# V. Mites, Chemical treatments, small cell.............what to believe?



## RichardsonTX (Jul 3, 2011)

Everything I read says that if I don't treat my hives for v.mites then they will eventually die but I am also reading stuff about the chemicals used to treat v.mites also maybe getting into the honey even if the honey supers are put on after treatment. (Maybe the bees moving around honey. Not sure). And, the chemicals might not even be effective. 

Then there's this stuff about small cells and it preventing mites from being able to reproduce. But, the feral bee population (producing natural cell sizes in their combs) has supposedly been mostly diminished by v.mites and the only thing keeping European honey bees from going extinct are the beekeepers. 

I'm a first year beekeeper with 30 untreated hives going into the cold Jan/Feb months for Texas and I don't know what to believe now but I am worried about my hives. This coming spring my intentions are to split my hives into 100-120 hives (split in March and then early May).

My hives all started out as nuc hives created this spring. All of them are double deeps now and some three deeps with lots of honey stores for the winter. Some say that because my hives started as nuc hives this year then I don't need to be as worried about v. mites for the first year. I don't understand that rational either. 

I just want to get my hive count up to a level that it generates a positive revenue stream to pay for my "bee habit". I plan to do this through some honey sales (giving away some honey to family members) and some pollination contracting. But I need to be able to keep my bees alive and my honey clean in order to achieve my goals. 

Would anyone care to give me their two cents worth?


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

RichardsonTX said:


> Everything I read says that if I don't treat my hives for v.mites then *they will eventually die *.....


Before the the war starts, lets get one thing out there that everyone can agree with!  Whether you treat your hives for mites or not, they *will *eventually *die!* Every creature on Earth, humans, dogs, cattle, birds, etc will eventually die. All types of individual plants also have a limited lifetime. With the exception of species going extinct, new individuals of each species are "born" (so to speak) in some manner to replace those that are dying. Bees are no different. 

OK, now stake out your positions. Fire when ready! (Don't worry about the aiming part ...) :lookout:


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

RichardsonTX said:


> I'm a first year beekeeper with 30 untreated hives going into the cold Jan/Feb months for Texas and I don't know what to believe now but I am worried


you have asked enough questions here to make Beesource debate fodder for months. There is lots of good reading on here about your other questions but let me just focus on this one. If your cluster sizes are adequate at this time of year (when fairly tightly clustered volleyball size is adequate, basketball is great) then perhaps do some mite testing on a fairly warm day. Again lots of good info on here on testing. If you are finding real high numbers (doubtful if your clusters look large and healthy). Then you might want to consider a mid winter OA trickle but only if you catch a warm spell. At this point, though, considering you are planning on splitting everything this spring I think your best course of action is to most likely hold off on any treatment decisions until your nucs are up and running. 
We all worry about our bees, perhaps you are getting a bit ahead of yourself even putting a timetable on when you might want to start large scale pollination until you get a bit more comfortable with what you are doing. Perhaps in your climate and your area making nucs and raising queens in addition to honey production would be a bit more viable revenue stream until you reach a point where you can put together your own semi load of bees. 
So there's my .02 worth, hope it helps and best of luck.


----------



## Andrew Dewey (Aug 23, 2005)

Greetings from Maine!

A couple of things to keep in mind:

Your plan to heavily split your colonies next spring may very well do all the Varroa treating next year that you need to do in that as depending on how you do your splits you may have a significant brood break, both for the bees and Varroa. In any event the only way to know for sure what your Varroa levels are is to test. Randy Oliver has descriptions of the various means of testing on his web site scientificbeekeeping.com

Are the feral bees in your part of Texas africanized? If so you'll want to take that into account in your splitting plans, and make arrangements to purchase queens for your splits.

As for your other questions, I am not a scientist and can't give you a definitive answer. I will give you some opinions though, and I like to think they are well founded:

Bees can have varying degrees in quantity of African genetics. Africanized bees seem to be able to handle Varroa ok, but some of there means they handle them by (frequent swarming for example) are not especially beekeeper friendly. And of course temperament can be an issue. All I've read of Africanized bees states that they are smaller than the usual commercially available European Honey bees, and draw out "small cell" comb in their nests. I don't think "small cell" in and of itself is what solves the Varroa problem.

As for honey purity, it is important for you to research what compounds you will be placing in your hives to deal with Varroa and once you've decided on one be sure to read, follow and understand the "label" for use. Find out if the mites in your area are resistant to any particular products (Here in Maine we are told mites are resistant to both Apistan and Checkmite.) Remember that the bee supply companies are in business to sell you products.

Good luck, and keep us posted on what you decide to do and how it works out!


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

rich, my .02 is also likely overpriced but,

sounds like you already have a considerable investment of time and money in your operation, and are about to get in even deeper.

as far as how 'responsible' you feel for keeping the bees healthy and free of pests that is one you will have to determine for yourself.

as far as how responsible you feel for making sure your operation doesn't become a source of diseases and pests to nearby colonies is also something will have to determine for yourself.

either way, if you were like i was, and put doing mite counts down towards the bottom of the list of things you have to do when getting into beekeeping, than my suggestion is moving it up the list.

without knowing exactly what is going on in your hives, it's hard to know how much or how little of a problem you have or don't have.

there are different methods of testing how infested your hives are, and the threshold for how much infestation requires action is not well established.

as you have read, there are many methods for dealing with infestations, that vary from doing nothing and letting the bees die, to using insecticides that will get in the wax and have the potential for getting in the honey.

it's probably one of the more brain racking decisions associatied with beekeeping, and the source of constant debate and strong disagreement on this forum.

if you haven't already, spend some time this winter on randy oliver's website scientificbeekeeping.com. 

most if not all of what you need to know about varroa to make an informed decision you will find there.

good luck!


----------



## libhart (Apr 22, 2010)

Mine is only worth 1c. And I predict this thread may become 5-6 pages worth of posts.

