# Losses and Successes



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

Here's your continuing chance to have any and all serious questions answered by a genuine treatment-free beekeeper of high caliber. I start these threads from time to time as old ones die out or go off topic. I want to be available especially for new beekeepers or backyard and hobbyist beekeepers. This thread is for you. Do you want to start treatment-free? Do you want to go treatment-free? Find out what you're in for.

If you are a commercial beekeeper or have no intention of being treatment-free under the guidelines of this forum, this thread is not for you.

My background: I have been keeping bees more than ten years and currently have ~32 hives, all 100% treatment-free and always have been. I call myself an avid hobbyist, I am a small time queen breeder and nuc producer. I try to do it all on a slightly bigger than backyard scale. You can also check out my website for frequently asked questions.


----------



## jrbbees (Apr 4, 2010)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

I want to lurk, read and gain knowledge. My current sit prohibits participation.


----------



## flyingbrass (Jul 2, 2011)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

first, maybe define what treatment free means to Solomon Parker. I've been following your posts closely since I am from Arkansas also. Beetle traps are ok.


----------



## gone2seed (Sep 18, 2011)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

I realize there are losses but I have never seen the actual amount posted.How many colonies do you lose each year?


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

Well, I generally abide by the forum rules in the forum as far as the definition.

My personal practice is that I do nothing for any disease other than burning hives infected with AFB.

Things that are not treatments are things done in the normal course of beekeeping. I don't do anything because "this will help them deal with mites better." I will do things that will diminish swarming or make more honey or get rid of this mean hive. That's beekeeping and it has nothing to do with treating. I don't do anything that wasn't done before mites came along. Not only are these things ultimately not necessary, they shouldn't be. In my view, the bees _should do these things on their own_ or die trying.

I am a Bond Test beekeeper for these reasons. It works very well for me and I have very low winter losses.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*



gone2seed said:


> I realize there are losses but I have never seen the actual amount posted.How many colonies do you lose each year?


I regularly post my losses on various threads here in the forum. I've lost a single colony over winter the last two winters. Overwinter losses are easy to keep track of because there's no increase or selling going on. This year, I've lost one in the spring and one in the summer. I've had as many as 45 total hives this year, but again, that fluctuates almost by the day in spring and early summer.

Compare my losses to the national average which is in the range of 30% winter losses and I make the case that my system is far superior to the common methods. However, one must remember that this is a long term system and these results cannot be duplicated immediately, or so is my contention.


----------



## Specialkayme (Sep 4, 2005)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*



Solomon Parker said:


> This year, I've lost one in the spring and one in the summer. I've had as many as 45 total hives this year, but again, that fluctuates almost by the day in spring and early summer.


So the difference between your 45 hive peak and your 32 hive current count is because you have sold hives, not lost them (for whatever reason)? How many have you sold this year, and on average do the hives you sell bear similar overwintering success to your own hives (say, 95%)? Or do you not keep track of that type of information?

Just to be clear, we are talking about a 95% overwintering success rate overall, not just those that failed from mites, right? That type of rate is head and shoulders above the pre-varroa average success rates, let alone today's averages. Which would indicate that you are doing something other than being treatment free to contribute to your success rate. Would you agree?


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*



Specialkayme said:


> So the difference between your 45 hive peak and your 32 hive current count is because you have sold hives, not lost them (for whatever reason)?


Or done something else with, like combine or requeen.




Specialkayme said:


> How many have you sold this year, and on average do the hives you sell bear similar overwintering success to your own hives (say, 95%)?


Eight or something, plus queens, just as many cancellations. I have not had reported the loss of a hive or queen I have sold.




Specialkayme said:


> Or do you not keep track of that type of information?


I was always taught if you ask negative questions you'll get negative answers.




Specialkayme said:


> Just to be clear, we are talking about a 95% overwintering success rate overall, not just those that failed from mites, right?


Correct.




Specialkayme said:


> Would you agree?


Only if you believe in the power of prayer. :lpf:


----------



## Huntingstoneboy (Feb 10, 2013)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

First year...16 hives...cut-outs and splits. Treatment free so far...Tub of apiguard in the basement as stand-by. Watching this thread, as I am on the fence w/ the treatment free, and take care of what you got mentalities. Finacially, I can afford to lose them all. Emotionally, I'm not so sure, kinda like my girls! I do believe treatment free is the only way we will ensure a strong mite resistant honeybee. That being said, not sure I am confident letting them go into winter w/o treatment.


----------



## CtyAcres (Apr 8, 2012)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

Huntingboy..........Please don't treat! I'm in my 3rd year and I've lost 1 hive out of 52 total, some swarms but mostly nucs I
purchased. I don't treat and above all else do not feed them SUGAR wet or dry.


----------



## Huntingstoneboy (Feb 10, 2013)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

Unfortunately, I have been poking the sugar and HBH right to them. Have been feeding them right along based on the advice of my mentor, trying to get them built up to 2 deeps each for winter. I didn't realize there were any negative effects associated with sugar syrup until I read a few threads on here. At that point I was already in the "feeding game". Out of my 16 hives I have only 2 that I believe are being affected by mites. This is from simple observation, I have done no mite testing, as I knew I would get them, and figured once I did there were only 2 options...Treat or don't. Like I said still on the fence...If I don't I don't, If I do it will be all 11 hives that have not had a brood break.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

Note that simply feeding sugar does not violate "treatment free" per the rules of this forum.


> The definition of the term treatment also does not include feeding items such as:
> Sugar syrup
> Dry granulated sugar
> High Fructose Corn Syrup (HFCS)
> ...


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

I thought the purpose of the Treatment Free forum was to allow people who were interested to ask questions.
So….exactly….why do they need a special thread?


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*



beemandan said:


> I thought the purpose of the Treatment Free forum was to allow people who were interested to ask questions.
> So….exactly….why do they need a special thread?


It's helpful for people to know their questions can be answered and not shot to pieces. People such as yourself who don't recognize the importance of the topic come in and make a mess of most threads, including most of these Q&A threads I start, can really push newbees away. It helps to have a thread where the topic is well defined and as has been the case, more questions are asked and answered in these threads about treatment-free beekeeping than elsewhere. It's really useful for people to have that kind of access to the information they're looking for. Now, if you don't mind, please move along. You're obviously not interested in the topic at hand, but rather in nitpicking.


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*



Solomon Parker said:


> It's helpful for people to know their questions can be answered and not shot to pieces.


And….in a thread initiated by Solomon Parker….no such thing could occur?



Solomon Parker said:


> People such as yourself who don't recognize the importance of the topic come in and make a mess of most threads


Your usual uncivil response to a reasonable question.
Solomon…you are so transparent.
I understand why you feel the need to start these threads….I simply wonder if you do.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

And that's why I start these threads. Please move on, you are off topic.


----------



## Huntingstoneboy (Feb 10, 2013)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

Solomon...Do you attribute your success to aggressively splitting, or do you believe that some bees can "coexist" with varroa? Also do you ever feed sugar?


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

There is an order to the forums on Beesource. In my mind that order serves a purpose.
Take the Treatment Free forum. The rules are clear and as a result I don’t see a lot of newcomers questions being ‘shot down’….by anyone.

