# TF and AFB, part deux



## JWChesnut (Jul 31, 2013)

[Some] TF advocates are prescribing a deliberate AFB-contaminated comb inoculation to "purify" honeybee genetics.

In a now-buried thread on this sub-forum, I presented a personal story about my observations on the inadvertent cross-contamination of hives with AFB by a TF newbee. 

A more pernicious idea is being promoted on the inter-tubes. Facebook (where newbees gather, and no experience and reputation profile is used) has a heavily moderated "Treatment-Free" group. The impact of the group is high (more activity than the rather dusty TF sub-forum on this site).

The FB group owner has this to say about AFB:AFB resistant bees are guaranteed possible as demonstrated by the number of beeks who have acheived it. I suggest at the minimum replacing the queen, and more preferably *dissolving the hive and moving the frames to a more resistant hive to be cleaned up.* Many recommend further measures, but in my view,* anything that gets rid of the weak genetics will suffice.* (_ed: my emphasis added)_​
So AFB has become the element of an "accelerated Bond Test", and is to be promoted and distributed. This advice makes no sense to me, but documenting its existence I think is critical to understanding the sociology of the TF ethos. It makes a leap from controlled trials to backyards, ignoring the changed conditions of distributed hobbyists.

Notes: M. Spivak and M. Gillian did substantial work on AFB resistance and VSH in 1997-2001 period. This carries on the earlier work on AFB hygenie from the 1940's to the 1960's (when tetracycline temporarily rendered the efforts irrelevant). A good jumping off place is M. Spivak's 2001 paper (downloadable) Resistance to American foulbrood disease by honey
bee colonies Apis mellifera bred for hygienic behavior
Marla SPIVAK*, Gary S. REUTER http://hal.inria.fr/docs/00/89/19/03/PDF/hal-00891903.pdf​
(A 2009 review paper has a useful recent bibliography) American Foulbrood in honeybees and its causative agent, Paenibacillus larvae
Elke Genersch * http://www.bijenhouders.nl/files/Bijengezondheid/graaf/3.-avb-art-genersch-2009.pdf​
For reference, the advice given -- * DO NOT emulate* ---


----------



## enjambres (Jun 30, 2013)

I don't do Facebook so I have no idea how it works.

But is this guy seriously suggesting deliberate, field (as opposed to controlled in-lab), innoculation of AFB-infected material from one hive to another? Are you sure it's not some kind of weird spoofy/parody site? Does he have the chops to make this bizarre idea credible to his readers?

I live in NY and we no longer have Bee Inspections. I thought AFB (in those locations with robust inspections) was a mandatorily reportable and euthanizable disease. 

I recently discovered a neighbor who maintains a small, Bond-style, mite-bomb apiary, with predictable results (for both of us). They are getting discouraged at losing so many hives to the combined (according to them) evils of Monsanto, GMO, neonics, rampant CCD, etc. When I enquired about their mite levels they airly informed me that they are very TF, so of course there is no need to check. And that checking was buying into the whole commercial, profit-driven, Earth-damaging, Big-Pharma/Big-Ag mindset. Besides they never see any mites on their bees, so that's all good, right?

My Better Angel wanted to help them out; My Wicked Angel whispered slyly: "Maybe they'll get so discouraged in their unsuccessful struggle to Right The Terrible Wrongs Done To The Poor Bees that they will find another problem to solve and finally give up beekeeping." At the very least I think I'm going to present them with nice set of anti-robbing screens for their hives. That may help keep my girls out of my neighbor's collapsing plague-houses. 

Why does the name Solomon Parker seem familiar - does he post here or has he written a bee-book? Do Facebook posters actually have to be who they say they are?

Enj.


----------



## crabbydad (Apr 29, 2012)

there is a solomon parker on this forum


----------



## mathesonequip (Jul 9, 2012)

JWChesnut said:


> [TF advocates are prescribing a deliberate AFB-contaminated comb inoculation to "purify" honeybee genetics. ] absolute stupidity. I hope illegal in most states.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

Dann Purvis has been inoculating his bees with everything including AFB for years. I'm not saying I want to try it nor am I recommending it, but to act like it's some new idea is kind of far fetched and your tendency to lump all people who are treatment free together and act like they are all responsible for what one person does or recommends is really quite tiring. It does tempt me sorely to do the same to those who treat, except that it would be completely unfair of me to act like all of them have the same attitude.


----------



## Juhani Lunden (Oct 3, 2013)

I leave AFB infected hives (0-3/year) on the yard for so long that most of the brood has came out. Then they are shaken away, sometimes to foundation, but usually they are at that point so weak, that better to unite them right away. Frames are melted. Very seldom any colonies nearby get infected.

A friend of mine who has had serious problems with AFB insists that my bees handle AFB well. He says his small frame nucs (6 in a Langstroth box) "got cured" after they got daughter queens from my line.

Solomon Parkers advise seems a bit exaggerated to me.


----------



## AstroBee (Jan 3, 2003)

There's a big difference between inoculating queen grafts and transferring AFB infected comb. Charles Mraz was doing it long before Mr Purvis.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>Charles Mraz was doing it long before Mr Purvis.

I'm sure he was. So was John Eckert. Back when Dadant had a mating yard near where all the old comb came for processing the bees they were selling were very resistant to AFB... these ideas are not new and did not come from some specific "group" and have probably contributed more to there being less AFB now than in times past.


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

I certainly don't (and never have) recommended such a practice.

I have described situations where the beekeeper does something similar to what is described. If the bees weren't resistant, there would be no bees left in the operation (deep frames extracted and moved to a different yard). 

The truth is much more interesting (and ultimately useful) than misinformation and scare tactics.

Deknow


----------



## JWChesnut (Jul 31, 2013)

Michael Bush said:


> these ideas are not new and did not come from some specific "group" and have probably contributed more to there being less AFB now than in times past.


Undemonstrated assertion. Alternatively, and more likely -- Less AFB because of Tetracycline, and because AFB is slow and Varroa collapse is very fast.

Spivak identifies VSH as a primary mechanism of AFB clearance, your argument (by extension) implies that VSH is widespread and adopted by commercial breeders, a curious admission given the scorn otherwise heaped on the "Commercials". 

Parker is promoting do-it-yourself backyard breeding by novices, in those hands, AFB is dynamite. 

Backyard breeding in an outcrossing flying insect is an oxymoron.


----------



## peterloringborst (Jan 19, 2010)

Michael Bush:



> >Charles Mraz was doing it long before Mr Purvis.
> I'm sure he was. So was John Eckert.


Mr. Bush, to suggest that Dr. J. E. ECKERT would support your notions of AFB resistance and treatment free beekeeping is ridiculous. Eckert was a highly respected scientist and would never have advocated a let alone response to foulbrood. He wrote:


> While all races of the honeybee, Apis mellifera, are subject to the same diseases, some are less susceptible or more resistant than others. Also, the ability to resist the ill effects of certain diseases appears to be an inheritable trait in most instances. Natural resistance to American foulbrood has been noted in some apiaries in the Territory of Hawaii, where inbreeding is possible under natural environmental conditions because of the vast water barriers between the islands.


This suggests that resistance could be developed under very specific conditions. It does not suggest that it is widespread and could be easily turned to advantage. However, he writes (in the same piece) extensively about the benefit of antibiotics against this same disease, suggesting that its use would likely become universal and lead to the eradication of the disease.



> Dr. Leonard Haseman of the University of Missouri published in 1945 the results of his tests in feeding sulfathiazole to colonies infected with Bacillus larvae, the cause of American foulbrood. He found not only that the development of the bacteria could be prevented but that the bees in an infected colony were stimulated in some way to eliminate an infection already present. The combined results have been so promising that the destructive roles of bee diseases to the beekeeping industry are gradually loosing their significance, in well managed apiaries.
> 
> The beekeeping industry is now employing the use of therapeutics to prevent, to control and to eradicate American foulbrood as well as certain other bee diseases. The response of honeybees to the stimulating effects of these treatments has changed the concept of American foulbrood from one of utter destruction to one that envisions its ultimate control without destroying valuable colonies or equipment. It is an example of how an insect can be aided by modern medicine in its fight for survival. Since extremely small amounts of therapeutics are needed, and since they can be administered before or after nectar-flows, the danger of contaminating honey with them is slight when they are used properly. The incidence of bee diseases in well managed apiaries is generally low- and only where colonies are endangered by bee diseases, need these aids to bee behavior be used in order to maintain healthy and flourishing colonies.


SOURCE:
Eckert, J. E. (1955). Bee diseases as factors in the life and behavior of the honeybee Colony. Insectes Sociaux, 2(3), 187-194.

Finally, the idea that resistant bees is the inevitable response of a bee population which is subjected to natural selection was utterly disproved by Dr. Adrian Wenner when he wiped out the honey bee on an offshore California island by introducing varroa mites. The varroa mites killed every last colony, no resistant bees ever developed.

