign of disease or mites.

As long as the hive is in good shape, I have never had a hive die of starvation with honey in the hive. I have had lots of hive die of starvation within inches of honey but they were destined for death anyway. A good hive doesnt starve with honey in the hive.


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

Sol: You do understand that "cold starvation" is a result and not an actual malady dont you? Its pretty hard to say four years removed from the fact what actually caused the death of your hives. Wait a minute.....something is coming into view in my crystal ball........yes, yes! I see small clusters..... I think their are five of them. They appear to be very small, yes very small clusters, looking closer..... trying to figure out what the problem might have been.......poof! Darn it!!!! It just went black on me. Ah well! Probably varroa.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

I have had hives starve on hard honey also, yet the hive right besides were fine. The difference was the hive that starved on the hard honey had issues, the hive that lived beside them went in looking good


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

Ian, I would put it this way: Good hives don't die. That's perhaps the cornerstone of my philosophy.

Ultimately, it doesn't matter why they die, unless I caused it, therefore I don't waste time on mite counts and such. It's their responsibility to stay alive, mine is to keep from killing them.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

Solomon Parker said:


> Ian, I would put it this way: Good hives don't die. That's perhaps the cornerstone of my philosophy.


yup, 
I always get a kick out of beekeepers claiming hive death to "they starved inches away from the honey!" Unless those hives have been exposed to the depths of winter for weeks on end, they did not starve because they couldnt reach the honey, they were not in shape to winter at all!


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

Ian said:


> yup,
> I always get a kick out of beekeepers claiming hive death to "they starved inches away from the honey!"


The one that always gives me a chuckle.



Solomon Parker said:


> no sign of disease or mites.


----------



## Joes_bees (Jul 9, 2012)

I've always ran 9 frames in my brood chamber, gives me more space to work and I feel like it's less likely I'll squish her majesty.

In this case I'm increasing the bee space from how the hive originally built the comb which I'm sure changes how the brood is heated and cooled.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

I would love to hear an alternate explanation rather than just chuckling.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Daniel Y said:


> Nature created the AHB. And we think she got it wrong. nearly completely and utterly wrong.


Is this two quoted sentences and a third sentence of your authorship?

The first sentence is untrue which makes the second sentence untrue also. So the trhird sentence is incorrect. Nature didn't make the AHB, so Nature didn't get it wrong.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

Mark, can you please explain why the first sentence is untrue?


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

AHB, aka Africanized honeybees were "created" by a retired USDA entomologist in Brazil in 1953. He was on a search for the right kind of bee to use in Brazil, so he gathered bees from all over the World. One of those was the African bee, originally from North of South Africa, (apis scutellata, if I remember correctly). The African bee bred w/ other bees in the area thereby creating Africanized honeybees. Africanized because they were no longer African, but European bees bred w/ African bees, making them Africanized.

Africanized honeybee did not comne about naturally.

That's how I understand it.


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

Solomon Parker said:


> I would love to hear an alternate explanation rather than just chuckling.


Something weakened those hives of that you can be sure and I am aware of no such malady as "cold starvation" syndrome or something on that order. I could sure speculate but that is about all it would be. Post #35 indicates to me that knowing why your hives perished isnt terribly important to you. Am I wrong in that assessment?


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

Ian said:


> A good hive doesnt starve with honey in the hive.


Back when this happened to my second hive I didn't know what the other possibilities could bee. I have seen it explained as a set of circumstances where the bees consume the honey upwards normally. If they eat up far enough and there is no break in the weather where they can break cluster long enough to move the honey from below they starve because they have reached the cover so they can't go up anymore. I would also say that it is late in the winter, maybe early spring where brood is being raised so they can't leave yet their need for food is greater. These conditions will not happen in the south because there are not extended periods of cold weather. Is it a beekeeper mistake? Probably, but what can you do or not do to prevent it?


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

jim lyon said:


> Am I wrong in that assessment?


I generally like to know, but it's not terribly important to me. I just find it funny that no matter the symptoms, the prognosis is always mites. I know what mites look like and I know what a hive full of mites looks like. I know what a hive dying from mites looks like, and I've seen a hive with a profound mite infestation survive. But maybe you can't figure out what's going on because you aren't familiar with treatment-free bees, I don't know. I'm not willing to ascribe the death of a hive to mites when no trace of a mite can be found in that hive.


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

Solomon Parker said:


> They could not survive temperatures of 0 F, twenty degrees lower than to what they were accustomed.





Solomon Parker said:


> no sign of disease or mites.





Solomon Parker said:


> I don't waste time on mite counts and such.


What ‘sign’ are you using to make the statement then? 
I can put Apiguard in a hive with a screened bottom board and slide an uncoated piece of corrugated plastic beneath. A few hours later there will be hundreds of dead mites on the plastic. I return it carefully…and a few days later check again…zero mites.
When I find a deadout it is rare that I see mites on the solid bottom boards. But I know there were mites in that hive. And I know that a parasite as devastating to a bee colony may or may not have been the direct cause of its collapse. But I know with certainty it was a factor. 
Beekeepers, queen breeders and scientists have been working for decades to find a ‘mite resistant’ race. And along comes Sol with a few dozen hives and he’s convinced that he has the holy grail of beekeeping…. hives without mites.
Your hives have mites. Those mites take a toll. Unchecked, your overwintering bees will be especially heavily parasitized…the bees that need to be the most durable to successfully overwinter. Your clusters ultimately become too small and the lost vigor in those few surviving bees isn’t enough.
And disease? What do you mean 'no sign of disease'? You have absolutely no idea.
To paint it as a simple, black and white result of low temperatures is a case of denial.
I suppose chuckle was a poor choice of words.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

Daniel Y said:


> Nature created the AHB. And we think she got it wrong. nearly completely and utterly wrong.


How do you come by that? It's an organism which is incredibly adept at inhabiting and dominating its niche in the ecosystem. If humans hadn't figured out clothes, we'd be similarly confined.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

beemandan said:


> a case of denial.


You would think I hadn't heard all this before. But I have no such luck. I am beset upon at all sides by people much more willing to call me names and insult me rather than make a coherent argument while spouting off some theory that is uninformed as to the facts. I offer my experiences openly and honestly and I speak my mind about the world as I see it. All I have to offer is my experience.




beemandan said:


> I suppose chuckle was a poor choice of words.


