# The Future of A.I.



## Ricko (May 18, 2004)

The thought occurred to me that we are now experiencing times where the subject of cloning has become a common household topic of discussion. First, it was sheep, and now we can read about the most recent racehorse clone.
A.I. has been around for years and is a common practice on most every dairy farm these days. I myself remember the liquid nitrogen tank in the milk house that held all the straws of sem_n that we used to breed the cows with. There was even a catalog from distributors / suppliers that you could order from. These catalogs read like a Christmas catalog describing all the offered straws. Even from bulls that may have been dead 15 years, and straws were still available!
Now I'm not a geneticist and have no training in genetics, so my questions may seem very elementary. I know we have some brainiacs that occupy this forum, and I'll leave the answers up to them.
This month's issue of the ABJ features an article about the first bees imported from Australia. There's even a post inquiring about whose going to the Sue Cobey queen rearing school. So A.I. of honeybees is no longer a technique of the few and gifted, it can be learned by just about any beekeeper having the desire to learn. Just think, getting some straws from Australia and not having to go through a quarantine period, or risk the physical loss of the bees being sent.
So do you think that any of the great traits of today might be stored away in some liquid nitrogen somewhere for years from now, just in case?
Maybe in years to come we might be able to order up a few specialty straws from queen breeders some where, instead of sending a live queen through the mail? 
The thought of a genetic drone bank to draw from, interesting!
Your thoughts?


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

I don't know much about AI in bees and freezing, but I know a bit about horses and cattle. Cattle semen can be frozen fairly easily with fairly consistent results. Horses are much more complicated. Some stallions don't freeze well enough to even be worth doing it. Of the others there are various extenders added that work on some stallions and not on others. Even at that the success rate with frozen is very low and fresh cooled is always prefered. So it's not so simple as just freezing any kind of semen and getting the same results. Even with different individuals in the same species.

That said, I'm not sure how well freezing works for bees.


----------



## magnet-man (Jul 10, 2004)

I have wondered if you could freeze an egg as soon as it was laid. I just have to talk my doctor into letting me use his liquid nitrogen.

The other interesting question is could you inseminate a laying worker. Could you get that laying worker to lay a few fertilized eggs? This is not meant as a solution to any problem but is an academic question.


----------



## Bob Harrison (Mar 15, 2005)

Sue Cobey's class is a wonderful introduction into instrumental insemination. in other words similar to taking a 12 week karate course and expecting to be the next Bruce Lee.
Collection of the semen is time consuming and a big part of the process. 
If one is precise in hand movement, has excellent vision and proper equipment (other than the actual II devise) then the process becomes easier.
The number of *beekeepers* which have performed an instrumental insemination is smaller than one would imagine. I have seen the question asked at large beekeeping meetings and perhaps a single hand will raise.
In my opinion the need for instrumental insemination is rare *except* for those doing research or those wanting to keep their breeding lines correct and matings controlled. In those cases almost impossible without instrumental insemination.


----------



## BerkeyDavid (Jan 29, 2004)

deleted by author


----------



## Hillbillynursery (Nov 13, 2003)

I worry about a narrowing genetic pool from AI. If you do not allow some open mated queen into the closed AI breeding program you could be doing more harm than good. I do like the idea of shipping semen from far away places. I would like to see a Buckfast from the abbey. Or even bring in new italian blood lines by importing semen. The NWC is proof that AI is a very good way of controling breeding. They started with a large genetic pool and have been keeping several lines seperate to keep the diversity.


----------



## tarheit (Mar 26, 2003)

You can already buy straws (glass capillary tubes actually) of semen, at least from Sue Cobey.

The number who do it I belive is very small primarily because of the cost. The class itself is cheap compared to the $2000-3000 the instrument, syringe and microscope can set you back. 

-Tim


----------



## Bob Harrison (Mar 15, 2005)

Tim,
In our Australian import we imported a hybrid. A cross between a recent import into Australia of pure buckfast from the abbey and a recent import into Australia of a "Blue Ribbon" Italian bee from Italy.

Also the best stock of the Joe Horner Australian line.All my beekeeping friends which took the Australian beekeeping tour praised the Joe Horner operation and stock.

approx 100 queens of the first and 200 of the second line.

Many beekeepers put us down for doing the Australian import (and still are!)

