# Is the European Honey Bee domestic or wild?



## bluegrass (Aug 30, 2006)

In order to keep another thread on topic I thought that it would be interesting to see what the consensus is around here about honey bees and whether they are domestic or not. The question is a simple yes or no and because Vbulletin allows Moderators to edit poll results I have made the results public so you can see that your own vote went into, and stays in the proper category. 

Feel free to post comments to debate the topic.

From Merriam Webster Domestic: to adapt (an animal or plant) to life in intimate association with and to the advantage of humans.


----------



## bluegrass (Aug 30, 2006)

I would be interested in knowing every bodies reasoning for believing that they are wild. I presented the reasons that they are Domestic in the other thread, so lets hear what makes them wild.

To recap: 


> Domestication involves selective breeding to meet the needs of humans where because of human interference; the natural evolutionary path was altered. With bees we have bees selectively breeding them for at least 3000 years to produce more honey, swarm less, sting less, etc.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

I voted yes but if left on there own it wouldn't take long for them to become wild. I don't mean to muddy the water but are you trying to say that if bees were left on their own they couldn't survive in the wild for long? That I would disagree with.


----------



## bluegrass (Aug 30, 2006)

No not at all. All I am saying is that they are domestic, not wild. The honey bee that we keep in our hives were not created in the beginning when god created the heaven and earth. They were developed from wild bees by man with selective breeding. Just like dogs from wolves, cattle from bovine species, chickens from wild game birds, house cats from wild cats.

Their temperaments have been improved, production has been improved, disease resistance is being improved.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

It sounds like an Adam and Eve story but isn't it the same for humans. Hasn't every multi celled organism changed over time? My wife thinks all males are domesticated wild animals that can very easily go back to wild.


----------



## bluegrass (Aug 30, 2006)

Yes all organisms change over time, but the key difference is that the change is intentional and selected by man to fit mans needs. 

I think humans are de-evolving. The smartest people in our society have the least number of offspring.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

I think you Poll Calculator is messed up. First it says 1 to 6 of 6. Then when I voted it says I already voted and that 9 votes have been entered 44.4% to 55.5%.

How about another Poll? Are feral bees domestic or wild?

Comparisons have been made between feral pigs, feral cats, feral dogs, etc. and domesticated pigs, cats, and, dogs. Then saying the same is true w/ honeybees. I think the problem may be that there is a difference between "feral" and "wild". I believe that wild horses or cattle relatives are inherently different from their relatives which have been domesticated and allowed to become feral, gone back to the wild. Feral cats and dogs may be beyond untame, but domesaticated is not a wild animal tamed. They are fundamentaly different.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

If your bees require treatment to survive, then I'd say yes, your bees are fully domesticated and reliant upon your continuing interference and management for survival.

My bees do not require such interference.

*Other.


----------



## bluegrass (Aug 30, 2006)

If it is feral it is wild, that does not change the fact that they are from a domestic source and should not intentionally be allowed to go feral. It also does not change the fact that if brought back into captivity they are still domestic bees. 

Mustangs are a great example. They are domestic horses that have gone wild, they can be brought back into domestication and with a little effort can be used once again to do what any similar horse could do, pull, ride etc. Are they damaging to the environment that they were introduced into? Yes that is why the BLM rounds them up and auctions them off regularly.


----------



## bluegrass (Aug 30, 2006)

Definition of feral:
fe·ral /ˈferəl/ adjective
1 : of, relating to, or *resembling a wild beast *
2 — used to describe an animal (such as a cat or dog) that *has escaped and become wild *

An animal can't be feral without having been domestic.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Please illustrate the difference between feral and domestic honeybees. Thank you.


----------



## beeware10 (Jul 25, 2010)

one lives in a tree and the other lives in a hive. same bee. never saw a pet bee.


----------



## bluegrass (Aug 30, 2006)

If you go to Africa and bring the Cape Bee back to the USA and put it in a box, you are keeping a wild species of bee in a box. 
If it leaves your box it is now and Invasive wild species of bee. If you keep it in the box for 20 years, and breed it so that it begins to have traits that it originally did not have when you got it, it is a domestic Cape Bee. 
If it now leaves your box and moves into your neighbors ceiling it is a feral Cape bee. 
If you recapture it and put it back into the box, it becomes a recaptured domestic Cape Bee.
If it cross bred (not possible but for the sake of the argument) with an Italian and you returned the offspring to Africa is would be ICB (Italianized Cape Bee).


----------



## Fusion_power (Jan 14, 2005)

The U.S. supreme court holds that bees are Ferae Naturae i.e. the same as a zebra or a lion or any other animal that has been caught and put in containment. You can call them domestic all day long and they will still be captured wild animals. Do you want to have a conversation about those "domestic" buffalo in your local zoo? If you get in the pen with them they will show you just how domestic they really are.

DarJones


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

I have heard they are not too domestic when they are used for meat either.


----------



## bluegrass (Aug 30, 2006)

Fusion_power said:


> The U.S. supreme court holds that bees are Ferae Naturae i.e. the same as a zebra or a lion or any other animal that has been caught and put in containment.


What case?


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Aren't AHB a hybrid of Apis mellifera mellifera and Apis mellifera scutellata? Both are kept, aren't they? So what is it about scutellata that makes it wild when mellifera isn't?

