# "Artificial Breeding Parameters"



## JSL (Sep 22, 2007)

This is an honest question...

I was reading through my January ABJ this morning. In the announcement for the Organic Beekeepers Group, it stated, "getting off all artificial breeding parameters, not in 'tandum' with Nature." I don't recall seeing this description and wondered if anyone here has attended and can share what it means.

Thanks,
Joe


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

No idea.


----------



## jwcarlson (Feb 14, 2014)

Anything that goes against this:


> The virgin queen’s marital flight is a quest for the Sun so she waits until it is high in the sky before flying off to find the drones. Though we may think the purpose of the young queen’s marital flight is only to mate, the new queen flies with a more developed intention. Her maiden flight has deeper purposes that raise her into the sky.
> 
> She was born with a fundamental imperative to deliver her hive’s message to the Sun. This message describes the situation into which she has incarnated and the conditions about her as she rises to the mating. In delivering this message, she unlocks and begins her metier as Mother of the Hive. She shares this communication about her and her hive’s physical and spiritual geneology as she opens herself to the Sun.
> 
> ...


http://spiritbee.com/maidens/

:lookout:


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

:lpf::applause: inch:


----------



## clyderoad (Jun 10, 2012)

wow!


----------



## Saltybee (Feb 9, 2012)

And I thought the 60's were the dawning of the age of Aquarius.


----------



## JWChesnut (Jul 31, 2013)

Now, you all have a better understanding of the guff I have to wade through at my "Bee Club".


----------



## jwcarlson (Feb 14, 2014)

Sad to say that I missed this! 

:lpf:


----------



## Stephenpbird (May 22, 2011)

When I started with Warres it seemed the only acceptable way to get increase was to catch your own swarms, because the bees chose the new queen and she was naturally selected by the bees. Queen rearing was seen as a dark art used for industrial beekeeping. One member of a Warre forum described instrumental insemination as rape and was so disgusted and appalled by a you tube video he demanded the link to the offending video be removed.


----------



## Riskybizz (Mar 12, 2010)

Great responses to Joes post. There are so many individuals who have hopped on the beekeeping bandwagon it boggles the mind. Joe I know you live in Ohio, and its probably not know for it's Holistic Approach to modern day beekeeping. Please feel free to pay me a visit in Santa Fe any time your in the neighborhood. We have here an incredible assortment of dynamic natural minded individuals who have made it a lifelong goal to take a few bees along for a ride on their social and spiritual evolution.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

> "getting off all artificial breeding parameters, not in 'tandum' with Nature."

I'm sure those are Dee Lusby's words. So based on past discussions with her, I will speculate that she would define "artificial breeding parameters" as things like: little to no propolis, less drones (reproductively challenged), perfect brood patterns (no hygienic behavior) etc. Dee does not talk about things like bees being "heavenly messengers" etc. though I'm sure some of the people at the Organic meeting will...


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Saltybee said:


> And I thought the 60's were the dawning of the age of Aquarius.


 Back in the day, cough, cough, I thought it was "the age of aquariums".


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

i'm starting my 8th season keeping bees off treatments and only time i have ever come across this stuff is when some jokester on the forum is trying to be cute. i am fairly certain that the more reasonable minds here already know that these 'out there' beliefs shared above are not synonynous with treatment free beekeeping at large.

joe, i'm not able to answer your question directly because i really don't know what exactly was meant by that statement, but i think michael's answer is pretty close to what i would venture as a guess. 

queens that produce profitable colonies when managed for almond pollination and honey yields are mostly what i assume drives the breeding programs. whether 'artificial' or not really depends on one's point of reference does it not?

as a stationary beekeeper interested in honey yields and nuc production, my selection parameters for breeding have to do with survival, production, and a favorable response to swarm prevention. i don't get too detailed with specific metrics, but tend to assess colonies more globally and graft queens from those which are the best overall performers.

over time i am seeing measurable improvement in those particular parameters.


