# to go to florida or Not??



## suttonbeeman (Aug 22, 2003)

Where in Fl will play a big role in your decision. In central Fl around Frostproof and what we call the "Ridge" is excellant for orange honey but poor build up. little willow and no maple. Some areas such as Umatilla are great build up areas with lots of maple and willow and decent orange but not as much variety so not as good (long) flow a futher south. I do not build up in groves....all the areas down south now spray for the cilid that causes citrus greening and really knocks out the bees. Most beeks in Fl have abandoned groves for build up. Where in Fl is the Groves? You are going to have alot of expense moving bees south, then bringing down extra equipment, yoiur travel cost and motel room(they get expensive...is some areas with no tourist in orange areas they are 80-100 a night and are plain jane) For 60 hives I dont think you would make a profit! maybe cost you money.


----------



## papar (Apr 10, 2007)

The groves are around Ona, FL area. I might be able to get the bees down fairly cheap but it all seems relative to the crop you might get.

Thanks


----------



## 67630 (Jul 17, 2008)

Been to florida lately? There are ALOT of people. Lots more people than groves. It smells there too.


----------



## jesuslives31548 (May 10, 2008)

I would recommend placing them on the Georgia Florida line ( georgia side)
Everyone says FLORIDA, but the diffrence in Tempature is minimum. I was extracting Honey the last week of March. I live on the costal island side of Georgia on the Florida Stateline. The titi and maple blooms early here. Not to mention the little bit of cold we have is messured in hours not days. I would guess 98% of the time my bees even in the coldiest hours of winter we have get 5 or so hours of flight time. I took care of a guys bees for years that he moved down each winter. He was able to make some honey, do splits and leave with strong bees. Just a thought for you or anyone else. Im a hobbiest/sideliner with 100 double deep meduim 8 frames. One of the larger package bee producers is 80 miles north of me and he starts shipping packages in March to give you and idea. My 2cents.....


----------



## peacekeeperapiaries (Jun 23, 2009)

Moving 60 hives to FL would be a losing proposition for many reasons to incluse cost, time, length of flow, facilities, where will you overwinter, what will you build up on, etc.


----------



## Michael Palmer (Dec 29, 2006)

Took 400 to FL in 98. Worst mistake ever. When they got home...chalk, AFB, 50% failing queens, 15% hopelessly queenless. Leave your bees home and go on a vacation.


----------



## suttonbeeman (Aug 22, 2003)

The ona area is just south of my orange yards...again for the most part not good build up area. Most beeks move into orange at begining of bloom. The area you are looking at will have some ahb(afranized honey bee), is in a area that is heavily sprayed for citrus greening(pesticide)before and after bloom and sometimes during bloom. Most beeks build up in a differant area. Orange is fickle....you can make 100-150 lb some year and 20 the next. I still would recommend that for the number of colonies you have that you winter in south Ga. It will cost you less, and bees build faster. My build up yards are 50 miles south of the ga line! I then move south for orange at begining of bloom. Plus in that area motels are expensive....80+ per night!


----------



## jesuslives31548 (May 10, 2008)

What is the process at the Agriculture inspection station. I seen a semi load last year on the side of the station for two days last year. I assume he ran into some problems? I was wonder if the crossing statelines with a load of bees is a probelm? I got stoppped one time with a load of empty boxes I baught Just over the stateline and the guy was a real butt. I dont think I would want to deal with a truck load of live bees......
I still VOTE Winter in the fine Peach State and enjoy some of the best saltwater fishing the Atlantic has to offer right here in our small town. If anyone need to winter down this way I have plenty of Landowners that are willing to allow folks to place there bees.


----------



## suttonbeeman (Aug 22, 2003)

To get into Fl at ag station You must have inspection certificate from your state. Otherwise you wont likely get across the border. If you call Fl office ahead of time it is possiable to get in and they will inspect you shortly after you get bees on the ground, but this must be done in advance of loading bees and leaving to go to Fl. If they find AFB colonies infected they are burned and you are quaranteened 30 days or until you get it cleaned ...but at a minumn of 30 days under quaranteen.


----------



## papar (Apr 10, 2007)

Thanks for the input guys. I have found it very helpful and always appreciate the input.