Apis capensis isn't kept, is it? Can it mate w/ other Apis?


----------



## bluegrass (Aug 30, 2006)

A.M. Scutellata is resistant to domestication... even with cross breeding the undesirable traits remain intact. 

Apis Capensis takes over other bee hives. They don't have to mate at all, all the workers can lay female eggs without mating.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

All? I thought that some could under stress conditions.


----------



## bluegrass (Aug 30, 2006)

sqkcrk said:


> All? I thought that some could under stress conditions.


They all are capable of doing so. This is why they are so destructive in South Africa, social parasitism. Stress conditions are not required as I understand it.


----------



## Ted Kretschmann (Feb 2, 2011)

Bees are feral by nature. TED


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Polls only establish what people think. They don't isolate facts.


----------



## bluegrass (Aug 30, 2006)

sqkcrk said:


> Polls only establish what people think. They don't isolate facts.


Correct. the "nos" are wrong either way


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

"It depends on what the meaning of the words 'is' is." –Bill Clinton


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Of course.


bluegrass said:


> Correct. the "nos" are wrong either way


----------



## Barry Digman (May 21, 2003)

bluegrass said:


> ... and because Vbulletin allows Moderators to edit poll results I have made the results public so you can see that your own vote went into, and stays in the proper category.



Why would a moderator want to edit the results of this poll?


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

A conspiracy theory Mr. Digman?

The plot thickens.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

What if you live in Europe?

In Italy for example.

Then the Italian Honeybee would be both wild and domestic.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Is that Honeybee or Honey Bee? Or api du mielle?


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

I'll bet if the bees could vote, they would vote for "wild".


----------



## Guest (Dec 29, 2011)

This has the makings of another "White Man's Flies" thread. :banana:


----------



## Ted Kretschmann (Feb 2, 2011)

I think people have gone "wild". Heck I aint even house broken yet. TED


----------



## bluegrass (Aug 30, 2006)

Michael Bush said:


> I'll bet if the bees could vote, they would vote for "wild".


I bet those Friesians of yours would also 

All domestic animals still have a wild side to them, they were developed from wild animals... Try startling a Pitbull...


----------



## bluegrass (Aug 30, 2006)

Barry Digman said:


> Why would a moderator want to edit the results of this poll?


We have feral Moderators around here. 

I had it happen once in the past with a public poll I put up, so now to save someone the embarrassment, I disclose right in the thread that it is public.


----------



## bluegrass (Aug 30, 2006)

WLC said:


> What if you live in Europe?
> 
> In Italy for example.
> 
> Then the Italian Honeybee would be both wild and domestic.


Absolutely if there were wild ones still around. But there would be noticeable differences between feral and native wild.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

bluegrass said:


> But there would be noticeable differences between feral and native wild.


Such as?


----------



## bluegrass (Aug 30, 2006)

sqkcrk said:


> Such as?


For starters they are all dead.. wiped out by Acarine. But they would be swarmy, more aggressive, smaller honey crops... much smaller colonies. 

Read Bro Adams, search of the best strain of honey bee and you get a pretty good picture of the traits that we have bred out.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>I bet those Friesians of yours would also

I'll be my cats would not consider themselves domestic. I'll bet my dog and my horses would. They like being cared for and obviously consider themselves to belong to people.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

bluegrass said:


> Read ...


Telling people to go read something really gets on their nerves. If you want to present a point, summarize or quote your source.


----------



## FlowerPlanter (Aug 3, 2011)

"Yes"
I believe that they have been bred and hybrid for certain traits. No different than cats, dogs, cows and horses. 

When cats, dogs and horses are released or escape they go feral and are free to be captured by anyone and redomesticated.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

What about the Norway Rat? Domestic or not? How about Lab Rats?


----------



## RiodeLobo (Oct 11, 2010)

Perhaps it is more of a symbiotic relationship versus domestication?


----------



## bluegrass (Aug 30, 2006)

sqkcrk said:


> How about Lab Rats?


Lab rats are domestic, they were specifically bred for a purpose. White rats with pink eyes do not occur in nature. Just like calm honey bees with huge honey reserves do not occur in nature.


----------



## Fusion_power (Jan 14, 2005)

> Just like calm honey bees with huge honey reserves do not occur in nature.


Have to disagree bluegrass, the reason we can select calm productive honey bees is because they already exist in nature. If you look back at the records, Carniolans were widely known as calm and productive bees well before anything resembling breeding was done with them. Take a look at ABJ in the early 1900's and you will find numerous articles discussing various races of bees and their strengths and weaknesses.

Said another way, when it comes to calm productive bees, it was not a matter of breeding for these traits, rather it was a matter of not breeding from the aggressive non-productive colonies. In other words, the traits were already widely available.

We could have a different discussion about the Apis Mellifera Mellifera that was prevalent in the U.S. and were derived from the earliest imports of honeybees. We could have a different discussion about the Cyprian bees that were imported in the very early 1900's. Both races are unequivocally aggressive. But for Italians and Carniolans the record is clear that they were valued for their non-stinging traits.

DarJones


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

May I change my Vote?

Were all beekeepers to walk away from their hives of bees, how many would survive for how long? What would be left, would they be domesticated?