----------



## JWChesnut (Jul 31, 2013)

The complete phrase ("artificial breeding parameter") is a portion of the opening paragraph of the PR announcing last February's 2016 Organic Beekeeping roundup lead by Lusby near Tucson. For instance see: http://bajanbees.org/index.php?opti...eb-2016-in-oracle-arizona&catid=84&Itemid=435

The Organic Beekeepers yahoo.com discussion group has now grown in numbers to over 5900 + members, we have now put together our 9th annual meeting for an American Beekeepers Association, for beekeepers into clean Organic Beekeeping, to come together to associate for clean sustainable beekeeping with ZERO treatments, and getting off all artificial feeds, and getting off all artificial breeding parameters, not in tandem with Nature.​A parameter is a numerical characteristic of a population, ie. a quantitative variable (e.g. 4.9, 5.4). For comparison, a "statistic" is a numerical value of a sample of that population. A non-parametric statistic is a non-numerical characteristic (e.g. "perfect", "less", "little") These statistics can be used to characterize a population when they are ordinal or binary, or even canonical ("AHB").

The 2016 Organic Beekeeping Conference was reported on by several observers... this summary is excellent=


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

JWChesnut said:


> The complete phrase ("artificial breeding parameter") is a portion of the opening paragraph of the PR announcing last February's 2016 Organic Beekeeping roundup lead by Lusby near Tucson. For instance see: http://bajanbees.org/index.php?opti...eb-2016-in-oracle-arizona&catid=84&Itemid=435
> 
> The Organic Beekeepers yahoo.com discussion group has now grown in numbers to over 5900 + members, we have now put together our 9th annual meeting for an American Beekeepers Association, for beekeepers into clean Organic Beekeeping, to come together to associate for clean sustainable beekeeping with ZERO treatments, and getting off all artificial feeds, and getting off all artificial breeding parameters, not in tandem with Nature.​A parameter is a numerical characteristic of a population, ie. a quantitative variable (e.g. 4.9, 5.4). For comparison, a "statistic" is a numerical value of a sample of that population. A non-parametric statistic is a non-numerical characteristic (e.g. "perfect", "less", "little") These statistics can be used to characterize a population when they are ordinal or binary, or even canonical ("AHB").
> 
> ...


I'm left wondering if treatment free includes epinephrine.  I must give this "anonymous" person credit for hanging in there. I have dealt with such a scenario a couple of times in my beekeeping career and it can be a bit frightening even for a seasoned beekeeper. I walked away from one such encounter thinking that if beekeeping had to be like this I think I'd find another line of work.


----------



## jwcarlson (Feb 14, 2014)

squarepeg said:


> i'm starting my 8th season keeping bees off treatments and only time i have ever come across this stuff is when some jokester on the forum is trying to be cute. i am fairly certain that the more reasonable minds here already know that these 'out there' beliefs shared above are not synonynous with treatment free beekeeping at large.


I'm not the one making the link, SP. I did post it somewhat jokingly, but doesn't surprise me to see her speaking at the meeting where they're "getting off all artificial breeding parameters, not in tandem with Nature".



> The 9th Annual Organic Beekeepers Chemical Free Conference 26-28 Feb 2016 in Oracle, Arizona
> 
> As the Organic Beekeepers yahoo.com discussion group has now grown in numbers to over 5900 + members, we have now put together our 9th annual meeting for an American Beekeepers Association, for beekeepers into clean Organic Beekeeping, to come together to associate for clean sustainable beekeeping with ZERO treatments, and getting off all artificial feeds, and getting off all artificial breeding parameters, not in tandem with Nature.
> 
> ...


http://bajanbees.org/index.php?opti...eb-2016-in-oracle-arizona&catid=84&Itemid=435

More about Ms. Freeman here:
http://spiritbee.com/contact-us/us/

She wrote the above "snippet" posted. Again... I didn't invite the lady to speak, I'm just pointing it out that she probably believes the things she writes and speaks about... Apparently that makes me a jokester.

