# Treatment Free forum slow down?



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

My perception is that everything has. Used to be that there were 3+ pages of new posts most mornings. Now...mostly less than 1.


----------



## msl (Sep 6, 2016)

yes
The mite losses (virus) are getting worce, TF is getting harder

2011-2013 according to BIP almost 70% of the 50 hive and under club was TF, 2016-17 its 28% . 
There are a lot less TF beekeepers then there were 
when I started in 09 here in CO it wasn't too hard, people were teaching that a single culling of all the drone comb in a KTBH was all you needed for mite controal, no one made counts, ect
when the BIP started tracking in 2011 CO TF losses were 28.5%. it has climbed almost every year... 2017 was over 60% losses


----------



## Michael Palmer (Dec 29, 2006)

msl said:


> .. 2017 was over 60% losses


60% dead. What % worthless as a production colony?


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Far as the surveys go, a few years ago I think some of the stats were bogus, because of the way the questions were asked. It was what were your losses if you didn't treat, and what were your losses if you did treat.

Issue with that was, nearly all new beekeepers started out making a decision to be treatment free. Only way they would ever consider treating is when they noticed their hive was sick, very sick, and the reality suddenly hit they could lose their bees. So they had a mind change and treated, but too late the hive died. So when they did the survey they answered that they treated, but the bees died.

Now, there's more education out there and less crazy theories. The surveys are being filled in a bit more accurately. There's also a much lower percentage of TF beekeepers, and the ones who are around are more educated, more realistic, and more likely to be successful. Which means less people to suddenly do last minute treatments and skew the overall results.


----------



## ruthiesbees (Aug 27, 2013)

We've just learned not to feed the trolls. Gets tiresome to try and have a conversation when you are constantly having to defend what you are doing.


----------



## msl (Sep 6, 2016)

MP I would guess most, those are the BIP's numbers for the state, not my personal ones. 
Before I started to mange my mites I never got a crop from a 1st year hive(even if installed on drawn comb), and had almost no swarming issues 2nd year. I was using KTBHs so looking back no swarms is very telling as to the health of the bees. 
There is a huge difrance between surviving and thriving, but until you see thriving for yourself you don't know what your missing, at least I didn't


----------



## 1102009 (Jul 31, 2015)

ruthiesbees said:


> We've just learned not to feed the trolls. Gets tiresome to try and have a conversation when you are constantly having to defend what you are doing.


+1


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

ruthiesbees said:


> We've just learned not to feed the trolls. Gets tiresome to try and have a conversation when you are constantly having to defend what you are doing.


That street runs both ways. It stuns me sometimes how blind people can be to anyone’s view but their own. 
A moderator recently created an entirely new thread in an effort to move a treatment free troll from a thread on lithium as a mite treatment.


----------



## shinbone (Jul 5, 2011)

ruthiesbees said:


> We've just learned not to feed the trolls. Gets tiresome to try and have a conversation when you are constantly having to defend what you are doing.


I am surprised to hear this because I thought the Treatment Free forum is moderated specifically to keep out such trolls.


----------



## Buzz-kill (Aug 23, 2017)

shinbone said:


> I am surprised to hear this because I thought the Treatment Free forum is moderated specifically to keep out such trolls.


You have to be kidding with this!


----------



## shinbone (Jul 5, 2011)

Buzz-kill said:


> You have to be kidding with this!


The TF forum unique rules state:

"_Any post advocating the use of treatments, according to the forum definition of treatment will be considered off topic and shall be moved to another forum or deleted by a moderator, _*unless it is employed as part of a plan in becoming treatment free." *(see Post #2 by Barry; http://www.beesource.com/forums/showthread.php?253066-Unique-Forum-Rules)

From the little time I spend on the TF forum, it appeared to me this rule is actively enforced.

Is the TF forum now unmoderated? Rules change? Moderators have slacked off? Something else?


----------



## rwurster (Oct 30, 2010)

shinbone said:


> I am surprised to hear this because I thought the Treatment Free forum is moderated specifically to keep out such trolls.


But the TF trolls are free to do as they wish where ever they wish


----------



## Buzz-kill (Aug 23, 2017)

rwurster said:


> But the TF trolls are free to do as they wish where ever they wish


Oh yes the treatment folks are sooooo put upon. They are constantly accused of laziness, irresponsibility, unscientific fantasy thinking, and total lack of moral rectitude.


----------



## rwurster (Oct 30, 2010)

Buzz-kill said:


> Oh yes the treatment folks are sooooo put upon. They are constantly accused of laziness, irresponsibility, unscientific fantasy thinking, and total lack of moral rectitude.


You forgot claiming to have open minds yet chastising others for using treatments, pushing their own TF agenda on others in unrelated threads, how others should be breeding, and a total lack of moral rectitude.


----------



## shinbone (Jul 5, 2011)

Would anyone who feels the TF forum has slowed down due to harranguing by the Treatment people please kindly link to, or cut-and-paste some examples of such posts from the TF forum? I looked through the forum and I didn't see any examples.


----------



## rwurster (Oct 30, 2010)

Sol's TF forums must be hopping 

I think the general slow down is due to FB Beekeeping groups. They get more or less instant responses there. As far as searching a topic there though, have fun.


----------



## gww (Feb 14, 2015)

I could show a bunch of post from all sides taking every position mentioned so far. I don't think that is why there might be a slowdown though. I figure on open forums people will have differring views and experiances and so I just argue mine when I feel like it and let others argue thiers. It could just be winter and the game is about to start and people are resting up for the next round. I doubt the ones with strong feelings are going to be run off and those feelings are showing pretty good so far on this thread.
Something interesting will be discussed again and will draw lots of interest and there will be no slow down when it happens. I also notice the site drys up at 10:30pm lots of times and also some weekends are slow on the forum compared to most week days. Show that regaurdless of all the differrences, people do quite a bit of the same things in life.
Cheers
gww


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

rwurster said:


> I think the general slow down is due to FB Beekeeping groups. They get more or less instant responses there. As far as searching a topic there though, have fun.


I'm sure that's a part of it, TF facebook and other forums did not used to be available, but now they are, so people can pick and choose where to go. On the other hand there are a heckuva lot of TF or near TF people have been kicked off Sol's facebook page for various infractions, real or imagined.

What I don't get though, is why the reduction of activity on the rest of Beesource. I know when Barry sold it there was a bit of complaining but personally for me anyway, I didn't see any difference in the site or any resaon to stop using it. I heard from some of the commercial guys they have left Beesource for a commercial beekeepers facebook page, but commercial beekeepers were only a small portion of posts anyway.

But me, I don't like the facebook format. Not as searchable or useful as a Beesource type format.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

View attachment 37447


this shows up at the bottom of the 'forum' page and the screenshot was taken just before posting.

'guests' typically outnumber 'members' by about 10:1

'views' typically outnumber 'replies' by even more.

my '2015-2018 experience' thread continues to average between 200-300 views per day:

http://www.beesource.com/forums/showthread.php?306377-squarepeg-2015-2018-treatment-free-experience

i'd rather have more quality as opposed to more quantity.

meat and potatoes, right ot?


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Ha, you have a great memory Squarepeg


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

That was an inside joke for those who didn't catch it.



squarepeg said:


> yep. i'm for more meat and potatoes and less garnish.


----------



## Dan the bee guy (Jun 18, 2015)

I would like to be treatment free but if I want live bees in the spring I have to kill mites somehow. The treatment free forum doesn't have anything in it that will keep my bees alive so the only way I go there is by accident.


----------



## rwurster (Oct 30, 2010)

squarepeg said:


> i'd rather have more quality as opposed to more quantity.


I noticed the dramatic slowdown when I came back. I don't see how the slowdown equates to more quality in any way, looks like the same ol' same ol' with a few hidden gems, as usual - just slower. And a much diminished commercial presence. I always liked a commercial point of view to beekeeping questions.

When I saw "Copyright © 2018 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved." was when I realized I hadn't seen any posts by Barry. If it weren't for that, I probably would have never realized Barry wasnt still running BS.


----------



## shinbone (Jul 5, 2011)

To me, it seems like the TF forum has slowed down much more than the general Bee Forum.

As of the time of this Reply, the last post in the TF was 4 days ago. Except for the stickied threads, there have been posting gaps as long as 2-1/2 weeks in the recent past. I seem to recall seeing a higher posting rate a few years ago.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

rwurster, when verticalscope took ownership they made it clear to the moderating team that this was 'our' community and actually look to us for suggestions as opposed to dictate how we are supposed to do things.

shinbone, i don't facebook but i can see where it might be more desirable for the hardline treatment free camp that doesn't want to consider anything else as well as the dedicated commercials who don't want to be encumbered by us small timers pestering them with our input to take their business there.

bottom line, i think anybody would be hard pressed to find an open access english speaking web based beekeeping forum as far reaching and successful as this one.

the pendulum swings.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

squarepeg said:


> bottom line, i think anybody would be hard pressed to find an open access english speaking web based beekeeping forum as far reaching and successful as this one.


Correct. This is the best bee chat site in the world. 

Sure there's bickering between factions, but that happens in any large group, should see the aquarium chat site I used to be in . Take what you need and get over the rest, first world problem.


----------



## shinbone (Jul 5, 2011)

squarepeg said:


> bottom line, i think anybody would be hard pressed to find an open access english speaking web based beekeeping forum as far reaching and successful as this one.


I agree 100%. 

And, my original question wasn’t meant to suggest there is a problem with Beesource. On the contrary, I think Beesource is doing as well as it always has, which is to say it is doing great.

It seems that people generally agree there has been a slowdown in the TF forum. And, it seems there is disagreement as to why. I wonder if the answer is simply that fewer people are practicing treatment free beekeeping?


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

i made the comment some time back that those of us managing off treatments represent a small minority of the membership here and for that i received pushback from folks on both sides of the approach.

going back to that forum page, the number of people viewing at any given time ranges from about 400-700 depending on the time of day. the number of those viewing who are looking at the treatment free subforum is usually less than 10.

there are a few in the tf subforum who have sticky threads that were updating fairly regularly but haven't posted in a while. i reached out to a couple of them via private message and was told that life had them duly occupied and they just didn't have time to post.

as gww points out it's the slow time of the year at least for those of us in the northern hemisphere so it may be that there's just not much to report at the moment.

this thread is a good example of that. here we are talking about talking instead of about beekeeping.


----------



## gww (Feb 14, 2015)

Shinbone


> It seems that people generally agree there has been a slowdown in the TF forum. And, it seems there is disagreement as to why. I wonder if the answer is simply that fewer people are practicing treatment free beekeeping?


All I know is that I saw four new members join the site this year that said they had been keeping bees for 3 to 4 years with out treatment before they joined. I don't think there is that much of a slow down on keepers and that there are more then join here. Some that were treatment free may now treat and some don't. New ones may join tomorrow.
It has been going on too long for it to go away. Plus, some areas and honestly probly the attitudes in some places are more conducent to keeping bees that way.

I don't, not treat, cause I am a purist but more just saw what others did around me and thought I would go ahead and see what happened. I am sure there are other places like that and people like me. I do believe the horror stories of those that have tried it where they are and had bad losses. Heck, I might someday have bad losses. Of course you have a calafornia thread now talking about bad losses and some of them were treating. 

I just think sometimes there is more to talk about then other times. An interesting thing will pop up and the tf forum will be popping. 

I missed the last post in a thread that I was participating in cause I went for a weekend to paint my daughters new house. 

I don't know who participates where cause I usually get to where I am going from the "new post" tab. It could be tf or top bar or commercial and I wouldn't even notice till I get yelled at for breaking some rule cause I didn't know where I was. I do only look at what interest me when I am in a hurry though.
Cheers
gww


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

gww said:


> It has been going on too long for it to go away.


It will not go away, and in fact any rational person should hope that TF beekeeping will at some future point be the norm.

I think the reason for the decrease in numbers of TF beekeepers is simply that nowadays, there are less new beekeepers starting up attempting TF, when they have near zero chance of success due to bee type and location (ie, package bees, in a location where noone is TF and there are no surviving ferals). Good information is coming from within the TF community itself, to guide these people on the right path, or even tell them not to bother it won't work in their particular circumstances. But the remaining TF beekeepers are tending to be more knowledgeable and competent than their forbears of 10 years ago. 

I don't see the lower number of TF beekeepers as any kind of threat to the continuance of TF beekeeping, rather, less of the people trying it but not understanding it and mostly doomed to failure.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>Would anyone who feels the TF forum has slowed down due to harranguing by the Treatment people please kindly link to, or cut-and-paste some examples of such posts from the TF forum? I looked through the forum and I didn't see any examples.

Here are a few name calling incidents against treatment free beekeepers in the treatment free forum (there are many more in other forums)

http://www.beesource.com/forums/showthread.php?317280-Small-Cell-Mite-Counts&p=1322887#post1322887
>..."rainbow and unicorn" claims of the vociferous advocates of small cell ...

http://www.beesource.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-294414.html
>I very much doubt that a forum devoted to the Gospel of Bispham will yield productive results.

http://www.beesource.com/forums/showthread.php?323262-About-To-Give-UP-TF&p=1402297#post1402297
>Part of the cult mentality to create an "enemy". In the oft-repeated TF catechism, "commercials" are evil.
>...to breed a magic bee.

http://www.beesource.com/forums/showthread.php?324874-TF-Queens&p=1415803#post1415803
"Like many internet fables, this advice takes on a life of its own."

http://www.beesource.com/forums/sho...undationless-experiment&p=1446072#post1446072
"...the small cell fantasy thing, all the "fairy dust"."

http://www.beesource.com/forums/sho...eatment-Free-Beekeeping&p=1463434#post1463434
"In my opinion, this thread illustrates everything that is *wrong* with TF partisans." 

http://www.beesource.com/forums/sho...-them-alone-beekeeping!&p=1481449#post1481449
In a world where the spigot-based flow hive can raise 15 million dollars in a weekend and get world-wide press coverage (abetted by the TF'er favorite Circus Barker); I will say the ship has already sailed....
The mind share among the Marie-Antoinette style hobby farmers is for "let bees be", and no amount of fulminating will change that until the circus barkers are honest about their losses from their "method".

A summary of the insulting terms:
"rainbow and unicorn" claims
vociferous advocates...
The Gospel of Bispham...
cult mentality
TF catechism
magic bee
internet fables...
Fairy dust
TF partisans
Circus Barker
Marie-Antoinett style...

Insults get very tiresome. These are limited to the ones in the treatment free forum... most of the insults have moved elsewhere now.


----------



## shinbone (Jul 5, 2011)

Michael - Thanks for the follow-up to my question.


----------



## fieldsofnaturalhoney (Feb 29, 2012)

Michael, that's all you could come up with:lpf: I haven't really noticed any, Perhaps it is because "we" are told to learn how to keep bees on treatments first


----------



## gww (Feb 14, 2015)

fieldsof........


> Michael, that's all you could come up with:lpf: I haven't really noticed any, Perhaps it is because "we" are told to learn how to keep bees on treatments first


"we"?
Cheers
gww


----------



## Nordak (Jun 17, 2016)

Me personally, I got busy with life. Happy to report my bees are just fine and I'm sure that's the case with many others. Hoping to be more active on the forums this year if time allows. There's trolling on all forums, it's an inevitable part of being a member of an online community unfortunately. There are some people who love a good (or otherwise) argument. I think the slow down is due to the fact that if anything, things on that end have really settled down. It's not the wild west forum it once was based on past posts I've seen.


----------



## 1102009 (Jul 31, 2015)

guys, give it a break 

I got a pm recently telling me I´m insulting and perhaps people see me as a troll sometimes. I´m sorry.
It was never my intention, it´s just that I´m a passionate person and a notorious poster 

crofter once posted:


> People really have very different inclinations about how they perceive and weigh reality as it presents itself. They often clash, but the net result is the amazing adaptability of our species. I think we all like to feel confirmation for our ideas and actions but the dependency on it varies person to person.


We all like to have the confirmation, don´t we?


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

Looks to me like JWChesnut has single handedly driven practically everybody from the tf forum. His last listed post was 2016. 
Other than the Mike Bisham thing....and I think that was the time he was trying to get Barry to give him his own forum....which, in my opinion, was universally viewed (both tr and conventional) as ridiculous.


----------



## Nordak (Jun 17, 2016)

> crofter once posted:
> People really have very different inclinations about how they perceive and weigh reality as it presents itself. They often clash, but the net result is the amazing adaptability of our species. I think we all like to feel confirmation for our ideas and actions but the dependency on it varies person to person.


Crofter is quite the wordsmith. I always had a high level of respect for him. Awesome quote.


----------



## Andrew Dewey (Aug 23, 2005)

I've gone almost exclusively FB. Once upon a time I tried TF extensively, and posted frequently in that forum. I still visit to read on occasion. Mostly though I log on to see if there is any activity here. At some point, it will be time to turn the lights off. The first several BBS I connected to are long gone. How we communicate changes. So it goes.


----------



## dudelt (Mar 18, 2013)

I feel the slowdown is not only the TF forum. The other forums seem rather quiet as well. However, I also don't think it is just this forum. We have a Washington State beekeepers forum too and it is very slow as well. And that really surprises me. When you see how many local people are buying packages and nucs, you realize that there are a lot of beekeepers out there that are not participating. Perhaps, as was stated earlier, they are just reading but not posting. Most of the questions have already been asked a 100 different times and perhaps people are getting better at searching than they used to be.


----------



## shinbone (Jul 5, 2011)

Andrew Dewey said:


> I've gone almost exclusively FB.


I am curious - what is the appeal of Face Book over a traditional chat forum like Beesource?

For me, the linear arrangement of Face Book comments makes it hard to follow any thing more than an immediate conversation. There's no ability to follow anything long term like over a few hours, days, or weeks. Maybe there is an advantage to that?


----------



## gww (Feb 14, 2015)

I don't even know how to get on face book and probly will never try and learn. It was a big step for me to even ever join a forum and I trolled this one for a year before joining. I did find this format to be real helpful for doing new things and was part of a solar one when I was installing a system and a forrest one when i was building a sawmill (to build bee hives for free). These places seemed to be the best and quickest to learn things that I knew nothing about. They have helped me. I am normaly a anti-social type personality and now forums take up a lot of time and have almost replaced any tv I might watch. I would rather enjoy my working better then my interactions here but have found that some of that work was helped by suggestions here and some was stopped by time spent here.

I personally like (with in reason) all the strong views here. I have never listened to anyone and always have to learn the hard way by making my own mind up and all the back and forth gives me things to chose from to decide for myself what to try. Half of the battle of places like this is having a tallent of deciding what on here will help my personal situation and which sends you down rabbit holes. It is a tallent fitting knowlage that is out there to what is real for yourself.

With out people defending thier positions, not enough effort is put in to learn anything new that might be usefull. I like those that type in the why they have thier position more then those, my way or the highway post that leave you basically relieing on only trust. The only exception to this are those few out there that you see others reflecting respect to that track record makes them not have to defend as hard.

Like all places that deal with people, you have to sift the wheat from the chaff.
Cheers
gww
Ps shinbone, I agree with your thoughts right before this post. I don't see where a chat room is better either. The only time I could see chat maby being better is if you had a real personal relationship and trust with the one person you were chatting with but if that close, might as well use a phone and hear the inflection in the voice that goes with the words.


----------



## shinbone (Jul 5, 2011)

gww said:


> With out people defending thier positions, not enough effort is put in to learn anything new that might be usefull. I like those that type in the why they have thier position more then those, my way or the highway post that leave you basically relieing on only trust. The only exception to this are those few out there that you see others reflecting respect to that track record makes them not have to defend as hard.


 I am in 100% agreement with this. 

And, like anything, taking it to an extreme is bad, like too much defending required because of too much attacking.


----------



## msl (Sep 6, 2016)

> There's no ability to follow anything long term like over a few hours, days, or weeks. Maybe there is an advantage to that?


if you run the group, yes
Social media reinforces peoples confirmation bias and makes them more narrow minded, plenty of studys on it
Great to promote your cause, but not to debate the truth or share data .... I had a friend add me to a flat earth FB group... what a great laugh... but scary...
there is a handfull of theses groups at almost 200k followers spiting out hundreds of posts a day each


----------



## gww (Feb 14, 2015)

msl


> Great to promote your cause, but not to debate the truth or share data .... I had a friend add me to a flat earth FB group... what a great laugh... but scary...
> there is a handfull of theses groups at almost 200k followers spiting out hundreds of posts a day each


I wonder how many are out there that say the holocaust is a PR stunt and the moon landing was just a movie shot on earth?

I think the forum is more open and the participant has more to chose from then just one side and practicing being a good chooser is the ticket to success.
Cheers
gww.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

msl said:


> Social media reinforces peoples confirmation bias and makes them more narrow minded, plenty of studys on it
> Great to promote your cause, but not to debate the truth or share data ...


Certainly from what I've seen, that is very true.

On social media people become tribal. New people who don't even have bees yet will sometimes find certain people whose views match their own pre formed ones, and sign up to that tribe. Then they all support each other no matter what. Bad behavior is tolerated or even supported if it comes from a member of the persons own tribe. If the person has an experience that contradicts the commonly held wisdom of the tribe, they will not say so, because that would be letting down the team.


----------



## shinbone (Jul 5, 2011)

Oldtimer said:


> On social media people become tribal. New people who don't even have bees yet will sometimes find certain people whose views match their own pre formed ones, and sign up to that tribe. Then they all support each other no matter what. Bad behavior is tolerated or even supported if it comes from a member of the persons own tribe. If the person has an experience that contradicts the commonly held wisdom of the tribe, they will not say so, because that would be letting down the team.


And an "outsider" who questions the wisdom passed down by the tribal elders is attacked without a second's thought.

Unfortunately, such tribalism is a common aspect of human nature. By which I mean such progress-thwarting behavior is not unique to any one group.


----------



## msl (Sep 6, 2016)

_ If the person has an experience that contradicts the commonly held wisdom of the tribe, they will not say so, because that would be letting down the team._
Yes, an that may why we see a bit calmer fourm these days
actions like this


squarepeg said:


> healthy skepticism is also welcome here so long as the guidelines outlined in the unique forum rules stickied on the treatment free subforum page are observed.


have caused a shift.
So when some one posts something a bit far fetched, its not the trolls holding up a red flag, its some of the tribe. 
like wize when "someone" wrote a thread about mite counts and use of chemicals as needed to save colasping hives so that the new TF beekeeper is just buying new queens with better genetics come spring may be a preferably path to TF then letting the hive die and buying new packages... not only wasn't it locked, it ended up stickied 
if you shine enuff daylight on a subject the riffraff on both sides of the debate goes looking for shade, and we can get back to facts, results, theroys and studys ...and there are less of those then opinions.... more so If you challenge peoples numbers/facts/research your not challenging there belief structure, and the debate tends to be calmer, as does peoples posting rate


----------



## Andrew Dewey (Aug 23, 2005)

shinbone said:


> I am curious - what is the appeal of Face Book over a traditional chat forum like Beesource?


It is a dream to administer. I have a private group for my classes where I can post files and exchange links to web sites with students. And answer questions.

I am also administrator of a much larger public group, "Keeping Bees in Maine." I try to post interesting things that I come across on the net and members post pictures and videos of their hives. Sometimes looking for critique, sometimes just to show off. We did an FAQ this weekend. I'm on a Master Beekeeper program kick at the moment, posting each day links to different MB programs. Today I did Florida. I get a few likes on my posts, enough for me to know that people read the posts, or at least acknowledge that they have been posted.

Speaking of likes, I wished for years we had that feature here!

I like the single platform for both my personal communications (big with me right now are the Patriots (great game last night - Congratulation Eagles) and Peace Corps, as my two kids are volunteers) On Facebook I have access to a variety of opinions - some open, some not so. I got run off from a Warre group for questioning what might well have been the prime directive. I still have my Warre hive which I need to restock in the spring. (It blew over this winter)

I find it much easier to use than BeeSource.

I occasionally miss Rader and his ability to find just about anything, but most of the time when my attention span for a thread is done just about when people stop commenting on it.

It is, perhaps only for the moment, free. The long lasting nature of posts and requests for personal information are concerns.


----------



## psm1212 (Feb 9, 2016)

Oldtimer said:


> Certainly from what I've seen, that is very true.
> 
> On social media people become tribal. New people who don't even have bees yet will sometimes find certain people whose views match their own pre formed ones, and sign up to that tribe. Then they all support each other no matter what. Bad behavior is tolerated or even supported if it comes from a member of the persons own tribe. If the person has an experience that contradicts the commonly held wisdom of the tribe, they will not say so, because that would be letting down the team.


Technology meets Lord of the Flies.


----------



## Andrew Dewey (Aug 23, 2005)

Ah, you folks realize BeeSource is social media too?


----------



## shinbone (Jul 5, 2011)

Andrew Dewey said:


> Ah, you folks realize BeeSource is social media too?


I think that is exactly the point.


----------



## enjambres (Jun 30, 2013)

Did I miss something very important? Andrew mentioned he missed Rader(Sidetrack)'s amazing ability to find stuff here.

Has RS left BS, or did something happen to him? I really hope it's not the latter! He was always so helpful and could connect you to the perfect thread, no matter how odd your question.

Nancy


----------



## gww (Feb 14, 2015)

Nancy
Andrew was saying he was hanging somewhere else and rader wasn't there. Rader is still here thank god.
Cheers
gww


----------



## shinbone (Jul 5, 2011)

Rader’s funeral is next week. All of Beesource is invited but don’t throw tomatoes.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

That was pretty funny Psm1212, all the more so because it is also true .


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

I'm not dead yet.


----------



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

facebook is better and more informative. chat doesn't work for most, and the majority of the successful beekeepers aren't on here. this is a place i hit up when bee season is slower than honey in febuary


----------



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

Radar better not be gone he is a busy bee on here


----------



## Richinbama (Jan 15, 2018)

Him guys, I'm a newbee myself. I follow you guys allot, and some of you are on my friends list. You guys passed allot of valuable info to me my first day on resource. !!! I'll keep following also.
Opinions about treatment free as follows...
I know starting out this spring, I can't go treatment free.. Just too many losses to absorb. But I do believe in this pursuit. 
Also, as time goes, and my knowledge, and bee pop grows, I'll experiment with f2f as well. As I do believe in the goal, I just don't know how well it do starting off from scratch. I certainly will try to implement as many tf goals as I can till I get established. 
It does seem to me that the merits are there. I have a farm, and raise cattle. 1 commercial herd, and 1 reg. Black Angus herd. I do try to be as diligent in tf with my cattle already. But I might say this, I can't afford to not treat my cattle in some fashion. I can't afford to lose any of my babies, I'll never neglect them in their time of need. I've spent a many night staying up with the sick, and usually hopeless animal. Knowing it was not going to end well. I never quit this, just in hope of the rare miracle. So, I'll be diligent, and caring for my bees as well. I never enter into any endeavor , just to let things happen, and waljnaway when things don't work out as I want them too. So, as I start my bees up, I'll start with as much knowledge in both aspect of tf, and treating. To me there is no hobby here, it's an investment, and have bigger goals. 
Thanks for all you guys do, and keep up the good work !!!! Richard


----------



## shinbone (Jul 5, 2011)

I still don’t understand the utility of Face Book:



Tennessee's Bees LLC said:


> facebook is better


 - what makes it better?



Tennessee's Bees LLC said:


> and more informative.


 - How can it be more informative?



Tennessee's Bees LLC said:


> chat doesn't work for most,


 - the chat format seems super easy to participate in, and search for information in. why doesn’t the chat format work for most?

I am not doubting that many prefer FB, I am just trying to understand why . . .


----------



## little_john (Aug 4, 2014)

Oldtimer said:


> On social media people become tribal. New people who don't even have bees yet will sometimes find certain people whose views match their own pre formed ones, and sign up to that tribe. Then they all support each other no matter what.


I find that such examples of tribalism can equally be found in all beekeeping forums (fora ?). The phenomenon of wannabee beekeepers pre-judging (i.e. displaying pre-judice) that Treatment-Free Beekeeping is THE only way to proceed, right from Day One is - imo - akin to some kind of religious faith. But - exactly the same faith can also be seen in those who see medications as unquestionable solutions to any problem they may encounter. Fortunately there are still others who only see medications and other invasive treatments as being necessary in the short term, and who look forward to that happy day when even these may be dispensed with.

I've come to view pretty-much the whole of the vocal beekeeping world as consisting of religious 'churches', with each group claiming their own unique knowledge of THE one true god, and thus all others must therefore be worshipping a false god, or even Satan - for the intensity of passions being voiced is pretty-much identical to that of religious zealots - with only the content matter itself being different.

Just as I don't subscribe to any religious church or organised religion, I don't identify with any particular beekeeping ideology either, but it's sure lonely out here in the cold ...
LJ


----------



## shinbone (Jul 5, 2011)

little_john said:


> I've come to view pretty-much the whole of the vocal beekeeping world as consisting of religious 'churches', with each group claiming their own unique knowledge of THE one true god, and thus all others must therefore be worshiping a false god, or even Satan - for the intensity of passions being voiced is pretty-much identical to that of religious zealots - with only the content matter itself being different.


+1


----------



## DaisyNJ (Aug 3, 2015)

I got back into bees in 2016 and immediately found this "tribal" mentality, online and at the local meetings. Interestingly though, I have seen more badgering of TF folks by those who treat, both online and at the local meetings. It was as if they were born arch enemies. 

Badgering got so bad, at local meetings, no one even dares to ask question about top bars. Its treat-treat-treat-and-treat-some-more-treat mantra every month. 
Couple of years ago, few folks wanted to talk about oxalic acid and they were treated like they just committed cardinal sin. Fast forward to today, they want to talk about oxalic acid. 

All of this becomes even more pronounced when new beekeepers gets involved. Its as if David & Goliath fighting for the newbee souls, except there was no David and its really Goliath on both sides. 

I treat with oxalic acid, try to match it with brood break period. And I source my queens from a well known TreatmentFree breeder. I read lot of Randy Oliver. 
I gave away queens, bees in 2017 as I had more than I wanted.


----------



## rwurster (Oct 30, 2010)

little_john said:


> ... but it's sure lonely out here in the cold ...LJ


Why is it lonely out in the cold? Looking for a tribe m8? 

Choose a path, who cares who walks it with you :thumbsup:


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

At the risk of repeating myself….this is a two way street. 
I have been badgered by tf folks on any number of occasions…here and in the real world. Who takes the greatest beating? It’s all dependent on your perspective. 
There were a couple of posts in this thread about tf people being abused here on Beesource. Then a poster listed the evidence. One poster was all he found. The most recent offending post was over a year and half ago.

Some years ago it frequently got real ugly here….both ways. Those who’ve seen that are hard pressed to understand the complaints today.

The reality for me is….the only people who are able to cause me any distress in this forum are those I actually know and respect.


----------



## DaisyNJ (Aug 3, 2015)

rwurster said:


> Why is it lonely out in the cold? Looking for a tribe m8?
> 
> *Choose a path, who cares who walks it with you* :thumbsup:


EXACTLY. DOUBLE THUMBS UP. 

