# am i right?



## loggermike (Jul 23, 2000)

I wouldnt count on it!There are a lot of factors involved in how many mites will be in your hives so you need to do some sort of check.I personally am skeptical about the claims of the small cell users.
-Mike


[This message has been edited by loggermike (edited December 11, 2003).]


----------



## BjornBee (Feb 7, 2003)

The person most associated with successful small cell is the Lusby's. They keep bees in isolated desert high plains and have a particular strain/breed of bee that is adapted for this region. If you read the articles or profile on the lusby's you will learn more. Go to the main page and look for their profile etc.

I'm not so sure I can duplicate or anyone else, the circumstances that make the lusby's successful. Unless you live where they do. I think its more genetics and selective breeding than small cell.

My only comment on small cell is that I hope its not needed, that with survivor selection of queens and better genetics.


----------



## odfrank (May 13, 2002)

Of the two small cell colonies I started this year, one died out. No cause of death determined.


----------



## clintonbemrose (Oct 23, 2001)

I have 50 hives fully regressed but I still use FGMO fog and cords. After all the work with these hives to get to 4.9 I am to chicken to try no treatments. It took a lot of work to find survivor bees that would live during the process. I might try not using FGMO on 5 of these hives next year to see what happens.
Clint

------------------
Clinton Bemrose
just South of Lansing Michigan


----------



## loggermike (Jul 23, 2000)

If your hives are alive at this time,there is no point in disturbing them.Just keep in mind that there may be enough mites in the hives to multiply and crash the hives by next summer.So check early next spring and treat if neccessary.If you go into the season with very few mites,there will be time to get a late crop before having to treat.Have you noticed many varroa in the hives this year?In this area ,I hardly saw a mite all season,but I am not letting down my guard!


----------



## Kurt Bower (Aug 28, 2002)

I am seeing a lot of input from those skeptical about the benefits of 4.9.
Where are the supporters, particularly the ones not using any treatment?
Surely the Lusby's are not the only ones using 4.9 and no additional treatments.
Please speak up and give others some encouraging words if you can!


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

I'm sort of in Clintons position. I worked very hard to get the bees regressed and was using FGMO to keep them alive until I could do so. So far about half of them are totally regressed. I also want to ship bees and want clean bill of health on them. If I get the time to get it all done this next year, I will try some hives with no treatments, but I'm not there yet.

Swarmtrapper, I would monitor the mite level no matter what else you do. At least until you are confident that it is working for you. Even Dee Lusby says it's only 1/3 cell size. She also says it's 1/3 genetics and 1/3 feed (only real pollen and real honey). She also includes the Housel Positional and culling drone and having a clean (no chemical residues in the hive) system in the 1/3 that is cells. So if you only have small cell going for you, I would be sure to monitor what is going on to tell if it's working for you, even if you aren't treating. If the number of natural mite drops stays low (5 to 10 in 14 hours) then maybe you can not treat. If it gets high, you have a choice of FGMO fog, cords, drone magnet, Oxalic acid etc.


----------



## swarm_trapper (Jun 19, 2003)

so if we have to treat then what is the advantige of small cell??


----------



## Clayton (Dec 8, 2000)

Hi Kurt,

>I am seeing a lot of input from those >skeptical about the benefits of 4.9.
>Where are the supporters, particularly the >ones not using any treatment?

