# TF until today



## drlonzo (Apr 15, 2014)

Sometimes in life we must make tough decisions that go against what we had hoped and worked toward for much time. These decisions are always the ones that make us sit and think about what went wrong and how it all happened. 

I applaud you for letting every one know what has happened.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

losses like that would definitely make me reconsider my approach.


----------



## burns375 (Jul 15, 2013)

squarepeg said:


> losses like that would definitely make me reconsider my approach.


how much honey was on the hives over winter that you lost?


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

burns375 said:


> how much honey was on the hives over winter that you lost?


was your question meant for eyeshooter?


----------



## Specialkayme (Sep 4, 2005)

I was TF for about 6 years, up until 2011. I too had losses in the 25-45% range, until the last year. Starting in the fall, I went from (I think) 25 full hives and 30 nucs down to 5 nucs and 15 hives by November. By December I was down to 5 hives. By January I wasn't a beekeeper anymore. TF "survivor" stock, brood breaks and natural comb ultimately proved unsuccessful. I feel that when one hive crashed from mites, the mites flooded to the neighboring hives, causing a domino effect.

When I got replacement hives in 2012, I didn't consider going TF anymore. Just treating when needed and in the least invasive method possible. It proved to be a good choice for me.

When I announced that TF didn't work for me, I was criticized by the TF community. I was told I failed because I did something wrong. Should have been small cell instead of natural cell. I took off too much honey (even though they didn't starve), my "survivor" stock wasn't good enough, or a variety of other things. In the end, they pointed the finger at me. Made me feel horrible. I hope the same doesn't happen to you.

Good choice. I hope it works out for you.


----------



## Riverderwent (May 23, 2013)

I don't blame you; I do sympathize with you; and I am not in your shoes. From your blog, the inability of the bees last year to produce sufficient honey even without your harvesting honey is troubling. Did you see signs of _varroa_ in the collapsed hives? I am curious what the effect of treating, not harvesting, and not feeding would be. But not so much that I would suggest that you do that. (See first sentence.) In my location and given my goals and purposes, I would not have taken the same steps that you did. (kirkwebster.com/index.php/collapse-and-recovery-the-gateway-to-treatment-free-beekeeping) But in the context of your larger operation, I get it. And your sharing your experience will help others know what to expect and prepare for decision points. Thank you for sharing, and I hope i goes well with you.


----------



## johng (Nov 24, 2009)

I think you will shocked at the mite drop you will get over the next few days. I hope you left your sticky boards in so you can see just how many mites it kills. Remember you will need to do a couple more treatments over the next few weeks to clean up the mites that are hidden under the capped brood. I've used the vapor on lots of hives and have never noticed any kind of negative effect. I don't use it much any more because of the time required for treatments. But, I must say it is one of the only treatments that I've used that I don't notice at least some negative side effect. Apigaurd and Apivar are my favorite treatments right now but, if your wanting to go semi treatment free Oxalic vapor is a good compromise.


----------



## clyderoad (Jun 10, 2012)

I hope Eyeshooter sees johng's comment below.

"Remember you will need to do a couple more treatments over the next few weeks to clean up the mites that are hidden under the capped brood."

One OAV treatment this time of year is not sufficient.


----------



## KQ6AR (May 13, 2008)

I've been IPM with small cell for 6 years. Our losses run from 0-20%. I only remove the drone comb if its infested, & only PS occasionally.
Everyone's experience is different.


----------



## stan.vick (Dec 19, 2010)

The end goal should be keeping your bees alive with as little treatments possible, you did that, dead bees can't adapt. If ever I get in that position, I will also chose to treat.
Where I would try draw the line is giving them something that will kill off all the things in their gut that they depend on to keep their immune system going. An external treatment is not too bad. Hope your bees do better this winter, thanks for sharing.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Re the OA treatment, 70% to 80% of the mites are inside sealed brood and not available for the OA to kill.

So as per the other comments, repeat applications are necessary, and on a time frame that does not allow mites coming out of brood cells to get back into another one before getting killed.

It is very satisfying to do an OA treatment and a few days later see a big pile of dead mites on the floor but if that is the case, consider how many must still be in there and do something for them also.


----------



## Eyeshooter (Mar 8, 2008)

To Burns375:
Most of the nucs were very low on honey tho' there were still a couple of frames in most of the nucs. 3 were empty.

As to the hives, I still have 7 full supers of honey I removed from the dead outs this spring plus I have given the nucs and hives about another 15 frames throughout the early spring and summer. Every hive had honey still present.

I had the state inspector come visit and autopsy the hives with me. We had a brutal winter last year. Several periods of 4 -5 days of -20F. Several hives "chimneyed" because it was so cold and never broke cluster. They moved straight up one side of the hive (leaving honey in their wake) reached the top and starved. Most of the others had significant numbers of mites on the tops of the frames. Ben said cold may have gotten some of them but the main culprit was mites.

Johng:
Thanks for the heads up. I've read that OAV only affects the phoretic mites. I plan on doing a 2nd treatment in 6 days and possibly one more the following week. I did take a look at one of the sticky boards under one of the high count hives. After about 8 hours there were more than 150 mites on the board. 

I'm not thrilled that I had to treat but my plan was not working and I was going to loose 2 booming hives. The choice of OAV gives me some satisfaction in that it is considered an organic treatment but I am not trying to fool myself. All of the research says it is not harmful to the bees and does not affect the queen's cycle. We'll see but I do know the bees were acting as if nothing happened today. The front activity was a bit slow immediately after the treatments but was back to normal shortly thereafter. When I went out to clean up the apiary this afternoon the bees were numerous and gentle as normal. Just short some mites...

Thanks for all of your thoughtful responses. 

John


----------



## marshmasterpat (Jun 26, 2013)

SpecialKayme - Is there a lot of commercial or other bee sources in your area? I have wondered if maybe any hygienic genetics in your cutouts might have been bred out of the hive after a few years. Each mating could reduce the hygienic actions and finally the mites just overwhelm the colony. Hate to hear that because the path you went down sounds just like me. 

Eyeshooter - I plan on doing treatment free but build a fogger in the spring just in case. 

Sometime you have to do what you have to do. Good Luck


----------



## enjambres (Jun 30, 2013)

Don't confuse the correct statement that oxalic acid is classified as an _organic acid _ in the chemical sense with the idea that it is an "organic" treatment, meaning acceptable in organic production certification. 

I'm not being critical of your decision because I treated this summer, too, with formic acid (MAQS) and later this year when my bees are broodless, with OA vapor. Last year I used concentrated thymol (Apiguard). I chose all three of these because they are "soft" treatments, unlike "hard" ones like Amitraz. 

I will do what I have to do keep my colonies alive and healthy. I also wouldn't want to be the source of the neighborhood mite-bomb that spreads the problem to other apiaries.

I'm glad to hear of your positive experience with OAV. 

Enj.


----------



## clyderoad (Jun 10, 2012)

enjambres said:


> Don't confuse the correct statement that oxalic acid is classified as an _organic acid _ in the chemical sense with the idea that it is an "organic" treatment, meaning acceptable in organic production certification.
> Enj.


what organic production certification are you referring to?


----------



## enjambres (Jun 30, 2013)

To sell food (and some fibers, like cotton) labeled as organically produced you must grow them using only certain growing techniques, chemicals, ferilizers, etc. The word certfied organic is a national standard, but the actual practices allowed under the certification varies from state to state. 

Materials used for treating certified organic crops have a listing with OMRI (Organic Materials Research Institute) but each certifying state or organization has their own list of permissible materials. Small producers in some areas may self-certify if they keep good records, for the first few years. After that it's more complicate and expensive to get, and maintain, certified organic status.

Just because some particular chemical is OMRI-listed doesn't mean it is completely benign for the environment, or safe to use widely. Sometimes the OMRI chemicals are pretty vile (and unsafe for bees), but are allowable when no other chemical or cultural practice will suffice to make a crop.