The idea is that anyone with a question concerning a particular area of tf will ask it….and will give it a subject in the initial post. That subject will draw other tf beekeepers who have knowledge specific to it, to read the question and offer their opinions. It also allows other tf hopefuls to follow each topic.

Now…in a general ‘Ask questions here’ thread all of those subjects get lost within a long winded thread…often filled with contentious topics debated by people who are glued to their opinions. Many novices…and frankly experienced beekeepers, I’m sure, lose interest….and then someone asks an appropriate question….but those newcomers and experienced tf beekeepers have already stopped following the thread.

So, again, I ask, and I think reasonably….what purpose does this sort of thread serve that isn't already better served by the fundamental Beesource format?


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

Please move on Dan.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*



Huntingstoneboy said:


> Solomon...Do you attribute your success to aggressively splitting, or do you believe that some bees can "coexist" with varroa?


I attribute my success with allowing bees to die that can't deal with disease on their own, and deal with it well. Winter is that main test. I do help the process along in the spring by replacing queens in hives that aren't at least making some minimum progress. I don't do traditional splitting, I raise new hives up from mating nucs supplied with queens raised in the more or less traditional way. I don't know of anybody else doing this sort of method, though I'm not saying somebody isn't doing it. I'm not the only one who uses queen castles for mating nucs. Essentially, new hives are made, not split off other hives. That way I can make maximum increase from favorable genetics with minimum resources. It probably helps with my loss rate that I requeen or merge weak hives, I don't deny that, but that's really just beekeeping and doesn't have a lot to do with treatment-free. Ultimately, the success of larger hives lies entirely on their own capabilities to deal with mites because I employ no outside method to deal with mites including brood breaks.




Huntingstoneboy said:


> Also do you ever feed sugar?


I do occasionally feed sugar. I have gotten away from syrup completely. Sugar allows me to safely feed only the hives that need it, and they only take what they need during winter. So there isn't a slug of syrup somewhere in the hive from when the hive was fed. That means essentially no sugar ends up in the honey, especially considering the fact that a hive that is fed rarely if ever produces any surplus honey, and is usually requeened or replaced for a related reason.

"I like" feeding sugar, because of its usefulness, but if you ever feed sugar, you'll find out it's like no other feed. It is not robbed, you can't 'build up' on it, and it is not eaten if it isn't needed. Unless the hive really needs it, you'll be removing the leftovers in the spring. It's the perfect feed for something that shouldn't be needed except rare cases.


----------



## Huntingstoneboy (Feb 10, 2013)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

Very helpful Solomon...Thank you!


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*



Solomon Parker said:


> the topic


Solomon....this is my point!!!!! There is no topic.
I have a suggestion....and you might even agree with it. 
Ask Barry to start a new forum. Give it a title like Solomon Parker on Treatment Free Beekeeping. 
You write the forum rules...each topic remains separate and visible....
And I can move on.


----------



## gone2seed (Sep 18, 2011)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*



Solomon Parker said:


> I regularly post my losses on various threads here in the forum. I've lost a single colony over winter the last two winters. Overwinter losses are easy to keep track of because there's no increase or selling going on. This year, I've lost one in the spring and one in the summer. I've had as many as 45 total hives this year, but again, that fluctuates almost by the day in spring and early summer.
> 
> Compare my losses to the national average which is in the range of 30% winter losses and I make the case that my system is far superior to the common methods. However, one must remember that this is a long term system and these results cannot be duplicated immediately, or so is my contention.


Thanks for the answer.Those are losses I could live with.I may well consider this when I get my numbers up some more.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

Let me reemphasize that this is a long term method and single year losses in the early years will most likely be higher. That is why I emphasize efficient methods of increase so you can obtain the greatest number of chances for ultimate success. It's possible to play pinball all day on one ball, but chances are, you'll need a few extra quarters, know what I mean?


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*



Solomon Parker said:


> And that's why I start these threads.


Please don't anymore. Thread titles are to be descriptive of a topic so members can find them when searching. This is an open forum that all members can participate in and respond to questions asked.


----------



## Will O'Brien (Feb 22, 2006)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

Solomon,

I am going to restart my bee yard in the Spring and am interested in your opinion of how many hives to start with given a TF approach. Given your pin ball analogy I am thinking it would be between 6 and 10 - enough to have some "insurance" but not an over whelming amount. Your thoughts.....


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

Will, I recommend no less than five. Six to ten is a great idea. I started with 20 myself, and didn't find it to be overwhelming, even when I discovered that due to foundation malfunction, I would need to do cutouts on about half of them. That got a bit overwhelming. However, I made it through, and I learned a lot and real fast. 

Also, I suggest you research methods of increase and start practicing them as soon as is convenient. Simply buying more hives as time goes on doesn't help much. You need to source the ones you already have because they are the ones that are alive and at your location, especially after the first winter. Survival is first.


----------



## Will O'Brien (Feb 22, 2006)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

Thanks Solomon, one of my goals is to be able to grow and maintain my bee yard without having to buy additional bees, doing it through splits and raising my own queens etc. Also trapping swarms. I would like to only purchase bees or queens for adding to the genetics, not because I need more bees.

The goal for year 1 is to survive and build up in preparation for winter (will be living near Cleveland). In year two I intend to make some splits and make queens. Does that sound about right to you?


----------



## odfrank (May 13, 2002)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

>Let me reemphasize that this is a long term method

Please give us an outline of this method so that we can duplicate your success. Or is it proprietary?


----------



## frazzledfozzle (May 26, 2010)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

Solomon you said

"especially considering the fact that a hive that is fed rarely if ever produces any surplus honey, and is usually requeened or replaced for a related reason."

I don't know where you got this information from and I don't know if you could call it a fact.

In my experience this is completely untrue and is likely to misinform beekeepers who don't have much experience.

Just saying because some new beekeepers will take your word as gospel so you need to be very careful with what you call facts rather than opinions, there's a very big difference 

cheers


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*



Will O'Brien said:


> In year two I intend to make some splits and make queens. Does that sound about right to you?


Sounds fantastic, keep me updated.




odfrank said:


> Please give us an outline of this method so that we can duplicate your success. Or is it proprietary?


I have outlined this method at length many many times, here, on my website, my blog, etc. If you'd like the details, please read up, the information is available.

Basically it boils down to: Make the bees deal with disease on their own, breed from the best of the survivors, do everything else as normal. No trademarks, no copyrights, and you well know I am more open about everything that I do than just about anybody on this forum.





frazzledfozzle said:


> I don't know where you got this information from and I don't know if you could call it a fact.


Experience. I've been doing this for a while now.





frazzledfozzle said:


> In my experience this is completely untrue and is likely to misinform beekeepers who don't have much experience.


I know, that's why _I stated the obvious_ that it regularly works different with treated bees. You're talking about treated bees, but we're in the treatment-free forum.


----------



## AR Beekeeper (Sep 25, 2008)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

The only adult "treated" bee in the colony that will not be dead in 6 weeks is the queen. Whether or not the colony survives or not is determined by her genetics and those of the drones she mated with. I am a beekeeper that does not regularly treat for varroa, but I do treat if I see a colony that is going to crash without help. I treat and then requeen, so actually I am "killing" the genetics of that colony. I do not make my living from bees, I am retired, but I do sell nucs to help pay for my hobby. I don't care how anyone else keeps their bees, the bees are their property and it is none of my business what they do with them. 