Only thing that matters is your goals, experience, appetite for risk and reward.


----------



## crofter (May 5, 2011)

I miss the input of some of the valuable posters who are apparently now spending more of their time on Faceook. I have some strong negative feelings about what I perceive as the dominant "groupie" mentality there. Tribalism is a human instinct that was very valuable as survival tool in prehistoric times. When it throws it weight around now, in what should be purely rational discourse, it is not helpful at arriving at anything near objective truth.

I think that perhaps for quite a few years the new beekeeper influx was strongly slanted towards the idealistic attraction of keeping bees "naturally" and without having to treat them. Just put them in a box and let them be bees! It makes a tought row to hoe when a person starts with little to no experience, many preconceived ideas, and handicaps himself into a form of bee keeping that demands a lot of knowledge, adherence to timlines etc., Knowledge, time, money, discipline, objectivity, consistency, record keeping, etc., to name a few must haves.

It is not surprising that there is a high drop out rate; couple that with a sharp rise in prices recently for bees and equipment and the result is about as expected.

I have become less inclined to argue. Incorrect information is sometimes easy to set straight but attempting to turn around someones deeply held personal conviction pays poor dividends. Probably others that still visit and post occasionally feel the same effect.


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

Tennessee's Bees LLC said:


> facebook is better and more informative.


This is an unproven claim.
Better means WHAT exactly?
Sure, IF you need to sell something, then you can hide behind some business facade and post that onto FB.
If you want the whole world to find out about your specialty honey - go for it and do an FB post.
But otherwise, FB is just another quick living social butterfly-type gimmick. 
It will go away and something else will come up just as quickly.

FB forces you to choose between privacy and convenience every day. 
I choose privacy by not even having FB account. 
I don't need FB. 
I do need to myself what left of my privacy as it is.


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

On the topic, TF beekeeping is entering a little-bit different stage now.
It is just like a stock market (see Dow Jones lately?)..
OR just like the climate change.
There are ups and there are downs.
And then there is a general trend that keeps the direction regardless of minute ups and downs.

It became obvious to many by now that simply not-treating bees is not TF beekeeping.
TF is bigger than that. 
It maybe just more people are realizing this fact and it takes time to sink in and quietly reflect a little.

It turns out TF is more complicated than simply not treating bees.
Yet TF can and will be successful in the long-run.

I would not worry about "TF forums" slowing down. 
Just as I am not worried about my retirement accounts.


----------



## shinbone (Jul 5, 2011)

GregV said:


> Yet TF can and will be successful in the long-run.


That sounds like statement of faith, which gets back to previous comments about beekeeping and religion.


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

shinbone said:


> That sounds like statement of faith, which gets back to previous comments about beekeeping and religion.


No. 
A statement of common sense.
Long-term common sense, to be exact.


----------



## DaisyNJ (Aug 3, 2015)

shinbone said:


> That sounds like statement of faith, which gets back to previous comments about beekeeping and religion.


here we go again. What sounds like statement of faith ? Which part of research conducted by Universities, Queen Breeders (VSH, Purdue Mite Biting), Tom Seeley (small hive beekeeping), Randy Oliver (breeding towards mite resistant bee) etc efforts towards uncovering HoneyBee genetics that eliminates treatments do you consider "statement of faith" ?


----------



## shinbone (Jul 5, 2011)

There is no research that proves TF is guaranteed to solve the mite problem. Thus, saying that TF will solve the mite problem is a statement of faith.

JMHO


----------



## rwurster (Oct 30, 2010)

The honeybee we all want that is mite resistant is more than likely going to be one we can't keep because it swarms too much or its too aggressive or they require management techniques that are impractical on a large scale. What if the answer is a GMO bee? How many are going to like that one LMAO 

Be careful what you wish for...


----------



## DaisyNJ (Aug 3, 2015)

shinbone said:


> There is no research that proves TF is guaranteed to solve the mite problem. Thus, saying that TF will solve the mite problem is a statement of faith.


There is already PROOF that treatments are only effective to certain degree and resistance is imminent. And every genetic research and variety of bees being put into market are based on TF. 

If one's definition of "solve mite problem" is NEVER TO ENCOUNTER ANY MITES at all or have ZERO LOSSES from mites, then you believe in as much T religion as next guy who believes in TF religion. 

And success (as stated by OP) is an individual definition.


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

Okay, for humans what is the preferred way to fight heart disease?
Is it non-ending dependence on chemical "magic bullets" sold by big pharma OR life-style changes? 
General answer is clear and simple - life-style changes where humans behave themselves as they have been for the last few hundreds of years (be active, eat less carbs, etc).

So, for any species to be long-term healthy, this species ought behave they way it did for the last several hundred of years (and longer).
Be it dogs or bees or cows. 

Regarding so called "aggressive, swarmy" bees - I want them any day. 
If someone wants to give up overly defensive bees, I will take them (locally, of course).
It is all about management and appropriate equipment. 

People down south manage these "angry" bees every day, get their honey, and don't fuss too much.... 
This is how it has been for centuries about beekeeping and no-one complained about (no shorts/t-shirts around bees) until beekeeping became a pop-culture thing.
http://musingsonbeekeeping.blogspot.com/p/blog-page.html


----------



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

shinbone said:


> I still don’t understand the utility of Face Book:
> 
> - what makes it better?
> 
> ...


Well many of the folks who posted and post here are on other social media outlets. These groups have a better concentration of videos, photos and it is quicker to do all of the above. Not to mention chat works on Facebook. It may not be more informative but it is neck and neck at least. You post, more people see it faster and responding is easier due to Facebooks interface. PLUS you have newbie groups, sideliner groups, TF groups, drop the hammer groups, flow hive groups, local groups and commercial groups. Better concentration of what you want without wading through as much b.s.


----------



## rwurster (Oct 30, 2010)

Import some AHB they're not "so called" they're the real deal. T and TF solved!


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

rwurster said:


> Import some AHB they're not "so called" they're the real deal. T and TF solved!


AHBs will not do where I am - too cold.

But the real black, traditional AMMs can be just as defensive as AHBs. 
I grew up around AMMs, knew nothing better and we had no fuss about it. 
Fine bees. 

You either keep AMMs OR you don't keep bees. 
All it was to it.

So, it is time to just be honest about it. 
Bees sting and need to be treated with respect. 
You don't toss about open boxes with bees as if they are LEGOs and still walk about in a t-shirt and shorts (AMMs would teach you a lesson really quickly).
If TF means respecting bees a little, then it is fine with me.


----------



## clyderoad (Jun 10, 2012)

GregV said:


> .........beekeeping became a pop-culture thing.



One-upmanship, embellishments, outright fabrication, pseudoscience and money grabbing has become the flavor of the day. 
Fortunately with little effort it's easy to detect and most practitioners of that craft will fade into the sunset in a few years.


----------



## gww (Feb 14, 2015)

Greg


> It became obvious to many by now that simply not-treating bees is not TF beekeeping.
> TF is bigger than that.
> It maybe just more people are realizing this fact and it takes time to sink in and quietly reflect a little.


I am not sure about this. I do not pull drone brood or make splits purely to be treatment free. I think it is more like you have to do what it takes to become what you consider successful and your bees and area and your skill will kind of guide what that means.

Lots would call me a bee haver and not a beekeeper for the way I am keeping bees so far. However, I have read all my options and so far the bees have not forced me to use any option but to put them in a box and add space when they need it. Now I am not saying that will last forever but also wonder if sometimes people don't over compensate and do more then is needed, "just in case".

I look at bee keeping more as following the trends over time. If you have bees and they die every year, the trend is bad and you have to do something to change that. If the trend is you are losing 30 percent every year, then you look at what is going bad for those thirty percent. Now you have options to handle that. You can do what michael palmer did and when he was polinating apples and make a bunch of nucs to make up for losses. Then you can add on to what you have found for solving one problim like he does with now that he is making the nucs he can have brood factories also to even make stronger hives for his main purpose. 

The process is one of continual immprovement untill you have found what works well enough for you. 

Somebody might move next to you with a hundred bees and that might change the things you have to do.

Starting out and wanting to go treatment free and thinking you have to jump through all these hoops to call yourself a treatment free bee keeper in my view may actually hurt. It might be better to just learn all those options and watch the bees and use what you have learned is possible but only use it based on what the bees tell you. They may tell you that you don't need to destroy all those drone brood. They may tell you they are going to die if you don't start destroying some mites along with some drone brood.

My bees so far have told me that I don't have to do anything much and even the few things that I did do that should have killed them, Like starting robbing or breaking brood comb or collapsing all thier comb while moving them, but yet they survive anyway.

I say bee keeping can go good and it can go bad and that there is no constant that can not change latter. I do wonder how many pre-emptive actions are taken that really might not have been needed? Of course losing stuff and finding later that you could have did something is hard to take also but that is learning and will take lots of years to learn cause and effect and even then with live animals, the same action may not work the same way every time.

I do think you should learn all the treatments and Ipm things for treatment free that you can but personally if a new person like me, I would use them sparingly untill I am sure they are needed for what I want to do cause, I am thinking most will not come off what they have found success with once they are happy with what they are doing. It is sorta like smoking, It is really hard to quit once you smoke and if you have quit then you can't smoke cause the minute it is ok to smoke one then it must be ok to smoke two.

One thing to me is when looking at how every body out there keeps bees and what they want from them is, there is more then one way to skin a cat.

The only real requirement is finding what is out there that you can use that gets the person doing it to the place he feels it is worth it to keep doing it. 

Cheers
gww


----------



## clyderoad (Jun 10, 2012)

Seems to me the TF forum has slowed down.
Also seems there are just a handful of the same participants posting in the TF forum.


----------



## gww (Feb 14, 2015)

Clyderoad


> Seems to me the TF forum has slowed down.
> Also seems there are just a handful of the same participants posting in the TF forum.


I spend way to much time on the computer rather then doing more productive things. It seems to me that your statement would also be the same for the whole forum. Yes, new people will come along and be really active for awhile and then they dissapear for awhile but over all you will see the same people being active. 
Cheers
gww


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

gww said:


> Greg
> I am not sure about this....
> Cheers
> gww


So, gww, here is one example.

Successful TF management revolves around a local *population* that exhibits a trend you want (resistance trend in our case), not just few hives.
This is what I refer to, as only a single facet of a bigger project.
Have to think above and beyond your own, separate apiary. 
Your apiary is only a single part of a larger eco system and is plugged into it.

So, IF you are lucky enough you just plug into an existing population in your area that already has a significant resistance level in it.
Then you seem to have success (chances are good you may not be even aware of what is going our around your apiary, but this is significant).
SP's example is one such case; Leo Sharashkin is another case (there are many, many others).

On the other hand, if such local population does not exist (or too small to affect the local trends in general) then the TF success is less likely (or even impossible).
So, if it appears that the local population exhibits no desired trend, you have to do it yourself - create such population.

In your case, it feels as if you a lucky one.
In my case, pretty sure now, I need to create such population myself (working on it).


----------



## clyderoad (Jun 10, 2012)

gww said:


> Clyderoad
> 
> 
> I spend way to much time on the computer rather then doing more productive things. It seems to me that your statement would also be the same for the whole forum. Yes, new people will come along and be really active for awhile and then they dissapear for awhile but over all you will see the same people being active.
> ...


The difference is a handful vs many, many handfuls of posters.

Someone earlier mentioned a general slowdown in all beesource forum traffic, this too I agree with. Not at all sure it's just a seasonal thing, many it seems are now inactive.


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

One reason I spend less time on Beesource is that all too often a thread devlolves into the tf/conventional debate….just like this thread. 
Everything has been said. Over and over. It is boring. There is nothing new.
Some say yes.
Some say no.
Arguing doesn’t change anybody’s mind.


----------



## gww (Feb 14, 2015)

If you look at the forum activity, I wonder if the over all trendyness of bee keeping is still growing or if it is retracting. I saw a chart that I am pretty sure I could not find that showed the trend of new beekeepers starting bee keeping. It was a climbing chart. I wonder if sociaty is still excited about the ideal of bees or if the trend is waneing like the cabbage patch doll did. I don't know the answer but wonder if one has to do with the other?
Cheers
gww


----------



## Charlie B (May 20, 2011)

Did all their bees die?


----------



## msl (Sep 6, 2016)

still growing/mantaining, when it drops off you will see package prices drop off


----------



## gww (Feb 14, 2015)

Greg


> In your case, it feels as if you a lucky one.
> In my case, pretty sure now, I need to create such population myself (working on it).


I know I am lucky so far, that could change. I do take a bit of a differrent view then you on what goes on around me. You want to create a strong bee from nothing and so that is a save the world type project. A project like that means you have to get into everybody elses buisness to get them to play along.

My ideal is to use what is availible and to get as much from it as is possible regaurdless of all those things that are around me. Now, I would like to do that in a way that makes it more possible for those around me to also move in that direction if they so desire but figure that no matter what route I take, they will do what they want. So I don't worry about all that out side stuff. I just look and see if my stuff is living and adjust if I have to. I am not building up any thing for anyone but me or taking away from anyone else. 

I don't buy into the magic bee solves all mite problims forever. I do think you can have a process that can let some people keep bees in some places with out treating and it is still profitable. I have looked at all the bee keeper that treats hive loss numbers state by state and they are not the same and even year to year state losses can change. So my view of beekeeping is that it is like every living thing, Something bad can come through every so often and you just have to find how to work through it.

I think resistant bees could still die of mites just like I am heathy now and can still catch a cold. So working on a trend of how to counter things that happen and still be profitable is my view. I really don't see that if one guy lost 20 percent and one guy lost 30 percent but both could make it up with out buying stuff and still make a profit that there is really any finger that could be pointed that one is that much better of a bee keeper then the other. They just have differrent routes to get to the same place. Both can probly improve what they are doing but they are the ones to get to add up the cost on the worth of it.

I understand what you want to accomplish but just say it is not the only way. But, I do think I am lucky where I live and the bees I keep so far just like somebody who lives in a place that will produce 200 lbs of honey per hive most times is lucky where he lives. Not everything is management. Or, you can't make a pig out of a sows ear.
Cheers
gww


----------



## gww (Feb 14, 2015)

msl


> still growing/mantaining, when it drops off you will see package prices drop off


The prices seem to be raising where I am at.
Cheers
gww


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

gww said:


> Greg
> 
> I know I am lucky so far, that could change. I do take a bit of a differrent view then you on what goes on around me. You want to create a strong bee from nothing and so that is a save the world type project. A project like that means you have to get into everybody elses buisness to get them to play along............Cheers
> gww


Not exactly, gww.
I am a "modern peasant", not a "bee saver". 

For a "modern peasant" to keep bees the old way (like the peasants have always done it, like for hundreds of years), the bees must be care-free (or TF - pick your term).
This what I am working on, not the "bee saving" as interpreted by popular media.

Those who are about "saving bees" are too often misguided people, but make for great package buyers. 
Great for bee selling business (just stating the facts as it is, like it or not).
Bee sellers will kick me over saying this, of course.
This is exactly what I refer to pop-culture beekeeping.

Every year people around me buy commercial packages from South, buy equipment, spend thousands of dollars and then try to "save bees". 
They keep doing it year after year. 
Some give up sooner, some later.
A depressing sight that keeps happening a their own expense.

I never bought anything but few feral queens from TF folks right here on the forum. 
If you will have TF feral queens available, let me know, btw.
This is all, gww. 

PS: I don't buy bees - I catch them for free; 
I don't buy hives - I build them from free scraps... 

"Saving bees" has nothing to do with TF or not TF and is irrelevant all together here.
But it has everything to do with habitat protection.


----------



## gww (Feb 14, 2015)

Greg
I wouldn't know how to give you a queen if I wanted. I am not that advanced yet. I have given a couple of queen cells away but not with the ideal of saturating the area. I did buy bees once and caught 4 swarms. I gave a swarm away also.

I have no ideal about treatment free queens. I just have bees that I have not treated, that is the only thing that makes them treatment free. For all I know, the swarms I caught could have came from some beekeepers southern packatge. I have not seen a marked queen yet though.

Reading other peoples experiances on here, I though my swarms built up pretty slow in comparison. I only know that I have not treated and they are still alive (for now).

I did go to a few bee club meetings (three or four over the last two years). It did not seem to me there that treating or not had to do much with all the hives the members at the club lost. It seemed that a lot did lose all their hives.

I have not expanded my hive numbers on purpose though swarm instint forced expansion on me. I just started building hives and putting bees in them. I am more just going with the flow till I learn enough to extract a little money out of the bees. My view was to just sorta see what happened natural like so that I could have an ideal of normal so that when I decided which direction to jump (make honey or bees) I would be able to see what effect my pushing has compared to what was normal. 

I am not sure how healthy my hives are and have made up my mind to let a few die just to see what it looks like but they haven't died yet. I do notice some differrances in the hives from each other which is what I am sorta looking for. I have never been around bees and so don't know what normal is and if I did something, I would not know if it really did anything. So if I watch the bees on thier own for a while and then decide to do something, I am hoping to be able to see the effect of what I did from normal. Reading only gets you so far.

I know the guy that I got my hive from does not treat but I also know he gets a dead out here and there. I don't know the percentage but know he has kept bees for 20 years and has not quit. That is all I know and the only hives I have ever seen but mine.

I too am a peasent and since I don't want anyone to tell me what I have to do, I don't worry much about what the people around me do unless I see a way to help them with a queen cell or something like that.

This is my only hobby and the way I do it, I have lots of time in it but no money. I might feel differrent about the risk I am willing to pay if I didn't have the time and had to pay real money for stuff.

Don't take it wrong, it will hurt if stuff dies but it is mostly a learning experiance to see what is possible. When I know more, I will make more decissions.

Off topic, I almost took some pictures of my apple buds to send you but it is still cold and may never happen.

Cheers
gww


----------



## clyderoad (Jun 10, 2012)

> I am a "modern peasant", not a "bee saver".
> 
> For a "modern peasant" to keep bees the old way (like the peasants have always done it, like for hundreds of years), the bees must be care-free (or TF - pick your term).
> This what I am working on, not the "bee saving" as interpreted by popular media.


WHAT?


----------



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

Maybe its not that the TF group has gone downhill. It is more likely they just need more people to argue with!


----------



## rkereid (Dec 20, 2009)

I see absolutely no difference in the forum as seen on my computer.


----------



## msl (Sep 6, 2016)

same here


----------



## trishbookworm (Jun 25, 2016)

I would say the Top bar group is pretty slow in terms of numbers of posts, sometimes only 1 a week, but I can't say if the group is slower compared to past years. There is a top bar group on FB, a really big one. I joined, and I found a few plusses: 1) a better chance to find someone near u, since so many join and so many can spot your "you in OH?" post compared to here, 2) better pics and videos. 3) more action. But the minuses are why I get on FB maybe 1-2 a month - 1) same beginner questions, no way to shift that to a beginner room, 2) thoughtless responses as often as thoughtful ones, 3) no easy way to find past posts and build on them. Not searchable - Beesource is quite searchable.

The Ohio top bar group is very slow. Not taking off. I know there are top bar people out there!!! Guess they have better things to do that chat on FB. 

Here, on BeeSource, our posters are often aware of others' work with TF that was very carefully documented, like Seeley's work, Fries too. Lots of people who have taken time to read others' experience, compare notes, and think hard about their own. And I have learned so much from reading through BEeSource's peoples' posts on their TF experience. I am limited to OAV because of my hive design, and I have found so many key details about peoples' experience there. So, thanks all for sharing, and I will work to continue to keep this place (all of Beesource) a welcoming place. Ciao!


----------



## ruthiesbees (Aug 27, 2013)

trishbookworm said:


> I would say the Top bar group is pretty slow in terms of numbers of posts, sometimes only 1 a week, but I can't say if the group is slower compared to past years. There is a top bar group on FB, a really big one. I joined, and I found a few plusses: 1) a better chance to find someone near u, since so many join and so many can spot your "you in OH?" post compared to here, 2) better pics and videos. 3) more action. But the minuses are why I get on FB maybe 1-2 a month - 1) same beginner questions, no way to shift that to a beginner room, 2) thoughtless responses as often as thoughtful ones, 3) no easy way to find past posts and build on them. Not searchable - Beesource is quite searchable.
> 
> The Ohio top bar group is very slow. Not taking off. I know there are top bar people out there!!! Guess they have better things to do that chat on FB.
> 
> Here, on BeeSource, our posters are often aware of others' work with TF that was very carefully documented, like Seeley's work, Fries too. Lots of people who have taken time to read others' experience, compare notes, and think hard about their own. And I have learned so much from reading through BEeSource's peoples' posts on their TF experience. I am limited to OAV because of my hive design, and I have found so many key details about peoples' experience there. So, thanks all for sharing, and I will work to continue to keep this place (all of Beesource) a welcoming place. Ciao!


And that great big group you speak of on FB is sponsored by a vendor of topbar beehive products, and boots people off the group when it suits their purpose. They only post updates there to sell their products. I got the boot in December, apparently for answering too many of the newbees questions and then linking back to videos on my page.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

ruthiesbees said:


> We've just learned not to feed the trolls. Gets tiresome to try and have a conversation when you are constantly having to defend what you are doing.


Oh you were kicked off the Top Bar Group? Now you the troll.


----------



## ruthiesbees (Aug 27, 2013)

Oldtimer said:


> Oh you were kicked off the Top Bar Group? Now you the troll.


Cute comeback, OT, but not accurate in the least if you were to follow my postings on FB.


----------



## herbhome (Oct 18, 2015)

Hey guys,

I just thought I'd chime in to say I hope this forum stays alive. I have mostly been lurking and trying to learn. I can't honestly claim treatment free but I am sympathetic to the ideal and hope to work towards that goal. I find it odd that so many swear it is impossible when a plethora of beekeepers report success at it. Clearly the path of ever increasing and changing chemical treatments is not sustainable.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

ruthiesbees said:


> Cute comeback, OT, but not accurate in the least if you were to follow my postings on FB.


It is accurate if you put yourself in their shoes. 

To them, you were a troll, posting links and trying to lead people from their group, to your group. IE, steal their membership. Sure, you will say you don't see it that way. But they would have.

You will find that site administrators hate that behaviour and consider it trollish, and many will kick repeat offenders off. I have even been in groups that state as part of the rules that linking to other groups is not allowed.

Having said all that, not for me to judge your motives because I have no idea what your real motivation was. To help, or to lead people your way. Most likely there was an element of both. But regardless, to the administrators, you were a troll.

And yes, my comeback was pretty cute, I agree. The irony of the situation .


----------



## shinbone (Jul 5, 2011)

herbhome said:


> Clearly the path of ever increasing and changing chemical treatments is not sustainable.


"_Clearly_"?

OAV has been in use for many decades with no evidence of any resistance build-up.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

herbhome said:


> I can't honestly claim treatment free but I am sympathetic to the ideal and hope to work towards that goal. I find it odd that so many swear it is impossible when a plethora of beekeepers report success at it. Clearly the path of ever increasing and changing chemical treatments is not sustainable.


Good post and good attitude. But there is one inaccuracy, something that is often repeated about TF beekeeping. The claim that there are "so many that claim it is impossible". This is normally repeated in statements that go something like "They say it's impossible but I'm doing it" 
I'd like to know who are "they". Where are all these multitudes of people that say it is impossible?

When we hear about all these "non believers", in reality, the statement nearly always come from within the TF camp.

I think that where this myth came from was years ago when varroa first arrived, and people literally did lose 100% of their bees, and even some commercial beekeepers were driven right out of business. They may well have made statements that running their businesses without treating was impossible.

And even now, for most commercial beekeepers, running their business without treating is still imposible. To TF hobbyists they may be fine with taking a 40%, 60%, or even 70% loss, then rebuilding. To most commercial beekeepers such losses would kill their business they would not survive, therefore they may correctly state that for them, going TF is impossible. But that is different than stating that bees cannot be kept TF under some circumstances.

As I see it, these statements illustrate the tribal nature of some in the TF movement. To have a tribe, one has to have an opposing tribe. So an opposing tribe of people who say it cannot be done even though it is being done, is manufactured, and referred to. Even though this tribe in reality, does not exist.


----------



## rwurster (Oct 30, 2010)

shinbone said:


> "_Clearly_"?
> 
> OAV has been in use for many decades with no evidence of any resistance build-up.


You know, I was going to comment on that exact line and say something pretty similiar and I just let it go lol


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Oh and Ruthie, you probably don't know this, but I've been reading your posts for a long time and consider you pretty knowledgeable and a dispenser of pretty good advice to the Top Bar folks.

Just, overly ready to call troll, perhaps.


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

Oldtimer said:


> I'd like to know who are "they".


They = JWChesnut


----------



## rwurster (Oct 30, 2010)

When I was "TF" the TF forum members themselves were what turned me off of the TF forum. And there were only a few zealots back then, but they ruined the experience. Lots of good people there, spoiled by a few. Good riddance TF forum

Ruthie I like your apitherapy page, especially your banner. If you hadn't noticed, sunflowers are my fav flower <3


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

beemandan said:


> They = JWChesnut


Yeah he's hardline and ruffles feathers. And he'll reference his own TF apiary and it's high losses. 

But I don't think even he says that TF beekeeping cannot be done, after all, even HE is doing it in one apiary. I think that as someone with a background in science he has been rankled by some of the flippant claims made in the past and has reacted. But I don't think he is in denial that TF beekeeping is being done, he will question the success of it.


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

Oldtimer said:


> But I don't think even he says that TF beekeeping cannot be done, after all, even HE is doing it in one apiary.


To my thinking, he is a 'tough love' sort of character. I agree.....he doesn't say it cannot be done but is perceived by the tf tribe as saying so.


----------



## rwurster (Oct 30, 2010)

One thing that we can all count on is that Chestnut will never be sold a nuc of rainbow and unicorn magic bees sprinkled in fairy dust from a cicus barker, so says Carniolans 4:14 in the gospel of Bispham.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

LOL, I don't think JWC will get caught like that .

All the same, I did watch a few days ago a video about some (seemingly) successful TF beekeeping happening in Wales, maybe Bispham had a few nuggets of truth all the time.

Anyhow, Bispham has now left us and found his own happy space, which is a couple of FB pages where he can preach to his hearts content, and is in Sole charge to make the rules, say what he wants, and kick any transgressors off, at will.


----------



## rwurster (Oct 30, 2010)

Heavy is the head that wears the crown


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Ha ha


----------



## little_john (Aug 4, 2014)

I don't treat bees - never have, probably never will. Any diseases like nosema, for example - I re-queen or alter the hive configuration to improve conditions. Last few years have seen zero winter losses (sorry if that sounds like bragging). I do lose a few colonies during the season - usually due to weather-related poor mating - but disguise these losses by combining in the Autumn (fall).

BUT - although I don't treat bees, I DO treat mites - which of course are a parasite, not a disease. There's a huge difference between these, and I do so wish a certain group of beekeepers would try to understand this.

It's quite true that bees are resident within the hive when I treat the Varroa mites with VOA (the only substance I use), but the target of that treatment is the mite, and not the bee.

But there may be a game-changer if Lithium Chloride ever gets to be used as a miticide, as the bees do ingest this, and so that would indeed be treating the bee, in order to kill the mite. Maybe I'll use it (subject to future research results), but then again maybe not - it all depends. Current use of VOA is proving to be an excellent miticide, such that I no longer have serious infestations. Of course, being fairly isolated also helps.
LJ


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Since you are from Britain Little John, what are your thoughts on this video? Could this be spread through the rest of the country?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FgR5FzMx_uA


----------



## clyderoad (Jun 10, 2012)

herbhome said:


> I can't honestly claim treatment free but I am sympathetic to the ideal and hope to work towards that goal. I find it odd that so many swear it is impossible when a plethora of beekeepers report success at it.


A plethora?
If you say so :scratch:


----------



## gww (Feb 14, 2015)

Shinbone


> OAV has been in use for many decades with no evidence of any resistance build-up.


However, I did see a thread started this year that said to keep thier bees alive they no longer can get by with one or two treatments a year but were having to treat 4 times a year to keep thier bees alive.

Oldtimer
Say what you want about jwc not saying it can't be done because he throws around his treatment free apary like a sword just to make his point. He does it in a way that is not questioning the results but saying it is a fantasy.

I have seen a few others also but don't figure that I want to spend the rest of the day looking up links to prove all this. On the other side, tf throw some stones also. You have been here much longer then me and you know the truth of what I say. I know your retirement pledge was to become the snake oil salesman buster. So I do also pay attention. The good thing about this forum is nobody can make anybody change thier mind and so it is up to the person trying to use it to suffle through all the dirt and try and find a dimond every so often.

Success or failure is in the eyes of the beholder but as far as commercial beekeeper and treatment free goes. Most people that have built a successful buisness are not going to be open to breaking from what they know is successful just because they know what they are doing is successful. I know I wouldn't. 

The ones like bee weever that did do some breaks saw a bit of a profit motive to do so cause they are selling queens and it helps them sell to a nitch market and for a high price. So, it was worth the risk. Not talking for them but putting my view of why it might be good for them.

Cheers
gww
Ps In defence of jwc using his tf experiance like a sword to prove it can't be done, I use squarepeg like a sword to show it can.


----------



## little_john (Aug 4, 2014)

Oldtimer said:


> Since you are from Britain Little John, what are your thoughts on this video? Could this be spread through the rest of the country?
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FgR5FzMx_uA


IMO - there's some self-delusion evident regarding the figures quoted. And perhaps it's worth stating the obvious - that there's no way of knowing whether the figures cited are truly representative of the area - that is, how many beekeepers did NOT supply data ?

That said, if you look at the percentage losses for 2010-11: 27% for treated colonies, and 11% for none-treated - a ratio of approx. 2.5:1 Fast-forward to 2014-15, and the losses for both groups are 8%. That's a ratio of 1:1 ... so the efficacy of not-treating has actually FALLEN relative to the treated group. Ignore the 500 colonies stuff - the number of colonies is unimportant, it's the percentage loss comparison which counts.

Then - to put a positive spin on these figures, the guy combines BOTH treated and non-treated in order to suggest that 8% is close to the figures for losses in pre-Varroa days. As losses for BOTH groups were higher in 2010-11 and 2012-13, it looks to me as if those years were probably difficult years, and that the relatively low figures for losses in the other 3 years are probably due to factors other than treatment. But - people will always manipulate statistics to suit their own agenda.

Four other points:
1. feral bees in Wales are almost certain to be AMM mongrels, which have very little going for them: nasty barstewards to work with, and hopeless for commercial honey production (one reason why the Buckfast line became so successful, and why Italians were imported in large numbers).

2. there is now a voiced reliance upon catching swarms, rather than raising nucs - that sounds to me very much like 'playing at beekeeping'.

3. I noticed in one background a Top Bar Hive and a Warre Hive - again, I think that speaks volumes about the type of beekeeper and the seriousness of their operations.