I was just trying to point out that oxalic acid which is classified as a "organic acid" in chemistry (vs an inorganic acid) is NOT the same thing as using a chemical allowable for certified organic honey production. (I'm not even sure if there is such a thing as certified organic honey.) But for sure, some of the more agressive anti-mite chemicals could not be used in hives that were organically certified, even if there was no honey crop in the hive when particular chemical was in use. Similarly, as an example, you can't treat bean seeds with non-OMRI certified soil fungicides even though those fungicides wouldn't be on the beans themselves that were later harvested and marketed as food. Organic certification is about more than just limiting chemicals directly applied to the food crops. It's about how the crops were grown, in what type of environment, with a limited input of precisely spelled-out practices and allowable materials.

One thing I am sure of though, is that without formal certification as organically produced by some outside agency you can't use that phrase on your product. You could say it was produced without chemicals, or naturally raised, or pure and natural, etc., just not "Certified Organic Honey" unless you met those standards (whatever they are in your certifying area.)

Enj.


----------



## clyderoad (Jun 10, 2012)

I understand the organic acid classification and point you made about it.

My question relates to the organic production certification, and I'm not sure either if there is such
a thing as certified organic honey or organically certified hives but I'm pretty sure there is not.

I am familiar though with certified naturally grown, CNG , and Oxalic acid is allowable under their guidelines.
clyde


----------



## Riverderwent (May 23, 2013)

"Several hives "chimneyed" because it was so cold and never broke cluster. They moved straight up one side of the hive (leaving honey in their wake) reached the top and starved."

I wonder if the fact that several hives did that illustrates that taller hives with smaller boxes (8 or 5 frame boxes) may fare better in harsh conditions.


----------



## Specialkayme (Sep 4, 2005)

marshmasterpat said:


> SpecialKayme - Is there a lot of commercial or other bee sources in your area?


None that I'm aware of. The hives were mainly in Cary, NC at the time. Not a hot spot for commercial apiaries. I've heard there was one commercial operator located in Wake County, NC, but as best I could tell he would be at least 20 miles away from where I was. That's based on rumor, speculation and conjecture. No way to be certain though. 



marshmasterpat said:


> I have wondered if maybe any hygienic genetics in your cutouts might have been bred out of the hive after a few years.


I attempted, rather vigorously, to maintain the genetic diversity of the TF stock I had. My stock had gone untreated since 2005. In 2008 I incorporated two MH queens into the mix (trying to increase hygenic behavior). While I kept them as part of the gene pool, I did not graft from those hives. In 2009 I bought out a guy in eastern TN. He had 5 hives that had gone untreated (and unmanaged, other than him "robbing honey" once a year) for 8 or 9 years. I continued to graft from my stock, and 1/2 of the TN stock. In 2010 I incorporated 1 VSH queen and 2 local "survivor" queens, both of which were advertised as maintained without treatments. I hadn't bred from either of them, as in 2011 I was still evaluating their genetic value. 

Who knows what actually happened, but I highly doubt the hygienic (or whatever traits they had) were "bred out" of them.

Looking back on it, I wouldn't have done anything differently (except I would have treated as soon as the first round of hives started to collapse, rather than let the whole house of cards fall).



enjambres said:


> I'm not being critical of your decision because I treated this summer, too, with formic acid (MAQS) and later this year when my bees are broodless, with OA vapor. Last year I used concentrated thymol (Apiguard). I chose all three of these because they are "soft" treatments, unlike "hard" ones like Amitraz.


I hope your experiences are better than mine. When I went back to treatments, I started with Apiguard. I still had mite losses. The Apiguard helped, but didn't knock the mites back enough. I then switched to formic acid (MAQS). The mite kill was substantial, but the temp range is so picky I can't treat in July/August. Only in the spring. When I treated in the spring, I lost 15% of the queens that were treated. The remaining 85% of the hives shut down all brood rearing for a 3-4 week period. It KILLED my honey production, as a shut down of brood rearing in spring destroys the foraging force. This year I was weighing either going with OA or going with Amitraz. I went with Amitraz. Zero recorded residue in comb, and it's legal. Not what I wanted, but my hives are healthier than ever after using it.

I may go with an OA/Amitraz combo next year though. Jury's still out.



Riverderwent said:


> I wonder if the fact that several hives did that illustrates that taller hives with smaller boxes (8 or 5 frame boxes) may fare better in harsh conditions.


I've heard that mentioned several times. I have yet to see a shred of evidence supporting the theory though (other than anecdotal evidence). 

It was mentioned in the last ABJ issue, and dismissed as "unfounded."


----------



## snl (Nov 20, 2009)

With the ranks of the TF folks declining daily due to high losses, perhaps it's time to consider the organic treatments as a possible alternative to remaining completely TF.....


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

snl said:


> With the ranks of the TF folks declining daily due to high losses, perhaps it's time to consider the organic treatments as a possible alternative to remaining completely TF.....


i'm just pragmatic enough to not say that i would never consider organic treatments, but there are enough examples out there proving that the right stock in the right locations with the right management can thrive off treatments, so i'll continue to give tf every reasonable opportunity. i am encouraged by some of the findings presented in randy oliver's latest articles regarding the return of vigor in unmanaged colonies and local adaptation.

to be fair i've always thought ipm made a lot of sense and is what i would consider had i not lucked into some bees that were already demonstrating resistance and survival off treatments, but of course there's no guarantee that they always will.

i'm nowhere near throwing in the towel yet, but just in case do you happen to know where i can get a good oa vaporizer?  

fwiw, the ranks of tf folks in my area are increasing.


----------



## Specialkayme (Sep 4, 2005)

squarepeg said:


> fwiw, the ranks of tf folks in my area are increasing.


Any of them have more than 3 years of experience beekeeping, as of when they turn tf?

Beekeepers as a whole are on the rise. Doesn't mean they last. They give it a go for a few years, the hive swarms, they starve out, they get overwhelmed by varroa and/or SHB, they get robbed out, and they quit. Same happens to those starting out with tf, only they don't have the history or experience to understand why it doesn't work. Most quit. Doesn't mean tf is "increasing" long term.

I sell bee equipment. Nucs boxes mostly. Usually to those starting out that want a smaller hive configuration. Most tell me how they are going tf, and a 5 frame nuc box is closer to the cavity size they find in nature. I smile, and sell them the equipment. Answer any questions they have. Happy to help. Most last a few months. Some over a year. I've yet to meet a tf starting out beekeeper in the area that's still in it after 18 months. Not a single one.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

there are six that i know of sk, and only myself and my supplier (who started tf in 1996) would qualify for the more than three years experience. one is coming up on her third winter, two their second winter, and one his first winter. 

when things slow down this winter i want to track down some of the other keepers that use this supplier to find out whether they are treating or not and with what kind of results. i hope to get us all loosely networked so that we can share information, swap queens, ect.


----------



## crofter (May 5, 2011)

I spoke at length with a retired bee inspector about treatment/treatment free in northern ontario. I asked him if he knew any treatment free beekeepers. He said he knew of none that were making it through the third winter. The damage from mites and the viruses they carry seems to be accumulative and not necessarily in proportion to the mite numbers. Mite levels that were tolerable the first season may not be by the third.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

crofter said:


> Mite levels that were tolerable the first season may not be by the third.


that seems to be the recurring theme crofter. what gives me hope is that my supplier still has two of the five original feral cut outs he started with in 1996. the other way to look at that number at 30% overwintering loss (national average treated or not) any given colony statistically doesn't have much hope of making it past three years.

i'm still under 15% overwinter loss, but that may rise as my colonies get older. i think 30% is sustainable considering how easy it is to make increase to more than offset that, (while at the same time culling out those who didn't have the right stuff) even 50% is manageable, but probably would have me thinking ipm.


----------



## Specialkayme (Sep 4, 2005)

squarepeg said:


> i hope to get us all loosely networked so that we can share information, swap queens, ect.


That would be neat. I've always wanted to have a local queen rearing co-op, or genetics trading group. But the more I talk to those around me, either they are so far away that their climate differs and the genetic needs become so different, or what they select for is SO different I'm uncertain if it would work.

There is a strain of bees called "Wayne's Bees" that are local and (purportedly) can trace it's lineage back to 1995, without the use of any form of treatments for any type of mite. If you get a queen, you promise not to treat the colony that it goes into. They either make it (the Wayne's genetics were strong enough) or they don't (the Wayne's genetics were weaker than competing genetics). I've been trying for 3 years to get a Wayne's queen, to see if it's worthy of the hype, but I've been unsuccessful. The lack of availability (while I don't know ANYONE who is getting them locally) leads me to believe it's either mostly hype, or they aren't as vigorous as they should be.