To those narrow minded people I give a recent quote by my friend Allen Dick:

"The future is coming, either lead, follow OR GET OUT OF THE WAY"


----------



## WG Bee Farm (Jan 29, 2005)

The introductions of SMR, Hygienic behavaior, and Russian Bees have shown that nationwide there is an increased effort to develope higher resistance to the two mites.
The question I have: Does the imported bees from Australia have these traits, in any measure? Have they been exposed to varroa?, if so what are their treatment methods.
Frank Wyatt


----------



## Bob Harrison (Mar 15, 2005)

The Australians are untreated so far but last week the boys found some deformed bees in *one* hive and varroa in drone brood. 
Not bad for having been in Almonds and apples but we expect no varroa tolerance at all.
We have already used the Australians to create a few hybrids but will take time if not years to see the results. We need the new alleles and the hybrid vigor the Australians bring.


----------



## WG Bee Farm (Jan 29, 2005)

Rob, you mention that we need new alleles and the hybrid vigor the Australians bring. Is this not available when you cross a new smr, hygienic, or russian breeder queens -daughters with drones from open mating. Has research been done that shows that we have a limited number of alleles in the US. If so, where can I locate this information. The treatments I mentioned: How were they treated in Austr.
Thanks for the information,
Frank


----------



## bjerm2 (Jun 9, 2004)

I use AI and yes I agree with a possibility of a limited amount of alleles being used. I try to avoid that by actually letting some of my AI queens swarm out into the wild. I also keep buying some other queen bees from different breeders and use them into my breeding system. I figure that some time in the future it will be of great help with having some kind of 'good genes' out there. I think over time with the wild swarms that I allow to escape it will help with the over all bee population. After all only the most 'resistant' or really tolerant to mite bees will survive over time.
Dan


----------



## Bob Harrison (Mar 15, 2005)

Frank,
I do not have an allele problem in my bees but many U.S. queen producers do.

My self and a close group have tested most of the bees available today in the U.S..

I never post names or results but the results are shocking at times! If you read through all my posts on BEE-L over the years you will see I never name the queen producer by name. I have passed information directly at meetings on a one on one basis.

I was looking today at a future hybrid breeder queen *from a II breeder queen* and saw a BIG improvement in brood viability. 

Although the original II breeder queen is a high dollar Glenn Apiaries gal I find three bad faults with her. 
1. brood viability
2. temperment of her bees
3. running on frames

In a breeding program just because a queen is from Glenn Apiaries does not mean you add into your breeding program without looking at her, her bees and her brood viability. I about pinched her head today but will wait awhile. 

What Australian treatments in Australia? Terry Brown has nothing to treat for? He did have some chalkbrood problems in the past but got rid of the problem with new queen sources.

Hybrid vigor is as Frank says common in most crosses. 30 % is the normal figure given for hybrid vigor.

However if doing a cross out of the same gene pool you might not get the hybrid vigor and create a poor brood viability problem. Using the Australian bees will almost assure a hybrid vigor situation.

Time will tell what treatments tha Australian bees will need. Do not paint the Australian bees with a broad brush. Our shipment came from a queen breeder and not simply a queen producer. Big difference!
My guess is the Australian/Australian (Joe Horner line) will need varroa treatment and tracheal mite treatment being Italian stock. The Terry Brown stock (as imported) will most likely need varroa treatment but perhaps not tracheal mite treatment because a direct cross with a pure Buckfast line from the abbey.
Those wondering what I am talking about can read my articles in the April & May ABJ to better understand.


----------



## Fusion_power (Jan 14, 2005)

So to answer the original question re storing bee sem_n, at present, it is ineffective. Two problems were encountered: very low viability after freezing and death of queens that were AI'd with previously frozen semen.

It is very feasible to ship fresh collected semen and is a tool being used by some breeders today. There are regulatory barriers that restrict this activity to a large degree.

Fusion


----------



## WG Bee Farm (Jan 29, 2005)

Rob, 
The question was "Has research been done that shows that we have a limited number of alleles in the US." I was not implying that you have an allele problem in your bees. How would I even know. I am only interested in finding documents that I can read as reference material, for my "hungry mind". There should be no problem referencing material that has been put out for publication. As in most discussions, many opinions are presented by all parties that may or may not be fact & sometimes you have to filter through the "muck" to get the facts.
I agree that it is a good policy not to mention names of "any" queen producers or breeders that in your opinion have faults.
I personally would like to be able to import other bees and not just Australian. It would be great to get true Carniolans and see how they fair here in the US

Thanks 
Frank


----------



## Bob Harrison (Mar 15, 2005)

I don't know of any actual research but the allele problem is talked of often at national meetings.

I don't mean disrespect but not sure you understand fully what I am saying. An excellent book to help you understand is "Queen Rearing & Bee Breeding: by Laidlaw & Page.

Those "shotgun" brood patterns are a dead give away. We test at least fifty queens from a producer to be sure of what we are seeing.