It does bother me that some people give advice to novice beekeepers that is inaccurate. Whether they do so out of ignorance or ego I do not know, but the effect will be the same. This forum is no more than a "soap box" for some to promote their ideas about how they think others should keep bees, and the rules do not allow for disagreement. For a person with practical experience keeping bees to read some of the information presented will cause no problem, they will recognize the BS when they see it. The novice will not and will follow advice or a method that will cause them to fail as beekeepers.

Here are some of my observations about treatment free beekeeping in north Arkansas. Any Buckfast, MN Hygienic, VSH, or Russian queen (these are the ones I have experience with) purchased from a queen producer known for raising good queens will head a colony that usually will survive for 3 years with no treatments for varroa. Usually the colony will supersede or swarm and requeen it's self successfully until the 3rd summer during which, it will start to show distress because of varroa. Failure to requeen after a swarm or failed supersedure during the 3rd summer is a common cause for colony failure in an untreated colony. You can raise your own queens or you can purchase queens from "treated" stock and the results will be the same. Colonies headed by queens purchased 15 years ago and overwintered untreated would show BPMS by mid July. Deformed wings are commonly seen and are not sign of colony failure untill the amount becomes massive. Resistance to varroa and the virsuses they carry is much improved today versus 15 years ago. A "Bond Yard" started in the spring of 2006 with 12 colonies grew to 22 with caught swarms, and now has dwindled to 6. They have had no manipulations other than an occasional queen removed for a breeder.

Untreated colonies the first spring will produce surplus honey at the usual rate, then production will start to fall off and by the third spring will be about 2/3 that of a treated colony. Often a colony will be stressed to the point it will not produce it's own yearly food supply and will require help from the beekeeper in the form of feeding. Walk-away splits do seem to have an effect on varroa populations as does making nucs.

Cell size does not control varroa. In 2006 I started 20 colonies on 4.9 foundations and 20 on Pierco plastic foundations. Over the 3 years I kept them the winter losses were the same for each group, 1 colony from each group per winter. The small cell colonies had many queen problems that were corrected by replacing lost queens with home raised VSH queens from the same mother that were raised in small cell colonies. The standard cell colonies had noticeably fewer problems and were replaced by sister queens raised in standard cell colonies. In August 2009 all colonies were treated with formic acid pads so the mite fall could be counted (I never want to do that again!), the 72 hour count varied from just over 3200 to over 5000. The standard cell colonies had fewer mite fall (the same as in studies printed in ABJ), the small cell the highest.

I have described my experiences so novice beekeepers that have no mentor will not rush to judgement about beekeeping methods. Most "gimmicks", and I put the "Bond Method" in that group, will cause the average beginning beekeeper severe losses, and nothing to show for it. Good queens are already available, good methods of keeping bees known, just learn to recognize them and don't fall for snake oil.


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*



AR Beekeeper said:


> I have described my experiences so novice beekeepers that have no mentor will not rush to judgement about beekeeping methods. Most "gimmicks", and I put the "Bond Method" in that group, will cause the average beginning beekeeper severe losses, and nothing to show for it. Good queens are already available, good methods of keeping bees known, just learn to recognize them and don't fall for snake oil.


Well, I appreciate it, but your experience is just one datapoint. For example, you say that small cell did not work for you, and I believe you, but what about Michael Bush's experience? He says he continued to have high losses until he went to small cell. 

For another example, I don't know why any serious beekeeper who was attempting the Bond method would fail to make increase from the hives in that program. I am not treating, but I am making splits and bringing in resistant stock via purchased queens. It seems to me that just allowing the colonies to live or die without any attempt to maintain their numbers is not really beekeeping. It's beehaving on a larger scale.

My advice to neophytes (like me) would be to read widely, read everything you can find, and make judgments based on both common sense and on the results obtained by the various folks you read. And also, I find that you can tell who's smart and who isn't just by the way they express themselves. You sound pretty smart to me, so anything you tell me I'd take seriously, but I have to weigh your experience against the experience of others... and my own, once I acquire any.

I will say this, the small cell package I ordered has not done as well as my other hives, which come from 4 different genetic sources. But it's difficult to say why. It was a package, they superceded early, despite a laying queen, and have struggled all summer. Is it because they are small cell? Probably not. There are too many confusing factors, and my research has taught me that this is true of all things bee-related. Your sample size is much better than mine, and I would wholeheartedly accept your viewpoint if it were not for the existence of beekeepers like Michael Bush and Dee Lusby who have had great results from small cell bees.

So rather than worry about small cell or large cell, I'm using foundationless frames so they can build what they want, and so far so good.


----------



## JWChesnut (Jul 31, 2013)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

The "Bond" method is wasteful in the extreme. Even the best genetics are 'resistant' not immune to the host of recently introduced parasites. You could win the genetic lottery with just the right mix of queen genes, and worker genetics and lose the colony very easily due to lack-of-intervention. All the effort on that blood line is wasted - gone. 

A responsible breeding program tests a lineage for a trait (ie counts hygenic behavior or resistance when challenged for N. ceranae). The best performers are selected and maintained to breed into the outcrossing population. In this way, improved genetics are slowly built up. For bees, an added wrinkle is that bloodlines must constantly be out-crossed, and the grafted queens produce workers (the arena of mite selection) that are 2 generations away from the mother queen. 

My professional experience is with breeding plants, and the process of selection/test/reselection is painfully slow, requires impeccable records and a commitment to freedom from bias.

Folks that are saying a backyard keeper can change genetics in 2-3 years of "bond" selection are simply not being realistic. If it were that easy-- nature would already have done it. And bees collected by me off of isolated islets and desert oasis would be resistant, and they are most definitely not. And I have gone looking for "isolated" populations -- which is how outcrossing species make races. 

Randy Oliver has an instructive annecdote about testing a Glenn Apiary VSH-Russian hybrid. He called it a super queen and it sounds like he hit the jackpot. He grafted it into hundreds of future daughters. The daughters were not stars like the mother (though not bad). That is not surprising, as the daughters' worker bees are F2 generation away from the mother. They only have 1/4 of the mothers genes and even those genes have been thoroughly resorted into a mix. This is high school biology.

In plants, hybrid vegetables are often produced by combining fixed low variance bloodlines to generate a specific combination -- hybrid vigor. Both F1 and F2 crosses are produced in very specific combinations -- and the mother lineages are often not production lines at all. Randy Oliver's super Queen is an obvious example of a F1 hybrid with spectacular vigor-- (and pure VSH is shown to be lower in production than crosses -- inbreeding depression). Without selected bloodlines you cannot reliably create the hybrid crosses that work. Buckfast lineage (a multi-hybrid) is notoriously unstable, the inbred grand-daughters often revert to bad behavior.

Backyard keepers who want to contribute to genetic improvement should become testers for a confederated and organized breeding program. They should use a metric to select for a trait ( e.g. VSH freezing test) and the best performers moved into an isolated outyard with selected drone hives from a sufficiently outcrossing population. (Drone hives are simply a lineage that is not grafted for queen production).