4. Finally, towards the end of the video we hear a plea for others to join in this treatment-free exercise, in order for it to spread more widely. This is nothing less than an admission that the treatment-free approach is one of Human Selection and not Natural Selection.
If Natural Selection was indeed taking place - that is, that a survival advantage was being expressed prior to mating ('colony expansion', in the case of the honeybee), then this genetic advantage would be spreading quite naturally and without any human effort or involvement. But it isn't.

So in answer to your question "will this spread throughout the UK ?" Not a chance. 
LJ


----------



## shinbone (Jul 5, 2011)

gww said:


> Shinbone
> 
> However, I did see a thread started this year that said to keep thier bees alive they no longer can get by with one or two treatments a year but were having to treat 4 times a year to keep thier bees alive.


Yes, but you can't automatically conclude that the mites are building OAV resistance on that point, alone. The person's OAV applicator could be working less efficiently, the OA could be stored improperly and the purity is degrading, there could be more mite pressure in the area from other beekeepers, etc.

I am not saying that OAV will always work. I am just saying there is no reasonable evidence, yet, that OAV's effectivity is declining. And, OA's method of toxicity - acid causing gross chemical burns or altering the internal Ph of the mite - is not something that an organism can easily evolve an immunity to.


----------



## gww (Feb 14, 2015)

Shinbone


> Yes, but you can't automatically conclude that the mites are building OAV resistance on that point, alone. The person's OAV applicator could be working less efficiently, the OA could be stored improperly and the purity is degrading, there could be more mite pressure in the area from other beekeepers, etc.


I agree with you on not coming to the conclution that anything has changed with the effectiveness of oav against a mite. In fact, it seemed even the people in the thread seemed to be blaming the bees as being even weaker if I even understood what was being said. I do know but probly could not find where I saw it that when mites first arived and some were trying to learn thresholds before having to treat that higher thresholds were not nessisaraly killing the bees but that it is now where you better treat some of them at 2 percent or are at real risk and in some cases that number is even one percent and seeing damage starting to be done.

Some of this might be how we comunicate and we may have the out come kinda right even if we are not connecting the dots exactly right with the words we say. I know I miss lots of small facts that probly pertain cause even in the thread I mentioned, I read it but did not consintrate well and now it is in my memory kinda fuzzy. I know when I sing to my grandkids, I sometimes put my own word in the song rather then the origional word and my grandkids will correct me. So I mostly get the song right even if I don't do it perfectly. 

So oav being effective could be phrased as not being as good even though it still kills mites just as good as it always did.

I am not even saying that cause all I was mentioning was a thread that might put herbhomes comment more in context of not being so wrong to be pointed out even if sorta wrong on it if it was only about oav.
It is winter time and this is the best game in town for now as far as bees are concerned.
Cheers
gww
Ps Michael palmer has said for his area that oav just does not work well.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Good analysis LJ (if I may call you that?)

Yes the swarm collecting thing did ring alarm bells it can delude a person into thinking he is doing OK when he isn't. Just, in a different video on Welsh beekeeping, which I cannot find unfortunately, they showed some hives that had survived TF for 7 years. In my country that just would not happen, nearly all hives will collapse in 12 months here if not treated. So I was thinking there must be at least something to whatever is happening in Wales.

GWW you are more widely read than i knew, scary!
I don't really spend my retirement busting snake oil, it was just a quip to inject a little humor into a very robust debate with some particularly nasty characters that were about to attempt to scam a lot of money from beekeepers, treaters and treatment free alike. I did my little bit to expose them. Luckily, they and their product have since disappeared. And in defence of JWC, he has more book learning than I do, and was able to do some research on these guys and expose some background information on them, and in that way he did the bee industry a big favor.


----------



## gww (Feb 14, 2015)

Hey oldtimer, I am not busting jwc or letting him get off free from what he does write. My view is he is probly ten times smarter on bees then me just like little john is probly 500 times the bioligist that I am. I have a heathy respect for everyone that puts thier money in the pot. I of course pick and chose (transulate: STEAL) the good things they are willing to share and what I don't use that is good, I get to pay the price for.
It is all good.
Cheers
gww


----------



## herbhome (Oct 18, 2015)

Mea Culpa, 

You got me. I didn't think that out. It is highly unlikely that varroa will develop a resistance to OAV because of the way it acts. I was writing in broad generalities. I've been an organic farmer for thirty-five years but am a newb to bees (3 yrs). 
The "they" I was refering to was beginners books and pamphlets and sometimes web info that states without treatment all bees will be dead in three years. If you don't recognize that advise perhaps we read different info.
I hope my tone didn't offend. It is difficult to communicate inflection in type. I meant nothing but support.


----------



## shinbone (Jul 5, 2011)

beemandan said:


> They = JWChesnut


JMHO, but many times I think there is a lot of truth to what JWChesnut says. His style can be quite direct, which doesn’t endear him to the targets of his comments. I do appreciate his “pragmatic realist” view of beekeeping.


----------



## shinbone (Jul 5, 2011)

Neil - no mea culpas are necessary. There are lots of moving parts to the whole TF/T debate, plus the scenary is always changing, so it can take some time to become familiar with all the info floating around out there.


----------



## msl (Sep 6, 2016)

OT- me thinks I missed a good thread some were....lol some one PM me link...



> is not something that an organism can easily evolve an immunity to.


yes and no 
if you dig threw the old works (80s-90s) It seems like the mean phorice period of mites has decresed and the % in brood has increased.... we have seen 60-40 66-33... Seeley still sites old numbers of 50/50. Prof Dennis vanEngelsdorp of the BIP now talks about 80/20 could be just more effective data collection or how the numbers get twisted 
but there have been some scuttle but that it may be do to TXs..
No studys I am aware of, but we have most certainly seen a trend of people using oav needing to change from 3 TX a week apart to 5 or so TX 3-4 days apart to get controal when brood in on. If you regularly do a corse of TX when brood is on it makes sense your selecting for mites that have a shorter phoric period ... Ie if your doing 7 days apart and OAV kills for 3 days(spitball number) your selecting for mites that are phoric for 4 (the short end of there common range) or less days.. 

Not saying it is or isn't happing but it does seem a reasonable adaption

OA is a wonderful tool for us, we should work to safe guard its effectiveness, no how remote the chance


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

msl said:


> OT- me thinks I missed a good thread some were....lol some one PM me link..


Here it was

http://www.beesource.com/forums/showthread.php?286507-Bee-Shield


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

shinbone said:


> JMHO, but many times I think there is a lot of truth to what JWChesnut says. His style can be quite direct, which doesn’t endear him to the targets of his comments. I do appreciate his “pragmatic realist” view of beekeeping.


I have high regard for his opinions as well. His method of delivering those opinions is the thing. I singled him out as Michael Bush linked a number of tf forum posts that he believed were 'troll' like. All but one belonged to JW and were a bit old. The one that wasn't JW's wasn't even troll like.
Ergo, when folks complain about trolls on the tf forum....they must be speaking of JW....and going back a while.


----------



## gww (Feb 14, 2015)

beemandan


> Ergo, when folks complain about trolls on the tf forum....they must be speaking of JW....and going back a while.


If that is what you want to believe and if going back a while means a couple of weeks. It ain't worth searching for to prove cause with a little patience it will happen soon enough to prove its self.
Poeple that are dead sure of something and that want other people to know it are all around. When I was in school the yard at resess could get pretty rough once in a while too.

Now for the real reason that I posted. I did do some searching for old threads of oldtimers yesterday. So oldtimer, while you are in the mood, I was looking for the picture tutorial that you did on queen rearing but could not find the right search term to get me to it. Have you got it were you can link to it eisily with out a lot of extra work on your part?
Thanks
gww


----------



## Andrew Dewey (Aug 23, 2005)

Hi everyone!

I have read all the posts on this thread and have a few thoughts:

One, a key to good writing here and on Facebook is not needing to have the last word.

Two, based on bee school enrollments, I'd say the number of new beekeepers is declining OR they are getting their information about beekeeping is some other way. That is bad news for forums and groups that depend on new membership to stay alive.

Three, new beekeepers have it extremely rough. A column by Rusty Burlew reported that something like 70% of new beekeepers lose their first hives, and give up the hobby after a season or two. My own measure of success if if someone is still "into" bees after 20 years. At least that is the goal. It will be a few years before I have any real idea if I am successful in that.

Four, (again I think) Barry saw the writing on the proverbial wall in terms of participation on Beesource (or BeeSource as I like to write.)

Five, (big statement here), I think the entire Treatment versus Non-treatment debate is phony. I could care less how you handle say Varroa in your bees, as long as your bees don't pose a risk to mine. If brood breaks and grooming induced by powdered sugar work for you, great. I liked what Little John wrote about treating mites, not bees.

Sixth, Beesource has been a great place for me to learn and share about bees. I've met some great people through here, and I am a better beekeeper because of my participation here.

Seventh, and last, I really like having a regional group as I do on Facebook to discuss bees. Sorry, but I don't really care about keeping bees in say, Oklahoma.

Thank you!


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

gww said:


> beemandan
> 
> If that is what you want to believe and if going back a while means a couple of weeks.


I'd like to see what you consider a troll post in the treatment free forum. Particularly in the past month. Or...find one that you consider recent.
I remember a few years ago when it was ugly. Both sides. I haven't seen anything remotely close to that. 
It might help to see what you consider trolling. We all have different perspectives. Doesn't make either of us right or wrong.


----------



## gww (Feb 14, 2015)

beemandan
I will be honest, I don't even really know what trolling is. I would be thinking more on the lines of dissmissive to the point of calling what someone else is doing as a lie that is not possible. Or questioning one persons method and trying to hold it to a higher standard than what is normal in an effort to put it in a bad light. An example to me would be somebody saying treatment free queen for sale and somebody else saying about that, "are you going to garrentee that if I buy you queen I will not have mite problims for the next 20 years. A I-2 two hundred dollar queen will be one tested in the sellers yard but the treatment free queen is expected to be tested in the buyers yard. Take on this "seller must be lieing."

That is a tame example cause some of it is pretty harsh and some when the name calling and cuss words start to come out are deleted by moderaters. It happens going both directions and will always pop its head up cause it is a wide margine of people interacting and is the nature of the beast. I am not whineing about it or complaining. It might be better at times and worse at times but is never going to go away. 
I just enter the forum knowing that will be part of it and pick the things I like and find interresting and though I might be part of it once in a while as a devils advocate and not compleetly innocent myself, I get what I can and learn what I can and figure the bad is worth it cause I get enough good. I sorta push the treatment free cause that is what I am doing now but to be honest, I sometimes involve in topics on boths sides cause the hard line my way or the highway type statements just seem arragant and then my arragant streak kicks in to question how anyone can be so sure at the expence of others that they are so right. If I get too "right" I have to kick myself also and so I don't become insinsitive.

Andrew
I saw your name on randy olivers site as a donor. Good for you. I personally have not donated and yet have got a lot of good info off of all the free sites like his and would not have caught my first swarm or made my first split with out the info from guys like randy and micheal bush and all the others that put helpful things out. So I say thank you from me for helping with that.
Cheers
gww


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

all very excellent points made in your post andrew, many thanks for taking the time to contribute here.


----------



## 1102009 (Jul 31, 2015)

I asked my husband what a troll is and that he studies some posts. He is in a motorcycle forum himself.

He said a troll is someone who is not interested in the topics or what the forum is about but only in disturbance and he questions everything and never contributes.

So I believe I´m no troll. To call me a troll is insulting me. If someone thinks otherwise please be free to discuss this via pm. If a moderator thinks this, please tell me so I can adapt to the forum.

Sibylle


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Really doubt anyone thinks you are a troll SiWolKe, heck you haven't even been kicked of any FB pages 



gww said:


> Have you got it were you can link to it eisily with out a lot of extra work on your part?


Here ya go

http://beesource.com/resources/elem...queen-cells-without-grafting-cut-cell-method/


----------



## gww (Feb 14, 2015)

Oldtimer
I looked really hard cause I was going to post it on this thread.
http://www.beesource.com/forums/showthread.php?342191-Queen-Rearing-Question
Not because that was what he was asking for but more because he may not have seen it.
Thanks.
gww


----------



## rwurster (Oct 30, 2010)

In Internet Slang, a *troll* is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting quarrels or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal, on-topic discussion, often for the troll's amusement. - Wikipedia

Some types of trolls you'll meet online:

*Spammer troll
*Persistent debate troll
*Grammar troll
*Forever offended troll
*Showoff, know it all troll
*Off topic troll
*White knight troll
*Profanity and all caps troll
*Insult troll


----------



## clyderoad (Jun 10, 2012)

hey rwurster, after reading the different types of trolls list it does seem like BS has/had our fair share.
Is there such a thing as a agenda troll?


----------



## Fivej (Apr 4, 2016)

I have had nothing to contribute to this thread, but have been following it. Now I have something to contribute. Siwolke, nobody thinks you are a troll. You contribute thoughtful and meaningful responses to the forum. J


----------



## rwurster (Oct 30, 2010)

Plenty of types not listed clyderoad, plenty of which we can all relate to seeing here or there. My thoughts are yes, I've seen its presence, even if it's an unlisted species


----------



## Lauri (Feb 1, 2012)

shinbone said:


> His style can be quite direct, which doesn’t endear him to the targets of his comments. .


My goodness, that line cracked me up!


----------



## 1102009 (Jul 31, 2015)

OT I´m not on FB. I wonder how people have the time to use all this social media. 

Fivej: many thanks, it´s nice to be appreciated.  I promise to be more objective.

My own personal trolls are those:
http://www.konstanzer-trolle.de/index.php?bilderbuch


----------



## DanielD (Jul 21, 2012)

Nothing to worry about SiWolKe. Often when someone calls someone else a troll, they're acting like a troll. Funny thing. 

I'm not calling anyone a troll here now.:kn:


----------



## ruthiesbees (Aug 27, 2013)

SiWolke, OT was calling me the troll because I was kicked off a FB group, which is where the FB comment came into play in his response to you. 

He completely missed the point I was trying to make about the Facebook social media platform and that is the content in any FB group can be extremely filtered by what the moderator allows to stay posted for that group. It is completely different here on BeeSource, where the only filtering is done for off-color comments or moving posts into the correct forum. It is much more "open" but the posts in BS are also viewable by people who may not necessarily be of the same mind-set as the forum that is was posted in (ie Treatment Free forum). This can lead to many comments that are viewed as "trollish" or "not helpful to the discussion".


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Just to set the record straight, SiWolKe I did not call you a troll, nor do I think you are a troll, and I'm sure nobody else thinks you are a troll. If you thought I called you a troll, it must be a language translation thing.

I did however, succumb to the temptation of pointing out trollish behavior in someone else not you. Only because the person had been very quick to call other people a troll and some of it was presumably directed at myself. Something about pots and kettles. However neither me, nor anyone else, think that you are a troll.

We've had a bit of mansplaining about why she got kicked off FB but she still does not accept she was trolling the site, yet called me a troll based on my post #5 in this thread, which although may not suit everyones view, was a perfectly reasonable assesment of what I consider the facts, and was on topic. 

And Ruthie, my original "now you the troll" comment while I meant it, was intended as a light hearted poke in the ribs, a reminder none are perfect. Not some massive attack. Only called out someone who had already called me out. You can call me a troll or anything else, it bothers me not. Just do not be surprised or offended that the complement might be returned if I discover justification for doing so .

I still think you a pretty good beekeeper for top bar hives.


----------



## ruthiesbees (Aug 27, 2013)

OT, I never said your comment in #5 was trollish. Had I made my comment while quoting your #5 post, then that would have been calling you a troll, which I did not. If you look at the time stamp, we were posting just minutes apart, probably typing a response to the post at the same time, as I tend to type slowly to rephrase my wording. 

I used to be an active participant in the Treatment Free forum, but not so much anymore, for the reason I gave in #6.

And your justification for saying I was trolling the facebook group because my comments and videos were pointing them to my page (which is not a "group" by the way) is just not accurate. The topbar beekeeper groups exist to share our ideas on how we handle our topbar hives. (But I'm not trying to convince you of my way of thinking as we are going to have to agree to disagree on this point. Let's just keep moving this thread forward.)


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

OK. I agree.


----------



## rwurster (Oct 30, 2010)

FB has its fair share of tyrants wielding power in the only place they have power. To be fair, plenty of forums and subgroups that I've read or participated in have said explicitly that there will be no self promotion be it benign or otherwise and sometimes they dont say anything, its "understood". Nothing I'd ever worry about


----------



## Michael Palmer (Dec 29, 2006)

Oldtimer said:


> OK. I agree.


My wife gets pissed when I say, "Whatever" :lookout:


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Michael Palmer said:


> My wife gets pissed when I say, "Whatever" :lookout:


Indeed. A fatal mistake . Although having met your wife Michael, I would say guess is far too nice to ever get worried about such things. 



rwurster said:


> FB has its fair share of  tyrants wielding power in the only place they have power. To be fair, plenty of forums and subgroups that I've read or participated in have said explicitly that there will be no self promotion be it benign or otherwise and sometimes they dont say anything, its "understood". Nothing I'd ever worry about


Have to agree, in fact some FB groups were started by malcontents who were run off normal forums so started their own, run according to their own idiosyncratic and sometime disfunctional viewpoints.

And since we are kissing and making up I can fess up to Ruthie that I too got kicked of a Facebook group LOL. So we both have at least one thing in common .


----------



## clyderoad (Jun 10, 2012)

Is this what you'd call a flare up between trolls? :scratch:


----------



## Buzz-kill (Aug 23, 2017)

shinbone said:


> There is no research that proves TF is guaranteed to solve the mite problem. Thus, saying that TF will solve the mite problem is a statement of faith.
> 
> JMHO


Your bias is to call it a statement of faith. It could just as well be described as a prediction about a future outcome. Do you ever predict future outcomes? Pretty stupid if you don't. Now the prediction may be informed or not. It may turn out to be true or not. But to call it faith based without any knowledge of what it is based on shows your bias or predilection to demean someone else's opinion.


----------



## Buzz-kill (Aug 23, 2017)

little_john said:


> BUT - although I don't treat bees, I DO treat mites - which of course are a parasite, not a disease. There's a huge difference between these, and I do so wish a certain group of beekeepers would try to understand this.
> 
> LJ


Trying to understand the logic. So you when your doctor prescribes an antibiotic for you they are treating the bacteria and not you? The bacteria are the patient? Secondly, why is it important to not treat diseases but as you put it almost axiomatic to treat a parasite? Never heard of such a thing before.


----------



## Richinbama (Jan 15, 2018)

I'm New to bees this year. I'd like to say that I've looked over both sides of the treatment vs. Not treating thing. Each to his own, and what works for one , may not work for the other. Personally, I'd like to be treatment free, but also the reality to me seems that....
We will never duplicate the bees situations in the wild in our hives. 
We have pest that transport themselves from one area to another, mostly by mankind. 
We probably will never solve this problem, and the bees probably will never evolve to remedy this either. 
So, I'll take a neutral position on this, but I'll probably treat my bees, ill also look at ideas from.each side of the fence, make what I hope is an educated decision based on what I gather from each side, and move forward. As both approaches have good merits. I want to learn from each side of the big question/argument, and try to do what I feel is best for my bees. I think we have manipulated bees, environment, and habitat to the point that the bees will never remedy this situation on their own. Every organising on this planet evolves to their niche or place of origin... except man. We make our own environment. So, let's help the bees when we can, and if we choose good breeding, and good treatment strategies. There may be some eveloution within the bees themselves. But only if they never get moved, shipped, or such. Just an innocent observation, and hope to hear much on these debates from the pros out there. Debate helps us learn through expression of ideas, we just have to pick and choose with an educated, and common sense approach. 
Thanks, hope to learn from you guys and gals .


----------



## shinbone (Jul 5, 2011)

(reviving an old thread)

Roughly four years after starting it, I'm popping this thread back to the top to see if anyones' opinion has changed - i.e, is the Treatment Free sub-forum slowing down?

JMHO, but it seems to me the beekeeping community has evolved to a more "mature" viewpoint on TF beekeeping (i.e. while possible under the right circumstances, it's not necessarily easy), resulting in fewer practitioners and thus less activity in the TF sub-forum than a few years ago. Again, JMHO.


----------



## psm1212 (Feb 9, 2016)

I concur with your opinion shinbone.


----------



## NUBE (May 24, 2009)

It has definitely slowed a ton over the last decade. I still post in there in a thread that I basically use as a bee journal, but not much of that has been anything that couldn’t be posted in other sub forums the last few months. I may have to end that thread this summer as I’ve finally talked myself into most likely performing a mite wash sometime in early July. If I wash any mites, I think I’m going to try some treatments. A little depressed at the thought, but I feel that to go completely treatment free requires either a ton of management on top of the normal management that already takes up so much of a beekeepers time, or the willingness to embrace the Bond method and build back up every year from survivors… if there are any. I tip my hat to anyone who has the persistence and temerity to make it work. I could say I’ll likely end up treating this year because of my area, blame other local beeks who dump bees in a box at the start of the year, collect a little honey in late summer early fall and call their job done, or starting with poor stock, but, really, I’m just tired of shelling out $ for new bees every few years and I have no intention of trying to experiment around with the best practices to stay TF and scramble to split my way out of winter losses every year (basically I’m cheap and too lazy). Moving forward I’ll be concentrating on keeping bees alive through winter (if that means some Apiguard in the summer and a few rounds of OAV in the winter so be it) and selecting queens to pull a small round of grafts from every spring in an attempt to double my numbers every year.

Sorry, kind of a long, off-topic train of thought to give the obvious answer to the on-topic question. Yes, it has definitely slowed down… considerably.


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

shinbone said:


> beekeeping community has evolved to a more "mature" viewpoint on TF beekeeping (i.e. *while possible under the right circumstances, it's not necessarily easy*)


Yes.
I am pretty happy with my own evolvement and fact finding.
It is not "treat, treat, treat" and it is not "let them die".
It is - it depends.

Do your own fact finding instead of blindly taking some abstract and largely irrelevant "internet advice".
Once your own facts are figured out - adjust as needed.


----------



## psm1212 (Feb 9, 2016)

It just became a doctrine with dogmatic evangelicals that gave rise to counter-doctrines with dogmatic evangelicals on the other side. 

It is a continuum. If I live on the side of a mountain, miles from other beekeepers, I would be trying a whole lot of treatment free strategies. If I live in a neighborhood in New Jersey with 10 beekeepers within 3 square miles of me, I would treat prophylactically. Probably wouldn't bother to even fool with mite washes. 

Find your place on the continuum with what works for you. By all means, tell us your failures and your successes, but don't proselytize your very limited experience as "THE WAY."


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

It's not just the TF forum on Beesource, it's TF forums everywhere, they are all slowly dying, along with plummeting numbers of TF beekeepers.

There also used to be some very persuasive "gurus" who would attract lots of new players to replace those leaving, but even a bunch of the gurus have now thrown up their hands and walked away.

Back when 70% of Beesourcers were TF and some of them very self righteous about it, it was reasonably obvious that we were in a bubble that would not be sustainable, and so it has proved.


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

To be sure, again, we have examples of TF beeks who hold their own rather well (look at @Litsinger).

Here and now (on the BS platform at least) it has been demonstrated and agreed upon that the TF possibilities are very much a function of the local circumstances.
One can land anywhere on that spectrum.
The only relevant advice that should work for everyone and everywhere - find your own facts (don't take them from the outsiders).


----------



## joebeewhisperer (May 13, 2020)

I don’t dare post in TF as my experience with it is about a teaspoon in the ocean. That said, I have a few TF hives just to experiment on. Make no mistake, if I think a serious infestation is brewing I’ll blast them to kingdom come.

For now, I’m grabbing a slab of drone brood every so often and digging out specimens. Have one in the freezer I’ll autopsy soon.

With all that said, mite-resistant bees can work at our place and fail when moved to mite-covered neighborhoods.

I have someone coming for several nucs in a few days. I’ve had to split the TF hives as one of them is blowing the roof off. So this gentleman is taking a couple of TF nucs. But they are clearly marked and he is aware. He can blast them if he wants as I don’t have a specific market for TF.


----------



## Roland (Dec 14, 2008)

Oldtimer is right, it would be crazy today to continue treatment free (commercial or otherwise) beekeeping. Wink Wink Wink.

Crazy Roland


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

Roland said:


> Oldtimer is right, it would be crazy today to continue treatment free (commercial or otherwise) beekeeping. Wink Wink Wink.
> 
> Crazy Roland


So if people *are able and willing *to do the TF - why is it they are crazy? 
I will just go ahead and say - no, they are not crazy. 
If one can get away without doing extra work, what is crazy about it?


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

LOL, Rolands comment was something of an inside joke, for those who were around a long time ago.

There used to be a guy called Wired For Stereo, who later changed his user name to Solomon Parker. Very influential in the TF scene back then. Rather argumentative also and quite happy to throw insults at anyone with an opinion different to his own. During a "discussion" with Roland, he branded Roland as CRAZY. Never mind that Roland is a long time beekeeper who is successful enough at it to make his living from his bees.

Just for the record, I don't think anyone who goes TF is crazy. Some of them were cos they jumped in with insufficient knowledge or research and lost all their bees, but learned nothing and did it all over with new bees the next season, _ad infinitum_ until they gave up beekeeping. And yeah, doing the same failing thing over and over without being open to new ideas could be construed as crazy. But there are those who are successful at TF, they have my respect and I wish I could be one of them.


----------



## Fusion_power (Jan 14, 2005)

I'm still here, still TF since 2005. I've had to limit my beekeeping activities the last couple of years due to a few changes in my life, but the bees are still here. The only major problem I'm still working to resolve is hive beetles. Every 2 or 3 years, someone in this area lets their bees develop a huge population which crashes the hives and the hive beetles move into my bees. I lost 2 colonies last winter and early this spring from hive beetles eating too many eggs. My bees have some natural tolerance, but it is not an easy trait to breed for.

IMO, a lot of the preceding comments are accurate. If you are in an area with a bunch of beekeepers, TF will be very difficult. I am fortunate to be far enough out in the country that bees can be managed sans treatments. Mite washes to determine status are a very useful tool. If you really want to know whether your bees are mite tolerant, do diligence to find out what the mite population is doing.

But Roland is still crazy.


----------



## Roland (Dec 14, 2008)

GregB - the "wink, wink,wink" was meant to indicate the preceding be facetious. 

Fusion power - I am honored.

Crazy as always, Roland


----------



## Gino45 (Apr 6, 2012)

Oldtimer said:


> Just for the record, I don't think anyone who goes TF is crazy. Some of them were cos they jumped in with insufficient knowledge or research and lost all their bees, but learned nothing and did it all over with new bees the next season, _ad infinitum_ until they gave up beekeeping. And yeah, doing the same failing thing over and over without being open to new ideas could be construed as crazy. But there are those who are successful at TF, they have my respect and I wish I could be one of them.


It remains true that there are far too many dogmatic know it alls in this world. Perhaps this has been always true, but given our modern communication technology these folks now have the means to spread their dogma far and wide.
As regards beekeeping, most of these folks have by now failed if they followed their own teachings.
Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying it can't be done. What I know is that I can't be treatment free and be a successful beekeeper. Would that this is not how it is.


----------



## BEE J (10 mo ago)

BTW, don't take any of this against yourselves. I just thinking/talking to myself and don't want to slam anyone. I actually think that some of this this is just a repeat of what some of you are already saying

I'm going into beekeeping TF. Well see what happens I guess . If If come across with a pest problem I am going to look for a different solution than chemicals. Why? Well I am bias against them. I live right next to a corn field and we dread seeing the spray drift over are livestock and trees. Also I have learned about the nasty effects these have overtime. I am not against "treating" bees. We "treat" are livestock. The question is, with what? We "treat" are livestock with herbs instead of isolated compounds and properties from herbs (aka. drugs/antibiotics/etc.) The downside of even "natural" treating (that's probably not even a thing😄) is that the bees in the wild don't get to have it, and we want to be breeding independent and hardy races of bees, that could survive without any help from us. Of course if you don't have "wild" colonies in your area then of course you'll need to baby these ones to even have a chance, because none of the other cousins living on their own could do it.

To be fair I will say a lot of migration and importation has occurred in recent times. This does present a huge challenge for some areas where beekeepers are trying to breed a hardy strain of bees. If these "foreign" bees were left alone for long enough, though, they would eventually adapt to the climate or die out all together.

If an area absolutely requires treating, (which I highly doubt in Virginia, and IMO the majority of America) then I may end my practice of apiculture. 

The question I have for all those in area's where TF is not supposedly possible, is this: 

*Are there wild colonies in your area that are, have, and continue to thrive?*
Because that proves that TF is possible in that area.

*However, if not, then we can conclude that: bees can't survive in your geographical location without human intervention. *Period. You can't keep parrot's in the north pole naturally. You can't keep animals in unsuitable habitats without "treating" them for the problems that are undoubtfully going to arise.

Anyway, that's my two cent on this topic. I'm sure I totally overlooked some important matter in my talk.😄
What I'm thinking is that if there are wild colonies in your area doing it, so can you. If not then bees can't/don't live in your area, for a reason.

Now how are we going to find wild colonies in your area?😄😄


----------



## BEE J (10 mo ago)

GregB said:


> So if people *are able and willing *to do the TF - why is it they are crazy?
> I will just go ahead and say - no, they are not crazy.
> If one can get away without doing extra work, what is crazy about it?


Well put Greg! It's one less thing to do, and one less disturbance of the colony.


----------



## TelmahQ (Jun 3, 2021)

BEE J said:


> If an area absolutely requires treating, (which I highly doubt in Virginia, and IMO the majority of America) then I may end my practice of apiculture.
> 
> The question I have for all those in area's where TF is not supposedly possible, is this:
> 
> ...


Bee J, I don’t think the wild bees question is as black/white as you are calling it.

How do you know if bees are from the wild? Even if you see a tree cast a swarm, that queen could be from your neighbor’s package bees last season. Many hives can survive their FIRST season with mites, so the mere existence of live bees at a given moment does not prove that bees are thriving off treatments.

Wild bees could be thriving, and then next season mite bombed by a dying imported hive and perish. That’s a geographical problem but the question at hand is not whether the bees were suitable, but whether the human-caused varroa crisis is dense there. There was nothing unsuitable about those bees until humans brought death to their doorstep.

Even rural parts of VA are relatively populated in my view, like most of the east coast. I live in a small town in CO, and even this area is denser than more remote parts of the west. When I first moved out here (my bee yard is on a ranch outside of town, wide open spaces), I really thought I would be the only apiary for miles, but the honey at the grocery store has an address 1.5 miles away by the crow, just over the ridge. We might as well share feed, water and equipment too, at that distance!

Bees are not native to USA, at some point all of them were brought here for agriculture. I am not saying anything about treat, or don’t treat, but don’t not treat _because_ you think your swarms are feral. Odds are better they came from another beekeeper.


----------



## William Bagwell (Sep 4, 2019)

Isolation, genetics, monitoring, more than one hive, acceptance of losses. Ignore those who say it can't be done. Also ignore those who say it's easy! Easy is still very time consuming so not my definition of easy. Oh, have a back up plan! Mine is thermal...