The only way you can get imports from Australia (at this time) is to buy around 384 packages. Around forty thousand dollars worth.
The only way a hobby beekeeper will be seeing Australians (as imported) is to get a few from a beekeeper which received a shipment.

We are sending six above average Australian queens of each line to Dann Purvis to hold the pure line for us through instrumental insemination and use as he sees fit.

Although Dann and I are good friends the deal 
above also involved a trade to us of one of his best instrumentally inseminated gold line breeder queens.

All trades and offers considered.


----------



## mobees (Jul 26, 2004)

I had a great talk with a lady, who does AI at the EAS meeting. She said she has found that open mated Queens are generally the most prolific. AI is great for keeping the line strait, but her open mated daughters are the
best in production hives. It is also really important, to drone flood your mating yard, to change the genetic makeup of the mating area.
You will need lots of pollen.

You can really slow the line divergance by controling the drone population. And might not
need AI, as long as you pick up breeders every few years.

Also, I remember asking about freezing semen, it doesn't work well with insects. Most of the semen in viable for weeks and is stored at room temp, in glass vials with air plugs. 

Some of my best queens last year were NWC crossed with local ferels, kicking butt this spring!


----------



## Jim Fischer (Jan 5, 2001)

A very rainy day here in Virginia, so no apiary
work for me.

Sorry Bob, but I think you know where I stand
on your most recent method of replacing dead-outs.
Don't get angry, I know you have the "right" to do so,
I just did not think anyone so well-informed would
decide to put us all at risk.

The arrogance required to import packages from
Australia or New Zealand under the current lack
of anything more than "trust me" controls amazes me.

Sure, nearly everyone thinks that they are the best
beekeeper on the planet - I am confident that each
of the people responsible for the introduction of
tracheal mites, AHB, and varroa to the western
hemisphere also thought that "nothing would go wrong".

If Australian or New Zealand bees had any traits
of value, the Purvis brothers could get some
genetic material much more cheaply than via the
ordering of hundreds of packages. Likely, such
a transaction would be free, as neither NZ or Oz
pay any money at all for genetics from the
"advanced technology" breeding work-product of
groups like the USDA, and they would not be so
stupid as to set the precedent of charging for
what they want to get for free from us.

But more important, importing genetic material
rather than live bees would avoid the risk of
importing yet another pest or disease in the process.

As far as "what diseases or pests?", my pick
for the next nasty problem to come from the
other side of the planet is Tropilaelaps clareae.
It is tiny, it is in countries that send ships
to Australia and New Zealand daily, and it is
yet another pest that neither country has ever
seen before, just like varroa was for New Zealand
and Small Hive Beetle was for Australia.

Please recall that both countries made
grandiose claims about their "biosecurity"
in order to gain the negligible revenue stream
they will get from selling packages to the USA,
yet each country let serious and very obvious
pests (SHB and varroa) get well-established in
multiple apiaries and in breeder stock before
they even discovered the problem.

...and now they can send packages to anyone with
a little money who is willing to put the entire industry
at risk for their own personal profit.

If these bees were worth buying, why would the
Canadians, who have been able to import these
bees for years, want to instead get bees from
the USA badly enough to petition their government
for years on the issue?

The Canadians realized that these bees are
resistant to nothing at all, an obvious result
of buying bees from places who brag of their
countries' "pest-free", "disease-free" status.


----------



## Bob Harrison (Mar 15, 2005)

Well spoken old friend! Judging by other posts of yours on the subject you went easy on me!

Future possible imports in
the works to cause even more sleep lost by Jim.

1. direct import from Russia

I am not (at this time) in favor of two and three but many many commercial beekeepers are.

2. import of varroa tolerant 
AHB into California from Brazil

3. import of ninety cent queens and twenty dollar AHB packages from Mexico.

Flying out tonight and back Tuesday if future comments are needed.


----------



## Bob Harrison (Mar 15, 2005)

Hello Jim & All,
The hotel I am at has an internet hookup so will answer Jims questions.
Jim infers a beekeeper is the source of all our pest problems. My self and many others point the blame in another direction. We had the most too lose. Who had the most to gain without a problem in beekeeping to solve.
I believe Jim and I will have to agree to disagree.
Jim brings up the dreaded T. clareae. Just another blood sucker in my book. If measures are not taken by the industry there will not be a U.S. beekeeping industry to worry about. The same beekeepers which lost hives last year are allready seeing varroa out of control. Many packages sold in the U.S. this spring were varroa infested.
Several I have talked to can not decide if to super or try an treat. The problem is getting worse instead of better.
The pollination needs of the U.S. out way all other uses for bees. Period.
Those which have tried to stop migratory beekeeping have found out by now that pollination needs trumps state borders. Hold us up for a day of a few days but we are going to get released. Sooner or later we find intellegent life as we move up the supervision ladder.
The almond growers have got more clout than beekeepers, AHPA & ABF. They have got plans A B C & D to get bees. If beekeepers do not work with the almond growers they will find solutions which (I already know about) which Jim and others are not going to care for.