It hasn't stopped you yet.


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

Solomon Parker said:


> I generally like to know, but it's not terribly important to me. I just find it funny that no matter the symptoms, the prognosis is always mites. I know what mites look like and I know what a hive full of mites looks like. I know what a hive dying from mites looks like, and I've seen a hive with a profound mite infestation survive. But maybe you can't figure out what's going on because you aren't familiar with treatment-free bees, I don't know. I'm not willing to ascribe the death of a hive to mites when no trace of a mite can be found in that hive.


I only made a joking reference to mites because I knew you wouldnt accept that. My point is I that any guess I would make would be just that....a guess. My only clues are they died in 2008 within 2 years of a move from Oregon, they made it through one winter but not the second and we are sure varroa mites werent a factor even though you dont do any mite counts. Perhaps someone brighter than me can solve this.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

is there any way to establish the presence of mites other than a mite count? i shook out a dink last week that was down to a few hundred bees. an alcohol wash revealed more than one mite per bee! but there were none with deformed wings, and none seen on the bottom board.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

beemandan said:


> Beekeepers, queen breeders and scientists have been working for decades to find a ‘mite resistant’ race.


Your worries are over. You should have gone to the Syracuse convention. The answer is Russians.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

Also, just to clear up one point, they weren't small clusters.

But back on topic. I just try to share my experience and everybody gets all unhinged telling me about my bees.


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

You don't test in any way but you insist that it's not mites or disease? 


Solomon Parker said:


> I am beset upon at all sides by people much more willing to call me names and insult me


This is your coherent rebuttal?


----------



## Joes_bees (Jul 9, 2012)

Solomon Parker said:


> I just try to share my experience and everybody gets all unhinged telling me about my bees.


Seems to be the norm on these forums. As soon as a thread so much as mentions a topic like Treatments, protective gear, screened bottom boards, etc. Everyone has to weigh in on that topic and abandon the original thread.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

Solomon Parker said:


> Also, just to clear up one point, they weren't small clusters.
> 
> But back on topic. I just try to share my experience and everybody gets all unhinged telling me about my bees.


from where i sit, it doesn't look like anyone is challenging your experiences, but rather your conclusion that it was the moving of the bees to blame for their collapse.


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

squarepeg said:


> but there were none with deformed wings, and none seen on the bottom board.


An alcohol wash is as good as it gets, in my opinion.
A lack of DWV is not a vindication of mite infestation. You can, and apparently did, have a serious mite load. The mites may, or may not carry the virus. Also, this time of year, if you have a 'dink' it probably has stopped brood production. Since the bees displaying DWV typically only survive a short time, you may have had some during active brooding but they have since died. 
Dead mites on the bottom board of a failing hive disappear pretty quickly. Scavengers of all sorts collect them. In our part of the country ants and yellow jackets make short work of them.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

many thanks dan, that makes sense.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

beemandan said:


> This is your coherent rebuttal?


What's the point? If you're willing to insult me, there's no point in trying to explain anything to you. It's common decency.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

squarepeg said:


> but rather your conclusion that it was the moving of the bees to blame for their collapse.


They collapsed after I moved them after doing fine untreated for five years. Give me a theory that fits the evidence.


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

Solomon Parker said:


> I would love to hear an alternate explanation rather than just chuckling.


You asked for an opinion….and since I originally used the word chuckle, it seemed like you asked me. So I gave you a coherent opinion.


Solomon Parker said:


> I am beset upon at all sides by people much more willing to call me names and insult me rather than make a coherent argument while spouting off some theory that is uninformed as to the facts.





Solomon Parker said:


> everybody gets all unhinged telling me about my bees.


I only see one person who appears unhinged.
Again, if you don’t want an opinion…..simply, don't ask for one.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

beemandan said:


> Dead mites on the bottom board of a failing hive disappear pretty quickly. Scavengers of all sorts collect them. In our part of the country ants and yellow jackets make short work of them.


This doesn't appear to happen in my neck of the woods. If I didn't dump and kill the live ones in my trays I wouldn't have a good indication of whether the fall is increasing or decreasing. Also, there are no ants or wasps in the dead of winter when the hive dies. I will give Solomon the benefit of doubt that he can tell if mites did his hive in. I could be wrong.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

Solomon Parker said:


> They collapsed after I moved them after doing fine untreated for five years. Give me a theory that fits the evidence.


fair enough. some have been offered already.

but let's suppose these hives happened to have some resistance to varroa, and were never really challenged in their original location. then they were moved, and ended up robbing out other hives collapsing with varroa. in the process of robbing, they picked up a lot of mites, brought them home, and were challenged with a load that even their resistance could not handle.

if you didn't do mite counts, what other method(s) were used to determine the absence of mites?


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

Acebird said:


> Also, there are no ants or wasps in the dead of winter when the hive dies.


As of today, here I see plenty of both. 



Acebird said:


> I will give Solomon the benefit of doubt that he can tell if mites did his hive in. I could be wrong.


Keep in mind, I never said that mites did his hives in. I do strongly believe that mites are part of nearly any collapse and small, sickly winter clusters are typical symptoms. 
At least Ace, it appears that you know you have mites in your hives. And if those hives fail, I hope you will accept that mites contributed to their demise.


----------



## jbeshearse (Oct 7, 2009)

squarepeg said:


> is there any way to establish the presence of mites other than a mite count? i shook out a dink last week that was down to a few hundred bees. an alcohol wash revealed more than one mite per bee! but there were none with deformed wings, and none seen on the bottom board.


Squarepeg

I look at brood patterns. When I see any significant spotting and/or workers uncapping brood it is usually a sign of mite. Then you test for them if you are so inclined. I did not test this fall. When I pulled honey and extracted I noticed spotty patterns. Then when uncapping the honey I had a few drone cells in the comb(I don't use excluders, except during the tupelo bloom) I saw mites on the drone brood I pulled. So I treated with apiguard.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

thanks jb, nice to have another 'clue'.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

beemandan said:


> I hope you will accept that mites contributed to their demise.


