# Treatment free, is it really that easy



## Rader Sidetrack

Note that the quote _laketrout _posted appears to have come from the Glenn Apiaries website, on this page:
http://www.glenn-apiaries.com/vsh.html

Also note that the Glenns retired several years ago and their stock is no longer available. Some of Glenn's former customers may have bees/queens that are descendants of those queens, though.


----------



## camero7

I say it depends... I use only VSH type queens and get them from reputable breeders. I have been unsuccessful in my location trying to raise TF bees. My winter losses with TF have been from 50% to 100%. However, I have sold TF nucs with VSH queens to a few people and they have been generally successful with TF management. I suspect it's location and luck, but what do I know?


----------



## crofter

I think it well to keep in mind that the degree of VSH may get diluted in most situations of open mating. Also if you get a big influx of varroa the VSH habits of pulling brood from cells may hurt buildup. Probably VSH is a useful tool in dealing with mites but needs operator to control and monitor.


----------



## Mike Gillmore

The only way to know for sure if it will work for "you" is to set up a separate yard with VSH queens and let nature take it's course. Don't commit all of your colonies and put all your eggs in one basket, have that experimental yard and see what happens. If your hives are still alive and thriving after 3 years you're onto something.

What works for Michael Bush in his region might not work in yours. There is only one way to find out. I wish I could get a TF beekeeper to set up a few hives at one of my yards in "Massillon" and see how they do ... but no one has taken me up on the offer so far.


----------



## laketrout

They make it sound like its the answer , so the biggest percentage of gene's is probably retained by the queen but will eventually will be diluted , correct .Yes Rader thats where I read it , I didn't want to point any fingers and I didn't know they were out of business , and they probably work for some beeks , does it come down to location again .

Cam, what else could be done buy the hobby beekeeper to help those vsh traits come through or isn't it possible with open mating .

Mike how far away would a test yard need to be from the other bee's .


----------



## rookie2531

I have heard from every beekeeper out there, " you might think you don't have voarra mites, but you DO." Now after that I'm reading, vsh queens are the bomb, but their colonies have mites. Now I'm no rocket scientist, but I can read between the lines, I do applaud those trying, but I don't think anyone should be screaming success, now buy my queens. Just my opinion, and until someone out there is tf and has zero mites, my opinion won't change.


----------



## Mike Gillmore

laketrout, I would say a couple miles would be more than enough. You could even set them up separately in the same yard, but then you could be facing the possibility of drifting and robbing which might influence your results.


----------



## laketrout

It seems the guys having success with treatment free whether from vsh or other means find the bee's still have a mite load but its one the bee's seem to cope with and able to live with , not sure how productive they are though . 

Mike it would be interesting to try it some day , but it would be a big expense in my area with the need for another bear fence and all the equipment to set up another yard .Whats the going price for a good vsh queen 250.00 ? and how many would you need to start out . Has Randy Oliver ever done a test with vsh queens .


----------



## JWChesnut

The Bee Informed 2013-14 overwintering success survey of 5621 respondents indicates that TF beekeeping suffers from significantly higher loss rates overwinter than practices that seek to control mites. 

The basic data can be shown on this graph -- (note I will make a comment on the reliability of the TF data).


The data can be broken down multiple ways:
Consider North-South difference in winter survival among 5458 (mostly) hobby keepers)


This graph shows that winter survival is better in the south, but a constant 15% mortality "cost" is found across the regional TF/T pairs.

The Bee Informed survey attempted to secure information from the migratory beeks (who possess the vast majority of North American hives). The survey has 106 "multiregional" respondents broken into 90 treaters managing 328,197 hives and 16 TF multiregional reporters (supposedly) managing 78,325 hives. I believe the TF "multi-region" colony report is corrupt -- because 
mean colony count for the 16 in this category is 4895 and the reported Standard Error is 4219.8. SE is defined as SE = StDev/Sqrt. This indicates the StDev is 16,879 for the 16 participants -- in order to get this extreme value of StDev and Mean, you might have 12 respondents with less than 500 hives, and one with 68,000. I expect the "migratory TF" census has a transcription error, since the likelihood of a TF commercial running 70,000 hives under the radar is vanishingly unlikely.

The migratory data (with the caveat that some TF reporter overstated colony count (or data entry mis-transcribed)).


I will note that the very large scale Bee Informed survey replicates the much smaller Marin Bee Association survey -- 1) TF apiaries have winter loss rates of about 50%, and these losses are 15% or greater than apiaries managed for mites. 2) The vast majority of hobby beekeepers have adopted the TF prescription (by a ratio of about 2 to 1). TF has won the "mind-share" race due to its promotion as a successful, easy, and "lazy" management style. Unfortunately, TF is the worst performer of any survival strategy. TF makes the beekeeper "feel good", but kills the bees more frequently than other management.


----------



## Rusty Hills Farm

While the graphs all look very impressive, I've got VSH genetics in my hives RIGHT NOW and the results I am seeing are that F1 generation is fantastic, F2 is sorta-kinda, and F3 is a flub as far as mite control and honey production. If you keep F1 queens in your boxes, you will do great. But that also means you either have to buy II queens and breed your own or buy somebody else's mated F1's for your hives--hardly a self-sustaining proposition either way you go. 

Frankly, I don't keep bees to have to use other people's queens. I want to raise my own. So I'm still trying to figure it all out. Meanwhile I am treating with OAD.

JMO

Rusty


----------



## JRG13

I don't think VSH is touted as the solution, stopping treatments and looking for survivors is what you want to do, but your results will vary. I've yet to see mite resistance in this area, even from supposedly treatment free bees.


----------



## Adam Foster Collins

I don't think quote from Glenn sounds "that easy" at all. And I don't think many who are really working toward being treatment free think it is either. Work is work. Glenn did a lot of breeding work, and I don't think many people are talking about having "no mites". Mites are here to stay. People are trying to work toward having bees that can tolerate mites, yet still achieve levels of honey production similar to treated colonies.

I don't know how many people are achieving that goal at this time, but I do believe it's worth trying. I feel that the whole spectrum of approaches can be beneficial if individual results can be shared and learned from collectively. On the other hand, I also know that there are so many variables at play - and trying to measure the effectiveness of any management program really has to look at the total program before it makes much sense.

Sure, dead bees are dead, live ones are live. 100 pounds of surplus is not 10 pounds or no pounds. But how did you get there? How good is the beekeeper? How many of the "treatment free" people are new to the game? How many "rookie errors" did we all make in our first couple of seasons? How strict is the definition of treatment free? 

One thing I know makes a ton of difference is *attention*. A beekeeper who is able to find the time in their schedule to pay proper attention to their hives and to what needs to be done exactly when it needs to be done is often miles ahead of beekeepers who are playing catch-up around other demands. Yet they report as equals. 

So many variables. 

You end up having to choose what is right from your perspective and take your swing. Come back and share your results as accurately and patiently as you can. People here will do their best to challenge it - as they should. The collective is truly important to progress - as are contrasting views.

If we all agreed, there wouldn't be much to talk about.

Adam


----------



## grozzie2

I think this article on Randy Olivers website should be 'required reading' for all folks that want to start out down the TF path.

http://scientificbeekeeping.com/queens-for-pennies/


----------



## Mike Gillmore

Rusty, What has been the typical longevity of your f1's before supercedure or queen failure. 2 years .. 3 years?


----------



## Vance G

When I re entered beekeeping mites were new to me as I got out right before they became endemic. I tried the EO's with some success, the small cell with indeterminate success and stayed with it because of its other advantages and I tried VSH and queens from Treatment free suppliers. None have so far led me to shangrilah and I have a position of being treatment free until my mite load is going to kill my bees then I treat! Maybe my heart and hives are not pure, but I believe these attempts are good practices and indeed take us down the road to genetics that can live with a certain mite load. All I know is you can't keep bees without live bees and dead bees are not going to ever become resistant. Time is the healer and all the folks out there doing what they can will get us there someday. In the meantime I am going to produce some honey and bees and that means monitoring for mites and knocking them down as required.


----------



## squarepeg

vance, do you make your decision to treat on a colony by colony basis? do you use different thresholds at different times of year?


----------



## Rusty Hills Farm

Mike Gillmore said:


> Rusty, What has been the typical longevity of your f1's before supercedure or queen failure. 2 years .. 3 years?


Two years.

HTH

Rusty


----------



## Lauri

I've been successful with most of my colonies being treatment free, but I've found it to be labor intensive, requires skill and management experience, very good genetics and the right environment.(Plus a lot of other ducks that have to be in a row)

My methods of controlling mites are great for rearing queens and making increases. But for honey production, my methods would take it's toll on your overall harvest unless your timing was perfect with your brood breaks and simulated swarms.

I have total faith in my VSH line of queens, but if you wanted to buy one of my premium queens, expect her to work miracles and drop her in a mite infested hive, I probably wouldn't sell her to you.
It would be a disservice to that Queen not to give her a decent environment to allow her genetics to eventually persevere with her own brood having the chance to actually hatch without DWV and exhibit their traits.

VSH genetics are only part of the bigger picture. But are a step in the right direction.

Understanding the mite life cycle and suppressing them while at the same time providing the colony an environment they can flourish in, is tricky. 

Even when you get a thriving treatment free hive, these hives are always evolving. Success for a short period really doesn't count. You are never out of the woods. Nearly every brood hatch can change the playing field. Your seasonal changes, age of the colony and queen, circumstances within the hive will always be changing and therefore you must also adapt (Anticipate and intervene when necessary) or eventually pay the price.