Don't post as often in the TF forum as I should mainly because of laziness.


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

BEE J said:


> Now how are we going to find wild colonies in your area?😄😄


#1 - feral, not wild - get this one down into your book
#2 - without investing time into the beelining techniques AND then spending LOTS of time practicing it - you can not really predictably find feral bees (granted they truly exist in your location)
#3 - even if you find bees in some barn wall or a tree (say, someone called you) - this does not mean you found truly feral bees
#4 - if your newly found (or caught) "feral" bees exist within dense cultured bee population - they are not really feral since the genetics of the bees are very fluid within the population - no one colony can exist isolated from the surrounding population.

So - before the word "feral" is even stuttered - look around and see if an isolated feral bee population can *per-annually self-sustain* in your area - just from a basic common sense point.


----------



## johno (Dec 4, 2011)

Before varoa it was estimated that feral hives lived an average of 7 years before dieing due to queen failure after swarming, also that only 10% of swarms survived their first winter. After Varoa ferals lived a max of 2 years before succumbing to virus bourne disease, now these figures could be region specific as at my advancing age I cannot remember. But most of these feral bees that have occupied a space are generally replaced by another swarm every year or two. This makes it very difficult to claim there are feral bees that are mite or virus resistant. Even in an isolated area most imported bees bring in their own mites which guarantees the end of that hive unless its mites are controlled or you can be sure that the bees you bring in do not carry a single mite.


----------



## shinbone (Jul 5, 2011)

_"I'm going into beekeeping TF."_

Classic! A person with no beekeeping experience knows he can keep bees chemical free. That's pretty much the poster child for the TF community.

Not trying to pick on you, BEE J. I wish you good luck in your endeavor. When you stop posting in two years, we will know why.


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

shinbone said:


> _"I'm going into beekeeping TF."_
> 
> Classic! A person with no beekeeping experience knows he can keep bees chemical free. That's pretty much the poster child for the TF community.
> 
> Not trying to pick on you, BEE J. I wish you good luck in your endeavor. When you stop posting in two years, we will know why.


@BEE J needs to do his own *fact finding.*
He can do it by taking the losses (should they happen).
OR he can do it by monitoring the mites (and possibly learning the proper treatment methodolog).
AND/OR - the general situation needs to be accessed (isolation, etc).
AND/OR - his *successful (*not another wanna-be*!) *TF neighbor beekeeper can share the knowledge and the bees.

But the fact finding must take place somehow.

*Not up* to the outsiders to tell BeeJ what are his facts on the ground.
See?
You just predicted his facts FOR him - the same old trend (to be avoided).

But I do agree - too many TF-wanna-be people indeed just dissolve to never be heard from again - instead of reporting back in 2-3 years with all the lessons learned (the most valuable input).


----------



## shinbone (Jul 5, 2011)

GregB - you are correct, I did predict a certain outcome without any knowledge of BEE J's particular situation.

In doing so, I am just relying on statistics. Harsh? Yes. But it is also the unfortunate truth. The number of people on this forum who successfully practice TF beekeeping are so few that they are minor celebrities. Based on the number of Beesource people who are TF vs all the ones who are not (including the ones who quit beekeeping because they failed at TF), the odds of successful TF beekeeping are less than 1%. Probably much less. The hopeful TF newbies should not be shielded from this reality.

We know there are least two factors leading to successful TF beekeeping: 1) an experienced beekeeper; and, 2) an isolated bee yard. A new beekeeper does not have #1, and, if he doesn't know whether he has #2, it shows he is not willing to put in the research/legwork to overcome the stacked odds.

Hopefully, BEE J beats the odds. And, also, hopefully, his beekeeping neighbors are not hurt when his mite bomb goes off.

JMHO


----------



## William Bagwell (Sep 4, 2019)

msl said:


> snips
> if you dig threw the old works (80s-90s) It seems like the mean phorice period of mites has decresed and the % in brood has increased.... we have seen 60-40 66-33... Seeley still sites old numbers of 50/50. Prof Dennis vanEngelsdorp of the BIP now talks about 80/20 could be just more effective data collection or how the numbers get twisted
> but there have been some scuttle but that it may be do to TXs..


Realize this is a 4 year old post, but your still around. (Possibly ignoring _this _thread...) Seems to me that thermal would drive this ratio in the opposite direction. Near 100% kill of mites under cappings and a partial kill / sterilization of mites on bees. Pointless for me to look, even if if I knew how, with only four treatments in three years. May ask about this on the MMK forum. Got my curiosity up.



shinbone said:


> Classic! A person with no beekeeping experience knows he can keep bees chemical free. That's pretty much the poster child for the TF community.


Chemical free and Treatment Free while related are not the same. And yes one can have a much higher expectation of success being chemical free while aspiring to be TF.


----------



## BEE J (10 mo ago)

TelmahQ said:


> Bee J, I don’t think the wild bees question is as black/white as you are calling it.
> 
> How do you know if bees are from the wild? Even if you see a tree cast a swarm, that queen could be from your neighbor’s package bees last season. Many hives can survive their FIRST season with mites, so the mere existence of live bees at a given moment does not prove that bees are thriving off treatments.
> 
> ...


 Thanks for the great reply TelmahQ!

Yes. Absolutely. I do not want to deceive myself into even thinking that my swarms are not from other beekeepers. I am not concerned about that. However, varroa is not only a problem in the US where bees aren't native to. It's a pest in probably dozens of other countries that bees are native to. I have confidence that these bees have adapted to these new circumstances.

I hear so much talk about the need for isolation for TF, would someone please give their definition of an isolated area?
I probably have other beekeepers within 2-5 miles of me. Am I isolated?

Thank you for considering me. I am not treating because I think my swarms are feral. I am not treating because I believe it's better for the bees, nature in general, and me. Also because IMO, it's possible.

Great thoughts, man! Thanks for the reply!


----------



## ursa_minor (Feb 13, 2020)

BEE J said:


> The question I have for all those in area's where TF is not supposedly possible, is this:
> 
> *Are there wild colonies in your area that are, have, and continue to thrive?*
> Because that proves that TF is possible in that area.
> ...


Every animal in our area aside from the wild ones, cannot survive here without human intervention, the habitat is unsuitable. Should we then not have them, because we need to treat? Bees are being kept in a box by both the TF keeper and the non TF keeper, that in itself is an unnatural habitat and which can cause problems, disease etc. for the bees. When you move to keeping feral bees in a box, you have already altered them and have possibly created conditions for a disease, not yet prevalent, to fester.

The reality is, including with bees, a species does not always adapt sometimes it just wipes it out altogether and then it is extinct.



BEE J said:


> Well I am bias against them. I live right next to a corn field and we dread seeing the spray drift over are livestock and trees. Also I have learned about the nasty effects these have overtime. I am not against "treating" bees. We "treat" are livestock. The question is, with what? We "treat" are livestock with herbs instead of isolated compounds and properties from herbs (aka. drugs/antibiotics/etc.) The downside of even "natural" treating (that's probably not even a thing😄) is that the bees in the wild don't get to have it, and we want to be breeding independent and hardy races of bees, that could survive without any help from us


Drawing a direct line between the chemicals put on a crop and the organic treatments such as OA or Formic is a false comparison. The downside of the TF movement is that somehow there is the inference that those that treat are the problem.That we will not get an independent hardy race of bees if we continue, when IMO, the problem is that we have yet to get a really good product to wipe out varroa that is safe and effective for both the bees and the beekeeper and that needs few applications.


----------



## BEE J (10 mo ago)

shinbone said:


> _"I'm going into beekeeping TF."_
> 
> Classic! A person with no beekeeping experience knows he can keep bees chemical free. That's pretty much the poster child for the TF community.
> 
> Not trying to pick on you, BEE J. I wish you good luck in your endeavor. When you stop posting in two years, we will know why.


Thanks man. Maybe your right. 
BTW My Dad kept bees TF for many years too.
I accept the challenge. Game On!!!


----------



## BEE J (10 mo ago)

Sorry Guys, I'll have to drop out for now. But I hope to come back and go through all your intresting thoughts and advice. Maybe on Monday...


----------



## ursa_minor (Feb 13, 2020)

BEE J said:


> I hear so much talk about the need for isolation for TF, would someone please give their definition of an isolated area?
> I probably have other beekeepers within 2-5 miles of me. Am I isolated?


IMO, no.


----------



## msl (Sep 6, 2016)

William Bagwell said:


> (Possibly ignoring _this _thread...)


nope, just not shure what I could add that I haven't said repeatably... worked a few 18 hour shifts this week... ie yesterday was 730am to 130am then back at 8am to day.. so i don't have the energy
home now to find I forgot to close the back door on my cell builder and it just swarmed and I am trying to retreive the swam (read my breeder queen) and I am back at work for 10pm shift

I am with shinbone on this one, chaff left unchanged is a huge issue, its why fogger mite cures keep poping back up
the problem with the internet is the ghosts of the past keep poping back up, ready to grab another victim


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

All the best to you BEE J, only way for you to find out is to give it a try.

For a very few, TF works. You may be surprised that quite a few of the participants in this thread were once TF. Even me. In my case I lost 100% of the 27 TF and small cell hives to mites, so abandoned the project.

There used to be well in excess of ten thousand TF beekeepers on Beesource. Of those you can probably count the ones still here and still TF on your fingers. Those are the odds, it would seem the 1% success is overstated, the real odds are way less. But, there are those few successful, so if you want to give it a shot, you can try.

How to achieve it has always been an interest of mine, even though I myself was a failure and have decided not to spend any more of my own resources pursuing it, I do follow the experience of others with interest so please keep reporting .


----------



## Litsinger (Jun 14, 2018)

Oldtimer said:


> All the best to you BEE J, only way for you to find out is to give it a try.


@BEE J:

I share this sentiment and respect your decision to give it a try. Based on the lessons learned from my own experience and my study/interaction with other TF beekeepers, I'll offer a few thoughts for you to consider:

1. I think you are wise to utilize swarms as the basis for your efforts. while they are still a bit of a 'pig in a poke', they at least offer the possibility of being feral (or in transition). If one starts with packages, they are almost doomed to failure from the start as these offer almost no prospect of resistance. The only thing better might be with known resistant stock from a reputable source.

2. Attempt to ascertain all you can about the resistance profile of the swarms you hive. Many well-intentioned folks take up the mistaken notion of 'what they don't know can't hurt them'. At least if you understand what the mite dynamics are doing in your colonies, you can be somewhat proactive in your TF management.

3. Learn all you can about bee and mite biology. I think most of us could stand to know more about these topics and the more we know, the more we can understand and appreciate what both the colony and the mite are seeking to accomplish throughout the year.

4. Listen and learn from successful and experienced beekeepers. Regardless of where one lands on the interventional continuum, 98%+ of beekeeping is based on foundational first principles.

5. Get to know all the beekeepers in your area. There are a lot more beekeepers that don't post anywhere on the internet than do- and they have a lot of good information to share. When I started beekeeping in my area I mistakenly thought I was the only one experimenting with TF until I went around and met all my BK neighbors- and lo and behold, two of the more successful beekeepers in/near the flight range of my apiary are TF too- so you might be surprised.

6. Run your own race. While I believe it is wise and prudent to solicit advice and understand the perspectives and opinions of other beekeepers, the sole judge of success in your operation will be you. So make your beekeeping your own and make it work for you. Better yet, start your own YouTube channel and become an internet celebrity (totally kidding).

Keep asking the good questions- I look forward to seeing how your operation progresses.

Russ


----------



## BEE J (10 mo ago)

Thanks for the encouragement, everyone! I will try to keep you informed. According to Ursa Minor I am not an isolated beekeeper and I don't believe so either, so this will be a chance to test my hypothesis (well I didn't actually come up with it). My hypothesis is that just like humans, strong colonies don't get overrun by mites (at least the majority of the time). We would have to define strong I guess, but I think you get my point. If a colony gets overrun by mites or a disease it means something was wrong with it, and the mites or disease took advantage of it, just like germs don't directly cause a disease... but the condition (of the body) that invited them in.

Well see what happens, I guess, and I sincerely appreciate your concern and comments for me.


----------



## BEE J (10 mo ago)

Litsinger said:


> @BEE J:
> 
> I share this sentiment and respect your decision to give it a try. Based on the lessons learned from my own experience and my study/interaction with other TF beekeepers, I'll offer a few thoughts for you to consider:
> 
> ...


I really appreciate this helpful post Litsinger! Thanks so much!
Do you have a resource you like on learning about mites, and other bee predators/diseases (for a layman😄)?
I definitely want to learn more so I can help improve my understanding of what causes pest infestation.
Then I could also help other beekeepers if I discover something!
I know I need to get in touch with other beekeepers, I'm just more of a hermit sometimes😄.

Thanks again, BEEJ🐝🐝🐝


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

shinbone said:


> GregB - you are correct, I did predict a certain outcome without any knowledge of BEE J's particular situation.
> 
> In doing so, I am just relying on statistics. Harsh? Yes


It is not harsh.
However, I will argue in that it is not correct.
Incorrectly relying on the statistics ends up with wrong conclusions and advice.

Do you have the statistics for Halifax, VA, USA?
No - you don't.
(that is the BeeJ's location, to be clear).

Let me remind everyone the same abused cliche (the umpteenth time by now) - beekeeping is local, anyone?
What does it mean, again?

It also means (among other things) - the statistics are *local*.
The only statistics that are relevant to *anyone *are the local statistics.
The local statistics *are *the local facts.


----------



## BEE J (10 mo ago)

GregB said:


> #1 - feral, not wild - get this one down into your book


Sorry about that. 😄 😄


----------



## NUBE (May 24, 2009)

Bee J, do a search on YouTube for Samuel Ramsey. Any of his ~1 hour + presentations are something every beekeeper wanting to better understand the effect varroa has on their bees should watch. It’s pretty terrifying for a bunch of reasons, not least of which is the question, “Why did it take 30 years for his work to be done?” Seems we’ve basically been throwing chemicals and compounds into hives the last few decades to see what knocks the mites back without even trying to understand how they are actually living and thriving off of our bees.


----------



## shinbone (Jul 5, 2011)

GregB - I am saying that, based on the overwhelmingly common pattern we see time and again on this forum, a newbie starting up TF beekeeping will most likely fail.

You argue there's something special about Halifax, VA, so that a newbie TF beekeeper in that location will beat the odds. I'll note that what is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.


----------



## Litsinger (Jun 14, 2018)

BEE J said:


> Do you have a resource you like on learning about mites, and other bee predators/diseases (for a layman😄)?


@BEE J:

If you are in to watching/listening to presentations, three (3) resources have been particularly helpful to me:

University of Guelph- 



https://www.youtube.com/c/UoGHoneyBeeResearchCentre



And this one in particular:






NC State Apiculture-



https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCg5Q97sTgjXXj_AmqThECxQ/videos



And this one in particular (starting at the 33 minute mark):






Two Bees in a Podcast-





__





Podcast - Honey Bee Research and Extension Lab - University of Florida, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences - UF/IFAS


The Honey Bee Research and Extension Laboratory (HBREL) is to advance our understanding of managed honey bees and wild bees in Florida, the U.S., and globally, with a goal of improving the health and productivity of bee pollinators everywhere.




entnemdept.ufl.edu





And this one in particular:









Episode 35: Natural Varroa-Resistant Honey Bees and Small Hive Beetles by Two Bees in a Podcast


In this episode, we are joined by Dr. Steve Martin, a professor from the University of Salford in the United Kingdom, who will be discussing his research on natural varroa-resistant honey bees. This will be followed by a segment where Cameron interviews Jamie on small hive beetles. We end this...




anchor.fm


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

shinbone said:


> GregB - I am saying that, based on the overwhelmingly common pattern we see time and again on this forum, a newbie starting up TF beekeeping will most likely fail.
> 
> You argue there's something special about Halifax, VA, so that a newbie TF beekeeper in that location will beat the odds. I'll note that what is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.


I don't know anything about Halifax, VA.
But just as well you don't know either.
I know well my own situation and that's where it stands (same for you).

Let me point out I am not acting as a pro-TF advocate right here and now.
Moreover, I will be the first to say that Michael Bush with his "easy TF" teachings ignores the same exact point - everything is local (but he ignores that very point).
Necessity of local fact finding should be the very first line and in bold letters on the very first page of any TF-promoting pamphlet.
This should be the very first part (and the conclusion) of any talk show.

This being said, I would not discount abilities and pure luck of a newbie.
I just want the newbie to be fully informed (not indoctrinated).


----------



## shinbone (Jul 5, 2011)

GregB - Unless you have support for your apparent assertion that Halifax, VA deviates from the national average of TF non-success, your giving false hope to a newbie TF beekeeper.


----------



## BEE J (10 mo ago)

NUBE said:


> Seems we’ve basically been throwing chemicals and compounds into hives the last few decades to see what knocks the mites back without even trying to understand how they are actually living and thriving off of our bees.


That's exactly what I want to know! What is truly the cause of this infestation?


----------



## BEE J (10 mo ago)

Litsinger said:


> @BEE J:
> 
> If you are in to watching/listening to presentations, three (3) resources have been particularly helpful to me:
> 
> ...


Thanks a lot!


----------



## BEE J (10 mo ago)

GregB said:


> I don't know anything about Halifax, VA.


I'm not surprised! 😄 😄 😄 (considering how small we are. Don't even ask what town I'm in, you'll never have heard of it😄😄😄!)
Okay let me get serious...



GregB said:


> This being said, I would not discount abilities and pure luck of a newbie.
> I just want the newbie to be fully informed (not indoctrinated).


I understand your concern. My doctrine on raising bees is the same as for chickens, sheep, worms, fruit trees, berry bushes, etc. 



shinbone said:


> ...deviates from the national average of TF non-success,


I wanted to ask how you could find out that. I did a little searching online. I suppose it might be hard to get a very accurate statistic since many TF's are probably keeping their bees just like their grandpa did in their own backyards and that's not getting reported.
Anyway, the failure stats are probably pretty close to conventional- treatment operations, right? That's what I would assume since I hear of all the die offs happening in these massive conventional apiaries. I might be wrong though.


----------



## Roland (Dec 14, 2008)

Bee J - the Bee Informed Partnership has statistics available, but don't put any money on them. If you are using the same logic that you have applied to stationary or fenced plants/animals, I believe you will have your posterior handed to you, but I might just be crazy.

Good luck and best wishes.

Crazy Roland


----------



## BEE J (10 mo ago)

From what I've heard from several sources, it sounds like I'm doomed. Is it really true that I am subject to failure? Is my percent of success only %1?  There must be a reasonable average in most parts of the US.

Is it impossible for the average homesteader to have a couple of hives on hand without treating anymore?
Is varroa going to wipe all the TF unisolated hives?

Could I have some answers as to why most beekeepers think this way? 

I hope I don't become another example of an ignorant newbie. 

But I'm not giving up when I've got so much to learn and explore. I just hope I can be of more useful to others here, than just confirming what everyone already knows.


----------



## Litsinger (Jun 14, 2018)

BEE J said:


> Is it impossible for the average homesteader to have a couple of hives on hand without treating anymore?
> Is varroa going to wipe all the TF unisolated hives?


I think the short answer is 'No'. I think the longer answer is that it depends upon a lot of variables including locale, source stock and management approach to name a few.

Being as objective as possible, there is such a paucity of data out there that it is next to impossible for any of us to ascertain with much precision how TF might work in our specific setting until we try it.

Even then, with the number of variables involved, it may ultimately come down to how much we are willing to invest to make it work, and whether that investment is worth the return.

If you are philosophically disposed, and willing to be patient I think there is better than an even-money chance that you can find an approach which will allow you to keep more than a few colonies TF in your area.

That said, it definitely won't be easier and will likely not be more successful than an approach utilizing more conventional methods- but it can be done (IMHO).


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

BEE J said:


> From what I've heard from several sources, it sounds like I'm doomed. Is it really true that I am subject to failure? Is my percent of success only %1?  There must be a reasonable average in most parts of the US.
> 
> Is it impossible for the average homesteader to have a couple of hives on hand without treating anymore?
> Is varroa going to wipe all the TF unisolated hives?
> ...


Granted how small your town is - I would offer this - you are not doomed by default.
Find out for yourself.
OK, enough said.

In my town you'd be doomed.
That much I can tell, per my hard facts.


----------



## NUBE (May 24, 2009)

Given your location and time of year you are capturing swarms, I would be very surprised if mites did them in this winter (next year is a different story). Most likely, your biggest hurdle this year is making sure they have enough food stored to make it through winter and keeping an eye out for brood diseases.

I think every beekeeper should try TF at some point. The Varroa mite is definitely the biggest obstacle to being successful with this in the long run. If you aren’t prepared to see the hands off approach to TF through all the way using something like the Bond method, I’d suggest at least checking their mite numbers periodically and taking proactive measures like cutting out and freezing a certain percentage of drone brood. There are a number of other pest management techniques which most people don’t consider treatment that you should also familiarize yourself with.

Keep reading, asking questions, watching videos and inspecting your hives. You’ll learn a lot your first few years, not the least of which is whether or not you think you can make it TF.


----------



## shinbone (Jul 5, 2011)

In my area, beekeeping is still “cool“. Consequently, there are lots of backyard bee-havers. Hives are neglected, and crash due to mites. The next season, these hopeful and naïve bee-haver‘s buy new packages and start all over again. I regularly suffer the effects of their mite bombs. There is no way I could keep my bees alive without an aggressive mite treatment program.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

BEE J said:


> Anyway, the failure stats are probably pretty close to conventional- treatment operations, right? That's what I would assume since I hear of all the die offs happening in these massive conventional apiaries. I might be wrong though.


Correct, you'd be well wrong on that.


----------



## AR1 (Feb 5, 2017)

You may get lucky. If you split frequently so have lots of young colonies, and catch plenty of swarms so you repopulate your hives, you can probably get by TF. But new, young colonies won't usually produce much honey. Or, you can spend some money and buy queens that are supposed to be more able to handle mites. Reports are variable as to the success of these queens. It may be worth a shot.

My only caveat is that when you do get a hive overrun by mites (and you will, eventually), be ready to do something serious to prevent those mites from booming into all the neighboring colonies, yours and those of other people. I missed my first mite-bomb colony and the result was horrible.


----------



## msl (Sep 6, 2016)

there is a part of me that hates "everything is local"
in TF, it means it didn't work out like the few isolated examples of success left... it often digresses in to blame your nehobores and there treated bees with there low mite levees for your losses..

in normal beekeeping it often means the same... some ones success didn't work out, often they didn't read the label and or follow all the steps....ie OAV failed me... I vaped my package in nov and they still died

arguably much of beekeeping is universal.... dead mites, good nutrition, and fact based beekeeping.. sure it would be bad for me to split at the same time as oldtimer as we are seasonal opposites, yet despite that he is in a rainforest and I am in a desert our take on things is remarkably similar



BEE J said:


> Anyway, the failure stats are probably pretty close to conventional- treatment operations, right?


nope... not even close, if they were any were near close, why bother with all the mite counts and treatment costs and what not ?
you run 3,000 hives and you spend and advarge $5 a treatment (with labor), 3 times a year... going TF would be a $45,000 increase in your profit.. if it worked

but mites don't work that way, the people who feed and clothe there families with bees, know this

a few years back my nehobor didn't find tie to treat his bees till late in the year..





masive wipe out, flooded my (mite free (ish) .. ie aug broodless oa ) hives

and he repeats this every outher year



BEE J said:


> My doctrine on raising bees is the same as for chickens, sheep, worms, fruit trees, berry bushes


sousuficed to say if bee worked like that, out problems would be over



BEE J said:


> y hypothesis is that just like humans, strong colonies don't get overrun by mites (at least the majority of the time). We would have to define strong I guess, but I think you get my point. If a colony gets overrun by mites or a disease it means something was wrong with it, and the mites or disease took advantage of it, just like germs don't directly cause a disease...


with mites the strong hives die 1st 
HIV/ bubonic plague/what ever flu (or name your novel germ) killed a lot of strong people, there was nothing wrong with them.
we didn't become immune to we attacked the vectors (sanitation, rat control, clean needles, safe sex, masks, etc) and developed drugs to fight infection.


----------



## Tigger19687 (Dec 27, 2014)

@BEE J 
You should read the WHOLE section of TF to learn from here what people tried and what failed and why for them.
Take a full week to read it all and then post on the thread you started what you've learned as how you will proceed.
You are all over the place here.
Chickens and Bees are Way different


----------



## BEE J (10 mo ago)

Well, I think I'm going in circles so I better just say that I'm going to give it a shot.   We can have a more in depth discussion after 5 years.😄

I appreciate your thoughts, everyone!

Yours Truly, BEEJ


----------



## BEE J (10 mo ago)

Tigger19687 said:


> @BEE J
> You should read the WHOLE section of TF to learn from here what people tried and what failed and why for them.
> Take a full week to read it all and then post on the thread you started what you've learned as how you will proceed.
> You are all over the place here.
> Chickens and Bees are Way different


I know I should. I might if I set aside some time for it. I have done some TF study from the books we have.

Really appreciate the idea Tiger!


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

BEE J said:


> Remember the bird flu? Now think of varroa. Any similarity?


No.

Bird (avian) flu is a virus. A virus is a submicroscopic infectious agent that replicates only inside the living cells of an organism. 

Varroa are mites. Small mobile creatures that hitch a ride with honeybees. 


References:








Information on Avian Influenza


Avian Flu is a disease caused by infection with flu Type A viruses.




www.cdc.gov






https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virus







__





Varroa destructor : USDA ARS






www.ars.usda.gov






https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Varroa


----------



## AHudd (Mar 5, 2015)

BEE J said:


> We can have a more in depth discussion after 5 years.😄


That being said, I would love to eat some crow if someone could come up with a bee that could survive outside their own apiary.
Please report back on BeeSource how things progress. 
We all want to be TF with thriving hives. I tried it and it didn't work for me.
Believe what you see with your eyes, not what you hope to see. Hope is a wonderful thing, it just doesn't work in the stock market, beekeeping or weather forecasting.
I hope you are successful in your journey.

Alex 
P.S. Chickens and bees, warm blooded vs. cold, antisocial within the flock vs. social. Throw out a small piece of bread and watch what happens to the one that picks up the morsel. In its selfish manner it tries to keep it from the others by running around never taking the time to eat any while the others peck the bread from its beak. 
I guess that type of behavior ensures equitable distribution to the rest of the flock, but my point is, honeybees do it willingly.


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

shinbone said:


> GregB - Unless you have support for your apparent assertion that Halifax, VA deviates from the national average of TF non-success, *your giving false hope to a newbie TF beekeeper.*


Disagreed.

I said about 57023487  times by now - *find your own relevant facts* (rather than get indoctrinated either by treaters OR anti-treaters).

Where do you see the false hope again?
Fact finding <> hope. 
These are totally different concepts.

Right on this very forum (and the very thread!) we have examples that totally defy the so-called national average.
So what do we do about these people?
Ignore them? Pretend they don't exist?
Call them liars?

I say we look at the examples and systemically study them and identify the circumstances that increase the probability of TF success. And just as well - define what circumstances that undercuts the TF success likelihood. And while at it - call out the false ideas and teachings.


----------



## shinbone (Jul 5, 2011)

_"I say we look at the examples and systemically study them and identify the circumstances that increase the probability of TF success. And just as well - define what circumstances that undercuts the TF success likelihood. And while at it - call out the false ideas and teachings. "_

I'll agree with that.


----------



## Roland (Dec 14, 2008)

Bee-J - in post #203, I wrote:

If you are using the same logic that you have applied to stationary or fenced plants/animals, I believe you will have your posterior handed to you, but I might just be crazy.

Did you miss my point that by NOT using the same logic, you might have a chance?

Crazy Roland


----------



## Fusion_power (Jan 14, 2005)

msl, that video reminds me that some "beekeepers" have no idea how to handle frames.

Roland, sometimes you have to be direct to get a point across. Contrapositives don't work very well.


----------



## msl (Sep 6, 2016)

LOL
I have gotten lazy sense my top bar days


----------



## BEE J (10 mo ago)

Roland said:


> Bee-J - in post #203, I wrote:
> 
> If you are using the same logic that you have applied to stationary or fenced plants/animals, I believe you will have your posterior handed to you, but I might just be crazy.
> 
> ...


I don't think your crazy. 😄Your pulling info from your personal database of practical knowledge, for my benefit.

I might partly see what your getting at. Not sure if I agree %100. Everyone's different though and I don't believe there's a big, right-or-wrong when it comes to most areas in beekeeping. 

I think you mean that bees aren't contained or isolated in a controlled environment like other livestock. 

Keep Buzzing, BEEJ🐝🐝🐝


----------



## Gray Goose (Sep 4, 2018)

BeeJ keep in mind if you CAN catch a swarm, you are not isolated.
the swarm came from some other hive, tree barn wall.
Maybe with mites.
bees go 3 miles to forage and up to 5 to forage in dearth.
so any hive/bee tree with in 10 miles of you can have its bees and your bees frolicking on the same bloom.
it can do the same with any hive with in 10 miles of it.

so here is the scenario
someone has 2 hives 6 miles from you.
someone else has 4 hives 8 miles from him/her.
either one orders a package, bam you all now have mites.
or some one sets down 20 hives to pollinate, 5 miles from either of them.
this all can and does happen, and with out you seeing it.

IF chems are your fear, look into the mitty mite heater, bees can take the heat better than mites.

good luck
read lots

former TFer

GG


----------



## Roland (Dec 14, 2008)

Fusion Power - true that

.Bee-J wrote:
I think you mean that bees aren't contained or isolated in a controlled environment like other livestock. 

Winner, Winner, Chicken Dinner. If you change your current/former way of thinking, you may have a chance.

Crazy Roland


----------



## HTB (Aug 12, 2020)

shinbone said:


> _"I'm going into beekeeping TF."_
> 
> Classic! A person with no beekeeping experience knows he can keep bees chemical free. That's pretty much the poster child for the TF community.
> 
> Not trying to pick on you, BEE J. I wish you good luck in your endeavor. When you stop posting in two years, we will know why.


That was me 3 years ago and I'm doing just fine. Still even post sometimes.


----------



## BEE J (10 mo ago)

Roland said:


> Fusion Power - true that
> 
> .Bee-J wrote:
> I think you mean that bees aren't contained or isolated in a controlled environment like other livestock.
> ...


Yes!🐔🐔🐔🥳🥳🥳 (I like trivia)

Yes, I agree %100 that bees are not isolated, and I actually sort of like the fact that mine aren't. That way I can do some interesting experiments on mite control. There's so much to try! 

Stay tuned to see if BEEJ's hypothesis is correct!


----------



## BEE J (10 mo ago)

HTB said:


> That was me 3 years ago and I'm doing just fine. Still even post sometimes.


You've been TF for 3 years? Cool! I would love to learn more from you HTB!
Could you tell me about how you started?