Added:

This is from Eckert's obituary



> Professor Eckert retained his concern for pesticide-caused bee losses throughout his career. In 1945 he became excited about the potential for controlling bee diseases by treating infected colonies with antibiotics. He pioneered chemotherapy in California, despite strenuous opposition from some beekeepers and regulatory personnel. His experiments ultimately led to the control of bee pathogens with antibiotics, a practice accepted as fundamental to successful contemporary beekeeping.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

Hello, it is me, the real (and only) TF Solomon Parker beekeeper. I've been gone so long, I guess I've been forgotten!



JWChesnut said:


> TF advocates are prescribing a deliberate AFB-contaminated comb inoculation to "purify" honeybee genetics.


No, not really, like I said, to be cleaned up by that hive. I don't think I used the word "purify" and I wasn't really making that case. But I am a treatment-free beekeeper, and that means if the bees don't survive disease on their own, they don't survive.





JWChesnut said:


> Facebook (where newbees gather, and no experience and reputation profile is used) has a heavily moderated "Treatment-Free" group.


If by "heavily moderated" you mean "moderated" then yes. I am happy to keep the discussion on topic as I did when I was the moderator here. And many of our regular posters are very experienced beekeepers as well as are some of the guests on my podcast which is also associated with the group.





JWChesnut said:


> The impact of the group is high (more activity than the rather dusty TF sub-forum on this site).


Wow, thank you, that's exactly what I was going for. We don't have to constantly fight with a forum full of treating beekeepers. And quite unlike the TF forum here, we have over 1600 members. Also unlike here, the purpose of the FB group is to _promote_ treatment-free beekeeping. The reach is amazing, I'm glad I switched my focus. I must also thank you for your substantial contribution in bringing about the TF sub-forum's "dusty"ness. Were it not for you and your ilk, I'd probably still be here spinning my wheels. I am deeply grateful.





JWChesnut said:


> So AFB has become the element of an "accelerated Bond Test", and is to be promoted and distributed. This advice makes no sense to me, but documenting its existence I think is critical to understanding the sociology of the TF ethos. It makes a leap from controlled trials to backyards, ignoring the changed conditions of distributed hobbyists.


I must agree with Michael Bush when he says this is not new. There have been many beekeepers of note who have done this and recorded favorable results as I have pointed out on the FB page. I also pointed out what others here have pointed out, that AFB affects relatively few hives, and that most TF bees (and bees in general) simply don't get it. So, again I stress, what's to be afraid of? What I advocate, Dee Lusby has been doing for literally decades!

I must thank you for giving me so much new publicity and for posting that post. The middle paragraph is one of the most direct and succinct treatments of the treatment-free experience I have ever penned. I am particularly satisfied with that paragraph.

Even funnier is that I have suggested this very practice on these pages in the past and gotten the same response, from some of the same people. Nothing has changed. This is not new. You guys just don't get the concepts and mindset behind treatment-free beekeeping.


----------



## JWChesnut (Jul 31, 2013)

So you give criminally negligent advice, and then circle back to crow about it.
Sheesh, this isn't going to end predictably.
I am sure you are well on your way to becoming a star celebrity TF lecturer, jet-setting around the country, where newbees lap up your stories, you have all the proper attributes, best of luck to your new career.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

Did you think I was going to deny my own words? Did it ever occur to you why I use my real name on the internet?


----------



## Slow Drone (Apr 19, 2014)

It's a shame DR.Wenner wasted all those bees not distinguishing the difference between resistant and tolerant.


----------



## JRG13 (May 11, 2012)

JW knows how to troll you guys so bad...... In fact, so good, I don't even think he knows he's trolling....


----------



## cerezha (Oct 11, 2011)

I think, it is time to close this thread.


----------



## Juhani Lunden (Oct 3, 2013)

peterloringborst said:


> Mr. Bush, to suggest that Dr. J. E. ECKERT would support your notions of AFB resistance and treatment free beekeeping is ridiculous. Eckert was a highly respected scientist and would never have advocated a let alone response to foulbrood.
> 
> This suggests that resistance could be developed under very specific conditions. It does not suggest that it is widespread and could be easily turned to advantage.
> 
> Finally, the idea that resistant bees is the inevitable response of a bee population which is subjected to natural selection was utterly disproved by Dr. Adrian Wenner ...


http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/281/1785/20140454


----------



## AstroBee (Jan 3, 2003)

Juhani,

I respect your knowledge and opinnions, but what is being advocated here is NOT the inoculation of queen cells, which under a highly controlled environment may illicit some resistance. Mr Parker is advocating the transferring of AHB infected combs to other colonies, which he ASSUMES have some level of resistance. This is one of the most reckless suggestions I've ever heard on this forum. Just because the colony next to the infected AFB colony is free from visible signs of AFB does not suggest in any way resistance. This total bunk. All I can say is that I'm grateful that I don't keep bees in Colorado or anywhere else this nonsense is practiced.


----------



## peterloringborst (Jan 19, 2010)

More from Eckert:



> As stated previously, American foulbrood has been considered incurable
> until relatively recent times. Many of our bee laws relating to the control
> of bee diseases are still based on this premise and thousands of infected
> colonies and their combs have been destroyed annually. The intensification
> ...


This was written in 1955. The project was never really undertaken until Marla Spivak started raising hygienic bees. As anyone who uses them, including her, will tell you, hygienic bees are not disease proof. There is no such thing as disease proof bees, anyone who suggests it is simply mistaken. Marla Spivak would laugh out loud by some of the ridiculous statements we have been hearing lately.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

AstroBee said:


> There's a big difference between inoculating queen grafts and transferring AFB infected comb. Charles Mraz was doing it long before Mr Purvis.


Sighting someone doing something like this w/out fully explaining what they were doing, why they were doing it, w/ what base of general bee knowledge and science background, and under what conditions make it easy for someone of less integrity than the late Charles Mraz to do something they don't understand just because "Charles Mraz did it. So why shouldn't I?"


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Michael Bush said:


> >Charles Mraz was doing it long before Mr Purvis.
> 
> I'm sure he was. So was John Eckert.


What was left out by the OPer was Solomon's description of what Dee Lusby does when she finds AFB in her hives. Would you, Michael Bush, care to tell the rest of us what she does? And why? And w/ what result?


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

deknow said:


> The truth is much more interesting (and ultimately useful) than misinformation and scare tactics.
> 
> Deknow


which is what? Don't leave us hanging.


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

sqkcrk said:


> What was left out by the OPer was Solomon's description of what Dee Lusby does when she finds AFB in her hives.


Unless she has changed, in 2001 she wrote:



> We just pull any diseased frames and remelt under water and press and salvage the wax and remake into new 4.9mm foundation.





> So what is an "Old Shakedown" Chris and I are discussing? Well Joel, as we
> (Ed and I) do it, it means restarting the bees with completely new
> foundation from scratch, to force them to get over the EFB (or AFB also, or
> para-foul). (Note: we did it/do it to regress colonies to 4.9mm foundation).
> ...


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

What about taking frames w/ a small number of infected cells from the colony they are found in and putting that frame in another, disease resistant, colony? That's what was left out. There was no mention of rendering diseased frames.


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

sqkcrk said:


> which is what? Don't leave us hanging.


I have posted this many times on bs.

Anything less than 6 cells of scale on a single comb (both sides) gets left in place. Anything with more than that gets destroyed.
Dee uses all deeps and no excluder.....honey frames are also brood frames. Frames to be extracted are replaced with extracted frames from a different yard....and extracted frames are placed in colonies in a different yard.

This is about the best way possible to share AFB exposure from hive to hive and yard to yard. No antibiotics in 20+ years (and then it was mostly in queen rearing where it was generally considered as common practice).

If there was not a robust resistance mechanism at play, she would not have bees left. I've never seen more than 1 infected hive in her bees (800 colonies aprox) and ive seen most of them every year or every other year since 2008.


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

sqkcrk said:


> What about taking frames w/ a small number of infected cells from the colony they are found in and putting that frame in another, disease resistant, colony? That's what was left out. There was no mention of rendering diseased frames.


I've never seen dee do that, nor have I ever heard her advocate that.

If you are going to state or imply that someone does or advocates such a thing, a source for your statement would be appropriate.

Deknow


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

My mistake, I mixed Dee up with another beekeeper (maybe it was Ed Levi, former Arkansas State bee inspector who developed bees that could clean up AFB if my memory serves) or some other beekeeper, this is not a unique occurrence.

But to be fair, Dee is perhaps even better at spreading it around as Dean mentions. She essentially inoculates all her foundation with AFB spores, and leaves small outbreaks in the hive without management at all, then mixes honey supers around as if it doesn't matter. 

To reiterate, I see no logic behind the phobia that surrounds AFB. The very worst infection rates I've ever heard were 1-2%. Yet every year 20+% of managed colonies are dying from varroa or other related and issues. And I'm called criminally negligent for drawing the conclusion (and applying it in practice) that AFB is not that big of a deal. I'm an engineer. I work with numbers. I'm still waiting for someone to provide the reason, evidence, and logic behind the AFB phobia. It's not AIDS, it's not Ebola, It's not northern Africa (where AFB was introduced finding no resistance), it's a minor bacterial infection in the modern American beekeeping world which is where I keep bees. In a properly micro-biologically balanced hive, it will never be an issue as it must compete with other bacteria.


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

Soloman, 

AFB spores are harmless when rendered into foundation.....there is no inoculation of foundation going on.