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

That was my point Mark. 'Domestic' bees won't survive two years without treatment. I've had mine for almost nine.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

bluegrass said:


> Lab rats are domestic, they were specifically bred for a purpose. White rats with pink eyes do not occur in nature. Just like calm honey bees with huge honey reserves do not occur in nature.


Have you seen the NOVA program about the Domestication of a group of Foxes, originally kept for their fur. The profound changes over many generations of breeding for certain traits is amazing.


----------



## bluegrass (Aug 30, 2006)

Fusion_power said:


> Have to disagree bluegrass, the reason we can select calm productive honey bees is because they already exist in nature.


The trait has to be present to select for it... we cannot breed something out of nothing. 

Compare the volume of traditional European hives like the British National, WBC, Smith hive etc. to the Langs we use today. You will notice that Europes hives are about 1/3 the volume of the Lang as we know it today. That is because the Brits are were closer to what was wild stock before we started breeding for larger colonys. http://www.deanforestbeekeepers.co.uk/sitefiles/docs/HiveGuide.pdf

The British have adapted their hive to the larger colony and now have what they call a 12x14 which is a deeper traditional British National hive.

Solomon: Your bees survive without treatment because you have selected for that quality, not because they are not domestic. Didn't you say in your treatment free guide to start with multiple hives and breed from the ones that survive... That is trait selection.

I will repeat that any house cat can live in the wild on it's own without any interference from humans. They will happily go fourth and multiply.


----------



## bluegrass (Aug 30, 2006)

Langstroth carefully calculated hive volume when he invented his hive. This is what he patented. Do you think you could keep bees in it now without them swarming?


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Do you think you could keep bees in a 55 gallon drum w/out swarming?

If swarming tendency has been selected out of bees why do they keep swarming? Why haven't we produced a bee that doesn't swarm at all?


----------



## Fusion_power (Jan 14, 2005)

Were you to go back and study the British Brown Bee of the 1800's, you would indeed find that a National hive was all they needed. Unfortunately, that does not carry over to Carniolans, Italians, or most other variants of A.M.M. If you read Brother Adam's books you will find where he records that the British bee was decimated by acarine, then the bees were replaced with colonies from mainland Europe. Britain no longer has a bee that corresponds to the British Brown which is a very sad state of affairs. 

Once again, you are trying to compare apples to oranges. Langstroth determined the size of his hive by measuring natural cavities to see what the bees needed. He was working with A.M.M. bees that were NOT bred for much of anything except that they swarmed a lot. We can conclude that the size of our modern hive was determined based on natural cavities used by distinctly un-modern bees.

DarJones


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

sqkcrk said:


> Why haven't we produced a bee that doesn't swarm at all?


It doesn't sound like the species would last very long.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

bluegrass said:


> Solomon: Your bees survive without treatment because you have selected for that quality, not because they are not domestic. Didn't you say in your treatment free guide to start with multiple hives and breed from the ones that survive.


So you're saying I let the domesticated ones die out? I'm undomesticating them. Sounds good. I like it. I think that's pretty close to what I said earlier. 

I keep undomesticated bees.


----------



## Corvair68 (May 10, 2011)

bluegrass said:


> Lab rats are domestic, they were specifically bred for a purpose. White rats with pink eyes do not occur in nature. Just like calm honey bees with huge honey reserves do not occur in nature.


White rats with red eyes do occur in nature... they are called albinos just like albino people, albino squirrels, albino snakes... They just bred albinos with other albinos the keep the trait going.


----------



## bluegrass (Aug 30, 2006)

Solomon Parker said:


> So you're saying I let the domesticated ones die out? I'm undomesticating them. Sounds good. I like it. I think that's pretty close to what I said earlier.
> 
> I keep undomesticated bees.


No

I am saying some bees have a resistance to mites and don't need to be treated. You are selecting for that resistance. Bring in a hive of good old fashioned EFB and see how long your hives last!


----------



## bluegrass (Aug 30, 2006)

Corvair68 said:


> White rats with red eyes do occur in nature... they are called albinos just like albino people, albino squirrels, albino snakes... They just bred albinos with other albinos the keep the trait going.


Albinism is a genetic defect.

If you really care to educate yourself about domestic Rats: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fancy_rat


----------



## bluegrass (Aug 30, 2006)

sqkcrk said:


> Why haven't we produced a bee that doesn't swarm at all?


Some hives don't swarm. I have had hives headed by the same queen for 3-4 years. I think if beeks didn't requeen at every whim we would see a lot more hives that don't swarm.


----------



## bluegrass (Aug 30, 2006)

Most Entomologists seem to be on Vacation for winter break, but I did get a response from Harvard



> Hi Brad, this is a very interesting question, and I am glad you raised it. I must say that I can offer my opinion as an evolutionary biologist, and entomologist, rather than as a bee expert of course. Assuming we are speaking about bees in North America, I think that question of whether or not Apis mellifera is domestic is secondary to their impact, now and in the future, on the populations of native bee species here. I think I can speak for bee taxonomists and ecologists in saying that this impact has been devastating for native bees which have been displaced by A. mellifera, with likely side effects on native plants that relied on them for pollination but which are not visited by the honeybee. This may be a surprising perspective, but it is one that is universal I think I can say in the scientific community. So the question of whether or not the honeybee is domesticated or not is moot, at least where they are not native. Nevertheless, the question of domesticity, in an evolutionary genetic sense, is interesting enough to warrant asking a bee expert like Gene Robinson. at U. Illinois (http://www.life.illinois.edu/robinson/). I will guess that they may very well pass the domesticated test in the sense that the bees we keep are probably behaviorally and genetically distinct from whatever, wild populations they arose from, in ways that are conducive to being husbanded. But, I am not an expert on this topic. Thanks again for writing.
> Best
> Brian


And Gene Robinson's response:



> Most people consider honey bees "semi-domesticated." They are domesticated in the sense that they have been shaped extensively by artificial selection. But not completely domesticated in the sense that they are, and always have been, capable of living on their own, unlike a cow, for example.
> 
> Sincerely,
> Gene Robinson


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

bluegrass said:


> I am saying some bees have a resistance to mites and don't need to be treated.


