# About To Give UP TF



## Chuck Jachens

A few questions before throwing in the towel on TF. We need more information to help.
1. Are all 15 hives in one place and where are they (describe the landscape)?
2. Do you feed (sugar water, protein patties)?
3. How many places to get packages hive you tried?
4 Ever try Nucs rather than packages?
5. When are the hives dying?
6. Describe the dead-outs (where are the bees, honey stores, etc)?

Enough to get get started.


----------



## squarepeg

Planner said:


> Replacing 15 packages a year is expensive.


we have had many reports on the forum of folks who purchased commercially produced bees that came with a history of being treated for mites, and they ended up with a similar outcome as yours after attempting to manage them off treatments

if possible, try to locate folks having success keeping bees off treatments in your area. try to obtain your bees from them and mirror their management practices.

there are a couple of forum members from illinois listed in this thread:

http://www.beesource.com/forums/showthread.php?320882-treatment-free-member-listing


----------



## Harley Craig

the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. If you keep buying package bees that require treatment to survive, why would you think they would survive without? Don't get me wrong I suppose theoretically you could get lucky and get some survivors, but it's truly rolling the dice and like winning the lottery, the odds are not in your favor. Either treat, or get a source of bees where mother nature or another beekeeper has already laid the groundwork of culling the weak genetics that can't deal with the mites.


----------



## BuckeyeBeek

Planner said:


> Replacing 15 packages a year is expensive.


In my opinion, if this is the solution each year then it is turning into the following year's problem like deja vu all over again. You've got to wean yourself from package bees and the first step is admitting you have a problem. Ive never treated with anything and in 3 years I've gone through about $1200 worth of Georgia package bees, none of which can survive the winter in my experience. It's been really frustrating and I almost gave up too. After the first 3 years bees all died. Last year in addition to the packages I tried something different - a local nuc overwintered that last I used to make my own queens from, and 2 trapped swarms. I went into winter with 10 colonies and so far I'm coming out with 7. In my view the keys to making this work is 1) make your own Queens 2) trap/capture swarms This year I'll use that survivor stock to make more queens and try to capture more swarms. Hope this helps you get off those crap packages!


----------



## Phoebee

Here's the short version of a TF versus treat-treat-treat seminar at our bee club.

The TF advocate got up and said something to the effect of: "Well, I lost all but two of my seven hives last winter, so I don't even know why I've been asked to give you advice."

The old pro who takes a dim view of mites and uses very low thresholds (but does recommend counting mites before treating) said she lost no hives over the winter, or the winter before. I forget how many she has as she has outyards in several places, but I think it may be in 3 digits.

This is not, in itself, a reason to stop trying TF. It is a warning that it is a hard road, best entered with bees that have already had success with TF.

Not at the seminar was the local breeder who has been mixing up a locally-successful stock based on VSH. He claims he is TF, and that he's also getting good honey production. We have a daughter and granddaughters of his stock, and a queen on order from him this summer. The local VSH line do seem to keep the mites down mostly on their own, but we do counts and treat occasionally when the thresholds suggest: the big hive has been treated twice in 3 years. The nucs have not needed it yet. Brood breaks due to making the nucs last summer are no doubt part of the reason for this.


----------



## Colino

When I stopped listening to the Bee Gurus and started listening to my bees that's when things got better.


----------



## bean tree homestead

Have you tried the OTS system
http://www.mdasplitter.com/ he does not use mite-a-cides but if you dont like reading then I would not bother researching it much. Also can you please explain the health issue of OAV other then when it is applied?


----------



## fieldsofnaturalhoney

Planner said:


> For 7 years I have tried to be TF. Is it time to stop TF?


 Only you can decide this, but it is definitely time to stop buying treated packages and expecting a different result, and maybe time to stop counting



squarepeg said:


> we have had many reports on the forum of folks who purchased commercially produced bees that came with a history of being treated for mites, and they ended up with a similar outcome as yours after attempting to manage them off treatments if possible, try to locate folks having success keeping bees off treatments in your area. try to obtain your bees from them and mirror their management practices.


Good place to start and it should show you something in management practices you hadn't thought about or done, but more important it should offer you bees that have been living off treatments. Skip the packages & get bees from these beeks.


----------



## FlowerPlanter

>Replacing 15 packages a year is expensive

Packaged bees are not TF bees, they need treatments or they will die.

Look for TF bees in your local area, might also look at beeweaver they raise TF bees and I believe they ship them and queens. Russian are more mite tolerate. Some have had success with VHS queens. 

By buying all there packages you may be making it impossible for others in your area to keep TF bees. 

http://scientificbeekeeping.com/queens-for-pennies/

http://scientificbeekeeping.com/wha...fference-between-domesticated-and-feral-bees/

http://www.beesource.com/forums/showthread.php?317932-The-Mighty-Mite-Bomb&p=1368072#post1368072


----------



## BigBlackBirds

Planner
the package route seldom works for the TF game that you have been trying. however, if its your only source of new bees, go that route but simply requeen in the summer with different stock. different genetics will get you closer to where you want to be quicker than anything. if your packages can build up to reasonably strong colonies you could pull nucs in mid year and use those to replace your packages that die in the winter. then you would be able to start the following year with overwintered stock. 

not sure where you are at in illinois, but also keep in mind the environment where you are keeping bees. if you happen to be close to the big pollination areas of michigan/wisconsin that presents an entirely different set of challenges compared to an area that does not experience such an influx of bees and will make your TF goal even tougher.


----------



## COAL REAPER

so long as Planner is not trolling, they have not put in enough effort. just joining a forum like this after failing for seven years? you should have been here asking questions a long time ago. MBs site is a great place to start, but you need more.
most package bees die out within a year. stop buying them if you dont want to replace every year.
look into mels OTS in detail. it is much more than just notching. i dont have experience following his methods exactly, but i believe that to be the only way package bees might survive a year. simply requeening does not give the brood break (btw, this is considered a treatment by TF purists) needed when the mite load has become too much. by raising you own queens you have a chance for them to mate with drones from hives that are surviving without treatments.
"I have about a 100% loss." so youre saying theres a chance? what comes of the minority that isnt a loss?


----------



## enjambres

I realize you have posted in the TF forum, but I want to correct you on one point: not all treatments have the same level of toxicity to bees, humans, or the environment.

I do treat my my bees for varroa, but there are some treatments I wouldn't use, because I consider them too toxic, even though I know good and careful beekeepers who do use them.

My bees are all from local swarms (or now, their open-mated daughters) in an area with a surviving population of unmanaged, feral bees. So in theory they should be ideal candidates for a TF approach. On the contrary, however, I believe that without treatments they would succumb pretty regularly in their second summer from a build-up of mites, just like the nearby feral hives do. 

I would like to be TF for varroa, but it is not a possibility here, with my bees. So I carefully monitor and treat in a way so that I can use the least toxic chemicals (formic and oxalic acids, primarily), for the least number of times, and at the most effective points in the year in order to successfully disrupt the mites' life cycle, without harming my bees or contaminating their hive environment. This gives me strong, healthy, thriving and _long-lived_ colonies. My oldest (original) colonies are starting their fourth season with me, some with their original swarm queens. I have never lost a colony. I doubt I could get this with a non-treating approach, so I don't see the point of abandoning what clearly works for me.

It would crush my spirit to just let my bees die every year when there was something I could do to prevent that. 

Even if you are giving your honey to cancer patients with compromised immune systems, there is no reason you couldn't develop a treatment regimen that would protect both your honey AND your bees. 

I agree with other posters, though, if you can find a nearby person who has successfully kept their bees alive, without treatments - including hyper-management using continual brood breaks, then try the TF approach with those bees. If not, I'd still try for local survivors, but be prepared to manage the problem rather be managed by it. 


ETA: Oxalic acid is not toxic to the bees. It is quite toxic for humans who apply it, but meticulous attention to the required personal protection equipment will mitigate that. And it should pose no issue with honey contamination as it is only applied when the supers are off the stack, anyway. 

Enj.


----------



## johngfoster

Planner
You mentioned you had tried reqeening as one of your strategies. Who did you get your queens from?


----------



## phyber

Is it hard to stay TF while keeping first year packages or queens purchased from treated yards...or is it hard to stay TF while using genes from natural colonies?

I guess I'm asking, are you still having problems being TF when you're already a generation or two into locally bred bees?


----------



## BigBlackBirds

phyber said:


> Is it hard to stay TF while keeping first year packages or queens purchased from treated yards...or is it hard to stay TF while using genes from natural colonies?
> 
> I guess I'm asking, are you still having problems being TF when you're already a generation or two into locally bred bees?



I can only say for my locale that the challenge to survive varroa without treatment remains a constant battle; at least the best I can tell and I've played this game for a quite a long time now---back into the mid 90's at least. 

Historically pressure was from great influx of migratory colonies. Trying to maintain stock in such environment can present challenges as there is such a flood of drones from what are typically treated southern bees. I'd venture a guess there aren't more than 5-6000 colonies wintered in this state anymore (and I bet that is a generous estimate) but 3-5 weeks from now 50,000 will hit the ground from 30-40 outfits. Makes mating control complicated but doable particularly after the bees pull out of blueberries in June.

In recent years the problem has been from an influx of "beekeepers with a few colonies in their backyard. That didnt really exist around me 15+ years ago. Now you have to contend with drones from that stock also interfering with mating. It takes more selection pressure than simple local stock survivors to be TF here in the long run. 

Local bees are great but that doesnt mean all local bees are created equal even when they are treatment free survivors. Take someone that is in a fairly secluded area; might have TF stock that is perfect for the local conditions---winters in perfect cluster, builds up just right, produces honey, etc but has very little varroa pressure. Take that local stock and drop it into a different high pressure varroa environment and watch it crash. Or watch what happens to those TF colonies that are wrongly assumed to be varroa resistant as soon as a big yard of 75-100 migratory colonies drops in nearby. 

There is a very well known beekeeper from VT that is awful quiet these days but he was a pretty active writer of his beekeeping practices in the last 20 odd years. He started out down the path of TF from what he considered hearty localized stock. Via trading of stock way back then I can say he had exceptionally great bees. However, he also was adamant that his stock was varroa resistant. In fact it was only marginally resistant but he wasnt a fan of the low production qualities of what was truly varroa resistant stock at that time (and cant blame him because none of us were and we didnt fully understand how to use those genetics just yet). So he continued down theTF path with the same stock until a year when the wheels fell off and everything crashed causing him to find a new path with russian bees. 

The upside these days is that bees with varroa resistance are more readily available and flying around out there. If you live in an area where you can just get some of this stock and do nothing more, that is great. But not all local environments are like that and you may find much more is needed on your part.