----------



## Joel (Mar 3, 2005)

In addition Rob all of the problems are shipped throughout the country in bee packages, nucs and general migration of Bees. ( all of which I participate in) To think we can isolate any problem is the ultimate fallacy. I remember when we were told gypsy moths and asiain long horn beetles wouldn't make it accross the Hudson River. I don't believe Austrailian bees are any more the answer then any of the other bullet proof bees introuced over the years. Ultimately though we must keep working to develop better stock. Chemical controls will ultimately fail and eventually infect our honey supply. I sure hope those involved at the import level have carefully weighed the risks and benefits. Look what happened with AHB in Brazil. Another negative genetic trait or pest could be just as devastating. My sense is if it had been well thought out the concept of introducing bee stock from Australia, which has been isolated from problems until recently, dosen't make much sense. That gives me concerns about how much else went into the thought process. I don't think it would take much of a new problem to devastate the US industry, especially in light of the problems at hand. I also think it is a just a hop, skip and a buzz accross the border from Canada so if Austrialian bees will introduce a new problem it is already on the horizon. It is a good think people like Jim are there to raise the red flag and keep us thinking instead of just reacting. Those who critize critical thinkers should take some time and check there ego's a the door, as we all must sometimes do.


----------



## Dick Allen (Sep 4, 2004)

>...the dreaded T. clareae. Just another blood sucker in my book...

Like others I dread the day it shows up, but if the past is any indication of the future as far as pests are concerned, well, as Jim has remarked in the past: "Connect the dots."

From what I read on T. clareae, it appears to be more easily controlled than varroa. 

"Tropilaelaps clareae apparently cannot persist in regions where honey bee colonies have a seasonal break in brood rearing. In other areas, artificially creating a broodless period has eliminated the mites from Apis mellifera colonies." 'Honey Bee Pests, Predators & Diseases'


----------



## Jim Fischer (Jan 5, 2001)

Not to worry folks, I am being "hard" on the issue here, not
on Bob. In fact, Bob is about the only person reading this
who is sure to laugh and nod rather than get steamed.
Don't worry - Bob's a big boy, and can hold up his end of
either a polite debate or a heated argument without any help.

> Jim infers a beekeeper is the source of all our pest problems. 

I do? If it is true that a beekeeper is the source of all our
pest problems, let's find him, and have a stern conversation!









Seriously, we are often are the cause of our own problems.
We can't blame resistance on anyone else, can we?
I can imagine that a few pests, such as SHB, >>might<< have
arrived on fruit, but the best vector for the spread of bee
pests and diseases is live bees without question. Other pests
and diseases simply don't have vectors other than live bees.

> My self and many others point the blame in another direction. 

Of course you do - I understand that someone who imports packages
from the other side of the planet, and promptly trucks them around 
the country would have to do so in order to simply enjoy a good 
night's sleep.

> We had the most too lose. 

I disagree. There are many people who depending upon a thriving
beekeeping industry in order to feed a family, and the dwindling 
number of large-scale migratory beekeepers are very much the tail 
on the dog. The hobby market is what keeps everyone in business - 
no business could survive on sales to a few hundred large customers 
who demand everything at prices that don't really even cover the cost
of production plus overhead, let alone a profit. Please note that
there are more people making a living from making and selling items
for beekeepers than are employed by large-scale beekeeping operations.

There are many more crops than almonds that need bees for pollination,
and those crops swamp out the value of the almond crop, both on a 
dollar-volume basis, and on a utility basis. Almonds are a snack.
Real food gets pollinated too.

> Who had the most to gain without a problem in beekeeping to solve.

Ah yes, the old tinfoil-hat paranoia that "researchers" want to
prolong the problems so they can get funding and screw around on
the same problem(s) for decades. Yeah, right. No one likes spending
their time working on invasive diseases and pests, as they all have
OTHER interests that they would rather be working on. Even if there
are some who "enjoy" working on the problem, it should be obvious that
the team that "solves" the problem gets fame, perhaps even fortune.
They certainly would get the respect of their peers, wouldn't they?

> Jim brings up the dreaded T. clareae. 

Yes I do, and yes it is.

> Just another blood sucker in my book. 