I'm a backyarder, and fairly new at that, which is why my opinion isn't worth as much. But here's the deal as far as I'm concerned. Everyone loses hives, that's just the way it is. Each hive, due to a myriad of factors like queen verility, stores, weather, mite load, virus load, etc, has a certain chance of not making it. Things you do or don't do as a beekeeper affect those chances.

Mites are a huge factor in those chances of death vs survival. So what do you do to help? Having hygienic queens helps. Even though I think the studies aren't very sure of it, I think there's enough people saying small cell helps that I won't discount it. Good nutrition is a big help. All these things work to reduce a hives chance of dying. Most of these things have very mild if any side effects. 

Now you look at chemical treatments, both "hard" and "soft". Clearly the chemical treatments have side effects and impose restrictions on your management. Things like you can't treat with honey supers on the hives, the treatment bonds to the wax, the treatment is temperature dependent, the treament is hard on the queen, and the list goes on. Each treatment has its own set of side effects and impositions. But most, if not all, of these treatments deal a death blow to mites or they wouldn't even be on the market. Knocking mites back at the right time(s) of year for your location, in my opinion, is a *huge* advantage to your bees. Mites don't just kill a bee, they spread viruses. The question is simply around your own feelings on treatment of your hives. For many, their own view on the treatments is that the treatments are so detrimental in the long term that they don't even want to start using them. But I believe that for most of these, not all, but certainly most, their losses overall are higher. This simply goes back to my statement that each hive, due to all the conditions it faces internally and externally, has a certain chance of dying. Treating lowers that percentage, I believe dramatically. So in the end it's up to you. Statictics as well as the real world I believe bear out that the more hives you have going in, the more hives you'll have coming out. But not treating mites in any way means you'll have more losses. It's up to you if those higher losses are worth saving money on the treatments and the feeling of knowing that you're not treating.

I'm not sure how pollination contracts work, I've never even read one. But I'd think that the contract is committing you to having hives there for that farmer. I'm not sure the farmer is going to accept, "Well I lost more than I thought I would so I don't have your hives." Someone who knows can chime in, but if you're looking at doing pollination, the requirement of having the bees available, not just the nicety of their survival, may need to weigh heavily on your decision to treat.


----------



## Vance G (Jan 6, 2011)

Consider the material at mdasplitter.com You are right to worry about mites. Chemicals are not the end of the world, but no one should use more than absolutely necessary. Just get friendly with the search feature and do a whole lot of reading and take notes including how you got to information you have read. I often can't find my way back without writing things down. Bread crumbs don't work. You have a couple months to do some serious studying. Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.


----------



## tsmullins (Feb 17, 2011)

Rader Sidetrack said:


> Before the the war starts, lets get one thing out there that everyone can agree with!  Whether you treat your hives for mites or not, they *will *eventually *die!* Every creature on Earth, humans, dogs, cattle, birds, etc will eventually die.


Very well said Rader,

The key to me is becoming sustainable. Replacing losses with splits/nucs from my overwintered hives.

Shane


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

i'm guessing for pollination, rich wants them strong out of the gate in spring.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>Would anyone care to give me their two cents worth? 

I have not treated mine in more than a decade and have not lost a hive to Varroa in more than a decade. I'm on natural comb and small cell and before I did that I was losing all of them to Varroa.

http://www.bushfarms.com/beesnaturalcell.htm


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

michael, was the switch to natural comb and small cell the only change that you implemented when you got the upper hand on varroa? i.e. are the genetics pretty much the same as they were before?

and, do you have an idea as to what levels of varroa may be in your hives that your bees are successful in dealing with?


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

Michael Bush said:


> I have not treated mine in more than a decade and have not lost a hive to Varroa in more than a decade.


Michael Bush, did I understand that you suffered some significant losses a few years ago when you were away for an extended period or …..is my old brain scrambled?
My recollection is that some hives had covers blown off and the bee colonies died, in all likelihood from exposure. What were your other losses during that time? And how sizeable?


----------



## jmgi (Jan 15, 2009)

The only way to know "for sure" that the residue from mite treatments is not getting into the honey you remove from the hive, is to not treat, period.


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

I think Jim proved that statement wrong. The other way is to have your honey tested.


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

jmgi said:


> The only way to know "for sure" that the residue from mite treatments is not getting into the honey you remove from the hive, is to not treat, period.


This is, of course, a true statement. It is also true to state that the only way to know for sure what is in any honey is from a chemical analysis.


----------



## libhart (Apr 22, 2010)

Michael Bush said:


> I have not treated mine in more than a decade and have not lost a hive to Varroa in more than a decade.


As venerated as you are here and everywhere Mr. Bush, I always take with a grain of salt the comment, "I've not lost a hive to varroa."

I liken this to a person being ill. If I have cancer and go into the hospital and I get pneumonia and die, I didn't die of cancer, I died of pneumonia. But no one would argue that cancer didn't play a part in my death. It made me weaker and drove me to go into the hospital. The same is true of varroa. Losing a hive to varroa can be said to be the situation where you see mite feces and DWV all over the hive. But all hives have mites. And those mites are damaging bees, even if the load is small or maybe not so small but simply not big enough to show the "loss by varroa" symptoms. Ridding hives of those mites could mean the difference between a hive surviving and a hive not surviving a winter or a dearth. Whenever anyone has a deadout that appears to have starved yet there's some honey in the hive, he'll say it was starvation, not varroa. But maybe had the hive been treated for varroa, the cluster would have been larger and healthier and been able to better contact the available honey, and therefore not have starved. Did this hive then not die of varroa? Not directly from varroa inflicted wounds, but the mites hurt the bees and helped them along on their way to demise.


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

I would tend to agree with libhart. "Before I lost all of them......now in more than a decade I have not lost a hive to varroa". Is a pretty definitive statement and one that a reasonable person might well bring into question.