I keep bees that don't need maintenance, the very definition of feral. If they can't survive like wild bees, they simply won't survive.


----------



## beeware10 (Jul 25, 2010)

while many will disagree where do the wild bees come from other than swarms from beekeepers? domestic bees swarm and move into vacant trees etc and then they are called wild. this may not be always the case but the majority are a result of this.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Semi-domesticated. I like that answer. It's a better fit, imo.


----------



## Corvair68 (May 10, 2011)

bluegrass said:


> Albinism is a genetic defect.
> 
> If you really care to educate yourself about domestic Rats: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fancy_rat


A genetic defect that occurs in nature and has no bearing on whether the rat is domestic or not. It's just a really bad example that in no way supports the theory. Rattus norvegicus which the lab rat is also continues to thrive in the wild. I have owned several domestic rats, fancy, albino, and others... I didn't really care for the white ones though, they kinda creeped me out.


----------



## bluegrass (Aug 30, 2006)

sqkcrk said:


> Semi-domesticated. I like that answer. It's a better fit, imo.


His answer after I reposed the question:

Me



> Thanks Gene
> What is your professional opinion? A house cat can live on it's own, so can any hog, and horses. All of which we would agree are domesticated.
> What is it about a honeybee that separates it from these other animals?





> I wasn't aware that any representative of all three of those groups can easily live on its own. But if that is how you defined domesticated, then honey bees are definitely domesticated.
> I've always called them "semi" because of that consideration.


----------



## bluegrass (Aug 30, 2006)

Solomon Parker said:


> I keep bees that don't need maintenance, the very definition of feral. If they can't survive like wild bees, they simply won't survive.


So do you think that if all crop production in the US ceased tomorrow, that the honey bee would survive? It is heavily dependent on crop land to survive If we let all the cleared land in this country go back to brush and trees they would definitely vanish. They do very poorly on forested land. 

So they are dependent on human activity for their survival, one way or another.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Wasn't aware that they could live on their own? Maybe we need to determine whether they do or not. Has anyone ever tagged and studied cats abandoned by their owners? Horses? Pigs?

The one time I helped harvest an unmanaged pig the rest of the group was killed or rounded up and returned to their owner before they had a chance to winter over. I don't know who they would have mated w/ to continue the line, except w/in the family group.

So, how do feral pigs become feral pigs from domesticated pigs? By mating w/ wild pigs? Or, are feral pigs simply unmanaged pigs not used to being handled by humans thereby appearing to be wild? And, after capture, their offspring would be indistingquishable from other domesticated pigs?


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

bluegrass said:


> It is heavily dependent on crop land to survive


:lpf: Um, no. 



bluegrass said:


> If we let all the cleared land in this country go back to brush and trees they would definitely vanish. They do very poorly on forested land.


Back? The natural state of the world is not brush and trees everywhere. You obviously live somewhere where forest fires and prairie fires are not part of the natural ecology. Not to mention desert bees. You're working on a severe lack of information.



bluegrass said:


> So they are dependent on human activity for their survival, one way or another.




You're obviously working from your own back yard. Widen your horizons.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

bluegrass said:


> So do you think that if all crop production in the US ceased tomorrow, that the honey bee would survive? It is heavily dependent on crop land to survive If we let all the cleared land in this country go back to brush and trees they would definitely vanish. They do very poorly on forested land.
> 
> So they are dependent on human activity for their survival, one way or another.


So you are assumimg that all of the clover would disappear too? There is plenty of forage not agriculturally provided. Basswood, locust, goldenrod, loostrife, etc. There was very little agriculturally provided forage when bees were brought here in 1619, so I don't think you hypotheosis holds water.

Besides, were all agriculture to cease tomorrow, not all land will return to forest. There is much of this country that was open plain, unforested land. and, even in the forests there were open spaces, pastures.

I have yds that are some distance, miles, from the nearest farm land and they do well. So I question your idea.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

bluegrass said:


> It is heavily dependent on crop land to survive If we let all the cleared land in this country go back to brush and trees they would definitely vanish. They do very poorly on forested land.


It is quite the opposite. Monoculture is killing the bees even without pesticides. If all you ate was corn (actually we are) we would be unhealthy. Actually we are. Wild land is best for bees in general.