Brave words from someone who had to import hundreds of packages this
spring. One blood-sucker at a time is bad enough. Can you honestly
imagine how much worse it would be with TWO varroa-like pests, each
independent of the other?

> If measures are not taken by the industry there will not be a U.S. 
> beekeeping industry to worry about. 

So, screw the consequences, and do whatever seems best for this season
AGAIN??? That's exactly the sort of short-sighted, self-interested
approach that has driven so many large-scale operations straight into
bankruptcy, and only made matters worse for the innocent bystanders
who have not invested every dime they have on bees, but still want and
need bees as part of a vertically integrated operation.

> The same beekeepers which lost hives last year are allready seeing varroa 
> out of control. 

In April? That's a tad early unless the varroa overwintered, isn't it?

> Many packages sold in the U.S. this spring were varroa infested.

I've not heard this - anyone get any packages that were infested?
If so, from which producers, and why hasn't anyone demanded their
money back, or replacement packages?

> The pollination needs of the U.S. out way all other uses for bees. Period.

Sure, but pollination has never been a profitable stand-alone business,
so the pollination customers are reaping what they sowed for so many years,
playing one beekeeper off against another, and encouraging a race to the
bottom of price per hive, and hence, quality of pollination.

> Those which have tried to stop migratory beekeeping 

No one has ever tried to "stop" it. No one sane, anyway. 
No sane person would even think of such a thing.

> have found out by now that pollination needs trumps state borders. 

Except in the case of the fire-ant controls at the California border,
which trumped every truckload of bees with even a little dirt on the
pallets. When someone at last got serious about a pest, bee trucks 
got turned around and sent home. Not that I think that this is any
sort of an "answer" to any of the problems of beekeeping, of course.

> Sooner or later we find intellegent life as we move up the supervision ladder.

Except when it is ants and California.









> The almond growers have got more clout than beekeepers, 

Sure they do - they have organizations worthy of the designation.
But they aren't the only growers out there, and other growers are
not as desperate about the situation as the almond people are.
The main reason is that the almond people created much of the
"shortage" of bees by expanding their acreage faster than they
could support with firm pollination contracts. So, some fraction
of the increased price per hive was simply due to a grower-created
shortage, rather than any "shortage" of hives.

> AHPA & ABF. 

Neither is worthy of the title "organization" until they actually GET
organized, and can at least play nice together.

> If beekeepers do not work with the almond growers they will find 
> solutions which (I already know about) which Jim and others are not 
> going to care for.

I really don't care what the almond people do. They created an artificial
economy for beekeepers in the form of a massive pollination demand, but
can't seem to admit that at the price they get for their crop, that even
$100 per hive is a very reasonable price for pollination. To be honest,
taking almonds out of the equation would return beekeeping to a more
stable footing. Other countries don't have the almond orchards of the US,
and somehow, beekeepers still prosper in those countries. I wonder how.









Beekeepers chasing after the rainbow of both pollination income and a 
large crop went bust on a regular basis long before the invasive pests, 
the imported diseases, and the current high fuel prices. The "industry"
(or at least the part of the industry that has ratios like 1000 hives
per employee) has been marginal for a long time. Announcing "the death
of beekeeping, film at 11" is just as silly as announcing "tens of thousands
of hive crashing" when no one can find anything worse than prior "bad years".

So, yeah, it was not a good winter for many beekeepers.
But whining about it won't solve the problems, and neither will importing
bees that have never even been exposed to the problems that bees face in the US.

All importing bees does is undercut the agenda of getting some serious dollars
and effort behind the R&D and the regulatory work required to give beekeepers
tangible solutions. After all, if bees can be imported as "disposable pollination
units", perhaps just a tube of bees with a pheromone lure to replace the queen,
the almond growers don't need beekeepers at all, and would then have no interest 
in standing with beekeepers to ask for tangible effort towards tangible solutions, 
do they?

Think about what happens AFTER what comes next.
(For me, its a full-time job to do so.)


----------



## Bob Harrison (Mar 15, 2005)

Excellent post Jim! I like Beesource because I do not have problems getting what I want to say past the moderators.

First let me say I speak from the beekeeping front lines. Until you see first hand you have a hard time understanding current beekeeping issues.
Jerry Hayes sees things different now.

Joel has given his opinion but little facts. His position is typical.

Dick Allen has done his homework. The ONLY people worried about T clareae are researchers trying to instill fear in beekeepers! 

Bee-l would not print the opinion I am about to give. We have traced a couple new pests back into the direction of the research community. I believe Soy bean rust in soybeans can be traced back to at least possible cause of being spread by chemical companies. No way to prove which is the same in beekeeping. Only tossing out an opinion(based partly on location of first finds)

Jim said:
"it would be like two varroa like pest'
What kills varroa kills T. Clareae. Also the broodless period issue .