----------



## georgiabeekeeper (Sep 14, 2004)

I have been taking my bees to the orange groves for the past 6 years,but im not going to this year as it is getting too costly and takes up too much time for me , and now all the pesticides they use now to spray with hurts the bees. Some years the bees do good there and other times they dont. So I will be staying in GA.with mine,except the ones im taking to the pepper. Thats just my thought.... But one more thought if anybody is planning on going that has never been before you need a good pulling truck cause that sand in them groves is terrible least the many ive been in are.


----------



## suttonbeeman (Aug 22, 2003)

I agree with georgia beekeeper...and if you gey stuck its a pain to get out. Once you start to spin you just get deeper and deeper even if you are moving foward until you are buried to the axle. If you start to spin stop immediately and get someone to pull you!


----------



## paul h (Apr 19, 2009)

My biggest problem in Florida is Yellow Jasmine. One year was
so bad I think I lost 15-20 drums of honey. Beeyards affected 
smelled of dead bees. It is realy bad in a year like last year when we
get several hard freezes and kills all the wild flowers except Yellow
Jasmine.
Paul


----------



## Bud Dingler (Feb 8, 2008)

nobody mentioned getting a case of beetles either. my understanding is they are everywhere in that state.


----------



## suttonbeeman (Aug 22, 2003)

Bud beetles are all over this country! They just down cause much a problem 
when you get north of ga, al ms ect....the father north you get the less a problem it is. By the way have you seen any of the new research coming out on neonictinoids? Interesting isnt it?


----------



## Beeslave (Feb 6, 2009)

suttonbeeman said:


> neonictinoids? Interesting isnt it?


Not interesting! Down right scarey!


----------



## Bud Dingler (Feb 8, 2008)

Randy Oliver is part of a group of beekeepers and researchers who meet with Bayer that was supposed to be a forum to resolve the so called issues. Randy has the latest reports and studies on neonics and the results of this group that meets with Bayer. What I get from his posts and writings are neonics are not causing any widespread losses and we still do not have any convincing evidence. 

here are a couple of snippets. but don't listen to me - send Randy an email - he seems pretty reachable. 

this is dated 10/24/09

http://community.lsoft.com/scripts/...A28A84C13B666&[email protected]&P=32473

"What's there to disagree with? I am a data guy. If the neonics are as
rough on bees as you are convinced, it would not be difficult to demonstrate
in field trials. So far, about 30 field trials have not done so."


more here

http://community.lsoft.com/scripts/...A28A84C13B666&[email protected]&P=52142

and yet more

http://community.lsoft.com/scripts/...A28A84C13B666&[email protected]&P=74670

and even more yet

http://community.lsoft.com/scripts/...A28A84C13B666&[email protected]&P=73415



sorry sutton - there's no proof just a bunch of beekeepers trash talking Bayer while some of them go home and then put Bayer coumaphous or other bee poisons into their hives intentionally. oh and by the way we DO have data that DOES prove that comaphous and fluvalinate are a problem for bees. 

while beetles may be everywhere a migratory beekeeper goes many stationary beeks in the north do not have beetles and don't want them either. this thread was from a beek who presumably does not have the beetles so I thought I would point that out. in the upper midwest there may be a lawsuit in the works against a migratory beekeeper who infested a nearby stationary beeks yards. should be interesting if this proceeds and what the outcome is - could set a legal precedence if the stationary beek wins.


----------



## suttonbeeman (Aug 22, 2003)

Bud 
I agree with you 100% of the damage comaphous and fluvalinate cause. After all they are Pesticides! I have not used comaphous since the first year it was introduced. After reading about it and what it was,I have never used it again. I have not used fluvalinate for 5 + years. Both of these pesticides have negative affects of bees and I believe are the cause of the problems we are having with queens. THeir affect on queens(coma) and drones(flu) are well known. I think the long term exposure the queen has to the chemicals in comb by laying and coming in contact with them is the problem.