My answer to your question ' Is it really that easy' would be a loud 'NO'
Is it possible? 
That would be a 'Yes'. 
Most of the time. 
If you pay attention and are willing to do the work and set yourself up for success. 
Try to put the odds in your favor, instead of leaving them to chance or allowing them to be stacked against you. Buying bees with _price_ being the most importaint thing is a mistake in my opinion. Do your homework. Know your product, ask questions. Pay a little more for those 'favorable odds' by investing in quality stock, right from the start if it is available.

But don't go into it with your head in the sand. 

I have Apivar on hand in case a hive has been overlooked and I notice too late in late summer, I have enough mites I may need to treat with no time for natural suppression methods.

I have no issue with treating. Just prefer not to when ever possible. I monitor mites all summer long, not just in late summer. 

I'm over wintering about 230 colonies this year.( Of various sizes) Equivalent to 170 double deeps. I've never allowed my hives to go longer than three years before I break them up into a simulated swarm & nucs.(Or at least gave them a brood break) Not because they needed it, but because I figured they were probably on borrowed time if I didn't. I don't allow my mite population to get out of control, then act. I prevent high mite populations by anticipating their behavior in susceptible (Older) colonies and supressing or preventing it while it is still managable & _before_ issues result.

I started beekeeping in 2011 with NO experience-no mentor-No club affiliation. All increases from my original purchases of about 35 packages and a couple swarms. I over winter with very little losses. But I have 35 years of agricultural experience behind my madness. There is an awful lot of it that carries over to beekeeping.

But I don't fool myself. I won't be so stubborn to try to stay treatment free I will allow my investment to perish.
Although some don't agree, I feel a treatment reduced goal is much more realistic middle of the road stance to take, rather than a die hard one way or the other T or TF. 

I'm treatment free..right up until the time I have to treat.
But if I've done my job, I can sustain without it. 

Personally I focus on genetics & colony health. A healthy strong colony with hybrid vigor can keep most everything in Balance.

*Healthy Balance* is the key to hives that can maintain well on their own, without much manipulation from me.
I couldn't have so many hives if they didn't.


----------



## shinbone

"_ . . . entire local populations of bees can be transformed into mite destroying armies . . . _"

Onward bee-ee soldiers, marching as to war . . .
(sung to the tune of "Onward Christian soldiers")


----------



## shinbone

Lauri - What you say makes very good sense!


----------



## fieldsofnaturalhoney

"I'm treatment free..right up until the time I have to treat.
But if I've done my job, I can sustain without it."

Priceless,, nothing in life is easy.


----------



## Lauri

All I know is what I do, works for me. There's a lot of things I do I haven't mentioned. Too lengthy for a forum post. Still fine tuning.




























Dang! Those photos are BIG. You could almost make a meal out of the buggers


----------



## squarepeg

another great post lauri, many thanks. since you decide to treat on a case by case basis, what is your threshold for say early, mid, and late summer?


----------



## Monie

Great pics and post, Lauri. Sometimes, "madness" is what makes all the difference.


----------



## Vance G

I regularly do sugar rolls which are not as accurate as an alcohol wash but they tell me close enough. If I find a nine or ten mites per 300 bees I treat them. Most colonies get a brood break and they are not a problem, it is the splits with the old queens that can get out of hand and if I find that threshold on them they get treated in June with Apiguard or apivar. In the fall I test the ones with brood breaks and if it is 3% or less I don't treat and if it is over that, they get whatever they didn't get last. I write on my covers with a sharpie what I found and dates of treatment. 


squarepeg said:


> vance, do you make your decision to treat on a colony by colony basis? do you use different thresholds at different times of year?


I have lost some already this winter to mite crashes, hives that were queened with TF mite resistant queens I was testing for a breeder. I don't think I will do that anymore. Those colonies could be alive and ready to split or to make honey or both. I guess I have played mad scientist about enough to satisfy myself on this score. 

I can understand why many want to continue being mad scientists and don't fault them. I do fault those who are just blind to what is happening and let their bees die.


----------



## squarepeg

understood vance, thanks for the reply. did the counts get above 3% on the tf hives that crashed?


----------



## Vance G

Yes they were at 5% in September and I thought they would be OK but I imagine the brood in the can was just riddled. I don't want to study that anymore. I will keep my isolated yard and keep adding TF queens but they will get treated if they get over 3%. I was just placing an order and when I saw the shipping was over fifty bucks I bailed! I paid $40 for queens LAST when I realized their was no easter bunny and Robert Russel was a fraud. Maybe I will just keep selecting my own best.


----------



## golddust-twins

And Lauri, hopefully someday you will offer classes for beekeeping in the Pacific Northwest....


----------



## Roland

Our biggest issue with Minn. Hygenic was that they made about 2/3rds the honey of an average Italian, and marginally survived better. Not impressed. On a whim, we pooled the surviving hives in one yard, and after 6 years of no outside genetic additions, the count in fall was 8. Still not impressed. 

For anyone heading this direction, I would search for a thread started by StevenG. After a few hours of discusion, I can testify that he has a good understanding of beekeeping.

Crazy Roland


----------



## beepro

Nobody can say they have bees without the mites in their apiary. Honey, like to laugh at me when I posted
that I got the 'mite resistant' queen bees and no treatment. The reality is mites are here to stay.
So far I have not found a mite remedy to get rid of them entirely for good. The drifting will bring the mites in eventually.
Even with the mite resistant bees it is still an uphill battle. My plan is to continue to select from the survivor that has
the least amount of mites with a huge bee population and to treat when necessary. Without the bees then there is 
no sense to treat, right. Also continue to add the mite fighting survivor bees into my local bee genetics. 
Even with 6 bees crawling on the ground got my heart sank already. In the long term I hope to get some no treat 
bees to share. Are we all heading at the right direction?
This year I found out that the bee nutrition is really important against these mites. With a well fed healthy colony they
are able to withstand the attack of these mites. A weak under nourish colony will not survive this cold winter with the
mites on. I also found out that the Spring and Fall treatment is very important for the population to build up. There will be
many crawling bees on the ground if you don't keep the mite population under control. So feed them well.


Keep them well fed:


----------



## Juhani Lunden

Roland said:


> On a whim, we pooled the surviving hives in one yard, and after 6 years of no outside genetic additions, the count in fall was 8.


Which count, hive number, mite ?


----------



## camero7

> My methods of controlling mites are great for rearing queens and making increases. But for honey production, my methods would take it's toll on your overall harvest unless your timing was perfect with your brood breaks and simulated swarms.


I wonder how your queens would perform for honey production, since they are being selected for brood production and other traits?


----------



## FollowtheHoney

At least for brood production that seems like a benefit for honey production, as a larger population would potentially mean more foragers.


----------



## GLOCK

Lauri said:


> I've been successful with most of my colonies being treatment free, but I've found it to be labor intensive, requires skill and management experience, very good genetics and the right environment.(Plus a lot of other ducks that have to be in a row)


I just have to say after coming here to beesource for almost 6 year you are one of the best beekeepers i have followed . What you have done in such a short time is just crazy . I only have 32 hives but they are strong and healthy . I only treat with OAV when i need to and do alcohol wash's all summer in to the Fall. you are very good at what you do. 230 hives that is up about 100 from late year right?
Great job Lauri :thumbsup:


----------



## Monie

Interesting video on treatment free. http://youtu.be/6gCY6EZkgxE


----------



## Lauri

When I shot competition archery and came to a target who's distance I wasn't sure of, I would always split the difference between my high and low estimate. If I thought the target was between 45 and 50 yards I'd shoot it for 47-48 yards. That would always put me close to where I wanted to be, without risk of a very low score or a MISS.

A MISS with management judgement with your hives usually means an unfortunate dead out. If you are inexperienced, that can mean an unpleasant surprise down the road.

I choose moderation over a stubborn stance with most things. It usually is the right choice unless I am totally sure of my method. At least it is close enough I will not suffer extreme consequences. 

I won't advocate methods _just_ because they are popular or support ideas that people just want to hear. 
I always strive to be a organic and natural as possible. But there is a line of common sense of allowing my bees to live another day until I can tweak my methods to continue on as treatment free as possible.


Look at my frames with partial foundation. Another example of splitting the difference'. 










In the seemingly endless debate over foundation VS foundationless, why not do both?

I give a foundationless area to them so they can make what they want. They are more content. They are in a more natural balance.

In return I get exactly what I want. Clean frames with a designated area for drone cells. _Guaranteed _worker sized cells in the center of the frame. Healthy populations of spring drones for good mating. Harvestable honeycomb later in the season. More feed stored in the broodnest area, after the drones have hatched and they backfill with nectar. Less backfilling of the center of the broodnest due to actual room for feed on the outsides of the frames,_ in the larger cells where they actually want_ to put feed.










When frames like the one below are in the bottom deep, how do you think the bees respond to them when in a dearth period? Feed close to the broodnest area, no need to move up the the second deep and reposition the broodnest close to feed. 
You'll notice they are backfilling the large cells, not the worker sized cells here.










When I mention in my posts I am not into honey production, I mean I don't harvest my honey to sell. That doesn't mean I don't _produce_ honey. For my queen rearing and nuc production I run most of my colonies in one location, for my convenience. 

Talk about pushing the carrying capacity of an area. 
All my hives have to do is self sustain. I find the amount of honey they make to be extraordinary, considering the circumstances.