----------



## StevenG (Mar 27, 2009)

Let's see, Michael Bush lost a lot of hives to varroa more than ten years ago, and since developing a treatment free plan, and acting on that plan, he ascribes losses to varroa as zero. I guess he has lost hives to other causes. 

I have been treatment free for more than six years. No treatments for mites, don't even do mite counts. Don't worry about mites. :lookout: My losses run between 0 and 15%. Do I have losses? Of course. Most are explainable to causes other than varroa. Have I lost any to varroa? Perhaps. Has varroa been a factor in my losses? Perhaps. 

Now my question is, how many of you who treat, do mite counts, and alll that other stuff, have losses as low as Mike Bush or me? And there are others on the forum in like circumstances. If you want to buy weak bees, treat and test and do all that stuff you do, feel free to do so. Doesn't bother me. But don't sit there with your varroa and winter losses, and tell us we're doing it wrong.

My basic question for the original poster is, "Where did you get your nucs?" If they were bonafide treatment free, quit worrying. If they weren't bonafide treatment free, you'd better worry big time, because you WILL lose your bees. That has been demonstrated time and time again.

Now, I buy treatment free bees/queens, have been treatment free since returning to beekeeping, don't do mite counts, and keep my bees on a combination of large cell foundation and foundationless. I had my best honey harvest ever this year. Some hives netted 170 pounds of honey here in southeast Missouri. fwiw.
Regards,
Steven


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

steven, i sure would like to know at what level infestation bees can live in harmony with mites.

i wonder if i could talk you into taking a count or two next summer?


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

Good job Steven, I am not saying you are doing anything wrong and I am not sure anyone else is either. I wouldnt change a thing if I were you. Its pretty hard to get any hard numbers on treatment free losses vs. non treatment losses. Way too many variables to make sense of any sort of comparison but I think it is fair to say that there are a lot of losses on both sides.


----------



## libhart (Apr 22, 2010)

StevenG,

No one says that you or Mr. Bush are "doing it wrong." You're doing it very well. But that doesn't mean that others thousands of miles away can do it as well. Making statements like if your bees are bonafide treatment free, stop worrying, sets people up w/unrealistic expectations that if they buy treatment free hives and the hives are heavy in the fall that they're guaranteed to have those bees in the spring. Nothing is a guarantee. Mites hurt bees at any level. If the bees are able to cope with them, that's great, but eventually that queen will be replaced one way or another and maybe the next queen will have daughters not as able to cope. Maybe the hive will then succumb to mites or at least be affected enough to die. I'm with Mr. Lyon, there are too many variables, and the decision to treat needs to be made by the individual where they are and with respect to how many hives he/she has, not based on someone else's success or failure. I also stand by my opinion that treating a hive with anything over a 5% mite load will almost always helps those bees in that hive at that time. Is it the right long term solution? Is it absolutely necessary for their survival at the time? Different questions with no clear answers.

Best of luck to you, and I am absolutely impressed that you're successful at what you do w/no mite management as I am with Mr. Bush and his success.


----------



## HarryVanderpool (Apr 11, 2005)

A lot hinges on your goals.
Do you want to become a successful beekeeper?
If so, I reccomend that you do what successful beekeepers do.
And what they DO NOT do is get all carried away with a bunch of kockamaime nonsense.
One of the best things that you can do is to build relationships with beekeepers that are doing, that you want to emulate.
You will find beekeepers that do really well year after year, who's bees always look great and are an encouragement to you.
Remember this also; varroa is the easiest pest or disease that we have to deal with hands down.
Compare varroa that you can see, count, measure, and treat with several different products, with nosema or foulbrood for example.
My advise is: Don't hinge your entire bee operation around mites and mite treatments.
Hinge your operation around maximizing honey production, gentile bees, and strive for low winter losses.
And then when it comes to varroa or any other pest or disease for that matter, just do your job as a good beekeeper and address those issues, no big deal.
Don't fall sucker to the hype.


----------



## StevenG (Mar 27, 2009)

Libhart, thanks... one thing I discovered is that some bees advertised as treatment free really aren't. And you're absolutely correct, all beekeeping is local,and there are so many variables. That's why this forum is important, those of us who have some success at being treatment free can suggest where to find such bees... and it is much easier and cheaper to start out with them, let the breeder take the losses, not you. And the breeder has.

In the '70's and '80's we practiced the managment technique of regular requeening to keep up colony strength, health, and production. That today is also the key. There are so many older techniques that are also appropriate with current problems. 

Squarepeg, sorry, but I cannot honor your request. I am moving this spring/summer, and will be reestablishing my apiaries in a new location. My time is precious to me, as I don't have enough of it. And I just have no desire to do mite counts yet. Maybe in a few years. But not yet. My bees survive, and that's the important thing to me. 
Regards,
Steven


----------



## Dan. NY (Apr 15, 2011)

I want to chime in here with my .02. I started with 2 nucs this spring with Minnesota Hygenic queens. They were OK when I picked them up, had some stores. They both started real slow but picked up speed. I put them in my small cell plastic frames, which they appeared to hate and not draw quickly. One hive died out due to varroa. The other was doing average and is hanging in there. I hope it makes the winter. For me, 50% loss though I was on small cell, though I had a hygenic queen and treatment free bees. It does not work for everyone... I wish it worked for me but it did not. Small cell may or may not work for the OP. Conversely, large cell may or may not work for the OP either. I think at this point as mentioned by someone else, no guarantee. good luck.