----------



## aunt betty

I'm in Illinois and know some people who claim to be TF. 
Also have some bees I have that are TF but it's not because I'm a TF beek. They were too weak to treat last fall. (new swarms and cutouts) 
If you REALLY want some swarmy TF bees holler and I'll hook you up when mine start making cells.  
Other than that I think you're best off joining the treatment club.

Oh, by definition all my bees get "treated" because I feed them sugar syrup. By TF I mean no chemicals added.


----------



## JWChesnut

When it became abundantly clear that the "original" TF prescription ("put them on small cell and your problems vanish") was irreproducible, the TF partisans promoted another prescription "get TF bees and your problems vanish". 

No evidence other than anecdotal claims that this second "magic" is any more reliable than the first wave magic. 

TF has the "cancer survivor" problem. TF advocates report success (and sometimes greatly exaggerate this), the failures do not.

Beware of the current "nostrum" -- "only TF bees can be kept TF". No one has demonstrated this statement is true, exclusive or sufficient.


----------



## Kamon A. Reynolds

JWChesnut said:


> When it became abundantly clear that the "original" TF prescription ("put them on small cell and your problems vanish") was irreproducible, the TF partisans promoted another prescription "get TF bees and your problems vanish".
> 
> No evidence other than anecdotal claims that this second "magic" is any more reliable than the first wave magic.
> 
> TF has the "cancer survivor" problem. TF advocates report success (and sometimes greatly exaggerate this), the failures do not.
> 
> Beware of the current "nostrum" -- "only TF bees can be kept TF". No one has demonstrated this statement is true, exclusive or sufficient.


Or made it on a profitable scale. 

If you want to be successful or profitable you learn from those who are making money and lots of honey not those who give free advice.


----------



## beeware10

tennnessee---well spoken


----------



## jbeshearse

Tennessee's Bees LLC said:


> Or made it on a profitable scale.
> 
> If you want to be successful or profitable you learn from those who are making money and lots of honey not those who give free advice.


In 7 years of beekeeping, I have never met a TF beekeeper face to face that had more than 10 hives.

I think that says a lot.


----------



## Oldtimer

Planner is not a troll.

But Planner, in fact you are not a treatment free beekeeper.

Because the only reason you have had bees for 7 years is by supporting the treatment industry and annually getting treated bees, most likely treated with synthetics of some sort.

So you have 2 choices. Accept the only reason you are in business is due to mite treatments being done to the bees by someone else on your behalf, so instead, decide to take charge of that process yourself. Thereby saving a ton of money, plus using non residual treatments. Or, get bees supposedly showing mite resistance. Most commercial package bees are not bred for that and succumb to mites in a season or so, to practise TF you need different bees. Still may fail but you could try it.

Because this is the treatment free forum I cannot dicuss treatments but would be happy to do so elsewhere, because there are non residual treatments that will not contaminate your honey.


----------



## fieldsofnaturalhoney

A partisan I am not, nor do I have a prescription, but no way treated bees can magical withstand mites without being treated. Why do beekeepers who are keeping TF bees alive & productive have to provide evidence? And if they do, it is always exaggerated or a lie:scratch: Do we as ask/say the same for those who treat? 
Jbeshearse, maybe it says that you haven't meet enough faces?
Tennessee'sbees, agreed,, yet we all are giving free advice, & the OP needs some


----------



## jbeshearse

fieldsofnaturalhoney said:


> Jbeshearse, maybe it says that you haven't meet enough faces?


No doubt, one can never meet enough faces. Yet I stand by my statement, It needs no elaboration. Its just an observation, assign it any value (or none) as you will.

I wish all beekeepers well, no matter their philosophy. I tried treatment free and failed at it, but that does not mean others will not succeed. My bees were local adapted bees that showed hygienic behaviors, not commercially purchased bees.


----------



## jadebees

All my bees are caught swarms, in a remote area. They all have mites, some survive better than others. Treatment free was not very good here.

I need to treat fall and spring. In fall they all get it. In spring, the ones that fail to out breed the mites get treated. But a few years of TF taught me how to minimise treating. You see how many mites they do tolerate. And how to spot problems.


Wild bees usually take a long brood break, so have few, or no mites In spring. But, they rob the ferals that are not fortunate enough to live near a guy with an OA vaporiser. So, by june or july, signs of mite are appearing in all.


In wild populations, some adaptations have occurred, to allow the slow, Parasitic Mite Syndrome. But that is usually fatal in 1&1/2 to 2 years. They swarm more, take breaks, and live just long enough to propagate. Make them typical managed hives and mites flare up.


----------



## Fusion_power

I have more than 10 colonies treatment free and I have NOT met Jbeshearse face to face. Excuse me while I go pet my unicorn.


----------



## beepro

Welcome to Bee Source, Planner!

For the last 3 years I have not treat my ees. They die off every winter
going into Spring. Like you I have order many new queens before. Now I
graft my own queens and source the tf stocks. And give them the oav gadget
to knock down the mites. As long as you use a brood break and new honey frames your
honey is not contaminated using the oav treatment before the flow. Before you consider
to stop tf have you try to source the tf queens option? Some bees are more mite tolerant than
the other you know.


----------



## jbeshearse

Fusion_power said:


> I have more than 10 colonies treatment free and I have NOT met Jbeshearse face to face. Excuse me while I go pet my unicorn.


i look forward to meeting you face to face one day. Always enjoy chatting with you. 

I was was not calling into question your existence, just your rarity. If there were lots like yourself, I would have met some face to face. Hope you have your unicorn with you when we meet, my oldest daughter loves unicorns.


----------



## Riverderwent

jbeshearse said:


> I was was not calling into question your existence, just your rarity.


That's why we're so special.


----------



## pink bee man

There are a lot of ways to keep up on this,the hardis one is trick bees into clean moad ,I don't consider powerdsugar a treatment but a good cleaning is in everything's future ! Pulling and freezing is the hardes thing I've had two do ,but win they started over they out did the others pink bee man 27 hives 1/2 died ,weardwinter good luck never give up!


----------



## mike bispham

JWChesnut said:


> When it became abundantly clear that the "original" TF prescription ("put them on small cell and your problems vanish") was irreproducible, the TF partisans promoted another prescription "get TF bees and your problems vanish".
> 
> No evidence other than anecdotal claims that this second "magic" is any more reliable than the first wave magic.


What would count as evidence? Do I have to get a phd to come and look over my shoulder for 6 years, taking records, analyse, write up and publish the results in a respectable peer-reviewed journal? Only for you to claim that's just one example, and that there are many counterexamples? How many people here attest to successful tf beekeeping? Are they all liars? 



JWChesnut said:


> TF has the "cancer survivor" problem. TF advocates report success (and sometimes greatly exaggerate this), the failures do not.


What is your evidence for either of these claims? Seriously! 



JWChesnut said:


> Beware of the current "nostrum" -- "only TF bees can be kept TF". No one has demonstrated this statement is true, exclusive or sufficient.


In as much as 'tf bees' can have a sound meaning; its self-evidently true! Good grief whatever happened to rationality! 

Mike (UK)


----------



## marshmasterpat

Totally ignorant about much of this. Do know I read all I could about treatment free. Have all feral captures to start with. Pushed hard to make them all small cell (I like the little gals - not sure whether it impacts mites). Tried to create summer brood breaks. And lost 7 of 12 hives this winter, they just faded away. And lost 7 of 10 nucs. And some of these gals have some type of hygienic action, at least two of the hives would clean out at least half of the capped brood before emerging. 

Will do dribble treatments this year. And want to get some better stock, but time will tell.

I suggest you try to requeen any new packages if you try again.


----------



## mike bispham

marshmasterpat said:


> Will do dribble treatments this year. And want to get some better stock, but time will tell.


The minute you start treating you lose the ability to know which are the better mite managers, and you stop improving the local genetics though your drones. 

Don't treat. Make as many nucs as you can without weakening the colonies. Have as many hives as you can manage.

A central part of your strategy is to be able to pick the winning genes, so don't make any effort to balance them up. Ideally you'd treat them all in the same way, but some will be smaller so you can't - but try.

Another central part will be to run unlimited brood nests so that the stronger can contribute more drones to future queens. Of course use your best (longest lived/largest) colonies for queen material.

Start thinking like a breeder, and focus your thinking on the real organism under your care - the local population. Of course bring in as many potentially self-sufficient genes as you can. 

The crisis in beekeeping is almost entirely the utterly predictable result of universal incompetent, sloppy and/or deliberately poisonous breeding practice. Period. Learn the proper meaning of 'husbandry' and you'll be able to keep healthy bees. 

Read through my 'natural selection management' thread (http://www.beesource.com/forums/sho...al-Selection-Management&p=1249742#post1249742)

Mike (UK)


----------



## Planner

I think you are correct. I have received some very good advice from this thread and from some private responses. For this of us that start the year with packaged bees there are problems right out of the box. I am convinced these bees have been treated and probably contaminated from the pesticides uses on the almond crops in California. The queens are another issue but I can tell you from experience that the bees and queens from California are of very poor quality and the problems increase every year. In our area a large bee broker buys thousands of packages every year from California and sells to bee clubs, stores and individual breeders. This is the beginning of the problem as there is no method that he can manage the health or type or quality of the bees or queens. It is just a large business deal.Unfortunately the bee clubs, commercial bee supply stores, farming stores that sell bees, and others do not seem to have many options when they need to order hundreds of packages every year.Given the high rate of morality even for non-TF keepers the brokerage bee business continues to expand. I am convinced the bees I receive have been treated, the queens will not survive a year. I plan to try everything possible this year, but after that I will use some form of treatment as the cost of purchasing packages is like throwing money away.I have also concluded the that the commercial beekeepers and many others (not all), have out of necessity created an epidemic of sick bees that can not survive without treatment. There may be a few TF beekeepers but the main commercial bee industry is hooked on drugs. I have no background in chemistry but I am also concerned that some of these so called healthy chemicals will find their way into the comb of hives and ultimately into the honey supply. A rather sad commentary. Currently OA is all the rage. If you can't touch it, or inhale it in heavens name would you ever expose yourself to it. I also don't accept the often heard statement that you should follow instructions, and that this chemical is natural to certain plant materials and non hazardous.A leaf of rhubarb can kill dog. If you disagree read the label, and if you further disagree keep using it. It won't be very long before another chemical becomes available.Just look at the number of pages in the bee supply catalogs and the chemicals that seem to come along every year. I am rather cynical but I will try everything one more year with the hope of some surviability. Several responses to my initial inquiry suggested I obtain some survivor stock from my local area.All of the beekeepers that that I know that have hives that have survived the winter have used some treatment, even though they will not admit it.