Now with regard to beetles.....I agree that he was debating whether to take his bees to Florida and risk getting beetles. I have had beetles for 8 or so years. I go to south Fl every year. I left two hives there this past year due to no room on trucks...bottom boards black with beetles. Bees here in ky have some beetles. Bees I took to Wi, you have to look to find one. With cold long winters and short summers they have not been able to populate like they do down south. I have yet to loose a hive to beetles. I have had almost NO damage done by them. I do realize if I was down south all year they would be a big problem which is what I was trying to get across. So I guess we agree on two things.

According to a couple of my sources some researchers think there is a connection between nics and problems in bees. I think you would agree that pesticides cant be good for them! Also if you have a leak in a irrigation hose and in a drought and the bees gets her water there she gets a higher dose. A doctor recently told a friend of mine her child was in early puberty and overweight....she eats alot of chicken nuggets (chickens have growth hormones)The Dr seemed to think this might be a problem....long term exposure to growth hormones and their affect on us. Like I posted on here before a bee inspector in Fl put 250 hives in watermellons and lost 240 of them. The 250 that didnt go into watermellons over 90% did great? SO YOU TELL ME YOU DONT THINK there might be a correlation? Hard to prove somethings,,,,,,but common sense can take you a long way in life! With the weather, (droughts, cold, wet ect) miteicides in hives along with herbicides the bees picked up there are a host of problems in keeping bees healthy! But if you think a pesticide that is systemic and designed to kill insects wont hurt bees well...I guess you have a right to your opinion. I just happen to disagree 100%. After all bees are insects and neonictinoids are being found in pollen and nectar although at low levels, but what is the long term risk? That remains to bee seen....and some researchers think so too. I am interested in seeing what comes out in the next two years....one of us will have crow feathers out our mouths and if its you, you can bet I'll remind you of it!
Now for the lawsuit....just what we need more lawyers! enough said!


----------



## Bens-Bees (Sep 18, 2008)

Bud Dingler said:


> Randy Oliver is part of a group of beekeepers and researchers who meet with Bayer that was supposed to be a forum to resolve the so called issues. Randy has the latest reports and studies on neonics and the results of this group that meets with Bayer. What I get from his posts and writings are neonics are not causing any widespread losses and we still do not have any convincing evidence.


So basically what you're saying is that he's getting the sales pitch from Bayer and repeats it back to us... and we should believe this sales pitch... why?? 

Isn't Bayer one of the two companies that used to make lead additives for fuel and kept saying they were perfectly safe... at least until they lost that huge lawsuit and the government banned them because it was well proven that they are in fact harmful? I would have to be a very dim bulb to take anything they say, with anything less than a good grain of salt. Studies that they conduct, are meaningless. I'll believe third party, independantly funded studies, but not company paid for and run studies that low and behold, show that there's no reason to take their products off the market. 

By the way, France, Germany, and Finland have all banned neonic's because they did their own studies of them and found conclusive proof that they are very harmful to honeybees. But I guess some people choose to believe whatever the person trying to sell a product tells them about it... and it's impossible to get through to people like that... all you can do is walk away and let them screw up their own lives.


----------



## tecumseh (Apr 26, 2005)

sgtmaj writes:
So basically what you're saying is that he's getting the sales pitch from Bayer and repeats it back to us... and we should believe this sales pitch... why?? 

tecumseh:
humm... and what would be in it for mr randy oliver (a beekeeper) to promote this scam? sounds like a personal attack constructed of sheer nonsense to me.

another snip..
By the way, France, Germany, and Finland have all banned neonic's because they did their own studies of them and found conclusive proof

tecumseh:
show me this conclusive proof. europe is a bit different than here in that anything that even MIGHT be consdiered foreign introduced into the food supply is considered extremely bad... about 9 time out of 10 times you cannot construct an experiment which DOES SHOW that this or that product COULD actually shows up in the food supply. so the idea of conclusive proof (in regards to food stuffs contamination) and a european standard is really not rhetoric that should be used on the same page.


----------



## tecumseh (Apr 26, 2005)

to paper:
having spent some time in florida (and yes some of it raising bees) I would suggest that your idea sounds a bit a economic non starter... but then again I don't know specifically what you might wish to gain via this trip to florida. I suspect at below a truck load lot most folks would be better off staying at home, not exposing their bees to a bunch of nasty stuff they don't really know (and can't recognize) and spend their money they save by not taking the trip on table sugar.

having done 'the bee thing' for quite some time I have frequently wondered over the years if there might not be some natural tendency in beekeepers (individually and as a group) to always believe the grass is always greener on the other side of the hill?