That and me putting supers on too fast and taking too much honey on two of my hives. If we have another light winter they might make it otherwise they are toast.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

jbeshearse said:


> Squarepeg
> 
> I look at brood patterns. When I see any significant spotting and/or workers uncapping brood it is usually a sign of mite.


Hmmm, I just learned something today... hygenetic behavior. If you are following a philosophy of no treatments you might want a spotty brood pattern.


----------



## jbeshearse (Oct 7, 2009)

Acebird said:


> Hmmm, I just learned something today... hygenetic behavior. If you are following a philosophy of no treatments you might want a spotty brood pattern.


Ace,

You never really want a spotty brood pattern. But yes, it is a sign of hygienic behavior and pretty much all my hives exhibit it. But I still treat if the mite levels look to be too severely depleting the overall hive populations. In my area a weakened hive will succumb to SHB. 

I have only purchased 4 queens (six if you include the two that came with my original purchase hives) in three years. The balance are from my selected best performers and the cutouts and swarms I collect( mostly cutouts). 

So what do you guys think. A should I just let a hygenic hive that is weakened succumb or treat. You know my answer so answer this for yourself not me


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

looks like sol had to run, hopefully he will share his methods of determining the presence or absence of mites later.

jb, i'm pretty new at this, so this is not from experience, but....

what i think i will do if i encounter that situation, and i probably will, is....

pinch that queen, wait for the brood to emerge, treat for the mites, and requeen from a stronger more resistant colony or bring in a queen bred for resistance.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

Yes I know what your referring to Brian. Like I said long cold spells can prevent the hive from accessing honey. Especially if there is brood present late winter. But I will also tell you that I have not had a single strong wintering colony starve like this. Only the smaller ones. We will sometimes get cold snaps that hover in the -30 degrees C for weeks on end, 5 year ago or so we had a three week streak that our daily highs did not rise above -32 degrees C. That year I was wintering outdoors still and most all of my small hives died, but the larger hives chugged along! 
Most winters there are mild breaks that allow the hives to reorganize 



Acebird said:


> Back when this happened to my second hive I didn't know what the other possibilities could bee. I have seen it explained as a set of circumstances where the bees consume the honey upwards normally. If they eat up far enough and there is no break in the weather where they can break cluster long enough to move the honey from below they starve because they have reached the cover so they can't go up anymore. I would also say that it is late in the winter, maybe early spring where brood is being raised so they can't leave yet their need for food is greater. These conditions will not happen in the south because there are not extended periods of cold weather. Is it a beekeeper mistake? Probably, but what can you do or not do to prevent it?


----------



## Michael Palmer (Dec 29, 2006)

Ian said:


> But I will also tell you that I have not had a single strong wintering colony starve like this. Only the smaller ones.


Same here Ian. Strong colonies don't get stuck on one side of the hive and starve...or "freeze" with honey a frame away. They have a large enough cluster to be in contact with the honey.


----------



## TWall (May 19, 2010)

OK, so what do you, Michael and Ian, consider a strong colony? And, when do you decide that?

Is 8-10 frames of bees late summer/early fall strong? Do you like to see stronger?

Tom


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

TWall said:


> OK, so what do you, Michael and Ian, consider a strong colony? And, when do you decide that?
> 
> Is 8-10 frames of bees late summer/early fall strong? Do you like to see stronger?
> 
> Tom


Tom: If you have a full box of bees in a fairly tight cluster I would say you have a pretty strong hive anything more than that would be a bonus. I would think if they have ample stores and reasonable protection from the elements that they would be a lock to make it through an Ohio winter. I am assuming varroa levels to be fairly low to have come into winter with a cluster that size.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

Whats your thoughts on that?

Its not whether your hives are 10 plus frames or not, thats not the point. Its whether or not you hives have meet your targets strengths.
Ill give you some examples 

I winter in Canada, COLD. Now when I was wintering outside, my target population was 10 frames of bees plus. Anything entering at 10 frames I would consider a sure bet to survive. Now I winter indoors, my target population is 5 frames of bees plus, anything entering at that or above I would consider high chances to make it through. I also winter nucs, I want 3 frames with them. 
I would never be able to winter a nuc entering winter with three frames outdoors here, 

The point is, if the hive is managed to be a certain target strength according to your area's "climatic rules" and the hive misses the target, then something went wrong along the way. That hive entering winter smaller than was expected has a higher chance to die, cold and hungry.





TWall said:


> OK, so what do you, Michael and Ian, consider a strong colony? And, when do you decide that?
> 
> Is 8-10 frames of bees late summer/early fall strong? Do you like to see stronger?
> 
> Tom


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

TWall said:


> OK, so what do you, Michael and Ian, consider a strong colony? And, when do you decide that?
> 
> Is 8-10 frames of bees late summer/early fall strong? Do you like to see stronger?
> 
> Tom


I would say that if you had a double deep hive w/ a colony when the two boxes are tipped forward you could see the bees hanging below the bottomk bars of the bottom deep and then when you removed the cover(s) you coulkd see bees between the frames in the upper deep, that would be a strong colony, in Oct. or Nov.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

>>look at the feral colonies, they are getting by just fine without any intervention......

and related to the point of the topic, 
those ferals had to meet certain targeted strengths and targeted disease control on their own accord. If they didnt measure up in anyway, the good old arm of mother nature would kill them off. Those hives would starve inches away from honey also, but it wasnt starvation that killed them. Thats the only point I was trying to make


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

Sorry to leave you hanging there boys. I went to see a movie.

I don't have any solid proof that those hives didn't die of mites or problems related to mites. That wasn't the point. Nor did I ever say if anyone had been paying attention that I have no mites. The point was that where they were they were fine and when they were moved they died. The isolation argument is irrelevant because they are more isolated here not less. The small cluster argument is irrelevant because they weren't small clusters. But they did die and as far as my methods go, the only response is move on with the living.


----------



## ralittlefield (Apr 25, 2011)

Acebird said:


> Is it a beekeeper mistake? Probably, but what can you do or not do to prevent it?


Adding frames of brood to weaker colonies earlier in the season will help ensure that they have strong clusters in the winter.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Ian said:


> >>look at the feral colonies, they are getting by just fine without any intervention......