To think an uncontrolled out-breeding species surrounded by commercial genetics is going to shift it genotype is engaging in magical thinking. It violates what has been known and discovered about honey bee genetics.


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*



JWChesnut said:


> To think an uncontrolled out-breeding species surrounded by commercial genetics is going to shift it genotype is engaging in magical thinking. It violates what has been known and discovered about honey bee genetics.


From what I've learned this is correct. It's one reason why I believe that the influence of genetics in a successful treatment-free operation is usually over-estimated, and the influence of cultural practices under-estimated.

On the other hand, I'm encouraged to think that my personal situation is not dire in terms of breeding for resistance. In Florida there are no commercial operations with 30 miles of my hives, and in NY, there are no commercial operations within 5 miles or so, as far as I know. In the 6 hives that I have there are 5 different bloodlines.

One thing I haven't seen discussed much if at all, is that even those who treat are getting selective pressure toward resistance. The process isn't as rapid, no doubt, but if a commercial operation loses 30% of its hives and makes increase from the survivors, they are also breeding for resistance.


----------



## Hazel-Rah (May 12, 2013)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

Most commercial/pollinator beekeepers are re-queening with same non-hygienic Italian queens that the industry has been breeding for 50 years. This is not 'survivor stock', this is artificially reproduced commodity genetics.


----------



## JWChesnut (Jul 31, 2013)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

I was wiped out by Varroa in 91-92. I am fairly convinced that the current Varroa has lost some hyper-virulence, but have no data to support that supposition. 

AHB are replacing Italian in my region. AHB will swarm at a 2 frame colony, so recolonize constantly with very young bees (a la Parker's "expansion model"). That is the primary adaption in the feral type in my area. Very dark bees seem to persist -- these don't seem to be the dark with white hair Carnies I knew in the '70's -- but some other race. A Science paper attributes these to the German Black mitotype, which persisted in Texas at about 25%.

The queen breeders I know in Ca are incorporating other, often pretty exotic genetics into their lines, as quickly as possible. There may be a difference between mail-order Georgia types and the major California suppliers. Some of the exotic selection is extremely interesting, and in time the stories may be told.


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*



Hazel-Rah said:


> Most commercial/pollinator beekeepers are re-queening with same non-hygienic Italian queens that the industry has been breeding for 50 years..


How do you know this? I'm not being argumentative, but many of the commercial guys here on Beesource seem to raise their own queens.


----------



## Rusty Hills Farm (Mar 24, 2010)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*



Hazel-Rah said:


> Most commercial/pollinator beekeepers are re-queening with same non-hygienic Italian queens that the industry has been breeding for 50 years. This is not 'survivor stock', this is artificially reproduced commodity genetics.


One of the big guns--Koehnen out of California (with something like 15,000 hives)--states on their website that their Italians are *hygienic* and make up about 2/3 of their production. The other 1/3 are Carniolan. Those are certainly NOT the same genetics the industry has been breeding for 50 years.

Both Wooten's Goldens and Pendell (also California outfits) say their Italians are hygienic and Pendell goes so far as to add that theirs are VSH.


JMO

Rusty


----------



## marshmasterpat (Jun 26, 2013)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

Not wanting to muddy the waters more, but is a "hygienic" queen similar to a "organic" bee and can be loosely defined by the breeder. 

In other words if I have bees that appear to be weeding out mites, can I call them hygienic?

This stuff just makes me want to keep the MEAN AS HECK feal bees I have found in a few areas and just fight them off when I work the hive. They are survivors and likely AHB genes from their actions. 

As I told someone earlier this week. I would be rather mislead by one wrong man than confused as heck as to what to do from a dozen different opinions. Not saying anything bad about any of the discussion, I generally like it. But as a beginner looking at this forum over the last few weeks I have gone from knowing exactly what I needed to do to questioning everything I have read in any book.


----------



## Hazel-Rah (May 12, 2013)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

In my sincere OPINION, yes, 'hygienic' is a term that has a hype in beekeeping akin to that of 'organic' in consumer culture. Just because a company touts 'hygienic' doesn't mean much to me. If these commercial beekeepers are rearing queens for stock that is being shipped, fed, and treated with miticides and produced for the sole utility of industrial agriculture, we're not getting anywhere.

Having just attended a conference that included a incredibly in-depth lecture on honeybee genetics, I feel warily confident in suggesting that a majority of commercial bee genetics are redundant and propped up through artificial means. Though there may be plenty attention given to new 'exotics', always we are looking for the magic spell!


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*



Hazel-Rah said:


> Most commercial/pollinator beekeepers are re-queening with same non-hygienic Italian queens that the industry has been breeding for 50 years. This is not 'survivor stock', this is artificially reproduced commodity genetics.


I am with Ray on this. How would you know this and if it's true, why would those whose livlihoods depend on it be so foolish as to not try to improve? What exactly are "artificially reproduced commodity genetics" anyway?


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

Who gave this genetic lecture?


----------



## Hazel-Rah (May 12, 2013)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

The lecturer was Dr. Deborah Delaney and this is a link to her info - http://ag.udel.edu/enwc/faculty/delaney.htm

'why would those whose livlihoods depend on it be so foolish as to not try to improve' - Why do ranchers allow themselves to be victims of the predatory meatpacking industry? Why do grain belt farmers rely on ever increasing petro-chemicals to bring in a harvest? Why inject an 'organic' insecticide(Bt) into our food system, when we know this will result in increased natural resistance(among the bugs, that is)? The industrial agriculture scene is chock-full of these ridiculous conundrums concerning the future welfare of ALL of it's participants. And if I knew 'why', other then the obvious corporate corruption and linear capitalist model, then I would be the one quoted in a TIME article.

What _are_ 'artificially reproduced commodity genetics'... mostly I am referring to the industrial model of reproducing livestock that cannot be sustained naturally. The livestock/plant genetics are propped up through petro-chemicals and intensive management practices, they are produced by the market, for the market(a commodity). The same reason we now have diary cows who are burnt out at the age of 3 or 4(as opposed to 17 or 20), is the same reason people are finding themselves re-queening EVERY year(or more, I've heard, if you are transporting your bees to pollinate.).

Do I have PROOF that I am for sure the most certain I've ever been about anything? NO. But, it sure bears strong resemblance to the charade of other agricultural practices I know about.


----------



## Hazel-Rah (May 12, 2013)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

I would also like to add that, I am sure most if not all beekeepers, commercial or otherwise, are hip to the attention given to 'hygienic' stock and are making whatever improvements that can. But when you are stuck inside the industrial model it is almost impossible to truly make any radical changes, as you chained to the market demands. I am sure all beekeepers feel they do their bees more of a service in business, then out.


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

I have heard the name and will respect her degree and the research she does. Your synopsis, though, sounds a bit fatalistic when I think of some of the bright, innovative people I have met in this industry. I listene to a presentation by Dr. Bob Danka from the USDA Baton Rouge research lab at the AHPA convention this winter and he felt that some progress has been made albeit slow progress in developing lines of varroa tolerant bees. There is a list of really good beekeepers using much of this breeding stock already in their operations. We have ordered breeders from Glenn's in the past and plan on using some of the treatment free stock Adam Finklestein is producing this year for use next year and many other commercials I know are doing the same thing. Developing varroa resistance is time consuming but it's not an area that is being ignored by good beekeepers despite the stereotyping of commercials that seems to be in vogue in some quarters.