There is another breeder locally that sells "treatment free" queens. According to him, 4 years ago a swarm "came from that grain silo over there." He housed it in a box, and aggressively split from there. Never treated. Now he has (roughly) 100 colonies. All in a 4 year time period. I got a few of his queens in the spring last year (8 if memory serves me). They did well until August, when mite counts from a 48 hour drop test just EXPLODED. I decided to treat (I know others would say not to, but I don't really care). They are good guys, but I think they have TF genetics just because they don't know any better, not that their management techniques are superior or anything. But whatever, if it works for them.

I always worried that mixing different "successful" tf queens in one apiary would destroy the success of any one colony. If one colony is successful at being tf in a certain region, it could be for a variety of reasons (Purdue's Ankle Biters, VSH genetics, MH genetics, a natural break in the brood cycle, front porch grooming behavior, greater immune system, immunity to certain viruses, who knows). If you have a successful hive that contains one of these (grooming behavior, for example) and you introduce a successful tf queen from a different region that was successful for a different reason (VSH, for example), the resulting offspring could contain both traits. That could make a super resistant stock, or it could make a susceptible stock, meaning not enough of EITHER trait passed on with enough concentration to make it effective against mites.

It always made me nervous and uncertain.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

very interesting sk. i'm with you and this really is one big mystery wrapped in an enigma.

i have been giving some thought to the role hybridization plays and i was happy to see randy address it in his recent articles. 

there has been a fairly strong beekeeping presence around here for many decades, and over those years folks have been and still are bringing in genetics of all available varieties. it's a pretty bee friendly environment here weather and forage wise so most colonies swarm in most years. over time the local population has become very 'mongrelized' and it's these hybrids that are proving themselves in the unmanaged state.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

If your ultimate goal is to produce honey, usually for sale, I don't think treatment free will work for you. One of the methods of keeping mites down is brood breaks which result in smaller hives that produce less honey. The only way I can see it working for you is if you can get 8 dollars a pound for chemical free honey as opposed to 3 dollars a pound for tainted honey.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

i'm gettin' almost 8 per lb. ace, usually sold out in advance and having to keep a waiting list. ended up with about 700 lbs last year with most of that coming from five hives. i'm not sure yet about this year, i've got about 300 lbs so far but over half of my supers are still on. we had a shortened spring here and more of my harvest will be fall honey than in previous years.

i'm working on a scheme whereby i perform an artificial swarm on every hive and sell the nuc, and then try to average three to four supers harvest from each parent colony (assuming good weather). i'm getting close to having enough drawn comb to pull that off for about 10 colonies. if it pans out that should net me $700 per hive between the honey and nuc sales.


----------



## crofter (May 5, 2011)

Has anyone tried very quick comb replacement in comparison with keeping a majority of original comb. People doing a lot of splits accomplish comb change automatically. My thoughts about the three year barrier is that increase of virus titre in comb and frames could be a major component of the three year failure tendency.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

squarepeg said:


> i'm gettin' almost 8 per lb. ace, usually sold out in advance and having to keep a waiting list.


Yes, how will you get that price if you start dumping chemicals in the hive? Not tell the customer?


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

believe it or not even the beeks using chemicals around are getting close to that price. being able to say that i don't use them or feed sugar may appeal to some customers, but i don't think it would be a deal breaker. in the end they have to trust whoever they are purchasing from as to the purity of the honey and i have had a reputation long before becoming a beekeeper of being trustworthy. 

it's partly for the honey but it's mostly because i feel that i am doing right by the species that i'll go the extra mile to manage them off treatments unless it becomes unsustainable.


----------



## clyderoad (Jun 10, 2012)

squarepeg: "over time the local population has become very 'mongrelized' and it's these hybrids that are proving themselves in the unmanaged state".
How did you come to know this? 

squarepeg: "i feel that i am doing right by the species "
would "doing right" also include breeding these queens and making them available to others to see if they have what it takes in other locals? I'd pretty much know if a spring queen did or didn't have it by Thanksgiving.
clyde


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

clyderoad said:


> squarepeg: "over time the local population has become very 'mongrelized' and it's these hybrids that are proving themselves in the unmanaged state".
> How did you come to know this?


i'm only making an assumption clyde based in combination on what i know of the history of beekeeping in my area, the history of the stock my supplier has, my experience with this stock, and the research on ferals cited in randy's articles. it makes good enough sense for me to adopt it as a working hypothesis, but that's all it is. 



clyderoad said:


> squarepeg: "i feel that i am doing right by the species "
> would "doing right" also include breeding these queens and making them available to others to see if they have what it takes in other locals? I'd pretty much know if a spring queen did or didn't have it by Thanksgiving.
> clyde


i've been asked for queens from folks in different locals and i have talked to the breeder about stepping up production. i have a couple of beeks in neighboring states that have put orders in for nucs in the spring, and my thinking is that it would be better to gradually seed them closer going in all directions from here and see how they do.

frankly i would be very surprised if a queen sent to you in new york would produce a colony that would perform as good as bees that are already acclimated there. not only that but after the queen is replaced by her daughter which then mates with your drones you'll have an entirely different colony anyway. 

(the other part of the equation is that we are not using syrup and i don't know how much or how little that has to do with their success. some areas may not have enough flow to allow for a decent harvest without feeding back syrup).

sorry to repeat, but these considerations are explained very well in randy's articles and he does a good job laying out the scientific basis for them. as far as comparing these bees to others we will be sending queens to baton rouge next spring where precise quantitative testing can be done.


----------



## clyderoad (Jun 10, 2012)

all well and good.

I'm using myself (and location) as an example only.
Maybe a 7 month long observation of these queens in another local is all that is needed to see if their mite hardiness is transferable. 6-12 of these queens each in a spring nuc (april) eliminates acclimation, and syrup. Here, we routinely make spring nucs using purchased queens, then move them into 10 frame boxes with supers for honey flow. Some of these are good queens, some aren't. It's what we have come to expect. Do the same with these TF bees. 
Manage them correctly and the daughter queen issue becomes insignificant.
By August I'd have plenty of visible evidence as to whether they had a chance to make the fall flow. By end of November they would either be dead or had a shot at surviving the winter. 7 month's to see if they could handle mites TF, that's it. 
No acclimation necessary, no syrup, managed to minimize swarming so no daughter queens.
Get them out there, pretty easy to make bees, right?
Let's see what you're talking about and what these bees may have that other bees do not.
I'm keeping it simple, Am I missing something?


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

it would be interesting to see what happens with them in that environment. what i read is most of the time when bees like this are placed in different locals they make it alright the first year but the hardiness doesn't always transfer to the next generation. i haven't sold any queens only nucs. the supplier sells about 100 queens and 100 nucs each season. mating is done in four frame nuc boxes and his queens aren't sold until they have laid up a frame or two. i think he could probably get more queens produced with the use of an incubator. are you wanting to try some of them up there clyde?


----------



## clyderoad (Jun 10, 2012)

squarepeg, I'd give them a try, why not? It would be interesting to see what happens and that 7 month trial would yield plenty of useful information. From my perspective, it is not the time to become complacent when working with honey bees. Trying new methods, observing new bees for hardiness, etc., etc., is a must.


----------



## Riverderwent (May 23, 2013)

"I've heard that mentioned several times. I have yet to see a shred of evidence supporting the theory though (other than anecdotal evidence).
"It was mentioned in the last ABJ issue, and dismissed as 'unfounded.'" 

marinbees.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/MBN-2012-02.pdf


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

clyderoad said:


> Trying new methods, observing new bees for hardiness, etc., etc., is a must.


i'll second that motion, and i am willing to do whatever i can to facilitate getting some of these queens to you clyde. the breeder always has more demand than supply, but i think we can work on that.


----------



## clyderoad (Jun 10, 2012)

Riverderwent said:


> "I've heard that mentioned several times. I have yet to see a shred of evidence supporting the theory though (other than anecdotal evidence).
> "It was mentioned in the last ABJ issue, and dismissed as 'unfounded.'"
> 
> marinbees.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/MBN-2012-02.pdf


what are you referring to?