Current varroa problems:
For the last two years beekeepers buying packages in the U.S. from a majority of shippers have received packages with a high varroa content. Those packages died in the first year.
Starting last year commercial beekeeper started trying various ways to remove the arrival infestation.
New beekeepers reading the above are going Hmmm. Is that what happened to my package hive last year?
Carry over infestations are off the charts in many cases due to failing varroa controls. Many of those hives are already at June levels.

Would not get posted on BEE-L:
Our researchers have not solved the varroa problem. Done an excellent job of documentation!
Did you see a single solution on the NBC program?
Problem not solvable is their solution.
Sadly our information from samples sent to labs overseas have provided better information.
My own hives look better than they have in years! My methods have fallen on deaf ears (even with large commercial beekeepers). Once you have got a complete outfit crash then they consider my methods. It has taken around five years to replace all comb used with chemicals and convert to a varroa tolerant bee. Now complete I see the results. Expensive for sure but a success.
Not cheap to replace all but skids, hive bodies and tops. I did save some frames. Lots of comb to get drawn. 
Large beekeepers doing the math shake their heads at the expense & labor. 
We were never told by researchers that use of USDA approved chemical strips as per label would cause comb to need be replaced.

Many large beekeepers are selling out. The largest in Florida. Not only because of varroa problems. Honey selling below cost of production is also a factor. In large lots honey sales are at low levels. Honey needs to sell at around 1.25 U.S. in the drum to make honey production for the large beekeeper profitable.
The large beekeeper keeps the industry beekeeping equipment sales at reasonable levels and creates cash flow at woodworking plants as they buy in the slak season.
If you think Kona queen will not miss the 20,000 queens a year bought by the Florida beekeeper guess again. Takes a lot of 1-10 queen orders to make 20,000.


----------



## Jim Fischer (Jan 5, 2001)

> First let me say I speak from the beekeeping front
> lines. Until you see first hand you have a hard 
> time understanding current beekeeping issues.

Oh, OK - so I'm completely out of touch.
But howcome there's no dire hive losses to be found
when both the states and the USDA send people out
to look at colonies and talk to large beekeepers?

> The ONLY people worried about T clareae are 
> researchers trying to instill fear in beekeepers!

Gee, what would you have done if you could have
stopped varroa from getting in the western 
hemisphere? How about SHB? Your disdain for
the risks of not having at least the sort of
controls currently in place in Europe, the UK,
and Canada is, in my view, "part of the problem".

And if any researcher is trying to instill fear
in beekeepers, I'd sure like to hear some names.
You aren't going to get away with either insulting
or dismissing the research community around here,
no matter what your personal agenda.

> What kills varroa kills T. Clareae.

Uh, I thought that you said that "what kills 
varroa" ISN'T killing varroa currently! It
would seem to follow that T. clareae would go
through the same cycle of resistance build-up.

> beekeepers buying packages in the U.S. from a 
> majority of shippers have received packages with
> a high varroa content. Those packages died in 
> the first year.

I know of no widespread examples, and I know
many beekeepers smart enough to test newly-hived
packages. I'd need some names and dates to do
more than dismiss this as pure fantasy.

> My methods have fallen on deaf ears

Well, what exactly ARE "your methods"? If you've
got something that worked for you, I'd sure like
to hear about it, and I'm sure everyone else
would, too.

> It has taken around five years to replace all 
> comb used with chemicals

Golly - most of us have had a regular comb cycling
schedule for years now. Where were you when the
studies about comb contamination were published?

> and convert to a varroa tolerant bee

Again, if you think you've got bees that can
tolerate varroa, good for you, but why has no
one else agreed that you have such bees?

Danny Weaver wants to claim that his bees are
varroa tolerant too - funny how there has been
no independent confirmation there, either.

> We were never told by researchers that use of 
> USDA approved chemical strips as per label would
> cause comb to need be replaced.

Where have you been for the past decade? You'd
have to be not only drunk enough to be comatose,
but also living under a rock to have avoided all
the papers, presentations, and workshops on
this issue.

> Many large beekeepers are selling out.

This happens all the time. The whole concept
of a monoculture-based, migratory, large-scale
operation simply is not sustainable as it is
based on benign neglect of the bees. Such
operations are doomed when the strips and other
one-shot, no-monitoring-required "treatments"
fail to work.

> Honey selling below cost of production is also 
> a factor.