----------



## mike bispham

Try to focus on the one thing that matters Planner. If you don't have self-sufficient genes, you can't make tf work. Period. Forget all the rest - literally.

If you want to go tf using package bees you will have to buy in bred tf queens to replace the package queens. Period. If they are mated queens that's much better.

Forget everything else. Focus on that. Carefully research your queen sources and read up on queen introduction if you're at all unsure.

Good luck to you,

Mike (UK)


----------



## squarepeg

Planner said:


> Several responses to my initial inquiry suggested I obtain some survivor stock from my local area.All of the beekeepers that that I know that have hives that have survived the winter have used some treatment, even though they will not admit it.


your last post shows that you have really put a lot of thought into this planner, and your situation is a good illustration of the dilemma that beekeepers in some areas find themselves in.

you didn't indicate which part of illinois you are keeping bees, but having driven through your state on numerous occasions i can tell you that the habitat for bees looks much different there than it does here. in particular there are far less wooded and unmanaged areas for feral bees to populate. 

beekeepers in california (including randy oliver and jrg13) report experiences of bringing in queens from successful treatment free operations that do well against mites at their locations at first, but then that success wanes and disappears in succeeding generations as the daughter queens mate and the colonies become hybridized with the local population.

the point is that bees, for the good or for the bad, end up getting genetically mixed up with whatever happens to be around. if in your area the local population of bees is comprised of mostly commercially produced stock, whose survival has depended on treatments, than that's what you can expect to end up with in your apiary sooner or later.

this is why just getting tf bees to start with doesn't always work. this is why finding someone who is already having success in your local area is the best route. if you can't find anyone already having success you have to recognize that it may or may not be possible there.

i'm hoping that those on our tf member listing have been able to provide you with helpful information pertinent to your location. please keep us updated as to how things play out for you up there and good luck with your bees.


----------



## Oldtimer

Planner said:


> The queens are another issue but I can tell you from experience that the bees and queens from California are of very poor quality and the problems increase every year. In our area a large bee broker buys thousands of packages every year from California and sells to bee clubs, stores and individual breeders. This is the beginning of the problem....


Beats me why people talk about the bee suppliers like they are some kind of evil. They only sell bees if people buy them. The real problem is people who will not learn how to do the necessary to get their bees through the winter. Then they offer money to buy these supposedly weak bees, and complain about it.



Planner said:


> I am convinced the bees I receive have been treated, the queens will not survive a year.


Correct, you have proved this seven times running now.



Planner said:


> I plan to try everything possible this year, but after that I will use some form of treatment as the cost of purchasing packages is like throwing money away.


After that? Why not now? Is letting all the bees die seven years in a row not enough, it has to be eight years before any changes are made?

Both Mike Bispham and Squarepeg are correct. Mike is correct in that (in theory), breeding mite resistant bees requires selection of resistant ones. Squarepeg is correct in that in your area you will not be able to achieve it due to your bees mating with the surrounding non resistant bees. Pressure will be for the bees to move away from mite resistance, not towards it.

This year not next year, you should source some supposedly treatment free queens, or if you cannot find any, treat your bees. Letting them die is not some kind of noble act, in your situation it doesn't achieve anything. Except drain your wallet.


----------



## mike bispham

Oldtimer said:


> Mike is correct in that (in theory), breeding mite resistant bees requires selection of resistant ones. Squarepeg is correct in that in your area you will not be able to achieve it due to your bees mating with the surrounding non resistant bees. Pressure will be for the bees to move away from mite resistance, not towards it.


How come mine is a theory but Squarepeg's isn't


----------



## Oldtimer

Planner said:


> I have also concluded the that the commercial beekeepers and many others (not all), have out of necessity created an epidemic of sick bees that can not survive without treatment.


They have not really created an epidemic, and certainly not by design.

Commercial bee breeders work very hard on producing a bee that the commercial industry want, and their reputation hangs on that. Some hobbyists think otherwise because they want different things to the industry. What many hobbyists want are bees that can survive without treatment. But what commercial guys want is bees that will make them money. IE, they are productive, plus can be manipulated to make bees when needed, such as for spring pollination.

Commercial beekeeping in it's current form is migratory and stressful to bees in other ways also. If bees existed that could be treatment free in a commercial setting, plus be strong enough to work as hard as the current types of commercial bees, commercial beekeepers would use them. But the reality is that most often, the supposed treatment free bees used by hobbyists just are not going to cut the mustard in a commercial setting. They would have to be treated, and the majority of commercial beekeepers accept that they have to treat, or go bankrupt. 

Think about chickens. Someone can have a few chickens in their yard and never medicate them the chickens will be fine. But put those chickens in a commercial shed with thousands of other chickens and they may well need to be medicated, not just individually, but as a flock. Same goes for many commercial bee operations, put bees in it from some of the TF gurus, and they will succumb to mites same as all the others, unless they are treated.

That is why the breeders sell the kind of bees they do, not some evil plan to flood the world with weak bees.


----------



## Oldtimer

mike bispham said:


> How come mine is a theory but Squarepeg's isn't


Because yours IS a theory. Fully mite resistant bees do not yet exist, and we do not know if they ever will. Therefore it is a theory.

A good one, but a theory. There are cases of some hives that have existed several years without threatment. But put them in a commercial almond operation and see what happens.

I note from the bee survey there has been no improvement in survival rates of TF bees for several years now. Which begs the question about whether this evolution you talk about is actually happening. For now, it's theory.

What Squarepeg said is a fact. Many areas it will not be possible for a guy with 1/2 a dozen hives to breed a line of resistant bees.

And the commercial guys, they have to live in the world the way it is, not the way they wish it was.


----------



## JWChesnut

Planner said:


> I have also concluded the that the commercial beekeepers and many others (not all), have out of necessity created an epidemic of sick bees that can not survive without treatment.


Part of the cult mentality to create an "enemy". In the oft-repeated TF catechism, "commercials" are evil.

Posted below are images from the annual queen test of *Rufer's Apiaries* -- a very large commercial operation. I post these to indicate the "real" breeding that is being done is that of the commercials that have tens of thousands of genetic lines to choose from, and the discipline to generate data. The backyard breeder like Solomon P. who went from 35 to 14 to 6 hives between 2014 and 2016, simply does not have the genetic variance at hand to breed a magic bee.


----------



## mike bispham

What is a 'fully mite resistant bee'? What is a beehive that thrives for the lifetime of its queen without being much affected? How much effect does it take to qualify as being 'less than fully mite resistant'?

You have to quantify statements like these for them to mean anything. 

Plenty of people are working with bees - like my best - that don't seem much bothered by mites despite no treatment or monkey business at all. That's not theory, its fact. Your premise is incorrect.

If you put bees from any time in the past into a commercial almond operation they'd likely fail. That's modern farming - its so intensive that organisms need dosing just to survive there. That's not a fair comparison. 

Which 'bee survey' is this? The same one that shows that treated bees die at higher rates than tf ones? 

Fair point about a small number of hives in a treated arena - I've been saying the same thing for years, and getting plenty of stick for it.

As to the commerce; yep you have to optimise to maximise returns. But this discussion is about people who don't want to do that.


----------



## mike bispham

Oldtimer said:


> They have not really created an epidemic.


You're right they haven't. But they have, largely inadvertently, perpetuated the epidemic. And it isn't really in their individual interest to try to do anything about that. In fact many profit from it.

Mike (UK)


----------



## mike bispham

JWChesnut said:


> The backyard breeder like Solomon P. who went from 35 to 14 to 6 hives between 2014 and 2016, simply does not have the genetic variance at hand to breed a magic bee.


Magic bees! Of course! That's what we need! Doh!

Mike (UK) (Total amateur 'breeder'; just overwintered 68/80 with no treatment and no monkey business. 4 lost to mice. Feel free to compare with any other stats)


----------



## mike bispham

JWChesnut said:


> Posted below are images from the annual queen test of *Rufer's Apiaries* -- a very large commercial operation.


How are Rufer's doing as far as mite resistance is concerned?

Mike (UK)


----------



## Fusion_power

> Fully mite resistant bees do not yet exist, and we do not know if they ever will.


I have to disagree with this statement as it is overly broad. There is very clear evidence that bees fully tolerant to mites exist today and can easily be propagated in the future. I agree that there would be problems moving to almonds with mite tolerant bees because 100% of the bees in almonds are susceptible. There are several small effect genes involved in mite tolerance as shown by the difficulties producing productive VSH stock.

There is a fundamental issue that mite tolerance combined with other desirable traits is difficult to breed. Breeding a mite tolerant bee is doable. Breeding a bee that produces a huge crop of honey is doable. Breeding a bee that is highly mite tolerant and produces a huge crop of honey and has other desirable traits is difficult. I've evaluated every colony that 4 beekeepers (myself included) have in this area. All colonies are untreated. There are only 3 colonies in the group that I would rate good enough to breed from. I don't make this statement lightly. There are some good colonies in the group. There are some duds. There are a lot of swarm-in-a-heartbeat colonies. There are only three that are shining stars head and shoulders above the rest. This is not bad considering that many queen producers select at a rate of 1 breeder colony out of 100 evaluated.

As examples, I have one colony with an excellent queen both mite tolerant and highly productive, but the colony is excessively aggressive. I get stung several times when I open the colony. I have another colony that has mite tolerance and honey production, but they consume a huge amount of honey over winter. There are several colonies that I would rate otherwise acceptable but they attempt to swarm each year.


----------



## squarepeg

good post dar.

i wouldn't want to venture out on too small of a limb, but...

i've been transparent with my results with regard to survival, productivity, swarm rate, annual income per hive, ect., and...

the best i can tell these bees are holding their own in those regards when compared to the few other posters who are utilizing more conventional methods and have been forthright enough to share their experiences here.

in addition to dar and his group, there are myself and 6 others that i am aware of on this side of the state who are experiencing similar results.

that number will be increasing with the availability of queen cells this year, and we will be pushing the boundaries geographically with them to roughly a 100 mile radius from here.

it may take a few more seasons to see how far we can seed these genetics and still see similar results.

in the meantime the prospects are looking pretty good for getting a few queens down to baton rouge so that they may study them to see if there is any special going on with the bees vs. the presence of favorable environmental factors here vs. both and/or other factors yet to be discovered.


----------



## clyderoad

squarepeg said:


> i've been transparent with my results with regard to survival, productivity, swarm rate, annual income per hive, ect., and...
> 
> the best i can tell these bees are holding their own in those regards when compared to the few other posters who are utilizing more conventional methods and have been forthright enough to share their experiences here.


I must have missed the productivity and income post. Where is it posted?