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

crofter said:


> Has anyone tried very quick comb replacement in comparison with keeping a majority of original comb. People doing a lot of splits accomplish comb change automatically. My thoughts about the three year barrier is that increase of virus titre in comb and frames could be a major component of the three year failure tendency.


interesting thought. i guess it would depend on how long lived the viruses are out of the host.


----------



## Riverderwent (May 23, 2013)

clyderoad said:


> what are you referring to?


Research by Dr. Tom Seeley regarding the effect of nest shape and feral hive survival:
“Dr Seeley has recently been studying feral colonies in the Arnot Forrest of New York. In particular, he has been studying how bees live without intervention from beekeepers. His research compares managed vs. wild colonies. He has focused on four specific areas - colony spacing, nest site, nest design, and colony survival, and the consequences of these differences. 
…
"Feral hives tend to be tall and slender, while the Langstroth hive tends to be short and squat. The bees are able to manage the temperature more easily in a tall and slender shape; hence, there is better winter survival.”


----------



## clyderoad (Jun 10, 2012)

squarepeg said:


> i'll second that motion, and i am willing to do whatever i can to facilitate getting some of these queens to you clyde. the breeder always has more demand than supply, but i think we can work on that.


Thank you for your offer, please keep me in mind come early spring. March 15th. is usually not to early for starting spring nucs if the queens are available.


----------



## Harley Craig (Sep 18, 2012)

Why would anybody expect TF bees to last indeffantly in captivity, they surely don't in the wild. In nature they die out ( at some point ) wax moths and other critters destroy and clean out the cavity and a new colony eventually moves in to start the cycle over. My goal at a TF beekeeper is to replicate this cycle in a controllable manner so than I'm replacing any losses with new stock Will I get a ton of honey this way probably not (most likely not ) is that ok with me ? Absolutely..... I wonder if the ultra successful TF beekeeper success lies in this cycle as most I would imagine are selling bees witch means constantly rotating out combs in nucs, etc


----------



## Juhani Lunden (Oct 3, 2013)

Acebird said:


> The only way I can see it working for you is if you can get 8 dollars a pound for chemical free honey as opposed to 3 dollars a pound for tainted honey.


My long time customers very well know, I have told them about not treating for years and years, what I do and how difficult it is to be TF. These same folks might still be asking me for a better price... Don´t count on that you will get any better price. TF is new for beekeepers, but it is totally unknown among people buying honey.


----------



## Specialkayme (Sep 4, 2005)

Riverderwent said:


> Research by Dr. Tom Seeley regarding the effect of nest shape and feral hive survival:
> “Dr Seeley has recently been studying feral colonies in the Arnot Forrest of New York. In particular, he has been studying how bees live without intervention from beekeepers. His research compares managed vs. wild colonies. He has focused on four specific areas - colony spacing, nest site, nest design, and colony survival, and the consequences of these differences.
> …
> "Feral hives tend to be tall and slender, while the Langstroth hive tends to be short and squat. The bees are able to manage the temperature more easily in a tall and slender shape; hence, there is better winter survival.”


First of all, your quote is not of Dr. Seeley's work. It's of an article in "The Martin Beek News" (whatever that's supposed to be) in February of 2012 that appears to summarize and interpret Dr. Seeley's work. Incorrectly, I might add.

Dr. Seeley's research actually didn't look too much at the geometric dimensions of a hive. Instead, he killed the colony, filled the cavity with sand, and measured the volume of the sand that was poured in to determine the average volume of the cavity. No data was taken on the internal dimensions. While killing the colony in the process, there is no way Dr. Seeley could tell if the colony was "better at winter survival."

Dr. Seeley returned to the Arnot Forrest in New York 10 years after he studied feral colonies. What he found was the number of colonies was consistent. However, not one single location where I hive was 10 years ago still had a colony 10 years later. Meaning, at least arguably, the sites they chose (tall and slender) did not support proper "winter survival", as all of the colonies died out eventually, and their cavity spaces were not chosen by successor swarms as suitable locations.

But in the end, it's still just anecdotal evidence. Nothing actually using the scientific method to measure cavity spacing and determine if taller, slender hives produce better winter survival than standard 10 frame langstroth hives, negating all other possible factors. No scientific study has been done on this. I stand by my statement.

In the future, how about you actually quote Dr. Seeley's work, instead of quoting an article written about Dr. Seeley that attempts to summarize his findings. Lets be accurate here.


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

Acebird said:


> If your ultimate goal is to produce honey, usually for sale, I don't think treatment free will work for you. One of the methods of keeping mites down is brood breaks which result in smaller hives that produce less honey. The only way I can see it working for you is if you can get 8 dollars a pound for chemical free honey as opposed to 3 dollars a pound for tainted honey.


As long as we are on the subject of accuracy. Let me be clear about one very important point. Miticide or antibiotic residues only show up in honey of those beekeepers who choose treatments and treatment times that are off label. It's not only possible for people that treat to produce honey that is free of beekeeper applied chemical residue it's actually pretty easy, it only requires making responsible decisions. 
If your choice is to be treatment free with the goal of breeding stronger, more self reliant bees, I totally get that, I graft from such hives myself each year. Let's just not confuse the uninformed by insinuating that honey that comes from hives that have been treated with any chemical at any time in the past is somehow tainted.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

jim lyon said:


> Let's just not confuse the uninformed by insinuating that honey that comes from hives that have been treated with any chemical at any time in the past is somehow tainted.


Very informed people who look for honey without chemicals do not believe you. Many get into beekeeping because of that very reason.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

clyde, we are tucked up into the northeastern corner of the state and at an elevation of about 1400' asl. spring came 3 - 4 weeks late this year and the drones didn't start flying mid-april. 2014 queens weren't laying until the end of may. it may be possible to get queens as early as mid march from suppliers farther south than us, but ours wouldn't be ready until a couple of months after that.


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

Acebird said:


> Very informed people who look for honey without chemicals do not believe you. Many get into beekeeping because of that very reason.


...and the irony is that they are, at best, uninformed or, at worst, being dishonest with their customers by categorizing all honey from beekeepers who treat as being tainted based on the sins of a few. I have test results 5 years running that my honey is free of ALL beekeeper applied miticides. I think that is significant, don't you? I have yet to hear from a single treatment free devotee has had their honey tested to see what environmental contaminants, if not miticide residues from past years, may well be in it. So who actually are the "informed" ones?


----------



## johng (Nov 24, 2009)

I'm with Mr. Lyon on this one just because a bee keeper treats it does not mean that his honey is some how tainted with any thing. We received our test results back from the State yesterday and there was nothing found in it. No miticides or anything else. Here's a link to the cover page of the report. https://www.facebook.com/5198512314...9851231447309/657352824363815/?type=1&theater


----------



## Juhani Lunden (Oct 3, 2013)

johng said:


> I'm with Mr. Lyon on this one just because a bee keeper treats it does not mean that his honey is some how tainted with any thing.


This is one of the biggest tragedies of TF beekeeping: We cannot say we are producing better honey. OA and thymol are solely used in Finland and they work just excellent. How am I going to sell my honey with better price? It is hard and is only possible with those arguments Jim mentioned: "with the goal of breeding stronger, more self reliant bees"


----------



## marshmasterpat (Jun 26, 2013)

jim lyon said:


> As long as we are on the subject of accuracy. Let me be clear about one very important point. Miticide or antibiotic residues only show up in honey of those beekeepers who choose treatments and treatment times that are off label. It's not only possible for people that treat to produce honey that is free of beekeeper applied chemical residue it's actually pretty easy, it only requires making responsible decisions.
> .... Let's just not confuse the uninformed by insinuating that honey that comes from hives that have been treated with any chemical at any time in the past is somehow tainted.


Sadly this is so true with so many things. There is evidence that it was more the misuse of DDT that caused all of the issues with so rapid of bio-accumulation in birds. How many people read round up or other chemical labels and really follow them. A pound of fertilizer per acre is called for twice a spring, so someone wants the best looking lawn so does the 2X or more the application rate 3 or 4 times a spring. See it in the suburbs and seen it on the farms. An ounce is good so two ounces is better. A light misting is called for to kill the plant so I doused it extra heavy to make sure it dies. 

How many times have we something heard this if we really watched and listened to what was said by others?