I'll be moving many of my larger hives to the mountains this winter in order to produce a 2015 honey harvest. But not to sell. It will be to feed my nucs I've required to draw out new frames so I don't have to feed them so much syrup to get them to fall weight. 
By not harvesting honey, some may consider my operation to be a failure. 

My harvest is queens and nucs. And that's just the way I want it.

My customers would like to harvest as much honey as they can. But they want queens and bees that overwinter well even more than a guaranteed bumper crop. 
That is what I focus on for now.

This year with production hives in other locations I'll be able to see just how they produce without all the competition. 
But for now I am busy just trying to keep up with the demand for queens. To do that, they have to be easily accessable for me to work.


----------



## gezellig

Laurie, that's the best description and advise I've read.


----------



## Monie

Lauri, as soon as I read, "When I shot competition archery and came to a target who's distance I wasn't sure of..." I envisioned myself "rocking" side to side to look for hidden obstacles and then settling a pin above, and a pin below, the x. Shooting for 47 vs 45 or 50 is a better way to "win". I like your management practices. Like you, I am not it it to sell honey, but instead shoot for strong and healthy colonies which I can pass on to other beeks. For now, I supply nucs. Eventually, I may decide to breed and sell queens. Honey is last on my list of things to sell, because I firmly believe the hives are healthier by leaving the honey.


----------



## Fusion_power

It is always interesting when a thread like this pops up. Jwchestnut posts something about how treatment free means huge losses. Someone else chimes in that they are afraid to put their toe in the water. A bunch of folks then chime in about using minimal treatments, but they still treat.

I'm in the boat with Farrer, take your losses in the fall. He advocated combining weak colonies to get a strong colony for winter. I'm falling down on the job. I did not combine any colonies this year. It must be because all of them are at the right strength to get through winter. I may still lose one or two, but so far, they are holding fast and just starting spring brood rearing with a palm size patch of brood in most colonies.

So what do I treat my bees with? I don't know, but "nothing" seems to work. I don't put anything in the hive. I don't have apivar hiding in a cabinet somewhere just in case. I rely entirely on the bees to stay alive and produce honey. If they can't manage mites, they die. My wintering losses are typically about 10% and have been stable in that range for the last 5 years.

Do I make honey? Yes, I sold every drop I could make this year at $11 per quart. I figured out pretty fast that I was underpriced so next year it will be $14 per quart. I didn't keep track of how much I sold, but it was well over 100 quarts, maybe as much as 150.

I managed to split my bees and start another beekeeper with treatment free bees. This makes 3 in the local area running bees that have never been treated. One friend managed to sell 40 quarts from 2 colonies. He wants to split his bees next spring. I will work with him to do the splits because one of his queens is the best I've seen in this area in several years. I want a few raised from her.

I'll quit rambling now. Ya'll go back to talking about how to keep bees alive by treating them with soft treatments, hard treatments, and how good VSH genetics are.

Don't forget to add some praise and honors for the non-participants!


----------



## shinbone

Fusion power - Thanks for your input. What do you attribute your Treatment Free success to?


----------



## Lauri

It's funny, I can make so many references between beekeeping and archery. 

Anyone can pick up a bow and with a little bit of instruction hit the bale, perhaps hitting the target occasionally. 
Folks with a little more experience can hit the target pretty regularly, sometimes getting a bulls eye, but eventually they'll loose all their arrows and have to buy more. 

Some get bummed they have to buy new arrows, some understand you have to practice to get better and some losses are to be expected.
Most reach a point where they've progressed and can justify buying better equipment without fear of undue losses.
But Archery is addictive. Just like beekeeping. It's fun and people know they can eventually get to the point where they are satisfied with their performance.as frustrating as it may be at times, they keep on trying. 

The level of performance may be different between folks, depending on your personal goals.

But if you want to play with the big boys, who hit the bulls eye, dead center, time after time after time, day after day, year after year, you must know a _whole_ lot more.
You must understand the geometry of your bow, the spine of your arrow, the front of center weight, the kinetic energy your bow produces with a given weight of arrow, the deflection your arrow exhibits, especially when hitting an animal, what stresses your broadhead needs to be able to take if you are hunting. You must recognize your bow tuning is based on mathematics. You must be physically fit yourself and have a stable blood sugar level that will allow you to be steady all day long. You buy arrows that cost $500 a dozen, because you never miss and you want the quality for consistancy and longevity. Your biggest threat is of robbin hooding your own arrrow, or your competition blasts your arrow to pieces because it was in the way. (DC)
You must understand that perfect consistant shooting form is as mental as it is physical. You must learn the challenges you may face, such as target panic. By understanding potential issues, you can avoid them before they actually become a problem.

You can't go to a competition and drink all night and expect to shoot well the next day. When you stop to get a snack in the middle of the shoot and choose a coke and a snickers bar, well, your resulting blood sugar spike will make for some interesting entertainment for the rest of the group. Then you get shaky and crash, swear, throw your bow and call it a day. 
You wonder 'what is that smell?', as you turn around to see one of the top shooters quietly standing back, eating his tuna fish straight out of the can for his lunch, along with his hard boiled egg, water and fresh apple.

Do you see their relevance to beekeeping? The process of human behavior seems very similar to me.

My point is, no matter what you are doing,_ Details matter_. If you think they don't, yet you're not progressing beyond a certain level, you may want to rethink some things. 
You may or may not want to work that hard, But you should understand these details DO exist.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

Sounds pretty complicated. 


Are there _non-intervention_ archers, Lauri?


----------



## Lauri

That would be the recurve shooters.
:lookout:
Now, I'm asking for a fight!


----------



## Monie

Ouch! LOL. Gimme a good compound, any day. Tweak tweak tweak. Always tweaking my bow and arrows, just like the hives.


----------



## Juhani Lunden

Lauri: There is one beekeeper in Finland who is totally treatment free and who claims that his secret is that he cuts a lot of drone brood. I think about 6 whole size Langstroth (232x448mm) frames in a summer per hive. His system has been going on for about 10 years now and works well. 
If I have understood correctly, he has smaller cell size (than 5,3), but how small I don´t know.


----------



## BernhardHeuvel

Interesting. We are running a survey in Germany right now about summer and winter losses. There are few close-to-significant factors. Only one factor is significant: So far (the poll is still running) the drone culling is most significantly related to survival, while the losses are greater in apiaries that do not cut drones. Greater than can be expected statistically.

By nature drones are the hive's sink for diseases. Also drones that get weakened by diseases don't contribute to the gene pool by reproduction. So the drones play a part in natural selection.


----------



## beepro

How many frames of drones are cut out in each hive?
Are there any healthy drones left for the queen mating?
I would say a 4.9mm cell size is small enough. Though I have seen smaller bees here. Their
development process is shorter to out run the mites, supposedly.


----------



## Juhani Lunden

beepro said:


> How many frames of drones are cut out in each hive?


As I wrote, I recall 6, during the summer, systematicly as they are drawn, all 232x448 mm (=9 1/8 x 17 5/8 inches??) in size. He is a professional beekeeper.

I´m worried about his mating drones too, but obviously it works somehow.


----------



## Eduardo Gomes

>I´m worried about his mating drones too, but obviously it works somehow<
Juhani may be other apiaries in the area that provide the drones to the congregation areas. But I agree that it can be risky. We are putting ourselves in a position where we do not depend on us.
A question to me is about the cost effectiveness of this measure looking at the resources spent by the hive and the work and time spent by the beekeeper ?

I see few drones with DWV syndrome. So it is with you?


----------



## Acebird

laketrout said:


> The development and use of VSH bees show that man and nature can work together for the mutual benefit of both. So whats the catch ?


The catch is that it is a sales pitch where you become beholding to a breeder of bees instead of a chemical company. Both cures suffer from the same fallacy, they are temporary. Nature doesn't stand still. Everything cured by man will eventually come back. The cure has to come from nature and the cure in a lot of cases is coexistence not eradication.


----------



## Acebird

Fusion_power said:


> I figured out pretty fast that I was underpriced so next year it will be $14 per quart.


That is what you pay for junk honey.:scratch:


----------



## Lauri

Sorry to keep bringing up these frames, but they do fascinate me.

If these frames had equal numbers of mites, where do you think they will be? 



















Not only can you corral the mites in a removable area, but even if you _don't_ remove drone brood, it likely prevents or delays mites from invading the worker brood, when they have a preferred area to go. Just like why they don't backfill nectar in the worker brood cells when they have preferred large cells close by to fill. 


Every brood cycle the mites don't effect worker brood is a big advantage in my opinion. If that critical last batch of brood is allowed to hatch _virus free_ before the end of the main flow, the hive can go into a dearth period with healthy workers, it can have the chance to take advantage of their brooding down period and live to rebuild populations in the fall. Drones have done their job as far as mating and being mite bait. They die off or are evicted during periods of late summer dearth. Healthy workers can take advantage of a the brooding down period to groom off residual phoretic mites. 

At least with my Carniolan hybrids, that is the cycle I see here. Even with 2 & 3 year old queens, the brood frames are filled with eggs and larva come fall, but little or no capped brood. They clean themselves up nicley. 
I actually remove little drone brood for mite control, but if I wanted to keep large established hives in tact for longer than a couple years, I would experiment with it. 

One of the things I do is early spring, I will make up nucs with some of my overwintered queens from smaller mating nucs. I get into my very large hives and take the first frames of capped brood for that nuc. Where do you think the mites are that were in that hive? I've just removed them.