Show me the studys. Show me the data. Show me the books. I think there are a lot of assumptions about feral colonies amongst beekeepers. I think it is safe to say that feral colonys exist w/out beekeeper intervention, but to say they exist, or survive, "just fine" w/out intervention may be a stretch. Unless you consider how long a colony continually occupys a cavity in a live state.

What is "just fine'?


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Ian said:


> >>look at the feral colonies, they are getting by just fine without any intervention......


What is "just fine" in relation to "getting by" in the unmanaged environment? I think we may be making assumptions about the state of feral colonies which may not be true. Where are the studys?


----------



## Michael Palmer (Dec 29, 2006)

Solomon Parker said:


> I moved six hives from Oregon to Arkansas in 2008. They could not survive temperatures of 0 F, twenty degrees lower than to what they were accustomed. Five of the six died within two years. .


I don't see how moving your bees from Oregon to Arkansas, killed your bees...within two years. If the move killed them, they would have been dead when you got there...or by the end of their first winter. Did someone say "winter" in Arkansas??

I've seen bees fail because they were moved...didn't winter as well as the colonies not moved. But the rest of the colonies were normal the following spring. 
I could buy it if you moved from Arkansas to Bend, Oregon...in the mountains. Hard to buy into your claim when you say the Arkansas winter killed your bees.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

"Winter in Arkansas" is what you and I would call "the rainy season", Mike.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

jbeshearse said:


> Ace,
> 
> You never really want a spotty brood pattern.


I am not going to take up the argument / discussion. I couldn't do it justice, but I heard Michael Bush say something that made a whole lot of sense to me. Come to think of it everything he says makes a whole lot of sense to me.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

Mike, I'm not making a claim, I'm telling you what happened. It's not my problem if you think you know about weather in two places you've never been.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

Solomon Parker said:


> I'm not willing to ascribe the death of a hive to mites when no trace of a mite can be found in that hive.





Solomon Parker said:


> Nor did I ever say if anyone had been paying attention that I have no mites.


i respect your right to approach mite infestation according to your beliefs. 

we were debating other possibilities for your hives collapsing. did you have mites or not? and how did you determine your mite levels?


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

I've already said what I meant to say Squarepeg. I'm not going to play the quoting out of context game.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

i'm not into playing games sol. the point wasn't 'gotcha'. the point is you have contradicted yourself in your responses to those suggesting other factors were involved in your colonies collapsing.

your were adamant that moving hives kills bees, and you insist that mites did not kill yours, but you have not provided satisfactory answers to the reasonable questions that have been asked of you.

and you don't have to sol. it's not a trial, it's just a forum.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

I will repeat myself again for your benefit. I have mites, everybody does. I don't believe those hives died due to mites because none of the evidence fits, nor do y'all's theories. No, I don't have any evidence other than what I saw.

If those aren't satisfactory answers, whether you like them or not, that's your issue, not mine. I have been open and honest and will continue to be so.

I would love to see some evidence for the assertions that bees can't die of cold. I guess nobody told the Africanized bees.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

thanks sol. and i'll try one more time to ask the question:

what 'evidence' do you have that mites weren't involved if you don't have mite counts?


----------



## Daniel Y (Sep 12, 2011)

16 years living in Kansas, not that far or that different than Arkansas. And 35 years living in Nevada. I can tell you I know both. and it is a huge difference in winter cold. Kansas is bitter in comparison. From what I know about Oregon I don't think humidity would be a lot different. I can't say about Arkansas. no self respecting Jayhawker would step foot there. 

And Square Peg, You can't prove a negative. as in you can't prove you don't have mites. You can't prove something didn't happen. at most you could prove that they did die of something else.


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

If you are suggesting your bees may have been Africanized then you have just made your first good argument on this issue. If not, then perhaps you should just admit that you don't know why your bees died and take the word of many folks with far more experience in wintering bees in cold climates than you. It's no disgrace to admit you may have been in error and to learn from it which would make you like everyone else in the world including me. The nice thing about a forum like this is it forces you to look at things from a perspective that you probably never would have on your own. There are a lot of smart folks on here and a few....well I better leave it at that.  Come on Sol, just don't get all bent out of shape about it, its just a little learning experience and no, there have been no insults or name calling, just me having a little fun and Dan using the word chuckle (heaven forbid). Time to move on?


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

>>I think it is safe to say that feral colonys exist w/out beekeeper intervention, but to say they exist, or survive, "just fine" w/out intervention may be a stretch.

Who measures the success of the feral colony performance, the feral bees or out side looking beekeepers. There are feral bees out there, surviving and reproducing, and according to the laws of nature, they are meeting their minimum requirements and surviving just fine. 

But there is one thing I do not understand, about this whole naturalist management system
Why is it that there are some beekeepers who think we can manage bees in a non management sence,.? 
We as beekeeper control behaviour through out the year to maximize the hive potential to which we make a living. We step aside from the harshness of nature to increase survival and honey production by manipulating growth, feeding during derths, providing comb, and controling diseases. To manage bees we must cover all conditions. If a beekeeper follows all the management steps to achieve their hives maximum honey potential but insists on not following through with disease control, .... whats the point?
You will spend all your time building and working these hives, and then just let mother nature take them before you can pull any benefit off them. 
I kind of understand why you guys dont like chemicals and such but look at the other options out there. 

If you want to go treatment free, you will have to be more in tuned with the colonies disease pressures. You still have to manage disease pressures! otherwise nature will just kill them off anyway


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

squarepeg said:


> what 'evidence' do you have that mites weren't involved if you don't have mite counts?


Read the thread. It's all there. If there's something you are unclear about, then you can ask questions. I'm done with wasting my time retyping exactly the same things I typed yesterday and the day before. Just admit you don't accept what I have to say. It would save all our time.

Here, I'll say it for you. "'I don't accept your visual inspections as evidence.' - Squarepeg" - Sol

Can we move on now?


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

ok, you said it. or rather you said it for me, saying it for you.

i'm kinda dense sometimes sol. 

does anybody accept visual inspections as evidence for the presence or absence of mites?

i'm not into attacking anybody, i'm just trying to learn.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

squarepeg said:


> does anybody accept visual inspections as evidence for the presence or absence of mites?


yes, there are many visual signs of a colony failing because of mites. But to actually know whats going on, testing has to be done


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

thanks ian. several signs of mite infestation have already been mentioned, but you are saying that testing is the only way to be sure?