----------



## Richard Cryberg

mike bispham said:


> As to the commerce; yep you have to optimise to maximise returns. But this discussion is about people who don't want to do that.


At least for you this discussion is about polluting the land side with crap unproven genetics created by some back yard fellow who cares very little if bees survive or not. If it were not for commercials there would be no nucs or package bees for all the back yard bee keepers to buy every spring. Back yard bee keepers are 100% dependent on commercial bee keepers to maintain a supply of bees to feed the hobby every spring. It does not need to be this way. Those of us who maintain healthy colonies do not need to buy new bees. In fact we sell them instead of buying them. But, we are still 100% dependent on the commercial guys or we would not be able to buy quality breeder queens and would be stuck producing uncompetitive junk.

The treatment free guys will start to gain a little credibility when a whole bunch of them each start selling at least a few hundred treatment free queens a year that will make colonies able to produce a competitive honey crop and those queens prove themselves across the country. Believe me the commercial guys would love to have a bee they did not need to treat. But excuses like I am too busy to supply test queens to the commercial guys is simply an admission your bees are not worth a real person even testing. Until you are producing and selling queens and having real commercial guys test them treatment free is about as credible as those antivaxers who claim vaccines cause autism in kids. But, face facts. That is not going to happen. When someone develops a treatment free queen this good it is not going to be some back yard bee keeper. It will be one of the professional commercial queen breeders.


----------



## squarepeg

clyderoad said:


> I must have missed the productivity and income post. Where is it posted?


http://www.beesource.com/forums/sho...eg-2015-2016-treatment-free-experience/page12

post# 453

i'm looking to improve on those numbers this year, so far so good.

care to share your winter loss rate, lbs. of honey per hive, and approximate annual income per hive clyde?


----------



## clyderoad

16 year average: winter loss 22%, 72 lbs honey/hive.
Income per hive I will not post.
I retail all of my honey, sell bees, pollen, propolis and pollinate.
The income numbers discussed in your link would bankrupt me and I'd have to hobby a few hives in the backyard
instead of hives in 8 outyards spread over the county.

Isn't everyone looking to improve their numbers?


----------



## Oldtimer

Fusion_power said:


> I have to disagree with this statement as it is overly broad. There is very clear evidence that bees fully tolerant to mites exist today and can easily be propagated in the future.


Ever since I started reading Beesource I've been hearing that these bees are about to be propagated in the future.

But as Planner has found, it still seems like nobody who wants one can actually get one.



mike bispham said:


> What is a 'fully mite resistant bee'? What is a beehive that thrives for the lifetime of its queen without being much affected? How much effect does it take to qualify as being 'less than fully mite resistant'?
> 
> You have to quantify statements like these for them to mean anything.


Having done all this with you in the past Mike I know it is a waste of time trying to define things for you, I'm not going to turn this thread into a 20 page argument over definitions. Yes my statement was broad, so what. I was commenting on some of what Planner said and pretty sure it would have given him a better understanding of the issues he was talking about, if you don't get it i'm not bothered. Bottom line, a commercial beekeeper cannot take the kind of losses that you do.

What I said guys, was relevant in regards to what Planner wants to know, in the form I said it. I won't turn this thread into a point scoring thread or a TF vs T argument, that's not what it's about. You may note I suggested Planner treat, OR get bees that don't need to be. IE, I did not say he has to treat, I presented 2 main options.

Squarepeg, agreed, you have had good success with your bees, plus run an excellent thread on them. You are the best TF beekeeper on the forum.

But for all 3 of you, I'm starting to think you would have to actually BE a commercial beekeeper and do what they do, before you will understand what I'm talking about. When all your TF bees die in a commercial setting cos you didn't treat them, then, you will get it. Arguing definitions on the internet won't save you.

Has anyone produced TF chickens that can live in a commercial setting with no health care, and the flock stay healthy?


----------



## squarepeg

many thanks for sharing your numbers clyde. winter losses and lbs. honey per hive between you and i appear to be comparable.

this year's winter loss came in at 9.5% which is improved over last year. the reason i think honey production will be up is because i have quite a few more drawn supers, swarm prevention is working good so far, and the weather has been more favorable compared to last year. my goal for this year is to exceed 10k in sales and average more like $500 income per hive.

i'm not sure that i would be interested in pollinating, but even without that i'm thinking it's possible to make a decent living running about 150 hives with these treatment free bees. this is assuming one could secure the yards, and market and sell that much honey and that many nucs, which i have no way of knowing if that is possible or not.

the limiting factor isn't that these bees aren't productive as much as it is i really don't want to have to work that hard, especially when my current day job allows me to stay out of bankruptcy without anywhere near as much sweat and back pain.


----------



## squarepeg

oldtimer, i very much appreciate your kind words and i believe that you bring a wealth of insight to the forum. many thanks indeed!

i have commented before that i believe there is a universe of difference between what i am doing and what commercials do on so many levels. holding either to the other's standard makes very little sense, as you have so wisely pointed out...


----------



## Oldtimer

What you suggest SP may be possible, and indeed there are several people making a living doing pretty much what you propose.

But it will certainly not be possible for all commercial beekeepers everywhere. 

Did you guys miss the post showing some of the selection process being done by that commercial bee breeder? Seems to have been ignored in favor of discussing negatives.


----------



## sakhoney

I have been running TF for 7/8 years now. Loose about 25% a winter - make up splits from the ones that make it. 300 hive operation. Saw some mites last year -freaked out - bought 150 strips - never took them from the package (for sale if anybody wants them) Anyway make on tallow about 100 pounds and leave enough honey on the bees to keep them going. Takes 6 hives to make a drum. survivor stock is the only way to go in my book.


----------



## clyderoad

squarepeg said:


> many thanks for sharing your numbers clyde. winter losses and lbs. honey per hive between you and i appear to be comparable.


they are?
26 lbs home yard and 42lbs away yard averages in your post is comparable?

My bees drew 40 deeps and 25 mediums last season on top of a 68 lbs honey average.
I can only guess what
they went into winter with, syrup feeding was minimal last fall.
The bees need to make honey and generate real revenue or I am done and back to swinging a hammer all week long.


----------



## squarepeg

clyderoad said:


> 26 lbs home yard and 42lbs away yard averages in your post is comparable?


put your reading glasses on clyde, those are not the numbers i posted.

i harvested 876 lbs. from what ended up being 12 hives used for honey production. the other hives were used for queenrearing and splits. that's about 73 lbs. per honey producing hive. 

and that's not counting the 800 lbs of honey i left for the bees, so when comparing to an operation that harvests all of the honey and feeds back syrup that is a consideration.

my goal was and still is for more like 100 lbs. harvest per hive. fingers crossed for this year.

i'm not trying to boast here, only countering the often made claim that bees kept off treatments can't be productive.


----------



## squarepeg

sakhoney said:


> I have been running TF for 7/8 years now. Loose about 25% a winter - make up splits from the ones that make it. 300 hive operation. Saw some mites last year -freaked out - bought 150 strips - never took them from the package (for sale if anybody wants them) Anyway make on tallow about 100 pounds and leave enough honey on the bees to keep them going. Takes 6 hives to make a drum. survivor stock is the only way to go in my book.


very nice! is beekeeping your primary source of income if i may ask?


----------



## Riverderwent

Oldtimer and Squarepeg, I appreciate your posts.


----------



## sakhoney

No squire peg - Afraid not - I'm a drilling superintendent in Argentina and work a 28/28 rotation but the bees are putting my son through Texas A&M. Tried to make a living with 800 hives 15 years ago and saw that way to much work. I'm 56 and found that to run that many hives is a young mans game. But It's a nice little check when the crop sales. But working 28/28 and having the bees along with a few other projects keeps me out of the bar and having old lady problems. Timing is the biggest problem I have - have to go to work and bees ready for splits? oh great. Other than that it works out OK.


----------



## lharder

In my opinion SP does have a "commercial" operation. At what size of an operation does one have to be to be considered "commercial"? He has a product, a customer base and is beginning to accumulate a track record. I don't see why it couldn't be scaled up to more out yards. But why should it? The goal is not to have as big an operation as possible, but the find the scale that makes sense for the bees as well as the beekeeper. A large migratory operation has lost touch with basic parameters of keeping healthy bees. Some efficiencies are detrimental in the long run. Like off sourcing jobs to other countries, or shutting down product development. May pad the bottom line in the next quarter, but hollow out the economy and the company in the long term. 

TF and a large scale migratory operation have very different business plans. TF has a premium product like fine wine, and is closer to sustainable ideals, the other more like junk food, propping up a dysfunctional system.


----------



## squarepeg

understood sakhoney. i'm glad that you've joined the forum and thanks for adding yourself on the 'tf member listing' thread.


----------



## clyderoad

squarepeg said:


> put your reading glasses on clyde, those are not the numbers i posted.
> 
> i harvested 876 lbs. from what ended up being 12 hives used for honey production. the other hives were used for queenrearing and splits. that's about 73 lbs. per honey producing hive.
> 
> and that's not counting the 800 lbs of honey i left for the bees, so when comparing to an operation that harvests all of the honey and feeds back syrup that is a consideration.
> 
> my goal was and still is for more like 100 lbs. harvest per hive. fingers crossed for this year.
> 
> i'm not trying to boast here, only countering the often made claim that bees kept off treatments can't be productive.


Ok. misread this:


squarepeg said:


> as expected the hives have only lost a few pounds each. the average amount of honey per hive at the home yard is 26 lbs., while the average at the out yard is 42 lbs.


and this:
a quick recap of 2015:

1. went into last winter with 18 colonies.
2. lost 3 over the winter leaving 15 (16.7% loss)
3. increased to 26, sold 5, leaving 21 going into this winter
4. harvested and sold 876 lbs. of honey, left about 800 lbs. of honey for the bees
5. got 19 more medium supers of foundation drawn out.
6. realized just shy of $450 income per overwintered hive

so 2015 average loss 16.7%, 73 lbs/hive. revenue $450/hive.
good for you on the production/hive side, bad on the revenue side.
How much can you retail honey for? $6-$7/lb.?
nucs? $140?
At those numbers it's a quantity game to make a go of it. Lots of hives. Almost like a commercial stationary bee operation.
I wonder how the bees will hold up under that pressure? 

BTW No where in my response is the TF non productive claim made. 
Why throw it in? For good measure?
If the harvest 'all the honey' is directed to my methods, you are incorrect. I harvest after my main flow in July.
I supplement fall flow with
syrup to get the bees to winter weight.


Anyway thanks for clarifying your success.


----------



## Oldtimer

lharder said:


> A large migratory operation has lost touch with basic parameters of keeping healthy bees.