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

I want to preface this by agreeing with Jim.

At the same time, a shirt sewn by slave labor in a sweat shop can be 100% identical to one made by a well paid and insured worker....yet there is nothing illegitimate or misleading to choose to support the shirt made in a way that you want to support.


----------



## jbeshearse (Oct 7, 2009)

deknow said:


> I want to preface this by agreeing with Jim.
> 
> At the same time, a shirt sewn by slave labor in a sweat shop can be 100% identical to one made by a well paid and insured worker....yet there is nothing illegitimate or misleading to choose to support the shirt made in a way that you want to support.


So where did the fabric they sew with come from? GMO Cotton? Nylon made at a factory that dumps its waste on the landscape? Treatment free is just one small link in the overall honey supply chain. Most hives probably have more incidental pesticide in them than beekeeper applied mitacide. You can be treatment free and your neighbors can still be dumping pesticides on the flowers and plants your bees are visiting. Which end up in the honey. 

Treatment free does not equate to chemical/pesticide free, which it is very often implied to be.

But I do agree with Deknow, you can support whatever you choose to support in whatever manner you choose to support. It is just so often that people are led into thinking they are supporting something that in fact they are not.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

johng said:


> We received our test results back from the State yesterday and there was nothing found in it.


Or the chemicals detected are within the state guidelines?


----------



## lazy shooter (Jun 3, 2011)

I keep bees for a hobby and give my honey away. So my livelihood does not depend on my bees. My choices are to treat and help grow more pesticide resistant bees, or be treatment free and hopefully produce stronger bees. I choose the latter.


----------



## JWChesnut (Jul 31, 2013)

lazy shooter said:


> I keep bees for a hobby and give my honey away. So my livelihood does not depend on my bees. My choices are to treat and help grow more pesticide resistant bees, or be treatment free and hopefully produce stronger bees. I choose the latter.


The internet "meme" that some backyard keeper will shift the genetic composition of a worldwide interbreeding insect is pure foolishness. The genetics of a promiscuous outbreeding insect simply don't work that way.

The idea that TF/not TF is a moral choice driven by the selective death of backyard hives ignores what is known about bee biology. I have no idea why the internet promoters of TF trot this red herring out, but it is a disservice to their students.

John Kefuss originated the "Bond Test" strategy, and in interviews (2013) concedes he still experiences high mites and has colony death similar to other keepers in his region. He also recognizes that the pure "Bond" test is out-of-reach to most due to its very high losses, his gentler "soft Bond" prescription starts with -- 1. Obtain a large number of hives (500).......

The Weaver queens are based on the continuing selection of thousands of colonies in an semi-isolated breeding population.

For the same reasons that millions of backyard gardens growing cucumbers do not breed resistance to Cucumber virus transmitted by Diabrotica, backyard hives have (statistically) zero chance of developing intrinsic resistance.

Reference: Kefuss interview http://marinbees.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/BEEK-NEWS-Dec-2013.pdf


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

deknow said:


> At the same time, a shirt sewn by slave labor in a sweat shop


A more appropriate analogy, to my thinking, is for someone to insist on buying from a person who refuses to get medical care for their children...you know....those 'Bond method' parents.
As long as outrageous analogies seem to be....on topic.


----------



## JWChesnut (Jul 31, 2013)

beemandan said:


> A more appropriate analogy.....


I drafted a response using Dogs and Heartworm as a Husbandry/Livestock pair where society understands prophylactic medicine, but discovered in a quick Google that there is a whole sub-culture of "Treatment-free" Dog owners that insist that refusing to treat for Heartworm is a moral imperative for breeding better dogs.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

JWChesnut said:


> backyard hives have (statistically) zero chance of developing intrinsic resistance.


The hive doesn't breed with itself. The queens go out in the wild and hopefully pick up better genetics. All you are doing is letting the ones that can't survive varoa die that should only leave the one that can survive varoa live on.

It has been said that if you do not treat a hive in three or four years it will die out. Why? If the genetics can't change how does a hive get weaker and weaker as time goes on. Why wouldn't all hives die in the first year?


----------



## Roland (Dec 14, 2008)

It is though that the mites take 2-3 years to build to a critical level. I would suspect that the vectored viruses also play a role.

Remember Ace, re can not breed from survivors if you don't have any.

crazy Roland


----------



## Juhani Lunden (Oct 3, 2013)

JWChesnut said:


> The internet "meme" that some backyard keeper will shift the genetic composition of a worldwide interbreeding insect is pure foolishness ... backyard hives have (statistically) zero chance of developing intrinsic resistance.


People like Kefuss are rare exceptions. Crazy ( and rich?) professionals who are ready to jeopardize their living. Normally the big beekeepers are not interested in TF beekeeping.
Backyard beekeeper may not be able to fix inbreeding problems, but...

I think the change to TF beekeeping on global and large scale is only possible when the demand and change starts from the bottom level: honey consumers, small beekeepers, young beekeepers and beekeeping groups or associations. 

Josef Koller in Germany has a plan. Starting from one bee yard, making little by little small circles which have only resistant drones flying, larger areas where TF beekeeping is possible, could be created. At the moment I see no alternative to this plan.


----------



## Specialkayme (Sep 4, 2005)

Acebird said:


> It has been said that if you do not treat a hive in three or four years it will die out. Why? If the genetics can't change how does a hive get weaker and weaker as time goes on. Why wouldn't all hives die in the first year?


I would have thought someone wouldn't need to explain this to you Ace. 

High levels of mites sucking hemolymph (bee blood) from brood can weaken a colony. But it's usually more about the spread of viruses and other diseases. Not all mites cary DWV, or any of the laundry list of ****tail diseases. Only some do. So if one mite in 100 carries the DWV virus, and that mite becomes the mother of two mites, as she feeds off the bee larvae and infects the larvae with DWV, when her daughters feed off the same larvae, they get DWV too. Now they go off, and "pass it down" to other daughters. 

Some hives aren't strong enough to withstand the diseases for one year, and they crash. But a TF operation selects for the strongest hives. But the viruses continue to spread. It takes (on average) 3 or 4 years for the constant pressure of the mites and the spread of the viruses to eventually degrade the colony down. Sometimes not to the point that they abscond or die out, but sometimes it just makes them lethargic and weak, good targets for robbers and another strong colony.


----------



## peterloringborst (Jan 19, 2010)

Not exactly about bees, but germane


> “I don’t like taking medicines.” All physicians hear some form of this opinion very frequently. Even more frequently, patients don’t state this view outright but rely on it to completely subvert their doctor’s plans. When I was new to practice such an utterance would shock and confuse me. “I don’t want to take any medicines,” a patient would declare.
> 
> Lots of patients adopt this anti-medication preference in the absence of any evidence or serious thought. A strong preference without analysis or evidence is simply a bias. (When I have a strong preference in the absence of evidence, it’s a _philosophy_; when other people have it, it’s a _bias_.)
> 
> ...


http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2014/06/problem-anti-medication-bias.html


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

SPK, doesn't every hive have constant pressure of the mites? All you are doing is lowering the population of the mites and because chemical treatment is a practice of killing a bug on a bug you also lower the second bug population along with making them weaker (they are getting treated too). Do you treat when you have low numbers or high numbers of mites?


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

peterloringborst said:


> Not exactly about bees, but germane
> 
> 
> http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2014/06/problem-anti-medication-bias.html





> Now, don’t get me wrong. There are certainly good reasons not take a medication. You might develop a side effect.


Same article.


----------



## lazy shooter (Jun 3, 2011)

As time passes by, the vorroa mite becomes more resistant to our pesticides. The people that produce pesticides come up with newer and more efficient products to kill the mites. It seems to be an endless circle jerk. But is it? Can we produce newer mite toxins forever? I truly don't know the answer to this question.

Secondly, any chemical we introduce into the hive has some possible residual and unintended consequences. Do the current miticides leave a potential for long term harm to our bodies? Again, I truly don't know. What I do know is that if one does not introduce toxins into their hives these potential problems do not exist.

Hell, I raise treatment free beef. My cattle have been on my pastures for decades, and I do not vaccinate my cattle for anything. Also, my cattle are not sprayed for flies, and as a result, I have all of my calves sold before they are ready for market.