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

BEE J said:


> I am not treating because I believe it's better (1)for the bees, (2)nature in general, and (3) me. Also because IMO, (4)it's possible.


I meant to say something about the above (#s added by me).
See, here are already some ideas in that single line that need clarifications and corrections. 

1) TF is better for bees -* it actually depends *because IF your bees die (in short-term) - it is NOT better for them; and IF your bees still die (in longer-term) - then you are not able to do even a rudimentary selection towards the TF from your dead bees, no matter how VSH or feral those dead bees maybe (ask me how I know).

2) TF is better for nature - *probably false* because the honey bees don't even belong in North American nature; strictly speaking they should be removed from North American nature.  In fact, the honey bees being totally wiped out there they *don't belong* is probably best for the nature.

3) TF is better for me - *it again depends *because if you learn how to effectively and safely treat with lactic acid (a common, natural food component) and even oxalic acid (also natural and common in foods) the TF or non-TF actually does not matter that much to you.

4) TF is possible - *sure it is;* TF makes logistical and economic and even PR sense IF you can get away with it (and certain people most certainly do - good for them). Just keep in mind you don't know if this is possible at *your very location* until you try yourself. Be ready for any outcome, positive or negative or somewhere in between.

So maybe you want to review some of the points #1 - #4 as justification for non-treating. 

For me it was always easy - IF I could get way with less work while getting back good amount of ecologically clean bee product, THEN I would do TF hands down.

Well, I could not get away with the TF no matter how hard I tried.
So now to effective use of natural, organic acids - this works for me.


----------



## HTB (Aug 12, 2020)

As others have said it is entirely location dependent and has much less to do with the beekeeper. My out yards had 50 and 75% losses while my main yard at my home lost only 10%. Of note, the yard that lost 75% only had 4 colonies and it is only a mile from my home apiary. There were other factors that led to losing 3 out of 4 colonies in that yard and I don't expect that same yard to suffer the same losses this year. I just moved 14 colonies there Sunday. 

The out yard that lost 50% last year was due to lack of substantial food sources most of the year I believe and I moved most of my hives back home after the flow ended there this year. There are a variety of food sources available nearly all year around my home and nutrition plays a big part in treatment free beekeeping. Feeding sugar won't cut it. 

All that to say location is everything. Just because treatment free is possible in Florida doesn't mean it's possible everywhere in Florida and may not be possible at all where you live.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

HTB said:


> As others have said it is entirely location dependent and has much less to do with the beekeeper.


That is certainly what I have picked up from several years of reading the experiences of others. If we look at Solomon Parker, when he started out he was able to maintain a steady number of hives, he even used to say "I just can't kill them". Then he moved, and the losses began. (The rumor) is that by the time he gave up he only had 2 living hives, and that is despite catching numerous swarms to try to bolster numbers.

I think the other problem with TF literature on the web, is that those successful at it often assume anyone else can do the same, regardless of location. They teach that, and it has resulted in thousands of disillusioned beekeepers leaving the hobby after several years of failure.


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

Oldtimer said:


> That is certainly what I have picked up from several years of reading the experiences of others. If we look at Solomon Parker, when he started out he was able to maintain a steady number of hives, he even used to say "I just can't kill them".


Sol P just never made the "location connection" (tm) in his mind.
Later on he refused to accept what has become a rather obvious observation.


----------



## little_john (Aug 4, 2014)

Following these references to isolation, I feel a little more comfortable about posting a link which describes some 500 colonies which have been TF over a 10 year period within the area of North Wales, here in the UK :








BeeCraft Ltd







www.bee-craft.com





North Wales is an area of bare mountains grazed by hardy mountain sheep, which ensure that flowers and trees are non-existent on most of their peaks, so that it's possible those mountains have afforded some degrees of isolation. Of course more details about the apiaries involved and their precise locations would be needed in order to support this suggestion.
LJ


----------



## BEE J (10 mo ago)

HTB said:


> nutrition plays a big part in treatment free beekeeping. Feeding sugar won't cut it.


Amen.    

I thought about feeding my first swarm when I caught it. I decided not to. They not only did they survive but seem to be thriving, for now.


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

HTB said:


> Feeding sugar won't cut it.


In Florida. 
See?
Even this is a local issue.


----------



## BEE J (10 mo ago)

GregB said:


> In Florida.
> See?
> Even this is a local issue.


Could you explain, please? I thought it sugar was as bad for all bees as it was for humans.(Refined white sugar)

Maybe this is a topic for another thread?


----------



## ursa_minor (Feb 13, 2020)

BEE J said:


> Could you explain, please? I thought it sugar was as bad for all bees as it was for humans.(Refined white sugar)


Nope, not from what I learned, it is better than granulated canola honey.

Also, if I did not feed sugar all my hives would be dead. I left all the honey they made in the fall, including the sugar syrup honey. I had to feed till the end of Sept. and that was still not enough to take them thru the extra long winter.

The bond method of let them die is flawed on so many levels. Letting my bees starve to try and keep the strongest colonies would be like us letting our strongest cows eat all the hay by pushing the weakest out in an effort to create a strong herd. Hence we feed multiple bales at multiple sites so they all can thrive.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

BEE J said:


> Could you explain, please? I thought it sugar was as bad for all bees as it was for humans.


Sure. Humans and bees are different. For example, bees do not get diabetes.

Bees are designed to use sugar as their primary source of carbohydrates. They get this from nectar, or from sugar we feed them. All their other requirements being protein, vitamins, minerals and a few other things are supplied to them by the pollen they collect. Long as the hives pollen supplies are sufficient for their needs they can eat away at white sugar to their hearts content.

Honey has been shown to contain trace amounts of some of the things they need that are not present in white sugar. But further analysis has found that those things are present because of the trace amounts of pollen in the honey.

In Canada and places with long hard winters, bees have been found to have a better survival rate on white sugar, than on honey. That is because of the ash content in honey which requires the bees to poop more, and if they cannot leave the hive to do so they poop on each other and spread pathogens such as _N. Apis._


----------



## Litsinger (Jun 14, 2018)

little_john said:


> ... 500 colonies which have been TF over a 10 year period within the area of North Wales, here in the UK...


Cool article, LJ. Reminds me of Dr. Martin's interview on _'Two Bees in a Podcast'_:









Episode 35: Natural Varroa-Resistant Honey Bees and Small Hive Beetles by Two Bees in a Podcast


In this episode, we are joined by Dr. Steve Martin, a professor from the University of Salford in the United Kingdom, who will be discussing his research on natural varroa-resistant honey bees. This will be followed by a segment where Cameron interviews Jamie on small hive beetles. We end this...




anchor.fm





At about the 22:30 minute mark, Dr. Martin discusses his thoughts about the development of resistance in the UK (outlining the 500 colonies detailed in the paper above) and contrasts it with his observations in the US - amazingly suggesting that he expected that the UK would be largely TF within a decade.

When I asked Roger Patterson about this he suggested, _"Steven Martin... has done tremendous work on varroa. Personally I think the 10 year thing is grossly ambitious. Unfortunately we are still importing too many bees and queens to make it happen."_


----------



## Roland (Dec 14, 2008)

Little John - Is there ny row crop cultivation in this area of North Wales?

Crazy Roland


----------



## Joseph Clemens (Feb 12, 2005)

I've been TF for 56 years, and have kept bees from Washington state, to Ohio, Florida, Southern California, and now Southern Arizona. I'm not commercial and my primary purpose in keeping bees, is just so I can watch them, at my leisure. I don't try to convert anyone. I have a local friend, also an avid beekeeper. He always kept many times more colonies than I. We recently got together after losing touch during Covid. He has been working, seasonally with various commercial keepers around the country. He believes in treating. He no longer has any living colonies. We are working, together to build up my colony numbers, and for his help with this, my part is to use my bees to help him rebuild his own apiaries. Unsolicited from me, he often proclaims that he does not want all his bees to die again, so he plans to treat prodigiously. I say nothing, I just smile.


----------



## Joseph Clemens (Feb 12, 2005)

BTW, my friend is about 40 miles South of me, and he's had SHB problems. I have yet to see any SHB in any of my hives.


----------



## Litsinger (Jun 14, 2018)

ursa_minor said:


> The bond method of let them die is flawed on so many levels.


@ursa_minor:

I think I know where you're coming from- but I'd like to shine a bit of light on the distinction between the 'split from what survives' approach that is often referred to as the 'Bond Method', and the systematic approach that Dr. Kefuss took in his resistance breeding efforts:



Litsinger said:


> I think there has been a bit of reductionism when people equate the Bond Method to splitting from survivors. While I take no issue with folks pursuing either approach, it is my very humble opinion that Dr. Kefuss' Bond Methods (there are 3) are a very purposeful, directed approach to selection with clear objectives and measurable matrices whereas what is often referred to as the 'Bond' method is more of a 'black box' split from what survives method.





Litsinger said:


> The difference is that the ‘Bond Test’ does not stop at simply propagating from what survives, but is a focused breeding effort centered on three pillars:
> 
> Production- evaluated by pollen collection.
> Disease Resistance- evaluated by freeze-killed hygienic behavior.
> Mite Population Growth Mitigation- evaluated by counting the contents of 100 capped worker cells at purple-eyed stage (see attached PDF example of his spreadsheet- available upon request).


----------



## Litsinger (Jun 14, 2018)

Joseph Clemens said:


> I've been TF for 56 years


@Joseph Clemens:

Glad to see you back on Beesource- I'll look forward to your contributions and sharing your continued efforts at TF.


----------



## ursa_minor (Feb 13, 2020)

I take your point Litsinger, my use of the words 'bond method' was in reference to the feeding of sugar or doing other necessary manipulations to keep the hives alive. I still think it is a flawed approach especially in harsh climate zones which have many other factors that cause high hive mortalities to which even the best and strongest colonies can succumb. Selecting disease resistant or varroa resistant hives to breed from, sure, but not feeding, insulating or dealing with a varroa infestation in order to create 'strong' bees, no way. 

Loosing your best queen to starvation, humidity or because I as a beekeeper did not feed syrup and left the canola honey on is not the type of result I believe is helpful from a 'bond' approach. IMO a beekeeper, like a farmer, is at the mercy of mother nature and woe betide the farmer who sticks to his tried and true methods even when new conditions arise. You will get burned with no crop, no hay, cattle dead from something like Blackleg or any one of a dozen catastrophes because you stuck to what you always did or what you believe in. 

Personally, I love TF, would love to be TF, applaud those who can be and follow their postings on BS, but I will not allow my bees to be collateral damage for my ideals, especially because I know my ideals are not possible in my area.


----------



## Litsinger (Jun 14, 2018)

ursa_minor said:


> I will not allow my bees to be collateral damage for my ideals...


This is a great turn of phrase- and an excellent sentiment in my humble opinion.

My point in striving for precision in usage of verancular is that it hopefully allows us the means to better elucidate central ideas and separate the proverbial wheat from the chaff.

Take the 'Bond Method' for example- when we use this term, do we mean:

1. The three-tier selection protocol developed by Dr. Kefuss?

2. The generalized 'split from what survives' propagation method popularized in TF folklore?

3. A catch-all for all things non-interventional in beekeeping?

As an example (as I've said before), I think we would all do well to adopt some form of Dr. Kefuss' 'Soft Bond' technique, whereby we are at least allowing any nascent resistance/tolerance factors to express themselves with objective matrices to guide our efforts rather than the defaults of:

1. Treating prophylactically or;

2. Blindly do nothing.

In other words, set objective goals for our selection and propegation efforts and participate with Mother Nature and other breeders to help facilitate resistance development. 

All the other stuff about feeding and housing honey bees is basic animal husbandry stuff and is not central (IMHO) to the TF discussion - we either need to find stock that is suited to our conditions or provide the supplemental care for our selected stock that is not otherwise adapted to our environment, in a manner not altogether different than any other livestock.

That said, it seems plain that like us, bees are what they eat. So diet does likely play a significant role in the overall survival paradigm and there is likely merit to fostering the use of natural nectar and pollen where the environment will support it.


----------



## Joseph Clemens (Feb 12, 2005)

Quite so. I may be treatment free as far as what I personally consider as hard chemicals, such as synthetic chemical pesticides or harsh, but natural chemicals, but I also, most of the time, consider myself to micromanage my bees. Except for the past 7 years, or so. When I only looked at the hives in passing, noting only how many were still surviving. In my TF beekeeping, I do, however make one obvious exception - I like to spray a solution of Xentari - a form of Bt, onto any idle combs I may have, so they will still be usable some weeks later. It does seem to keep combs usable longer than they otherwise would be. I occasionally also feed sugar/sugar syrup, sometimes with a bit of copper gluconate added. So, technically I'm not a Bond Method TF advocate.

Though I have no empirical evidence, I believe a large part, if not all, that contribute to my partially TF success, is, I believe, due to the nearly total lack of any pesticides - insecticides, acaricides, or herbicides within foraging range of my bees. Lawns, or any other kinds of gardening that traditionally require standard uses of such chemicals are at least 10 miles North of my location - where cotton and alfalfa are regularly grown. I am also at the Northern edge of the Saguaro National Park. Also our last precipitation was back in January.


----------



## little_john (Aug 4, 2014)

Roland said:


> Little John - Is there ny row crop cultivation in this area of North Wales?
> 
> Crazy Roland


A good question. Mid- and South-Wales are very much mixed farming areas, especially dairy - but most of North Wales is dominated by bleak, desolate mountains. However, there *are* two areas which are very distinctly different - those of Anglesey, the Welsh name of which is 'Ynys Môn' (pronounced Innis Mon) to the North, and the Lleyn (pronounced Klee-en) Penisular to the South-West.










I've encircled in red those two relatively small areas, which are very much traditional lowland farming areas (including row crops), and which could feasibly support the number of hives in question. As you can see, they are to some degree isolated from each other and are certainly well-isolated from the rest of the country by mountain ranges.

This is a shot of the mountain Moel Tryfan, within the shadow of which I lived for a couple of years, and which is very typical of the terrain of the North Wales mainland.










And a shot of the infamous Llanberis (Klan-berris) Pass which cuts through the Snowdonia mountain range.










Hard to see how such terrain could support 500 beehives. It I was a betting man, I'd place my money on one or both of the isolated lowland areas described above. 
'best,
LJ


----------



## Joseph Clemens (Feb 12, 2005)

I wonder If agriculture in those two described areas could provide sustaining forage for honeybees, and possibly, at the same time be exposing them to the usually ubiquitous agricultural pesticides, complicating long term survivability.


----------



## BEE J (10 mo ago)

Joseph Clemens said:


> I've been TF for 56 years, and have kept bees from Washington state, to Ohio, Florida, Southern California, and now Southern Arizona. I'm not commercial and my primary purpose in keeping bees, is just so I can watch them, at my leisure. I don't try to convert anyone. I have a local friend, also an avid beekeeper. He always kept many times more colonies than I. We recently got together after losing touch during Covid. He has been working, seasonally with various commercial keepers around the country. He believes in treating. He no longer has any living colonies. We are working, together to build up my colony numbers, and for his help with this, my part is to use my bees to help him rebuild his own apiaries. Unsolicited from me, he often proclaims that he does not want all his bees to die again, so he plans to treat prodigiously. I say nothing, I just smile.


I would love to learn more from you! Do you have a personal thread or a website you could link me too? 
I am eager to learn from your practices!


----------



## Joseph Clemens (Feb 12, 2005)

BEE J said:


> I would love to learn more from you! Do you have a personal thread or a website you could link me too?
> I am eager to learn from your practices!


I don't have my own website, presently. About 7 years ago, and before, I posted many of my beekeeping experiences, here on Beesource. You could probably check them out in the archives. And I'm hoping to interact more regularly, going forward, also on Beesource.


----------



## little_john (Aug 4, 2014)

Joseph Clemens said:


> I wonder If agriculture in those two described areas could provide sustaining forage for honeybees, and possibly, at the same time be exposing them to the usually ubiquitous agricultural pesticides, complicating long term survivability.


Hello Joseph - following on from your recent posts, I wondered whether the Snowdonia National Park could play any part in explaining this puzzle - and sure enough it certainly appears to.

Here's a map of the Park:










I had absolutely no idea how big it was - over 2,000 sq.km. (823 sq. miles). During my time living in Wales I visited Anglesey, the Lleyn Penisular, and spent much of my time in the area between the northern boundary of the Park and the sea - but never once made a visit into the park as a tourist. And so I had no idea about what conditions were like further inland. It appears that, certainly at lower altitudes, conditions become very favourable indeed and, being a National Park there will undoubtedly be restrictions on what is permitted.

So - I quickly pulled 3 links off the Web related to Snowdonia:
Trees and Bees - 30 colonies
Eryri - Snowdonia - 6 colonies
https://northstaffsbees.org.uk/event/12-years-of-varroa-treatment-free-beekeeping/ - 20 colonies

With 56 colonies between those 3 beekeepers, 500 colones between 100 beekeepers becomes perfectly realistic. That last link in particular mentions numerous other "beekeepers in that area being TF" - so it looks like my suggestion was 180 degrees out, and that it's the Park itself which is far more likely to be responsible for those TF successes, rather than the farmland. Food for thought, certainly.
'best,
LJ


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

Joseph Clemens said:


> I don't have my own website, presently. About 7 years ago, and before, I posted many of my beekeeping experiences, here on Beesource. You could probably check them out in the archives. And I'm hoping to interact more regularly, going forward, also on Beesource.


I looked up your profile a bit.
Here is back from Dec 14, 2012


> For the past *couple of decades*, here in the *Marana/Picture Rocks area of Southern Arizona* *I have never treated*, and have had *very little problem with mites*.


Varroa mites never seem to be much of a problem | Beesource Beekeeping Forums

Which, basically, points back to the "location connection".


----------



## HTB (Aug 12, 2020)

BEE J said:


> Amen.
> 
> I thought about feeding my first swarm when I caught it. I decided not to. They not only did they survive but seem to be thriving, for now.


My comment "feeding sugar won't cut it" wasn't meant to suggest that you shouldn't feed when necessary, rather bees that have to be fed sugar for long periods of time do not seem to be as resilient as those with plenty of natural forage. That was my observation from year 2 with all things being equal in two separate bee yards aside from location and one suffering 50% losses (had to be fed 6+months after harvesting honey) and the other just 10% losses (did not have to feed at all).


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

BEE J said:


> I would love to learn more from you! Do you have a personal thread or a website you could link me too?
> I am eager to learn from your practices!


The best you can do - move next door to him.
Experience shows that the so-called TF practices are not really transferrable between the *incompatible locations.*

Where the location truly supports the TF, no special practices are really needed.
If the location is hostile to the TF, you may copy the practices to the letter and it will still not matter much.
There will be middle of the road situations, of course.


----------



## BEE J (10 mo ago)

Joseph Clemens said:


> I don't have my own website, presently. About 7 years ago, and before, I posted many of my beekeeping experiences, here on Beesource. You could probably check them out in the archives. And I'm hoping to interact more regularly, going forward, also on Beesource.


Great Joseph! I am looking forward to reading your posts!


----------



## BEE J (10 mo ago)

HTB said:


> My comment "feeding sugar won't cut it" wasn't meant to suggest that you shouldn't feed when necessary, rather bees that have to be fed sugar for long periods of time do not seem to be as resilient as those with plenty of natural forage. That was my observation from year 2 with all things being equal in two separate bee yards aside from location and one suffering 50% losses (had to be fed 6+months after harvesting honey) and the other just 10% losses (did not have to feed at all).


I totally agree that it's better to give your bees some feed (honey is best IMHO, just a lot more expensive) than to have most of them die out. And that it's better for long term sustainability to have the bees eat honey made from nectar, than white sugar. If I had to give some feed to my bees my first resort would be their own honey, the next would be a good quality, organic sugar(maybe sucanat?, etc.)
Feeding white sugar will *not kill a colony on the spot. *Your right, it's the long term effects we are watching.
I am not saying you can't use the white, processed, stuff too. As long as it's not an annual occurrence, IMHO. 
Any thoughts on this, guys?


----------



## Litsinger (Jun 14, 2018)

GregB said:


> There will be middle of the road situations, of course.


I think this is key- we need not necessarily speak only of all-or-nothing situations but rather making progress in our local population.

As Dr. Martin talks about in the above talk, there is the so-called 'Halo Effect' of propagating resistant genetics into the landscape.

Or as Tom Glenn suggests- 'additive genes':



Litsinger said:


> ... it seems to me that most of the recent scholarship on resistance seems to suggest that population-level factors are part of the equation. It reminds me of the 'additive genes' analogy that Tom Glenn suggested:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## BEE J (10 mo ago)

GregB said:


> The best you can do - move next door to him.
> Experience shows that the so-called TF practices are not really transferrable between the *incompatible locations.*


I don't think I'm ready to move (Bad time in market to buy)!😄😄 Just kidding, well sort of not actually.
I guess your right. Different areas may require different practices. Some areas still hold similar practices to be true though, right? I am practicing some beekeeping techniques people in areas, like Russia, use. (Insulated hives)


GregB said:


> Where the location truly supports the TF, no special practices are really needed.


I thought that the _special_ practices are *one* of the main factors that makes TF possible. 
I assumed it would be difficult to run a modern conventional apiary TF, but people who use these special practices can do it.


----------



## BEE J (10 mo ago)

I guess we would have to define what these "special practices" are.


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

BEE J said:


> I totally agree that it's better to give your bees some feed (honey is best IMHO, just a lot more expensive) than to have most of them die out. And that it's better for long term sustainability to have the bees eat honey made from nectar, than white sugar. If I had to give some feed to my bees my first resort would be their own honey, the next would be a good quality, organic sugar(maybe sucanat?, etc.)
> Feeding white sugar will *not kill a colony on the spot. *Your right, it's the long term effects we are watching.
> I am not saying you can't use the white, processed, stuff too. As long as it's not an annual occurrence, IMHO.
> Any thoughts on this, guys?


See, right here you need some education. 

Do realize the while regular sugar is *very consistent* in what it can and can NOT do - the natural honey is a very* inconsistent and randomized product* (place to place and time to time).
Now - some of the honeys not only bad for wintering but also outright deadly.
Again - this is for *wintering (!).*
You very well can kill your bees with their own honey and save them with very unnatural sugar.

Therefore, statements like "my first resort would be their own honey" just show you are not aware of many beekeeping nuances. 
Unfortunately, this same statement is being copied over and over from some of the "guru" sources.


----------



## BEE J (10 mo ago)

GregB said:


> See, right here you need some education.


Yes sir. 😄


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

BEE J said:


> I don't think I'm ready to move (Bad time in market to buy)!😄😄 Just kidding, well sort of not actually.
> I guess your right. Different areas may require different practices. Some areas still hold similar practices to be true though, right? I am practicing some beekeeping techniques people in areas, like Russia, use. (Insulated hives)
> 
> *I thought that the special practices are one of the main factors that makes TF possible.
> I assumed it would be difficult to run a modern conventional apiary TF, but people who use these special practices can do it.*


BeeJ,
Some of the most productive (by content generation!!!) beekeepers underscored over and over and over that no special practices are needed.
I will make it easy for you and quote Michael Bush - "Just don't treat".
That is all it is to it - directly from him - that is your one and only TF practice to follow.

(Like I said - this prescription completely ignores the locational context, but here you go).

So, keep your bees through 1-2-3 season (hopefully alive) - *observe and learn.*
No need to jump all over the place.
Try no chems; try no feeding; see what happens.
Do report back.


----------



## ursa_minor (Feb 13, 2020)

BEE J said:


> Feeding white sugar will *not kill a colony on the spot. *Your right, it's the long term effects we are watching.
> I am not saying you can't use the white, processed, stuff too. As long as it's not an annual occurrence, IMHO.
> Any thoughts on this, guys?



I totally disagree, you can use it annually, honey is not best if you are facing a long winter with few cleansing flights. Watch Ian Stepplar. If there is a connection with white sugar and bee mortality or decrease in health I would like to read it.


----------



## BEE J (10 mo ago)

I guess that's a danger of pulling honey in the middle of summer. I am considering leaving all of the frames till next spring. That way they can put their best honey where they need it for wintering.


----------



## BEE J (10 mo ago)

ursa_minor said:


> I totally disagree, you can use it annually, honey is not best if you are facing a long winter with few cleansing flights. Watch Ian Stepplar. If there is a connection with white sugar and bee mortality or decrease in health I would like to read it.


I respect your position, but must admit that it do not share this view.

Keep telling me more though!


If I get something facts I will try to send them to you.

Your Pal, BEEJ🐝🐝🐝


----------



## BEE J (10 mo ago)

GregB said:


> BeeJ,
> Some of the most productive (by content generation!!) beekeeper underscored over and over and over that no special practices are needed.
> I will make it easy for you and quote Michael Bush - "Just don't treat".
> That is all it is to it - directly from him - that is your one and only TF practice.


Is this how you preformed your TF experiments? You did everything the same, but just didn't treat? I am curious.
I never actually saw with what practices you keep your bees.


----------



## BEE J (10 mo ago)

GregB said:


> So, keep your bees through 1-2-3 season (hopefully alive) - *observe and learn.*


Thank You! That's what I am trying to strive to do.


----------



## BEE J (10 mo ago)

GregB said:


> I will make it easy for you and quote Michael Bush - "Just don't treat".
> That is all it is to it - directly from him - that is your one and only TF practice.


If I might ask. What about cell size, hive design, frame design, medications, diet, locations, etc? Are these not important?
I don't want to be led astray.


----------



## msl (Sep 6, 2016)

HTB said:


> it is entirely location dependent and has much less to do with the beekeeper





GregB said:


> Where the location truly supports the TF, no special practices are really needed.


I dissagree on this one.... I feel Its wrong to discount the skill of the beekeeper and there actions.. it has the very dangures effect of absolving the beekeeper of responsibility for there actions (or lack there of)... 
"special practices" have all ways been needed as a apiary is not a natural thing. Even pre mites, walk away for a number of years and its gone

Sam comfort notes that with out a forced brood break his operation would likely crash

notably we lately saw the Kefuss operation crash when handed to the son.. same location, same genetics, slight change in management and TF failed

location does mater (as with any AG) but management and genetics play a close 2nd


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

msl said:


> I dissagree on this one.... I feel Its wrong to discount the skill of the beekeeper and there actions.. it has the very dangures effect of absolving the beekeeper of responsibility for there actions (or lack there of)...
> "special practices" have all ways been needed as a apiary is not a natural thing. Even pre mites, walk away for a number of years and its gone
> 
> Sam comfort notes that with out a forced brood break his operation would likely crash
> ...


To reiterate - the "location" is an *umbrella term* (which includes many things - where the status of the *local genetics is* the #1 component, arguably).

So the true TF-favorable locations allow to keep bees in very low maintenance mode in the equipment such as Lazutin hive.
The entire Lazutin-style beekeeping story came out of this (I myself was very excited about this very possibility some years ago).
Of course, most of the promoters of this story, again, conveniently ignore the locational context.


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

BEE J said:


> If I might ask. *What about cell size, hive design, frame design, medications, diet, locations, etc? Are these not important?*
> I don't want to be led astray.


First and foremost question is - can you get away without artificial varroa mitigation?

That alone negates all and any of these - "cell size, hive design, frame design, medications, diet, locations".
Add the genetics onto the same list too - the very first item, in fact.

If you want to bother with a very simple sugar shake sampling (done around August/September) - you will most certainly have your answer (well before your bees actually die).
If you find >=3% infestation, your bees are done.
Then you write off your bees as lost and can start planning your next season.
It is only 2 months away - give it a wait.


----------



## Litsinger (Jun 14, 2018)

msl said:


> notably we lately saw the Kefuss operation crash when handed to the son.. same location, same genetics, slight change in management and TF failed


While I hadn't found the time or energy to finish up my commentary regarding Dr. Kefuss' approach and methods, I did ask him about this, and he responded as follows (giving me permission to quote him):

_My son Cyril treats because like most beekeepers ”he doesn’t have time” to do testing and keep records... at least that is what he tells me. Since he is not a queen breeder he does not see the financial advantage for him of loosing colonies and figures that it is cheaper to treat. So I have to respect his business choice. Since I produce virgin queens for him he is actually doing a soft bond test with my genetic material. For that reason all the 238 virgin queens from 9 different lines that I passed him in 2020 were marked with a number. When he works through his hives if he sees something that is correct he tells me the number. That way he does not have to do a lot of note taking and I can follow my genetic material. Also when I help him from time to time with his hive inspections I take a few notes on the hive list that I maintain for him. If I see something that is good I breed queens from it and test it out in my Bond Test.

For the moment I have not had the time to take Soft Bond Test samples from my son’s hives for analysis. I hope that can get that done later on this year. So it will be a while before the any test results come out._


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

BEE J said:


> Is this how you preformed your TF experiments? You did everything the same, but just didn't treat? I am curious.
> I never actually saw with what practices you keep your bees.


It is all here for you to read (remember?).
I spent the time trying various techniques and reporting it for you. 
Will you read the notes?

GregV's Alternative way to keep (have?) bees. | Page 57 | Beesource Beekeeping Forums

GregV's Alternative way to keep (have?) bees. | Page 57 | Beesource Beekeeping Forums

GregV's Alternative way to keep (have?) bees. | Page 57 | Beesource Beekeeping Forums


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

msl said:


> notably we lately saw the Kefuss operation crash when handed to the son.. same location, same genetics, slight change in management and TF failed


To me, the Kefuss thing demonstrated that the breed was not in fact TF. Had they been genetically mite resistant, the slight change in management would not have killed them.


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

Oldtimer said:


> To me, the Kefuss thing demonstrated that the breed was not in fact TF. Had they been genetically mite resistant, the slight change in management would not have killed them.


Or the location is such that the breed alone can not hold out (not for long).
Especially if one is trying to produce honey crop (running up large colonies).


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

msl said:


> I dissagree on this one.... I feel Its wrong to discount the skill of the beekeeper and there actions.


Yes and no. If we go back 10 years to the TF heyday, the 2 most influential "internet gurus" being Bush and Parker, were very much leave it alone beekeepers. Parker in particular, did pretty much nothing more than put boxes on or take them off, and collect swarms. At some point he learned how to produce queen cells and use them to make nucs, but he had been TF with (claimed) good success for some years before he even learned that.
I even recall him posting a video of a hive being furiously robbed, to show how strong his bees were. That was how much he knew about bees.

Of course he also claimed to be very much against feeding sugar. His practice was to harvest the honey right before the bees were going into a season with no nectar resources, leaving some of them in an unliveable position, then if they died, well "i didn't want those weak bees anyway". I actually posted to him once suggesting I drop him in the middle of a desert with no food supplies and no way to get any, then if he died it was because of his own weakness. His response was not of course to think about it and learn anything, but to name call.


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

Oldtimer said:


> Yes and no. If we go back 10 years to the TF heyday, the 2 most influential "internet gurus" being Bush and Parker, were very much leave it alone beekeepers. Parker in particular, did pretty much nothing more than put boxes on or take them off, and collect swarms. At some point he learned how to produce queen cells and use them to make nucs, but he had been TF with (claimed) good success for some years before he even learned that.