Here's the "college" of another of the speakers:


> The College of the Melissae
> Center for Sacred Beekeeping
> offers a community-centered hands-on approach to beekeeping science, art, craft, culture and ceremony.
> 
> ...


http://www.collegeofthemelissae.com/

For what it's worth, squarepeg, you've likely done more for the advancement of TF beekeeping than either of these two women's kookery.

Edit: 
Benjamin Pixie:


> Benjamin Pixie has been actively romancing the wilds of this world for over half of his life. He is husband to millions of virgin maidens who dedicate their lives to the sex work of the Earth. In addition to beekeeping, he is a mead maker, a conjurer of spirits, herbalist, a hide tanner, leather worker, & warrior poet. He is father of 2 shining radiant little witches. He dedicates his passion and work toward re-membering our world out of monoculture-nightmares back into the diverse and wild flowering garden-temples that it once was and will be. He has been pollinating hearts, minds, & plants throughout the west over the last few years on tour with the Pixie Travelling Medicine Show.


http://benjaminpixie.blogspot.com/p/blog-page.html

It's kind of strange that someone so in-tune with nature would promote the propagation of a non-native species.
He makes some really interesting clothes though, I'll give him that.


----------



## JWChesnut (Jul 31, 2013)

squarepeg said:


> I am fairly certain that the more reasonable minds here already know that these 'out there' beliefs shared above are not synonynous with treatment free beekeeping at large.


There is a structural, philosophic problem with "belief" based TF. The beekeeper from Nebraska has published a manifesto stating one must "believe" to keep TF bees successfully. That hardy midwesterner has sober, reasonable ideas.

However, once one has opened the door to the assertion that "truth" about bee husbandry can be learned by intuitive belief, and not verifiable testing, one no longer has any "parametric" to gauge any other claim. The various practioners of the multidimensional spirit beekeeping are just as moved by "belief" as the reasonable man from Nebraska.

This is why verifiable, repeatable testing is more important to the advancement of bee husbandry than the various unsupported claims from any quarter, no matter what color glasses the claimant wears.

The various proponents of belief-based beekeeping are all "commercial"-- not in the sense that they produce more than trivial quantities of honey, but in the sense they are competing for internet eyeballs and lecture-circuit bookings. This creates a malignant inertia to create the most extreme forms of kookery. The more extreme the claim, the more recognition. A Mr. Vladimir Lenin commented on this phenomenon in an essay on "left-wing infantalism".


----------



## clyderoad (Jun 10, 2012)

squarepeg said:


> i'm starting my 8th season keeping bees off treatments and only time i have ever come across this stuff is when some jokester on the forum is trying to be cute. i am fairly certain that the more reasonable minds here already know that these 'out there' beliefs shared above are not synonynous with treatment free beekeeping at large.


Yeah, it's just a handful of treatment free beekeepers who believe in the 'far out' concepts, the more reasonable TF crowd has 
their theories and beliefs built on solid foundation. 
Wonder why the organizers chose the topics they have? who can they possibly be appealing to?
Maybe the goal is to be audacious.


----------



## JSL (Sep 22, 2007)

Thanks for all of the insight! I envisioned two avenues, but maybe they are the same? One simply modern day queen propagation techniques and the other modern day traits and selection practices. 

Everyone certainly came up with some interesting avenues.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>There is a structural, philosophic problem with "belief" based TF. The beekeeper from Nebraska has published a manifesto stating one must "believe" to keep TF bees successfully. That hardy midwesterner has sober, reasonable ideas.

Of course I think you have to "believe" to replace the clutch in your old truck or learn to tie your shoes... because it is part of how you succeed at anything. But of course you never really read what I said, only misquote it constantly. For anyone interested in what I really said:


----------



## JWChesnut (Jul 31, 2013)

squarepeg said:


> i'm starting my 8th season keeping bees off treatments and only time i have ever come across this stuff is when some jokester on the forum is trying to be cute.