More importantly, AFB infection rates can be much higher than 1 or 2% and can be devistating. Many beekeepers and many bee inspectors have worked hard and burned a lot of hives since about 1900 to make sure that you don't generally see it.

Deknow


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

Most localized outbreaks that I know of in my area are clearly traceable to specific equipment...and spreads to neighboring hives. I hear about them in whispers behind the scenes....most are not discussed openly.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

deknow said:


> I've never seen dee do that, nor have I ever heard her advocate that.
> 
> If you are going to state or imply that someone does or advocates such a thing, a source for your statement would be appropriate.
> 
> Deknow


You just described her doing so. "Anything less than 6 cells of scale on a single comb (both sides) gets left in place." If I mischaracterized her methodology I'm sorry. I did site it. Solomon Parker described Dee doing something somewhat differently than you. What can I say. If you want to see intent behind my words so be it.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Solomon Parker said:


> But to be fair, Dee is perhaps even better at spreading it around as Dean mentions.
> 
> To reiterate, I see no logic behind the phobia that surrounds AFB.


There is no phobia, Solomon. Only education to sustain a certain level of awareness. Certainly you don't want people to forget what AFB looks like when it expresses itself in a hive, do you?

And I have been saying for years that Varroa is as much to blame for the apparently low occurance of AFB. That and the fact that fewer people, Inspectors, are looking for it. I have also been saying for years that Varroa mites and viruses have killed more colonies than AFB has ever done, in all of history perhaps. So, forget about it?

Back in 2000, in NY, Apiary Inspectors reported finding that 10% of the colonies inspected that year had AFB. That, after about 5 years of a much curtailed work force and scope of inspection. The next year, not so much. So, the conclusion, one which I questioned, was that apiary Inspection brought the numbers down. My suspicion is that the infected colonies were destroyed and Varroa counts rose until we got CCD. Now, very little looking is done. Not enough budget.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

deknow said:


> ....most are not discussed openly.


Why not? A number of years ago I gave a talk at the Southern Adirondack Beekeepers Association titled "Hi my name is Mark and I have AFB". Fight the stigma. If you are a beekeeper, either you have had AFB or you are going to get AFB. What's the shame? Unless you knowingly did something wrong and then sold it to someone else. Really, what's the big deal?


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

I don't disagree with that mark, but when I'm told things in confidence I am trusted to treat the information carefully...it is not my information to share..certainly not to post all over the net.

Most of the outbreaks I'm aware of are the result of crappy nucs or known infected equipment that was used innappropriately. In Mass we have a good irradiation program which is great....but people do hold on to infected gear with the intention of irradiating before use. This doesn't always happen.

Don't people tell you things that they expect you to keep to yourself?



sqkcrk said:


> Why not? A number of years ago I gave a talk at the Southern Adirondack Beekeepers Association titled "Hi my name is Mark and I have AFB". Fight the stigma. If you are a beekeeper, either you have had AFB or you are going to get AFB. What's the shame? Unless you knowingly did something wrong and then sold it to someone else. Really, what's the big deal?


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

Leaving something g in place IS NOT THE SAME AS MOVING IT TO ANOTHER COLONY. I wouldn't presume to guess your intent.....but your reading comprehension could use a bit more effort.



sqkcrk said:


> You just described her doing so. "Anything less than 6 cells of scale on a single comb (both sides) gets left in place." If I mischaracterized her methodology I'm sorry. I did site it. Solomon Parker described Dee doing something somewhat differently than you. What can I say. If you want to see intent behind my words so be it.


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

I don't do facebook, so I have no idea what soloman writes there. He seems to have made a number of inaccurate statements on this topic, and could probably stand to read a bit more and post a bit less.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

deknow said:


> I hear about them in whispers behind the scenes....most are not discussed openly.


Happy to be the spoiler and bring this issue to the fore.




sqkcrk said:


> So, the conclusion, one which I questioned, was that apiary Inspection brought the numbers down.


It's either a phobia or showing signs of cultish religion. At this point, I'm not sure which! Good on you for questioning the conclusions of those who claim credit.




sqkcrk said:


> Really, what's the big deal?


Out of context obviously, but my point exactly! There are bigger fish to fry. I approach this no different than varroa. I'd like to see every hive not capable of surviving it, dying from it as soon as possible. I want strong bees. And it's not a question of whether or not a bunch of bees have to die to get there, a bunch of bees have to die to get there. 

There are those that decry my practice of letting hives die while requeening their own hives. There is no difference. There is only misinterpretation of the nature of a hive. If you kill a queen, you've killed a colony and you've destroyed the same genetic information as if you'd poured gasoline in the lid. There is no fundamental difference between killing a queen whose hive can't cut it and letting the same hive simply die from not cutting it. If you requeen, you don't have the same hive anymore. And I want to reiterate that anything that gets rid of a hive that can't cut it is a good thing. That includes AFB, varroa, CCD, requeening, burning hives, and untraceable winter deadouts. It's all good.


----------



## JWChesnut (Jul 31, 2013)

sqkcrk said:


> There is no phobia, Solomon. Only education to sustain a certain level of awareness. Certainly you don't want people to forget what AFB looks like when it expresses itself in a hive, do you?


I realize from reading the thread that Solomon has never actually implemented the Typhoid Mary Strategy of "spread it around". I think it is reckless to give untested advice with a highly contagious disease, but that's just me. It is also not clear how much direct experience Mr. Parker has ever had with AFB. This illustrates a larger issue with i'net experts.

Mr. Parker is a man of his word, and I imagine him frantically posting a CraigsList advertisement --- "Wanted: AFB infected Comb" so he can gain experience with his own method.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

Here's a good example of the fearmongering that goes on with AFB: http://www.omafra.gov.on.ca/english/food/inspection/bees/afb-mgmt.pdf

Notice how swarms should be treated with antibiotics prophylactically. *There is no cure for AFB*! It's in bold even! *Biosecurity*!

Also a bunch of other nonsense, what a load. They are probably causing the problem by treating with antibiotics even though they loudly claim that antibiotics are not a treatment or a cure for AFB.


----------



## peterloringborst (Jan 19, 2010)

deknow writes:



> I've never seen more than 1 infected hive in her bees (800 colonies aprox) and ive seen most of them every year or every other year since 2008.


Are you saying you inspected the brood nests of 800 colonies each time you visited? That sounds like two weeks of full time work to me. I hope you are getting paid. We used to average about 80-100 hives a day as NYS inspectors. Of course, in NYS one AFB cell is supposed to be a fail.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

1 in 800 in a treatment-free operation (with no containment or much substantial action against the infection). That's one eighth of one percent, 0.125%. I could only hope for such good numbers.


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

Some years we did stay 3-4 weeks and worked bees every day, sometimes we only saw some of the bees. Some of the yards are 50+ colonies.

No, I did not inspect every broodnest every year...but I saw the same hives year after year since 2008. I've never seen more than one infected hive in a year.

How many years would you expect an operation with aprox 1% AFB to not show widespread breakout given the management I've described? 2 years? 4? If infection was spreading I'd expect to see something more widespread.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

deknow said:


> I don't disagree with that mark, but when I'm told things in confidence I am trusted to treat the information carefully...it is not my information to share..certainly not to post all over the net.
> 
> 
> Don't people tell you things that they expect you to keep to yourself?


Yup, that makes sense. I didn't get that from your previous Post. People that don't want me saying anything about something tend not to tell me.  Loose lips sink ships, and all.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Solomon Parker said:


> Here's a good example of the fearmongering that goes on with AFB: http://www.omafra.gov.on.ca/english/food/inspection/bees/afb-mgmt.pdf
> 
> Notice how swarms should be treated with antibiotics prophylactically. *There is no cure for AFB*! It's in bold even! *Biosecurity*!
> 
> Also a bunch of other nonsense, what a load. They are probably causing the problem by treating with antibiotics even though they loudly claim that antibiotics are not a treatment or a cure for AFB.


Some people see fear mongering while others see education. I think that says something about the people consuming the information/instruction at least as much as those doing the instructing.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

I would expect the infection to spread, so my assumption would be her bees have a level of immunity, some bees do I have even seen myself a hive have a (mildly) infected comb deliberately introduced and the bees clean it up.

Which I should add is against the law here but the guy who did it was a renegade who thought he was breeding AFB resistant bees. In the end the trait could not be fixed and AFB ended his operation of a couple dozen hives.

Other thing this thread illustrates is the problem with chat sites, how people get "expert syndrome" and start dispensing advice on subjects they have zero experience with. Not talking about you Deknow, at least you have seen the disease. However for the average hobbyist if they found AFB in a hive, to take some advice offered or inferred on this thread would be a disaster.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

JWChesnut said:


> It is also not clear how much direct experience Mr. Parker has ever had with AFB.


Unless I misread what Solomon said about that elsewhere, which is possible considering my reading comprehension disability, he has not had AFB in his hives.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

deknow said:


> How many years would you expect an operation with aprox 1% AFB to not show widespread breakout given the management I've described? 2 years? 4? If infection was spreading I'd expect to see something more widespread.


Talking recently w/ someone who seemed to know what he was talking about I asked him about the terms "incidence" and "outbreak", in relation to Ebola specifically and diseases in general. One case does not an outbreak make. That's an incidence.