----------



## Daniel Y (Sep 12, 2011)

As for the cat, pig and horse. Their survival would depend partially on their environment. The horse and the cat make a good comparison. Here in Nevada we have wild horses. this is actually an environment that it is difficult for much of anything to survive. At least in the high mountain dessert valleys where the horses tend to thrive. They are suited to living on poor foliage to graze on and long distances between water sources. In comparison a cat woudl not do well in that environment requiring more shelter more abundant water sources and better food sources.
The mountains would most likely be more suitable to the cat. In fact we have wild cats in the mountains here.
The pig is another whole story in itself. It's body shape and hair actually change. it starts growing tusks. And this does not mean it's offspring have these changes. the individual pig itself will actually change shape. Very strange.


----------



## Daniel Y (Sep 12, 2011)

I looked up the definition of domesticated and this is what I found. I am not saying these are the best definitions but they are at least definitions.

1. 
tame animal: to accustom an animal to living with or near people, usually as a farm animal or pet
2. 
accustom somebody to household life: to accustom somebody to home life or housework ( humorous )
3. 
biology adapt plants or animals for humans: to cultivate plants or raise animals, selectively breeding them to increase their suitability for human requirements

As far as the bee is concerend I don't see either 1 or 2 apply. Bees are kept but hey woudl not bee considered accustomed to living near humans or as pets. They may tolerate the presence of humans to a point. The keeping of bees dos not alter that natural tolerance.

number three is a bit sticky. IF you take the definition word for word. Has the bee been bred for use by humans? I have seen at least some information that says yes it has. The question that this leaves is what percentage of all bees being kept have been subject to this breeding? At the very least it could be said that at least some bees are domesticated. Domesticated on the basis that they have been bred "to increase their suitability for human requirements".
Not to be confused with the far more common manipulated to increase there suitability for human requirements.
So I guess I have to change my vote and say yes it does look like the Honey Bee is domesticated.


----------



## Fusion_power (Jan 14, 2005)

> A beekeeper's first tasks must be the study of bee behaviour and the adaptation of himself if he wishes for success.


I find it interesting that bluegrass makes such an argument over whether or not bees are domestic while maintaining the above tagline. The very epitome of a wild animal is that we have to adapt ourselves to the animal. The epitome of domestic is that we adapt the animal to ourselves. I suspect that bluegrass really enjoys a good argument.

The discussion re wild pigs has another twist that needs to be considered. We definitely have domestic pigs that under some conditions can go feral and survive in the wild. But these feral pigs are not even close to the level of problem that wild hogs present when descended from populations of truly wild pigs that were imported to the U.S. for hunting. The wild pigs freely interbreed with existing populations of feral pigs who escaped from captivity. The interbred pigs behave more like the wild forbears and cause environmental damage far more because they are adapted to living in the wild. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wild_boar

The single major determinant of whether a species is domesticated is whether or not it can readily survive in the wild without man. I submit that any and all colonies of honeybees can and will survive in the wild. I stipulate that infestation with varroa and whether or not a colony survives based on such infestation has nothing to do with honeybees being domestic.

To state that bees do not readily survive in forested areas is downright blind. Bees survive wherever they can find food and shelter. There are plenty of crown trees that produce abundant crops of honey. Here in the southeast, Yellow Poplar aka Tulip Poplar is a huge source of surplus honey. It thrives best in low areas with lots of water and heavy tree cover. Sourwood is another good source of honey that usually occurs as understory trees. Most of the forest areas of the Eastern U.S. were originally composed of Oak, Hickory, and Maple. Oak and Hickory are pretty much useless to bees, but maple produces an abundant early spring crop of nectar and pollen. Between maple, sourwood, and tulip poplar, I can make a huge crop of honey where there are no cultivated fields anywhere nearby.

This brings on the question of whether or not bluegrass is domestic. According to most women, men are semi-domestic animals that readily go feral. So bluegrass, did your wife domesticate you? or are you already feral? I happen to be unmarried but happily in a close relationship with a very loving and understanding woman. I guess I am domestic.

DarJones


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Didn't Tom Seeley base a lot of his work on bees from The Arnot Forest near Cornell University, Ithaca, NY? Those cols were surviving in a forest. bluegrass' statement is rash and bold, w/ all due respect. Similar to the "most books say bees are domesticated" statement. Not that others don't do the same from time to time. So I hold no ill will.


----------



## bluegrass (Aug 30, 2006)

Good post Fusion:

I am an avid hunter and have hunted Feral Hogs in several states across this country. While breeding with the Russian boar has played a roll the last 20 years, We have had feral hogs loose in this country since just after Columbus Landed and these were not wild to start with. The states the Russian boar is having the biggest impact are areas like NY state where the standard run of the mill feral hog could not survive without the cold tolerances of the Russian Boar. I plan to check NY off of the hog hunting check list this coming year. We plan to hunt Cortland, Onondaga, Cayuga and Tioga Counties. 

I am well aware of honey crops being made from trees like locust and Poplar and have kept bees in three very different states. I am not a migrator, my hives are placed and stay put. You can move hives to a mature stand of locust in the spring for about a week, but they cannot stay on it all season without other good sources of nectar around. Goldenrod also doesn't grow in mature forests, it requires sunlight and does really well on the edges of forests and in clear cuts.

The history of migratory beekeeping dates back to the days of flat boats on the major rivers prior to the huge expanses of ag land in this country. Prior to farmers realizing they could boost yields with good pollination and long before pollination contracts were big business. Back then beekeepers had to move hives to make money because a single area could not sustain a good honey crop.