I let that nuc grow for a month or more, then repeat that procedure. I remove the frames of capped brood and leave the overwintered queen with the frames of open brood and eggs with all foragers. They have a chance to groom off any remaining mites.

I take that capped brood and make up a mating nuc with a capped queen cell. Now those transferred mites will soon be exposed and groomed off. The mite population is low in spring here, But those are the breeders that would have multiplies and compounded all summer if they had remained in the big overwintered hive.

I encourage good populations of drones in my hives and those big hives thrive. _*With correct timing*_, I think both removal of capped drone brood and available drone rearing areas are more importaint to the hives balance than most people think. Don't take out all the drone brood, just take it out when it has the most impact.

I use 5.4 foundation in the center of my frames and encourage large cells on the sides. I think the drone and honey sized large cell importance is also overlooked.

If they made 5.1- 5.2 foundation I would try it, but I'm not unhappy with 5.4. I think my queens would have difficulty laying in 4.9, I rear them to be creatures if I can.


----------



## Acebird

Rader Sidetrack said:


> Are there _non-intervention_ archers, Lauri?


I used to shoot frogs in a pond with a #25 plastic bow and a target arrow. Never lost an arrow and the frogs tasted awesome. Yes, the devil is in the details but today I'd be lucky to hit the broad side of the barn. As I got older I found it was easier to use a hook with a piece of tinfoil on a pole. (didn't have to get wet)


----------



## Lauri

Acebird said:


> The catch is that it is a sales pitch where you become beholding to a breeder of bees instead of a chemical company. Both cures suffer from the same fallacy, they are temporary. Nature doesn't stand still. Everything cured by man will eventually come back. The cure has to come from nature and the cure in a lot of cases is coexistence not eradication.


Ya, but I'd rather have Arnold Schwarzenegger as the father of my children over Pee Wee Herman. Just Sayin' 

Seriously, I think we've shown backyard queen rearing something most should try. If you want the pick of the litter, when you need them, without much cost, it's the way to go.
Everyone should do a couple walk away nucs early spring. Even I do a few, even though I rear a lot of queens.


----------



## missybee

I did some searches, I give up...... what is a walk away nuc?

Some brood frames in a nuc box, and leave them be? see what happens?


----------



## Juhani Lunden

Lauri said:


> One of the things I do is early spring, I will make up nucs with some of my overwintered queens from smaller mating nucs. I get into my very large hives and take the first frames of capped brood for that nuc. Where do you think the mites are that were in that hive? I've just removed them.
> 
> I let that nuc grow for a month or more, then repeat that procedure. I remove the frames of capped brood and leave the overwintered queen with the frames of open brood and eggs with all foragers. They have a chance to groom off any remaining mites.
> 
> I take that capped brood and make up a mating nuc with a capped queen cell.
> 
> With correct timing, I think both removal of capped drone brood and available drone rearing areas are more importaint to the hives balance than most people think. Don't take out all the drone brood, just take it out when it has the most impact.


I think you have a very clever system, combined with good stock and management. No wonder you are thriving. 

My hives have 2 inches of free space beneath the bottom box, so they can rear as much drone brood as they wish. Strong hives make more than weak ones, which is good for drone selection. Quick mite checks are easy to do, too.

Eduardo: I see DWV in drones, sometimes. Drones are haploid and therefore very rapid selection takes place: If your genes are not up to standards, you are out. Drones are really one of the main things to raise varroa resistance in a population. Many beekeepers think they are worthless, or even negative - so sad. Virus resistance varies a lot between breeding mothers. In all virus resistance has improved a lot during these hard years of big losses, but every now and then some breeders offspring seems to be vulnerable.


----------



## Eduardo Gomes

Juhani Lunden said:


> Eduardo: I see DWV in drones, sometimes. Drones are haploid and therefore very rapid selection takes place: If your genes are not up to standards, you are out. Drones are really one of the main things to raise varroa resistance in a population.


Thank's Juhani. Hence the importance of selected drones for a well planned program like yours.
The drones, according to a study I read some time ago, may have an important role in the social balance of the colony. If I find it I'll let the reference.


----------



## Monie

missybee said:


> I did some searches, I give up...... what is a walk away nuc?
> 
> Some brood frames in a nuc box, and leave them be? see what happens?


missybee, I believe she is referring to a "Walk Away Split". Michael Bush has good info on splits. http://www.bushfarms.com/beessplits.htm


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

When reading about walk away splits at Michael's page linked above, note a _key _concept ...



> *A walk away split. *You take a [HIGHLIGHT]frame of eggs[/HIGHLIGHT], two frames of emerging brood and two frames of pollen and honey and put them in a 5 frame nuc, shake in some extra nurse bees (making sure you don't get the queen), put the lid on and walk away. Come back in four weeks and see if the queen is laying.
> 
> http://www.bushfarms.com/beessplits.htm#walkaway




Occasionally, _some _might miss the part about eggs (or young larva). That _can _result in this _crazy _situation ... 
http://www.beesource.com/forums/showthread.php?291085-Split-like-crazy


----------



## Monie

Thanks for pointing that out, Rader. Been a awhile since I was a newbee. I forget the little, oh so important, pieces of info that should be imparted.


----------



## missybee

Monie said:


> missybee, I believe she is referring to a "Walk Away Split". Michael Bush has good info on splits. http://www.bushfarms.com/beessplits.htm





Rader Sidetrack said:


> When reading about walk away splits at Michael's page linked above, note a _key _concept ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Occasionally, _some _might miss the part about eggs (or young larva). That _can _result in this _crazy _situation ...
> http://www.beesource.com/forums/showthread.php?291085-Split-like-crazy


Thanks to both of you, my dear hubby has stated he wanted to try and get a new hive started. We made one by accident trying to catch a swarm, last summer. We were not even sure how we did it, but had a pretty queen laying eggs.


----------



## BeeAttitudes

Thanks for the info everyone (especially Lauri).

Strategies can be developed and optimized after one understands the life cycle, incubation periods, etc. of verroa mites. Where can I find this info?


----------



## Eduardo Gomes

It is very wise to want to know more the enemy. See here please:
https://bienenkunde.uni-hohenheim.d...ier_Ziegelmann_Varroa_biology_and_control.pdf


----------



## Andrew Dewey

BeeAttitudes said:


> Thanks for the info everyone (especially Lauri).
> 
> Strategies can be developed and optimized after one understands the life cycle, incubation periods, etc. of verroa mites. Where can I find this info?


See: www.scientificbeekeeping.com


----------



## grozzie2

Lauri said:


> One of the things I do is early spring, I will make up nucs with some of my overwintered queens from smaller mating nucs. I get into my very large hives and take the first frames of capped brood for that nuc. Where do you think the mites are that were in that hive? I've just removed them.


So what happened to the nucs that just got loaded up with a heavy mite load ?


----------



## Lauri

grozzie2 said:


> So what happened to the nucs that just got loaded up with a heavy mite load ?


If this was done in late summer, yes you might be talking about a heavy mite load, But early spring there are few mites.(Remember, I have Carnie hybrids and an extended wintertime broodless period) But those are the breeders. Just like like all the yellow jacket queens you see in early spring, if you can kill them, you eleminate an entire nest you'd otherwise have to contend with later on in summer. It's exactly the same thing.

I let that nuc grow for a month or more, then repeat that procedure of removing the frames of capped brood. I remove the frames of capped brood and leave the overwintered queen with the frames of open brood and eggs with most of the foragers. They then have no hidden mites and have a chance to groom off any remaining phoretic mites before the remaining young larva is capped. Younger foragers easily revert back to nurse bees.

I take those frames of capped brood I've removed (And the mites they may harbor)and make up a _*mating nuc with a capped queen cell*_. Now those transferred mites will soon be exposed and groomed off during the brood break while the virgin queen is getting mated, before she starts laying & her brood is actually capped. By eliminating the breeders that would have multiplied and compounded all summer if they had remained in the big overwintered hive, I inflict a good early blow to the mite's foothold on the colony.

This timing actually works perfectly for me.
My overwintered mating nucs are sometimes too small to build up on their own come early spring. They are more like queen castles than nucs I'd expect to build up quickly in spring, although many do. They may need the support of more bees and resources, which the transfered standard frames gives them. It's too early for queen rearing so no capped cells or virgins are available at this point, usually early March. 

When the queen has moved up to and laid up the standard frames after about a month, I can then rear new queens and have cells ready for new nucs and the brood break that actually takes care of those overwintered mites once and for all instead of just transfering them.

Heres two mating nuc colonies in a divided deep. I remove one queen from the divided deep and just set another deep on top with the donor standard frames for the nuc, a few new frames and an interior feeder. Afer a short introduction period with a screened divider, I just let them combine. I've let them combine after as short as overnight when weather was forecast to be bad. I give the nuc frames above NO queenless period! Do not give them time to start their own queen cells. You don't want to have to inspect all the frames before letting them combine. Weather is too cold for that and it would cause a lot more work for you. 
I generally confine them for 2 days above the queen to prevent too many older bees from retuning to the old location and allowing brood to chill. I will open the entrance early in the morning on the third day and once they start to become active, will remove the screened divider & let them combine.
I've never had them start queen cells by doing it this way. 100% success last year with about 40 of these nucs.










After 30 days of setting on top the overwintered mating nuc. The queen has laid up the frames on top as well as below. They are taking up feed well, have drawn out the new frames and are ready for the next step.