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

You can walk into a yard, open your tops and look in at a hive. By that you can not tell if you have mites. You can look further, like on the bottom board or entrance, and there you will start seeing signs of viral infections usually directly related to mites. You can look further and pull some frames of brood, there you will see further evidence of viral infections of the young bees emerging, directly related to mites. But if your seeing all that stuff your hive has already crashed.
You need to know your mite levels, and need to know your thresholds. I dont care what you use your thresholds for, whether its for treatment action or anyother type of action. The point is action has to be taken or that hive WILL die if mite levels are over the threshold. 

I wash my bees in alcohol, few bees per hive, and count my % infestation. Spring time threshold is 1% and 3% in fall for my operation


----------



## Daniel Y (Sep 12, 2011)

Square Peg, I think you first attempt went crosswise in asking this question. Not that I see that as your fault. But no I don't consider inspections adequate to even discover mites. That from an over curious first year beekeeper that probably had mite problems since June or so and didn't find them until August. In hind sight I can see that a lowering of honey production in my hive may have been the result of an increase in mites. I was at a loss and not certain it was normal. I realize one of my worst deficits right now is recognizing symptoms in a beehive. Those I do believe exist. But visually seeing a mite is not one of them. I never did see a mite on a bee. I found them on drone brood that I pulled from their cells. Pulling drones pupa will now be a standard part of my hive inspections. I do not have screen bottom boards or stick paper yet. but will have them by spring. I actually want to make bottom boards for may hives that serve multiple functions. Mite counts being just one.


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

Through the summer I just do ether rolls by taking a few bees from about 10 different hives in a yard, a really easy way is to open up some drone brood or even a small patch of worker brood and tap it out on a white surface. If it looks like someone has just been there with a pepper grinder then there is trouble brewing. The only caveat being that if the patch of brood you are using is about the only brood left in the hive it most likely will contain a pretty good number of mites as it is "the only show in town". Having a lot of hives your decision is whether to treat the whole yard or not and not to make individual hive assessments. If I only had a few hives I would monitor each hive via sticky board natural mite drops and use drone brood removal and analysis of that brood or sugar shakes to decide what to do with each hive individually.No need to treat hives that are doing fine on their own.
Visual inspections (just looking closely at bees) mean nothing to me. If I see them there is most likely a BIG problem as my eyes just aren't that sharp and most mites hide on the bee anyway.
A quick "poor mans sticky board" that I have used on occasion is a bunch of Crisco smeared on some freezer paper and placed on the bottom board. It's only good for about one day though as the bees will begin to clean it off pretty quickly. It's also a good idea to look closely if there are any unattended obscure corners of a bottom board that the bees aren't cleaning. Dead mites can occasionally be found there and can be an indication of bigger problems.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

>>Visual inspections (just looking closely at bees) mean nothing to me.

I doubt that, I bet you will use visual inspections to diagnosis a death problem

>>ether rolls 

The thing I like about counting mites in an alcohol wash is that it gives parameters to work in. If the testing falls within a certain reading, you have high limits and low limits to base treatments on or alternative actions on.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

good replies all.

i tend to agree with jim, in the case of sol's hives there's not reliable way to 'know' why they didn't make it.

and to the larger question, and the point of the thread,

my view is that if one assumes that the colony is challenged by the impact of the beekeeper, then the beekeeper is obligated to be 'hands on' in helping the bees out if they get in trouble.

if the colony has dwindled to the point of no return, and if it is because it is from the lack of traits that enable resistance, and if that colony is unlikely to pass it's genetics on anyway....

there's really no point in letting it die. my approach would be to help it out, and change the genetics.

hobbiests and sideliners are in a better position to micromanage colonies in this way. it may not be feasable for those with hundreds or thousands of hives.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

>>hobbiests and sideliners are in a better position to micromanage colonies in this way. it may not be feasable for those with hundreds or thousands of hives.

especially with beekeepers with hundreds or thousands, infact they are already doing such. In my op any hive that doesnt meet my specs will get a new queen, bred from the finest suppliers in the country. 
Do not get the impression that commercial operators do not open their hives, we do, and we do it often. Just on a larger scale, and probably not as intensively as sideliners. But a good beekeeper can tell whats happening in the colony by observing all the outside conditions of hte hive, and making a quick hive inspection


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

interesting ian. so i would assume that a lot of your management time is spent checking out your hives. for efficiency, and assuming no overt signs of a problem, is the alcohol wash on each hive the gold standard?


----------



## Joes_bees (Jul 9, 2012)

Ian said:


> >>I think it is safe to say that feral colonys exist w/out beekeeper intervention, but to say they exist, or survive, "just fine" w/out intervention may be a stretch.
> 
> Who measures the success of the feral colony performance, the feral bees or out side looking beekeepers. There are feral bees out there, surviving and reproducing, and according to the laws of nature, they are meeting their minimum requirements and surviving just fine.


This is a point I wanted to make from the beginning. Except I won't go as far as to say they're meeting their minimum requirements. Many researchers believe they are dying off and succumbing to mites in alarming numbers as well.
So when naturalist use the bee tree as their holy grail of beekeeping, well I don't think that's the answer in and of itself. I do however think there is still room for optimization in hive management by looking at how bees naturally want to live.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

Joes_bees said:


> This is a point I wanted to make from the beginning. Except I won't go as far as to say they're meeting their minimum requirements. Many researchers believe they are dying off and succumbing to mites in alarming numbers as well.
> So when naturalist use the bee tree as their holy grail of beekeeping, well I don't think that's the answer in and of itself. I do however think there is still room for optimization in hive management by looking at how bees naturally want to live.


well said joe and ian.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

I agree totally Joe. I agree totally with your entire statement. 
We as beekeeper have to look at how bees naturally survive to be able to understand how we can keep them in a managed state. In my opinion there is no in between sence of beekeeping. Either the bees are keep "all natural" or they are kept in a "managed" sense. And if managed, the beekeeper must follow through to keep the bees from being subject to the wrath of nature herself. Because that is what managed mean, keeping them in an un natural state, even though it looks like are allowing them to live naturally. 
Otherwise the beekeeper might as well just keep the "all natural".