You might want to get out more. On some of the belief-bubble social sites, the predominant meme currently is "bee-centric beekeeping". You find that phrase frequently cited by lecturers that presented at the Lusby 2016 conclave. The buzz word is used to short circuit any discussion, "Robbing Screens, those are *not* Bee-Centric, how dare you suggest I use them".

In my gloss, "bee-centric" must mean you afford the innocent bee souls greater and more frequent opportunities for re-incarnation.


----------



## RayMarler (Jun 18, 2008)

I hesitated posting this, but heck, I'm bored with winter time blues and need some entertainment.

Here comes the sun...







Queen of the sun...

http://www.queenofthesun.com/

The bee dancer, Sara Mapelli...

http://saramapellibeequeen.com/index.html


----------



## jwcarlson (Feb 14, 2014)

RayMarler said:


> http://saramapellibeequeen.com/index.html


Oh dear...



> Long Distant Healing Sessions:
> 
> I also perform Long Distant Healing Sessions. I have worked from my home in the North West with clients in New York, Portland, Vancouver, Chicago, Minneapolis, California, Florida, Arizona, Mexico, South America, Germany, Italy and Morocco. A long distant session is usually done over the phone unless I am working from another country where as you will receive an email report.


----------



## Juhani Lunden (Oct 3, 2013)

JSL said:


> "getting off all artificial breeding parameters, not in 'tandum' with Nature."


Reading the posts in this thread has been enlightening about how things might evolve here too. 

I have been a hard critic of the rules of Organic Beekeeping in Finland. One principal error in these rules is that they concider the best of bees more important than the best of humans. One example: It is not allowed to use styrofoam boxes in winter. Why? Because wood is considered to be more pleasant or comfortable for bees. But: in summer styrofoam boxes are allowed as honeyboxes. So honey for human consumption can be produced in styrofoam, but bees can stay all winter in natural wooden boxes.

Another: wing clipping of queens is not allowed in Organic Beekeeping in Finland. Why? I really don´t know, but surely it has something to do with the false information of the writers of these rules. It most propably has something to do with the idea that the queen is in pain during or after the wing clipping procedure. No consideration has been put on the fact that sometimes wing clipping is essential for breeding or how it is making beekeepers work and life easier.

Be aware if you buy Organic honey in Germany that there might have been oilseed rape in flying zone of bees. But if you buy Organic honey in Finland you can enjoy honey with no residues of oilseed rape. Why? Because the rules are different in different coutries in Europe. The rules are not based on any certain facts. The rules are made by a group of organic minded people, beekeepers and members of the Organic Association. http://proluomu.fi/english/


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>One example: It is not allowed to use styrofoam boxes in winter... Another: wing clipping of queens is not allowed in Organic Beekeeping...

I have issues with most of the "rules" people come up with for "natural" or "organic". The "certified naturally grown" people have a lot rules I think are irrelevant and ridiculous. Who cares how far off the ground the hives are... but they do. Actually I understand people who have an aversion to plastic (though I don't really...) better than things like how far off the ground the entrances are or whether you mark your queens...


----------



## lharder (Mar 21, 2015)

Well the styrofoam and plastic issue is probably more about environmental issues with those products. And maybe some possible leaching of chemicals in the plastic. I use both, but am aware of the issues. 

With A.I. for instance, it is more an issue of taking away another selective process. A queen going out and successfully mating. Some may think these things inconsequential. We have salmon hatcheries here in BC to "enhance" wild stocks. Generally, they fare much worse once released and returns are poor compared to true wild stock. So too much reliance on A.I. may not be good because we are generally ignorant of long term consequences. To use it alongside more natural techniques? I think it could be useful, especially when trying to establish a new pocket of TF bees in an area of treated bees. My take is that a diversity of approaches, open mating, isolated mating, and A.I., could help avoid some of the pitfalls of relying solely on one or another.