----------



## johng (Nov 24, 2009)

Mr. Lyon has gave you some very good advice. 30 hives is a pretty good investment. You will most likely be fine your first winter. The mites seem to build up to lethal levels going into the second winter. I would do some good mite counts the first chance you get. Then you will be able to make an informed decision. In the meantime keep reading on the different mite treatments. Each treatment has its good points and bad points. Decide which one you feel most comfortable with in case you end up having to treat. Then if you decide to treat, do mite counts before and after the treatment so you can make sure the treatment worked. The mites have built up some resistance to some of the original treatments.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

understood steven, thanks anyway, and good luck with the move.

i have found that most treatment free beekeepers aren't counting mites, and i can see why they wouldn't want to waste time gathering information that doesn't factor in to what they are doing anyway.

i just thought it would be good information for the beekeeping community at large, to have an idea as to how small of a mite load results in a sustainable situation for the bees in the absence of treatments.

my situation is similar to yours stephen, in that i obtained by bees from a supplier that has never used treatments, and in that i am using standard foundation. my first loss to mites was this year, one out of 21 colonies.

i have too much time, (as one can infer from my all too frequent posts ), and i am going to start counting next season. i hope to be able to use that info to better decide when to requeen, split, ect., as well as to get an idea about what levels are sustainable without treatments.

all the best to you and yours.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

http://beeinformed.org/2012/04/ghost-bees/

http://beeinformed.org/2011/09/test-for-varroa/

here are a couple of short articles from beeimformed.com

even the experts are fuzzy on what levels of mites pose a problem and should be dealt with.


----------



## Charlie B (May 20, 2011)

HarryVanderpool said:


> Hinge your operation around maximizing honey production, gentile bees, and strive for low winter losses.
> And then when it comes to varroa or any other pest or disease for that matter, just do your job as a good beekeeper and address those issues, no big deal.
> Don't fall sucker to the hype.


Good advice Harry.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

Michael Bush said:


> I have not treated mine in more than a decade and have not lost a hive to Varroa in more than a decade. I'm on natural comb and small cell and before I did that I was losing all of them to Varroa.


I am not getting paid, just an opinion or belief on my part.
When you believe in not treating you accept the fact that you are going to get hit hard in the beginning and hope to improve as time goes on. It does not appear that if you treat things will get better. It appears that things will get worse. So you either accept these two different approaches or you don't believe what will happen, happens.
I think most of us who are not treating are not looking to get the success that Michael has gotten, we are just looking to not make matters worse.


----------



## BWrangler (Aug 14, 2002)

Hi Guys

One says this and another says that. But when dealing with bees listen to the bees first! Let them teach you.

Mites. The question is what kind of mite load are they carrying now? Sampling and counting before symptoms become obvious is easiest on the bees and the beekeeper. If they need treating, treat with something that won't contaminate the hive. And then monitor they again to determine it's effectiveness.

Beekeepers who use one method or another without monitoring mite loads are, sooner or later, going to get a very nasty surprise regardless of which method/poison they use.


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

HarryVanderpool said:


> Don't fall sucker to the hype.


In your opinion…what is *the hype*? 



BWrangler said:


> Beekeepers who use one method or another without monitoring mite loads are, sooner or later, going to get a very nasty surprise regardless of which method/poison they use.


Truer words have not been spoken…..or written as the case may be.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

dennis, dan,

can either of you share when and how you take mite counts?

do you have a working threshold that you use for taking action?

(dennis, cool website. haven't seen all of it yet)

(dan, do your classes involve 'hands on' demonstrations?)


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

squarepeg,
I usually do a sugar shake (used to do alcohol/ether wash) after honey harvest in summer. I should do one in spring as well but am usually so overwhelmed then that it is hit and miss. A half cup of bees. Mite counts over ten are high. In all honesty it is rare to find a hive with a lower count that late in the season.

We do three, hands on beeyard sessions in my class series. The first two are spring inspections. They are mainly intended to familiarize the students with the basics inside the hive plus help them get over the intimidation factor. The only mite testing we do are mite drops/sticky sheet in the August session. I’ve found that it is best to start simple for absolute beginners or many won’t do it at all (too many don’t anyway).


----------



## oldforte (Jul 17, 2009)

I suggest you learn the hard way...like I just did. Lost 1 out of six ...for now. Have another that will probably go. Been at it for 3 years....not very long but seeing a hive die out because of the mite is discouraging to say the least. The one that died was feral...the one on the brink is small cell. Started treating by fogging with MO and EO....seams to be the least toxic to me and can be used most anytime they are flying. After seeing a die out ....I believe you will start some treatment method.
Good luck!


----------



## StevenG (Mar 27, 2009)

Dan.NY - I tried MnHyg also... When I arrived to pick up the nucs and queens, I asked the breeder the question I should have asked when I placed the order: "What treatments have you given?" Not, "do you treat?" because he said a soft treatment...don't remember what it was though, as it was several years ago. Those bees never did any good for me, and before I lost them, I requeened with queens from B. Weaver. So fwiw, my take is that MnHyg aren't truly treatment free survivor stock.
And some of us treatment free beekeepers have gone many years without any "nasty surprises."
Regards,
Steven


----------



## mac (May 1, 2005)

So let me get this straight. If ya treat your hives and some die that’s a sign of success. If ya don’t treat your hives and some die it means treatment free doesn’t work. If you treat your hives and they survive it means the treatment is why they survived. If ya don’t treat your hives and they survive it means your lucky, special circumstances to your location, probably have lots of mites anyway and your hives are week and will sooner or later crash. As a side note 25% of all traffic deaths are alcohol related which means 75% of all traffic deaths are related to sober drivers. Drink up my friends.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

mac said:


> Drink up my friends.


 I like it mac.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

'bout sums it up. 

merry Christmas and,

cheers!


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

And I can't believe I'm _publicly_ agreeing with Acebird! 


OK, I've still got to have an _animated _emoticon for this post .... :lpf:


----------



## libhart (Apr 22, 2010)

mac said:


> So let me get this straight. If ya treat your hives and some die that’s a sign of success. If ya don’t treat your hives and some die it means treatment free doesn’t work. If you treat your hives and they survive it means the treatment is why they survived. If ya don’t treat your hives and they survive it means your lucky, special circumstances to your location, probably have lots of mites anyway and your hives are week and will sooner or later crash.