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

Stuck inside the industrial model? Interesting analogy. Have you been around commercial beekeeping much?


----------



## Hazel-Rah (May 12, 2013)

HAHA I'm a bit fatalistic! I do believe there are people out there doing good work, but I think we need to hyper-vigilant about assuming that the market will motivate us towards what is best for the bees. 

Perhaps I am naive about what is going on in the commercial world, as the only beekeepers I have ever worked for are the treatment-free, or nearly there, nuc/queen and honey producing types. Once when I was hitchhiking through CA, I just happened to get picked up by pollinator beekeeper - that was an amazing conversation. He was totally onto all the afore mentioned problems, but of course his situation was very dynamic. When I make sweeping generalizations about industrial/commercial agriculture, you can be assured it's because I am throughly traumatized by the history of failed practices.


----------



## Rusty Hills Farm (Mar 24, 2010)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*



marshmasterpat said:


> Not wanting to muddy the waters more, but is a "hygienic" queen similar to a "organic" bee and can be loosely defined by the breeder.
> 
> In other words if I have bees that appear to be weeding out mites, can I call them hygienic?


There are good tests available to test for the hygienic levels in a hive. testing-honey-bee-colonies-for-hygienic-behavior at extension.org has a good explanation and a pdf you can download. There is really no guesswork involved. When I say I have hygienic bees, I do have the test results to prove it. I would hope others feel the same as I. In any case, when you are buying stock--ask for proof first. "Buyer beware" is a good axiom to follow even in beekeeping.


HTH


Rusty


----------



## frazzledfozzle (May 26, 2010)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

Hazel-Rah Just wondering how many hive you keep and how long have you worked in commercial beekeeping?

what size operation were the commercials you worked for?

Are you breeding your own queens?

cheers


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

Hazel-Rah said:


> HAHA I'm a bit fatalistic! I do believe there are people out there doing good work, but I think we need to hyper-vigilant about assuming that the market will motivate us towards what is best for the bees.
> 
> Perhaps I am naive about what is going on in the commercial world, as the only beekeepers I have ever worked for are the treatment-free, or nearly there, nuc/queen and honey producing types. Once when I was hitchhiking through CA, I just happened to get picked up by pollinator beekeeper - that was an amazing conversation. He was totally onto all the afore mentioned problems, but of course his situation was very dynamic. When I make sweeping generalizations about industrial/commercial agriculture, you can be assured it's because I am throughly traumatized by the history of failed practices.


I guess this is where we differ. I believe that those who choose to select for better bees and constantly strive to improve will, in the long run, have the best success. I knew one beekeeper years ago that told me he likes to mix Fluvalinate with Amitraz to treat his bees because he felt it would really knock the heck out of his mites. He isn't in business any more.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*



JWChesnut said:


> A responsible breeding program tests a lineage for a trait


Absolutely. I test for winter survival. It's called the "Bond Test." It's extremely effective in figuring out which colonies will survive any given winter. 

I don't have to worry about all the inbreeding and other nonsense that single trait breeders work for. I don't need Dorian Gray hives that are expected to last forever. If some hive picks up bad enough genetics, it dies. This is effective animal husbandry.


----------



## Hazel-Rah (May 12, 2013)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

OK, Sunday was my 'day-off'... so Im not going to be able to banter as before but I will answer in short(if that's even possible for me). 

Rusty - I think you're right, not only do people need to insist on the genuine quality of hygienic testing being done, but need to learn how to do it themselves. True progress will be made when bioregions of community-minded beekeepers are able to produce their own quality survivor stock.

FrazzledFozzle - I could quote directly from myself in a previous post to answer your questions, but that would be rude. I find the tone of your question to be a little passive-aggressive, as it seems obvious to me from my former posts that I am not a commercial beekeeper(perhaps this was not your intention at all, simply the way the posted word comes across). 

Nor do I have any interest in being such. Of course, what is your definition of commercial? I've worked for beekeepers who produce honey and nucs on less then 100 hives in western Oregon. I've worked for keepers in New England who produce honey, nucs and breed queens on a few hundred hives. For the past 5 years I have kept a small amount of hives(I move often, leaving bees yards in my wake.), with a very small amount of losses, treatment-free and began grafting my own queens this year. I have purchased queens from Melanie Kirby's line a arid mountain region bees, as that matches the foraging pattern of my own geographic region.

Jim Lyon - I realize that you are a well established and migratory beekeeper. I respect your deep rooted experience and I'm sure if anyone knows of commercial beekeepers who are striving to improve the quality of bees in this country, it would be you. However, if everybody in industrial agriculture were to have the health and vitality of our livestock in mind, and NOT the market demands... why are we always waiting until some crises brings us to our knees?? 

I'm fringe, I'm radical - usually it takes a group of these people to tip the scales against the conservative, head-in-the-sand majority(speaking of the public at large). You know what I dream about?? I dream that all migratory beekeepers would stop sending the bees to pollinate almonds. Then all the health-yuppie, pseudo-bourgeoisie would know what a crisis our current food system really is. Is that ever going to happen? Probably not voluntarily .


----------



## beedeetee (Nov 27, 2004)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*



Hazel-Rah said:


> I'm fringe, I'm radical - usually it takes a group of these people to tip the scales against the conservative, head-in-the-sand majority(speaking of the public at large). You know what I dream about?? I dream that all migratory beekeepers would stop sending the bees to pollinate almonds. Then all the health-yuppie, pseudo-bourgeoisie would know what a crisis our current food system really is. Is that ever going to happen? Probably not voluntarily .


Has Halfway changed so much that this is a common view there? Or are you more of an "outlier" in town? I grew up in Cove and my family is still there. Sold the cherry orchard though.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*



Hazel-Rah said:


> In my sincere OPINION, yes, 'hygienic' is a term that has a hype in beekeeping akin to that of 'organic' in consumer culture. Just because a company touts 'hygienic' doesn't mean much to me.


I see a lot of confusion about this so here is a simple explanation.

Hygienic as in common usage, means the bees will remove dead larvae from cells. All bees do this to a greater or lesser extent. The trait can be measured by simple experiment, which involves killing a bunch of larvae, then looking at the comb 24 hours later to see how many larvae were removed. If 50% have been removed, the bees are 50% hygienic. Or at least that's one measure that is often used.


This may be different to varroa sensitive hygiene ( VSH ), which measures hygiene the bees target specifically at brood that has varroa in it, not just general hygiene. VSH happens in a number of ways and is measured in a number of ways. It is very time consuming to measure. The VSH bees being developed in my country use the mechanism of sensing the cell that has a varroa mite in it, and uncapping it, so the varroa mite leaves and her breeding cycle is interrupted, after which the bees re cap the cell.
The way this is measured is to examine individual brood cells and look for mite families. In some cells there will be a mother mite plus her offspring. In other cells, there will be mite faeces plus perhaps a male egg or larvae showing a mother mite was there, but now she isn't there. So it can be deduced the bees uncapped the cell and let her out before she completed her breeding cycle. So to measure it, if of all the cells that had or still do have mites in them, 50% no longer have mites, the bee is called 50% VSH.