Wholesale honey prices are set based upon world
prices, rather than the US cost of production.
Beekeepers who willingly put their livelihoods
in the hands of packers and brokers get exactly
what they can expect from these people - no more
than the lowest price paid for what might pass for
honey on the "world market". The answer is to
vertically integrate, and package one's own honey.
Even the co-ops have turned on their members,
such as Sioux Bee, who has become a co-op of
both US and South American beekeepers.

The future of beekeeping is just like the past
has been for 20 years, and either you "get it",
or you aren't going to be a beekeeper for much
longer:

"The price of honey is eternal vigilance."


----------



## Rob Mountain (Dec 8, 2003)

Excellent post Jim! I like Beesource because I do not have problems getting what I want to say past the moderators.

Hey Rob

You shoot straight I dont shoot back.

Keep up the good work

Rob Mountain  moderator


----------



## Bob Harrison (Mar 15, 2005)

I am not going to argue. You are indeed out of touch. Period! Especially on the package infestation issue!


WE WERE NEVER TOLD WHEN APISTAN AND LATER WHEN COUMAPHOS CAME ON THE MARKET CONTAMINATION OF WAX WOULD BE A PROBLEM! I have been around since the start!The first talk of wax contamination came after checkmite came on the seen. Jeff Pettis (USDA-ARS Beltsville)told me at the Apiary Inspectors meeting in Savannah in 2002 for the first time about the big wax contamination problem.
I told Jeff I was aware of the problem two years before through private testing.

You can take me at my word or disagree all you want. The beekeeping industry is in trouble because of lack of control which worked like Apistan & Checkmite did when first used.Severe wax contamination! Period!

If those on this list want my position & methods I suggest a search on BEE-L using my name,varroa and read my posts on the subject.

I am not going to rehash the whole story over again! I came on these lists to share as I travel in the circles of the largest SUCESSFUL beekeepers
the world has ever seen.

They told me I was wasting my time on internet lists. I don't believe so. At least I hope not!


Jim may not like what I have posted but many beekeepers say I say what needs said.

Jim knows it is not my way to post names of beekeepers in trouble or researchers. A policy I do not break. Some consider this my weak point but if I posted sources before long I would not be getting direct information out of the bee labs and from large beekeepers. Which I do! 

As with all internet discussions. You can read all posts and make up your own mind.


----------



## Jim Fischer (Jan 5, 2001)

OK, Bob... but when even PDB was known to be a
build-up problem for comb for years before the
introduction of Apistan, I don't think anyone
has any excuse for claiming ignorance.

But, exactly like Bob, I'm not about to argue.


----------



## Bob Harrison (Mar 15, 2005)

PDB is a known but little talked about wax contaminant. Most large beekeepers use Phosdin gas.
I use PDB but store supers in a 40 foot air tight ship container. I seal the four air vents. Once 20 skids of supers are placed in the container I toss a *pound* of PDB crystals in by the door.
Big difference than several tablespoons per five to seven supers.
I could use phosden gas but see no need in a airtight container. In fact I might not even need the crystals but I do get moth larva & eggs in supers brought in late fall or simply not extracted fast enough.

I believe phosden gas (legal) is less of a contaminant than PBD crystals but I have not seen any research on the subject.

Cyanide gas works best (with zero contamination I have been told) but not legal and certainly dangerous (as is phosden gas). Both pull all oxygen from the air which kills all life forms and eggs within minutes. Cyanide is used in death house gas chambers.

PBD is available at WalMart and easy and safe for the small beekeeper. When you move into the relm of containers or buildings full of supers cost,labor and contamination becomes a concern.

I thought the use of cyanide was old history when phosden became legal until I heard of the cyanide problem in the Dakotas. I knew most those beekeepers charged (and convicted). They made a poor choice when phosden would have worked as well but both are dangerous to use.

A drum of liquid cyanide in the wrong hands is a dangerous situation but so is phosden gas.

I have never used either of the above but I have seen both used first hand.

Cyanide was sold in tabs and crystals by bee supply houses years ago and was used in the sixtys at at least one bee lab that I know of.


----------



## Jim Fischer (Jan 5, 2001)

> PBD is available at WalMart 

Not in any form that would be labeled (and hence
legal) to use on honey supers, unless MallWart has
expanded to the point where they carry bee supplies.









> ...Phosdin gas
> ...phosden gas

I don't know either of those names.

You don't mean Phosdrin, do you?
Certainly not Phosgene!