In my own outfit I come across a couple of cases of AFB every year or two. That would mean, this year, two cases out of about 500 colonies. 

In Tailgater we are arguing about the contagiousness of Ebola. Here AFB. AFB takes a specific set of criteria and circumstances to spread. And it is spread primarily by beekeepers. As Dean has illustrated numerous times. Nucs in New England.

I would love someone to show me what an outbreak of AFB looks like. Seems to me as though my own operation would be prime for just such a thing. Yet it has not happened. For those who don't know, I do not treat preventively or otherwise for AFB. I know it when I see it and deal w/ it when I do.


----------



## Juhani Lunden (Oct 3, 2013)

AstroBee said:


> Juhani,
> 
> I respect your knowledge and opinnions, but what is being advocated here is NOT the inoculation of queen cells, which under a highly controlled environment may illicit some resistance. Mr Parker is advocating the transferring of AHB infected combs to other colonies, which he ASSUMES have some level of resistance..


My point was that epigenetic factor are for sure having some impact. If Dee Luzby is leaving frames less than 6 AFB infected cells in the hive (and Solomon has maybe somewhat exaggerated/misnderstood that advise) I think she might have by experience come to the conclusion that that is the limit how much stress/contamination you can/should put. 

You cannot breed for resistance unless you have the disease.

Getting comments from my friend about my bees coping with AFB I understand that practise very well. Might not work everywhere or for everyone, put has she said that?


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

Nope, I have not had a case of AFB in 12 years despite relying upon used equipment, exposing my yards to fresh caught swarms, intermingling with commercial treating genetics, and just generally not caring a lick. And I have looked, hard, inspecting deadouts, and checking suspicious looking live hives. I'm not going to hide from the facts.

But I'm still not going to cave to the fearmongering that surrounds this bacteria. And praise God I'm now in a state with no beekeeping laws so I don't have to cave to the whims of the afraid. To reiterate, I'm not inflexible in my practices, but I'm going to need reason and evidence. Reason is totally absent in fearmongering conversations, but the more evidence I get, the more it confirms my case that AFB is not a big stinking deal, and that the bee population at large is fully capable of dealing with this and any other problem allowed natural selection or an enhanced version thereof.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

Juhani Lunden said:


> (and Solomon has maybe somewhat exaggerated/misnderstood that advise)


As I pointed out, I was mistaken in the attribution, not the practice. It was another beekeeper, and more than one actually.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

But Solomon, correct me if I am wrong, you attribute the lack of AFB in the TF Community, if I may use that term, to the ideology and practices of true TF beekeeping. Whereas, it may simply be something else like varroa/virus killing colonies before they can get infected by AFB. Which I also something you have mentioned. Right?

TF beekeepers are not the only ones seeing less AFB. Or it appears that way. Appearances can be deceiving.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

I don't recall mentioning varroa killing hives before AFB can. Can you make a case for it?

I'd find it hard to accept considering that hives don't die that rapidly. How rapidly does a hive have to die to stave off AFB? And wouldn't AFB be operating autonomously from varroa?

The only person I've ever heard talk about this is you and you don't seem to have thought it through very thoroughly.


----------



## AstroBee (Jan 3, 2003)

Solomon Parker said:


> Notice how swarms should be treated with antibiotics prophylactically.


So, you really don't see any middle ground between the practice quoted above and your method of redistributing infected frames? 

How many times have you had AFB in your hives and successfully treated them using your suggested approach?

Full disclosure: My colonies have never had AFB, and I've never see it outside of a lab, but when I do, you can bet that I will take swift action to minimize its spread, including burning infected woodenware, administering antiboitics exactly as labeled, and requeening.


----------



## peterloringborst (Jan 19, 2010)

> How many years would you expect an operation with aprox 1% AFB to not show widespread breakout given the management I've described? 2 years? 4? If infection was spreading I'd expect to see something more widespread.


You are comparing an outfit out using Africanized bees isolated in the desert to more conventional situations. Back in the 1980s I had 500 colonies in San Diego. Almost everybody had AFB, it was seriously out of hand. I always got a few cases every summer. I doubt you could avoid it under those circumstances, no matter what kind of bees you had. 

But maybe African or resistant bees could persist untreated in a cosmopolitan environment. Nobody has showed that. All we get is anecdotes, no data. On the other hand, I have seen time and again that if commercial beekeepers are around, small timers will have all the same problems they do, by infection from one apiary to another. 

The mortality rates and contagious nature of these bee diseases has been adequately described in the literature. There are only a couple of examples of resistant populations (Hawaii, Gotland, etc). There are many examples where a disease moved in and wiped out most or all of the colonies. Anecdotal stories are very persuasive among certain groups; and not, among others.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Solomon Parker said:


> I don't recall mentioning varroa killing hives before AFB can. Can you make a case for it?
> 
> I'd find it hard to accept considering that hives don't die that rapidly. How rapidly does a hive have to die to stave off AFB? And wouldn't AFB be operating autonomously from varroa?
> 
> The only person I've ever heard talk about this is you and you don't seem to have thought it through very thoroughly.


Oh, okay. My mistake.

My point is that AFB being not only a disease of the bees but of the equipment also, if varroa/virus kills a colony before that colony has a chance to be exposed to AFB from some source there is no way for the equipment to get infected. And since varroa/virus does kill colonies, they aren't there to get infected.

I've thought it through as far as I am able, considering my knowledge and abilities or lack thereof.

My theory has been considered valid by smarter people than I. For what that is worth.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

AstroBee said:


> So, you really don't see any middle ground between the practice quoted above and your method of redistributing infected frames?


For myself, I don't see the purpose. If you want to burn them, that's good for all of us, even the equipment manufacturers.



AstroBee said:


> How many times have you had AFB in your hives and successfully treated them using your suggested approach?


I've never treated anything.


----------



## JRG13 (May 11, 2012)

I think Astrobee was askiing, if you found a hive with AFB in your apiary, would you gladly disseminate frames from it to all your other hives.


----------



## AstroBee (Jan 3, 2003)

Solomon Parker said:


> I've never treated anything.


Just to be clear, your colonies have never had AFB and you've never used the approach of transferring infected frames in any other colony? Do I have this right?


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

I have already been clear. Apparently you have not been reading the thread. 

Should it happen, I will try it, as have a number of beekeepers in the past and currently. I can not in good conscience as a real treatment-free beekeeper, do anything else. Is following through on your convictions such a strange concept to you that you'd question whether or not I would do what I say I would do? Maybe I'm old fashioned, but I find this lacking honor.


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

I will also point out that one of the things I like to teach new beekeepers is how to practice the techniques of inspecting a hive the way a musician practices scales.

Looking for AFB is one of the steps I emphesize. I just did a talk and hive opening at the fl. State conference, and although the circumstances made it difficult to be as clear as of like to everyone present (loud equipment nearby, lots of people on a hot roof with bees that were not very settled) I did emphesize this step as being important (making a habit out of looking in the back bottom corners of cells for scale), and my hope is that the new beekeepers work at making this a habitual practice.

Deknow


----------



## AstroBee (Jan 3, 2003)

Solomon Parker said:


> I have already been clear. Apparently you have not been reading the thread.


I'm reading perhaps I missed some, but what I you wrote was: "I have not had a case of AFB in 12 years". Forgive me, but I don't know your entire beekeeping experience, which may have existed prior to joining BS, which is why I asked for the clarification.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

That's what you get for selective quoting. You missed something:


Solomon Parker said:


> Nope


----------



## peterloringborst (Jan 19, 2010)

> I can not in good conscience as a real treatment-free beekeeper, do anything else.


Spoken as a true ideologue. Stick to the ideology, irrespective of any evidence to the contrary. 

Ideology is the enemy of science, truth, art and freedom.


----------



## Juhani Lunden (Oct 3, 2013)

peterloringborst said:


> Spoken as a true ideologue. Stick to the ideology, irrespective of any evidence to the contrary.
> 
> Ideology is the enemy of science, truth, art and freedom.


I think if somebody writes something in Facebook it is not considered as science. I´m not in FB, but what I heard they speak there mainly nonsence...


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

I think you also have not been reading the thread Peter. Have you missed all my challenges to reason and evidence? I'm still looking for something from contemporary beekeeping that could make a case against what I've been saying. But all I keep getting are allusions to AIDS and Ebola and numbers that demonstrate AFB to be a rather minor problem. How I wish all the older beekeepers would have treated varroa the way they treat AFB (the burning, not the antibiotics)! Burning is an excellent TF method.

But all I see is this cult-like religion that says that AFB has to be, well let's be honest, treated like witchcraft. Let's keep the religion out of beekeeping.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

Juhani Lunden said:


> I think if somebody writes something in Facebook it is not considered as science. I´m not in FB, but what I heard they speak there mainly nonsence...


You can read the page without being a member. Interesting to find you traffic in hearsay.


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

I know of 100+ boxes burned over a wide area in a fairly recent incident.

My recollection is that it started from diseased nucs (but I don't remember exactly and i certainly don't know first hand.