That is a very simple and incomplete explanation, but hope it can give the basic idea.


----------



## mike bispham (May 23, 2009)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*



Hazel-Rah said:


> 'why would those whose livlihoods depend on it be so foolish as to not try to improve' - Why do ranchers allow themselves to be victims of the predatory meatpacking industry? Why do grain belt farmers rely on ever increasing petro-chemicals to bring in a harvest? Why inject an 'organic' insecticide(Bt) into our food system, when we know this will result in increased natural resistance(among the bugs, that is)? The industrial agriculture scene is chock-full of these ridiculous conundrums concerning the future welfare of ALL of it's participants. And if I knew 'why', other then the obvious corporate corruption and linear capitalist model, then I would be the one quoted in a TIME article.
> 
> What _are_ 'artificially reproduced commodity genetics'... mostly I am referring to the industrial model of reproducing livestock that cannot be sustained naturally. The livestock/plant genetics are propped up through petro-chemicals and intensive management practices, they are produced by the market, for the market(a commodity). The same reason we now have diary cows who are burnt out at the age of 3 or 4(as opposed to 17 or 20), is the same reason people are finding themselves re-queening EVERY year(or more, I've heard, if you are transporting your bees to pollinate.).


An important nail lucidly driven home, thank you Hazel-Rah. Systematic practices driven by the extreme competion for the lowest price that shape our commercial envionment are driving our livestock and plantstocks into the forms that best suit that end. Yes, there are well intentioned folk at work who understand the dangers in this, but largely the agri-chemical industry lobby shapes the way most commercial beekeepers work, to suit the ends of the current market without a great deal of thought for the future. Short termism wins the day.

Mike (UK)


----------



## frazzledfozzle (May 26, 2010)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

Commercial beekeepers have been around for a very long time doing what they do to make a living. Most commercial beekeepers will look after their bees and not deliberately allow them to die over winter through starvation or in Spring and Autumn from varroa infestation. 

Commercial beekeepers need their hives full of live bees, dead bees are no use to anyone.

Besides where would you all get your nucs and packages from if there weren't any commercials any more.


----------



## frazzledfozzle (May 26, 2010)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

in fact to put it quite bluntly some of you here are just plain wierd in your ideas about all things bees:scratch:


----------



## AR Beekeeper (Sep 25, 2008)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

I have a question perhaps someone here can answer for me. If it is the viruses the varroa carry that kill most of the colonies that die because of varroa, the ones that survive live because of a resistance to the viruses. Exposure to the viruses must trigger the immune system of the bees. What level of varroa infestation does it take to trigger the immune system?


----------



## zhiv9 (Aug 3, 2012)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*



AR Beekeeper said:


> What level of varroa infestation does it take to trigger the immune system?


This is an interesting question and could be asked on the level of an individual bee's immune system or the immune system of the colony as a super organism.


----------



## Cub (Feb 14, 2013)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

This is a continuation of a post I placed on one of Solomon's other threads. that thread is now closed? I asked before about feeding, and was given advice from multiple folks that did not quite agree, which is just good information from different viewpoints.

Here is what I am doing: I have 3 hives in one yard and 5 in the other. The 3 hives are getting nothing, because a quick peek this weekend revealed that they are bringing in huge amounts of nectar, and their stores have really increased. The 5 hives that are all mostly light are getting 2:1 syrup, being open fed continuously. This weekend, I will check all of them to see if the desired effect is taking place. If not, I will place the feeders in the entrances. (earlier I said the entrances were top entrances, but now have made SBB for them that allow entrance feeders.)

My question is, do I need to reduce the entrances when open feeding? 

Thanks in advance,
J


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

Robbing is less of an issue when open feeding than if feeding internally, however during a dearth it would pay to keep entrances down to whatever they can sensibly be expected to fully guard. But not the really small entrance needed for internal feeding.


----------



## mike bispham (May 23, 2009)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*



frazzledfozzle said:


> Commercial beekeepers have been around for a very long time doing what they do to make a living. Most commercial beekeepers will look after their bees and not deliberately allow them to die over winter through starvation or in Spring and Autumn from varroa infestation.


Their methods have changed enormously over the last 30 years or so. What is happening now has not been 'around a long time'



frazzledfozzle said:


> Besides where would you all get your nucs and packages from if there weren't any commercials any more.


I've never bought a bee in my life. 

Mike (UK)


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

How's that Frazz! He's telling you what commercial beekeepers do LOL

I guess you need to be told about your methods. Just incase you didn't know!


----------



## mike bispham (May 23, 2009)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*



Oldtimer said:


> How's that Frazz! He's telling you what commercial beekeepers do LOL


Oldtimer, you can fool some of the people all of the time, and you can fool all of the people some of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time.

That's a lie designed to cast a slur upon me. Nothing else. That's plain to anyone who wants to look upward two posts to see what was said.

It isn't the first time you've done it. 

It just makes you look foolish and unpleasant. 

Mike (UK)


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

Well no, it's not that complicated.

I just thought what was said to Frazz, coming from you, was pretty funny. That's all.


----------



## mike bispham (May 23, 2009)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*



Oldtimer said:


> Well no, it's not that complicated.
> 
> I just thought what was said to Frazz, coming from you, was pretty funny. That's all.


You misrepresented what I said - as you often do - as part of a silly little campaign to belittle me. You told a lie designed to damage my reputation. 

That's seriously bad mannered and deeply unpleasant behaviour. Its not funny. 

It was also extraordinarily clumsy. All you've achieved is to make yourself look deeply foolish and vindictive.

Mike (UK)


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

Well if you say so, although I see no misrepresentation at all.

I just thought what you said was so pompous it was funny.


----------



## BernhardHeuvel (Mar 13, 2013)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

:v:


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

LOL Bernhard, something tells me you've seen this all before on Biobees.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*



Cub said:


> My question is, do I need to reduce the entrances when open feeding?


It can help. I certainly don't recommend open feeding or using entrance feeders. Top feeders are better. Mountaincamp style is most utilitarian in my view. In fact, I don't recommend any feeding when bees are flying. But you can certainly gain your own experience in this field.


----------



## frazzledfozzle (May 26, 2010)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

Mike I don't know what commercial beekeeping methods you think have changed enormously. Are you talking about US beekeepers UK beekeepers or beekeepers world wide?

Nothing much has changed here apart from managing hives with varroa.

Most commercial beekeepers need to look after their bees because thats their livelyhood I wouldn't think you would see too many of them letting their bees starve or die from mites and viruses as you seem to do.

I couldn't stand back and let my bees die for the sake of a litre or two of syrup or a varroa treatment.

Dead bees wouldn't bring me much income either.


----------



## Huntingstoneboy (Feb 10, 2013)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

Great thread.


----------



## Hazel-Rah (May 12, 2013)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

Interesting comment huntingstoneboy, I was wondering what this thread was about LOL! I'm glad people are entertained.

Frazzledfozzle - Instead of focusing your resources on your bees that need to be saved from the brink of varroa or a couple liters of syrup. Wouldn't it be more ecologically efficient to focus resources on your bees that show a natural vigor despite these challenges? 

We breed working draft horses. In the breed of horse we use (American Belgian Draft), some horses display soft feet and are in need up epsom salt treatments or long-term shoeing. You know what happens to those horses? The don't get bred, and if they're a lot of work - they get culled straight out of the working string. 