I don't mind if the rest of you treat, and I can understand a commercial beekeeper not being able to lose too much of his live stock.

Finally, I'm 75 and don't have a lot of time to worry about what to do.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

Specialkayme said:


> It takes (on average) 3 or 4 years for the constant pressure of the mites and the spread of the viruses to eventually degrade the colony down. Sometimes not to the point that they abscond or die out, but sometimes it just makes them lethargic and weak, good targets for robbers and another strong colony.


preventing robbing is huge. 

there is a beek near here that started new last year with 20 hives using commercial stock. robbing became a problem and reducing entrances didn't stop it. one by one 19 out of 20 of these colonies died out over the winter except for one. the one that made it to spring was queenless and had laying workers. 

when i examined the frames left behind by these dead outs it was obviously varroa as there was more mite frass in the brood comb than i have ever seen. 

so it was a total loss, most likely a domino effect whereby the mites became more concentrated with each successive robbing event.

i am very interested to see if the three to four year thing pans out in my apiary. i'm just now getting to the point where i should be able to see it. i am encouraged by the fact that my supplier has colonies that are thriving well beyond that with a couple of them at 18 years now. time will tell.


----------



## peterloringborst (Jan 19, 2010)

> As time passes by, the varroa mite becomes more resistant to our pesticides. ... Secondly, any chemical we introduce into the hive has some possible residual and unintended consequences. Do the current miticides leave a potential for long term harm to our bodies?


This may be true for many or most, but not for the organic acids (formic, oxalic, acetic). No resistance has developed to these, as the action is different from conventional miticides. They "burn" the mites. Maybe the could learn to hide from them, but I doubt it.

Second, "any chemical" is sort of a blanket statement. Any? The crux of the matter is _dosage_. Water is a chemical, so is oxygen. Without the proper amount of these you would die. Too much can kill somebody but to refer to water and oxygen as poisons would be to invite derision. 

The organic acids occur naturally in honey, and are perfectly harmless in low concentrations. At high enough concentrations any of them could burn the hide off a horse. 

The idea that "chemicals are bad" shows a lack of understanding of basic biology, medicine, reality. In reality our bodies produce chemical defenses to ward off pathogens. Many plants, bacteria, etc. produce poisons to kill invading pathogens like bugs, viruses, other bacteria, etc. It's a dog eat dog world. You will survive based upon your ability to defend yourself.

What I don't get is that people that would spend thousands protecting their children, their pets, their homes -- turn their back and let their bees die. Bottom line: you can't be a beekeeper with dead bees.


----------



## Juhani Lunden (Oct 3, 2013)

peterloringborst said:


> This may be true for many or most, but not for the organic acids (formic, oxalic, acetic). No resistance has developed to these, as the action is different from conventional miticides. They "burn" the mites. Maybe the could learn to hide from them, but I doubt it.


In Finland OA has widely been used for at least 15 years. In the beginning it was strictly forbidden to use it more than once a year. The reason was possible bee losses, it is quite heavy stuff.

Today most of the professional beekeepers have changed their practises and use OA in autumn and spring (before brood rearing starts more heavily). 

I asked the local advisor, how come this change has happened. He answered that no resistance has been demonstrated, but viruses have become so much more severe; when 95% efficiency was enough 10 years ago, today 99% efficiency is needed.

Little more wax on the mites cuticle could make acids ineffective?


----------



## Specialkayme (Sep 4, 2005)

Acebird said:


> SPK, doesn't every hive have constant pressure of the mites?


I don't understand the point you are trying to make.

Yes, hives are under constant pressure of the mites. Yes, you treat when mite levels are high. 

But if you leave the mite levels high, that's where the damage comes from. Sometimes immediately, sometimes it takes 3-4 years. I don't understand why you don't get that.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

Specialkayme said:


> I don't understand the point you are trying to make.
> 
> Yes, hives are under constant pressure of the mites. Yes, you treat when mite levels are high.


Too late they are already infected with viruses. You medicate to kill the mites not the viruses. No body medicates to kill the viruses. Every hive is under constant pressure. The hives that cannot survive on their own die unless you want to medicate them (for mites). That doesn't make them stronger that makes them weaker and dependent on you. The hives that can survive the pressure on their own are stronger bees and don't depend on you to medicate for mites.


----------



## wcnewby (Sep 28, 2014)

I don't think you are a traitor to the TF movement at all. Mites are not a disease, they are creatures that are trying to survive, same as your bees. No bees are immune to them. Russian bees can tolerate them, but I don't believe they can make them go away. You would almost have to do something or be irresponsible. I don't understand enough about mites to know what you could do to make them all die. From what I do understand, they go for drones first, which makes sense because other hives will let strange drones in. This would allow the mite to spread from hive to hive. If you get one hive with mites, it will spread them to the rest of your hives.... like fleas would spread from dog pack to dog pack. You did the right thing for your bees. Anybody who calls you a jerk is a jerk. Just ignore them.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

_wcnewby_, perhaps you could benefit from studying this USDA Agricultural Research Service page on the mechanisms around varroa reproduction ....

http://www.ars.usda.gov/Research/docs.htm?docid=2744&page=14


----------



## Specialkayme (Sep 4, 2005)

Acebird said:


> Too late they are already infected with viruses.


Bees don't spread viruses to other bees by contact. They spread it through mites. SOME bees are infected with viruses. If you remove the mites, the viruses stop spreading. If you don't remove the mites, the viruses continue to spread, infecting a larger percentage of the hive. Why do you think mite infested hives show DWV, but after treatments, the DWV goes away? At least until the mite levels get high again. DWV isn't spread by one bee breathing on another. 

That's akin to saying small pox exists in third world countries. The world is already infected, might as well stop giving vaccines or spreading anti-bodies. Asinine.


----------



## Bblock (Sep 2, 2014)

Eyeshooter - I'm 4 months new to this. It seemed like you had a good thing going for what? 6 years or so? Then last year had a epic winter and you lost a lot. I'm just wondering why or what makes you think the same will happen this winter? I'm wondering how things were going into last winter and all the winters before, how did the mite counts compare from year to year? I'm in no way criticizing your choice please don't take this comment as such. I'm wondering if the shock of how easy they were lost compared to the labor invested was a humbling experience. Once bitten twice shy, type of thing. Again, I'm new and naive, having great dreams of wanting to offer the bees the opportunity to cull themselves out, what doesn't kill them makes them stronger. I have 2 hives and my counts are 11 and 50 on the stickyboard. I bought 4 packs of the Thymol and they are sitting on the counter as I try to decide which fork in the road to travel. Could it be a test of time, trials and tribulations one is willing to put up with??


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

Specialkayme said:


> The world is already infected, might as well stop giving vaccines or spreading anti-bodies. Asinine.


You should research some of the side effects of giving vaccines. Maybe some of your labeling will stop.


----------



## wcnewby (Sep 28, 2014)

Rader Sidetrack said:


> _wcnewby_, perhaps you could benefit from studying this USDA Agricultural Research Service page on the mechanisms around varroa reproduction ....
> 
> http://www.ars.usda.gov/Research/docs.htm?docid=2744&page=14


disgusting little buggers....


----------



## GLOCK (Dec 29, 2009)

I say treat {I use OAV} and get all the VARROA off the bee's and let the hives get strong so they have a fighting chance.
I treated with OAV last fall and no mites this year . I plan on treating a couple soon. as of 2 week's ago no mites in any of my alcohol wash's.
Get the mite's out of the hive and off the bee's and they will bounce back once they are healthy bee's are pretty strong. then you can see what hives are what when it come's to handling mite loads and build from there. 
Just my 2cent's


----------



## Specialkayme (Sep 4, 2005)

Acebird said:


> You should research some of the side effects of giving vaccines.


You're a troll.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

More labels ...


----------



## Eyeshooter (Mar 8, 2008)

Well, this thread has taking some interesting turns, including name calling which is one of the reasons I debated about even posting this topic. Of course, some folks just make you want to call them names.:no: Basically, I think it has been educational and thank everyone for sharing their experiences. This is helpful and is how I learn.

Some folks have asked me questions which I hope to answer with this post but first, here are the results 6 days post treatment.