Now I can once again split this colony and get 3 mating nucs out of the deal, besides the five frame standard nuc with the overwintered queen.

I'll get both sides of the bottom divided deep with small frames that are now filled with bees & brood + a couple standard frames for a 3 frame+ feeder mating nuc.Remember, capped brood goes with the new capped queen cell or virgin queen. Overwintered queens are left with eggs, open larva and most of the foragers in the original location.










It sounds complicated , but once you get the hang of it, it's not. You have to sometimes juggle the overwintered queens around if you have two still in the divided deeps, but I usually have a few hives coming out of winter that are queenless, so I always take one queen from each deep and leave one behind to set myself up for the next stage, described above. Otherwise I just make up another nuc and install the spare queen the usual way.

Sounds like I'm doing it the hard way, doesn't it? 
Well, it is worth the trouble for the benefits I get.
Making up new mating nucs each spring is a lot of work & can take a lot of resources. This way it is pretty much done for me. Making up nucs in March in a northern state would be impossible without overwintering my own queens. 
Plus of course I get an overwintered 5 frame nuc to keep or sell. 

I move the mating nucs and leave the queen, open brood and most of the foragers in the old location. 
In about a week, when most of the brood is capped, I call my customer to come collect it.

That way it has had a brood break,has a queen that was mated at the right time of year that is just coming into her prime, has a good population of bees that will have nothing to do in the near future other than draw out new comb and put up stores and has a population explosion that is eminent.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

> Strategies can be developed and optimized after one understands the life cycle, incubation periods, etc. of varroa mites. Where can I find this info?

Also this is a very useful page:
http://www.ars.usda.gov/Research/docs.htm?docid=2744&page=14


----------



## BeeAttitudes

Thanks for the great links to mite info! 

And thanks Lauri for the additional information. I'm wanting to start beekeeping this year. An acquaintance with 2 hives is selling out and I may buy his hives and equipment. If I can find a queen, I may try a modified version of your approach:

- pull first frames of capped brood and start a nucleus with a new queen
- wait roughly 30 days and pull capped brood from nuc to start one or two mating nucs

I would get 2 or 3 additional colonies, hopefully reduce mite population in all hives, and maybe reduce swarm pressure in the 2 original hives. Think this could work? Where can I find a good queen in February?


----------



## Just Krispy

WIth brood breaks how does it work with newly installed packages? Is that enough of a brood break to forego treatment in spring?


----------



## Acebird

Just Krispy said:


> WIth brood breaks how does it work with newly installed packages? Is that enough of a brood break to forego treatment in spring?


Most likely the bees have already been treated if they came from a package in the spring.


----------



## Acebird

Lauri said:


> Sounds like I'm doing it the hard way, doesn't it?


Yeah.


> That way it has had a brood break,has a queen that was mated at the right time of year that is just coming into her prime, has a good population of bees that will have nothing to do in the near future other than draw out new comb and put up stores and has a population explosion that is eminent.


How is this better than just taking two splits off an overwintered hive and letting the splits make their own queen?


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

I think the difference, Ace, is about 199.5[SUP]*[/SUP] queens! :lpf:



Lauri said:


> I'll have [HIGHLIGHT]a couple hundred queens [/HIGHLIGHT]cookin in the mating nucs to back me up so some maybe of that money will eventually stick.


That is, if Ace's one remaining hive is still alive. Have you determined whether it has a live queen yet? :scratch:


*(the 0.5 queen above represents an estimate of the viability/presence of a possible queen in Ace's hive.)


----------



## Lauri

Acebird said:


> Yeah.
> 
> 
> How is this better than just taking two splits off an overwintered hive and letting the splits make their own queen?


Can't do that in February /March in my neck of the woods. I'd still have to make up all those mating nucs from scratch. Not only does that save me time, it can be difficult to make up small nucs late spring before the main flow. (Robbing issues) 

A surplus of Overwintered queens _mated during the warm months of summer_ that are just coming into their prime, are priceless. It also gives me 2 months earlier production VS just waiting around for April/May to mosey on in. 

I work on nuc production late Feb/ March with overwintered queens, then am free to focus on queen rearing the rest of the spring and summer.


----------



## beepro

Yes, Lauri. Those priceless overwintered queens I called them the "after the solstice queens."
Good for the Spring build up and overwintering success too. One word from the post here had changed
by beekeeping practice for sure. Going to try to get the queens mated
at the beginning of September. What is the latest date that you can get them mated for overwintering?


----------



## Lauri

I did some experimenting last fall and placed some virgins late. Around August 31st was the latest date for placement I believe. They were mated quickly and looked great. Overwintering in small nucs right now. Last check one of the smallest ones recently before a forecasted cold snap & they looked well.
They just needed me to reposition what remained of the sugar block back over the colony, which is on one side only of a divided nuc box.
I usually have freezing temps here by the end of October. You are in Ca, I'm sure you'd have no problems with late mating.


----------



## Fusion_power

Strictly OT, just because it will interest Lauri

http://www.core77.com/blog/object_c..._away_part_1b_mongolian_thumb_rings_27215.asp


----------



## beepro

Nice looking nuc. Lots of healthy winter bees there. 
A beekeeper once told me that the virgin can still mate into late October
where he's at. I don't want to wait later than Sept. because they need to
have a few brood batches hatch before going into the cold winter here. Besides,
once the Italians got mated she will not stop laying all the way into the Spring with some nice fat
winter bees. Now is the time that they are building up the brood nest with the day light hour getting longer.


----------



## kilocharlie

grozzie2 - A big THANK YOU! for the link in post 14 of this thread. 

Randy Oliver's "Rant" in that article extolling the difference between the neglecting of "domesticated" honeybee stocks versus breeding survivor stocks that actually have a chance of surviving a treatment free program is a succinct, well-stated position. I wish I could have said it so eloquently myself.

I will be making up a LARGE, laminated poster set with that article on it and displaying it at our annual shows - Earth Day and Ojai Day.

I guess I'll make it my New Year's resolution to send him a donation.

Great Thread, Everybody! THAT'S a 5-star! Thanks to all of you.

Dar & Lauri - The Mongol thumb ring reminds me of the Turkish _sipir_, The thumb ring on the bow hand to allow the use of shorter arrows on a longer draw for greater distance shooting. The rail is longer (up to 6") and grooved for the arrow. An archer with a 30" draw could shoot a 25" arrow using the sipir (one inch overlap). It would be one VERY coordinated archer to use both rings.


----------



## Acebird

Lauri said:


> Can't do that in February /March in my neck of the woods.


I got lost in the endless manipulations. I thought you were putting in queen cells not mated queens. Aren't these mated queens in nucs of there own so they can overwinter? Near the end of winter you are doing a combine? I still don't get it.


----------



## Just Krispy

Acebird said:


> I got lost in the endless manipulations. I thought you were putting in queen cells not mated queens. Aren't these mated queens in nucs of there own so they can overwinter? Near the end of winter you are doing a combine? I still don't get it.


Im confused too....


----------



## Lauri

That's why I hate writing things like that. Too confusing to follow with text alone. A quick reply on a thread isn't exactly complete or clear.

A video of some of the things I do would show the method much better.


----------



## shinbone

A video or two would be awesome . . .


----------



## Lauri

shinbone said:


> A video or two would be awesome . . .


Already got my new camera, Go Pro and tripod. I have a buddy that does a lot of hunting videos for the larger archery manufacturers. He offered to help with the editing so they will actually not be boring and slow moving.


----------



## JRG13

Did you get the 4?


----------



## Acebird

Lauri said:


> That's why I hate writing things like that. Too confusing to follow with text alone.


Writing is a skill. You can see where I don't have it.

That being said if you could get someone to help you organize your thoughts and methods there are a whole bunch of people who like what your doing and believe you have a more natural way of keeping bees that they would be tickled pink to pay to see you give a talk. You probably don't have the time but in the future you might. Over time you might change the way you do things. Editing a manuscript would be easier if it was already written. Comon you got to make use of that nice new office you just built now that your not cutting so much wood.


----------



## Lauri

JRG13 said:


> Did you get the 4?


?? Don't know what that is, a new Go Pro?
I got an older hand me down I havn't used yet. But I saw the new Go Pro version demo at Cabalas the other day. WOW> Perhaps I should spring for that, but Acebird would just call me extravagant again


----------



## missybee

Lauri said:


> ?? Don't know what that is, a new Go Pro?
> I got an older hand me down I havn't used yet. But I saw the new Go Pro version demo at Cabalas the other day. WOW> Perhaps I should spring for that, but Acebird would just call me extravagant again



Aww you only live once go for it! I am tempted to get the new one, but just replaced my canon eos, since my old one failed on me. We found a gopro2 hd on the beach, perfect working condition. They are sweet little wide angle cameras. I did find that my gp2 did not do real good on focusing close up, i.e. trying to video the fish under water in my pond. 

Do a few test runs to see how it does with bees. I am thinking of using it when we do hive inspections, quick view for the brain cells that can't seem to remember everything you see during the inspection.


----------



## Acebird

Lauri said:


> but Acebird would just call me extravagant again


Not when you are buying toys Lauri. The shy or your pocket book is the limit. Yeah, go for it. I want to see some video.


----------



## Wildflower Meadows

Rader Sidetrack said:


> Note that the quote _laketrout _posted appears to have come from the Glenn Apiaries website, on this page:
> http://www.glenn-apiaries.com/vsh.html
> 
> Also note that the Glenns retired several years ago and their stock is no longer available. Some of Glenn's former customers may have bees/queens that are descendants of those queens, though.