Infected boxes/combs were stored to deal with on an as needed basis. A relative took equipment off the wrong pile and distributed it to a number of yards. Those yards and neighboring apiaries (one of which of a beekeeper that was dealing with debilitating health issues and let things fester for a while) burned boxes....well over 100 was what I was told. I did not know about any of this until after the fact, and I have no reason to believe that I've been misled.


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

Without being a member of your group...or of facebook?
Most Facebook content I'm steered towards I can't see without having g a Facebook account.



Solomon Parker said:


> You can read the page without being a member. Interesting to find you traffic in hearsay.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

Even I wouldn't store infected combs.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

deknow said:


> Without being a member of your group...or of facebook?


The group.

When there's information I want to get to, I get to it.


----------



## JRG13 (May 11, 2012)

The resident pathologist at a former life never believed in letting disease take a foot hold let alone test out relative resistance if you didn't need too. It's one of the pathways to developing breaking strains. When looking at a bacterial pathogen, it's just not very smart disseminating it in any matter. I see the point of testing resistance, but with a rare but devastating disease (especially bacterial), it's just not smart to test the waters IMO.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

And would you consider AFB rare and devastating? It seems to happen every year (not rare) to a small number of hives (not devastating) and a bunch of beekeepers claim to have developed resistant bees. I'm just weighing the evidence.

I'd consider Ebola rare (less than once a decade) and devastating (70%+ death rate). Plus unlike Ebola, all our hives have a couple AFB bacteria running around in there somewhere.


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

The point is that your neighbor's brother in law might. The point is that it does happen. The spores persist for 40+ years, and because there is generally so little of it, novice beekeepers don't know what it looks like and certainly rarely learn to look for it...until they get it.

Your neighbor's brother in law might even stop at a yard sale and buy infected equipment. The very large operations are most certainly using Tylan routinely, and having any samples tested for resistance. The smaller beekeepers generally aren't looking closely for it and it can become a big problem quickly. The progress that others before you have made (usually by burning lots of hives of bees) is why you have never had it. Obviously I'm in favor of working with resistant stock (or stock with a 'superior' heritable population of microflora that enhances resistance)...but beekeepers were using sulfa drugs before terramycin was invented, and they are obviously (in this country) going to keep using antibiotics as long as allowed, and they are going to keep being allowed. AFB is, for the foreseeable future, an occasional (for most) problem that _might_ destroy an operation of any size if not handled CAREFULLY.

When you tell beekeepers who have seen this happen, seen new beekeepers start off with nucs that develop symptoms just as the tylan is wearing off the old combs, that this is nothing of any consequence, you pollute the rest of your message. Beekeepers (and inspectors) who have seen and experienced foulbrood know that you are spouting off from ignorance, and you are misleading others. I don't really wish to be so harsh but you are standing in the middle of the room, and you are the only one that hasn't noticed that you forgot to to put pants on this morning. I say that with a smile and hope you receive it as such 



Solomon Parker said:


> Even I wouldn't store infected combs.


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

Solomon Parker said:


> The group.
> 
> When there's information I want to get to, I get to it.


Funny...that's what facebook says to me every time it wants me to log on. 

Go spend $5 a month on a website, or post here regularly if you want people to access it without selling out your readers.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

deknow said:


> Go spend $5 a month on a website, or post here regularly if you want people to access it without selling out your readers.


I do have a website. And posting here is like stepping in dog crap. I rarely do it on purpose, but it keeps happening. And the dog crap doesn't appreciate the effort.

Not sure what selling out my readers means. Check out the podcast. I'd love to have you on at some point. No, you don't have to be on Facebook to get the podcast.


----------



## AstroBee (Jan 3, 2003)

Solomon Parker said:


> Should it happen, I will try it, as have a number of beekeepers in the past and currently. I can not in good conscience as a real treatment-free beekeeper, do anything else. Is following through on your convictions such a strange concept to you that you'd question whether or not I would do what I say I would do? Maybe I'm old fashioned, but I find this lacking honor.


What I find lacking honor is to knowingly and willingly advocate exposing others to the consequences of your poorly conceived experiments. Honor...what a joke !! I've stayed quiet on most of this TF blather for many years, but this...unbelievable! What you suggest is reckless, delusional, ignorant, just to name a few. What you call honor I call borderline illegal. 

"And praise God I'm now in a state with no beekeeping laws so I don't have to cave to the whims of the afraid." Yeah, and what would be the honorable thing to do if your actions result in Colorado instituting beekeeping laws. On second thought, that could turn out to be the greatest legacy of the TF movement. Carry on Solomon, the rest of the state needs your important work.


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

Peter, I am not at home and don't have all my files with me. I think the study is: 
Curr Microbiol. 2008 Oct;57(4):356-63. doi: 10.1007/s00284-008-9202-0. Epub 2008 Jul 29.
Detection and identification of a novel lactic acid bacterial flora within the honey stomach of the honeybee Apis mellifera.
Olofsson TC1, Vásquez A.

I'm pretty sure this is the one where they were sampling hives weekly, and there was a bloom of panabacillus larvae that built over time, and coincident with a change in forage, disappeared without displaying clinical symptoms. I know you have easy access to it, I hope you are curious enough to read.

I don't know how other people's brains work, but somehow I don't see it as 'giving advice' when I talk about things that i see going on that the experts would say can't happen. Does one have a more or less accurate understanding of AFB if they are aware of some of the circumstances that have shown to lead to resistance? I'd say more.

deknow


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

Solomon Parker said:


> Not sure what selling out my readers means.


Then you don't understand the nature of facebook.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

deknow said:


> new beekeepers start off with nucs that develop symptoms just as the tylan is wearing off the old combs, that this is nothing of any consequence, you pollute the rest of your message.


If you are starting off with nucs just as the Tylan is wearing off, you deserve everything you get. That has nothing to do with anything I talk about. I am very clear about the effects of antibiotics and advocate staying away from them.

The fact is that the inspectors have not done a very good job of demonstrating what they claim the problem is. I'm still looking for the evidence that this is the problem you say it is. No projections about what will happen if I do such and such, but what actually is. They talk a good game, you'd think the world would come to an end if you didn't burn everything you found a soak it in Tylan (or however you do it) but I haven't seen the evidence. I'd love to see it. Tell me Dee burns her hives. Tell me nobody has ever developed AFB resistant bees. Tell me TF doesn't work. None of these are true.

It used to be so much fun to press the Housel Positioning button, but I seem to have found a bigger noisier button.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Juhani Lunden said:


> I think if somebody writes something in Facebook it is not considered as science. I´m not in FB, but what I heard they speak there mainly nonsence...


A belief in something not necessarily in evidence. Nonsense. Go look at what goes on on the TF Beekeeping Facebook Page and then get back to us. You don't have to join to look.


----------



## JRG13 (May 11, 2012)

I stand corrected, AFB is not rare or devastating to a hive, I guess that's where the burning part comes in. Perhaps rare was a poor choice of words, how about uncommon, sporadic, or happens on occasion at low frequencies but I digress into the not so eloquent disagreement of the compilation of synaptic patterns of grey matter(s).


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

deknow said:


> Then you don't understand the nature of facebook.


I don't know what that means either. Nobody came to Facebook for me. I didn't sell anybody out. If they did it, they did it to themselves.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

JRG13 said:


> I see the point of testing resistance, but with a rare but devastating disease (especially bacterial), it's just not smart to test the waters IMO.


Resistance of what to what? Please explain.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

Here's the crux of my TF issue with AFB: What would all the bees do if humans weren't around to burn the hives and save their species? The migratory paradigm does more to spread disease and threaten the species than anything else. At best, what you're doing is remedying a problem you created by allowing it to spread less than it would naturally (a thesis I wouldn't even accept due the existence of feral and derelict hives).

In nature (or in an abandoned backyard apiary) a hive dying of AFB is going to be spreading it to every hive for miles. So you burn some of those hives? So what? The original is still there, to be repopulated and become a derelict again probably. As we've seen, the spores last for 40 years. Are they carried by wax moths? That would be interesting to find out. Burning is good, treating is bad. Spreading is natural. I could argue that by putting frames in a better hive, I would actually be preventing wholesale spread from a robbed out dying hive, if the new hive can handle it.

How about this? What if I get AFB and I try my experiment and it only makes it worse, I'll burn the whole equation and leave beekeeping in disgrace. Will that make anybody happy?


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

Solomon Parker said:


> I don't know what that means either. Nobody came to Facebook for me. I didn't sell anybody out. If they did it, they did it to themselves.


Which is why I won't log on to facebook to see what you have to say. I won't do that to myself, and I wouldn't help facebook build profiles of people that are interested in what I say.

I have not and will not see what you write on facebook because I won't log on.

I spent some time typing above (and went a bit out of my comfort zone as far as stuff I'm told in confidnce) for your benefit. You keep stating that no one can demonstrate the problem. You don't seem to hear it.

If your neighbor buys a bad nuc (that was represented to him/her as a good nuc) and things go south it is their problem, and according to you, what they deserve. I'm not sure what you think their neighbor deserves (who might be even less experienced), but I have a feeling I'd rather not know.