Wow. I'm not smart enough to write so much between so few lines. I don't believe I wrote any of that; I certainly had no intention of it. But since I'm writing I will state that what I personally don't like is the absolute confidence shown by so many beekeepers that if you do it their way, it'll work and you won't lose hives because they don't lose hives. This is not exhibited solely by treatment free beekeepers, but seems to be spoken with much more ardour from that group. If you just use small cell, if you just buy treatment free nucs, if you just do this, that, or the other thing, then mites can't touch you. I don't say that if you treat then you won't lose hives to mites or any other thing. Mites can still take down a hive that's been treated and those bees can also, as you say, survive with no treatment at all. What I do say is that treating lowers a hive's chance of dying due to mites and those viruses for which they're vectors. Maybe a hive's chance of dying is already low and so the reduction in loss probability using a treatment is not necessary. But there's only one way to find out, and that way is an all or nothing decision for that hive. 

So if my opinion that treatment reduces a hives chance of loss rings true with the reader, then he/she must decide if the treatment, and all the various side effects and management impositions it brings, is worth that lowered probability of loss. No guarantees. My answer to both the question, "Must I treat?" as well as "Will my bees survive if I don't treat?" is the same: I don't know.


----------



## RichardsonTX (Jul 3, 2011)

Wow! Thanks everyone for the many responses! 

I'm going to go through my hives this coming Thursday and Friday. Depending on what I see, I might treat with oxalic acid if I think there is a need. After that I plan to take the advice of a local "old timer" beekeeper and go through my hives every other weekend. 

Thanks everyone for the advice and I hope this discussion goes on further.


----------



## mac (May 1, 2005)

libhart said:


> Wow. I'm not smart enough to write so much between so few lines. I don't believe I wrote any of that; I certainly had no intention of it.


Well this back and forth has been going on for a very long time my response was to a totality of all that has been discussed in the past it is a brief over view of the mind set of the people who treat and all the science that has tried to debunk treatment free beekeeping


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

since there is not a 100% agreed upon definition of 'treatment free' (i.e. hbh is a treatment to some tf beekeepers, and not others, and some tf beekeepers allow a dying hive to collapse and some tf beekeepers don't),

there is no way to debunk treatment free beekeeping, because it is too ill defined.

there's nothing wrong with trying to establish any practice as accomplishing what it purports to accomplish or not.

tf beekeeping has brought a lot to the table. jmho.

unfortunately, 'proving' in this business can be tricky, because of all the variables.


----------



## Charlie B (May 20, 2011)

Rader Sidetrack said:


> And I can't believe I'm _publicly_ agreeing with Acebird!
> OK, I've still got to have an _animated _emoticon for this post .... :lpf:


One thing I've figured out about Ace is that he loves to stir it up and see what the response will be. I don't think he's a bad guy at all and like the rest of us, he does get it right sometimes.


----------



## StevenG (Mar 27, 2009)

Yep, Mac's post (#36) pretty much sums up what some of us have been dealing with on this forum for a few years. Not everyone tells us we're nuts, but there's enough out there... 

Now, to change the subject - Merry Christmas folks!k
Steven


----------



## Andrew Dewey (Aug 23, 2005)

One thing to remember is that the total depth of scientific knowledge evolves over time. What we "know" in 20 years will in all likelihood be very different from today. The folks that have concluded that TF is the one and true way to do things tend to ignore science except when it agrees with their particular position.

The TF folks may have the scientists beat. Who knows? I sure don't!


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

Andrew Dewey said:


> The TF folks may have the scientists beat.


I think the TF folks are listening to the scientist more so than non TF. Very similar to climate change.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>michael, was the switch to natural comb and small cell the only change that you implemented when you got the upper hand on varroa?

Yes.
http://www.bushfarms.com/beessctheories.htm

>Michael Bush, did I understand that you suffered some significant losses a few years ago when you were away for an extended period or …..is my old brain scrambled?

"significant" is not a word I would have used to describe it...

> My recollection is that some hives had covers blown off and the bee colonies died, in all likelihood from exposure.

Some went queenless when they swarmed. Some had the covers blow off or hives blow down (we get winds that blow down mature live trees in the same yard) and I'm sure some cold starved or just plain starved.

> What were your other losses during that time? And how sizeable? 

I was away and with no managment (which I'm not recommending) and no splits to make up loses and no swarm control to prevent loss of bees from swarming, I lost about 20% every winter. When I'm managing them those numbers are significantly smaller.

>what I personally don't like is the absolute confidence shown by so many beekeepers that if you do it their way, it'll work and you won't lose hives because they don't lose hives.

Everyone loses hives eventually.

>As venerated as you are here and everywhere Mr. Bush, I always take with a grain of salt the comment, "I've not lost a hive to varroa."

It's not hard to diganose. A hive lost to Varroa will have thousands of dead Varroa on the bottom board. It will have Varroa feces (little white flecks) in the brood comb. A hive that hs died of other causes has very few Varroa (in fact hard to find) and no Varroa feces that I can find. I think I lost enough to Varroa in the past to know what it looks like...

>So let me get this straight. If ya treat your hives and some die that’s a sign of success. If ya don’t treat your hives and some die it means treatment free doesn’t work. If you treat your hives and they survive it means the treatment is why they survived. If ya don’t treat your hives and they survive it means your lucky, special circumstances to your location, probably have lots of mites anyway and your hives are week and will sooner or later crash. 

That does seem to be the consensus among those who treat. If they lose hives it's just bad luck and at least they did everything they could. If you don't treat and you lose a hive, it's your own fault. Never mind if you're losing less hives than them...


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

I will agree with Mr. Bush that it is pretty easy to diagnose situations of hive collapse where mites are clearly the overt cause. It is virtually impossible, though, to determine when varroa might have been an underlying cause in a general weakening of a hive that falls victim to something else. Varroa is just one of many stresses a hive can be subjected to. In our cases losses run about 10 to 20 % March to March. Are any of those losses varroa related? I honestly don't know. I do know that few, if any, are from easily diagnosed varroa collapse as Mr. Bush describes.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

Thanks for the excellent post, Michael.