----------



## 1102009 (Jul 31, 2015)

Juhani Lunden said:


> Be aware if you buy Organic honey in Germany that there might have been oilseed rape in flying zone of bees. But if you buy Organic honey in Finland you can enjoy honey with no residues of oilseed rape. Why? Because the rules are different in different coutries in Europe. The rules are not based on any certain facts. The rules are made by a group of organic minded people, beekeepers and members of the Organic Association. http://proluomu.fi/english/


When I was in bee class the teacher was a beekeeper who sold his honey as organic and even had a certificate of an organic label.
I asked him why his honey is organic and how he was able to tell his bees where to forage ( in his location farming is not organic).
The answer was because he keeps bees in a more natural way but the honey is not organic.
This honey costs double € more 500g than the average.
Win win. Less work, more money. Nice the customer doesn't know.


----------



## lharder (Mar 21, 2015)

Another point is outcomes. 

Modern beekeeping has introduced new challenge after new challenge to bees with devastating consequences. 

Now if the history of beekeeping was filled with only nuts who meditated with local bees that they caught. We would have a diverse group of bees with relatively few challenges. So what was the better long term approach? Could it be industrial beekeeping is scientifically illiterate making the same category of mistakes over and over again? Should they be pointing fingers at another group of people with alternative views, when they have their own sets of questionable belief systems.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

lharder makes some good points. 

Also holding alternate views can in fact be a pretty good business model. Here we have the Bee Queen making $4,608 for a days work, certainly not an amount to be sneezed at. She has shown innovation and a good business head thinking up this model, it may well be her full time job and she probably pays income tax. Likewise there are others with non mainstream beekeeping ideas making a good dollar at whatever it is they do, if they are dealing with hobbyists and other folks who think they are getting a good time, the customer will go home satisfied.


----------



## Saltybee (Feb 9, 2012)

Shouldn't the title be; 

"Artificial Believing Parameters"


----------



## JRG13 (May 11, 2012)

lharder said:


> Well the styrofoam and plastic issue is probably more about environmental issues with those products. And maybe some possible leaching of chemicals in the plastic. I use both, but am aware of the issues.
> 
> With A.I. for instance, it is more an issue of taking away another selective process. A queen going out and successfully mating. Some may think these things inconsequential. We have salmon hatcheries here in BC to "enhance" wild stocks. Generally, they fare much worse once released and returns are poor compared to true wild stock. So too much reliance on A.I. may not be good because we are generally ignorant of long term consequences. To use it alongside more natural techniques? I think it could be useful, especially when trying to establish a new pocket of TF bees in an area of treated bees. My take is that a diversity of approaches, open mating, isolated mating, and A.I., could help avoid some of the pitfalls of relying solely on one or another.


Yeah, but hatchery fish are the issue, not necessarily the genetics, but being raised in a hatchery environment does not prepare the young fish for the wild which is not the case of II'ing a queen which only controls her genetics, not creating 'hatchery' bees. Also, I think open mating is more of a de-selective process in highly diverse areas or even in areas of less diversity depending on the mating outcome.


----------



## JRG13 (May 11, 2012)

I find it a little arrogant to profess breeding for traits that don't match 'your' philosophy of beekeeping to be Artificial or even detrimental to the industry. On the flipside, is the commercial side of beekeeping a perfect model, of course not.


----------



## tpope (Mar 1, 2015)

Wow!


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Frankly it's likely there would be a degree of mental illnes in some of the people doing the more out there stuff, which is not to say that they may also be highly intelligent despite that.

One thing you can betcha, they will all be treatment free.

But as per SP, it is demeaning to tar all TF people with the same brush, heck a few years back I even tried to be TF myself (Uh Oh) .


----------



## JRG13 (May 11, 2012)

I hope to be treatment free one day as well, I just don't see why take such a die hard approach to it as some people do.