Culling is a practice that has been shunned in modern day livestock management, when we have so many intensive veterinary and therapeutic options. When people's livelihoods depend on the status-quo and recreational beekeepers don't understand that being lovey-dovey with your bees doesn't help them thrive as a specie. I was happy to see 'the cull' revitalized as a serious topic in a recent treatment-free conference, as it is one of the pinnacles of responsible animal husbandry.

For the past 2 years I have been making the cull on hives that I was certain wouldn't make through the winter, usually it has only been one or two. Since doing that, my winter losses have dropped almost zero. Not to mention that if I do have a late spring, I have plenty of surplus 'bee feed' honey (from the culled hives) to carry through. It takes a few years of watching hives struggle through the fall/winter/spring to know the signs of a cull, and it can be a tough choice to make. It would be a greater injustice to the thriving bees to allow the failing hives genetics to continue to dilute, or to potentially be exposed to mite drift from their failing neighbors. The equipment itself is better off stored where the mice and wax moths can't get it.


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

Culling hives? Yeah, you learn that pretty quickly in this business. You either combine them, rebuild them or shake em out and stack em up. If you dont then you may well be cleaning out a moth, beetle or mouse infestation the next time you check the hive. Nothing too revolutionary there, just good beekeeping.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*



Hazel-Rah said:


> We breed working draft horses. In the breed of horse we use (American Belgian Draft), some horses display soft feet and are in need up epsom salt treatments or long-term shoeing. You know what happens to those horses? The don't get bred, and if they're a lot of work - they get culled straight out of the working string.


So, let me get this. The horses that need Epsom salts or long term shoeing, get that. Right? They just aren't bred from, and if they are a lot of work they are culled? 

So, how is that different to what most of us are doing with our bees?

For me anyway, as it applies to my bees, I would not say culled, I would say requeened.

Rather than look for something to argue over if you check your facts you will find many of us have a lot in common.  Keep doing what you do with your horses it's the right way, and as you seem to be suggesting the idea should apply to bees also, apply it to your bees.


----------



## Hazel-Rah (May 12, 2013)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

Not trying to sound revolutionary, most everything I do-I learned from someone else. But the first several years I was practicing bees, I never heard culling discussed. Once I did, it changed they way I thought about the goal of beekeeping, I think for the better. Now I am always striving for the dynamic vitality. 

Oldtimer, I hope you can excuse me if I seem combative- it is not my intention, I'm not looking to argue. I like sharing better. And honestly I'm not sure how it differs from other people's beekeeping, but only that it seems I have the privilege of exercising stricter definitions of 'thriving' with my bees. These are not really things I KNOW, more I am writing things I SEE... 

If I seem to be heavily pushing an aggressive no-treatment breeding policy, well... I guess it's cuz' I thought I was in the treatment-free forum... Not that I don't welcome the knowledge gained from all (and kinda think the treatment-free forum rules are a little silly).

I have been getting more into requeening this year, now that I had a little more to play with in terms of potential families. Shake-out culls are really only appropriate(for me) in the late fall, at last inspection. Maybe I eventually I won't have to make these culls, because I will learn how to requeen appropriately earlier in the season.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*



Hazel-Rah said:


> I hope you can excuse me if I seem combative- it is not my intention.


True enough, it's been so combative here I guess I'm pumped for it, I'll take what you say as a cue to wind back. I think the mite family debacle has been sorted now, anyway.

If you are treatment free, you will probably always have to make these culls. Just look at it that you save money on treatments so that goes towards whatever the cost is. That's how I try to rationalise the costs I've had in my treatment free efforts anyway. Although thus far I'm rather in the red LOL.

Also, if there wasn't a buck in treating, nobody would. So not treating is just a choice some people make.


----------



## Adam Foster Collins (Nov 4, 2009)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*



Solomon Parker said:


> ... In fact, I don't recommend any feeding when bees are flying...


Very interesting. I've not really thought of it that way, but that's interesting. If they aren't hindered physically by temperature, then let them do their thing and get their own... And if they don't have enough once it's too cold, then you know they're not able to get it. And then dry sugar can be added without adding wetness or needing processing... interesting indeed. Well put, Sol.

I topped my hives last year with dry sugar and it worked well enough. A little messy in the spring, cleaning up un-used sugar, but the bees moved right into the sugar and clustered there. We had a major dearth late last season, and a lot of hives were light.

It seems I remember you saying in some other thread that you thought they didn't have to process dry sugar, and that they could just eat it. Yet I've heard others say they need water "to process it". What's the deal? Anyone know how bees deal with dry sugar in terms of eating it?

I'm set up to be able to feed liquid feed if necessary, but this comment of yours Sol, has got me rethinking that...

Adam


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

They need water. If you watch bees feeding on dry sugar, their tongue, which works by capillary action, laps any wetness off the surface of the sugar grain. They don't crunch up and eat whole grains lol.

So if feeding dry sugar, it should be done with this in mind, ie, in a place where the bees are able to work it and moisture will go onto the sugar as the bees work it. That's why they don't store it, such an involved difficult and slow process for them to collect it, they don't get to store it it's unlikely they would get more in a day than their daily needs.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

Edit - Double Post


----------



## frazzledfozzle (May 26, 2010)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

Hazel-Rah Oldtimer has pretty much said what I would have said in a reply to you.

I would just add that I'm not having to pull our bees back from the brink of death from varroa or anything else and our if we take 600 hives into winter I would expect 590 to come out the other end.

We are always working on improving our breeding program but I will always draw the line at letting bees die for no reason. 

But we are commercial beekeepers and it's our livlihood dead bees and empty hives are of no use to us.


----------



## Adam Foster Collins (Nov 4, 2009)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*



Oldtimer said:


> They need water. If you watch bees feeding on dry sugar, their tongue, which works by capillary action, laps any wetness off the surface of the sugar grain. They don't crunch up and eat whole grains lol...


That's why I think it can work well in our climate. If you put it over a cluster in the cold months, the warm moist air from the bees respiration dampens the cluster-side surface of the sugar and the bees can readily consume it. Kind of great that way...

Adam


----------



## Moonfire (Apr 2, 2013)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

Hi Soloman! I was wondering if you are also doing foundationless frames? And if so on average how big are your drones in retrospect to your queen? This is my first year and so far being treatment free and foundationless has proven to be pretty successful! I had a minor set back in late spring with my queen being squished . I had ordered a small number of bees and a replacement queen for my local honey lady (love her!) and at the time of installing them My bees had made a new queen already who is AMAZING! so I put the small order in it's own box so now I have 2 although the second one is still struggling, my first hive has exploded! I noticed that my queen has been laying a lot of drones in the last few weeks and that they are 2xs the size of her. my workers on the other hand are 1/2 her size! I was wondering if I just have REALLY big boys or if I maybe should have expected this?! On a different note... I have yet to have a single mite, (knock on wood) I created a spiral herb mound with their water on top that has mint, lavender, thyme, and wild flowers growing at least 3feet higher than their water source so that they have to fly through them to get to it!! thinking this would be my varroa control spot, and it seems to be working. it is approximately 30 feet from my hives and my ladies love it!