The honey bee migration across this land coincided with the activities of early settlers. This is two fold, 1st the settlers moved the bees with their progression across the land. Even though the bee was allowed to swarm, it did not extend out very far beyond the progression of the pioneers on it's own. The second dynamic is that the settlers cleared land as they went, set up farms, created opening in the forest that the bees needed.

Ever do removals for people? The bulk of my calls come from urban areas.... Not because we keep large amount of bees in urban areas, but because the bees tend to move towards the best cultivated sources of nectar and that is within the suburbs of the cities. 

I used to Line bees as a kid and can assure you from experience that you never find a bee tree deep within the forest. A few hundred yards from the edges max. They only choose to live in the forest for lack of a better hollow tree within a field. 

I will compromise on this with the term Semi-domestic. But only because I could reason that all feral animals, through the process of natural selection, would revert back completely to a wild state given enough time. And I could reason that any of the above listed feral animals are also semi-domestic as they are in the process of reverting back through natural selection. Like I said I have hunted hogs, and it is hard to see them as anything except fierce destructive beasts even knowing their history.


----------



## bluegrass (Aug 30, 2006)

sqkcrk said:


> Didn't Tom Seeley base a lot of his work on bees from The Arnot Forest near Cornell University, Ithaca, NY? Those cols were surviving in a forest. bluegrass' statement is rash and bold, w/ all due respect. Similar to the "most books say bees are domesticated" statement. Not that others don't do the same from time to time. So I hold no ill will.


Arnot is only 4000 acres and pretty well surrounding by a lot of developed land. How much land can a single colony of bees cover? Much more than that.


----------



## Fusion_power (Jan 14, 2005)

Thank you Bluegrass, spoken like a gentleman and a scholar. I too can compromise on semi-domestic.



> Not because we keep large amount of bees in urban areas, but because the bees tend to move towards the best cultivated sources of nectar and that is within the suburbs of the cities.


This could also be argued that bees move toward places that provide abundant places to build their nest. Most houses are candidates and there are lots of houses in suburbia.

DarJones


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Solomon Parker said:


> I keep bees that don't need maintenance, the very definition of feral. If they can't survive like wild bees, they simply won't survive.


Really?

Then all the ones you had that died must have been domesticated.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

That's my case.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

I see. Your case is that you had domesticated bees, but they died because you didn't care for them.

Which left you with the non domesticated ones.

I don't really buy that.


----------



## Corvair68 (May 10, 2011)

bluegrass said:


> So do you think that if all crop production in the US ceased tomorrow, that the honey bee would survive? It is heavily dependent on crop land to survive If we let all the cleared land in this country go back to brush and trees they would definitely vanish. They do very poorly on forested land.
> 
> So they are dependent on human activity for their survival, one way or another.


If we let all the commercial crop production cease they would probably be better off. They would be foraging from a wider range of food sources rather than just almonds, soy beans or apples etc. It's like a person trying to get all their nutrition from limited sources. It would eventually have a negative affect on health. There are thousands of beekeepers in the U.S. and other countries who have apiaries in forest areas that are doing just as well if not better than people who bees are in commercial farming areas. Human activity has hurt their ability to survive. They have been around millions of years longer than we have. Also, When bees abscond, aren't they essentially migrating to a place they feel is more suitable to their survival.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

Oldtimer said:


> I see. Your case is that you had domesticated bees, but they died because you didn't care for them.


If that's the way you want to look at it, it seems to fit the facts.
Unless you have a better explanation?


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

The only thing is though, you must have started out w/ undomesticated bees to begin w/, right?


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

This whole thread has been bluegrass' attempt to push a point. Ultimately, he/she is wrong, but that doesn't mean he/she won't keep trying.

Bees are wild animals. You can't keep them in a cage.


----------



## Ted Kretschmann (Feb 2, 2011)

Nor in the little white boxes we like to provide for them. The box is just a way for management. The bees could care less and would be just as happy in a hollow tree, rotten stump, wall of a house or even a rocky nook. And when no such site is found, nest out under a limb exposed. FERAL BY NATURE. TED


----------



## NDnewbeek (Jul 4, 2008)

More interesting to me would be the question:

How does our perception (wild or domestic) influence our management (decisions, overall philosophy, etc.)? 

It seems that both perceptions come with biases - some good and some bad. If these biases aren't recognize (and accounted for in the decision making process), they will almost certainly have an effect on management and ultimately outcome.


----------



## bluegrass (Aug 30, 2006)

This whole thread was started because of a comment in another thread about somebodies goal being to let their hives swarm in order to help the environment. I responded to that with an offhand comment that bees are livestock and that allowing them to swarm does not help the environment at all. They being non-native and the fact that they displace native pollinators, are not necessarily the best pollinator of some native plants.

They are necessary, from an agricultural standpoint, to us as a society, but they are detrimental to this environment that we have introduced them to.Intentional swarming and allowing them to go feral, is both ignorant and irresponsible.


----------



## NDnewbeek (Jul 4, 2008)

I would also say, that the question, "Are bees wild or domesticated?" is too general. 

I think a more appropriate question is, "Are these bees in front of me (whether they are in a box, tree, drum, etc.) wild or domestic?" 

In the same way the question can be asked about other organisms - Are these hogs in front of me wild or domestic? If they are in a pen, then the more correct answer is that, although they may have been running wild only 2 hours ago, at a minimum, there is an attempt to make them domestic. If they are in a forest, then again, at a minimum, they are in the process of becoming wild.