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

Ian said:


> >>Visual inspections (just looking closely at bees) mean nothing to me.
> 
> I doubt that, I bet you will use visual inspections to diagnosis a death problem
> 
> ...


Yeah you got me there Ian. The point at which I can easily visually diagnose a problem is pretty much the point at which it's game over for the hive. 
With varroa I like to use the old analogy of how you can be a millionaire by doubling a penny each day for a month. You really don't have much money if you quit after 20 days (a shorter season in varroa terms) its the late summer surge that can do you in and it's always right after the "they looked awesome the last time I checked them" inspection that's so fresh in your mind.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

squarepeg said:


> interesting ian. so i would assume that a lot of your management time is spent checking out your hives. for efficiency, and assuming no overt signs of a problem, is the alcohol wash on each hive the gold standard?


yes, every round we work the hives, we expect the yards to be performing at a certain bench mark. We are always measuring the hives, thats what hive management is all about. That is the beekeepers job.
Then we manipulate the hive accordingly so that they all meet that bench mark. But it can drive a man crazy trying to meet the "gold standard"
So I work on averages, I expect certain amount of hive to be meeting a certain benchmark at a given time of the year.  Some are over, some are under. My job as a beekeeper is to keep those averages in check. 
and when you make that comparison between a hobby and commercial, that is actually what your referring to. 
A hobby beekeeper can manage his averages much closer than a commercial can, well feasibly anyway lol


----------



## Joes_bees (Jul 9, 2012)

A great example of the optimization I'm talking about is Mike Palmer's method of creating a sustainable apiary. He creates nucs the time of year when a hive would be swarming. He makes these splits from hives that aren't producing and adds queens from proven genetics that thrive in his region.

Who would have thought creating lots of little colonies before a honey flow would result in more colonies the following year? Nature figured that out a long time ago.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

ha ha ha ha, 
Im just figuring that one out!!! lol


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

fascinating ian.

can you share your benchmarks?

and maybe share how and when in the season you are looking for them?


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

yes, here is one of my pillars for this area, and described simply

3-4 frames of brood third last week of May
2 or 3 frames of feed at minimum
mite counts under 1% infestation

and if those benchmarks are not meet, the hive or operation is managed accordingly
Strength manipulation, queen replacement, feeding, hive treatment and such


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

many thanks ian. and if i may...

strength manipulation - adding frames of brood from stronger hives?
queen replacement - appears straightforward
feeding - i assume before honey supers are placed
treatment - you may have already touched on this, but what is your treatment of choice for mites?


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

another is 5-8 frame of bees entering winter with mite counts under 3%

By using these targets we are able to manage our bees more efficiently and have a better sense of whats ahead. Otherwise how would you read and react to your hives yearly behavior routeens

How do you measure your bees performance on an annual basis squarepeg? How do you what manipulation needs to be done throughout the year? What is it that tells you to work the colony a certain way? Are you a reactive beekeeper or a proactive beekeeper?


----------



## Joes_bees (Jul 9, 2012)

Sorry, watched the sustainable apiary talk recently.

I've had a lot of experience beekeepers tell me a hive that small won't make it through the winter. I've never tried it myself. I'm still trying to wrap my head around that as well.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

squarepeg said:


> many thanks ian. and if i may...
> 
> strength manipulation - adding frames of brood from stronger hives?
> queen replacement - appears straightforward
> ...


I usually dont boost smaller one, in those cases I will requeen and if all else is good they will catch up. I will use stregth from the larger to make up new hives. No use wasting strength resources on failing hives, right?
To replace queens you need to know if your old queens are meeting your expectations, so you need to have targets in place, so that when she fails to meet those targets, you can quickly replace her. 
Feeding is an act of the beekeeper to keep the queen laying to ensure a constant bee emergence as the honeyflow comes on. If the keeper gets his timing right, and keeps the hive going through a derth, a hive can enter into a honey flow with 100000 bees plus and reap an outstanding crop while avoiding the loss of the bees to swarming. So you have to know how much honey to expect to see in the hive through out the year to be able to react positively with feed pails. Feeding hives at the wrong times can decrease your overall performance.
And for treatments, I have been using Apivar. This is a huge area of discussion also. There are so many ways to keep bees using a whole array of different mite control options. Apivar is by far the easiest, but if a beekeeper gets creative, chemical treatments can be avoided


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

good questions ian. i try to be proactive, but sometimes find myself being reactive.

this was my second full season with bees. i had to be careful about moving frames around because i had a afb loss right at the beginning of the season.

most of my colonies were started last fall or this spring. i started with 10, lost one to afb, (my fault for not knowing better to buy old treated hives), lost one to laying workers, (my fault for not getting around to my outyard often enough), and lost one to mites, (my fault for not sampling).

i have learned how to do mite counts and plan on doing them on all of the hives next year.

i have also gained a little experience in recognizing a strong vs. weak colony, and hopefully that will help me be more proactive in the future.

i appreciate your willingness to 'mentor' here.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

Joes_bees said:


> Sorry, watched the sustainable apiary talk recently.
> 
> I've had a lot of experience beekeepers tell me a hive that small won't make it through the winter. I've never tried it myself. I'm still trying to wrap my head around that as well.


I winter indoors, 5-8 framers is about my hive frame count average. 
now if I were wintering outside, Id want 10 frames plus


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

>>most of my colonies were started last fall or this spring. i started with 10, lost one to afb, (my fault for not knowing better to buy old treated hives), lost one to laying workers, (my fault for not getting around to my outyard often enough), and lost one to mites, (my fault for not sampling).

Key words right there, you just told me the diagnosis of your hives failures. You obviously know enough to be able to recognize the issues that took the hives down. Alot of the time these things are out of our control, but how you act on the problems and hopefully in a proactive sense will determine the success of your overall beekeeping year


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

Nature has benchmarks and she measures the performance of hives on an annual basis. Ifthey do not meet her standards, she kills them off.
Same thing with keeping bees, we set our targets, and if they dont meet those targets actions are taken to meet those targets, and ultimately Mother nature decides if we fall within her parameters

So when I chuckle when I hear a beekeeper claim colony loss due to starvation inches away from the honey, Im chuckling because it was not the starvation that killed the colony . . . it was the other factor/s


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

thanks again ian, i guess i was gravitating toward the same conclusion.