Allow me to point out that while the forum does not have a "_Like_" button function, it does have a "Rate This Thread" function. It located just above Post #41 on this (and similarly on every other) page. Check it out. _Five stars_! :applause:


----------



## RichardsonTX (Jul 3, 2011)

RichardsonTX said:


> Wow! Thanks everyone for the many responses!
> 
> I'm going to go through my hives this coming Thursday and Friday. Depending on what I see, I might treat with oxalic acid if I think there is a need. After that I plan to take the advice of a local "old timer" beekeeper and go through my hives every other weekend.
> 
> Thanks everyone for the advice and I hope this discussion goes on further.


So does anyone think that using vaporized oxalic acid to treat my hives would be a bad idea? The temperature is suppose to be in the 50's this coming weekend. Are there any dangers in this? Long term effects on my hive? 

I'm also curious if those individuals who use small cell as their method of minimizing v. mite damage have any negative effects from using that route. Lower honey production per hive?


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>So does anyone think that using vaporized oxalic acid to treat my hives would be a bad idea?

It will disprupt the microbes in the hive, but probably less than trickling.

> The temperature is suppose to be in the 50's this coming weekend. Are there any dangers in this? Long term effects on my hive? 

Some microbes never recover. Some take a long time. Of course you want to have smoker lit and make SURE you're standing up wind.

>I'm also curious if those individuals who use small cell as their method of minimizing v. mite damage have any negative effects from using that route. Lower honey production per hive? 

I have seen no negative effects. I have seen no change in production (although some claim an increase).


----------



## mac (May 1, 2005)

RichardsonTX said:


> I'm also curious if those individuals who use small cell as their method of minimizing v. mite damage have any negative effects from using that route. Lower honey production per hive?


I'm using foundationless frames and let the bees make what they want. I save hundreds of $$not using foundation and hours and hours not putting foundation in frames I'm not doing it just for mites and used Hop Guard on a couple of hives this year. I haven't used the Bond method yet. I have nothing to compare production with. I also checker board and open the brood nest and let the Queen lay wear ever she wants. Using SC doesn't exclude treating if ya choose. Using no foundation will save lots of cash. Reed M.B,’s book. If ya tell people at your local bee club beeee prepared to get a bunch of flack.


----------



## RichardsonTX (Jul 3, 2011)

mac said:


> I'm using foundationless frames and let the bees make what they want. I save hundreds of $$not using foundation and hours and hours not putting foundation in frames I'm not doing it just for mites and used Hop Guard on a couple of hives this year. I haven't used the Bond method yet. I have nothing to compare production with. I also checker board and open the brood nest and let the Queen lay wear ever she wants. Using SC doesn't exclude treating if ya choose. Using no foundation will save lots of cash. Reed M.B,’s book. If ya tell people at your local bee club beeee prepared to get a bunch of flack.


I've also been considering just letting the bees build their own comb without putting in any foundation when i assemble the frame. So you are just putting in one frame that has a sheet of foundation and the rest of the frames do not have any foundation? Are they wired? Starter strips? Is the comb strong enough to extract the honey using a radial extractor?


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

rich, for what it's worth, i caught a swarm last spring and put a single frame of brood from another hive in the middle of the box. i also put foundation only on the very ends, but the remaining frames were foundationless with popsicle stick guides.

they drew out the foundationless frames nicely, (made sure the hive was level left and right).

these were deep foundationless frames, and were not wired, but in retrospect i wish they would have been wired. the reason is that i forgot and had the comb fall out of one of the frames while inspecting it this fall.

i think i will be introducing more (wired) foundationless frames as i go. 

to answer you question, it might be good to start with one frame of foundation, and maybe use a 'follower board'. i also recommend mike bush's website for guidance on this topic. (bushfarms.com)


----------



## mac (May 1, 2005)

RichardsonTX said:


> I've also been considering just letting the bees build their own comb without putting in any foundation when i assemble the frame. So you are just putting in one frame that has a sheet of foundation and the rest of the frames do not have any foundation? Are they wired? Starter strips? Is the comb strong enough to extract the honey using a radial extractor?


 No I didn’t start with a frame of foundation and stick in a bunch of empty frames that is a disaster waiting to happen. I started with 10 frames of foundation and let the bees draw them out and use them for a bit then you can remove a center frame and insert a foundationless frame BETWEEN the drawn frames. I did use starter strips at first then strips of wood now I cut an angle on the top bar before putting them together. That’s the trick for straight comb. I use all mediums with no cross wires and extract taking care not to spin like a mad man. Older wax is stronger than new wax. All this info I got from M Bush his web site is great and his book is better.


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

It's important to note that what Mac is talking about works very well if you aren't planning to run a lot of hives and plan on always being careful what speed you run your radial extractor. If your aspirations are to become a commercial operation and someday use automated extracting systems your comb won't hold up without some type of additional support whether is be wiring or some type of plastic.


----------



## RichardsonTX (Jul 3, 2011)

Here's an article giving the results from allowing bees to build their own comb versus using standard wax foundation. Allowing the bees to build the comb themselves without any foundation did not show any benefit either in reduction of v.mites or honey production. 

http://rosecombapiaries.com/2012/02/bee-research-2009/


----------



## Honey In The Meadow (Jul 9, 2012)

Here was my treatment plan.......... I bought " Mite AwayQuick Strips ™ " you can find them online at www.miteaway.com I am new to beekeeping so I did my homework and researched and came up with this stuff. Yes I bought it as well as gloves, etc. So I am all ready to use the stuff but chickened out!  Didn't do a thing. Shamed to say but still in my garage not even opened. But I did wrap them up in the bee cozy's that they also sell. I am just as confused as most. Maybe this just means I am fitting in as a beekeeper:banana:


----------



## libhart (Apr 22, 2010)

WRT extracting, at least for mediums, as long as you're not starting full bore, foundationless frames are easy to extract with very little danger of blowout. Did 7-8 supers worth through a friends Maxant 20 frame radial, all foundationless, no wiring or pins. Once ramped up at a reasonable pace, full speed was no problem to get the last of it. Only one comb broken and only a chunk from the bottom corner at that. I guess maybe it's just ensuring good connection on both sides and the bottom. They'll leave lots of little gaps along the way so they can get from one side of the comb to the other w/o taking the long way 'round, but they'll connect it at a lot of spots too. Here's one of my nicer looking frames

http://bees.libhart.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/drawn_frame.jpg


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

RichardsonTX said:


> Here's an article giving the results from allowing bees to build their own comb versus using standard wax foundation.