When the Glenns retired in 2012, our company, Wildflower Meadows, bought all of their bee colonies and the remainder of their breeder stock. It is not entirely true that the Glenn stock is not available. In conjunction with VP Queen Bees, Wildflower Meadows selected the best remaining Glenn VSH breeders, kept a few for ourselves, and forwarded the remainder to VP Queen Bees. VP Queen Bees inherited the best of the Glenns' stock, and has incorporated it into their own VSH Breeders' stock, which anyone can continue to purchase. Wildflower Meadows took over the Glenns' bees and continues to produce and sell VSH queens from the Glenns' stock as well as VP Queen Bees' stock, although we are focused primarily on VSH-Italian crosses. 

For the record, it is 100% true that the Glenns did not need to treat their stock for varroa. Yes, they took some losses, but nothing significant. The proof of their methods was in their outcome: successful treatment-free beekeeping. When we acquired their bees, we found them to be in excellent condition. Wildflower Meadows has continued treatment-free beekeeping on both their stock and on the majority of our own stock with continued success. 

Is VSH a "silver bullet" for mite control? In its purest state, most likely yes. When VSH is outcrossed with other stock, however, the level of resistance does decrease to varying extent. Nevertheless, VSH crosses are significantly more mite resistant, and in our experience, far more successful in controlling varroa than their non-VSH counterparts.

Murray
Wildflower Meadows
www.wildflowermeadows.com


----------



## squarepeg

welcome to beesource murray, and thanks for your post.

i'm guessing that outcrossing is especially problematic in areas like southern california due to the significant presence of non-vsh stock located there. do your customers that pursue a treatment free approach find it necessary to bring in new queens regularly from your breeding program in order to maintain a sufficient level of the trait to remain off treatments?

on the minority of your stock that requires treatments do you use an infestation threshold to determine if treatment is to be applied, and if so can you share that threshold with the forum?


----------



## JRG13

The 4 is the new one, I got a 3 last year at some point, haven't played around with it much. You need to get a different lens for closer shots I believe, but maybe I'll get it going and mounted to the 12 ga for some waterfowl action this month.....


----------



## beepro

Nope, Lauri's posts are not confusing. She made many different posts from feeding to nuc making in her other
threads. If you've been following her posts and can visualize what her queen rearing operations are then it will
be much clearer. What she's writing and the pics combine make perfect sense to me. I like the most about
the part of letting the nucs combine. And harvesting the queens. How else would one does it otherwise? She's
describing the whole process thru out the entire year of her bee and queen operation. Good job, Lauri. Keep it up!


----------



## Lauri

I wish we could *like* the posts of others. Let them know we read what they said or say thank you. 

Those *likes* on facebook really direct me towards ether posting more detailed information on a given topic, or moving on the the next topic if a photo and post have only gotten just a couple likes.

I know, I know Barry, this isn't facebook. But an interaction slightly less than an actual Post reply could be beneficial. Let's us know what lurkers are thinking too.
How about a thumbs up or thumbs down counted at the bottom of each post?
There are a few characters here on Beesource that would be quite entertaining to count their responses


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

Thanks Lauri. 

Allow me to point out that some Beesource smileys :thumbsup::thumbsup: can serve as 'likes'. 




... also, in _*contrast *_to Facebook, Beesource offers smiley options that can be interpreted as _*disapproval*_: :scratch::no:



and who could forget this one . . . :ws:



:lpf:


----------



## Lauri

I thought posting icons only was frowned upon.


----------



## Monie

LOL!!:lpf:


----------



## cg3

:banana:


----------



## BeeAttitudes

Any response to my thoughts from a post above? Good plan?, bad?, other options that are better?

Thanks!



BeeAttitudes said:


> I'm wanting to start beekeeping this year. An acquaintance with 2 hives is selling out and I may buy his hives and equipment. If I can find a queen, I may try a modified version of your approach:
> 
> - pull first frames of capped brood and start a nucleus with a new queen
> - wait roughly 30 days and pull capped brood from nuc to start one or two mating nucs
> 
> I would get 2 or 3 additional colonies, hopefully reduce mite population in all hives, and maybe reduce swarm pressure in the 2 original hives. Think this could work? Where can I find a good queen in February?


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

_BeeAttitudes_, queens can be purchased most of the year from producers in Florida and/or Hawaii. Here is one vendor:
http://www.konaqueen.com/

> pull first frames of capped brood ...

I'm not entirely sure what you mean by "pull first frames", but if you take _all _the brood from a hive, the bees may act as though the lack of brood is the queen's fault and supersede her. That may set back your plans a bit.


----------



## BeeCurious

Lauri said:


> I thought posting icons only was frowned upon.


----------



## BeeAttitudes

Isn't this exactly what Lauri says she is doing to remove the bulk of the mite load from the hive?



Rader Sidetrack said:


> _BeeAttitudes_, queens can be purchased most of the year from producers in Florida and/or Hawaii. Here is one vendor:
> http://www.konaqueen.com/
> 
> > pull first frames of capped brood ...
> 
> I'm not entirely sure what you mean by "pull first frames", but if you take _all _the brood from a hive, the bees may act as though the lack of brood is the queen's fault and supersede her. That may set back your plans a bit.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

I did find a quote from _Lauri _that is pretty close to your question ...



Lauri said:


> One of the things I do is early spring, I will make up nucs with some of my overwintered queens from smaller mating nucs. I get into my very large hives and take the first frames of capped brood for that nuc. Where do you think the mites are that were in that hive? I've just removed them.


Perhaps Lauri will comment further, but that is an interesting mite control strategy. If I read that correctly, yes the mites will be removed from the parent hive, but then the nucs will start out with those same mites (that would be in the capped brood cells). :s

Removing (and destroying) _drone _brood is a more common way of controlling varroa in capped cells.


----------



## Barry Digman

Lauri said:


> I thought posting icons only was frowned upon.


Indeed it is. This is from the rules that members are supposed to read, understand, and agree to as part of the agreement to participate here:



> "Me too", "I agree", ":thumbsup:", "Thanks". Please refrain from posting meaningless threads, one word (or short) non-sense posts, or the such.


It's really a matter of respect for the amount of work that has been put into this forum for the last 17 years or so to abide by such rules. Some get it, some don't.


----------



## beepro

It works for her to remove the mites that way. I'm doing exactly the opposite to see the
results. One nuc hive is infected with mites and the queen took off while one cell got capped now.
Instead of dismantling this nuc to distribute the frames into another nuc I left it the way it is. Then
put a frame of attaching bees with capped broods that are about to hatch into the mite infested nuc.
As the virgin queen hatched and do her mating flight the mites have no place to hide.
This frame of bees came from another hygienic hive with low mite count. Lots of healthy young bees in it.
The purpose is to see if the hygienic bees from this frame will clean up the mite nuc after they hatched. Continue
to experiment to see which methods work for a no treat hive. As usual, Lauri had shared some interesting management
techniques for us to think about.


----------



## Lauri

Rader Sidetrack said:


> Perhaps Lauri will comment further, but that is an interesting mite control strategy. If I read that correctly, yes the mites will be removed from the parent hive, but then the nucs will start out with those same mites (that would be in the capped brood cells).


True, that's why you give them a capped queen cell or virgin queen instead of a mated queen. Zap them with a brood break.

Walk away nucs would give them an even longer brood break, but those take too long for my taste and leave the colony on the edge of it's demise if they have a failed return of the virgin & you don't catch it immediatly. Colonies develop laying workers quickly in early spring if left queenless for any real length of time.

A happy medium is to let the nuc start their own queen cells and about 5 days into it, direct release a virign queen. She'll tear down all the started cells on her own without any help from you. A little longer brood break than installing a capped cell right away, but shorter than a full blown walk away nuc takes. 
You can also use a capped, close to emerging queen cell for this method.

I do this 5 day queenless/direct virgin release with large hives too. Works like a charm.
You have to let the started cells get big enough, the virgin recognizes them as a _threat_.

A large hive generally won't accept a mated queen if they've started their own cells, but they'll accept a virgin queen & love on her right away. 

Difference is, if accepted, a mated queen won't bother the started cells, they'll hatch and kill her. 
A virign queen will wipe them out immediatly upon her introduction.

I use to install a capped queen cell along with the _Marked_ virgin queen in case she was killed upon introduction, but after doing several large hives and the marked virgin _always_ came out the winner, It was apparent, placeing an additional capped cell was just a waste of a good cell.


----------



## Roland

Rader wrote:

Removing (and destroying) drone brood is a more common way of controlling varroa in capped cells. 

But that seems to be too much work for the "Live and let Die" crowd. Yes, it really CAN be that easy, but it takes more WORK.

Crazy Roland


----------



## Lauri

Roland said:


> Rader wrote:
> 
> Removing (and destroying) drone brood is a more common way of controlling varroa in capped cells.
> 
> But that seems to be too much work for the "Live and let Die" crowd. Yes, it really CAN be that easy, but it takes more WORK.
> 
> Crazy Roland






Lauri said:


> I've been successful with most of my colonies being treatment free, but I've found it to be labor intensive, requires skill and management experience, very good genetics and the right environment.


Which brings us back to the OP.

"Is it really that easy?"

(miracle queen or cell size)
In my experience I say no, it wasn't that easy for me. I tried _just _those things and failed.
They may be_ part _of the answer, _along with other managenent methods_, but alone they were not the 'Magic Pill' everyone is looking for.