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

Joes_bees said:


> Many researchers believe they are dying off and succumbing to mites in alarming numbers as well.


I think it may be just the opposite. Back when mites first devastated managed bee colonies, they also slammed the ferals. I believe that there is an upswing in feral colonies today. I suspect it is the result of improved genetics in managed hives that eventually find their way into feral stock. Add to that the possibility that some of the feral mite populations may be less virulent. I doubt if we will ever see feral populations that rival those of the old days but I do think they are becoming more common.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Solomon Parker said:


> Mike, I'm not making a claim, I'm telling you what happened. It's not my problem if you think you know about weather in two places you've never been.


Another assumption.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

> If you want to go treatment free, you will have to be more in tuned with the colonies disease pressures. You still have to manage disease pressures! otherwise nature will just kill them off anyway


If Nature kills them off, is that not a natural selection process which TFBs would find acceptable?


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Joes_bees said:


> . I do however think there is still room for optimization in hive management by looking at how bees naturally [...] live.



What does "want to" have to do w/ it?


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

sqkcrk said:


> If Nature kills them off, is that not a natural selection process which TFBs would find acceptable?


yes, I see your point, they probably would find that acceptable.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

i get not propagating dinks, but why let the whole hive die, get sick, robbed, load up your good hives and the feral bees with whatever, and let those poor bees die in imaginalbly horrific death....

when all you have to do is take care of the problem and the genetics?


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

What are "dinks"?


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

>>when all you have to do is take care of the problem and the genetics?

to each is there own. All depends on what our beliefs are I guess
but I agree with you, whats the point of it all?

unless your part of this kind of operation,

www.saskatraz.com


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

you've seen them mark. colonies that get way behind the rest, unless all of yours are super-hives.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Below average colonies? Then let's say so, so unhip guys like me can understand. Or should I start w/ der espanol?


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

i think i got 'dinks' from an randy oliver paper, mike palmer uses his to make nucs for his new queens.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Michael Palmer uses that term? I have to spend more time w/ him.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

never heard mike say 'dinks'. i was refering to his use thereof for mating nucs and starter colonies. culling the less productive hives in favor of getting rid of the potentially bad genetics and ushering in hopefully better.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

I c


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

u c d b?


----------



## Michael Palmer (Dec 29, 2006)

Icdbzb


----------



## Michael Palmer (Dec 29, 2006)

squarepeg said:


> i think i got 'dinks' from an randy oliver paper, mike palmer uses his to make nucs for his new queens.


Bob Harrison, Missouri beekeeper on Bee-L uses the term "dink" when referring to weak colonies. 

While I don't use weak colonies, or dinks if you prefer, to make up my mating nucs, I do use "non-productive" colonies to start my regular nucs for wintering. While I still sacrifice these colonies for nuc making, I'm moving toward making all my nucs from over wintered nucs. I think I used about 20 colonies to make somewhere near 100 of the nucs this year, but the rest of the 450+ came from nucs. In 2013, all will be made up from nucleus colonies. My mating nucs are 4 way on mini-combs. These I make up by expanding the winter survivors onto additional mini-combs.


----------



## buzz abbott (Mar 6, 2012)

I have not heard anyone mention powdered sugar rolls to count mites. Could you guys with lots of experience comment on the pros and cons of a sugar roll count?


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

buzz abbott said:


> pros and cons of a sugar roll count?


In my opinion sugar roll 
Pro:
Doesn't kill bees
More significant results than mite drops
Con:
Not as convenient as mite drops
Not as accurate or consistent as alcohol or ether wash.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

Michael Palmer said:


> Bob Harrison, Missouri beekeeper on Bee-L uses the term "dink" when referring to weak colonies.
> 
> While I don't use weak colonies, or dinks if you prefer, to make up my mating nucs, I do use "non-productive" colonies to start my regular nucs for wintering. While I still sacrifice these colonies for nuc making, I'm moving toward making all my nucs from over wintered nucs. I think I used about 20 colonies to make somewhere near 100 of the nucs this year, but the rest of the 450+ came from nucs. In 2013, all will be made up from nucleus colonies. My mating nucs are 4 way on mini-combs. These I make up by expanding the winter survivors onto additional mini-combs.


thanks mike, sorry for not representing it accurately.

are you leaning toward using all nucs for your nucs because you are having less non-productive colonies?

and, what will be your approach to dealing with (if any) non-productive colonies?

i c d bz 2!


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

squarepeg said:


> and let those poor bees die in imaginalbly horrific death....


I have never lived the life of a bee so it is hard for me to imagine how to measure the death from being eaten by a bird, skunk etc. or starvation by being kicked out of the hive which beeing male would be my destiny anyway.


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

Acebird said:


> starvation by being kicked out of the hive which beeing male would be my destiny anyway.


Not necessarily......on the other hand the alternative death is only slightly prettier.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

i think i would rather be eaten by a bird or skunk, unless i were a drone, then i would rather die from mission accomplished!

i don't think bees necessarily 'feel' misery in the way we do. but i choose to try not let them succumb to what is the equivelent of ticks and fleas getting under my cloths, sucking my life's blood, and inoculating me with viruses.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

Michael Palmer said:


> I do use "non-productive" colonies to start my regular nucs for wintering.


Doesn't that propagate more "non-productive" colonies? It makes sense to me that you would switch to over wintered nucs because they would most likely have good survivor genes.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

squarepeg said:


> but i choose to try not let them succumb to what is the equivelent of ticks and fleas getting under my cloths, sucking my life's blood, and inoculating me with viruses.


You don't think that happens every day of your life? AH, because you can't see them...


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

basically the same thing as an alcohol wash



buzz abbott said:


> I have not heard anyone mention powdered sugar rolls to count mites. Could you guys with lots of experience comment on the pros and cons of a sugar roll count?


pros, it gives you parameters to work in
its quick and accurate 
cons, there are no cons,


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

Michael Palmer said:


> I do use "non-productive" colonies to start my regular nucs for wintering. While I still sacrifice these colonies for nuc making, I'm moving toward making all my nucs from over wintered nucs.