And rightly they should be skeptical. I am an advocate of small cell yet I'm skeptical about many things concerning bees. I have used no treatment for 4 yrs now. The 4 yrs before I used only FGMO the old hard way. Manual application on top bars as there was no fogging method at the time. FGMO worked well even in the old way. But I was really not content to have to crutch bees forever. So I comitteed to small cell 100%. Well the rest is history now. I can tell you any one regressing and not treating should expect 50 to 90% loss. This figure is quite appropriate for anyone breeding for true survivors without chemicals except for it should be 50 to 100% loss, instead of the 90% with small cell. I think half of the loss or even more is due to the regression phase. To be honest some part of me wishes I continued with FGMO till regression was completed. But then you still have to take that step pulling the plug on the chem's. Thats the hardest part I think. I man / woman has to have real conviction here, might I even say "faith". I not taking cristian faith here but well thought out reasoned, studied historical evicence, dug real deep and researched all that is possible. Then says I'm gonna do it or go down trying...... To be honest I'd love to compare the results from you guys that are regressed then pull the plug on the chem's vs. cold turkey and similtaneous regression like I did. I don't say any of this to dishearten any one wanting to try small cell, but it is hard work like anything else, there ain't no free rides, silver bullets, special chants, ect. Only beekeepers who have a view of what they want and will commit to it, good or bad. 

I will write more later, gotta run a the moment.


----------



## Clayton (Dec 8, 2000)

Hi Kurt,

>I am seeing a lot of input from those >skeptical about the benefits of 4.9.
>Where are the supporters, particularly the >ones not using any treatment?

And rightly they should be skeptical. I am an advocate of small cell yet I'm skeptical about many things concerning bees. I have used no treatment for 4 yrs now. The 4 yrs before I used only FGMO the old hard way. Manual application on top bars as there was no fogging method at the time. FGMO worked well even in the old way. But I was really not content to have to crutch bees forever. So I comitteed to small cell 100%. Well the rest is history now. I can tell you any one regressing and not treating should expect 50 to 90% loss. This figure is quite appropriate for anyone breeding for true survivors without chemicals except for it should be 50 to 100% loss, instead of the 90% with small cell. I think half of the loss or even more is due to the regression phase. To be honest some part of me wishes I continued with FGMO till regression was completed. But then you still have to take that step pulling the plug on the chem's. Thats the hardest part I think. I man / woman has to have real conviction here, might I even say "faith". I not taking cristian faith here but well thought out reasoned, studied historical evicence, dug real deep and researched all that is possible. Then says I'm gonna do it or go down trying...... To be honest I'd love to compare the results from you guys that are regressed then pull the plug on the chem's vs. cold turkey and similtaneous regression like I did. I don't say any of this to dishearten any one wanting to try small cell, but it is hard work like anything else, there ain't no free rides, silver bullets, special chants, ect. Only beekeepers who have a view of what they want and will commit to it, good or bad. 

I will write more later, gotta run a the moment.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>so if we have to treat then what is the advantige of small cell??

First, you don't HAVE to treat. The object is to get where you don't, but until the bees are regressed they don't have a fair chance of survival. AFTER they are regressed there is still the issue of genetics. I would try to get survivor bees from swarms or houses or trees. If you catch a swarm, don't kill the queen. Especially if they are obviously feral survivors as evidenced by their small size. If you can't get some feral survivors then try some Russian, Harbo or some other bees with some reputation for good genetic resistence to the mites. Then when you "pull the plug" the bees are in a position to have a fighting chance at survival. Still I would monitor them. If they are failing, try some kind of "soft" treatment and requeen with some different stock. I still fail to see the advantage of letting the bees die. Dead bees have no genes to pass on, but you can stop the "bad" genetics just by requeening.

The MAIN reason for small cell is that it is natural sized cells. This reduces stress on the bees and gives them a fighting chance against all the pests and diseases.

I will start trying some hives with no treatments once they are all regressed.


----------



## Kurt Bower (Aug 28, 2002)

I appreciate everyone's input.
I was positioning myself to go small cell, but with the lack of people that are committed to this without treatment I dont think that I can justify the expense.
I understand all the elements involved. I also understand that before mites my grandfather ran 1000 hives on a larger cell size and never treated. 
I am currently enjoying much success using FGMO. It takes a little time but I am very comfortable with the results and lack of chems.
My goal in switching to 4.9 was to enjoy the benefit of not having to treat except for Nosema, AFB, Hive beetles etc... There are enough other problems in beekeeping besides Varroa mites. 
I can not replicate what the Lusby's are doing and probably wont as long as I have a regular job.
I guess I will just keep on doing what I am doing unless someone can give me some realistic hope.