----------



## JWChesnut (Jul 31, 2013)

If you a mite bit rusty on "the erogenics of nektars and their surrogates" you should hasten over to the path of pollen as "_hieros gamos_, sacred union is sought and initiated understanding of the the art of shunammitism and gerokomy and the transference of vital power is explored"

Not saying i didn't warn ya.
https://sacredtrust.org/workshops/pollen/


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Interesting find. From it - "Those women who walk this indefinitely ancient path carry particular bodies of teaching, orientated towards encouraging the student to become both the flower, the flow-er and the pollinator of honeyed wisdoms, a vital salve for the fragile and delicate times we live in, and a calling to women to change the face of the world through the facets of her own body.* We will excavate aspects of the feminine principle that have become buried and then balance them alongside the divine masculine, seeking equanimity and the fluid movement of both within".

Yikes!


----------



## crofter (May 5, 2011)

Oldtimer is your signature line a freudian slip of the tongue?


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Ha, it's a poke at the brand of outside the box thinking which assumes that all the wisdom beekeepers over the last two hundred years have collectively assembled is inside the box, and should be discarded to make way for the new. Luckily not all outside the box thinking is like that, sometimes outside the box thinking produces a new pearl of wisdom, that can be added to the box.


----------



## jwcarlson (Feb 14, 2014)

Oldtimer said:


> sometimes outside the box thinking produces a new pearl of wisdom, that can be added to the box.


Or added to the the erogenic of nektars as the case may be.


----------



## lharder (Mar 21, 2015)

JRG13 said:


> Yeah, but hatchery fish are the issue, not necessarily the genetics, but being raised in a hatchery environment does not prepare the young fish for the wild which is not the case of II'ing a queen which only controls her genetics, not creating 'hatchery' bees. Also, I think open mating is more of a de-selective process in highly diverse areas or even in areas of less diversity depending on the mating outcome.


It can be about genetics, different selection filters are used, its going to affect genetics. 

The open vs closed mating is about relative gene flow. I would guess most bee genetic environments are somewhat chaotic because of all the bee movement. Limit it and local bees would converge on a survival solution. There would still be variance, but it would narrow. Its the chaotic genetic environment that a breeder is fighting against, or if he is swimming upstream as to his local situation. This could a TF person in a sea of migratory bees, or a more trivial situation of breeding for golden bees when most local bees are black. In these situations I can see the use of A.I. However, this limits the possibilities. Open breeding widens the scope of natural selective experimentation, leading to new possibly good, possibly bad combinations. The bad ones get washed out but the good ones are useful. It also keeps traits going that may not be good today, but may be good 5 years down the road. In terms of long term viability a better solution, even if short term losses are greater.


----------



## lharder (Mar 21, 2015)

Oldtimer said:


> Interesting find. From it - "Those women who walk this indefinitely ancient path carry particular bodies of teaching, orientated towards encouraging the student to become both the flower, the flow-er and the pollinator of honeyed wisdoms, a vital salve for the fragile and delicate times we live in, and a calling to women to change the face of the world through the facets of her own body.* We will excavate aspects of the feminine principle that have become buried and then balance them alongside the divine masculine, seeking equanimity and the fluid movement of both within".
> 
> Yikes!


I feel the same way on the rare occasions I am in a church


----------



## lharder (Mar 21, 2015)

Oldtimer said:


> lharder makes some good points.
> 
> Also holding alternate views can in fact be a pretty good business model. Here we have the Bee Queen making $4,608 for a days work, certainly not an amount to be sneezed at. She has shown innovation and a good business head thinking up this model, it may well be her full time job and she probably pays income tax. Likewise there are others with non mainstream beekeeping ideas making a good dollar at whatever it is they do, if they are dealing with hobbyists and other folks who think they are getting a good time, the customer will go home satisfied.


Maybe you could do a similar thing in New Zealand. A OT king bee dancer  Or perhaps a wizardly kind of theme would be more suitable. 