I do the same. I will take down a yard or two and make up a couple hundred nucs, then I will make a round and pull all the non-production hives and cut them down into nucs. I will use cells on some and mated queens on others just depending on whats available. 
I average about 4 nucs per hive, alot of work but sure is a good way to make up numbers and a good way to bring in good genetics.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

That would be a factor if breeding from those wintered hives. I can not speak for Michael Palmer, but I hire all my queen work done. I have 4 or 5 queen sources that I pull from every year. 



Acebird said:


> Doesn't that propagate more "non-productive" colonies? It makes sense to me that you would switch to over wintered nucs because they would most likely have good survivor genes.


----------



## Michael Palmer (Dec 29, 2006)

squarepeg said:


> are you leaning toward using all nucs for your nucs because you are having less non-productive colonies?
> 
> and, what will be your approach to dealing with (if any) non-productive colonies?
> 
> i c d bz 2!


Sacrificing non-productive colonies for making nucs means less production colonies to make a future honey crop. The tradeoff is acceptable, when you have no other resources with which to make them. Might as well use what resources you do have in the best way you can. I would rather manage a production colony, boosting it with a nuc in the spring, or set it up with a second queen to boost population and re-queen. Keeps my numbers up for honey production. Now that I have so many nucleus colonies coming out of winter every year, I keep back a hundred, expand them up onto additional combs, and use them to produce all the brood and bees I need for cell building and nuc making.


----------



## Michael Palmer (Dec 29, 2006)

Acebird said:


> Doesn't that propagate more "non-productive" colonies? It makes sense to me that you would switch to over wintered nucs because they would most likely have good survivor genes.


I do get tired of using and hearing the "S" word. It has nothing to do with survivor stocks. All queens and bees are raised from survivors. 

Ace, I raise all my own queens. When I sacrifice a production colony to make nucs, I use the bees and brood, but don't allow them to raise their own queen. I give them all a new queen, caught from my mating nucs a day or two before. I agree, allowing them to raise their own queen could, I guess, select for stocks I don't want. But, the sacrificed colony isn't necessarily non-productice because it has some genetic fault. Could have swarmed and lost its population making it unable to gather mucvh surplus.


----------



## Michael Palmer (Dec 29, 2006)

Ian said:


> I do the same.
> I average about 4 nucs per hive, alot of work but sure is a good way to make up numbers and a good way to bring in good genetics.


I average the same.


----------



## Michael Palmer (Dec 29, 2006)

Ian said:


> I can not speak for Michael Palmer, but I hire all my queen work done. I have 4 or 5 queen sources that I pull from every year.


I hire my yard work help, and do the queen rearing myself...too much fun not to.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

I also slide two nucs together during the flows using an excluder and collect close to 100 lbs of honey off them. Sometimes I think they are bringing in honey faster than my production colonies


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

Michael Palmer said:


> Sacrificing non-productive colonies for making nucs means less production colonies to make a future honey crop. The tradeoff is acceptable, when you have no other resources with which to make them. Might as well use what resources you do have in the best way you can. I would rather manage a production colony, boosting it with a nuc in the spring, or set it up with a second queen to boost population and re-queen. Keeps my numbers up for honey production. Now that I have so many nucleus colonies coming out of winter every year, I keep back a hundred, expand them up onto additional combs, and use them to produce all the brood and bees I need for cell building and nuc making.


i was guessing that you would be requeening those colonies michael, but i did not want to be presumptive again. 

that's more or less the route i have found myself taking, since i have a fixed number of slots in my yards for production colonies. 

so far, overwintering losses have been few. sustaining, or filling in the empty slots, is easier done by splitting my best queens into a 3 frame nuc to start a colony, and using swarm traps.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

squarepeg said:


> and using swarm traps.


how do you use those?


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

the traps are the empty deeps that will go on to hive my new colony. i set a out a few of these traps around the property during swarm season this year. they consisted of an empty deep, with a reduced entrance, and a pack of mann lake's swarm lure inside. 

next year i will have some brood comb to put in as well.

after catching the swarm, a frame of brood from another colony was added to help anchor them to that box.

ended up with four new colonies this way. a couple of them i know were my bees, and a couple that i'm not sure about, but could be ferals.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

Michael Palmer said:


> When I sacrifice a production colony to make nucs, I use the bees and brood, but don't allow them to raise their own queen. I give them all a new queen, caught from my mating nucs a day or two before.


OK it is clear now. I can't see how that is practical for me with 2-3 colonies so it is very unlikely that I will go that route.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>...8. you get the idea
>any thoughts? 

A list of differences from natural:
http://www.bushfarms.com/beesunnatural.htm

As far as ferals surviving (I have always seen a lot of them) and any decline:
http://www.bushfarms.com/beesnaturalcell.htm#feralbees


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

many thanks michael. i thought i had read everything on your site, at least twice.

but i didn't remember your 'things we change from nature' page.

you said it best, and i am with you on:

'I would like to see research on the effects, both good and bad, that all of these changes we have made have on natural balance of the colony of bees and their parasites. '

ps: we seem to have a lot of ferals in my area as well.


----------



## johno (Dec 4, 2011)

Walking around my yard this afternoon temp. about 55 bees were out and about, saw a dying bee on a top cover checked it out and saw a live mite leaving the bee, squashed it then picked up the bee to have a good look at it and found another mite clinging to it sqashed that one too. All my hives have been treated with formic acid . so I guess that I am going to struggle with these critters until I can get sufficient genetic change into my hives.
John


----------



## Daniel Y (Sep 12, 2011)

I don't consider anything about a kept hive natural. I also think that gaining any benefit from pursuing natural methods has a very long way to go. Here is just one tiny example of why

Studies have been conducted on a queens ability to store sperm dependent on just the temperature she is kept at. Queens kept at 34 degrees C where able to store more sperm that those that where kept at 24 degrees C Note larger colonies are able to maintain proper temperatures.

If just one small factor can have an effect. what could the possible effects of a list like Michael has made be doing?


----------



## Tyson Kaiser (Nov 28, 2012)

Daniel Y said:


> I don't think beekeepers should stop keeping bees any more than I think people should stop keeping dogs as pets. But I do think that beekeepers need to be far more clear in just what they are keeping, and what is necessary for it's care. If feeding and treatment are necessary. then that is the result of making dogs out of wolves.


I loved nearly everything you wrote in this post, but especially this. Thank you.


----------