Thanks, Kurt


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

Even if all you do is only buy 4.9mm foundation from now on and only put that in. If you cull your combs fairly ruthlessly (any empty ones in the spring and move any with no brood above the excluder) you will eventually be on small cell. This is not a painful thing. You have to examine the hive from time to time, so why not just cull the old large cell combs? Eventually you'll get to 4.9mm without any really special effort.

I agree, the difficult thing is doing complete shakedowns to try to regress quickly.

Buckeye is now selling small cell packages and I'm selling small cell nucs, so you can start a small cell hive. The difficulty is getting small cell COMB. But if you have small cell bees they will BUILD small cell comb. If you have small cell comb in the center of the brood nest, the bees will build small cell bees. So if you establish a hive with small cell bees (from a package or a nuc of small cell bees) and keep swapping out small cell comb to give to your other hives (put in the center of the brood nest), you'll get there even quicker than just using the 4.9mm foundation.

Think of it as both a path and a destination. You may get where they are all regressed and you're ready to try no treatments. That's what I hope to do this year or next. But in the meantime you are stressing them less and going to something more natural.


----------



## swarm_trapper (Jun 19, 2003)

how many mites dose small cell get rid of 50%? 75%? dose anyone have a rough estiment? thanks


----------



## BjornBee (Feb 7, 2003)

Swarm trapper,
You should look at small cell as just one item of your IPM (integrated Pest Management) plan.

Screened botton board
Essential oil
FGMO
yearly requeening
Strain selection in buying queens
Survivor selection in raising your own bees
Chemical rotation and proper application
Small cell
Testing and diagnosing deseases
and others I'm missing at the moment.

The above items should be used in conjuction with each other to come up with a plan that you are comfortable with. Taking into account time, money, tolerance of chemicals, etc. No one item is the silver bullet.

For me its SBB, oil application although not fogging, and queen selection. I will also raise more of my own bees/queens taken from my own surviving bees. For the next person it will be different, but you need to implement what your comfortable with. Small cell is one area or item to consider. #1 reason for dead bees is poor beekeeping and not being on top of things.

[This message has been edited by BjornBee (edited December 12, 2003).]


----------



## clintonbemrose (Oct 23, 2001)

how many mites dose small cell get rid of 50%? 75%? dose anyone have a rough estiment?
My Answer:
I have 50 hives that are fully regressed to 4.9 and in comparing the records of these hives to my other hives that are down to 5.2 there seems to be a drop of about 40% in V mites with almost the same in T mites. Then comparing to 250 hives that are on about 5.6 to the hives that are on 5.2 there is another 20 % drop in mites. I currently have 200 hives on 5.2 and this spring will again shake them down again hopfully to 4.9 and shake another 200 hives down to the 5.2 that I will remove from my other hives when I shake them. I feel that small cell is working for me and my bees even though I use FGMO as an additional help.
Clint (with 503 hives and 36 years of learning) 

------------------
Clinton Bemrose
just South of Lansing Michigan


----------



## Clayton (Dec 8, 2000)

swarm trapper writes:

so if we have to treat then what is the advantige of small cell??

reply:

You don't have to treat using 4.9, but you have to understand that there will be some loss due to the regression. I am personally at the stage where I don't have to treat anymore.

how many mites dose small cell get rid of 50%? 75%? dose anyone have a rough estiment? thanks

reply:

Well In Erik Erickson study of small cell, this was on 5.0 cell sizing. He measured a drop of about 80% (if memory serves me right). He was using both african and EHB's. The results were just slightly better for african bees. Both survived on 5.0mm. These same bees were placed back on large cell and they both began to crash, they used chemical treatments to save the bees.


----------



## Kurt Bower (Aug 28, 2002)

OK Clayton, I think that I have got it now!