Realise this could be said about just about all modern agriculture, not only beekeeping. There's guys with a couple apple trees in their back yard, then there is large commercial orchards who have to deal with pests.

Other than that Iharder you'll be surprised to know I pretty much agree with your whole post. And yes, SP does have a commercial operation. But not like the ones I'm talking about. To say all commercial operations have to be run like SP's operation but just scaled up, is not going to happen in our lifetimes. Because other forms of agriculture would suffer, plus not everywhere is suitable for permanent stands of bees that can turn a profit. But eventually it will happen, when the oil has run out, and the human population has been devastated.


----------



## Oldtimer

clyderoad said:


> BTW No where in my response is the TF non productive claim made.
> Why throw it in? For good measure?


To be fair that would have been me. I mentioned the productivity aspect because if a typical large migratory operation stopped treating they would lose so many bees that the operation as a whole would be non productive.


----------



## sakhoney

Squarepeg - go to new post and check out my book on packages verses nucs


----------



## squarepeg

you're welcome clyde, sorry for the confusion. yes, those numbers in post# 450 were talking about how much wintering honey was on the hive at the time.

no sir, that comment wasn't directed toward you. in fact i think the whole tone on the forum has improved a lot over the past year or so with regard to treatments or not, and i very much appreciate that.

but still from time to time there claims are made that not treating will get you nothing but dead bees, (which of course happened to the op in this thread but that has already been discussed), or that not treating may be possible but you can forget about production, (for example see post# 19 of this thread).

anyway, thanks for recognizing my success, and here's wishing you a very good 2016!


----------



## squarepeg

Oldtimer said:


> Did you guys miss the post showing some of the selection process being done by that commercial bee breeder? Seems to have been ignored in favor of discussing negatives.


no, but i almost missed this one in the shuffle.

was there anything in particular that caught your attention about that ot?

i'm still on the learning curve here, but my thinking is that all of that attention being paid toward queen selection can only go so far. i'm starting to believe that it's the drone contribution that plays the bigger role. perhaps those 'experts' have some way of influencing that as well?


----------



## clyderoad

Oldtimer said:


> To be fair that would have been me. I mentioned the productivity aspect because if a typical large migratory operation stopped treating they would lose so many bees that the operation as a whole would be non productive.


I have the same concerns.
Which I think are well founded.


clyderoad said:


> so 2015 average loss 16.7%, 73 lbs/hive. revenue $450/hive.
> good for you on the production/hive side, bad on the revenue side.
> How much can you retail honey for? $6-$7/lb.?
> nucs? $140?
> At those numbers it's a quantity game to make a go of it. Lots of hives. Almost like a commercial stationary bee operation.
> I wonder how the bees will hold up under that pressure?


----------



## squarepeg

clyderoad said:


> good for you on the production/hive side, bad on the revenue side.


so $450 - $500 per hive is considered poor on the revenue side?


----------



## squarepeg

sakhoney said:


> Squarepeg - go to new post and check out my book on packages verses nucs



sorry sak, not sure where it is you want me to look.


----------



## Lburou

So Planner, did you treat yet?


----------



## sakhoney

SP - new posts button above - on page 2


----------



## beepro

Yes, SP. 
Both the virgin queen and the local drone population
will have a big impact on your next generation of tf bees.
Since half of the genetic is coming from the drone for the worker
bees this will dictate whether or not they can handle the mites.
In screening for the mite biting bees for a potential breeder queen all
the mites drop need to be under a microscope for the selection process.
So it is not just that the queen is important here. You need to balance out
the other side too. I found out the local drones mating with the mite tolerant
virgin queen is not that effective on the mites. The only way is to saturate the
local DCA with the resistant genetics.


----------



## mike bispham

Richard Cryberg said:


> At least for you this discussion is about polluting the land side with crap unproven genetics created by some back yard fellow who cares very little if bees survive or not. [...] But, we are still 100% dependent on the commercial guys or we would not be able to buy quality breeder queens and would be stuck producing uncompetitive junk.
> ...] Believe me the commercial guys would love to have a bee they did not need to treat. But excuses like I am too busy to supply test queens to the commercial guys is simply an admission your bees are not worth a real person even testing. Until you are producing and selling queens and having real commercial guys test them treatment free is about as credible as those antivaxers who claim vaccines cause autism in kids. But, face facts. That is not going to happen. When someone develops a treatment free queen this good it is not going to be some back yard bee keeper. It will be one of the professional commercial queen breeders.


Seems to me there's a whole lot of negative assumptions wrapped up in this post, which makes it hard to answer, but I'll make this point:

How many other things beside treat for mites do commercial beekeepers to do enhance their crops, that make hard a fair comparison with backyard t/f beekeepers figures? 

Mike (UK)


----------



## mike bispham

clyderoad said:


> Isn't everyone looking to improve their numbers?


Probably. But not at the cost of perpetuating bees that can't stand on their own feet. That's the turning point. that's what tf is about and we're in the t/f forum here.....

Mike (UK)


----------



## mike bispham

Oldtimer said:


> Bottom line, a commercial beekeeper cannot take the kind of losses that you do.


Commercial beekeepers would love my loss figures, particularly as 80% of them were caused by my own clumsiness!



Oldtimer said:


> What I said guys, was relevant in regards to what Planner wants to know, in the form I said it. I won't turn this thread into a point scoring thread or a TF vs T argument, that's not what it's about.
> 
> [...]
> 
> But for all 3 of you, I'm starting to think you would have to actually BE a commercial beekeeper and do what they do, before you will understand what I'm talking about. When all your TF bees die in a commercial setting cos you didn't treat them, then, you will get it. Arguing definitions on the internet won't save you.
> 
> Has anyone produced TF chickens that can live in a commercial setting with no health care, and the flock stay healthy?


That's the point Oldtimer: this is he t/f forum which is set up to discuss tf beekeeping. Its a given that bees under untreated, unmonkeyed regimes won't perform as well as bees in treated highly manipulated regimes. No-one has said otherwise. The ot wasn't asking about that - he was asking how for help with keeping t/f bees.

Definitions are necessary to any meaningful conversations. It seems to me that your 'commercial', whether in relation to bees or chickens (or any other livestock) has wrapped up in it an understanding along the lines: 

'so intensive that medications and interventions will be necessary and frequent'.

Given that isn't it unsurprising that tf bees/beekeepers aren't in the running?

You're arguing apples and oranges without realising it. I'm just trying to bring that to your attention.

Mike (UK)


----------



## mike bispham

Oldtimer said:


> What you suggest SP may be possible, and indeed there are several people making a living doing pretty much what you propose.
> 
> But it will certainly not be possible for all commercial beekeepers everywhere.
> 
> Did you guys miss the post showing some of the selection process being done by that commercial bee breeder? Seems to have been ignored in favor of discussing negatives.


Did anybody respond to my question: what sort of progress are commercial beekeepers making with mite resistance? 

Mike (UK)


----------



## mike bispham

clyderoad said:


> they are?
> 26 lbs home yard and 42lbs away yard averages in your post is comparable?
> 
> My bees drew 40 deeps and 25 mediums last season on top of a 68 lbs honey average.
> I can only guess what
> they went into winter with, syrup feeding was minimal last fall.
> The bees need to make honey and generate real revenue or I am done and back to swinging a hammer all week long.


That's fine, no-one is arguing with you Clyde. But this is the t/f forum! Its where people come to talk about t/f in the knowledge that t/f cannot match intensive yields! You're off-topic and getting in the way.

Mike (UK)


----------



## mike bispham

lharder said:


> In my opinion SP does have a "commercial" operation. At what size of an operation does one have to be to be considered "commercial"? He has a product, a customer base and is beginning to accumulate a track record. I don't see why it couldn't be scaled up to more out yards. But why should it? The goal is not to have as big an operation as possible, but the find the scale that makes sense for the bees as well as the beekeeper. A large migratory operation has lost touch with basic parameters of keeping healthy bees. Some efficiencies are detrimental in the long run. Like off sourcing jobs to other countries, or shutting down product development. May pad the bottom line in the next quarter, but hollow out the economy and the company in the long term.
> 
> TF and a large scale migratory operation have very different business plans. TF has a premium product like fine wine, and is closer to sustainable ideals, the other more like junk food, propping up a dysfunctional system.


Great post. Cuts through the apples and oranges like a knife. Definitions Oldtimer.


----------



## mike bispham

Oldtimer said:


> Realise this could be said about just about all modern agriculture, not only beekeeping. There's guys with a couple apple trees in their back yard, then there is large commercial orchards who have to deal with pests.
> 
> Other than that Iharder you'll be surprised to know I pretty much agree with your whole post. And yes, SP does have a commercial operation. But not like the ones I'm talking about. To say all commercial operations have to be run like SP's operation but just scaled up, is not going to happen in our lifetimes. Because other forms of agriculture would suffer, plus not everywhere is suitable for permanent stands of bees that can turn a profit. But eventually it will happen, when the oil has run out, and the human population has been devastated.


More or less agree with you for once! Yes, its the system that's at fault. The drive to improve yields on a competitive winner-takes-all basis regardless of environmental cost. That's one of the things many tf beekeepers are trying to achieve - to show that's not necessary; that more sustainable methods are, when all the accounting is done, more economically viable.

Mike (UK)


----------



## clyderoad

mike bispham said:


> That's fine, no-one is arguing with you Clyde. But this is the t/f forum! Its where people come to talk about t/f in the knowledge that t/f cannot match intensive yields! You're off-topic and getting in the way.
> 
> Mike (UK)


You think very highly of yourself. When did you become the editor of BeeSource?
Instead of quickly opening your mouth everytime another member posts here, particularly when one isn't on your TF list of 'approved persons' and who is not 'on the same mission', why don't
you try to actually read the discussions. It's clear you cherry pick at anything and everything to fit some preconceived 
ideology and miss the dialog regularly- it's at your own detriment you do this.
Have you ever had a discussion with anyone but yourself?

Now, you get out of the way so those with something to actually contribute to the discussion can do so without scrolling
past all of your merry-go-round half baked comments.


----------



## mike bispham

clyderoad said:


> It's clear you cherry pick at anything and everything to fit some preconceived
> ideology and miss the dialog regularly...


The dialogue is tf beekeeping. The op wants information about tf beekeeping. The tf beekeepers want to talk about tf beekeeping. And there is a long history here of people who don't think much of tf beekeeping obstructing that conversation. Its what you're doing.

The 'ideology' is biology-based husbandry. 

I don't cherry pick facts - I'm quite happy with all pertinent facts - as long as that's what they are - not opinions; and as lon as they're relevant to the topic.



clyderoad said:


> Now, you get out of the way so those with something to actually contribute to the discussion can do so without scrolling past all of your merry-go-round half baked comments.