Bees, I think, are similar in that respect. Certainly, there are wild colonies of bees out there. By the same token, there are plenty of colonies that, if released to the wild, could not survive very long without human intervention. 

So, are YOUR bees wild or domestic? I think that the answer depends on how you manage them. If you are treating them, feeding them, perhaps even marking your queen (analogous to branding, couldn't you say?) - then at a minimum, I would think that they are in the process of being domesticated. If they are not able to survive without that assistance, then maybe they are domesticated already.

If you do nothing but provide the box and take the honey, then maybe they are wild (or more wild). I try to manage my bees in as 'wild' a state as possible - but up here, purely wild bees don't last long, especially when winter hits. So, feeding and occasional treatments are necessary if I want to continue to 'keep' bees (does the term bee'keeper' imply at least some domestication?).

Given that, I consider MY bees to be at least somewhat domesticated.


----------



## NDnewbeek (Jul 4, 2008)

bluegrass said:


> but they are detrimental to this environment that we have introduced them to.


Actually, this is not necessarily true. It is generally true in the short term and there are plenty of examples of the impact of invasive species (mongoose in Hawaii, zebra mussels to North America, etc.) and the detrimental effect can be permanent (or semi-permanent) for some systems. 

However, nature is not stagnant - it continues to change and adjust. At some point, enough time passes whereby the introduced organism's effect is no longer felt. The environment and the organisms in it evolve in the presence of the introduced organism and, over time, adapt to the new species (or go extinct). Eventually, the introduced organism is simply another component of the natural environment.

By way of example, horses were 'introduced' to Asia naturally by crossing the Bering land bridge some million or more years ago. At the time, they were certainly an invasive species which the native plants and animals had no experience with. Now, however, they are considered a natural part of the ecosystem.

Have bees reached that point in North America? I don't know. The real question is, "Has enough time passed since introduction so that the negative effects of the introduction are no longer reflected in the environment?"

Perhaps - I hear all the time about how bees are so critical to plant propagation, both wild and in agriculture. A better question might be "Would the removal of honeybees at this point be damaging to the natural environment?" I think that if the answer is 'yes', then they aren't really an introduced species anymore, but a necessary part of the natural environment.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

bluegrass said:


> This whole thread was started because of a comment in another thread about somebodies goal being to let their hives swarm in order to help the environment. I responded to that with an offhand comment that bees are livestock and that allowing them to swarm does not help the environment at all. They being non-native and the fact that they displace native pollinators, are not necessarily the best pollinator of some native plants.
> 
> They are necessary, from an agricultural standpoint, to us as a society, but they are detrimental to this environment that we have introduced them to.Intentional swarming and allowing them to go feral, is both ignorant and irresponsible.


I agree w/ this, mostly. Being an invasive species, as nonNative Americans are, as are all the nonNative species of plants and animals brought to this continent in one way or another, Apis melliferal mellifera may not be "beneficial" to the natural environment, in the state that the natural environment was when Europeans first arrived. 

There are better pollinators of some native plants, such as cranberries. Even tho honeybees are better at providing better pollination coverage of these plants on a commercially grown basis.

Whether swarming, resulting in the establishing of more honeybee colonys in the environment. is detrimental to the environment, or more specifically the native pollinators, has this been studied and shown to be true? Perhaps the different species have their own niches and competition is not that detrimental.

This last Summer we had the most beautiful and abundant Locust bloom that I can recall and it didn't rain every day, as it usually does. The trees in my back yard were alive w/ bees. None of which, at the time of observation, were honeybees. And there were 60 colonies w/in 100yds of the trees. That seems like there was no competition between species in that anicdotal(sp?) incidence.


----------



## NDnewbeek (Jul 4, 2008)

sqkcrk said:


> Being an invasive species, as nonNative Americans are,


Actually, 'native' Americans were/are invasive as well. They crossed the Bering Land Bridge from Asia to North America about the time that horses were going the other way. There are no indigenous hominids to North America. In fact, shortly after the time of their introduction, the large North American mammal fauna underwent a mass extinction event. Many theorize that it was the invading people that drove these mammals to extinction (I have some doubts about the theory and am not completely convinced). 

But that makes my point - after a certain amount of time passed, 'native' Americans are considered to be 'natural' components of the environment.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

NDnewbeek said:


> Now, however, they are considered a natural part of the ecosystem.
> 
> Have bees reached that point in North America? I don't know. The real question is, "Has enough time passed since introduction so that the negative effects of the introduction are no longer reflected in the environment?"


Apparently species w/in an invironment can be considered invasive. If one considers NY State as an environmental area, purple loostrife is considered an invasive species even though I have bee books which are quite old and note the loostrife produced in the Hudson Valley.

I have often wondered how long a species has to occupy an area before it no longer is considered invasive. Maybe it's like the 99 year old person who died in Maine, having lived there since he was 6 months old, who was still identified by the headline "New Hampshire Man Dies in Bangor".


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

bluegrass said:


> but they are detrimental to this environment that we have introduced them to.


Are you saying honeybees are detrimental to their environment or ours? I always thought most people felt bees were good for the environment. I am sure some people would not admit it but I think there is more evidence that the only species that is detriment to the environment is human.