*Hive 1:*
Pre-treat: 24 hour mite drop of 10 - 12

6 Days post-treat with OAV: 1,100+ dead mites

*Hive 2:*
Pre-treat: 24 hour mite drop of 10 - 12

Post-treat with powdered sugar dusting 2x 1 week apart: mite drop count remaining at 10 - 12/24 hr

6 Days post-treat with OAV: 500+ dead mites

*Hives 3 and 4*
Hives were queenless long enough to break brood cycle in August, re-queened late August. Thinking that would nip the mite population I did not do 24 hr mite drop test prior to OAV (my bad...)

6 Days post-treat with OAV: about 350 dead mites in hive 3. About 250 in Hive 4.

Due to weather, I have not performed a complete inspection of the hives but have 3 anecdotal observations:
Bee activity appears unchanged
Looking inside top super continues to show a lot of bees
The number of dead bees in front of the hives does not appear to have increased

Now to the questions or comments:

I was treatment free from the beginning. It was the beginning of my 7th season when I had these losses. Prior to that I had not used sugar dusting or any other treatment except feeding syrup after the 1 time I dusted in year 2. This exceeds the 3 years that was mentioned several times but I truly believe all beekeeping results are local.

To BBlock:
You asked several very good questions. I started beekeeping hoping to be able to improve the LOCAL genetics of the bees in my area by showing other local beekeepers that honeybees could be raised TF and serve as an example to other beeks who insist on bringing up packages every year. Yes, I realize the hypocrisy of this statement as I started with package bees...It did serve as an example for our club as many folks at least started thinking about when to treat rather than prophylactically treating. 

After seeing the incredible number of mites we found this spring in the frass of the dead outs as well as the large number of mites we found on the top bars of the frames in the lower supers, I decided to treat this year based on mite counts quickly rising this fall. It became very obvious to me that my approach was not working and that if I want to have bees in the spring, I needed to help them manage the mite population this fall. As many have said in this thread, it is hard to improve the species when all of your bees are dead.

Does this mean I will automatically treat a year from now? No...I will once again look at the results of my inspections and make the decision based on findings rather than habit. That being said, if I find counts of 10 or above after a season of 0 - 1, I will not hesitate to treat. I did a lot of reading and believe OAV may be the bullet I was looking for. Minimally invasive to the hive, appears to have the least impact on the bees while having a significant impact on mites and is naturally occurring in honey. Of course, further hive inspections are required and I need to see how they come through winter. BTW, I also plan on doing another treatment tomorrow when the weather breaks as OAV is only effective on phorectic mites. If I'm going to treat I want to make sure it works.

Thanks, all!

John


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

very good post john. thanks for sharing your experiences.

i'm around the corner time frame wise with my colonies from where you were when you lost so many.

my unofficial number for acceptable losses is about 30% before reconsidering staying off treatments.

treating when indicated is a very pragmatic approach, best of luck to you.


----------



## Eyeshooter (Mar 8, 2008)

Thanks, Squarepeg. Best of luck to you, as well! Being thoughtfully TF is a lot of work and I do believe it can happen giving the right set of circumstances and perseverance. My retirement plan changed reducing the amount of time I had to spend in the apiary just as the girls reached the level I had intended. Unfortunately, the lack of time caught my bees tho' taught me a valuable lesson that I was first too blind to see. Now it is my job not to let that happen again.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

Eyeshooter said:


> Now it is my job not to let that happen again.


I would like to know how you plan on accomplishing this. If I understand your statement correctly you were retired and then you came out of retirement. The lack of time with your bees made them suffer and your solution is to add workload in the bee yard by treating as opposed to not treating? I don't know how that works.


----------



## Roland (Dec 14, 2008)

Eyeshooter: I believe you did the prudent thing, and mat be a role model for others. You followed one of my favorite mottos, from Dirty Harry, "a man has got to know his limitations".

Crazy roland


----------



## Juhani Lunden (Oct 3, 2013)

squarepeg said:


> my unofficial number for acceptable losses is about 30% before reconsidering staying off treatments.


I would suggest that even if you get 70% losses you could study the remaining hives and decide after that - 


"my mama used to say, life is like a box of chocolate, you never know what you gonna get", Forest Gumb


----------



## suzyq (Jun 30, 2014)

Knew my hive was loaded with mites in July. Did the powder sugar once a week for 6 weeks as suggested by a beekeeper on her website. Didn't do a lot for getting rid of the mites but did make them really pissy and during those six weeks got stung several times and chased out of my yard at far distances from the hive. Left them alone a couple weeks and they were back to being a pleasure to be around but my mite problem was still existed. Did a lot of research and read posts on this website and did OVA for the first time 2 1/2 days ago. Twenty minutes after I vaporized I stood in front of the hive to see if they were going to chase me off but it was life as usual for them and I'm one happy beekeeper. Ohhh and so far in the 2 1/2 days I have counted approximately 500 dead mites! Will do 3 more treatments 5 days apart and one after Thanksgiving. I also might add seeing all those dead mites was like having Christmas early for me! Yes, I do get attached to my bees and I love to see those mites dropping like flies. Really appreciated your thread to this post to John put a smile on my face. Happy to know I'm not the only one taking the time to count the mites.


----------



## Eyeshooter (Mar 8, 2008)

Acebird said:


> I would like to know how you plan on accomplishing this. If I understand your statement correctly you were retired and then you came out of retirement. The lack of time with your bees made them suffer and your solution is to add workload in the bee yard by treating as opposed to not treating? I don't know how that works.


Sorry Acebird. You do not understand my statement correctly. I believe to be what I call "thoughtfully TF", meaning doing everything one can to manage their bees without chemical intervention vs those who do nothing and say they are TF, takes more beekeeper time than a lot of the folks I know who treat. Let me also add here, I do not care if you treat your bees or not. They are your bees and you make your own management decisions just as I make mine. Those who treat, regardless of hard or soft, have a big eraser they can use to rid the hive of mites. Those who do not have to do more queen capture, splitting, monitoring etc since there is no quick way to destroy the mites. 

I planned on taking early retirement but several projects caught my interest and I continue to work when I thought I would be finished and have more bee time. Instead I had international travel, not apiary time, reducing the time I had to manage the apiary. As I look at a rapidly rising mite count this fall after doing queen capture, splitting, monitoring sugar dusting etc, I have decided to take a step off the bandwagon to intervene and use a soft treatment to help my bees prep for winter otherwise I will not have bees in the spring. As to more time, having done this only once and not claiming to be proficient, my OAV treatment took less time per hive than it takes to inspect 1 hive body. With over 2,000 dead mites across 4 hives, I believe that was time well spent. Hopefully, I do not have the same issues next year and will be able to manage the mite count. If not, I think I have found a happy medium that at first glance appears to have minimal effect on the hive and takes almost no time.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Eyeshooter said:


> Those who do not have to do more queen capture, splitting, monitoring etc since there is no quick way to destroy the mites.


I believe that true TF beekeepers would argue just the opposite. Especially since monitoring isn't usually part of their regimen. Let the bees take care of themselves is the motto I am seeing. And if they can't, good, better off w/out bees that can't. Is also what I am seeing penned by TF beekeepers. If I have that incorrectly stated I am sure someone will correct me.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

From a *time *perspective, as was Acebird's post and _Eyeshooter_'s response, doesn't all that splitting (and other management) required to make up those losses takes _more time_ than 3 OAV treatments + mite counts?



I thought _Eyeshooter _summarized the situation nicely. :thumbsup::thumbsup:


----------



## Eyeshooter (Mar 8, 2008)

Mark: Probably true and I also used to believe that. My personal experience finally led me to believe that if I monitor I have a better idea when to split or queen capture to break the brood cycle to reduce a blossoming mite load (which I guess are actually treatments). Some folks don't and figure the bees will work it out or not. We all do what we think is best. I guess I was not a "true TF beekeeper" tho' I never put anything into the hive that the bees did not bring in themselves except for feeding syrup only when absolutely necessary. My 2013/14 losses made me rethink my management plan and I am happy with my decision. I absolutely believe if you can bring your hive through winter without treating, go for it.