----------



## Bens-Bees (Sep 18, 2008)

sgtmaj writes:
So basically what you're saying is that he's getting the sales pitch from Bayer and repeats it back to us... and we should believe this sales pitch... why?? 



tecumseh said:


> humm... and what would be in it for mr randy oliver (a beekeeper) to promote this scam? sounds like a personal attack constructed of sheer nonsense to me.


A: Why would anything have to be in it for him? You're willing to unquestioningly accept study data from studies paid for by Bayer that casts their product in a positive light from a company with a history of getting caught falsifying study data to show their products aren't harmful, what makes you think he couldn't make the same mistake?

B: Would you even know if he was being paid?

C: Using your same logic, what's in it for me to perpetrate a personal attack against Randy, whom I have never met or heard of before?




tecumseh said:


> show me this conclusive proof. europe is a bit different than here in that anything that even MIGHT be consdiered foreign introduced into the food supply is considered extremely bad... about 9 time out of 10 times you cannot construct an experiment which DOES SHOW that this or that product COULD actually shows up in the food supply. so the idea of conclusive proof (in regards to food stuffs contamination) and a european standard is really not rhetoric that should be used on the same page.


Those governments didn't ban this class of pesticides due to concerns over human consumption, they specifically did it due to the ill effects they have on honey bees. Here's a couple quotes from the Wikipedia for you:



> Neonicotinoid use has been strictly limited in France since the 1990s, when neonicotinoids were implicated in a mass die-off of the bee population.





> In May 2008, Germany banned seed treatment with neonicotinoids due to negative effects upon bee colonies.


I'm farily certain that the nations of France and Germany have no interest in fabricating a personal attack against Randy Oliver whom I'm sure they haven't heard of before either.


----------



## Gene Weitzel (Dec 6, 2005)

sgtmaj, the incidents in both Germany and France involved either improper or faulty use of the pesticides. IMO, most of the complaints about many of these products are the result of off label use by the ag industry (including beekeepers). If banning a product is what it takes to prevent dangerous off label use of these products, then I am all for it, but I think that in many cases accusing the producer of the products to be guilty of a nefarious conspiracy to destroy mankind is a little overboard and probably gets started by those who are guilty of such off label use in an effort to cover their own sins. Don't get me wrong, I believe that many of the problems we face have their roots in the widespread use of chemical pesticides so I don't use chemical pesticides for any purpose (I have found organic and/or biological controls adequate), but I don't really buy into a "big chemical company" conspiracy either. What I do see is that they will vigorously defend their products provided that they are used according to label instructions (selling their product is pretty key to their survival). By the same token, I doubt that they are terribly "broken up" over the off label use of their products since it does increase their sales but they would be stupid to display even an inkling of support for it. I do applaud the European's extremely conservative approach, but at the same time, I doubt that there currently is the political will in our country for the same approach and for what its worth, I certainly "hope" for that kind of "change" here in the future. Sadly, I don't have confidence that it will happen very soon.


----------



## Bens-Bees (Sep 18, 2008)

Gene Weitzel said:


> I think that in many cases accusing the producer of the products to be guilty of a nefarious conspiracy to destroy mankind is a little overboard


I'm not accusing them of any such thing, I'm just accusing them of wanting to make money. I'm also not saying that their products are necessarily not safe for honey bees, I'm just saying that I'll believe they are safe for honey bees when I see data from studies not funded by the manufacturer.

I consider taking the word of the manufacturer about their product akin to simply asking a criminal if they are guilty or not, and letting them go free if they say they are not guilty without examining any evidence.

Anybody trying to sell any product has a motive to lie about the downside(s) to their product(s). Bayer makes about 6 billion dollars annually from their pesticides. I know I'd be willing to lie a lot more for a lot less. Truthfully, wouldn't you? If you would, how can you trust others not to? You can't. The only thing to do therefore is to only accept independant data from sources that don't have anything to gain from a particular outcome.