And then Sharaskin - the whole premise was (and still kind of is) - "set it and forget it".
Visit the bees twice a year. Not even boxes to add.
What skills?
None are necessary.

As a matter of fact - this actually works in some places.


----------



## Litsinger (Jun 14, 2018)

Oldtimer said:


> ... slight change in management





GregB said:


> ...the location is such that the breed alone can not hold out (not for long).


In my humble view, you both offer valid critiques but I think it is relatively easy to fall into reductionist explanations if we don't fully-appreciate the level of effort and skill Dr. Kefuss employs to maintain his Bond Program: 



Litsinger said:


> If I were asked to describe the ‘Bond’ Method in three words or less, I would respond with, ‘Unrelenting Guided Selection’.





Litsinger said:


> I do not read of many examples of beekeepers who have executed a program as detailed, rigorous, or disciplined as that which Dr. Kefuss describes. Thus, I am left to conclude that at least a fair percentage of his success was as a direct result of the judicious management and intelligent selection he undertook.





Litsinger said:


> ... he has an indomitable work ethic and the rare gift of also being an excellent queen producer by any objective measure. Even in retirement he is producing 2,000 queens for sale each year. So the secret to the ‘Bond’ Method appears to be something akin to Thomas Edison’s maxim that, _‘Genius is one per cent inspiration, ninety-nine per cent perspiration.’_





Litsinger said:


> The difference is that the ‘Bond Test’ does not stop at simply propagating from what survives, but is a focused breeding effort centered on three pillars:
> 
> Production- evaluated by pollen collection.
> Disease Resistance- evaluated by freeze-killed hygienic behavior.
> Mite Population Growth Mitigation- evaluated by counting the contents of 100 capped worker cells at purple-eyed stage (see attached PDF example of his spreadsheet- available upon request).


His son (and most of the rest of us for that matter) are frankly unable or unwilling to undertake the level of skill, testing and management that it takes to sustain such a program- in truth, I am unaware of anyone who has actually attempted to replicate Dr. Kefuss' approach as he outlines.


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

Litsinger said:


> *the level of effort and skill *Dr. Kefuss employs to maintain his Bond Program:


*NOT* your average hobby TF beekeeper, Russ.

Whereas, we are interested in rather relatively simple and achievable things that don't require PhD and/or a full-time commitment. 
And, heck, better be cheap!


----------



## ursa_minor (Feb 13, 2020)

On the subject of having the proper level of isolation to be successful as a TF beekeeper is it not also possible to be successful if you are surrounded by beekeepers who all treat to keep their mites in check? Like the local organic farmer with one quarter section set in the middle of a 50 mile radius of farmers who control pests and disease. Their level of success is higher because everyone around them controls the problems.


----------



## Litsinger (Jun 14, 2018)

GregB said:


> *NOT* your average hobby TF beekeeper, Russ.


No argument from me. Greg.

We just have to be careful we don't conflate apples and oranges.

Can't say that both Solomon Parker and Dr. John Kefuss were running Bond programs, nor that Cyril Kefuss is managing the operation in a manner akin to his father.


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

ursa_minor said:


> On the subject of having the proper level of isolation to be successful as a TF beekeeper *is it not also possible to be successful if you are surrounded by beekeepers who all treat to keep their mites in check? *Like the local organic farmer with one quarter section set in the middle of a 50 mile radius of farmers who control pests and disease. Their level of success is higher because everyone around them controls the problems.


As a matter of fact - this exact question is of interest to me.
And as of matter of fact - I am trying to learn and teach others of exactly this - properly and effectively (for a change) controlling the mite situation on hand.
Because if achieved this gives (for a change!) opportunities to:

initially start persisting the better bees for the location per-annually (in general locational context)
finally be able to start selecting the better bees for the mite control context

Heck, at my location the #1 priority is to *reduce *the *bee importation* - forget the TF.
Once the locally wintered bees are a common place, then we can talk more.
We even don't have this very basic ABC problem resolved.

(Not my ideas, I am parroting @msl here)..... 

Generally, if you struggle with massive bee importation/migration problem - the entire talk of the TF is premature.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

excellent discussion here. many thanks to all for contributing.


----------



## Fusion_power (Jan 14, 2005)

No, it is not possible to be successful treatment free in an area where every beekeeper around you treats. Genetics is the reason. A strain of bees that can make it treatment free will disappear rapidly as they cross with other bees without the genetic traits required. In one or two years you have bees pretty much the same as the bees everyone else keeps that require yearly care including treatments.


----------



## ursa_minor (Feb 13, 2020)

Fusion_power said:


> No, it is not possible to be successful treatment free in an area where every beekeeper around you treats. Genetics is the reason. A strain of bees that can make it treatment free will disappear rapidly as they cross with other bees without the genetic traits required. In one or two years you have bees pretty much the same as the bees everyone else keeps that require yearly care including treatments.


So the problem with bees is that even if every one around you treats, varroa is not totally eliminated. Therefor, if you are TF, sooner or later your bees will succumb to the varroa that drifts in as their TF resistance has been genetically watered down. While the people who treat will still have bees simply because their varroa is controlled by something other than the genetics of the bees themselves.


----------



## Roland (Dec 14, 2008)

Little John - Good report. So do we see a pattern here? Bees in a national park in Wales, and bees in a State forest near Cornell N.Y. both survive. And an island off Denmark. Hmmmm Seems like one factor in common, no agriculture, seeing as how there where numerous beehives in the Wales forest. - 

Oldtimer wrote about Parker:
His response was not of course to think about it and learn anything, but to name call. 

Me - Hey. I represent that remark.

Crazy Roland


----------



## AR1 (Feb 5, 2017)

Roland said:


> Little John - Good report. So do we see a pattern here? Bees in a national park in Wales, and bees in a State forest near Cornell N.Y. both survive. And an island off Denmark. Hmmmm Seems like one factor in common, no agriculture, seeing as how there where numerous beehives in the Wales forest. -
> 
> Oldtimer wrote about Parker:
> His response was not of course to think about it and learn anything, but to name call.
> ...


I think relative isolation is also a key. Few migratory hives that bring in the latest, greatest virus.


----------



## Joseph Clemens (Feb 12, 2005)

Roland said:


> Little John - Good report. So do we see a pattern here? Bees in a national park in Wales, and bees in a State forest near Cornell N.Y. both survive. And an island off Denmark. Hmmmm Seems like one factor in common, no agriculture, seeing as how there where numerous beehives in the Wales forest. -
> 
> Oldtimer wrote about Parker:
> His response was not of course to think about it and learn anything, but to name call.
> ...


Don't forget I'm also in a location where my bees are isolated from agriculture, on the edge of a national park. I had a dozen hives 7 years ago, when health issues put a freeze on my beekeeping pursuits. I was unable to deal with my bees, except to glance at them to see that they were still going strong. Now, 7 years later I still have five colonies remaining, and they're not just hanging-on, they're so strong it's a chore to manipulate them at all. They built up on Creosote Bush, then Mesquite and Saguaro came in together, this season. Also, we had our first day over 100F, before the end of April and no rain since January.


----------



## James Lee (Apr 29, 2020)

Oldtimer said:


> LOL, Rolands comment was something of an inside joke, for those who were around a long time ago.
> 
> There used to be a guy called Wired For Stereo, who later changed his user name to Solomon Parker. Very influential in the TF scene back then. Rather argumentative also and quite happy to throw insults at anyone with an opinion different to his own. During a "discussion" with Roland, he branded Roland as CRAZY. Never mind that Roland is a long time beekeeper who is successful enough at it to make his living from his bees.
> 
> Just for the record, I don't think anyone who goes TF is crazy. Some of them were cos they jumped in with insufficient knowledge or research and lost all their bees, but learned nothing and did it all over with new bees the next season, _ad infinitum_ until they gave up beekeeping. And yeah, doing the same failing thing over and over without being open to new ideas could be construed as crazy. But there are those who are successful at TF, they have my respect and I wish I could be one of them.


Devil's advocate because broad brushing does little to edify anyone these days....but who are these beekeepers that lose their TF bees every season and buy new ones the next season ad-infinitum? I guess SP's ghost will always haunt BS, but seriously, inquiring minds want to know? I heard from a few birds SP annually lost all of his colonies...

I'm still here, but in my infancy i'm sure abject failure is imminent...Oh well, I have 30+ more chances to fail again this winter


----------



## ursa_minor (Feb 13, 2020)

James Lee said:


> Devil's advocate because broad brushing does little to edify anyone these days....but who are these beekeepers that lose their TF bees every season and buy new ones the next season ad-infinitum


Both my neighbours LOL, three years running, one finally gave up bees altogether, the other now treats but willy nilly if they feel like it. 

TF is for the well educated beekeeper whether that is thru the time they have spent in the business or the time they spend learning the craft before they take the plunge and both need to keep up on the new studies. IMO it is not for either the feint of heart or the lazy beekeeper who thinks that going TF is easier.

It takes knowledge, dedication, and a willingness to admit when they live in an area where TF is not possible so work with a soft bond approach in the quest to get to TF status.


----------



## James Lee (Apr 29, 2020)

ursa_minor said:


> Both my neighbours LOL, three years running, one finally gave up bees altogether, the other now treats but willy nilly if they feel like it.
> 
> TF is for the well educated beekeeper whether that is thru the time they have spent in the business or the time they spend learning the craft before they plunge and both need to keep up on the new studies. IMO it is not for either the feint of heart or the lazy beekeeper who thinks that going TF is easier.
> 
> It takes knowledge, dedication, and a willingness to admit when they live in an area where TF is not possible so work with a soft bond approach in the quest to get to TF status.


another fine-point. this is one of the reasons we started the Sustainable Beekeepers Guild of Michigan. Both the sheer minority of TF beeks in general with good data or demonstrative evidence - plus the absence of mentors with experience to share, make education priority one if TF will find legitimacy. If you want vitriol you can go to the TF FB group and try to solicit advice on practice....but typically get a beat-down...

To be fair - 3 years is not ad infinitum


----------



## AHudd (Mar 5, 2015)

James Lee said:


> another fine-point. this is one of the reasons we started the Sustainable Beekeepers Guild of Michigan. Both the sheer minority of TF beeks in general with good data or demonstrative evidence - plus the absence of mentors with experience to share, make education priority one if TF will find legitimacy. If you want vitriol you can go to the TF FB group and try to solicit advice on practice....but typically get a beat-down...


In a different thread I mentioned that they were openly discussing feeding.
Also, someone mentioned making splits to "_make up for losses" _without receiving any grief.

Alex


----------



## Gino45 (Apr 6, 2012)

ursa_minor said:


> It takes knowledge, dedication, and a willingness to admit when they live in an area where TF is not possible so work with a soft bond approach in the quest to get to TF status.


A soft bond approach? That's a new one on me, but I think that's what I've been doing for the past 10 years. That is letting some hives succumb to the varroa (do I have a choice?) while treating not often enough to totally suppress the mites. That way I'm raising queens from the survivors, the hives that have done the best for me with the 2 treatments a year that they are likely to get from me.
And as far as the bees surviving treatment free in certain locations my opiinion is that population density has a great deal to do with this. Isolated bee are far less lkely to get the influx of varroa from deadouts which is the major source of varroa in more dense bee populations. So, hearing of isolated beehives surviving TF does not impress me at all.


----------



## A Novice (Sep 15, 2019)

ursa_minor said:


> So the problem with bees is that even if every one around you treats, varroa is not totally eliminated. Therefor, if you are TF, sooner or later your bees will succumb to the varroa that drifts in as their TF resistance has been genetically watered down. While the people who treat will still have bees simply because their varroa is controlled by something other than the genetics of the bees themselves.


I think there is probably another survival equation at work.

The mites need to survive. The main thing which hurts mite survival is the viruses they carry. Because those viruses kill bees, and when the bees are dead, the mites are mostly dead too.

When you have a lot of beekeepers who buy bees regularly and treat effectively (small and large scale beekeepers) mites that carry "bad" viruses have a good chance of survival, because treatment keeps the bees alive, and packages provide an endless supply of mites which are likely to carry "bad" viruses. So there are bad viruses in the local mites, and if you are TF, you are doomed, because those bad viruses will kill your bees.

However, in a remote area, with no bees coming in or out, colonies having mites with "bad" viruses will die off, but those not having "bad" viruses will be more likely to survive. Especially if the colonies die over winter, their mites die with them.

Since local survivors are already through this process, they have mites, but not the ones with "bad" viruses. So if you start with local survivors in this remote area, your bees have a good chance of surviving TF.

So TF will work for you. Until it doesn't. All it takes is one wannabeekeeper with a package of Italians from Georgia, and (even though you don't know she is in the neighborhood) your bees are doomed.

I am not suggesting this accounts for all of the difference in success between remote and urban areas. It may only account for half of the variation, perhaps less. But I suspect it is a confounding effect.


----------



## A Novice (Sep 15, 2019)

ursa_minor said:


> Both my neighbours LOL, three years running, one finally gave up bees altogether, the other now treats but willy nilly if they feel like it.
> 
> TF is for the well educated beekeeper whether that is thru the time they have spent in the business or the time they spend learning the craft before they plunge and both need to keep up on the new studies. IMO it is not for either the feint of heart or the lazy beekeeper who thinks that going TF is easier.
> 
> It takes knowledge, dedication, and a willingness to admit when they live in an area where TF is not possible so work with a soft bond approach in the quest to get to TF status.


Well said.

Guy I know started out TF. In August of his first year he thought he was having robbing problems. The big robber bees were fighting with his little bees. (The workers were kicking out the drones).

His bees "absconded" the first three years he kept bees. He blamed it on the windows in his warre hives. Now he treats. Not sure if he can tell a drone from a worker, but sometimes his bees make it into winter.

Unless you just want to kill bees, you need to know something about beekeeping before you try a method of beekeeping which is arguably more difficult to succeed at.

Disclaimer: TF is not a goal for me, as I see no practical or ethical advantages to it. Of course it would be easier to keep bees if mites weren't a problem.


----------



## James Lee (Apr 29, 2020)

AHudd said:


> In a different thread I mentioned that they were openly discussing feeding.
> Also, someone mentioned making splits to "_make up for losses" _without receiving any grief.
> 
> Alex


Again that's what makes this debate as to what or is not treatment-free beekeeping it boils down to intent which is arbitrary and up front interpretation based on the individual making the judgment as to whether or not you are legitimate treatment free or not.

If anything feeding is propping and flies in the face of the core group definition that the Solomon Parker group considers treatment versus treatment-free.


----------



## Litsinger (Jun 14, 2018)

Gino45 said:


> A soft bond approach?


Here's a good description of the approach courtesy of Randy Oliver:

_'Kefuss has a practical recommendation—the “Soft Bond” test. This involves positive (as opposed to only negative) selection. In the Soft Bond you positively select for indicators of mite resistance (and only from your more desirable colonies). Only the few that meet both goals are then not treated to control mites. Depending upon how your measure for resistance, the Soft Bond can also incorporate tedious testing (such as for VSH), but you don’t need to sacrifice any colonies.'









The Varroa Problem: Part 6a - Bee Breeding for Dummies - Scientific Beekeeping


Contents It’s been thirty painful years. 2 Breeding is merely Human-directed evolution. 3 Bees are still pretty wild. 4 Natural and artificial selection. 4 Assessment methods. 5 The Bond method (you get what you wind up with) 5 the bond method, but without the Needless carnage. 8 Getting down to...




scientificbeekeeping.com




_


----------



## ursa_minor (Feb 13, 2020)

James Lee said:


> To be fair - 3 years is not ad infinitum


ad infinitum IMO was used with a tongue in cheek reference and not meant to be taken literally  I am sure it was not meant to mean 'forever'.

Three years and then quitting is ad infinitum for those beekeepers, they were treatment free as long as they wished to keep buying bees in the spring, for the entire life of their apiary, till the disappointment took away their will to continue.


----------



## Snarge (May 4, 2015)

Litsinger said:


> Here's a good description of the approach courtesy of Randy Oliver:
> 
> _'Kefuss has a practical recommendation—the “Soft Bond” test. This involves positive (as opposed to only negative) selection. In the Soft Bond you positively select for indicators of mite resistance (and only from your more desirable colonies). Only the few that meet both goals are then not treated to control mites. Depending upon how your measure for resistance, the Soft Bond can also incorporate tedious testing (such as for VSH), but you don’t need to sacrifice any colonies.'
> 
> ...


Russ

Thank you for that link. This article, along with Randy’s latest podcast, and several thought-provoking discussions on Beesource (many of which you and Frank, et al, have contributed to) are helping me try to create a better beekeeping path.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

James Lee said:


> If anything feeding is propping and flies in the face of the core group definition that the Solomon Parker group considers treatment versus treatment-free.


Feeding bees is not "propping them up".

Back in the bad old days when a certain moderator was in charge and defining things, the fact that bees store food up for the very purpose of getting themselves through the lean times was ignored, in favor of the idea that by bad or lazy beekeeping you could remove all the honey from a hive or split or otherwise leave a hive with zero or near zero honey at a time when there was no natural food available. IE, leave them in an unsurvivable situation that you would not inflict on any other kind of animal, but if they died, they were "bad genetics, we don't want those bad bees anyway".

This idea flew right in the face of the fact that all our bees have survived for thousands of years by sufficiently providing for themselves, and present day cases of starvation are almost always the result of human interference.

So for me anyway, if I meddle with hives (which I do), and interfere with their natural honey stores or their ability to produce them, I have no ethical issue in making up the difference by feeding sugar, and in fact i see it as my responsibility to do so.

Letting bees starve is not improving the breed. As far as being able to feed themselves bees have already shown themselves experts, having refined the art over thousands of years. Some beekeeper intentionally setting a hive up to starve achieves nothing.


----------



## Litsinger (Jun 14, 2018)

Snarge said:


> ... try to create a better beekeeping path.


I think most of us are on this same path- glad the posts are of some help to you. They have certainly been helpful to me.


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

James Lee said:


> *If anything feeding is propping and flies in the face *of the core group definition that the Solomon Parker group considers treatment versus treatment-free.


Disagreed.
This is exactly one indication of that counter-productive T/F binary approach.
Such rigid position on bad/good definitions is not productive.
What about the nuances?
Well, the binary approach allows no nuances.

A matter of fact it would be silly for me to NOT feed about 10-20 of my units - as they surely would starve.
Some bees are store-less because they are in an experiment and meant to be fed.
Other bees are store-less because are not locally fit (fairly common case).

You simply get them thru and then use them as a resource to *propagate your better bees*.
Convert the propped-up bees into better bees - when the next season arrives.
It is silly to toss out valuable support staff if you already have it.

*It takes bees to make bees.*


----------



## Roland (Dec 14, 2008)

Let me repeat a phrase of mine from over a decade ago:... "It is easier and quicker to breed a weaker mite than it is to breed a more robust bee. "

I believe that is the reason for the crash of the beetree genes when removed from the Arnot forest(???) in NY and placed in contact with commercial bees. Where they "treatment free" in the wild, or just in equilibrium with the weakened mite/virus population in the wild????? ( a nod to A novice)

Crazy Roland


----------



## AHudd (Mar 5, 2015)

James Lee said:


> Again that's what makes this debate as to what or is not treatment-free beekeeping it boils down to intent which is arbitrary and up front interpretation based on the individual making the judgment as to whether or not you are legitimate treatment free or not.
> 
> If anything feeding is propping and flies in the face of the core group definition that the Solomon Parker group considers treatment versus treatment-free.


I was trying to point out that their rigid definition of TF seems to have softened a bit with the departure of one the more radical members. Hopefully, more people will join the conversation and not be shut out because they want to prevent their bees from starving by feeding them some sugar.

Alex


----------



## Litsinger (Jun 14, 2018)

Roland said:


> Where they "treatment free" in the wild, or just in equilibrium with the weakened mite/virus population in the wild?????


Dr. Seeley keeps some Arnot bees in his home apiary TF. I suspect it likely has to do with local adaptation - a combination of genetic and epigenetic / behavioral traits best suited for their specific situation.

So maybe we should not be waiting for a ubiquitous TF bee, but rather a bee which will demonstrate sufficient resistance / tolerance in our specific locale and management paradigm.


----------



## crofter (May 5, 2011)

Litsinger said:


> Dr. Seeley keeps some Arnot bees in his home apiary TF. I suspect it likely has to do with local adaptation - a combination of genetic and epigenetic / behavioral traits best suited for their specific situation.
> 
> So maybe we should not be waiting for a ubiquitous TF bee, but rather a bee which will demonstrate sufficient resistance / tolerance in our specific locale and management paradigm.


In experimenting with the varro mite/ European honeybee issue, it would seem to me more advisable to attempt to change the mites genetics. The bee was not the problem. The varroa mite is not likely to be the last enemy to arise; why bottleneck the bees genetics to handle what may be a temporary situation. Several more mites and diseases are already on the horizon. Shall we ask the honeybee to alter its genetics again and again as each one of these appear! Commonly each coping mechanism bears a cost to maintain. Work on the mite!

Some of the gurus pretty heavy on idealistic "cures" for the problem. Heavy on trite truisms and very very lite on the details of genetics, physics, law of probability and many other pertinent issues. Devoted followers is a prime issue. Big hollow things make the most noise!

There are some promising examples of beekeepers having locally superior bees but it seems key that some element of isolation or mechanism of overpowering outside influence must be in place to maintain the traits or they quickly get diluted to the average. Is there a way of locking it in! That is the question.


----------



## Litsinger (Jun 14, 2018)

crofter said:


> Shall we ask the honeybee to alter its genetics again and again as each one of these appear! Commonly each coping mechanism bears a cost to maintain. Work on the mite!


I'm game- how do we work on the mite to make it less virulent?

Thankfully, it appears that the suite of traits conferring resistance to varroa are a toolset that is already inherent in the species- and I expect will be utilized and selected for when the next novel pest rears its ugly head much like when tracheal mite reemerged on the scene.


----------



## Litsinger (Jun 14, 2018)

crofter said:


> Work on the mite!


For those interested, here are a few recent studies on the genetic variability of varroa mites in several different contexts- interesting stuff:









Varroa Mite Population Genetics


A recent discussion over on Bee-L concerning anecdotal variability in amitraz resistance piqued my interest as to any recent scholarship into varroa mite population genetics. While this is by no means exhaustive, here are three recent publications addressing the topic: Investigating amitraz...




www.beesource.com







Litsinger said:


> There have been a few recent studies which have examined the genetic make-up of varroa mites in two resistant populations (Gotland and Toulouse)...


----------



## crofter (May 5, 2011)

Litsinger said:


> I'm game- how do we work on the mite to be less virulent?
> 
> Thankfully, it appears that the suite of traits conferring resistance to varroa are a toolset that is already inherent in the species- and I expect will be utilized and selected for when the next novel pest rears its ugly head!


Get on it Russ; On the surface it seems that the mite is kind of a one trick pony! 

I was surprised at Randy Oliver's revelation about how little was known about the nature of its susceptibility to oxalic acid and some of the other tools against it. The different variants developing is a bit scary. Similarly the large number of variant strains in the sacbrood virus; that one is a meaner issue with apis ceranae but rapidly mutating.

Covid is a good example of how devious mother nature is. She takes no sides! I see little evidence that mankind's desires carry any weight.


----------



## James Lee (Apr 29, 2020)

GregB said:


> Disagreed.
> This is exactly one indication of that counter-productive T/F binary approach.
> Such rigid position on bad/good definitions is not productive.
> What about the nuances?
> ...


Feeding is propping according to the rigidity of that groups leaders. Their hypocrisy allows them leeway to say they are not sufficiently intervening into the course of the colony - and "letting them bee." 

I don't think feeding is treating. I'm not sure if you are understanding what I meant.


----------



## James Lee (Apr 29, 2020)

Oldtimer said:


> Feeding bees is not "propping them up".
> 
> Back in the bad old days when a certain moderator was in charge and defining things, the fact that bees store food up for the very purpose of getting themselves through the lean times was ignored, in favor of the idea that by bad or lazy beekeeping you could remove all the honey from a hive or split or otherwise leave a hive with zero or near zero honey at a time when there was no natural food available. IE, leave them in an unsurvivable situation that you would not inflict on any other kind of animal, but if they died, they were "bad genetics, we don't want those bad bees anyway".
> 
> ...


Again - as in Greg's response, I am not communicating clearly apparently. According to THAT groups practice feeding is not "labeled" as a treatment and is "permitted" discussion, but by their practice and yokes bore upon others to fall within their parameters of "treatment free" it is about "intent" not necessarily practice. 

I agree with you about the practice of feeding - it's within acceptable practice, but if they were true to their "pedigree" feeding is propping.


----------



## James Lee (Apr 29, 2020)

AHudd said:


> I was trying to point out that their rigid definition of TF seems to have softened a bit with the departure of one the more radical members. Hopefully, more people will join the conversation and not be shut out because they want to prevent their bees from starving by feeding them some sugar.
> 
> Alex


I disagree - they've gotten worse.


----------



## msl (Sep 6, 2016)

James Lee said:


> Both the sheer minority of TF beeks in general with good data or demonstrative evidence


yet, for quite a while TF keepers were the vast majority (number of keepers, not volume of hives) like 70+% if you believe the BIP numbers
one might ask them self's, then why such evidence doesn't exist in volume
the answer would seem to be its do to the much touted methods being incompatible with achieving the goals



James Lee said:


> arbitrary and up front interpretation based on the individual making the judgment as to whether or not you are legitimate treatment free or not.


right, and there is the rub, just about anything the beekeeper does or doesn't do impacts the bees "natural selection"
the simple act of hiveing a swarm with a few drawn combs dubbles its chances over "wild" survival, this props up poor stock as it




AHudd said:


> was trying to point out that their rigid definition of TF seems to have softened a bit with the departure of one the more radical members.


it was more like an entire generation of TF beekeeprs, they more or less got Darwined (quit or turned to treatments... I did the former and then when I got back in to bees the later) as there ways were selected against by realty. If you don't have resorces come spring to put you best gentnics in, you don't make enuff good gennics to make progress but before they left the drove a large about of very experienced beekeepers away... the TF fourm slow down was driven by the lack of TF keepers



Litsinger said:


> So maybe we should not be waiting for a ubiquitous TF bee, but rather a bee which will demonstrate sufficient resistance / tolerance in our specific locale and management paradigm.


Yep
if we all focused on restiance instead of "binary" beekeeping (you have to treat every hive/you can't treat any hive) we might see some real progress
organic IPM....treat what needs it, don't treat what doesn't, and the mite counts give you the data you need to make breeding/propagation selection


----------



## James Lee (Apr 29, 2020)

msl said:


> Yep
> if we all focused on restiance instead of "binary" beekeeping (you have to treat every hive/you can't treat any hive) we might see some real progress
> organic IPM....treat what needs it, don't treat what doesn't, and the mite counts give you the data you need to make breeding/propagation selection


Randy Oliver made some remarks earlier this year in ABJ regarding treating colonies that were at a specific threshold having caused loss of otherwise resistant colonies - because he arbitrarily treated at 2% he found some of those colonies were actually bringing the counts down to zero. This raises the "threshold" debate....

Mite counts are part of the puzzle, but as its alluded here in other ways by other posters, there is a conglomeration of data points that beekeepers need to be evaluating and making decisions on when treating or not treating and selecting not selecting etc..But without the education about pursuing this being more readily available, we risk recreation of the issues created by that TF name that shall remain unnamed...lol


----------



## Litsinger (Jun 14, 2018)

crofter said:


> On the surface it seems that the mite is kind of a one trick pony!


Based on everything we know to-date, it seems we have little means to address the virulence in mites without selecting for resilience in our bees.


----------



## crofter (May 5, 2011)

_"Based on everything we know to-date, it seems we have little means to address the virulence in mites without "_...........?

This feels like it validates the point that maybe we should redirect more of our efforts into the cause, not the victim.


----------



## msl (Sep 6, 2016)

James Lee said:


> treating colonies that were at a specific threshold having caused loss of otherwise resistant colonies -


no colony's were lost, they just weren't selected as breeder stock. Randy treats at what he feels is the economic threshold for his operation... that has nothing to do with survival off treatment ( Ie a colony that lived TF but doesn't make grade for almonds is about the same a dead out ) like wise just because the conly lived, doesn't make it a breeder.


James Lee said:


> there is a conglomeration of data points that beekeepers need to be evaluating and making decisions on when treating or not treating and selecting not selecting etc.


yes and no
time and time again we see its realy as simple as controlling your mateing and selecting for low mite counts, this has been repulacted time and time again ... the issue is controlling the mateing and the loss of traits in the out crossing.. ie meaing as a little guy you have to buy queens every year or 2 from some one doing the work


----------



## Litsinger (Jun 14, 2018)

crofter said:


> This feels like it validates the point that maybe we should redirect more of our efforts into the cause, not the victim.


I can certainly agree with this sentiment- unfortunately, the more we treat, the more virulent the mites become. So we need:

1. Better treatments and/or;

2. Better bees.

I expect it's not an either/or, but I do think that the most sustainable solution is ultimately going to be genetic.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

James Lee said:


> Feeding is propping according to the rigidity of that groups leaders. Their hypocrisy allows them leeway to say they are not sufficiently intervening into the course of the colony - and "letting them bee."
> 
> I don't think feeding is treating. I'm not sure if you are understanding what I meant.


Thanks JL, understood.

To me, as a retired queen breeder, the more traits one aims for in a breeding program, the harder it is to achieve them. So for example if you are just aiming for one trait alone, say, gentleness, it is much easier to achieve that than if you also want honey production, low swarming, and correct spring buildup timing for a particular location, it might take years to get all that in one bee, if you ever do at all.

When I used to see the absolutism in the TF posts about the evils of feeding sugar, the thought always ran through my mind that mite resistance, and use of feed, are two different traits and by insisting on both, just makes the real job of achieving mite resistance harder. Surviving on reasonable resources is already bred into our bees and not something we need to work on achieving, those guys were just needlessly wasting bees.

On the other hand, nearly all of the "bond" bee breeding programs as discussed on the various forums, was done in a completely unscientific and over simplistic manner, and wasting bees through poor and lazy beekeeping probably made little difference to the end result. As demonstrated by the main proponent from back then who thanks to swarm collecting, cutouts, and splitting, (which he termed "expansion model beekeeping"), had literally hundreds of bee colonies pass through his hands over the years. But out of all that, by the time he announced he was quitting, as I understand it he only had 2 living hives to sell, and they were collected swarms. IE, years of hard bond ended up in 100% loss of all genetics.


----------



## crofter (May 5, 2011)

Litsinger said:


> I can certainly agree with this sentiment- unfortunately, the more we treat, the more virulent the mites become. So we need:
> 
> 1. Better treatments and/or;
> 
> ...


Treating and increased virulence--- concurrence or causation? We dont know what is the Achilles Heel of the mites. How about talking that up? The virulence most likely would disappear if the mites breeding success was only slightly lowered. The mite vectored virus is apparently the major killer. Trying to change the bee (which prior to the mites appearance was not considered to need changing), seems ath backwards! 
The mite is the problem!