----------



## mathesonequip (Jul 9, 2012)

I got put out of beekeeping a little over 40 years ago by American foulbrood. I wish I knew then what I know now... antibiotics cover it up and beat it under control temporarily. antibiotics do not kill it. no sanitizer will kill it. radiation is not real practical. the only cure is "burn baby burn". the spores can survive well over 1/2 a century. some one playing with this stuff is criminal level stupidity. did you treatment free advocates consider you might be really be just as likely raising stronger diseases and pests...


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

deknow said:


> Which is why I won't log on to facebook to see what you have to say.


You really are scared of something. Not sure what it is. Is it some sort of conspiracy theory thing? 

And I don't know what this nonsense is about "to see what you have to say," like I wasn't already saying it. I have a free website, a free blog, and a free podcast, I'm not offering a pay-per-view service so you can see hear my secret teachings. Geez, the freaking cult religion mindset around here, it's just about too much.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Solomon Parker said:


> Nobody came to Facebook for me.


Maybe not, but 52 people "Like" your gripping about beesource.com.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

Maybe 52 people have the same "grip."


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

Interesting how nothing else I've ever said has been a quarter as popular. Perhaps I should do it more often.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

mathesonequip said:


> did you treatment free nuts consider you might be really be just as likely raising stronger diseases and pests...


Come on now Don. That kind of language doesn't promote communication. It just gives more evidence to what Solomon says about how TF beekeepers are treated on beesource. Let's be more civil, okay?


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Solomon Parker said:


> Maybe 52 people have the same "grip."


"grip" or gripe? The only one I recognize is Che Guabuddha.


----------



## mathesonequip (Jul 9, 2012)

sqkcrk said:


> Come on now Don. That kind of language doesn't promote communication. It just gives more evidence to what Solomon says about how TF beekeepers are treated on beesource. Let's be more civil, okay?


I am sorry I fixed it . you are for sure more people friendly than I am. thanks for correcting me.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

http://hal.inria.fr/docs/00/89/19/03/PDF/hal-00891903.pdf

"Highly significant" that's a scientific term by the way.

18 hygienic colonies, all inoculated, seven became infected, 5 recovered, leaving 2 of 18 unable to recover (within the time limit of the experiment). Meanwhile 100% of non hygienic became infected and only one recovered. Hygienic colonies produced nearly twice as much honey on average. And yes, Marla promotes burning.

And these are treated bees. So resistance to AFB and hygienic behavior had a proven correlation in 1998, five years before I started keeping bees, four years before Michael Bush had a successful TF winter, and while Ed Lusby was still alive.

So there's some science on the matter. Did anybody else post science?

Here's another fun quote from more recent research: "it is also proven that larvae do have an innate resistance, and that larvae of resistant lines become immune to the disease at younger ages than larvae from susceptible lines. The heritability of these traits shows clearly that AFB resistance has a genetic basis." http://www.mol-ecol.uni-halle.de/research/genomics/honeybees_6/

So shall we continue to fear the AFB, or shall we move forward in developing resistance?


----------



## kateowp (Aug 11, 2014)

Solomon Parker said:


> How about this? What if I get AFB and I try my experiment and it only makes it worse, I'll burn the whole equation and leave beekeeping in disgrace. Will that make anybody happy?


I would be interested to hear how your experiment goes.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Solomon Parker said:


> So shall we continue to fear the AFB, or shall we move forward in developing resistance?


And you are going to do that w/ your current strategy? Isn't a genetic resistance to AFB already inherent in certain queen stock? VSH and others for instance?

And aren't most of my colonies already resistant to AFB, the way things seem to be in my hives? So what needs developing?


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

sqkcrk said:


> "grip" or gripe?


It was a gripping gripe. I was griping and they were gripped.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

sqkcrk said:


> And you are going to do that w/ your current strategy? Isn't a genetic resistance to AFB already inherent in certain queen stock? VSH and others for instance?


According to the science, it sure is. So we do the same thing we do with varroa which is to let it ride. The resistant stock will survive and thrive and the non-resistant stock won't. And we can do this free of the effects of antibiotics therefore developing (redeveloping) a proper balance between the host and the pest. AFB is always going to be present in our hives (as varroa have come to be) the question is, are we going to nurture a more natural system where nobody causes any problems?




sqkcrk said:


> And aren't most of my colonies already resistant to AFB, the way things seem to be in my hives? So what needs developing?


Why yes Mark, most of your colonies are already resistant to AFB, and chances are, if you put a frame of AFB in each of your hives, the success rate might be upwards of 70% if you have modern stock. I don't know about you, but 70% is not good enough for me. I'd much rather have 95%, for any disease. Seems like some development is in order.

The fact is, this is not 40 years ago when AFB was a big problem. This is also not 125 years ago when wax moths were a big problem. And in my apiary, this is not 15 years ago when varroa were a big problem. Given the opportunity, the greater honeybee population will properly deal with and survive these issues without our "help." You know the Facebook page, every day somebody is afraid to let the bees do it themselves. But they can, and they should. Conventional beekeeping is slowing them down. If all beekeepers had burned AFB from the beginning, it would be much less of a problem than it is today, but chemicals and antibiotics get in the way. The science is sound. AFB will not be the end of the honeybee.


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

sqkcrk said:


> You don't have to join to look.


You do have to join FB in order to read anything.


----------



## rwurster (Oct 30, 2010)

I have several TF hives that will be 4 years old in the spring. If those hives or any of my hives ever got AFB I would do something about it, not just for myself but for anyone around me that keeps bees. Knowingly letting AFB run rampant in one's apiary to test their resistance is not only negligent but criminal. Why not subscribe to that good ol' non-intervention beekeeping so at least the ignorance of the state of one's hives can be one's crutch. If a beekeeper's bees are resistant they probably won't get AFB and if said hive(s) does get AFB 'burn baby burn' is merely hastening the inevitable by culling the weak and not exposing other hives/beekeepers in the area to one's own misguided ideology.


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

sqkcrk said:


> Maybe not, but 52 people "Like" your gripping about beesource.com.


 Another disgruntled BS member off doing their own thing, but they keep coming back to kick the hive!


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

Solomon Parker said:


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


nice to have you back solomon. have you modified your approach since this post?

i'm in the burn camp as well. had to torch one after getting laboratory confirmation. stupid me bought some old beehives as a beginner not knowing anything about afb or antibiotics and you can guess what happened.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

Well, when my associates come back with reports of people impugning my character, it needs to be checked out. Turns out some of it is accurate except for the repeated assertion of my actions being "criminal." It's not criminal. There's no law. Get a thesaurus. Plus I have my bees miles out in the middle of a desert. Not exactly in a metropolitan context as has been suggested.

Also, I'm not really telling anyone else that they should all do this. I'm not preaching that all newbees should mess around with AFB. That's a pretty severe exaggeration. I'm still plenty happy with the witch...er..uh, hive burnings, as I've stated on numerous occasions. I just don't feel like I need to do it myself on the off chance AFB does end up becoming a problem.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Solomon Parker said:


> According to the science, it sure is. So we do the same thing we do with varroa which is to let it ride.


This illustrates a misunderstanding of science, plus a misunderstanding of the difference between varroa and AFB.

The AFB resistance you talk about developing, will not happen across the board. It has been tried, and indeed nature has been trying via the bond method for millennia. Bees still get AFB.
Varroa is different, it is new to our bees, we do not as yet know if it will be possible to develop resistance, perhaps it will be.

Oh and since you keep talking about your Facebook page you will be pleased to know that I am a member. Under a false name of course LOL.  Let's see if you are clever enough to find me and root me out.


----------



## odfrank (May 13, 2002)

Five pages of posts all day long for twelve hours. I must be doing something wrong. Is beekeeping so profitable for you guys that you can just stay on BS all day bs-ing? Doesn't anybody else have a day job? I don't even have time to read these five pages to find out who is more full of it than the next guy, I have to still write paychecks tonite. No more packing comb honey tomorrow. I will stay home and catch up with this thread.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

squarepeg said:


> have you modified your approach since this post?


In theory, yes, in practice, no. I have in practice actually burned every hive with AFB that I've come across.

In fact, that statement was made after the first time I suggested that AFB was not that big of a deal and Mark talked me down. But a couple years later, the evidence has not changed and I am beginning to revisit it again, thanks to Mark who keeps bringing it up on the Facebook page.

I mean, if people around have Ebola, you just don't go there. But I have multigenerational treatment-free bees, 16 years beyond when Marla Spivak proved that most hygienic bees don't have a problem with AFB. And these aren't her inbred treated bees. These are real world TF bees. For the sake of the movement I'm championing, I'm willing to take the risk. But at the suggestion, the religiously inclined freak right out. I'm more than happy to entertain reason and evidence. No one can even show me how AFB is worse than varroa. It might be in treated commercial hives with ancient dirty comb and farm bred bees, but we long term TF beeks with clean comb and no influx of nastyness (like you experienced) really don't see it much if ever.

And I'm not back, I'm visiting.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Solomon Parker said:


> I have in practice actually burned every hive with AFB that I've come across.


There's some double speak.

Perhaps you missed your true calling, which would be a used car salesman.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

Solomon Parker said:


> but we long term TF beeks with clean comb and no influx of nastyness (like you experienced) really don't see it much if ever.


unless the influx of nastyness occurs when one of our pristine colonies brings it home from one collapsing with afb, or is the evidence you speak of now discounting this mode of transmission?