I don't know, maybe the trusting attitudes around here come from 2nd, 3rd or 4th generation beekeepers who haven't really worked in corporate America and thus may not realize just how routine it is for companies to lie to customers. Maybe I'm overly cynical, but at the same time, I've never worked for a company that didn't make a routine habit out of lying, exagerating, or omitting important facts to customers.

PS - I agree that most problems from pesticides, herbicides, fungicides, etc. comes from misuse rather than the correct use.


----------



## Bens-Bees (Sep 18, 2008)

I thought I'd look up Randy Oliver since I didn't really know who he was, and from his website (www.scientificbeekeeping.com) he does seem to be on the up and up. So that lends at least some credence to the claim that this class of pesticide is not harmful to bees, but I still wonder if Randy would even know if Bayer was handing him falsified study data or not. I'd still feel better about it if there was some data from a third party study not funded by Bayer that corroborates Bayer's study data.


----------



## suttonbeeman (Aug 22, 2003)

sgtmjr....I think you hit the nail on the head> I agree 100%!! When all this started I was told form a very good source that Bayer threatened to pull research $$ if neonnictinoids where implicated. This seems par to course althought I cant prove it. Too many $$$ involved!


----------



## Gene Weitzel (Dec 6, 2005)

sgtmjr, the reason I accept the studies has nothing to do with trust and is founded in the fact that they were by design intended to show exactly what they show. Being educated in Chemistry and Engineering, there is no doubt in my mind that the results can be duplicated as long as the exact same study regime is followed. It would be suicide for them to falsify these studies to the extent that they could not be duplicated since their study regime is what is used as a basis to license and label the use of their products. Do they know that it will not be followed, sure, but from their standpoint they have met their obligations to prove that their products can be used safely and as long as they follow current labeling regulations, they cannot be held liable for misuse. I do also think that it is possible that there could be flaws in their study regime, but if they are significant, they will result in a quick recall of the product since problems will manifest themselves pretty quickly when the products are used in real world applications. 

That being said, I do believe that long term low level exposure to these chemicals is an area that is deliberately not studied since it would dramatically increase the costs and significantly delay getting their products to market. But that in truth is a government regulatory issue and puts us back in the realm of politics in order to address it. As long as there are no regulatory requirements in place regarding it, no producer can be expected to study it. By the time an independent study of long term low level exposure can be funded and completed post use of these products and they are banned, the environmental damage has become significant. In many past cases, the products have become so embedded in the ag industry where an immediate and complete ban would cause extreme financial damage and many exceptions to the ban are granted resulting in continued use of the products for many years. It is a definite failure of our current regulatory structure.


----------



## StevenG (Mar 27, 2009)

Perhaps Gene has revealed the crux of the matter, when you said Gene that studies show what they are designed to show. Chemical companies want to prove their products are beneficial with little downside, so perhaps studies and tests are designed to prove just that. Any mode of testing, any questions or studies that might show otherwise do not become part of the testing protocol. 

I think chemicals, including pesticides, have their place. However, I remain skeptical that a pesticide that is systemic and ends up in the plants fiber and pollen does not have an adverse effect on bees, or humans. Personally I would like some research university to test corn and other foodstuffs for this class of chemicals. I'll bet they're in there. They're systemic, after all.


----------



## Bud Dingler (Feb 8, 2008)

SgtMaj said:


> So basically what you're saying is that he's getting the sales pitch from Bayer and repeats it back to us... and we should believe this sales pitch... why??
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Bens-Bees (Sep 18, 2008)

Bud, yeah, I said I hadn't heard of him before... read some newer posts maybe?

By the way, I was always under the impression that neonics don't kill any insects on contact... so why would anyone think they would work on bees any differently than they work on all other insects? One thing I don't get is why anyone would start with the assumption that a broad spectrum pesticide that works on all other insects wouldn't have the same effects on bees. Bees are insects after all. Unless it can be proven otherwise, I generally start with the assumption that they work on bees the same way they work on other insects.