----------



## Litsinger (Jun 14, 2018)

crofter said:


> The virulence most likely would disappear if the mites breeding success was only slightly lowered.


If this were so, then the threshold for economic damage would not continue on it's downward trajectory.

While I concur there is much we do not know, what is without dispute is that varroa mites (and the diseases they amplify) are around to stay.

So we've reached a proverbial fork in the road- and based on their illustrious history and dynamic genetic toolkit, I'm going to throw my lot in with the bees.


----------



## crofter (May 5, 2011)

Litsinger said:


> If this were so, then the threshold for economic damage would not continue on it's downward trajectory.
> 
> While I concur there is much we do not know, what is without dispute is that varroa mites (and the diseases they amplify) are around to stay.
> 
> So we've reached a proverbial fork in the road- and based on their illustrious history and dynamic genetic toolkit, I'm going to throw my lot in with the bees.


Russ could you unpack that first sentence; I am not following.
Mite breeding success is roughly 2 reproductions per 14 day cycle which gives the mites exponential growth relative to bees. If it was linear there would be different implications. My reason for suggesting that a relatively small interference with mite breeding success could change the game greatly in bees favor.
There are many of bees habits and characteristics that can quite easily be tuned and selected for local conditiions, such as aggressiveness, swarminess, overbrooding, propollis usage, early or late brood up, early foraging, hot weather tolerance etc. lots of low hanging fruit there to pick and choose from.

We have managed somewhat parallel traits in sheep varieties but so far no wolf proofing!


----------



## Litsinger (Jun 14, 2018)

crofter said:


> Russ could you unpack that first sentence; I am not following.


My apologies, Frank. I see now you are talking about mite reproduction rate and not mite load. Got it.

So you are looking for a treatment or gene-editing approach to reducing mite reproductive potential?

This is certainly intriguing and I hope something along these lines comes forth.

In the meantime I expect a parallel approach toward uncapping/recapping and VSH selection will continue to bear fruit.


----------



## Litsinger (Jun 14, 2018)

crofter said:


> We have managed somewhat parallel traits in sheep varieties but so far no wolf proofing!





Litsinger said:


> As Dr. Friedrich Ruttner pointed out after seeing the results of Dr. Kefuss' work, “_...it turns out that sheep can be bred against wolves.”_


----------



## msl (Sep 6, 2016)

mites spread from collapsing hives, this is what drives virulence

to stop the virulence cycle from continuing we need to stop the reproduction advantage they get form collapsing hives before winter and the flying weather stops... less vurianlt lines that kill the hive later in the season don't get to spread and die with the hive



crofter said:


> . My reason for suggesting that a relatively small interference with mite breeding success could change the game greatly in bees favor.


it could, but it could also lead to a more virulent mite/virus combo as there is still a great advantage in causing the hive to collapse before winter stops the bees flying.

That said it would be instering to look at say SA mites vurliance


----------



## James Lee (Apr 29, 2020)

msl said:


> mites spread from collapsing hives, this is what drives virulence
> 
> to stop the virulence cycle from continuing we need to stop the reproduction advantage they get form collapsing hives before winter and the flying weather stops... less vurianlt lines that kill the hive later in the season don't get to spread and die with the hive
> 
> ...


Jurassic Park comes to mind. Nature finds a way.


----------



## James Lee (Apr 29, 2020)

Oldtimer said:


> Thanks JL, understood.
> 
> To me, as a retired queen breeder, the more traits one aims for in a breeding program, the harder it is to achieve them. So for example if you are just aiming for one trait alone, say, gentleness, it is much easier to achieve that than if you also want honey production, low swarming, and correct spring buildup timing for a particular location, it might take years to get all that in one bee, if you ever do at all.
> 
> ...


Again that ghost needs to go haunt elsewhere. Theres too much knowledge from the experienced beeks around here to get snagged up on the vacuum of SPs failures or vitriol.

Weve also learned tons more since the hay day of his pinnacle fame. Regardless, Kefuss and many others have demonstrative scientific evidence and there are growing bodies of research illustrating resistance and additive genetic traits that even hobbyists can leverage. 

The education and tolerance of one another is where the ghost of Sp and the vitriol of that groups leadership loses its credibility... Therefore thats where we need to continue heading...

My bees dont pay rent, if im not mite bombing my neighbors and actively selecting for a solution, my losses are your gains...

We should support those who want to work on the solution not malign them because of wannabes.


----------



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

James Lee said:


> Jurassic Park comes to mind. Nature finds a way.


As a reader of the Gospel I am pretty sure the whole we live in a fallen/degenerate world should have some bearing. More so than Jurassic park. A fiction based on creatures that didn't adapt to the curve balls nature threw at them.
There is exceedingly more examples of creatures and plants going extinct or never regaining their former vigor or habitat than the opposite being true.

This coming from a reformed treatment free guy of about 5-6 years I might add. 

Genetics have their place but they also have limitations. Then there is the "competition's" genetics. Varroa, viruses, other stressors, and maybe a new mite on the way? They are very good at what they do.

After 20 years of observing and participating in treatment free I say we need less dogma, more data, and more realistic expectations.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

James Lee said:


> Kefuss and many others have demonstrative scientific evidence and there are growing bodies of research illustrating resistance and additive genetic traits that even hobbyists can leverage.


I'm not so sure about that, at days end Kefuss may have proved the opposite. Because for many years he spoke about his mite resistant bees, and one of his claims to fame was challenging visitors to his apiary to look in a hive and try to find a mite. If they could find one he would give them some money, I think it was the equivalent of a dollar or two, but he did not have to pay out very often.

But when he grew old and handed the business to his son, the bees began dying of mites and in only a season or so the son had to start treating for mites just to prevent a complete wipeout. 

So we are left wondering if the bees were truly mite resistant, or was something else at play while Kefuss senior was their carer.


----------



## A Novice (Sep 15, 2019)

Kamon A. Reynolds said:


> As a reader of the Gospel I am pretty sure the whole we live in a fallen/degenerate world should have some bearing. More so than Jurassic park. A fiction based on creatures that didn't adapt to the curve balls nature threw at them.
> There is exceedingly more examples of creatures and plants going extinct or never regaining their former vigor or habitat than the opposite being true.
> 
> This coming from a reformed treatment free guy of about 5-6 years I might add.
> ...


Agreed.

People talk about bees evolving, but they are not. They are adapting. On the time frames we are talking about, the chances of a beneficial mutation are practically nil. So we need to work with the inherent genetic diversity of the species.

And the BOND method will not be helpful for that, for several reasons. 

First it reduces genetic diversity, which is the only weapon we have. Nothing delays population based varroa resistance as effectively as BOND.

Second it has essentially zero statistical power. There is no control group and the sample size is 1. If you try BOND with 100 hives, you are running 100 experiments each with a sample size of 1. There is still no statistical validity to what you are doing. It looks like a way to find better bees, but it isn't. If you have a hive that survives BOND, you don't know if it is different from the ones that didn't survive. Using it to propagate more hives is unlikely to work, as many have seen. Funny thing about statistics.

In a real experiment you have two populations which are different in some way, and you compare how the different poplations do on average relative to some measurement to see if one population is better than the other.

Third, most of the time your bees will die (unnecessarily) which is cruel, discouraging, and expensive. Encouraging new beekeepers to go BOND is like telling children to play in traffic.

Sorry for the rant.

The problem with varroa is that in much of the managed colony ecosystem the mites will kill off all of the managed colonies. The pressure on the bees from varroa is simply too high, and no bees will survive unless something is done to keep them alive. This isn't true everywhere, but it is true for most areas where commercial, sideliner, and hobby beekeepers coexist. It also isn't true for unmanaged colonies in many areas. But beekeepers don't keep bees in a similar manner to unmanaged colonies.

So in order for superior genetics to emerge, there are two things that are somewhat helpful.

The first is to lower the selection pressure such that selection can occur while minimizing the loss of genetic diversity. The easy way to do that is to treat. The more difficult way is some form of TF where mostly the bees survive. Even treated hives do better if the bees have superior mite resistance. Hives that do well are more likely to be propagated from, and thus superior genetics can emerge. This is the opposite of BOND which is why it will work. However, it may take 100 or 1000 generations for it to work. That is reality. It might also take fewer, but there doesn't seem to be much evidence for that.

The second is to observe characteristics (such as mite biting, brood uncapping, etc.) and select bees which have those traits. Breeding and doing controlled experiments with bees that display such characteristics will speed up the process of finding resistance somewhat. However, getting those characteristics to predominate in the general population is difficult, and made more difficult by the large feral populations and the polyandrous behavior of queens when mating. There is also the risk of reduced genetic diversity and of the domestication of honey bees.
This activity may speed up the process of population wide resistance somewhat.

However, those hoping for bee genetics to provide the solution to Varroa should look at how effective Apis Cerana is at surviving with Varroa. Apis Cerana survives with Varroa by

1) Having very small colonies 
2) Swarming often
3) Producing brood (especially drone brood) somewhat sporadically.
4) Absconding if the mite levels get too high, leaving infected brood behind.

If this is the best that nature can do, given that Apis Cerana has lived with the mite for a long time, then it looks to me like Apis Mellifera has achieved at least that much resistance.

If you have a colony that fits in a large shoe box, that swarms 3 or 4 times a year and has significant brood breaks, it will probably survive just fine. So maybe the idea that the bees will "naturally evolve" tolerance for Varroa is incorrect.

The mites are also adapting, and since their lifecycle is much quicker than that of the bees, they will probably be able to keep up.

So enjoy your bees, and keep them alive some way.


----------



## James Lee (Apr 29, 2020)

Kamon A. Reynolds said:


> As a reader of the Gospel I am pretty sure the whole we live in a fallen/degenerate world should have some bearing. More so than Jurassic park. A fiction based on creatures that didn't adapt to the curve balls nature threw at them.
> There is exceedingly more examples of creatures and plants going extinct or never regaining their former vigor or habitat than the opposite being true.
> 
> This coming from a reformed treatment free guy of about 5-6 years I might add.
> ...


Both sides Kamon. Both sides. The dogma and partisanship is apparent in so many ways. 

We all could use an Ian Malcolm about now. Im also certain Varroa are satans spawn. Reading Jurassic Park reveals what MSL was pointing out, all the tricks in the world won't stop nature from doing its thing. Just when man thinks he figured it out, it adapted. The dinosaurs in Jurassic Park were bred without the ability to reproduce, but man in all his hubris used frogs, who can asexually reproduce to amend the dino DNA. 

Great examples of nature doing its thing...(or creation should we call it that), synthetic acaricide resistance and of late the issues with Amitraz. 


I would agree with data. Thats what I mentioned earlier, plenty of people claiming success but no data. Data, particularly regarding the inferiority historically and then currently regarding acaricides against an adapting and ever evolving animal like Varroa and soon the Tropilaelops...we need better solutions. As a commercial beek I would think that the veracity Varroa continues to show in the face of treatments should have as all very worried. 

Sustainability in beekeeping has often more to do with me and my bees in this lifetime and just like TF we need to redefine that, because if the practice results in dead bees imminently and in scale for the futur generations, its not sustainable beekeeping.


But, like in the Gospel when Jesus was told to silence his followers - he said even if he did the rocks would cry out...so as even with proof many dogmatic beekeepers would still reject evidence if their dogma was compromised by it.


----------



## Snarge (May 4, 2015)

A Novice said:


> Agreed.
> 
> People talk about bees evolving, but they are not. They are adapting. On the time frames we are talking about, the chances of a beneficial mutation are practically nil. So we need to work with the inherent genetic diversity of the species.
> 
> ...


A Novice

Fwiw, that may be one of the most complete and inclusive bee-mite relationship summaries I’ve ever read. Well-written and, absolutely, not taken as a rant by me, at least.

It also helps to provide encouragement for those of us with locally-adapted bees who are able to keep the mite/virus level at a balance where the bees remain healthy and productive.

Thank you for taking the time to document those thoughts so eloquently.


----------



## James Lee (Apr 29, 2020)

Oldtimer said:


> I'm not so sure about that, at days end Kefuss may have proved the opposite. Because for many years he spoke about his mite resistant bees, and one of his claims to fame was challenging visitors to his apiary to look in a hive and try to find a mite. If they could find one he would give them some money, I think it was the equivalent of a dollar or two, but he did not have to pay out very often.
> 
> But when he grew old and handed the business to his son, the bees began dying of mites and in only a season or so the son had to start treating for mites just to prevent a complete wipeout.
> 
> So we are left wondering if the bees were truly mite resistant, or was something else at play while Kefuss senior was their carer.


Yeah, I dont know what hes doing, but I dont know that youd want me to walk into your apiary and take over then have your success arbitrated by my failures would you?

The one thing this proves is the generational dilemma we face with outcrossing. It also makes us wonder what his particular handicaps were and what changed regionally? Just like that it can all be wiped out, theres ni magic bullet bee and there's no magic bullet treatment. Which is why I said we need to be working cooperatively without the polarity. 

Commercial guys dont want me mite bombing them and I dont want them crowding my local DCAs, but if theh have better genetics and we have better genetics and we are all dumping those into the breeding populations en masse isolation becomes less of a primary factor in success. But we wont get there with dogma like Kamon said.


----------



## James Lee (Apr 29, 2020)

crofter said:


> _"Based on everything we know to-date, it seems we have little means to address the virulence in mites without "_...........?
> 
> This feels like it validates the point that maybe we should redirect more of our efforts into the cause, not the victim.


I like that. But, I genuinely mean this, cant we say that is a bulk of beekeeping education? Treating and addressing the cause?


----------



## James Lee (Apr 29, 2020)

msl said:


> time and time again we see its realy as simple as controlling your mateing and selecting for low mite counts, this has been repulacted time and time again ... the issue is controlling the mateing and the loss of traits in the out crossing.. ie meaing as a little guy you have to buy queens every year or 2 from some one doing the work


Im delusional and think I can do this with my 5 apiaries so I can supply my own queens to myself. But I otherwise agree, and telling a beekeeper who wants to be TF this at the beginning is good advice, two hives aren't going to cut it when faced with genuine pressure. 

I like Randy's self admitted snafu, I appreciate that he admitted it. He continues to add to his TF yard with genetics and is more scrutinizing before prophylactically treating colonies. Again, something I feel needs to be inherent in teaching others...


----------



## Litsinger (Jun 14, 2018)

Oldtimer said:


> But when he grew old and handed the business to his son, the bees began dying of mites and in only a season or so the son had to start treating for mites just to prevent a complete wipeout.


To be fair, the good Dr. Kefuss still (in his 80's) manages a very successful TF queen breeding operation. As to the commercial operation, here is the explanation in his own words:



Litsinger said:


> _My son Cyril treats because like most beekeepers ”he doesn’t have time” to do testing and keep records... at least that is what he tells me. Since he is not a queen breeder he does not see the financial advantage for him of loosing colonies and figures that it is cheaper to treat. So I have to respect his business choice. Since I produce virgin queens for him he is actually doing a soft bond test with my genetic material. For that reason all the 238 virgin queens from 9 different lines that I passed him in 2020 were marked with a number. When he works through his hives if he sees something that is correct he tells me the number. That way he does not have to do a lot of note taking and I can follow my genetic material. Also when I help him from time to time with his hive inspections I take a few notes on the hive list that I maintain for him. If I see something that is good I breed queens from it and test it out in my Bond Test._


I fear that we often pursue easy answers and easy excuses - where it appears there is more than enough evidence to suggest this is a multi-faceted and dynamic issue that often suffers from reductionism.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

So as I understand that explanation, the operation was handed to the son in 2020 and Kefuss senior still supplies marked queens for the hives, but the son has to treat anyhow or face losses of an order not acceptable to a commercial operation?


----------



## James Lee (Apr 29, 2020)

A Novice said:


> Agreed.
> 
> 1) Having very small colonies
> 2) Swarming often
> ...


Dont forget the social apoptosis when dealing with the viruses! Which I believe there are some budding studies indicating this appearing in mellifera.


----------



## Litsinger (Jun 14, 2018)

Oldtimer said:


> So as I understand that explanation, the operation was handed to the son in 2020 and Kefuss senior still supplies marked queens for the hives, but the son has to treat anyhow or face losses of an order not acceptable to a commercial operation?


I believe the production operation was handed over to his son round about 2010. I think @msl's description below has it about right. 

I don't mind at all to ask Dr. Kefuss for a more detailed explanation of the transition of the production operation from TF to TX if there is genuine interest in this information, but I expect that it generally comes down to the sentiment that if we are not looking for resistance we certainly won't find it.



msl said:


> By 2010 Cyril has taken over the honey production of the operation McNeil (2010) ABJ we also see the mite counts in the 2015 paper end in 2010
> 2012 he takes 70+% losses
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Litsinger (Jun 14, 2018)

Kamon A. Reynolds said:


> After 20 years of observing and participating in treatment free I say we need less dogma, more data, and more realistic expectations.


Kamon:

Glad to see you back on the boards. I am genuinely curious- if the VSH queens you got from Cory this year pan-out, how do you see these genetics being incorporated into your operation?


----------



## Litsinger (Jun 14, 2018)

A Novice said:


> So enjoy your bees, and keep them alive some way.


Jon:

Thanks for your feedback. Just to make sure we are all on the same page:

1. You speak often of employing treatments as a means to protect genetic diversity. While I am aware of some of this going on with native bee populations in Europe, I am unaware of any studies in the US which suggest that our bee population diversity is at-risk. Are you aware of anything along these lines which supports this position?

2. While often used interchangeably, there is a fundamental difference between resistance and tolerance:

Resistance defines the,_ Ability of a host to limit parasite burden. _(In other words, it is a representation of a colony’s ability to check mite population growth). 

An example of this would be the University of Guelph's LVG program:



https://www.researchgate.net/publication/223978513_Genotypic_variability_and_relationships_between_mite_infestation_levels_mite_damage_grooming_intensity_and_removal_of_Varroa_destructor_mites_in_selected_strains_of_worker_honey_bees_Apis_mellifera_L



Tolerance on the other hand defines the,_ Ability of a host to limit the damage caused by a given parasite burden. _(This it is represented by the relative lack of disease prevalence in the colony irrespective of mite population). 

An example of this would be the Bee Weaver program:









Multi-tiered analyses of honey bees that resist or succumb to parasitic mites and viruses - BMC Genomics


Background Varroa destructor mites, and the numerous viruses they vector to their honey bee hosts, are among the most serious threats to honey bee populations, causing mortality and morbidity to both the individual honey bee and colony, the negative effects of which convey to the pollination...




bmcgenomics.biomedcentral.com





3. When we speak of bees that are able to survive in the face of mite pressure, we often talk in monolithic terms when the reality is there are many mechanisms at work within both the global bee and mite populations around the world that are dynamic and not easy to define in absolute terms. Here are three good studies that underscore this reality:









Advances and perspectives in selecting resistance traits against the parasitic mite Varroa destructor in honey bees - Genetics Selection Evolution


Background In spite of the implementation of control strategies in honey bee (Apis mellifera) keeping, the invasive parasitic mite Varroa destructor remains one of the main causes of colony losses in numerous countries. Therefore, this parasite represents a serious threat to beekeeping and...




gsejournal.biomedcentral.com













Natural selection, selective breeding, and the evolution of resistance of honeybees (Apis mellifera) against Varroa - Zoological Letters


We examine evidence for natural selection resulting in Apis mellifera becoming tolerant or resistant to Varroa mites in different bee populations. We discuss traits implicated in Varroa resistance and how they can be measured. We show that some of the measurements used are ambiguous, as they...




zoologicalletters.biomedcentral.com













Geographical Distribution and Selection of European Honey Bees Resistant to Varroa destructor


Developing resistance to the varroa mite in honey bees is a major goal for apicultural science and practice, the development of selection strategies and the availability of resistant stock. Here we present an extended literature review and survey of resistant populations and selection programs...




www.mdpi.com





I think it is likely more informative to study individual populations for the underpinnings that drive the bee/mite dynamic as one can better elucidate the genetic, behavioral, environmental and management forces at work that are driving selection.


----------



## James Lee (Apr 29, 2020)

msl said:


> Yep
> if we all focused on restiance instead of "binary" beekeeping (you have to treat every hive/you can't treat any hive) we might see some real progress
> organic IPM....treat what needs it, don't treat what doesn't, and the mite counts give you the data you need to make breeding/propagation selection


This however is commercially nonviable - and our current agricultural/market demand does not permit the economical impact employing these practices would generate. So then what? The interest of small-scale in TF to produce the solution lacks the sheer volume to impress the commercial industry for adoption and market availability stagnates.

How do we get to the point of gross buy-in? The more bees with better genetics the better the outcomes for all no? Maybe - but seems we're stalemated...


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

Oldtimer said:


> So as I understand that explanation, the operation was handed to the son in 2020 and Kefuss senior still supplies marked queens for the hives, but the son has to treat anyhow or face losses of an order not acceptable to a commercial operation?


Commercial production of honey is very different from commercial production of queens or bees.
Add the local nuances on the top.

For example, with the honey it is critical one must time their colony management to the local flows to max the crop.
This right there what drives your season and should explain some of the nuances of treatment requirement.
No?

IMO - it is not really fair to compare the queen sellers vs. the bee sellers vs. the honey producers.
Different businesses.
Different seasonal calendars.
Different treatment requirements that one can get away with, in fact.


----------



## James Lee (Apr 29, 2020)

GregB said:


> Commercial production of honey is very different from commercial production of queens or bees.
> Add the local nuances on the top.
> 
> For example, with the honey it is critical one must time their colony management to the local flows to max the crop.
> ...


I think I hit my head....I am agreeing with you again..bwahah


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

James Lee said:


> I think I hit my head....I am agreeing with you again..bwahah


Right.
I mean comparing queen sellers to honey producers is used all over the discussions here.
Not fair.
Not proper.

Comparing Honda Civic to F-150 is not proper - these vehicles have different business requirements (even though having lots in common).


----------



## msl (Sep 6, 2016)

A Novice said:


> If you have a hive that survives BOND, you don't know if it is different from the ones that didn't survive.Using it to propagate more hives is unlikely to work, as many have seen. Funny thing about statistics


disagree,
Bond, as used by Kefuss slected breeder queens based on mite counts. the breeders were then used to requeen the entire operation on a yearly basics. Removing treatments was just a way to pre screen the hives so you spent less time testing....

The TF gurus then held it up as proof of "natural selection" (it was human selection) and sense very few people acualy read kefus' work they believed that "let them die and split what lives" was proven to work, when it wasn't and hasn't


> requeening with queen cells and virgin queens from the best 1–5 colonies in each group throughout the field test. Low mite levels and general colony performance such as the ability to rear high-quality queens and honey production determined selection of the breeding material.


 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/00218839.2016.1160709



Oldtimer said:


> So we are left wondering if the bees were truly mite resistant, or was something else at play while Kefuss senior was their carer.


as Russ notes its likly the son triping on the selection tread mill and not keeping up

however... It seems that John's work may have had the predictable effect of breeding stronger mites that can over come the bees slected ristance


> With full‐sibling mating common among Varroa , this can rapidly select for virulent, highly inbred, Varroa populations. We investigated how the evolution of host resistance could affect the infesting population of Varroa mites. We screened a Varroa‐resistant honey bee population near Toulouse, France, for a Varroa resistance trait: the inhibition of Varroa's reproduction in drone pupae. We then genotyped Varroa which had co‐infested a cell using microsatellites. Across all resistant honey bee colonies, Varroa's reproductive success was significantly higher in co‐infested cells but the distribution of Varroa between singly and multiply infested cells was not different from random. While there was a trend for increased reproductive success when Varroa of differing haplotypes co‐infested a cell, this was not significant. This suggests local mate competition, through the presence of another Varroa foundress in a pupal cell, may be enough to help Varroa overcome host resistance traits; with a critical mass of infesting Varroa overwhelming host resistance.


 https://www.researchgate.net/public...g_resistant_honey_bee_Apis_mellifera_colonies



Oldtimer said:


> So as I understand that explanation, the operation was handed to the son in 2020


before that,


> Time brings change. Kefuss has turned over honey production in the French apiaries to his son Cyril, remarking “It’s easier to lift a queen than a deep super of honey.”


 Mcneil(2010) http://ncbees.org/library/John Kefuss Keeping Bees That Keep Themselves.pdf&.pdf

70% losses 2012


----------



## Litsinger (Jun 14, 2018)

msl said:


> however... It seems that John's work may have had the predictable effect of breeding stronger mites that can over come the bees slected ristance


One of the more counterintuitive findings from the research:

_'Our results show that, when Varroa resistance is allowed to develop by natural selection, it is possible for a host–parasite relationship to evolve. The increased reproductive success we identify when Varroa co-infests the drone pupae of resistant honey bee colonies means that, in contrast to acaricide-treated colonies, there may be selection for outbred offspring. This, combined with a small proportion of Varroa reproducing in each generation, could reduce the selective pressure for the evolution of more virulent counter resistance traits and result in a more stable host–parasite relationship.'_


----------



## A Novice (Sep 15, 2019)

GregB said:


> Commercial production of honey is very different from commercial production of queens or bees.
> Add the local nuances on the top.
> 
> For example, with the honey it is critical one must time their colony management to the local flows to max the crop.
> ...


And (even without considering varroa) completely different hive management strategies, different revenue per hive, and different labor costs per hive.


----------



## A Novice (Sep 15, 2019)

Litsinger said:


> One of the more counterintuitive findings from the research:
> 
> _'Our results show that, when Varroa resistance is allowed to develop by natural selection, it is possible for a host–parasite relationship to evolve. The increased reproductive success we identify when Varroa co-infests the drone pupae of resistant honey bee colonies means that, in contrast to acaricide-treated colonies, there may be selection for outbred offspring. This, combined with a small proportion of Varroa reproducing in each generation, could reduce the selective pressure for the evolution of more virulent counter resistance traits and result in a more stable host–parasite relationship.'_


I love the weasel words.

It is _possible_...

there _may_ be...

_could_ reduce...

However, the weasel they hired to write this prefers to be referred to as a mink.

(apologies to Scott Adams, I stole his line.)

No offense Russ, but what they are saying is they didn't find this at all. 

If I had 20 hours or so to spare, I could wade into the text of the paper and find out if they actually found anything at all, But the prose of their conclusion is so dense it makes my head hurt. Not willing to spend the time.


----------



## Litsinger (Jun 14, 2018)

A Novice said:


> No offense Russ, but what they are saying is they didn't find this at all.


I think we've already been down this road...

It appears in my very humble view that most of the framework is based on previous studies on the issue:

_'When mite density in a colony is low, the search time for an already-infested cell increases (Fuchs, 1992). Eventually, it could be expected that the fitness cost of entering an uninfested cell, and undergoing an inbred or failed reproductive cycle, will become less than that of continuing the search and risking reduced fertility or mortality (Charnov, 1976; Nazzi & Le Conte, 2016; Parker & Maynard Smith, 1990; Rosenkranz et al., 2010). This could explain why we detected significant differences in Varroa's reproductive success between singly and multiply infested cells but not in the distribution of Varroa among cells; any mechanism to detect and preferentially enter already-infested cells may not be used often enough to warrant its maintenance by selection. Therefore, the only criterion Varroa uses when deciding to enter a cell is whether it is of the right age, although this leaves open the question of why Varroa is still more likely to successfully reproduce when infesting a cell with other foundresses, that could be the result of local mate competition (Hamilton, 1967).'_


----------



## A Novice (Sep 15, 2019)

Litsinger said:


> Jon:
> 
> Thanks for your feedback. Just to make sure we are all on the same page:
> 
> 1. You speak often of employing treatments as a means to protect genetic diversity. While I am aware of some of this going on with native bee populations in Europe, I am unaware of any studies in the US which suggest that our bee population diversity is at-risk. Are you aware of anything along these lines which supports this position?


Every time a colony dies, some genetic diversity is lost.

Do you agree?

Since the genetic diversity in the bee population is the only tool we have for developing more resistant bees, and we do not know which pieces need to fit together to provide a more resistant bee which also is a reasonable bee for human use, it makes sense to preserve what we have. In addition, genetics which are irrelevant to varroa resistance may be crucial for the next thing to come along and threaten the survival of the bees. This is specifically with reference to BOND, which I consider so foolish, wasteful, cruel, and unscientific as to be immoral as an offense against reason and decency.

A righteous man regards the life of his animal, But the tender mercies of the wicked are cruel. Proverbs 12:10


----------



## Litsinger (Jun 14, 2018)

A Novice said:


> Every time a colony dies, some genetic diversity is lost.
> 
> Do you agree?


Only if the colony represents unique genetics that have been recently introduced to the population. More important might be preserving unique populations (i.e. subspecies or landraces) that are at risk of being wiped-out- but I suspect this risk is more likely from outbreeding depression than it is from varroa.


----------



## A Novice (Sep 15, 2019)

Litsinger said:


> I think we've already been down this road...
> 
> It appears in my very humble view that most of the framework is based on previous studies on the issue:
> 
> _'When mite density in a colony is low, the search time for an already-infested cell increases (Fuchs, 1992). Eventually, it could be expected that the fitness cost of entering an uninfested cell, and undergoing an inbred or failed reproductive cycle, will become less than that of continuing the search and risking reduced fertility or mortality (Charnov, 1976; Nazzi & Le Conte, 2016; Parker & Maynard Smith, 1990; Rosenkranz et al., 2010). This could explain why we detected significant differences in Varroa's reproductive success between singly and multiply infested cells but not in the distribution of Varroa among cells; any mechanism to detect and preferentially enter already-infested cells may not be used often enough to warrant its maintenance by selection. Therefore, the only criterion Varroa uses when deciding to enter a cell is whether it is of the right age, although this leaves open the question of why Varroa is still more likely to successfully reproduce when infesting a cell with other foundresses, that could be the result of local mate competition (Hamilton, 1967).'_


So did they find the things they talk about in the conclusion? Yes or no?
What is the magnitude of the effect? (numerical)?

And (in plain English) what is the effect they found?

Not trying to be combative, but I *H *Hate weasel words.


----------



## little_john (Aug 4, 2014)

Litsinger said:


> One of the more counterintuitive findings from the research:
> 
> _'Our results show that, when *Varroa resistance is allowed to develop by natural selection*, it is possible for a host–parasite relationship to evolve. '_


How exactly does that work then ?

Natural Selection requires that an advantage be expressed *prior* to reproduction, in order that the next generation be endowed with that advantage. With a parasite such as Varroa, honey-bee reproduction under 'natural conditions' may take place prior to a colony's demise, such that the next 'surviving' generation from that doomed colony is* not* actually endowed with any such advantage. Apparent varroa resistance from survivor colony reproduction in the wild will therefore be illusory, as colonies which may possess some advantage and those which definitely do not will be indistinguishable from each other.

Beekeeper-initiated reproduction from chosen survivor colonies is *human selection* (and thus biased), it is not *natural selection *- which is blind . 