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*



Moonfire said:


> Hi Soloman!


Hi! :thumbsup:




Moonfire said:


> I was wondering if you are also doing foundationless frames?


I have a few. I find them to be not particularly utilitarian. You see, I don't like to spend a load of time fixing comb and whatnot, so I only use foundationless between at least two other frames of fully drawn comb, that way it gets straight.




Moonfire said:


> And if so on average how big are your drones in retrospect to your queen?


In respect to the queen? Hmm, never really thought about it. Drones are bigger than workers, that's normal, but I've never really compared them to the queen. The important thing is that the drones are the right size in comparison to the workers, according to the pseudo-drone theory, one reason why I use small cell foundation.




Moonfire said:


> I had ordered a small number of bees and a replacement queen for my local honey lady (love her!)


Local is very good. Coincidentally, I grew up to the north of you in the Medford area. My original batch of bees actually came from Koehnen's just south of your area. Many if not most (or even all to some small extent) of my bees are descended from those. Can't really tell exactly.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*



frazzledfozzle said:


> We are always working on improving our breeding program but I will always draw the line at letting bees die for no reason.


That would be kinda dumb wouldn't it? Now if I were letting them die because they couldn't handle the disease and I wanted bees that could handle the disease....that wouldn't be for no reason.


----------



## frazzledfozzle (May 26, 2010)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

Solomon at this point in time we have no use for a boxs of dead bees.

If the bees are doing what we want them to do and performing we leave them alone if they aren't we requeen.

We never just walk away that would be financially stupid.


----------



## Moonfire (Apr 2, 2013)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

The important thing is that the drones are the right size in comparison to the workers, according to the pseudo-drone theory, one reason why I use small cell foundation.

I really have no idea what the "pseudo-drone theory" is can you fill me in? My drones are big.. I mean HUGE! bigger than the queen, she's still laying workers so I'm not worried about her status as woman of the hive, but the boys weren't this big a month ago they used to be slightly larger than the workers. but now they are mutants!

Coincidentally, I grew up to the north of you in the Medford area. My original batch of bees actually came from Koehnen's just south of your area. Many if not most (or even all to some small extent) of my bees are descended from those. Can't really tell exactly.

Neat! how did your Cali valley bees over winter your first year up in Medford? if you don't mind me asking. That's quite the climate change actually!


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*



Moonfire said:


> I really have no idea what the "pseudo-drone theory" is can you fill me in?


You'll have to read Dee Lusby's material on the POV (point of view) section of this website. A very simplistic version would be that we want workers and drones to be of the proper relative proportions so that the mites go after the drones instead of the workers. We can afford to lose drones.




Moonfire said:


> her status as woman of the hive


I really just cringe when I read things like this. They're bees, not "girls," the queen is not a "queen," they're insects. Sorry. I'm not given to sentimentality, it's just who I am. No offense intended.




Moonfire said:


> how did your Cali valley bees over winter your first year up in Medford? if you don't mind me asking. That's quite the climate change actually!


I don't really think so. It may be a little colder, but I don't see it as much different. The temp may be a little cooler, similar rainfall, but overall, I never encountered any problems from it. When I moved to Arkansas however, I did encounter many more problems, in fact, all but one of the hives I transported died by the second winter. They just couldn't handle temps in the low single digits. They had never had below freezing temperatures more than just overnight before. They would be full healthy hives, big clusters and full of honey, and they'd just starve to death in place. The same thing happened when I bought bees from Georgia.


----------



## mike bispham (May 23, 2009)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*



Solomon Parker said:


> A very simplistic version would be that we want workers and drones to be of the proper relative proportions so that the mites go after the drones instead of the workers. We can afford to lose drones.


Does this way of thinking include the notion that reducing the drone population in a hive also reduces its fecundity in the local breeding pool? Those bees able to save their drones by managing their mites well without having to dump them on drones, will be better represented in the next generation relative to those that can't?

Mike (UK)


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*

>I really have no idea what the "pseudo-drone theory" is can you fill me in?

http://www.bushfarms.com/beessctheories.htm#PseudoDrones

Dee Lusby's "pseudodrone" theory is that with large cell bees the Varroa often mistake large cell workers for drone cells and therefore infest them more. The Varroa in the large cell hives during that time would be less successful because they are in the wrong cells. The Varroa, during that time would be more successful on the small cell because they are in the drone cells. But later in the year this may shift dramatically when, first of all the small cell workers have not taken damage from the Varroa and second of all the drone rearing drops off and the mites have nowhere to go. 

http://www.beesource.com/point-of-v...ntrol/small-cell-foundation-for-mite-control/

"The stress upon our honey bees caused by being too big by way of artificial mutation through use of oversized combs, has resulted in parasitic mite infestations as our now pseudo-drones (workerbees) are perceived as a new food source by Varroa and Tracheal mites...

"Further, by changing out oversized artificial combs in our brood nests (some on the market are as much as 40% oversized) we reduce the attraction for Varroa to enter pseudo-drone cells (worker cells artificially enlarged with more larvae food for mites) and reproduce at higher than natural 10% infestation levels also."--Dee Lusby (see above link)

http://www.beesource.com/point-of-view/ed-dee-lusby/retrogression-back-to-normal-part-2/

"Additionally, by changing out and shaking-down colonies from oversized brood combs, they further reduce the attraction for Varroa to enter pseudo-drone cells, (aka: artificially oversized worker comb acting as an attractant with more larvae food for mites) and reproduce at a higher than natural 10% infestation level."--Dee Lusby (see above link)


----------



## Kidbeeyoz (May 8, 2013)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*



Moonfire said:


> The important thing is that the drones are the right size in comparison to the workers, according to the pseudo-drone theory, one reason why I use small cell foundation.
> 
> I really have no idea what the "pseudo-drone theory" is can you fill me in? My drones are big.. I mean HUGE! bigger than the queen, she's still laying workers so I'm not worried about her status as woman of the hive, but the boys weren't this big a month ago they used to be slightly larger than the workers. but now they are mutants!
> 
> ...


Why don't you post photos of the queen and the drones, so we can view them. I would say that your queen is a bit of a runt which may also explain her increased drone laying activity and your drones are just normal size.


----------



## Moonfire (Apr 2, 2013)

*Re: Have Your Questions Answered by a Treatment-Free Beekeeper*



Kidbeeyoz said:


> Why don't you post photos of the queen and the drones, so we can view them. I would say that your queen is a bit of a runt which may also explain her increased drone laying activity and your drones are just normal size.


I am more than happy to post pictures of them, as soon as I do my next check I will snap some! although I don't believe this queen to be a runt. I have 2 hives right now, the first (with big boys) is a Carni Hive and this queen is about [----------------] that big and fat! My other hive is Italian ( not doing so well I might add ) and the queen in that hive I would say is a runt by comparison being only about [----------] that big. also the first hive's queen came into fruition around June 1st and she is still laying a large number of workers and not too many drones, just really big ones. I mean huge compared to her which makes them stick out like a sore thumb! I was simply wondering if I should have expected this to some degree being as I am almost completely ( with the exception of the 2 frames that they came on) foundationless? Thank you for the explanation of the Pseudo-drone theory! It was very informative and I will surely look into reading more of her information!


----------