That's straight ad hominem Clyde. The strategy of someone who doesn't have an argument. 

Mike (UK)


----------



## clyderoad

mike bispham said:


> The strategy of someone who doesn't have an argument.
> 
> Mike (UK)


This!
You are incapable of distinguishing between a discussion and an argument.
Get out of the way until you can.


----------



## Juhani Lunden

clyderoad said:


> You think very highly of yourself. When did you become the editor of BeeSource?
> Instead of quickly opening your mouth everytime another member posts here, particularly when one isn't on your TF list of 'approved persons' and who is not 'on the same mission', why don't
> you try to actually read the discussions. It's clear you cherry pick at anything and everything to fit some preconceived
> ideology and miss the dialog regularly- it's at your own detriment you do this.
> Have you ever had a discussion with anyone but yourself?
> 
> Now, you get out of the way so those with something to actually contribute to the discussion can do so without scrolling
> past all of your merry-go-round half baked comments.




Well said, I hope the real moderators understand to do something.


----------



## lharder

Oldtimer said:


> Realise this could be said about just about all modern agriculture, not only beekeeping. There's guys with a couple apple trees in their back yard, then there is large commercial orchards who have to deal with pests.
> 
> Other than that Iharder you'll be surprised to know I pretty much agree with your whole post. And yes, SP does have a commercial operation. But not like the ones I'm talking about. To say all commercial operations have to be run like SP's operation but just scaled up, is not going to happen in our lifetimes. Because other forms of agriculture would suffer, plus not everywhere is suitable for permanent stands of bees that can turn a profit. But eventually it will happen, when the oil has run out, and the human population has been devastated.


Yes, my dysfunctional system covered all of agriculture, the corporate food system and the economic systems as they are currently configured. The dysfunction can be seen in the declining health outcomes on a population level caused by poor food and poorer prospects for young people. Not only that, the quality of some products has gone downhill. Appliances that used to last 30 years now last 8. 

So if a problem is identified, then what is to be done? Certainly not by accepting it. For me its about reviving a culture around food and pushing the corporate food system to the edges of my life where it belongs. Concrete action involves having a large garden sustained without pesticides. The bee thing started as an adjunct, but became a focus once I saw its potential and given my background in entomology. But its also a voice, standing up for the bees in my care and my interests. I'm lucky that I don't have migratory operations perched on my doorstep, but I remind my provincial apiarist from time to time, the health implications of migratory operations and the possible negative effects on my bees and bees in my region. He needs to hear my voice too. 

At the same time I am expanding my operation. I want to produce more bees than I need to help fill supply gaps locally (another source of disease in migration). I encourage self sufficiency at the local club/individual level tf or not. These are concrete steps that can be taken to moderate some of the disease pressure that bees are under.


----------



## JWChesnut

lharder said:


> Yes, my dysfunctional system covered all of agriculture, the corporate food system and the economic systems as they are currently configured. .... Appliances that used to last 30 years now last 8.
> == Utopian vision snipped ==


In my town, a "boutique locavore" storefront selling local lavender-scented goat milk soaps for just a fraction of the net-worth of the well-coifed BMW-driving customers occupies the same strip mall as the local "Foods-for-Less". The Foods for Less gets 100x the buyers, mostly gritty farmworkers watching their budget and filling the parking lot with beater cars with cracked windshields. They are the employees of the "boutique" wineries and olive farms that dot the hillsides of the "Knoll Set".

I just don't see the Utopian Vision ever being more then a day-dream of the intellectuals.


----------



## Juhani Lunden

JWChesnut said:


> I just don't see the Utopian Vision ever being more then a day-dream of the intellectuals.


Just came back from a lecturing trip to Estonia. They don´t even have varroa resistance in evaluation of breeders there, nor do they have it in Denmark, they only have hygienic tests. My prediction is that there will no major change in the economical importance of TF beekeeping in 20 years, unless oxalic acid loses its efficiency.

But anyway we need visions and how anecdotal it may be I have bees 8 years without treatments.


----------



## mike bispham

JWChesnut said:


> I just don't see the Utopian Vision ever being more then a day-dream of the intellectuals.


You should get to know permaculture John. At its best its the most productive farming system possible, totally sustainable, and it can happen at your house. The problem is today's system is set up by, and run on behalf of, the powerful few. The rest of us are cogs in their machine. Use your imagination and step outside.

Mike (UK)


----------



## Fusion_power

Juhani, Treatment free beekeeping will be a hit or miss proposition until most commercial beekeepers can make a living without treatment. There are breeding programs ongoing with Carniolan and Buckfast stock in Europe. There are no breeding programs in too many small EU countries that would benefit the most from TF genetics.

The current hoopla in England over type B deformed wing virus is especially worrisome. It seems that every beekeeper there believes that massive mite infestations are acceptable if you just get the right virus into the hives. I submit that simple solutions are rarely the right solutions when it comes to genetics. Many small effect traits added together are more likely to result in long term survival of honeybees. Part of the solution will be grooming, part will be removal of infested brood, part will be virus tolerance, and part will be from other factors currently unknown. Breeding hygienic bees is beneficial and desirable, but is not enough without other tolerance traits.


----------



## mike bispham

clyderoad said:


> This!
> You are incapable of distinguishing between a discussion and an argument.
> Get out of the way until you can.


I've got a good Ba in philosophy mate. You want to know what an argument can be anytime just ask.

Mike (UK)


----------



## mike bispham

Fusion_power said:


> I submit that simple solutions are rarely the right solutions when it comes to genetics.


Natural selection has done pretty well for 4 billion years, and at its heart it is simple. Elegant and beautiful too. Simple rule-based husbandry has worked wonders for a few thousand years. 

Don't let weakness into the next generation is a simple enough rule. Too tough for many beekeepers mind.

Mike (UK)


----------



## JRG13

Fusion_power said:


> Juhani, Treatment free beekeeping will be a hit or miss proposition until most commercial beekeepers can make a living without treatment. There are breeding programs ongoing with Carniolan and Buckfast stock in Europe. There are no breeding programs in too many small EU countries that would benefit the most from TF genetics.
> 
> The current hoopla in England over type B deformed wing virus is especially worrisome. It seems that every beekeeper there believes that massive mite infestations are acceptable if you just get the right virus into the hives. I submit that simple solutions are rarely the right solutions when it comes to genetics. Many small effect traits added together are more likely to result in long term survival of honeybees. Part of the solution will be grooming, part will be removal of infested brood, part will be virus tolerance, and part will be from other factors currently unknown. Breeding hygienic bees is beneficial and desirable, but is not enough without other tolerance traits.


I thought previous studies showed Varroa somehow skewed the population to the more virulent strain, but this new information is saying the less virulent strain somehow acts as a barrier for infection from type A? Am I confused on this or do I need to go back and do some reading?


----------



## mike bispham

JRG13 said:


> I thought previous studies showed Varroa somehow skewed the population to the more virulent strain, but this new information is saying the less virulent strain somehow acts as a barrier for infection from type A? Am I confused on this or do I need to go back and do some reading?


With respect: forget it. Its all detail that don't even help. As John Kefus puts it: you're on an aeroplane. The aeroplane works. You don't need to know how; you just need to know it works.

What works with bees (and every other form of life that exists, and has ever existed) is:

Those offspring made from the healthiest parents will have the best chance of being healthy.

The earliest farmers in Mesopotamia understood this; the biblical Aaron understood it; medieval Europeans understood it: 'Put best to best'.

Figure out how to do that with bees; forget the rest.

Mike (UK)


----------



## Fusion_power

> this new information is saying the less virulent strain somehow acts as a barrier for infection from type A? Am I confused on this or do I need to go back and do some reading?


 Competitive Displacement is the effect, pre-selection is what enables it to work. If bees are not treated, then all bees with the pathogenic type A form of DWV die. Only bees infected with type B survive. Since infection with type B tends to prevent infection with type A, the result is bees that carry high mite loads but do not collapse under pressure from DWV. As I stated earlier, this does not do anything about the mites.


----------



## Michael Bush

> But this is the t/f forum! Its where people come to talk about t/f 

Not really. Obviously we come here to be called a "cult" and accused of believing in magic bees. If we were discussing how to be treatment free we would be having a very different conversation.

In my experience, whether you treat or not, package bees are pretty much a waste of money, unless you requeen with some local stock shortly after and preferably treatment free local stock.


----------



## Mycroft Jones

I bought two packages this year, New Zealand stock. Packages come in early March, no exceptions. Canadian TF queens aren't available for another three weeks. My first package died in 2 weeks. My second package laid a small clump of eggs, then abandoned them. Now no bees are coming in and out of the hive. They didn't even survive long enough for me to requeen. Very frustrating. The wait list for TF nucs and packages is 2 years long here in Canada, and border restrictions make it a pain. To get TF into Canada, we need to get organized. Yes I fed, sugar and pollen patty. I even gave them some old comb (foundationless) to lay eggs in.


----------



## Michael Bush

>My first package died in 2 weeks. My second package laid a small clump of eggs, then abandoned them. Now no bees are coming in and out of the hive. They didn't even survive long enough for me to requeen.

They also didn't live long enough to treat them or even need to...

I would look for treatment free Canadians near you and see if you can talk them into selling you a frame of brood to raise some queens from.


----------



## clyderoad

mike bispham said:


> I've got a good Ba in philosophy mate. You want to know what an argument can be anytime just ask.
> 
> Mike (UK)


I'm impressed, a Ba in philosophy.

You are your own worst enemy.
How's it working for you?


----------



## mike bispham

clyderoad said:


> I'm impressed, a Ba in philosophy.


Me too! Are you thinking about getting back on topic anytime soon?

Mike (UK)


----------



## BernhardHeuvel

Yes. Get back to topic: give up treatment free beekeeping.


----------



## lharder

JWChesnut said:


> In my town, a "boutique locavore" storefront selling local lavender-scented goat milk soaps for just a fraction of the net-worth of the well-coifed BMW-driving customers occupies the same strip mall as the local "Foods-for-Less". The Foods for Less gets 100x the buyers, mostly gritty farmworkers watching their budget and filling the parking lot with beater cars with cracked windshields. They are the employees of the "boutique" wineries and olive farms that dot the hillsides of the "Knoll Set".
> 
> I just don't see the Utopian Vision ever being more then a day-dream of the intellectuals.


This statement amounts to a false dichotomy between boutique and discount stores. When you grow much of your own food, you opt out of part of the market altogether while getting quality. I live in an area with many working class Italians. They take their food seriously, but are extremely frugal and self sufficient.


----------



## Oldtimer

mike bispham said:


> The dialogue is tf beekeeping. The op wants information about tf beekeeping.