John


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

Juhani Lunden said:


> I would suggest that even if you get 70% losses you could study the remaining hives and decide after that -


i think i could recover from a 50% loss and still get a decent (but not great) honey harvest.

if i find that it is the 3 - 4 year colonies that consistently crash, and that correlates with mite counts above a certain threshold, then i'll likely help those out to get them through winter and split them up the next spring to start new colonies with fresh queens.

i have one at this time in which i found an 8.9% infestation rate. chances are it will be one of my overwinter losses this year. if somehow it survives, we might learn that some bees are able to tolerate higher mite loads. if that's the case and losses remain at less than 30% it would make more sense to allow the winnowing process to play out.


----------



## clyderoad (Jun 10, 2012)

squarepeg>> "i think i could recover from a 50% loss and still get a decent (but not great) honey harvest."

the honey harvest after my 50% loss a few years ago was dismal. to many resources go into rebuilding colony numbers for a good honey harvest.
i had plenty of new bees though, and sold lots of them off as the year progressed.
turned out to be 'make bees or honey' .


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

sqkcrk said:


> I believe that true TF beekeepers would argue just the opposite. Especially since monitoring isn't usually part of their regimen. Let the bees take care of themselves is the motto I am seeing. And if they can't, good, better off w/out bees that can't. Is also what I am seeing penned by TF beekeepers. If I have that incorrectly stated I am sure someone will correct me.


It is the way I see it Mark.



> If not, I think I have found a happy medium that at first glance appears to have minimal effect on the hive and takes almost no time.


Everything I have read about OAV says that one treatment is useless. You must have several, at least 3 with all the testing and inspection that goes along with it. If you are traveling abroad you are in the same boat I am in without traveling abroad. Essentially you are not available to do the necessary things on a schedule in the bee yard. It is not just having the time it is more having the time when things are critical. If you can't do that I don't suspect you will have any better luck being a "treater" than I do not being a treater. But good luck anyway.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

Rader Sidetrack said:


> doesn't all that splitting (and other management) required to make up those losses takes _more time_ than 3 OAV treatments + mite counts?


Absolute not. And is 3 OAV treatments by THEMSELVES enough to succeed with treating a hive. You don't have to do anything else?


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

Ace, since you _HAVEN'T _made up your losses, it seems a bit odd that you think that OAV takes more time to _SUCCEED _than what you are currently doing.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

clyderoad said:


> squarepeg>> "i think i could recover from a 50% loss and still get a decent (but not great) honey harvest."
> 
> the honey harvest after my 50% loss a few years ago was dismal. to many resources go into rebuilding colony numbers for a good honey harvest.
> i had plenty of new bees though, and sold lots of them off as the year progressed.
> turned out to be 'make bees or honey' .


understood clyde. a five frame nuc here started mid april will generally build up enough to draw new comb and fill a deep and two supers. one of those supers can be harvested still leaving enough honey for the bees to overwinter on. if that same nuc is given drawn comb it can produce 2 or 3 supers of harvestable honey, (usually 2 off the spring flow and 1 off of the fall flow).

on the other hand i have gotten close to 200 lb. harvests from established colonies that were not split and responded to walt wright's checkerboarding, while very little to no harvest from colonies that swarmed and after swarmed. 

walt helped me this spring and we learned that my bees are somewhat atypical in that only about half of them were prevented from swarming. this is better than the 100% swarming i was getting, but less than walt has ever seen with other bees.

so it turns out i may average more harvest by making artificial swarms (cut down splits) prior to our main flow, while making increase at the same time. this will be my 2015 experiment.


----------



## Eyeshooter (Mar 8, 2008)

Acebird said:


> It is the way I see it Mark.
> 
> 
> 
> Everything I have read about OAV says that one treatment is useless. You must have several, at least 3 with all the testing and inspection that goes along with it. If you are traveling abroad you are in the same boat I am in without traveling abroad. Essentially you are not available to do the necessary things on a schedule in the bee yard. It is not just having the time it is more having the time when things are critical. If you can't do that I don't suspect you will have any better luck being a "treater" than I do not being a treater. But good luck anyway.


Acebird, please read what I have already written. I already mentioned I would be doing 2-3 treatments. In fact, 2nd one was done today. 3rd is scheduled for next Friday. I will post results of the 2nd treatment next week.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Eyeshooter said:


> Mark: Probably true and I also used to believe that. My personal experience finally led me to believe that if I monitor I have a better idea when to split or queen capture to break the brood cycle to reduce a blossoming mite load (which I guess are actually treatments). Some folks don't and figure the bees will work it out or not. We all do what we think is best. I guess I was not a "true TF beekeeper" tho' I never put anything into the hive that the bees did not bring in themselves except for feeding syrup only when absolutely necessary. My 2013/14 losses made me rethink my management plan and I am happy with my decision. I absolutely believe if you can bring your hive through winter without treating, go for it.
> 
> John


I was trying to be nice by using a phrase other than "TF fanatics".


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Rader Sidetrack said:


> Ace, since you _HAVEN'T _made up your losses, it seems a bit odd that you think that OAV takes more time to _SUCCEED _than what you are currently doing.


:lookoutoesn't almost everything? k:


----------



## Eyeshooter (Mar 8, 2008)

Not to extend this thread, however, I said I would post results of the 2nd test and the subsequent hive inspections so here we go.

Hive 1:
Pre-treat: 24 hour mite drop of 10 - 12
1st treatment: 6 Days post-treat with OAV: 1,100+ dead mites
2nd treatment: 6 days post-treat with OAV: 1,253 dead mites
Saw the queen who is still laying. Eggs, larvae and brood look good, bees are plentiful, look and act healthy with a few dead bees in hive.

Hive 2:
Pre-treat: 24 hour mite drop of 10 - 12
Post-treat with powdered sugar dusting 2x 1 week apart: mite drop count remaining at 10 - 12/24 hr
6 Days post-treat with OAV: 500+ dead mites
2nd treatment: 6 days post-treat with OAV: 728 dead mites
Queen is still laying but was not found. Eggs, larvae and brood look good, bees are plentiful and look/act healthy, no dead bees in hive.


Hives 3 & 4
Hives were queenless long enough to break brood cycle in August, re-queened late August. Thinking that would nip the mite population I did not do 24 hr mite drop test prior to OAV (my bad...)

Hive 3
1st treatment: 6 Days post-treat with OAV: about 350 dead mites. 
2nd treatment: 6 days post-treat with OAV: 296 dead mites
Queen found and is not laying, brood has almost completely hatched, bees plentiful and look/act healthy.

Hive 4
1st treatment: 6 days post-treat with OAV: About 250 dead mites.
2nd treatment: 6 days post-treat with OAV: 255 dead mites
Queen found and is not laying. Brood almost completely hatched. Bees look/act healthy

So after 2 treatments I have counted over 4,500 dead mites on sticky boards. I will treat hive 1 and 2 tomorrow but will not treat hive 3 and 4 until I do a final treatment in November when the hives should be broodless. Looking in the hives, I would never know these bees were treated. Tho' they were a bit perturbed today, it was cold (55ºF) and at times a bit windy. The eggs, larvae and brood looked normal as did the queen and the rest of the bees. Overall, I'm quite pleased with my choice to use OAV and look forward to seeing how they overwinter. 

John


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Very satisfying result Eyeshooter, it's great when a plan comes together.

Got to say that is a LOT of mites from hives I in particular, so there will still be plenty within the brood it is imperative you follow up thoroughly to catch them when they emerge.

It will be interesting to compare results from the broodless one which should in theory, have a lower relative mite drop next treatments as most mites would have been phoretic the first time.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

I like hive #4 queen not laying and only 250 mites.


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

Thanks for reporting. I've been doing Apiguard treatments this Fall.....and it has been very hard on the bees. I don't see any practical way to do 3 OAV treatments a week apart....or I'd surely do that next year. I am planning a midwinter OAV.
Good luck.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

beemandan said:


> I am planning a midwinter OAV.


Is that a good idea?


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

He is in Georgia, Brian. It's not a bad idea midWinter in GA. In GA that may mean December.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

sqkcrk said:


> It's not a bad idea midWinter in GA.


I did recognize where he is from and still wanted to ask. Thanks for the answer.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Things are that much different 800 miles South of Utica, NY.


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

A midwinter OAV treatment here would usually be around December or January on a 40 - 50 degree day.


----------



## snl (Nov 20, 2009)

If you are "on the fence" about OAV read post 104 by Eyeshooter.


----------