----------



## RAST (Oct 30, 2008)

I live here (Fl.) year round. It is really chancy bringing bees here for just citrus as others have said. I can only give some truthful info on what others have said. One local commercial beek I know of had 10% of his hives taken over by AHB last spring in S. Fl. The SHB population is different, area by area. To get citrus honey, you need strong hives going into the bloom. It is usually too short to build up and produce a profitable amount of honey by itself. You had had better know what the groves have been sprayed with if you don't want to bring back some sick hives and that goes for any vegtable farms within foraging range. 
This past spring I built mine up on maple and swamp willow. Put them in the grove next to my house. The late freezes came in, killed the bloom and damaged the trees. I hustled and got permission to put them in an undamaged grove. Then we had wind and rain. What blooms weren't blown off were too diluted for the bees to produce. Stressed the bees by moving them so often and didn't get enough to rob and sell. Made bees instead this year. This coming year will be better.


----------



## suttonbeeman (Aug 22, 2003)

Rast is right, the freeze damaged many areas while other didnt get hurt. I made a 45 lb crop after almonds....the wind killed the end of the flow. Orange is fikle....looks like its going to hit and little,,,then doesnt look good and bam here it comes. You never know. Rast is also on the money about willow and maple....but they are not everywhere...you gotta get around water or a swamp. South Ga a better build up area.


----------



## tecumseh (Apr 26, 2005)

steveng writes:
Chemical companies want to prove their products are beneficial with little downside, so perhaps studies and tests are designed to prove just that. Any mode of testing, any questions or studies that might show otherwise do not become part of the testing protocol. 

tecumseh:
in the world of science you would replace your use of the word protocol with the word methodology. I think perhaps you understand the FIRST problem of buying into everything that 'science' sezs quite well.

for all practical purposes and for almost any academic area of study an experienced researcher know fairly well (and yes prior to the experiment itself) where a given methodolgy will lead. 

after methodolgy (for science folks of almost every hue) comes analysis where almost any researcher (even those with limited experience) can (if they desire) flavor the results to almost anyone's taste. most of the time a less than ethically minded research person will twist a studies results here rather than in the area of methodology.

as far as any moving of hives to florida I think rast and sutton beeman know the area and the problems quite well.


----------



## camero7 (Sep 21, 2009)

*Re: to go to florida or Not?? [neonicotinoids]*

This thread should be renamed. this study is concerning to me. 
Sublethal effects of imidacloprid and amitraz on Apis mellifera Linnaeus (Hymenoptera: Apidae) larval development and larval susceptibility to Varroa destructor Anderson & Trueman (Mesostigmata: Varroidae)
Tricia Toth, [email protected], University of Florida, PO Box 110620, Gainsville, FL

Managed honey bee populations have declined dramatically in the United States since 2005. Population decreases have been attributed to a number of causes including, but not limited to, pesticide exposure, parasite vectored pathogens, arthropod bee pests, and stress. Recently, there has been resurgence among researchers to investigate the possibility of pesticide effects. Pesticides of particular interest are the neonicotinoids and varroacides. Therefore, I chose to investigate how doses of two pesticides, imidacloprid and amitraz, affect bee larval development and larval susceptibility to varroa. To test this, I fed bee larvae with diet containing various concentrations of one of the two test pesticides and measured mortality at larval and pupal development as well as several sublethal variables. Secondly, I introduced pesticide treated larvae into varroa infested colonies to determine the number of mites per larva that occur in a treated cell. My results suggest amitraz fed larvae have higher larval mortality at the highest dose administered. Both amitraz and imidacloprid fed larvae had a lower percentage of adults to emerge than untreated larvae. Only imidacloprid treated larvae showed possible sublethal effects. Treated larvae had an increased larval weight at defecation and increased larval development time. There was not enough data to suggest whether or not treatment by imidacloprid or amitraz influences bee brood susceptibility to varroa. Results from my research suggest that even small doses of certain pesticides effect bee brood development, but the effects that these pesticides could have on a colony level are still unclear.


Species 1: Hymenoptera Apidae Apis mellifera (European honey bee)
Species 2: Mesostigmata Varroidae Varroa destructor (varroa mite)


----------



## johng (Nov 24, 2009)

*Re: to go to florida or Not?? [neonicotinoids]*

What is wrong with Yellow Jasmine? I am planning on getting my first bees in the spring. I live in North East Florida and have quite a bit of Yellow Jasmine (Called Carolina Jasmine locally) it blooms early in the year. Is it going to ruin my honey every year?


----------