Solomon Parker said:


> And I'm not back, I'm visiting.


well then, it's nice to have you 'visiting' again.


----------



## Michael Palmer (Dec 29, 2006)

AstroBee said:


> There's a big difference between inoculating queen grafts and transferring AFB infected comb. Charles Mraz was doing it long before Mr Purvis.


Hold on just one minute. I knew Charles, his son Bill, and his grandson Chas. I'm still friends with the latter two as Charlie passed in the 90's. Chas was in my shop yesterday. I've looked at Charlie's bees and helped the former Vermont inspector clean up his AFB mess. I've helped his neighboring beekeeper clean up the AFB mess that came from robbing Charlie's dead-outs, and burn the poor old guy's bees. I've seen Bill treat his colonies with TM.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Solomon Parker said:


> In theory, yes, in practice, no. I have in practice actually burned every hive with AFB that I've come across.
> 
> In fact, that statement was made after the first time I suggested that AFB was not that big of a deal and Mark talked me down. But a couple years later, the evidence has not changed and I am beginning to revisit it again, I have in practice actually burned every hive with AFB that I've come across.
> 
> ...


 "I have in practice actually burned every hive with AFB that I've come across." Which is none, right?
" thanks to Mark who keeps bringing it up on the Facebook page." What? I brought up what? I have only ever responded to questions Posted on the TF Beekeeping Facebook Page, haven't I? Maybe you'd Post the evidence otherwise, here?


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

Solomon Parker said:


> You really are scared of something. Not sure what it is. Is it some sort of conspiracy theory thing?


Scared? No.
Unwilling to give Facebook rights to my work (photos, videos, writings) in exchange for the convenience of using facebook.

I see value in doing so here on BS, and I'm sure it gives Barry some rights to what I post here, but he isn't also managing all of my contacts, storing all my photos, and tracking my every move. His placement of ads is extremely unobtrusive while being visible.

It's not really a conspiracy because it says it all in the TOS. when you post things on FB, you use your personal draw to help FB collect more data from the people that care what you have to say. ....and they don't even pay you.


----------



## AstroBee (Jan 3, 2003)

Michael Palmer said:


> I've helped his neighboring beekeeper clean up the AFB mess that came from robbing Charlie's dead-outs, and burn the poor old guy's bees.


And I suspect that the nonsense being advocated here will be equally as successful.


----------



## Roland (Dec 14, 2008)

It has occurred to me, that since robbing is the main transmission route for AFB spread, and that large hives are more prone to rob weak hives, that the non-intervention TF hives may not be strong enough to rob out an AFB hive. We have several hives at friends that are distant, and get neglected. They seldom are as productive, or as p[populace that the hives we commercialy manipulate.

I believe the work on breeding TF AFB hives was done by a man with a German sounding name in Iowa, after WWII, possibly at a University.

If this TF free talk continues, my "Crazy" prediction will come true.

Crazy Roland


----------



## Juhani Lunden (Oct 3, 2013)

JRG13 said:


> . It's one of the pathways to developing breaking strains.


What do you mean with this? Please tell some example.

I need to have resistance for AFB, because according to studies 30% of the Finnish bee yards are infected.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

squarepeg said:


> unless the influx of nastyness occurs when one of our pristine colonies brings it home from one collapsing with afb, or is the evidence you speak of now discounting this mode of transmission


If I were to postulate, I would say that the chances are slim of a treatment-free hive with good hygienic qualities of bringing home an infection.




sqkcrk said:


> I have only ever responded to questions Posted on the TF Beekeeping Facebook Page, haven't I?


I think it's fair to say you don't post any original material.




sqkcrk said:


> Maybe you'd Post the evidence otherwise, here?


Kinda hard to repost what you said that I was responding to when you get all huffy and delete all your posts. Right?




deknow said:


> Unwilling to give Facebook rights to my work (photos, videos, writings) in exchange for the convenience of using facebook.


You realize Facebook doesn't require you to post any photos, videos, or writings, right? You realize you could open an account (doesn't even have to be in your real name) and put absolutely nothing in it right? You've already given your work to Vimeo to watch over, that didn't seem to prick your conscience.




Roland said:


> the non-intervention TF hives may not be strong enough to rob out an AFB hive.


Seriously? Do you hear the stuff coming out of your mouth? I wish I had taken a picture on Sunday when I was out there. Does this look like a yard full of weakness? 







Roland said:


> If this TF free talk continues, my "Crazy" prediction will come true.


It's too late for that, your prediction already has run out of years, and my hives still haven't crashed. I laugh inside every time I see that. Because you seem to be proud of it, and yet you turned out to be dead wrong. It's like a big 4x4 with a McCain/Palin sticker on it.


----------



## Juhani Lunden (Oct 3, 2013)

It has been interesting following this thread.

Specially remembering all those from USA homecoming (Apimondia etc.) Finnish beekeepers who say: " You never believe what we saw! They feed antibiotics as routine in spring supplementary patties!" " The last time we did that was in the 70´s!"


One analogue was on the largest agricultural newspaper of Finland, Maaseudun Tulevaisuus, 6.th of October: Poultry producers in Central Europe don´t believe when they hear their Finnish colleagues telling that we don´t use any antibiotics. In Central European poultry there is sometimes 8 different to be found.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Solomon Parker said:


> Does this look like a yard full of weakness?


Looks like what happens to a big hive with no bees in it. Or very poorly bees.


----------



## Juhani Lunden (Oct 3, 2013)

Oldtimer said:


> Looks like what happens to a big hive with no bees in it. Or very poorly bees.


Yep, lots of boxes and weak hive, and all the colonies in 2 miles distance come and get what is left, that´s what it looks like.


----------



## AstroBee (Jan 3, 2003)

Solomon Parker said:


> Does this look like a yard full of weakness?


Looks to be some very poor beekeeping. From the YouTube channel:

"This, my strongest most prolific hive, was robbed completely. I have never even heard of such an occurrence. The queen survived, and the hive survived another two years before succumbing to a harsh winter. How I did this: Had to allow the hive to be totally robbed out until robbers discovered there was no more honey. Then I closed the entrance down so only one or two bees could pass at a time. Then I gave the hive a frame of honey from another hive so they didn't starve in the meantime. They then had to rebuild from there. This is a harsh way to save a hive like this, but at a certain point there's nothing left you can do. The robbers will keep attacking."


And can you just imagine the result if this colony was full of AFB? Yeah, let it ride. We'll send a hazmat team out to Colorado to clean up your mess.


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

Solomon Parker said:


> Seriously? Do you hear the stuff coming out of your mouth? I wish I had taken a picture on Sunday when I was out there. Does this look like a yard full of weakness?


Let's ask you the same question. You seriously believe a strong hive would get robbed out like this? Obviously the hives around you are stronger! To answer your question, yes.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Roland said:


> It has occurred to me, that since robbing is the main transmission route for AFB spread, and that large hives are more prone to rob weak hives, that the non-intervention TF hives may not be strong enough to rob out an AFB hive. We have several hives at friends that are distant, and get neglected. They seldom are as productive, or as p[populace that the hives we commercialy manipulate.
> 
> I believe the work on breeding TF AFB hives was done by a man with a German sounding name in Iowa, after WWII, possibly at a University.
> 
> ...


Dr. Walter Rothenbeuller perhaps, Roland? Highly hygienic, poor honey producer.


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

http://apisenterprises.com/papers_htm/BC2003/The Lasting Influence of Two Men.htm



> It was in determining the resistance mechanisms honey bees have built into themselves to fend off one of apiculture’s most feared diseases, American foulbrood, that his work would have the most importance. Here Walter might demur, giving credit as well to his students who played a great role in helping him find many of the details of what is collectively called “hygienic behavior.”





> Hygienic behavior has only recently been rediscovered by bee breeders, and it looks to be something that is correlated not only with foubrood resistance or tolerance, but also may be important in controlling other bee maladies, including Varroa mites. The idea languished for years in obscurity due to widespread use of antibiotics and a tragic consequence of the bee breeding process itself, the total loss of the foulbrood-resistant stock Dr. Rothenbuhler had labored so long to develop. The story as related to me was that aggressive inbreeding of the stock to concentrate the foulbrood-resistant genes caused it to become susceptible to what is called hairless black syndrome, a viral condition. In short, the stock, resistant to one disease, was eliminated by another, because both expressed themselves through concentration of resistant genes via inbreeding. This is an important lesson for those who would breed bees in the contemporary beekeeping environment. It is a characteristic of many scientists’ work that even failure can result in an important legacy.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Solomon Parker said:


> I think it's fair to say you don't post any original material.
> 
> 
> Kinda hard to repost what you said that I was responding to when you get all huffy and delete all your posts. Right?


Who does Post any original material on TF Beekeeping? All I ever see are the same old questions. Many of which have to do w/ things like, "So treatment free people's _ do you do any sort of application for mites or american foul brood?"_

And you have no trouble saying I have no TF experience and should be more humble, when all I have ever RESPONDED to has to do w/ general beekeeping and not specifically TF. When you don't like it when I respond to a nonTF question on TF Beekeeping's Facebook Page I get the feeling it's personal. What's up w/ that?