I'm not so sure encouraging more drone size cells in the hive are not a significant benefit. It would explain the success of some who have had success with foundationless. Perhaps incorrectly giving credit to the small cells, when in fact it is the larger cells that are making a difference. Just a thought. Lord knows you get a lot of drone sized cells with foundationless along with a small amount of small cell in the center of the frame. 

The experience of others is different of course. What ever works for you is what you believe. I'm not here to diminish or dispute their results. Just stating my methods & thoughts for you to take & modify for your specific circumstances.

Treatment free is a great goal, we all want to master. Unfortunatly, reality can rear it's ugly head and choices have to be made.


----------



## snl

Lauri said:


> I do this 5 day queenless/direct virgin release with large hives too. Works like a charm.
> You have to let the started cells get big enough, the virgin recognizes them as a _threat_.
> 
> A large hive generally won't accept a mated queen if they've started their own cells, but they'll accept a virgin queen & love on her right away.


There's gotta more to this than just releasing a virgin in a queen-less. I've had virgins killed upon release to a queen-less hive. They showed her no love at all. Perhaps it's the AGE of the virgin that is released into the queen-less hive that has the hive accept her?


----------



## Lauri

I thought so too when I started working with virgin queens. But I found age has no impact on acceptance, it's all about the receptivness of the colony. Age does have an impact on how you handle the virgin tho. 

The only time a colony usually can't be prepped to accept a direct release virgin is if they are queeenless with laying workers. Then a capped cell works wonders.

A subject for another thread..too lengthy a topic for a short answer.


----------



## snl

Lauri said:


> The only time a colony usually can't be prepped to accept a direct release virgin is if they are queeenless with laying workers. Then a capped cell works wonders.
> A subject for another thread..too lengthy a topic for a short answer.


Lauri, please take the time to expound on this as I've had virgins killed upon release into a queen-less hive. Yes, I've also found that a capped cell works wonders for a laying worker hive........


----------



## shinbone

Lauri - Thanks for your thoughtful comments on what you think works for you for your TF or mostly TF success. Too bad more TF people are not willing to discuss the details of what they think works for them.

"_I'm not so sure encouraging more drone size cells in the hive are not a significant benefit. It would explain the success of some who have had success with foundationless. Perhaps incorrectly giving credit to the small cells, when in fact it is the larger cells that are making a difference. Just a thought. Lord knows you get a lot of drone sized cells with foundationless along with a small amount of small cell in the center of the frame._"

When I have used foundationless frames, I, too, would gets lots of done comb. I would insert foundationless frames into the middle of the brood nest in early Spring to reduce swarming. The result was frame after frame of drone comb and lots (and I mean close to 50% in some hives) of drones in the hive. I viewed the hive making a lot of drones right when I was hoping for a big worker population build-up to catch our Spring (and only significant) flow as a big problem. 

However, if this early-Spring drone comb was cut out after capping, it could be a good way to significantly set back the mites as well as keep the drone population in check. (I know this, by itself, is not a new concept). In other words, like you say, Lauri, foundationless frames and the resulting strong tendency towards drone comb and drone brood production (at least in early Spring) maybe should be viewed as a blessing for its mite control potential rather than as a curse for its negative affect on honey production. And, with some fine tuning, the positive affect can be enhanced and the negative affect diminished.

Maybe the possibility exists that by a clever use of mixing of a certain percentage and location of foundation with foundationless (including, even, on the same frame, as Lauri does), and timing (such as, for example, use a 50% foundationless frame for one early-Spring drone brood cycle, cull those capped drone cells, and then continue the rest of the season with a 100% worker cell foundation frame or already-built worker comb in that same frame position), a substantial mite set-back through drone culling could be achieved without hurting worker brood production too much. In other words, use the bees' tendency to build drone comb in certain areas of the hive and at certain times of the year, plus the over-Wintered mites' (supposed) eagerness to jump into cells as soon as they appear in early Spring to drive the mites into small patches of drone brood for culling while the hive simultaneously still makes lots of worker brood. Call it "selective drone production and culling," with the emphasis on "selective."

Has anyone done drone culling to this level of detail? 



.


----------



## Acebird

shinbone said:


> I would insert foundationless frames into the middle of the brood nest in early Spring to reduce swarming. The result was frame after frame of drone comb and lots (and I mean close to 50% in some hives) of drones in the hive.


I have never seen one of my hives with 50% drones. You sure you didn't have laying workers?


----------



## shinbone

Acebird said:


> I have never seen one of my hives with 50% drones. You sure you didn't have laying workers?


Yes, the hive was queenright. Got zero honey from those two hive that year. Based on that experience, I would never insert 100% foundationless frames into the center of the brood nest in early Spring again.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

> You sure you didn't have laying workers?


_Every _hive has laying workers ....



> *There are always multiple laying workers even in a queenright hive​*
> "Anarchistic bees" are ever present but usually in small enough numbers to not cause a problem and are simply policed by the workers UNLESS they need drones. The number is always small as long as ovary development is suppressed.
> 
> See page 9 of "The Wisdom of the Hive"
> 
> "Although worker honey bees cannot mate, they do possess ovaries and can produce viable eggs; hence they do have the potential to have male offspring (in bees and other Hymenoptera, fertilized eggs produce females while unfertilized eggs produce males). It is now clear, however, that this potential is exceedingly rarely realized as long as a colony contains a queen (in queenless colonies, workers eventually lay large numbers of male eggs; see the review in Page and Erickson 1988). One supporting piece of evidence comes from studies of worker ovary development in queenright colonies, which have consistently revealed extremely low levels of development. All studies to date report far fewer than 1 % of workers have ovaries developed sufficiently to lay eggs (reviewed in Ratnieks 1993; see also Visscher 1995a). For example, Ratnieks dissected 10,634 worker bees from 21 colonies and found that only 7 had moderately developed egg (half the size of a completed egg) and that just one had a fully developed egg in her body."​
> http://www.bushfarms.com/beeslayingworkers.htm


----------



## Lauri

shinbone said:


> And, with some fine tuning, the positive affect can be enhanced and the negative affect diminished.


The partial foundation/foundationless frames ar exactly my idea of 'fine tuning'.

I control the amount of worker brood and drone brood. It is built how I want it, where I want it and when I want it.
When these frames are alternated with full frames of foundation, I get a good balance of what I need for hive health _and_ honey production.


----------



## Juhani Lunden

snl said:


> Lauri, please take the time to expound on this as I've had virgins killed upon release into a queen-less hive. Yes, I've also found that a capped cell works wonders for a laying worker hive........


Snl: Although I have never tried this method, Think of it from the bees perspective, they are 5 days queenless, what is their mental state? answer: "New queen is coming very soon"


----------



## shinbone

Lauri said:


> The partial foundation/foundationless frames ar exactly my idea of 'fine tuning'.
> 
> I control the amount of worker brood and drone brood. It is built how I want it, where I want it and when I want it.
> When these frames are alternated with full frames of foundation, I get a good balance of what I need for hive health _and_ honey production.



Lauri - Looks good! Do you then cull any of that drone brood? Do you insert foundation/foundationless frames only at certain times of the year, or do you continue to insert such frames throughout the comb-making season?


----------



## Acebird

shinbone said:


> Got zero honey from those two hive that year. Based on that experience, I would never insert 100% foundationless frames into the center of the brood nest in early Spring again.


There are people using 100% foundtionless frames and getting honey so I would not come to the same conclusion that you have even though I do not do foundationless frames.


----------



## Lauri

Rader Sidetrack said:


> > You sure you didn't have laying workers?
> 
> 
> _Every _hive has laying workers ....


 I'm talking about a problematic queenless laying worker hive. The kind that give you frames like this:










Turn a virgin loose on top the frames in a hive like this and they'll grab her by her legs & wings and drag her down between the frames into the depths of hell.


----------



## shinbone

Acebird said:


> There are people using 100% foundtionless frames and getting honey so I would not come to the same conclusion that you have even though I do not do foundationless frames.


Yes, I understand that and agree that my experience it is not necessarily universal. However, with my hives and my overall management practices in my area, I get lots of drone when I insert foundationless frames in the early Spring, so I won't use that method of swarm control again.


----------



## laketrout

Is anyone familiar with VP queens , turns out they ended up with some of the vsh strains from Glenn Apiaries and there pretty much in my back yard .When Glenn Apiaries decided to retire in 2012 Vp took it over and are working out of Frederick Maryland now. Unknown to me at the time I ended up with a daughter from there stock with a queen I purchased through are club for a split that never re-queened . I'll probably have to split the hive she's in this spring if it she makes it through so maybe I can build on those genes and try to build from there .I guess the answer to my question is its not that easy !! but after 122 posts we have to get it down to some specific things I can do to help this queen do her thing ,good post and info . :thumbsup:


----------



## Acebird

Lauri said:


> Turn a virgin loose on top the frames in a hive like this and they'll grab her by her legs & wings and drag her down between the frames into the depths of hell.


Lauri, how much time can pass and still have this work? Can you go through winter and do it if the colony is still alive? If not, how long after queenless occurs?


----------



## Wildflower Meadows

squarepeg said:


> welcome to beesource murray, and thanks for your post.
> 
> i'm guessing that outcrossing is especially problematic in areas like southern california due to the significant presence of non-vsh stock located there. do your customers that pursue a treatment free approach find it necessary to bring in new queens regularly from your breeding program in order to maintain a sufficient level of the trait to remain off treatments?
> 
> on the minority of your stock that requires treatments do you use an infestation threshold to determine if treatment is to be applied, and if so can you share that threshold with the forum?