----------



## Bob Harrison (Mar 15, 2005)

I did an internet search once and got many different spellings. I believe brand names. I do not know the exact chemical name or numbers.
I have never bought or used any. 
I did call our local chemical gas supplier once and he knew what I wanted and said he had the gas in any size bottle I wanted.
I understand tablets are available but know little about the source.
I asked at an apiary inspectors meeting I believe in Austin,Texas if the gas was legal and they said yes but used by only the largest beekeepers. 
A very large beekeeper told me a building was expensive to fumigate and if the door was opened for a single super the whole building would need fumigated again.
About all I know about the gas and I don't expect those which do to comment.
You are correct on the Wal Mart PDB crystals not having the correct label. However the product is correct. Demand would get the Walmart product labeled for bees but if sold with the correct label by bee supply houses many hobby beekeepers would still by the cheaper Walmart product.

NEVER USE REGULAR MOTHBALLS. Different product and will contaminate combs in a big way.


----------



## Jim Fischer (Jan 5, 2001)

> I understand tablets are available...

Oh, you mean Phostoxin!
Its just "Aluminum phosphide", if you want the real chemical name.

That stuff requires a pesticide applicator
license, and is very nasty stuff for the
person trying to use it. I wouldn't touch
it with a 10-foot pole myself.

I can't imagine anyone trying to use it
except the largest operations. You certainly
couldn't hire me to be the one who works with
the stuff.

And yeah, you gotta have an airtight chamber to
use it. Perhaps a decommissioned submarine...


----------



## Bob Harrison (Mar 15, 2005)

I agree the stuff is nasty & kills all life forms in a closed area. The 100 pound gas bottles are the most common use I have seen.

Found out the stuff is legal to use on supers yet Jim?

Pesticide applicator license.

Now those are hard for beekeepers to obtain in Missouri. You have got to pay a fee and watch a one hour video.


----------



## Jim Fischer (Jan 5, 2001)

> Found out the stuff is legal to use on supers yet Jim?

Are you asking me if its legal?
I thought you said it was legal.

I don't give a darn if it is or not.
I'm not going to even consider using it.
If someone else uses it, that's their problem.









Legal or not, it sounds like a problem just 
waiting to happen.


----------



## WG Bee Farm (Jan 29, 2005)

The post of Rob and Jim are extremely informative. Differing views from two distinct areas of the industry. 
The largest beekeepers use of chemicals (approved or not) is in a effort to remain profitable and in business all togather.
Mid-size, sideliners, and hobbyist use chemicals in an effort to be profitable, increase size, and because the industry as a whole suggest that this is the only way to keep their hives alive. 
It was not until last year that I had heard of increased chemicals in the wax. Not to say that this was not being discussed, for I now know that it was. The problem is that it was not being discussed in all circles and there will always be learning curves for hobbyist, sideliners, mid-size and large beekeepers.
What I understand from when the mite treatments were put forth, the beekeeping industry just wanted a mitecide that worked, and then when resistance started showing up the industry wanted another mitecide that worked. I doubt that there was any consideration for wax contamination. I doubt that it was even discussed. As we see now by the different treatments available and approved there is still mitecides being approved that may or may not contaminate wax.
It is through list, like this one that we learn of different methods of treatments, wintering, queen rearing, and opinions other than our own.
The Great thing about beekeeking is the bees; no matter what different methods we use and how we abuse our wards of nature, they forgive us by continueing to survive and reward us with a little honey.


----------



## Jim Fischer (Jan 5, 2001)

> The largest beekeepers...
> Mid-size, sideliners...

It is simpler than that - some beekeepers have
concern and respect for the health and safety of
their employees, and some apparently don't.

I hope I am not alone in putting human beings
before bees, but I simply would not ask anyone
to handle or apply highly toxic and very dangerous
stuff like Aluminum phosphide or sodium cyanide
when plain old carbon dioxide works just as well
in killing wax moth eggs, larvae, and adults.

I may be slightly more "fascist" about employee
safety than some others, but I hire teenagers,
for pete's sake - they require an approach that
eliminates hazards rather than expects them to
follow complex safety rules.

And yeah, you won't ever see any Check-Mite in
my hives. Not because of the now well-documented
impact on drone fertility and queen fecundity,
but because I will not expose my employees to an
organophosphate.

It is just beekeeping - there is no reason we
should ever take even a single casualty.


----------



## WG Bee Farm (Jan 29, 2005)

If we have to treat we should only treat hives that absolutely need it, and how would you know if you don't test for mites. Sugar shake the hives and only treat the ones that are peaking during august or sept. depending on location. I have only used Checkmite one time and that was on some hives that I purchased, in bad shape. The reason I used it then was because the previous owner used Tactic,& Apistan and I was finding cardboard squares and Apistan strips that had been in these hives for years. He never removed the strips.


----------