A very interesting study. Thanks for sharing.


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

Interesting and not terribly surprising at least from the standpoint of lost honey production. It is a given that additional wax that a hive must produce comes at a cost to honey production. I am not sure anyone has ever settled on just what the cost is though it seems as though I have heard claims of something in the range of a pound of wax costing 10 pounds of honey production.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

jim lyon said:


> I am not sure anyone has ever settled on just what the cost is though it seems as though I have heard claims of something in the range of a pound of wax costing 10 pounds of honey production.


From a Michael Bush page:
http://www.bushfarms.com/beesharvest.htm



> From Beeswax Production, Harvesting, Processing and Products, Coggshall and Morse pg 35"Their degree of efficiency in wax production, that is how many pounds of honey or sugar syrup are required to produce one pound of wax, is not clear. It is difficult to demonstrate this experimentally because so many variables exist. The experiment most frequently cited is that by Whitcomb (1946). He fed four colonies a thin, dark, strong honey that he called unmarketable. The only fault that might be found with the test was that the bees had free flight, which was probably necessary so they could void fecal matter; it was stated that no honey flow was in progress. The production of a pound of beeswax required a mean of 8.4 pounds of honey (range 6.66 to 8.80). Whitcomb found a tendency for wax production to become more efficient as time progressed. This also emphasizes that a project intended to determine the ratio of sugar to wax, or one designed to produce wax from a cheap source of sugar, requires time for wax glands to develop and perhaps for bees to fall into the routine of both wax secretion and comb production."​The problem with most of the estimates on what it takes to make a pound of wax is they don't take into account how much honey that pound of wax will support.
> 
> From Beeswax Production, Harvesting, Processing and Products, Coggshall and Morse pg 41
> "A pound (0.4536 kg.) of beeswax, when made into comb, will hold 22 pounds (10 kg.) of honey. In an unsupported comb the stress on the topmost cells is the greatest; a comb one foot (30 cm.) deep supports 1320 times its own weight in honey."


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

jim lyon said:


> It is a given that additional wax that a hive must produce comes at a cost to honey production.


I am not so sure that that is the difference Jim. After all the only difference in wax needed between foundation and foundationless is the amount of extra required to produce a midrib in the foundationless…..not a huge amount.
I am inclined to agree with the authors. It may be the difference between 1% drone (foundation) and 33% drone (foundationless). The extra energy needed to produce and maintain drones and the loss of worker brood production potential by up to 33% would likely conspire to reduce the honey surplus.


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

I think no definitive number exists simply because there is such a variation. I believe in an extremely heavy flow little if any "penalty" exists at all while in a very weak flow it may well be that there isnt enough nectar to even stimulate their wax glands to make much of anything. In a heavy flow I think a few combs of foundation may actually be a benefit in that it gives them a place to work off their wax producing urge without filling every gap with burr comb.


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

Dan: You make a good argument, that drones certainly were a factor. Here are two observations that I can offer and that I believe with a high degree of certainty. #1 A hive will fill up a box of drawn comb much faster than they will fill a box of foundation, some may believe it just forces more honey to be stored elsewhere in the hive and that the bees reluctance to build in foundation dosent actually mean lost production, I have serious doubts about that. #2 When we went from using 8 to 9 frames in a 10 frame honey box our total ratio of honey produced to wax produced dropped from a ratio of nearly 60:1 down to about 54:1. What I cant say, though, is how much honey production, if any was gained.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

the article is interesting, thanks again rich.

the small sample sizes would be problematic in a full bore peer reviewed study, but the information is useful.

i like the idea of introducing foundationless frames to get drone comb built and populated. it worked well in 9 out of 9 colonies that i tried it with early last spring. i wasn't set up for mite counts then, and didn't cull any, but i did pull drone larvae, and had some colonies with zero mites for 10 pulled larvae, and some with only 1 or 2.

this year, i will watch these drone frames carefully, and do an alcohol wash for mites before they emerge. i plan to cull the drones in the colonies with more mites, and allow the drones in colonies with less mites to emerge.

since i run one deep only, i'll probably limit it to one drone frame per hive.

i wasn't as lucky with my wired wax foundation frames in the extractor, as i blew several of them apart. i like the plastic foundation for these (rite cell).


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

clarification no longer needed


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

Sorry, correction has been made.


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

squarepeg said:


> the small sample sizes would be problematic in a full bore peer reviewed study, but the information is useful.


It might not endure a peer review but it is the first objective study w/controls comparing foundation to foundationless I’ve seen. And it should be taken more seriously than most of the anecdotal offerings posted but I doubt that the ‘believers’ will be interested.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

absolutely dan.

the author admitted not getting accurate mite counts, and too bad he kept requeening.

i'm thinking genetics will end up at the top of list of important contributing factors.

(and coming in a close second might be maintaining strong colonies with a robust queen)

i'm hoping i get more bang for my buck by splitting and requeening colonies with high mite loads after the spring/summer harvest.