"Weasel-words" ... just love that expression, LOL.
LJ


----------



## Litsinger (Jun 14, 2018)

little_john said:


> Natural Selection requires that an advantage be expressed *prior* to reproduction, in order that the next generation be endowed with that advantage.


@little_john - I may be under thinking your question, but how did the colony under natural selection survive the year before in order to be in a position to reproduce in the Spring?


----------



## little_john (Aug 4, 2014)

Litsinger said:


> @little_john - I may be under thinking your question, but how did the colony under natural selection survive the year before in order to be in a position to reproduce in the Spring?


Mite numbers not high enough to cause colony collapse in the previous year(*) ? Followed by a substantial brood break over the Winter ? Colony thus starts off the new season with a modest mite load - then swarms - then maybe collapes towards Winter. If it doesn't collapse, then it might survive to reproduce again in the same way the following year, but then, it might not. All down to mite numbers/ chance events etc.

There may or may not be an advantage present - the point I was emphasising is that there's no way of identifying an advantage (say, by assaying mite loads in retrospect) without human involvement. Mother Nature is only concerned with a population surviving and prospering (or not), with respect to other populations within the same habitat - either this happens or it doesn't. The mechanism involved is actually irrelevant (except to human curiosity).

I think the expression "Survival of the Fittest" (that is, survival of those organisms which are better suited to an environment, relative to those which aren't) describes the situation perfectly - but the big problem with Varroa is the time delay between the honeybees' typical swarming period and the exponential rise of mite numbers (which then causes the collapse) but which often doesn't occur until much later in the year. 

If either colony collapse, or the bees rendered incapable of swarming, were to happen much more immediately, such as happened with the IoW disease back in the 1920's, then any resulting 'survivor colonies' would have a far greater significance. 
'best,
LJ

(*) I seem to remember reading reports that describes collapse due to a Varroa infestation as often being a two or even three year process.


----------



## Litsinger (Jun 14, 2018)

little_john said:


> ... the point I was emphasising is that there's no way of identifying an advantage (say, by assaying mite loads in retrospect) without human involvement. Mother Nature is only concerned with a population surviving and prospering (or not), with respect to other populations within the same habitat - either this happens or it doesn't. The mechanism involved is actually irrelevant (except to human curiosity).


No argument here. Back to your question:



little_john said:


> How exactly does that work then ?


I'd say it is uncertain, multi-faceted and likely not the same population to population.

Which leads into the next question:



A Novice said:


> So did they find the things they talk about in the conclusion? Yes or no?


Conlon and colleagues had already studied Dr. Kefuss' stock and determined that there is at least one gene that was upregulated in the resistant stock:

A gene for resistance to the Varroa mite (Acari) in honey bee (Apis mellifera) pupae

Knowing this, and knowing that it is generally accepted there is a 'genetic arms race' going on between honey bees and varroa mites, they decided to study the mite side of the equation, expecting to find genetic and/or behavioral responses by the mites to counter the bee's attempts to suppress varroa reproductive success.

As a function of this, they assumed that mites would preferentially seek to coinhabit cells and were surprised to find that this hypothesis was incorrect, at least as regards the stock under consideration. Thus they were left to report and hypothesize:

_We screened a Varroa-resistant honey bee population near Toulouse, France, for a Varroa resistance trait: the inhibition of Varroa's reproduction in drone pupae. We then genotyped Varroa which had co-infested a cell using microsatellites. Across all resistant honey bee colonies, Varroa's reproductive success was significantly higher in co-infested cells but the distribution of Varroa between singly and multiply infested cells was not different from random. While there was a trend for increased reproductive success when Varroa of differing haplotypes co-infested a cell, this was not significant. This suggests local mate competition, through the presence of another Varroa foundress in a pupal cell, may be enough to help Varroa overcome host resistance traits; with a critical mass of infesting Varroa overwhelming host resistance. However, the fitness trade-offs associated with preferentially co-infesting cells may be too high for Varroa to evolve a mechanism to identify already-infested cells. The increased reproductive success of Varroa when co-infesting resistant pupal cells may act as a release valve on the selective pressure for the evolution of counter resistance traits: helping to maintain a stable host–parasite relationship._ 

In other words, the results were not expected- and so they were left to surmise what was going on (much like we are doing now).


----------



## A Novice (Sep 15, 2019)

Litsinger said:


> No argument here. Back to your question:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


This is like saying, "Varroa would have a better chance of reproducing if they could see, but they are blind. We expect to find varroa that have developed vision since it would enhance their mating success, but found that they hadn't, or if they had that weren't using it to their advantage."

The idea that animals evolve structures at will simply because they would be advantageous is nonsense.

Honestly, the Potawatomi stories of how the bear got a short tail, or how the chipmunk got its stripes are better. Equally credible and more entertaining.

I know you love this stuff Russ. But until they demonstrate cause and effect it is just armchair science. It is OK if it is presented as armchair science. But dressing nothing up in unnecessarily thick prose to make it look like something is not helpful.


----------



## Litsinger (Jun 14, 2018)

A Novice said:


> I know you love this stuff Russ. But until they demonstrate cause and effect it is just armchair science. It is OK if it is presented as armchair science. But dressing it up in unnecessarily thick prose to make it look like something is not helpful.


Jon:

In all sincerity, how would you have presented the results of this study?

Conlon and his team set-out to prove the assumption that multiply-infested cells conferred a fitness advantage to varroa and that as a result, varroa would preferentially occupy cells containing at least one other foundress mite.

When this assumption proved to be incorrect (at least within the context of the experiment), they were left to hypothesize as to why this were so.

So how would you have interpreted the data and summarized your findings had this been the result of a study you were involved in?


----------



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

Litsinger said:


> Kamon:
> 
> Glad to see you back on the boards. I am genuinely curious- if the VSH queens you got from Cory this year pan-out, how do you see these genetics being incorporated into your operation?


Hi Litsinger, 

Thanks! Kids, Beekeeping, and Hive Life have me happily busy. I have only had Cory Stevens Queens since late June but so far so good! Next year will be the true test of their behavior/production. I have followed and have chatted with Cory for a while and I like the no bullcrap TF mentality he possesses

My observation so far are these.


Not overly aggressive, but a touch more aggressive than mine.
Some mite suppression behaviors have been observed. Nothing to confirm anything yet though
No signs of any efb, chalk, etc
-build up seem to be good (from nuc to established doubles)

I hope to see comparable (or close) honey yields vs my queens next year and some clear mite suppression.

Realistically, I hope I can get a productive bee that requires less treatment. This would be a huge win for me and for beekeepers. If we can identify and consistently produce a bee that helps us out then we may start to roll down hill a little bit and I can use youtube to start getting a demand going for better bees. 

Money and demand drives innovation. If these work well for me I will be putting some weight behind them.


----------



## Litsinger (Jun 14, 2018)

Kamon A. Reynolds said:


> Money and demand drives innovation. If these work well for me I will be putting some weight behind them.


Kamon:

Thank you for your feedback. I sincerely appreciate it. I do understand the push and pull of the work-life balance, and you certainly have something to be really proud of when it comes to the success of Hive Life.

I often muse that one of the most significant challenges of resistant stock (beyond genetic) is economic- people have to see a demonstrable value in investing in the product that folks like Cory are producing.

To that end, I am grateful that influencers like yourself are willing to give resistant stock a try and report your findings. There is no doubt that should they provide a material benefit to your operation, it will stimulate interest in resistant stock and hopefully serve as the impetus for further investment in this area.

Thanks again for your reply. Happy Thanksgiving to you and your family.

Russ


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

Litsinger said:


> people have to see a demonstrable value in investing in the product


Yep.

No matter how "easy" it may appear to run yet another round of OAV.
This "easy" treatment sales pitch keeps going around.

You still need to allocate the time to go there - the time must be properly set, not a willy-nilly off-day.
You still need to dress up
You still need to get up and walk there (or drive there and burn your fuel).
You still need to be there - *physically present* (and cannot be elsewhere), no matter how "quick" the job is.
Every single time to do the supposed "quick OAV job".

Every quick job has overhead.
Often times, a non-trivial overhead.


----------



## James Lee (Apr 29, 2020)

Kamon A. Reynolds said:


> Hi Litsinger,
> 
> Thanks! Kids, Beekeeping, and Hive Life have me happily busy. I have only had Cory Stevens Queens since late June but so far so good! Next year will be the true test of their behavior/production. I have followed and have chatted with Cory for a while and I like the no bullcrap TF mentality he possesses
> 
> ...


Some of them have hive-tool sensitivity - they don't like my hive tool one bit haha. We are rooting for them in your yards Kamon. 

And Cory's no nonsense is refreshing to say the least.


----------



## A Novice (Sep 15, 2019)

Litsinger said:


> Jon:
> 
> In all sincerity, how would you have presented the results of this study?
> 
> ...


I don't exactly know. I probably wouldn't start by assuming that because a behavior would be advantageous it would be manifest. They could as easily have assumed that bees would develop the habit of picking the mites up and carrying them out of the hive (as they do other things). That would certainly convey a fitness advantage to the bees. Why haven't the bees done that?
It isn't the way things work.
I would probably write a summary which stated something like: We thought we would find the varroa did X, but in fact we didn't find that. 

These absurd little homilies where everything that is found (no matter what is found) is shown as evidence of evolution in action, i.e. everything is because it conveys a "fitness advantage" are ridiculous.

Yes, I think evolution is bad 19th century science, as I suppose any person who understands math does.

While existing behaviors which convey a fitness advantage are selected for, that does not mean that behaviors which would convey a fitness advantage are likely to manifest over any given time frame.

I think I will study to see if bees carry varroa out of the hive.


----------



## jtgoral (Mar 24, 2018)

A Novice said:


> ...
> 
> Yes, I think *evolution is bad 19th century science*, as I suppose any person who understands math does.
> 
> ...


Really? How bad


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution


is?


----------



## Litsinger (Jun 14, 2018)

A Novice said:


> Yes, I think evolution is bad 19th century science...


No argument on this score from me, Jon. However for the purposes of this study, I think you might be straining out a gnat...


----------



## little_john (Aug 4, 2014)

A Novice said:


> These absurd little homilies where everything that is found (no matter what is found) is shown as evidence of evolution in action, i.e. everything is because it conveys a "fitness advantage" are ridiculous.
> 
> Yes,* I think evolution is bad 19th century science, as I suppose any person who understands math does.*


Evolutionary* theory* (and it IS a theory) is pretty good - it's far more persuasive than any previous explanation, such as the Judeo-Christian notion of an all-powerful male entity being responsible for constructing the whole universe from nothing, and taking a singular interest in human beings and the planet Earth ... 

Sure, evolutionary theory has quite a few holes in it, but so too does the mathematics which impresses yourself. I suspect you may not have yet read Alfred Korzybski's 'Science and Sanity', which explains that the thinking we employ and the language we use to communicate this are all abstractions from reality. 
Many others have reached the same conclusion: that the language we use is more than just a communication tool – it determines our perception of reality and influences our behaviour. The language of mathematics is no exception. 

And, whilst talking about our 'perception of reality' - just checkout the 'Necker Cube': an example of how we see what we have been conditioned to see - in a very real sense, we 'see' only that which we have seen before (that is, in a form by which it may be compared) - such that if we were to encounter something of which we had absolutely no prior concept whatsever, we would very likely be blind to it's existence.

Darwin is usually given full credit for evolutionary theory, but it was his grandfather Erasmus who proposed the idea which Charles then firmed-up - so in fact Charles Darwin was 'seeing' an idea to which he had already been exposed.
LJ


----------



## msl (Sep 6, 2016)

A Novice said:


> I think I will study to see if bees carry varroa out of the hive.





> The 2015 season was marked regionally with substantial Fall losses due to being overwhelmed by mites; the MBB bees stole the remaining honey from collapsing neighboring hives, and also brought back hitchhiker mites with them, and guard bees groomed them off, killed them, and left them in piles next to the entrance.








Final Report for FNE15-819 - SARE Grant Management System







projects.sare.org


----------



## Litsinger (Jun 14, 2018)

little_john said:


> ... it's far more persuasive...


In fairness, the idea that the incredibly complex, orderly and intricate material cosmos was birthed out of nothing by spontaneous generation has some rather improbable suppositions as well.


----------



## crofter (May 5, 2011)

Describing something as an* improbable supposition* is a judgement highly questionable due to clear confirmation bias. Considering that the subject was properly described as being* incredibly complex, orderly and intricate* makes the statement a bit

A good reason for religion and purely ideological topics not being acceptable discourse on the public forum pages.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

crofter said:


> A good reason for religion and purely ideological topics not being acceptable discourse on the public forum pages.


Yes.

Lets not go off on _that_ tangent -- otherwise this thread will be closed.


----------



## Roland (Dec 14, 2008)

This might help change the direction........ In the 60's and 70's, the beekeepers would bring a few of the best hives of 1300 back to the home yard. There where many sort criteria, both positive and negative. On Saturdays my father would graft from them (my job was to set up the cell bars with cups). After 20 years, the gene pool had shifted enough that our bees where not the same as what was commercially available, or what our neighbors had. 

The point? A large number of hives to select from sure helps., and it takes time, a long time. 

But what if the current sort criteria is wrong? What if mites are not the cause, but the effect? Breeding to reduce the effect will not change the cause. 

A crazy person might breed from the hive that has the most mites,

Crazy Roland


----------



## Litsinger (Jun 14, 2018)

crofter said:


> A good reason for religion and purely ideological topics not being acceptable discourse on the public forum pages.





Rader Sidetrack said:


> Lets not go off on _that_ tangent -- otherwise this thread will be closed.


No argument from me, but we can't have it both ways- endorsing certain ideological statements via 'likes' on the forum and then suggesting that the topic is out of bounds.


----------



## Litsinger (Jun 14, 2018)

Roland said:


> A crazy person might breed from the hive that has the most mites,


When I asked Dr. Kefuss what he would do if he were to run his 'Bond' program all over again, he remarked that he would have tried to develop two populations- one that is resistant as defined by survival and low mite population growth and one that is tolerant as defined by survival despite high mite levels.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Litsinger said:


> one that is resistant as defined by survival and low mite population growth and one that is tolerant as defined by survival despite high mite levels.


My own view is that the second part of that statement, survival despite high mite levels, is a fallacy.

Because if the hive cannot regulate mite levels, numbers will grow until one way or another they weaken or kill the hive, tolerant or not.

Realise that from a commercial perspective at least, every mite represents one bee that was damaged as a pupa and will not perform at 100%, or will maybe not even perform at all.


----------



## Litsinger (Jun 14, 2018)

Oldtimer said:


> My own view is that the second part of that statement, survival despite high mite levels, is a fallacy.


Possibly so. I believe Dr. Kefuss' rationale for this is two fold:

1. It presents a reservoir for continued mite pressure.

2. It allows tolerance mechanisms to develop.

This is partially informed by his initial studies where Tunisian and Carni stocks survived despite high mite loads - and he lamented he never let this factor materialize.

The other aspect was his experience with breeding stocks for resistance to AFB- he understood the value from a research perspective to have a 'high' and a 'low' group to evaluate performance and the interactions of reciprocal crosses.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Litsinger said:


> The other aspect was his experience with breeding stocks for resistance to AFB- he understood the value from a research perspective to have a 'high' and a 'low' group to evaluate performance and the interactions of reciprocal crosses.


Not quite as simple as the arm chair scientists would have us believe.

Work done over here found AFB resistance can be conferred by recessive genes, and hives with the right combinations do sometimes exist. Problem comes soon as the breeder stock from those is open mated.


----------



## James Lee (Apr 29, 2020)

Oldtimer said:


> My own view is that the second part of that statement, survival despite high mite levels, is a fallacy.
> 
> Because if the hive cannot regulate mite levels, numbers will grow until one way or another they weaken or kill the hive, tolerant or not.
> 
> Realise that from a commercial perspective at least, every mite represents one bee that was damaged as a pupa and will not perform at 100%, or will maybe not even perform at all.


I'm curious what the bees I cut out of a tree trunk - who started with none of the original colonies resources - were given new frames/comb, and washed 16 mites at full strength at the end of the season will do... this would purely be an exercise in whether "tolerance" is part of the equation for them or not - because the mite load was incredulous to say the least.


----------



## Litsinger (Jun 14, 2018)

Oldtimer said:


> Not quite as simple as the arm chair scientists would have us believe.


Don't know if I'd call Rothenbuhler an armchair scientist... But your point about it not being easy is well-taken.


----------



## AHudd (Mar 5, 2015)

Roland said:


> This might help change the direction........ In the 60's and 70's, the beekeepers would bring a few of the best hives of 1300 back to the home yard. There where many sort criteria, both positive and negative. On Saturdays my father would graft from them (my job was to set up the cell bars with cups). After 20 years, the gene pool had shifted enough that our bees where not the same as what was commercially available, or what our neighbors had.
> 
> The point? A large number of hives to select from sure helps., and it takes time, a long time.
> 
> ...


Or select drones for II programs that have mites attached.

Alex


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

James Lee said:


> I'm curious what the bees I cut out of a tree trunk - who started with none of the original colonies resources - were given new frames/comb, and washed 16 mites at full strength at the end of the season will do... this would purely be an exercise in whether "tolerance" is part of the equation for them or not - because the mite load was incredulous to say the least.


JL if that question was addressed to me, sorry but I don't know what they will do. Time alone will answer that for you.

Let us know in due course....


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Litsinger said:


> Don't know if I'd call Rothenbuhler an armchair scientist... But your point about it not being easy is well-taken.


Excuse my ignorance but I've never heard of Rothenbuhler, so cannot be accused of calling him an armchair scientist. I know nothing about the guy. In fact I did not name anyone or call any person in particular an armchair scientist.

Over the years I have seen many posts by people postulating their theories on this topic and many if not most of them could only be described as armchair scientists at best. It was this general body to which I referred.


----------



## Litsinger (Jun 14, 2018)

Oldtimer said:


> It was this general body to which I referred.


10-4. Sorry if I misappropriated your comment. When referring to the AFB work, I was referencing Dr. Kefuss' training under Dr. Rothenbuhler, who studied AFB resistance. It was during these studies that Dr. Kefuss learned the importance of reciprocal crosses, which he suggests might be helpful in our efforts in studying varroa resistance / tolerance.

My apologies for the confusion- this thread has taken a few twists and turns and I'm having a little trouble keeping up. 

Always enjoy your contributions.

Russ


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

good thread folks, many thanks.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

No worries Litsinger, I can see how if you work up the chain and end up at Rothenbuhler, one could deduce I must have been talking about him.


----------



## James Lee (Apr 29, 2020)

Kamon A. Reynolds said:


> Hi Litsinger,
> 
> Thanks! Kids, Beekeeping, and Hive Life have me happily busy. I have only had Cory Stevens Queens since late June but so far so good! Next year will be the true test of their behavior/production. I have followed and have chatted with Cory for a while and I like the no bullcrap TF mentality he possesses
> 
> ...


An interesting and collaborative project in the European Union took place a few years back and they concluded their findings just last year I believe. Overall - the infestation of Varroa was lowered significantly in Commercial use by the local queen breeding projects in each region - using local stock and hygienic queens. The market availability of said stock was found wanting - but if production could match demand it is a win win for all beekeepers. The SBGMI is focused on a similar strategy in Michigan and we've just begun - and if indeed your results confirm the validity of Cory's claims and they can be replicated - it demonstrates the next steps forward for all beekeepers - especially breeders and queen rearing.

First link is a intro to the study with a clever animation video:

https://www.eurbest.eu/resources/EURBEST_video.mp4

The conclusion of results begins summary around 22:28

Cost and availbility came up the most frequently and there are many other factors that contribute to conclusions, the video as well as the independent presentations have great information for those who have interest and time. EurBeST - Presentations

TLDR:

1. Selection is an efficient way to increase the productivity and to improve bee health. It will also improve the ability of colonies to cope with environmental and climatic changes.

2. Support of *regional breeding programs* is needed to utilize the strong *genotype-environmental interactions*.

3. Improvement of the breeding sector highly depends on *scientific support.* Introduction and implementation of *new techniques, like selection based on genetic markers *or *breeding value estimation*, can contribute to an increased selection success.

4. The *market structures *for honey bee breeding material should be improved in most of the member states (countries in the EU) and need to be better harmonized between the countries.


----------



## Litsinger (Jun 14, 2018)

@msl:

Thanks for posting the MBB study- glad to see the Heartland Honey Bee Breeders Association representing.

The idea of MBB's putting varroa in a pile at the door is a new one on me- they offered this in the body of the research:

_'We observed piles of dead mite near the entrances of the colonies. Possibly the bees were setting up a 'battle line' by grooming field bees as they returned from 'robbing out' collapsing hives in the area.'_

That would be something impressive to behold.


----------



## Litsinger (Jun 14, 2018)

James Lee said:


> The conclusion of results begins summary around 22:28


Good stuff, @James Lee. This is a great presentation. Here were my thoughts:



Litsinger said:


> Ultimately, the results and attending recommendations are succinctly summarized in three lectures:


----------



## James Lee (Apr 29, 2020)

Litsinger said:


> Good stuff, @James Lee. This is a great presentation. Here were my thoughts:


You are great at summarizing - I appreciate the TLDR reports...


----------



## A Novice (Sep 15, 2019)

little_john said:


> Evolutionary* theory* (and it IS a theory) is pretty good - it's far more persuasive than any previous explanation, such as the Judeo-Christian notion of an all-powerful male entity being responsible for constructing the whole universe from nothing, and taking a singular interest in human beings and the planet Earth ...
> 
> Sure, evolutionary theory has quite a few holes in it, but so too does the mathematics which impresses yourself. I suspect you may not have yet read Alfred Korzybski's 'Science and Sanity', which explains that the thinking we employ and the language we use to communicate this are all abstractions from reality.
> Many others have reached the same conclusion: that the language we use is more than just a communication tool – it determines our perception of reality and influences our behaviour. The language of mathematics is no exception.
> ...


Your response is interesting.

In fact, you pretty much immediately expose evolutionary "theory" as what it is: A religious dogma. This is evident in that you immediately make reference to origins - which is not of any practical relevance in this discussion.

Humans are profoundly religious creatures, and while evolutionary theory represents itself as being "scientific" as does scientology and a few others, it appears to me the main reason it became so popular is that it provides answers to the religious impulse which many people find appealing.

While mathematics does have its limits, when applied to physical objects or processes it has the advantage that it accurately predicts how things will work or not. Math (helped by a lot of experimentation) makes airplanes fly. It makes computers compute and communicate. It is the basis for all conclusion s in science and economics.

To 19th century scientists with their crude optical microscopes the evolutionary conjecture seemed plausible, when a cell was filled with nothing but "protoplasm" an undifferentiated goo which contained the mysterious processes of life.

This came to an end though with the discovery of DNA. DNA is a molecule - a few atoms wide but incredibly long. It is too small to be seen, even with an electron microscope. Its structure was deduced by a couple of brilliant men - Watson and Crick - who figured it out using math and X-Ray diffraction images and a rough idea of its chemical proportions. X-Ray diffraction images are nothing but a few fuzzy spots on film. This was arguably the greatest development of theory from experimental data since Kepler deduced that both the earth and Mars have elliptical orbits with the sun at one focus of the ellipse from naked eye observations of the position of mars in the sky (the earth both moving and rotating, its rotation at an angle and etc.)

Francis Crick, who understood math, pretty much immediately recognized that something of such marvelous elegance and complexity could not have possibly originated on earth. The earth was too young, by anyone's estimate, and too small. It simply couldn't have happened that way. As a result, he became a proponent (though not the originator) of "directed panspermia" - the idea that life originated elsewhere in the universe and was seeded to earth by some intelligent principle. The intervention of an intelligence was needed because space is so immensely huge and empty (that math again) that if it originated elsewhere it could not have gotten here by mere chance.

However, Evolution lives on as religion (the primary reason for its original acceptance) because it appears to satisfy the religious impulse quite nicely for many people.

My comment about understanding math is not meant as an insult to people who disagree with me. Understanding math is a manner of thinking quite unrelated to intelligence, generally. It is like any ability which is not uniformly distributed among the human population.

Here is an example.

My third daughter, who is quite intelligent, was taking a biology class at the University of Wisconsin as preparation for Medical School. In the class were some rabid evolutionists who found out she disagreed with them. As religious types often do, they were harassing her. She mentioned to me that they were using Huxley's old saw - "If enough monkeys typed on enough typewriters for long enough, one of them would eventually produce the entire manuscript of the _*The Origin of Species*_".

While she is good at math, and quite bright, generally speaking, she doesn't understand math. So this line of argumentation was troubling to her as it has a superficial appearance of truth. When she related this to me, at first I attempted to simply state how absurd this line of reasoning was, but she didn't get it. Being able to do math and understanding it are not the same thing.

So I wrote it out for her, roughly as follows:

The key to understanding the absurdity of this argument is the word "enough".
Consider the following:
The mass of the universe is not more than about 10^60 Kg, though other estimates range down to 10^53 Kg.
The universe is no older than 14 x 10^9 years (though some consider it far younger)

So let's assume that the entire universe was made into monkeys and typewriters, 10 Kg total for a monkey and a typewriter. That gives 10^59 monkeys and typewriters. It seems unlikely that there could be more than that.

Now let's assume there are 100 possible keys per typewriter - a bit fewer than a modern keyboard, a bit more than a traditional typewriter. In any case, it won't affect the result materially, and it simplifies the math a good deal.

And let's assume that each monkey strikes 100 keys per minute, without fail for the entire 14 x 10^9 years.

Considering just one monkey, the first keystroke has a 1 in 100 chance of being right, the first and second 1 in 10,000 chance of being right, the first three 1 chance in 1,000,000. In general, the chance of having a correct string of n characters is 1/10^2n.
The total number of character strings cannot be more than the total number of keystrokes, as if each keystroke is the beginning of a character string.

For each monkey we get 14 x 10^9 years x 365.25 days/year x 24 hours/day x 60 minutes/ hour x 100 keystrikes/minute =7 x 10^17 keystrokes per monkey.

The total number of monkeys is 10^59.

If you multiply the total number of keystrokes per monkey by the total number of monkeys, you get 7x10^76 grand total keystrokes possible, which is also the number of character strings possible.

We will round that up to 10^78 keystrokes (as if the universe were 200 billion years old) because it simplifies the math a bit, and the result is not materially different.

If the probability of a character string having n correct characters in sequence correct is 1 /10^2n, There is about 1 in 10^78 chance of any one character string 39 characters long having all of the characters exactly correct. 

Since we have about10^78 character strings, there is a reasonable chance one of them will have 39 characters exactly correct. The chance of a string of 40 characters all being exactly the right characters by random chance is less than 1 in 100, and the chance of a string of 41 characters all being exactly the right characters by random chance is less than 1 in 10,000.

_I have greatly simplified the actual statistics and as a result overstated significantly the likelihood of finding a long character string by random chance. For example while the chance of rolling a 6 on a die on one attempt is 1 in 6, the chance of rolling at least one 6 in 6 tries is significantly less than 1, being about 0.66 This approximation is the same as saying the chance of rolling at least one 6 in 6 tries is 1, while it is actually significantly less. I can expound on that if anyone cares. While the difference is numerically significant, it is not materially significant, as it makes Huxley's case look more promising than it is._

Following the same logic, the chances of finding a string of 100 characters which are correct is significantly lower than the chance of selecting 1 specific atom out of all the matter in the universe on a single try. (There are far fewer that 10^120 atoms in the universe) That is 100 characters. Not a whole book full of them.

It should be noted that the choice of 100 keys on each typewriter isn't all that important. If the number of keys were only 10, the longest string would be about 78 characters. If the monkeys only had 4 keys to choose from (same as the number of DNA bases) the number of characters in an exact sequence in 10^78 attempts by random chance would be less than 129.

This illustrates how weak of a creative force random chance is.

Since it is easily seen that random chance is a rather powerful destructive force and is an incredibly weak creative force, the conjecture that random chance is the principal creative force behind all of the complexity and order that is embodied in living things is ludicrous.

I gave this summary to my daughter, who doesn't really understand math, but is able to use it. She presented it to her tormenters, and after that they left her alone.

All of that said, the likelihood of varroa developing new genetically derived behaviors, which may require developing of new sense organs or neurological features, is quite remote. The minor variations we see are not like that. What we see are deletions - loss of features or genetic material, and minor mutations- replacing one gene sequence with an alternate sequence. Not adding of beneficial genetic material.

Apologies for the length. Enjoy your bees.


----------



## A Novice (Sep 15, 2019)

Oldtimer said:


> Excuse my ignorance but I've never heard of Rothenbuhler, so cannot be accused of calling him an armchair scientist. I know nothing about the guy. In fact I did not name anyone or call any person in particular an armchair scientist.
> 
> Over the years I have seen many posts by people postulating their theories on this topic and many if not most of them could only be described as armchair scientists at best. It was this general body to which I referred.


Guilty as charged!


----------



## James Lee (Apr 29, 2020)

A Novice said:


> Your response is interesting.
> 
> In fact, you pretty much immediately expose evolutionary "theory" as what it is: A religious dogma. This is evident in that you immediately make reference to origins - which is not of any practical relevance in this discussion.
> 
> ...


I don't understand any of this because ....math.

But basically - honeybees - like David Beck says, could lose the arms race? We are pretty much delaying the inevitable?


----------



## jtgoral (Mar 24, 2018)

James Lee said:


> I don't understand any of this because ....math.
> 
> But basically - honeybees - like David Beck says, could lose the arms race? We are pretty much delaying the inevitable?


IMO no, we are not. The bees survived over 100 million years and maybe they will be alive for another 100 million after humans are gone...


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Likely they will survive but in what form? The bees that suit us live in large colonies and produce big crops of honey, but at the same time they are vulnerable to varroa mites.

Over the next few million years if humans go extinct, likely our honeybees will morph into something a bit different. There are already many bee species, nearly all of them are not bothered by varroa mites. I have linked a video showing the beautiful green / blue orchid bee.


----------



## A Novice (Sep 15, 2019)

James Lee said:


> I don't understand any of this because ....math.
> 
> But basically - honeybees - like David Beck says, could lose the arms race? We are pretty much delaying the inevitable?


They could.

Honey bees appear to be surviving on their own in several places. They may not be the sort of bees we like - ones that make huge colonies and hoard honey. However, their geographic range may be reduced.

I suspect without human help, they might be doing better. Having lots of huge colonies close together and moving bees from place to place are probably not the best thing for bee survival. 

We aren't in control, but we can have significant effects - both helping the species survive and hastening its demise.


----------



## david stern (Dec 13, 2021)

Litsinger said:


> for a more detailed explanation of the transition of the production operation from TF to TX


Hello! What does TX stand for?


----------



## William Bagwell (Sep 4, 2019)

david stern said:


> Hello! What does TX stand for?


Opposite of Treatment Free, someone who Treats. Think the 'X' is like a prescriptions RX. Latin or some such... Read a much more detailed explanation years ago.


----------



## david stern (Dec 13, 2021)

Ooohh. Got it. Thank you.


----------