I apparently didnt do a very good job of reading your earlier post. I missed that part about you NOT treating for the last 4 years.
Your are trying to let us know that anyone in the regression phase of 4.9 will have to expect to treat due to the fact that the bees are not at their natural size yet and do not have the full benefits of being smaller.
Once bees are fully regressed no Chems are needed from your viewpoint, but IPM is still recommended.
If small cell bees are purchased and put on 4.9 foundation then the regression phase has been eliminated and chems may not be necessary.
Does that sum it up? 
Sounds like you are the only one who is fully regressed and not treating! Way to go!

Thanks again, Kurt


----------



## dickm (May 19, 2002)

Clayton,
You probably mentioned it somewhere else but could you tell us how many hives you have? BTW what end of the state is Crown Point at? I'm in Ct 60 (crow flies) miles from NYC.

Dick Marron


----------



## Clayton (Dec 8, 2000)

I apparently didnt do a very good job of reading your earlier post. I missed that part about you NOT treating for the last 4 years.

reply:

Yes. NO treating at "all". I decided to follow the Lusby's original model. I believe Barry Birkey the owner of beesource, Dennis Murrel, and a few others have gone a few years without treatments too.


Your are trying to let us know that anyone in the regression phase of 4.9 will have to expect to treat due to the fact that the bees are not at their natural size yet and do not have the full benefits of being smaller.

reply:

I'm saying there is three choices here:

1. Don't do small cell
2. Eliminate all chem's and go for it (all honey is chem free and your methods are 100% clean)- you select for everything at once this way
3. Regress using only soft chemicals such as FGMO, then somehow find the courage to remove the chem's- you have maximum survivability this way, but may loose a low % that is unknown to me

Once bees are fully regressed no Chems are needed from your viewpoint, but IPM is still recommended.

reply:

No not IPM. Just good beekeeping practices. IPM has some good practices. If you choose method 3. from above instead of focusing on mite populations, watch the bee population, there health, ect. You are raising honeybees not mites! Your view of kill them mites will have to change and focus on your bees. The small cell will trigger different hygenics in the bees with no special breeding. Many of these will occur a certain times in the season, if you don't pay attention you will miss there. For example mite populations will rise during a honey flow, then there will be a heavy purge on the down flow. Natural mite drop at these times can be high but it is a good sign as it will indicate the bees are dealing with the mites. This very much different that a chemical mite drop. In which the chemical knocks down the mites. Which in reality means the bees are harboring and carrying a large mite load. In the former the the bees are controling the mites via natural methods. Such as grooming, attacking, chewing larvae down, throwing larvae out, tossing out infested bees and drones, not to mention the suppressing effects of the cells themselves, other things I don't know about or understand at this time.

If small cell bees are purchased and put on 4.9 foundation then the regression phase has been eliminated and chems may not be necessary.

reply:

I dare not comment on this as I have not brought in any bees in 8 yrs. But I will be this spring. But in theory yes. 

Clay


----------



## Clayton (Dec 8, 2000)

Dick,

Go here:
http://www.beesource.com/ubb/Forum2/HTML/001159.html 

Scroll down to my post. Crown Point is in the northern end in the adirondack mountains. Probably 2 hrs from Canada.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>how many mites dose small cell get rid of 50%? 75%? dose anyone have a rough estiment? thanks

Sounds like you got one estimate from the field, which is the more valuable estimate. In theory a sooner capping could cut it by as much as 40 to 50% and the early emergence could cut it another 40 to 50% (of what was left over) The SBB will get rid of 30% (of what was left over). But let's assume the figure of 40% for small cell and 30% of what was left over for SBB. If we started with an assumtion of 100 mites as a result and decrease by 40% we get 60 mites. If we get rid of 30% of the 60 mites, we have 42 left. I say this to illustrate that compounding methods helps, but the return is diminishing, so you can't assume that two methods that cause a 50% reduction will cause 100% reduction. It doesn't work that way.