"(some of whom continue to infest this group but are not allowed to do here what they do there) " If some unwanted beekeepers are "infest"ing your Treatment Free Facebook Page, there's a treatment for that.

"Here you are safe to be a treatment-free beekeeper, to talk about TF beekeeping, and to do so without the constant interruptions of people who refuse to understand what you are trying to do or to help you with it." But if you are not a TF beekeeper you cannot expect the same warm welcome. It's as if NonTF beekeepers have no experience at all keeping bees, when talking about NonTF beekeeping things on TF Beekeeping.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

For those of you who don't wish to "Find It On Facebook", here is how Solomon Parker responded to this Thread on the Treatment Free Beekeeping Facebook Page. 

"I've been kinda hiding a fact for the past year for fear of reprisal. But at this point it's kinda hard to care anymore and I am not the sort to like to protect secrets. The fact is, I started this group because of the hostility toward treatment-free beekeeping in general and to be honest toward me personally at Beesource.com. And that includes not just the members (some of whom continue to infest this group but are not allowed to do here what they do there) but the site’s owner and administrator, Barry Birkey.
The fact is this, if you want to keep bees treatment-free, BeeSource is not going to help you in your pursuit. The Treatment-Free Beekeeping sub-forum there has more treating beekeepers lurking around than it has experienced TF beeks. And they are hostile.
Here you are safe to be a treatment-free beekeeper, to talk about TF beekeeping, and to do so without the constant interruptions of people who refuse to understand what you are trying to do or to help you with it. Have fun here. I don’t get paid for this. My stated purpose is to promote TF beekeeping and to do so especially for smaller scale backyard style beekeepers. This is for you."

I love the drama in the first line. "fear of reprisal" Really? What caused such fear? What possible reprisal could cause such fear? What possible reprisal could have been neutralized making it safe for Solomon to Post this epistle on his TF Facebook Page?

Solomon Parker " Don't be afraid Guy Lessard. Mark is a treating commercial beekeeper. If you don't like what he says, ignore it." This in response to a question about planting plants to in effect treat hives for mites in which I told of my experience and the Poster felt I was mocking him. Me being the only one to directly answer his question . So, since it seemed as though my response had unintentionally caused others discomfort I deleted my responses to that Thread.


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

sqkcrk said:


> I love the drama in the first line. "fear of reprisal"


It is a martyrdom complex. Even while he was posting here regularly he bemoaned his persecution.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

http://www.beesource.com/forums/showthread.php?275161-treatment-free-beekeeping-the-risks

it all comes down to how much or how little responsibility one feels toward not allowing one's bees to become a source for diseases and pests to other nearby bees.

this linked thread has contributions from members representing the whole spectrum of approaches to beekeeping and it may be one of the few instances in which there is overall consensus on a topic.

i respect the desire of anyone wanting to experiment and keep their bees as they so choose, but in return there must also be respect for others who may not want their bees participating in such an experiment.

no beeyard is an island, and most of the rules and regulations regarding kept bees are because of that.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

Barry said:


> You seriously believe a strong hive would get robbed out like this?


It's the same scenario I have been here talking about for years. I don't have to believe it, I saw it. I relate my experience. Somebody says something, and I go: "nope, not how it happened for me." Just so happens this time I have the video of my yard full of "weak hives" unable to do much robbing because of how weak they are.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

it appears you allowed the robbing event to play out solomon. of course there's no way to know if bees other than your own were joining in the fray. were you able to determine what caused this colony to become weakened, and what was its ultimate fate?


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

squarepeg said:


> were you able to determine what caused this colony to become weakened


I think you're missing sol's point. He believes that, in his yards, strong colonies get robbed.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

This hive was not weakened. As I said, it was the strongest hive in the yard, 9 years TF without requeening. The robbing event was set off by an inspection that morning or the day before, I don't remember which. It was then that I quit doing inspections during dearths.

Yes, I let it play out then picked up the pieces. It survived another two years.


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4XT-l-_3y0

"It Depends on what the meaning of the word [strong] is"

It appears strong to you is strictly numbers of bees. The video shows they were not strong enough to defend their hive.

After rereading your last post, I see now that it was beekeeper assisted robbing. This detail was left out when you first posted your video.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

ah, the frames got loaded up with outsiders during inspection. was it over by the next day?


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

beemandan said:


> I think you're missing sol's point. He believes that, in his yards, strong colonies get robbed.


yeah, i get it now. the robbing event had more to do with dearth conditions than the strength or weakness of the colony. those bees were desperate. after all solomon reported that the majority of his losses were from starvation over the summer months. sounds like a poor location there and/or bad weather, too many bees and not enough forage.


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

It is interesting that after all the challenges to his assertion that this 'strong' hive was robbed...finally he confesses that it occurred following an inspection. Childish effort at damage control? This is the problem with Beesource. If you make a ridiculous assertion here you will be challenged publicly. If you moderate a facebook page....you can say anything you like without anyone calling you on it.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Solomon,
Since TF Beekeeping isn't a good fit for me and you and yours I left the Group. Why did you start that Thread? Seems like a pity party to me. You could have avoided a lot of drama had you not started that Thread on your Group Forum.

You seemed to start it off to complain about beesource and Barry specifically and when I Posted here what you actually wrote you didn't care for it. I guess to you reporting the facts is bullying?

I hope you are your Followers and Friends do well. Really, I do.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

beemandan said:


> If you moderate a facebook page...you can say anything you like without anyone calling you on it.


That's not exactly accurate. You can call someone on what they say on facebook, but you have to be willing to be the bad guy to all of the person's disciples. I mean Facebook Friends and Followers.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Re the "persecution", my observation is what goes around comes around.

Solomon certainly will speak his mind and can be blunt, to say the least. I have noticed over time that most of the people he has made enemies of are in fact other treatment free beekeepers and it is them he has run away from to Facebook, where he can be the moderator and guiding light.

I too recall feeling rather persecuted myself during and following my 2 year TF attempt, Solomon instantly decided that because I have been a "commercial beek" I would have to fail at TF, because of my "attitude". The two year duration of my TF trial was full of attacks and put downs from Solomon and this has continued since, he wanted me to fail. But there was wonderful support from the other TF beekeepers which was really encouraging and as a result I still feel as if I personally know a lot of those guys and still enjoy reading their posts. 
As an aside, a lot of treating beekeepers were also very supportive of my attempt, they are not automatically evil people just cos they treat their bees.


----------



## camero7 (Sep 21, 2009)

> As an aside, a lot of treating beekeepers were also very supportive of my attempt, they are not automatically evil people just cos they treat their bees.


Actually I was hoping you would be successful. Would have been a nice model to follow if it had worked. Not really surprised it didn't. I had similar results when I tried it.


----------



## Jim 134 (Dec 1, 2007)

It looks like we are wasting our money we need to send all the patience with Ebola to Simon Parkers only about 75% of them would die.

BEE HAPPY Jim 134


----------



## Jim 134 (Dec 1, 2007)

I have heard from a russian Queen breeder during his open house that the USDA bee lab in Baton Rouge
this past year or so do have bees that can withstand AFB according to him they put 100 full blown frames of AFB in 100 hives. In one year 98 hives were not showing any signs of AFB the biggest trouble is the bees are not very friendly.And yes these experiments are still going on 


BEE HAPPY Jim 134


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

Jim 134 said:


> .And yes these experiments are still going on


Of course the USDA has the good sense to conduct these sorts of tests in such a remote location as to pose no threat to other beekeepers.


----------



## Jim 134 (Dec 1, 2007)

you do realize when they first brought Russians honey bees in to this country they were on an island seven miles off the coast of Louisiana for 2 or 3 years before they came to the mainland.


BEE HAPPY Jim 134


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

Jim 134 said:


> you do realize


I am aware of that. Which makes me confident that they have the good sense to play with AFB in similar isolation.


----------



## Roland (Dec 14, 2008)

Sqkcrk: Roethenbueller yup that sounds right. If I remember right , he started with over a hundred hives.

Crazy Roland


----------



## JWChesnut (Jul 31, 2013)

Today's installment


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

The internet. A place where the blind can lead the blind.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

I'd like to see what he calls Scientific Research. I imagine he is referring to Dee Lusby's methods of dealing with minor vegetative infections. I'd like to see her do what she does with frames of scale.


----------



## JWChesnut (Jul 31, 2013)

Solomon is referring to papers such as this one authored by Dr. Spivak in 2001.
http://www.researchgate.net/profile...c_behavior/links/53d261d50cf228d363e93d15.pdf


The applicability of the the Spivak AFB challenge to hobby-scale "mutt survivor" bees would be most problematic.


----------



## rwurster (Oct 30, 2010)

Looks like he has a nice safe place where his TF ethos can be "No treating whatsoever, the bees can deal with it" which includes dealing with AFB. Just the kind of guy another beekeeper would want near their apiary. If his apiary dwindles I'm sure it's going to be someone else's fault and not his own negligence


----------



## mathesonequip (Jul 9, 2012)

i am glad i am miles and miles and miles away.


----------