----------



## bobbyelwell (Dec 27, 2012)

Steven, where do you get your treatment free bees? I like your approach.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

The "cost" of not having drawn comb is the amount of time it takes to get drawn comb while there is a flow that, if there had been a place to store it, could have been harvested by the bees, but since there is no where to store it they have to draw comb. It's a "time" cost. They draw foundationless faster than foundation, so I don't see any cost if you have no comb. But there is no doubt that having drawn comb brings the bigger harvest over not having drawn comb.


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

squarepeg said:


> i'm hoping i get more bang for my buck by splitting and requeening colonies with high mite loads after the spring/summer harvest.


I don't know how it is in your neck of the woods but I stopped doing late season splits a few years ago. It created extra opportunities for small hive beetles. I was splitting at the beetles' peak population, leaving both the parent and split weakened and the losses due to shb climbed. Springtime splits only in my world these days.


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

Michael Bush said:


> They draw foundationless faster than foundation, so I don't see any cost if you have no comb


From the cited study (the control was conventional foundation)

_ However, significantly more comb was built by control colonies (100% ± 0, mean ± s. e.) as opposed to natural cell (87% ± 5.78; P = 0.0492). This trend is also seen in honey production. Significantly more surplus honey was produced by control colonies (25.4 frames ± 3.9, mean ± s.e.) over natural cell colonies (5.4 frames ± 3.5; P = 0.0052)._


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

good point dan.

i actually saw more beetles here earlier in the season, maybe because i was eradicating fire ants in the yard.

i got lazy on the ants, made sure i had a fairly fresh disposable beetle trap in every box, and at the end of the season had very few beetles in the traps, (zero in a lot them).

when i split, there wont be a 'parent' colony, just strong nucs getting new queens. (again, this is more 'armchair' than tried and true).


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

> From Beeswax Production, Harvesting, Processing and Products, Coggshall and Morse pg 41
> "A pound (0.4536 kg.) of beeswax, when made into comb, will hold 22 pounds (10 kg.) of honey. In an unsupported comb the stress on the topmost cells is the greatest;


I don't know who Coggshall and Morse are but his statement is only true for a top bar hive not a hive with a frame all around. The instant the bees attach the comb to the bottom bars the stress is closer to equal on all cells.

I might also add that my ceiling fan extractor is always run WFO and it will never blow out comb. It doesn't reach full speed until the frames are nearly empty.


----------



## Cleo C. Hogan Jr (Feb 27, 2010)

Acebird said:


> I don't know who Coggshall and Morse are but his statement is only true for a top bar hive not a hive with a frame all around. The instant the bees attach the comb to the bottom bars the stress is closer to equal on all cells.


Isn't it true that unless you use foundation, a very large percentage of frames will never get attached to the bottom bars. And a very large percentage will only be attached to the side bar 1/3 to 1/2 from top to bottom.

cchoganjr


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

This study has been discussed on beesource before.....with Michael Wilson participating
The biggest problem is that the broodnest remains unexpanded in the foundationless setup. The bees built the core of the broodnest, then started making drone and honey comb around the nest. This isn't how anyone would manage a foundationless system for production, and the hives with foundation have worker foundation all through the hive to work with.
Once the broodnest is encapsulated by larger cell comb for drones and honey,they can't expand the broodnest.....unless the beekeeper starts moving frames around.

If left to their own, bees tend to chose small cavities to fill up and swarm from....we add volume and foundation or comb to trick the bees into thinking their cavity isn't full...that their nest is damaged (an intact nest will have honey packed above the brood.....empty comb or foundation above the brood is a damaged nest that needs to be repaired in earnest.

Deknow


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

Cleo C. Hogan Jr said:


> Isn't it true that unless you use foundation, a very large percentage of frames will never get attached to the bottom bars. And a very large percentage will only be attached to the side bar 1/3 to 1/2 from top to bottom.
> 
> cchoganjr


I don't think that is true. When I melted out the comb (accident) during my first years extraction all there was left was a little comb on top and the vertical wires. After the bees drew out these few frames I couldn't tell them from all the others. They are now solid comb just like before. I do not know what makes the bees attach to the bottom bar or not. In this case they did. Maybe it was some residual wax left on the bottom bar.


----------



## Daniel Y (Sep 12, 2011)

I have heard a couple of times that comb will be drawn short at typical times of the year but when a flow comes on they will draw out every nook and cranny. I can't say as the only bees I have let draw natural comb will not complete a frame yet.


----------



## DonShackelford (Jan 17, 2012)

deknow said:


> ...The biggest problem is that the broodnest remains unexpanded in the foundationless setup. The bees built the core of the broodnest, then started making drone and honey comb around the nest...Deknow


I used hundred of foundationless frames this year and found this to be true. Only the core frames get drawn out perfectly (and atttached well on all sides) , decreasing in quality as they progress outward. My frames have a vertical center support, so I can cut out a bad side and let them do it again.

I plan to convert most hives to nucs this spring to get better quality combs and grow bees, then progress to full hives again as drawn comb and nuc production permits.


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

DonShackelford said:


> I plan to convert most hives to nucs this spring to get better quality combs and grow bees, then progress to full hives again as drawn comb and nuc production permits.


This sounds like a lot of wasted time and energy to get to the same place you could have gotten a year or so earlier with foundation.
Why are you doing this?


----------



## DonShackelford (Jan 17, 2012)

-`


beemandan said:


> This sounds like a lot of wasted time and energy to get to the same place you could have gotten a year or so earlier with foundation.
> Why are you doing this?


This was my first year back in bees since before mites. I bought 25 nucs, and did a lot of trials and errors to bring myself up to speed on modern problems and management. By the end of the season, I came to the conclusion that 5 over 5 nucs are the foundation of my becoming a small commercial, self-sustaining beekeeper. Nucs make great comb on foundationless, so that is an added benefit of using nucs for increase. 
I should probably mention that I make all my parts, and am basically building an operation from scrap I find on Craigslist. I may buy pierco's to supplement when I can't keep up, but buying frames, putting them together, and dealing with foundation is an expensive endeavor I'd like to live without if possible.


----------