Do it right and opportunity for sexual misadventures could go up significantly. And from an evolution point of view, that is the most important gauge of success. 

We all know I'm kidding right?


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

OT might find some difficulty finding a suitable target audience willing to pay $288 a ticket to see _HIM_ engage in similar activity. :lpf:

k:


----------



## JRG13 (May 11, 2012)

lharder said:


> It can be about genetics, different selection filters are used, its going to affect genetics.
> 
> The open vs closed mating is about relative gene flow. I would guess most bee genetic environments are somewhat chaotic because of all the bee movement. Limit it and local bees would converge on a survival solution. There would still be variance, but it would narrow. Its the chaotic genetic environment that a breeder is fighting against, or if he is swimming upstream as to his local situation. This could a TF person in a sea of migratory bees, or a more trivial situation of breeding for golden bees when most local bees are black. In these situations I can see the use of A.I. However, this limits the possibilities. Open breeding widens the scope of natural selective experimentation, leading to new possibly good, possibly bad combinations. The bad ones get washed out but the good ones are useful. It also keeps traits going that may not be good today, but may be good 5 years down the road. In terms of long term viability a better solution, even if short term losses are greater.


II is just a tool to help push your breeding population or to make new stocks for evaluation. It's not a replacement for natural selection, it's a way to narrow and concentrate your desired traits down quickly which you can then build your selection populations off of a lot more quickly and effectively then say taking all your colonies and using the bond the method to narrow it down to a scant few hives while losing the rest. I know a lot of people think that just not treating will solve the problem, but in the scope of running a large commercial operation or even a small one, it's quite an idiotic approach when you have actual breeding tools and methods to work with.


----------



## lharder (Mar 21, 2015)

JRG13 said:


> II is just a tool to help push your breeding population or to make new stocks for evaluation. It's not a replacement for natural selection, it's a way to narrow and concentrate your desired traits down quickly which you can then build your selection populations off of a lot more quickly and effectively then say taking all your colonies and using the bond the method to narrow it down to a scant few hives while losing the rest. I know a lot of people think that just not treating will solve the problem, but in the scope of running a large commercial operation or even a small one, it's quite an idiotic approach when you have actual breeding tools and methods to work with.


I essentially agree with you. Maybe we become really nuanced when we understand better when to use what tool.


----------



## JRG13 (May 11, 2012)

It depends how you approach it and how you want to find your resistance I guess. In a larger operation you have more selection power and can narrow it down quicker before you start screening, where as a smaller operation might take 1-2 years just to build the populations to actually look at to narrow down to a few breeder queens, if you're lucky. At the same time though, you need to think about how to maximize your selection power and production of bees so you when you actually get there, you can do something meaningful with the good queens you find.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

JRG13 said:


> II is just a tool to help push your breeding population or to make new stocks for evaluation. It's not a replacement for natural selection, it's a way to narrow and concentrate your desired traits down quickly which you can then build your selection populations off of a lot more quickly and effectively then say taking all your colonies and using the bond the method to narrow it down to a scant few hives while losing the rest.


Point well said JRG13, both II, and bond method, are ways to (attempt) to eliminate undesired gentics and concentrate desired genetics. To me, both of them, plus other methods such as flooding an area with particular drones, have their place, but at the same time I'm wary of all these methods, although we have to do them.

The difference between human styled breeding programs of most animals, and the way nature does it, is a typical human breeding program will breed from the most desired selected few, (classic bond theory is you lose 90% of your bees yearly for a period then losses start dropping) whereas nature mostly takes the long approach, by removing the worst at the bottom end. In that way it's much more likely a good genetic diversity can be maintained, while slowly moving in the desired direction.

The natural approach has turned bees from Africa into carniolans, italians, and the other breeds we are familiar with, but took a long time to do it. It is also not fully known how much human intervention there may have been in this process down the centuries also. Even a simple skep keeper of hundreds of years ago may have chosen to kill and harvest the hive that stung him and keep the one that didn't.


----------