Wrong. Please read post one, and his second and only other post. 

The OP says he has done TF beekeeping for 7 years and failed 7 times, he is now asking for suggestions on different strategies and options, *including treating*, he is considering that. Read it.

You have subverted the discussion to your own personal agenda, the same thing you trot out in every thread regardless of topic. Then you are trying to moderate everyone else, plus throwing around your degree in philosophy and arguing, as if it's a badge of authority. 

Mike the OP has long abandoned this thread, please take your own advice, get back to, and stay on, topic.



mike bispham said:


> Me too! Are you thinking about getting back on topic anytime soon?
> 
> Mike (UK)


----------



## DaisyNJ

The knowledge and wisdom posts like this bring out is ming boggling. :k:


----------



## mike bispham

Oldtimer said:


> You have subverted the discussion to your own personal agenda, the same thing you trot out in every thread regardless of topic.


That's because people like you constantly try to use the t/f forum to further your own agenda - that t/f is impossible (sans subtext 'possible' entails thriving in the toxic 'commercial' environment); that only 'proper' breeders will ever achieve 'resistance', yada yada. Not gonna happen. This is where we try to clarify what tf might be and how to do it. And we'll defend our experience, our and understanding, and argue our case whether you like it or not. 

That case is founded on sound husbandry, where that terms means 'care of the genes down through the generations'. No serious husbandryman thinks otherwise. Its not my 'personal agenda': its the basis of tf beekeeping. It is the foundation of the topic. Whether you like it or not.

If supplying reasoned arguments is a crime; guilty. 

Mike (UK)


----------



## Oldtimer

mike bispham said:


> Bugger off.


Wow! I must have hit a raw nerve! 

Are you thinking about getting back on topic anytime soon?


----------



## mike bispham

Oldtimer said:


> Wrong. Please read post one, and his second and only other post.
> 
> The OP says he has done TF beekeeping for 7 years and failed 7 times, he is now asking for suggestions on different strategies and options, *including treating*, he is considering that. Read it.


Did: he still wants to try tf, and had (at that stage) concluded (among other things:

" ... that the commercial beekeepers and many others (not all), have out of necessity created an epidemic of sick bees that can not survive without treatment. There may be a few TF beekeepers but the main commercial bee industry is hooked on drugs.

[...]

Several responses to my initial inquiry suggested I obtain some survivor stock from my local area."

I think everything I've said here is supportive of that understanding and those inclinations.



Oldtimer said:


> [...]and arguing, as if it's a badge of authority.


The best argument wins. In reasoning, logic, science... Sorry about that. The winner of the argument is the authority; at least till someone comes up with a better argument. Hasn't anyone ever explained that to you?

You just don't like people arguing with you. Suggestion: give philosophers a wide berth. They love arguing.

Mike (K)


----------



## Oldtimer

Are you thinking about getting back on topic anytime soon?


----------



## Oldtimer

Mike I just noticed you have changed some of your posts, AFTER I commented on them, to make what I said later appear out of context. Since you consider yourself an expert on arguing, you should know you do not go back and edit your posts AFTER someone else has commented on them, to make what they said appear out of context.

That is BASIC to any proper and fair discussion. Clearly you know nothing about philosophy or correct method of argument at all. Or, you don't care. If you do not apply your much vaunted degree, it is just a piece of paper.

To do what you have done means you have realised you have been shown to be wrong, or that you have made an ass of yourself, but hey, no problem to you, just go back and change everything after the discussion has been furthered, making the other guys comments look out of context, hope nobody notices.



mike bispham said:


> In reasoning, logic, science... Sorry about that. The winner of the argument is the authority; at least till someone comes up with a better argument. Hasn't anyone ever explained that to you?


Since winning the argument is so important to you, sorry to break it to you that your underhand tactics mean you lose. 

But hey, are you thinking about getting back on topic anytime soon? That's kinda all the rest of us want.


----------



## clyderoad

mike bispham said:


> The best argument wins. In reasoning, logic, science... Sorry about that. The winner of the argument is the authority; at least till someone comes up with a better argument. Hasn't anyone ever explained that to you?
> 
> You just don't like people arguing with you. Suggestion: give philosophers a wide berth. They love arguing.
> 
> Mike (K)


Boy did I hit that nail on the head :lpf:


----------



## sakhoney

ZZZZZZZZ


----------



## Oldtimer

Sakhoney. I have enjoyed your posts. Just because your guy Mike has made a monkey out of himself does not mean you have to go to sleep now.

The OP may still be out there somewhere, you may have some positive advice.


----------



## marshmasterpat

mike bispham said:


> Did anybody respond to my question: what sort of progress are commercial beekeepers making with mite resistance?
> 
> Mike (UK)


Mike - I am still on the fence but with losses of 50%+ in both hives and nucs I may land on another side of the fence. So I probably should just butt out this. However, the irish and german in my like a good round or two and seldom have I been about to let volleys pass by without answering back. 

I know of at least 1 commercial operator on this forum that is raising hygienic queens at a large scale. I would love to buy but right now I cannot justify buying the 40 or so QC I would need to buy of make the trip worthwhile. Is he TF - nope, but serious doubt most TF folks would be able to run the size migratory operations he is and stay that way. 

And I know of others in this forum that are working with various hygienic stock bringing it in from well know breeders. But if you were requeening 3000+ hives annually as part of an operation to provide brood breaks and keep good queens in hive I suspect you would have hand full. 

But darn I have read what at least one large scale commercial person on this forum does to pick his breeders and he looks at the same stuff many of you do. Just sometimes he uses non-TF methods to remove the picked up pests that occur with the migratory commercial game.

Now going to go kick my hives and see if I can make something else mad.


----------



## sakhoney

I here ya old timer - didn't go to sleep - Got rid of something I though was an IM. Only way to rid it was to include something in the box - so therefor the ZZZZZZZZZZs


----------



## fieldsofnaturalhoney

Oldtimer said:


> Mike the OP has long abandoned this thread,


I wonder why?


----------



## mike bispham

Oldtimer said:


> Mike I just noticed you have changed some of your posts, AFTER I commented on them, to make what I said later appear out of context. Since you consider yourself an expert on arguing, you should know you do not go back and edit your posts AFTER someone else has commented on them, to make what they said appear out of context.


What I did was remove the part that would probably have got the post deleted. That didn't alter any of the arguments in the least.



Oldtimer said:


> That is BASIC to any proper and fair discussion. Clearly you know nothing about philosophy or correct method of argument at all. Or, you don't care.
> 
> To do what you have done means you have realised you have been shown to be wrong, or that you have made an ass of yourself, but hey, no problem to you, just go back and change everything after the discussion has been furthered, making the other guys comments look out of context, hope nobody notices.


I removed the incautious and inflammatory 'bugger off'. That's all. As Sazhoney says, ZZZZZZ



Oldtimer said:


> Since winning the argument is so important to you, sorry to break it to you that your underhand tactics mean you lose.
> 
> But hey, are you thinking about getting back on topic anytime soon? That's kinda all the rest of us want.


Pot, kettle, bla... Oh I just can't be bothered. ZZZZZZZZZZZ


----------



## mike bispham

marshmasterpat said:


> Mike - I am still on the fence but with losses of 50%+ in both hives and nucs I may land on another side of the fence. So I probably should just butt out this. However, the irish and german in my like a good round or two and seldom have I been about to let volleys pass by without answering back.
> 
> I know of at least 1 commercial operator on this forum that is raising hygienic queens at a large scale.


Ok, philosophers hat on:

Some (but not by any means all) 'commercial beekeepers' are then making an effort to raise resistance in their bees.

Lets note a few useful (for the purposes of this discussion) points:

1) This may be, and probably is, a tiny fraction of all 'commercial beekeepers'. Can anyone offer a percentage?

2) Most 'commercial beekeepers' are (as far as I know) making almost no effort at all in this direction

3) Many (I've no idea what proportion) requeen regularly with bought-in queens (from professional breeders)

4) Those suppliers of queens may and may not be making an effort to supply queens that will give some measure of mite resistance.

Does anyone have anything to add to those points? Anyone disagree with any part? 

I'm framing this in a way which will allow us, given goodwill, to explore the question of the role of the intensive sector, and its contribution toward raising mite resistance, and toward undermining it.

I'm anticipating we'll struggle to quantify many aspects, and will only have the option of saying something like: 'the more x happens, the more y will follow'



marshmasterpat said:


> Is he TF - nope, but serious doubt most TF folks would be able to run the size migratory operations he is and stay that way.


We've noted here and on other threads recentl;y that intensive systems need medication. There are no strains, and never have been, which will thrive under such intensive conditions. Competition/lack of regulation has driven beekeeping to operate in that manner. So an argument can be made that the problem doesn't lie with inadequate tf bes; it lies with the intensive nature of the industry.



marshmasterpat said:


> And I know of others in this forum that are working with various hygienic stock bringing it in from well know breeders. But if you were requeening 3000+ hives annually as part of an operation to provide brood breaks and keep good queens in hive I suspect you would have hand full.


All the time you are operating like that you cannot be part of an effort to selct those strains that work well in your system. The bees are effectively just cogs in your machine. You are not doing 'husbandry' in its proper sense. You're not, arguably (in a philosophical sense), a 'beekeeper' at all. You are an industrial bee user. I could try to find ways of making that sound less offensive - but right now I'm struggling. That's not because I want to offend folks. Its that I want a clear descriptive term so that we can all think more clearly about the real situation. 



marshmasterpat said:


> But darn I have read what at least one large scale commercial person on this forum does to pick his breeders and he looks at the same stuff many of you do.


No surprises there. I hope he can succeed.



marshmasterpat said:


> Just sometimes he uses non-TF methods to remove the picked up pests that occur with the migratory commercial game.


I'm sure that's necessary, and I'm sure he hates doing it because he'll know it'll be messing with his all-important breeding data.

Nice to meet someone who recognises the value of argument Pat

Mike (UK)


----------



## beepro

Fusion_power said:


> .... Since infection with type B tends to prevent infection with type A, the result is bees that carry high mite loads but do not collapse under pressure from DWV. ....



Now this is interesting!
Last year the more vicious mites crashed my 2 growing hives. I threw away
20 frames of comb with the dead larvae in them. Then combine the 2
hives into one letting them select their own preferred queen out of the 2.
This year the mites are more manageable that did not crash my hives even though
they're heavily loaded. So both the mites and bees have adapted somehow. And even
the queen that emerged in these hives will be infected with the mites too. And the newly
emerged worker bees with the DWV will be carried out by the healthy housekeeping bees.
If the mites on the DWV bees don't find a new host soon after emerging then they too will
be carried out by these housekeeping bees. If you don't have the vsh bees then the hygienic
bees are really important to battle with these mites. It could be that after the combine even
the mites are more tolerable now.