----------



## bluegrass (Aug 30, 2006)

sqkcrk said:


> I have often wondered how long a species has to occupy an area before it no longer is considered invasive.


Until it displaces all of its competition and the species that depend on it's competition is also extinct.

So let me put out a hypothetical scenario to ponder.

Lets say we, for the benefit of the environment propagate the honey bee to the point that it is feral all over the country in very large concentrations.The solitary pollinators like the mason bee and others like the Bumble bee go extinct because the honey bee populations are cleaning up all sources of pollen and nectar. 

We are currently making great strides in developing the usefulness of the bumble bee as a crop pollinator for crops that cannot be pollinated by honey bees (hothouse crops and stuff like blueberries which honeybees prefer not to pollinate unless forced to.) So now we have only one means of pollination because the others dies out for lack of food. Then we get hit with a new Disease like Europe did with Acarine in the early 20th century, and it wipes out the honey bee, our only pollinator. Now What?

Or we could be responsible in husbandry of the honey bee and also develop management methods for other pollinators so that we keep them in balance with honey bee populations.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Acebird said:


> Are you saying honeybees are detrimental to their environment or ours?


There's a difference?

bluegrass,
I'm all for respoinsible husbandry of ones livestock, but, don't the nonHoneybee pollintors have their own characteristics which help them survive? Don't some of them, like the alkali bee and the leafcutter bee live where honeybees would find it difficult to survive and thrive? Hylictidae work flowers too small for apis species to get into. There are a number of bee species in the Adirondacks where honeybees aren't suited for. 

So, I don't think we realistically could saturate the environment in the way you propose we consider. Maybe we could, but I doubt that we would. How would it benefit us to do so?

Do you think we already have in localized areas? Where? How does it show itself?


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

bluegrass said:


> So let me put out a hypothetical scenario to ponder.


I can't see how this scenario is possible. As fast as we could over populate an area with honeybees nature will balance it out. CCD could be an effect of over population.


----------



## bluegrass (Aug 30, 2006)

I said it was Hypothetical. But if we all think it can't happen, when it could, it surely would.

Here is a good article on native pollinators: http://dda.delaware.gov/plantind/fo...ManagementforNativeBees-AGuideforDelaware.pdf


----------



## bluegrass (Aug 30, 2006)

sqkcrk said:


> So, I don't think we realistically could saturate the environment in the way you propose we consider. Maybe we could, but I doubt that we would. How would it benefit us to do so?
> 
> Do you think we already have in localized areas? Where? How does it show itself?


I think in the current cases of over population of honey bees we also over populate with crops to support them. UC davis did a study in the early 2000s that showed that high concentrations of honey bees in an area did decrease the populations of native populations within the same area and that it would take a few years with an absence of bees for the native pollinators to recover.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

bluegrass,
did you notice that a lot of those plants on the list, pollinated by native bee species, are not native plants? Kinda interesting.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

It seems that the noes are taking a commanding lead.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

bluegrass said:


> Here is a good article on native pollinators: http://dda.delaware.gov/plantind/fo...ManagementforNativeBees-AGuideforDelaware.pdf


This article points to the destruction that monoculture does to both honeybees and native bees. If man simply overpopulates an area with honeybees it is likely they will die down in population. On the other hand if man eliminates the habitat that any species needs to live that is when the species runs the risk of extinction. This has been proven time and time again. I see no detriment to the environment if swarms get free (in the bee world).


----------



## bluegrass (Aug 30, 2006)

Acebird said:


> I see no detriment to the environment if swarms get free (in the bee world).


So the next question:

Do you see any issue with intentionally allowing bees to swarm?


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

bluegrass said:


> So the next question:
> 
> Do you see any issue with intentionally allowing bees to swarm?


Yes if they are unhealthy, yes if you live in an area that could provide a problem for your neighbors.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Solomon Parker said:


> It seems that the noes are taking a commanding lead.


Good to see you and Ace getting along.


----------



## odfrank (May 13, 2002)

Aren't they domesticated when they are in one of our hives but wild when they swarm out and live in a tree?


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

That's the definition of feral, imo.


----------



## NDnewbeek (Jul 4, 2008)

sqkcrk said:


> I have often wondered how long a species has to occupy an area before it no longer is considered invasive. Maybe it's like the 99 year old person who died in Maine, having lived there since he was 6 months old, who was still identified by the headline "New Hampshire Man Dies in Bangor".


HA! Very true! Here in ND, the locals still refer to my house as belonging to the previous owners, as in, "Oh, you live in the Johnson house" - even though the Johnson's owned the house 40 years ago and there were 3 owners between them and us! 

I suppose I will ALWAYS be considered invasive up here!


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Yup, I'm a forgiener wherever I go. "Yer not from around here. Air ya?"


----------



## Fusion_power (Jan 14, 2005)

you northern furrniers stay northern. us sutherners don't need you.


----------



## Daddy'sBees (Jul 1, 2010)

Odfrank, you hit that nail on the head!!! Ain't it so?


----------



## bluegrass (Aug 30, 2006)

Acebird said:


> Yes if they are unhealthy, yes if you live in an area that could provide a problem for your neighbors.


We are on the same page than.


----------



## Michael Palmer (Dec 29, 2006)

Fusion_power said:


> you northern furrniers stay northern. us sutherners don't need you.



When Tropilaelaps comes..... d


----------