I have about 40 hives of which half are fully regressed. If I had the time last year to coat all the PermaComb and cull all the brood comb, it would have been 100%. Hopefully I'll get it finished this year and perhaps try some with no treatments.


----------



## BWrangler (Aug 14, 2002)

Greetings Everyone,

I started treating with soft chemicals in 1996. I am on small cell and haven't treated since 1999. Once the hives got beyond the first season, normal mite fall has remained constant and peaks at about 1 mite per week. Yep, that's right per WEEK! And that's across all different kinds of races/selections.

My thinking has changed regarding the importance of loosing all those bees during regression to find the 'small cell survivors'. And my observations with natural comb building have confirmed it. See:
http://bwrangler.litarium.com/implications/ 

My conclusions aren't popular with some small cell beekeepers. Yet, if accurate, they could be the key for obtaining the advantages of small cell without killing most one's bees. And the difficulties of getting small cell comb drawn might be eliminated.

You guys with small cell hives that are still treating with soft chemicals are in an excellent position. I have actually re-established some large cell hives to get to that point. I would like to demonstrate that it's not necessary to kill most of ones bees to save them if soft chemicals are used. That's a sacralege in the organic circles but will make small cell possible for the rest of us.

You guys can remove the treatments and the bees will take care of the mites for themselves. Don't worry about 'the small cell genetics' or a small cell survivor. Just say 'no' for a whole yard and not just a few hives in a yard, as the whole beeyard acts like a superorganism.

I replaced my small cell survivors. They were highly susceptible to para foulbrood.
They weren't the best bee, just the luckiest bees that survived the mite overloads when regressing.

I have used Lus Bees, Boiling Caucasions, Russians(4 different lines),SMR, Strachan New World Caniolans, Miska Italian and Carniolan, Buckfast, Weaver All American, Weaver Harbo and a few others I've probably forgotten. All averaged about 1 mite/week natural drop. I will admit that some dropped up to two mites/week and others averaged 1/2 mite/week. Can you live with that?

And these mite counts remained stable in spite of the fact that I am surrounded by 4000 commercial hives. These hives have been devasted by chemical resistant mites over the last two years.

I had been using screened bottom boards on all my hives since 1996 and counting mites. No more screens, counts, treatments. I have tossed all my literature on mite treatments. It's a none issue for me.

Lot's of other speculation has been attached to small cell. I have observed that the small cell bees overwinter better and build up faster in the spring. They are not disease proof. The rest needs much objective testing.

Much of small cell rhetoric and management is based on the observations of the Lusbys. As others become involved with small cell, additional observations in different environments should result in a better understanding of the process. And small cell beekeeping should become easier as management practices become better aligned with the bees behavior and the hive environment becomes more natural.

Regards
Dennis



[This message has been edited by BWrangler (edited December 13, 2003).]


----------



## clintonbemrose (Oct 23, 2001)

Bwrangler you just answered one of my fears about my other hives bringing in a varroa problem to my regressed hives. I definately will stop my FGMO treatment to the regressed hives but keep an eye on them. Thanks
Clint


------------------
Clinton Bemrose
just South of Lansing Michigan


----------



## BWrangler (Aug 14, 2002)

Hi Clinton,

Keep some records on those hives and let us know what you see.

I don't keep bees for anything but pleasure now and would like to move/reduce my hives into about 5 top bar hives(small cell hive sale in two years). I have seen enough evidence with small cell beekeeping to know which way I want to go.

Yet, I can't quite escape my commercial beekeeping background. Some loose ends keep me entangled such as making small cell beekeeping work better with standard equipment. And of course the whys and hows which appear much different to me than what the Lusby's have proposed.

I have been quite surprised at how a small cell yard can handle the influx of immigrant mites from surrounding yards. You can't travel more than a mile without finding a commercial sized yard here in central Wyoming. And resistance mites have been around here since the mid 90's.

I don't think you will have any problems.

Regards
Dennis


----------