----------



## Oldtimer

mike bispham said:


> I removed the incautious and inflammatory 'bugger off'. That's all.


That's not the only post I'm talking about. In fact I've been catching you retrospectively changing posts for years, seems like the desire to win arguments takes precedence over all else.

As an adjunct to that, I disagree that the winner of an argument is necessarily the expert, especially when underhand arguing tactics are used. My experience is that eloquence and good beekeeping skills are often not linked. 

Also, in your last post you have reverted to your old hobby horse of attacking commercial beekeepers. Something of an oxymoron coming from the guy who keeps demanding that everybody ELSE stick with the thread topic. Oh, you needn't go back and delete it. 

If you really have to attack commercial beekeepers start a thread on it instead of yet again hijacking someone elses. I will then be happy to join the discussion and point out your ignorance on the subject. And since you want to make treatments part of the discussion don't do anything silly like start it in the treatment free forum.


----------



## mike bispham

Oldtimer said:


> That's not the only post I'm talking about. In fact I've been catching you retrospectively changing posts for years, seems like the desire to win arguments takes precedence over all else.


Evidence please. Since you won't find one case, an apology now will do.



Oldtimer said:


> As an adjunct to that, I disagree that the winner of an argument is necessarily the expert [...]


Shows how well you understand science and rational thought. 



Oldtimer said:


> Also, in your last post you have reverted to your old hobby horse of attacking commercial beekeepers.


I've been clear of late that I am blaming the system, not the players. 

Three times wrong in a row.


----------



## Oldtimer

mike bispham said:


> Evidence please. Since you won't find one case, an apology now will do.


I won't find one case? Wrong yet again, here's one case.



mike bispham said:


> Bugger off.


If you are so worried about correcting wrongs with an apology, an apology will now do. And if you are trying to say you have never before changed a post retrospectively then I'm just going to have to throw in the word dishonest.

And oh. Do you think you might get back to topic any time soon?


----------



## Oldtimer

Mike why don't you just start a thread called the Mike Bispham arguing thread. Then you can do all your arguing in that one instead of hijacking everyone elses.


----------



## Oldtimer

LOL. The eloquence of your post indicate that "science and rational thought" have deserted you. 

Truly. Take all this nonsense to another thread.


----------



## Juhani Lunden

There should be a democratic method of getting people out of this forum. Some sort of poll. If for instance 50% or more of the voters want somebody out and there are more than 20 people voting. How does this sound Barry and others?


----------



## Oldtimer

I'll agree with that Juhani, and if it's me get's booted I would accept it.

But with that should be a caveat that this forum should not be used as a "safe haven" from which to do things such as attack commercial beekeepers, when there is no right of reply. That would lead to unbalanced discussion and promotion of untruths, and would be abuse of the forum.


----------



## jim lyon

With some trepidation I'll make a cameo here. I may well be the commercial referred to earlier that regularly incorporates tf stock into their breeding operation. I am hardly alone in this practice. Between myself, my customers and some other equally large or even larger operations, the numbers of cells raised from tf breeders easily surpasses 100,000 annually and this is just from my limited knowledge. Spending $1,000 or more annually on some breeders is really a "no brainer" in my mind, it allows me to sublet the nuts and bolts of tf breeding out to people who specialize in it while still allowing me to be involved in supplementing them with my own selected stock. I look at it as a long term process any smart beekeeper would incorporate into his operation and not something that will show any dramatic improvement in any one year. BTW we were awash in bees this spring.


----------



## Juhani Lunden

Oldtimer said:


> I'll agree with that Juhani, and if it's me get's booted I would accept it.


We both know that is not what I meant. 

If it is me who gets booted, I´ll happy to accept that too.


----------



## Barry

OK, back to the question at hand, "Is it time to stop TF?"

BTW, I'm looking for someone to be the moderator of this forum again. Truly a unique person is required. Pay is lousy and work never ends. Perhaps we can nominate someone. If they get 10 nominations, they become moderator, like it or not!


----------



## JWChesnut

Barry said:


> OK, back to the question at hand, "Is it time to stop TF?"
> 
> BTW, I'm looking for someone to be the moderator of this forum again. Truly a unique person is required. Pay is lousy and work never ends. Perhaps we can nominate someone. If they get 10 nominations, they become moderator, like it or not!


I nominate SquarePeg and Phoebee. They have technical chops and patience.

Back to the subject at hand:

I haven't given up TF experimentation in more than 15 years. I think one needs to be realistic. Monitor for mites, and remove the colonies that do not "make the grade" for salvage.

Incorporate the queens from serious breeding programs into your apiary. Expect some improvement, but do not expect miracles. Breeding (when backcrossing is not an option) is very, very slow work, and all the progress is easily lost in a single year of contingent disaster.

Have a fallback strategy when the apiary develop problems.

The belief that a backyard keeper with 6 hives (or 60) will breed a Superbee is nonsense. There is no evidence to support that theory.


----------



## mike bispham

JWChesnut said:


> I nominate SquarePeg and Phoebee. They have technical chops and patience.


Seconded (with apologies to both of you!)



JWChesnut said:


> Back to the subject at hand:
> [...]
> The belief that a backyard keeper with 6 hives (or 60) will breed a Superbee is nonsense. There is no evidence to support that theory.


Can we have your definition John of a 'superbee', and will you give us some examples of backyard beekeepers who have theorised that they can breed one?

My suspicion is that you've invented this ridiculous and ill-defined claim in order to be able to belittle it. The implication is that one, or some, of us amateur breeders has been making such wild claims.

Some come on. Evidence please (again) 

Mike


----------



## squarepeg

i nominate phoebee x 10.


----------



## crofter

The forum needs a moderator of biblical wisdom and patience and an independent source of income (Barry says the pay sucks!)

As one persons signature for a while stated approximately, "If you are interested in finding the truth of a concept, be neither for or against it"!

We have seen the result of attempted moderation by someone who was perhaps a bit dogmatically a believer. Hard to referee a game where your kid is one of the players!


----------



## Fusion_power

> That would lead to unbalanced discussion and promotion of untruths


 TF engenders strong biases and opinions that are like manure in a pasture, extremely odorous and difficult to avoid. An overwhelming dose of anti-TF gets posted regularly by nay-sayers countered by blistering diatribe from yay-sayers.



> The belief that a backyard keeper with 6 hives (or 60) will breed a Superbee is nonsense.


This statement is nonsense and demonstrates very clear lack of knowledge of genetics and breeding. It is not necessary to breed a super bee. A bee capable of surviving mites is all that is needed. Once that goal is achieved, the traits involved in survival can be studied and selection performed for commercial traits such as honey production. Even a person with just a few hives in the backyard can get lucky and find an unusual colony that can survive mites. This happened to me in 2004 and led to the bees that I've kept since. I'm a plant breeder by choice. A few years ago, I found a single tomato plant, one out of a few hundred grown. That plant survived foliage disease in my garden that decimated all other tomato plants. I saved seed and the next year crossed that wild tomato with pea size fruit to a larger fruited domestic tomato. Now I have produced F2 and F3 seed. Each year I select for healthy foliage, large fruit, and good flavor. With a few more generations of selection, I'll have a tomato with outstanding tolerance to septoria and early blight. A few years ago I decided to try producing corn with higher protein content. Last year I had a very good crop and fed some of the breeding lines to my chickens. I noticed that one particular maize line increased egg production by 10% as compared to commercial laying feed. When I delved into the genetics, I could see that the chickens were responding to high methionine and determined that the commercial laying feed must be deficient in methionine. I'm growing 1/4 acre of the seed this year because I kind of like the idea of getting more eggs with a little effort on my part. I'm not a professional, just a guy who noticed something unusual in his back yard, the same as I noticed one particular colony that had very little mite drop late in the fall of 2004.

In the long term, the only possible solution to mites is to breed mite tolerant bees. Mother nature has already done most of the hard work by weeding out susceptible bees in the feral population. Beekeepers are caught in a difficult paradigm of either treating for mites or else watching most of their bees die as they search for resistance. I don't blame the commercial beekeepers for treating, but their genetics are the major reason we still have to treat for mites.



> BTW, I'm looking for someone to be the moderator of this forum again. Truly a unique person is required. Pay is lousy and work never ends. Perhaps we can nominate someone. If they get 10 nominations, they become moderator, like it or not!


 I nominate JWChesnut since he will have to actually learn something about genetics and keeping bees treatment free to be a good moderator. If he doesn't do a good job of keeping discussions on topic and supportive of treatment free principles, Barry could make him moderator of tailgater instead. You might note that tailgater is locked and has no new posts. This would make JWC a "figurehead" moderator.


----------



## Oldtimer

Squarepeg is the embodiment of the perfect moderator I nominate him, just, I know he is a busy guy he needs asking if he can do it before getting railroaded.


----------



## Slow Drone

I cast my vote for Squarepeg but wouldn't hesitate to vote for Oldtimer either.


----------



## crofter

If the position would be so educationally valuable and a character builder I think someone other than the names suggested would be more in need of such remediation!


----------



## squarepeg

i really do appreciate the endorsements, but with all sincerity i believe the obvious choice is fusion_power. not only is he among the most experienced and knowledgeable on the subject, but he has the right temperament to boot.

i must confess that i haven't mastered the ability to not get irritated at the occasional snarky remark or unsubstantiated negative claims made against the treatment free approach, and i'm afraid that i might find having that 'eraser' a little too convenient. 

dar jones on the other hand has shown that he can take all of that calmly in stride and provide responses that are more rational and less emotional.

barry is reaching out for and deserves a little help here, how about it dar?


----------



## DaisyNJ

New guy here.. but description of this forum at the top seem pretty clear in deciding which posts to moderate / boot. Call me naive 

------
Discussing and formulating honeybee management methods that cooperate as much as possible with natural bee biology without resorting to the use of chemicals and drugs.
--------


----------



## umchuck

TF or not TF we i happen to be an old farm boy and most of us believe in treating for any kind of parasite, be it hogs, cattle, dogs, and yes my bees, I have purchased as many as 7 nucs in one yr, and as many as 4 packages in other years, went into winter with 11 and came out with 11, ( doesn't mean anything) next winter i may lose half of them, i did read back before varroa normal losses were near 30% don't know if that's an accurate number tough good luck to all of us.


----------



## beepro

A moderator's job here is very simple.
Make an off-topic forum. When they started to argue or post off topic
just moved the individual's post to that forum or refer them there. Then they
can take it out all they want. I nominate Brian to be the off-topic
forum moderator just to show who else would like to continue with the discussion there.


----------