Thank you for the welcome. 

There is non-VSH stock in the area, but we do our best to load the mating areas with as much desirable stock as is possible. Although we start with instrumentally inseminated VSH breeders, we produce VSH-Italian hybrids (not pure VSH). This process is best explained on our website under the Genetics section.

Some of our smaller scale customers are pursuing treatment free beekeeping, and some are not. Regardless, all look to the VSH trait to reduce the frequency or need for treatments and to build up natural resistance in their stock. VSH is a highly desirable trait with or without the goal of being 100% treatment free.

Regarding the question about treatment thresholds, we do not always use a hard and fast threshold. In any case, we never treat any breeder stock or potential breeder stock at all. If these can’t survive treatment free, they are not breeders!

Murray
www.wildflowermeadows.com


----------



## laketrout

I understand your trying to weed out any stock that doesn't live up to the level of mite resistance your looking for but I was wondering if treating a survivor or vsh strain in any way hurts the traits in those bee's .


----------



## Fusion_power

Treating does not hurt the traits, they are genetic. But treating does remove the mite selection pressure therefore does not allow you to pick out the breeders in the first place.


----------



## Mike Gillmore

Fusion_power said:


> But treating does remove the mite selection pressure therefore does not allow you to pick out the breeders in the first place.


But couldn't this work for someone who is in the transition period working towards treatment free stock? Why allow colonies to perish just for the sake of selection?

If "all" of the colonies are treated at the same time, then you would be starting with a clean slate. All colonies begin their evaluation period at the same starting point, in good health and basically mite free. Later in the season you would requeen your colonies using breeder queens from the colonies which displayed the best mite resistant traits. 

Each season this process would be repeated, continually selecting the best mite resistant colonies to requeen from. Unnecessary loses would be reduced, yet a culling and selection process continues. 

I'm not a queen breeder or TF so maybe this is not realistic. Just a thought.


----------



## Acebird

Fusion_power said:


> Treating does not hurt the traits, they are genetic.


I totally disagree. Most beekeepers do not have the ability to artificially inseminate the queens and certainly do not have the ability to isolate drones. All you can do is pick queens that have the traits that you are looking for but the traits from a queen that comes from one you selected will be anybodies guess. Yes they are genetic. What do you think would happen if you gave your children over the counter drugs when they were first borne? Seemingly harmless drugs when you are an adult and virtually lethal when your child is developing.


----------



## laketrout

Mikes point clearly describes the position I'm in , I'm not starting from a clean slate I'm trying to build on what I already have which was a pretty hi mite load in the fall because I didn't want to treat in the spring , kind of looked the other way just thinking they will be fine attitude .If I hadn't treated in the fall I would have loss at least 3 out of 4 colonies but now if I wasn't to late with my treatment they might make it till another season . 

A wild colony I collected from a log so far has shown the lowest mite count , the new queen I purchased with vsh hasn't had a chance to show what she has yet because I dumped her into a colony with mites , all I was doing at the time was trying save a split that was very close to dying out .At least now she has a chance to turn this hive around , they went into the winter in four mediums and alot of bee's and honey . This is all very new to me so I'm learning as I go , I just need the other piece's to the puzzle that we have been talking about that will make vsh and treatment free work .


----------



## Michael Bush

>Why allow colonies to perish just for the sake of selection?

For selection. Selection is the point. How do you select for bees who can survive without treatments when you are treating? I think it's a mistake to assume that the ones with the most mites or the least mites are the good ones. The ones that survive without treatments are the good ones. I had Russians and they had a lot of mites, but they could tolerate a lot of mites... I think that is probably a good trait, but it didn't keep the mites down. It's some combination of traits that allows them to survive mites and keep the numbers down enough. Until they reach some critical mass of mites, the mechanisms that they use to survive may not even kick in.


----------



## shinbone

Mike Gillmore said:


> But couldn't this work for someone who is in the transition period working towards treatment free stock? Why allow colonies to perish just for the sake of selection?
> 
> If "all" of the colonies are treated at the same time, then you would be starting with a clean slate. All colonies begin their evaluation period at the same starting point, in good health and basically mite free. Later in the season you would requeen your colonies using breeder queens from the colonies which displayed the best mite resistant traits.
> 
> Each season this process would be repeated, continually selecting the best mite resistant colonies to requeen from. Unnecessary loses would be reduced, yet a culling and selection process continues.


This sounds like a good plan to me.

As beekeepers know, the workers bees are the ones that practice the mite resistant traits (uncapping mite infested cells, grooming, etc.), but it is the queen that carries and transmits the genes for those traits. Consequently, there is no selective advantage to letting poor performing worker bees die out. It is the queen producing the poor performing worker bees, as evidenced by unacceptably high mite level, that must die out. Treating such a hive to knock the mite level down so the new queen will have a fighting chance, and replacing the old queen with a more mite resistant queen (whatever your source may be) should work perfectly well to move the hive towards mite resistance.

In other words, saving those worker bees by treating gives you a platform to test out another queen. While the original worker bees aren't mite resistant, they will allow the new mite-resistant queen to quickly lay large amounts of brood, and those original worker bees will be dead in a few weeks so the hive will quickly become populated with the new mite-resistant worker bees allowing you to then gauge the success of your new mite-resistant queen sooner than if you had to start a new hive from scratch.

I am not TF, but the above method is what I plan to do to transition to TF once I get a better grasp on the basics of beekeeping.





.


----------



## Lauri

Mike Gillmore said:


> But couldn't this work for someone who is in the transition period working towards treatment free stock? Why allow colonies to perish just for the sake of selection? If "all" of the colonies are treated at the same time, then you would be starting with a clean slate. All colonies begin their evaluation period at the same starting point, in good health and basically mite free.


That's _exactly _what I did. 
Something folks really need to understand is, when you are _working toward _treatment free in the beginning, it makes a HUGE difference if you have you own overwintered hives to manage and evaluate, VS purchased bees. Especially if they are from a warm weather climate where they have been rearing brood for some time.

_*If you don't know their history, you have no idea what you are working with. *_

That includes collected swarms too. Some of my collected swarms have been the best or worst bees I've ever seen. It all depends on their _History_.

When I first purchased bees, I cleaned them up before ever attempting to get to a treatment reduced..then treatment free routine. Requeening was also high on the list. Not only did I want queens that thrived in my climate, I wanted genetics that were not dependent on antibiotics for their vigor.
Bees that were not dependent on antibiotics were just as high on my list of traits as bees that were not dependent on mite treatments. 

After seeing hundreds of people loosing hives every year, I wasn't interested in leaving anything to chance. It was up to ME to be sure my bees had what it takes to meet my goals.

-I treated to clean up mites from purchased colonies. My reasoning was, these purchased bees had had regular treatments before I got them, one more treatment wasn't going to hurt them and I would know where I stood when it came to my mite load. I wasn't interested in being inexperienced and guessing about a pest that fools almost everyone and kills most hives.

-I requeened with genetics from a respected source (Glenn Apiaries)

-Got rid of any frames that were not drawn out at my place. 

-Focused on nutrition and colony health before honey harvest.

Since then it's been almost effortless (Except for all the work) 
But that work is building so much equipment and managing so many hives. 

Not work from stress, struggling to keep my colonies alive and the financial loss dealing with eventual dead outs.
I did what I could to set myself up for success. Put the odds in my favor. 

I don't claim to be totally treatment free. Not yet. 

I don't want people to buy a queen from me and drop her in that hive with an unknown history and expect miracles. Like I said in my earlier post, that would be a real disservice to that good queen.

But I _am_ totally antibiotic free. 
That's why I bring in some new lines to try every couple years. I use hybrid vigor instead of meds. 


And yes, Laketrout, I purchased 12 queens from VP Queens this year. They are overwintering as we speak and look promising. Adam was good to deal with and the queens arrived on time and in great shape.

Once I'm satisfied with the health and traits of new VSH lines, rotating my drone mothers every couple years between three yards should keep my mating well outcrossed. That genetic diversity may be part of the reason I have queens with good longevity. I have many overwintering now for the third time.


----------



## Beelosopher

Michael Bush said:


> >Why allow colonies to perish just for the sake of selection?
> 
> For selection. Selection is the point. How do you select for bees who can survive without treatments when you are treating? I think it's a mistake to assume that the ones with the most mites or the least mites are the good ones. The ones that survive without treatments are the good ones. I had Russians and they had a lot of mites, but they could tolerate a lot of mites... I think that is probably a good trait, but it didn't keep the mites down. It's some combination of traits that allows them to survive mites and keep the numbers down enough. Until they reach some critical mass of mites, the mechanisms that they use to survive may not even kick in.


I agree with the philosophy of selection (select the fewest number of traits possible to allow variation). I only select breeding hives from 1. winter survivor hives; 2. excessive aggressiveness. The only thing I am not certain of is if the mites from a crashing hive will cause the crashing of another, otherwise solid hive (other beekeepers claim this occurs). I don't think that in nature you would ever walk up and find two bee hives within 1 foot of each other. Therefore in nature this would be less likely to occur on the scale that it could in an apiary of any size. 

Of course I have no idea if this will work for me since I haven't been bee keeping long enough


----------



## Jim Brewster

shinbone said:


> This sounds like a good plan to me.
> 
> As beekeepers know, the workers bees are the ones that practice the mite resistant traits (uncapping mite infested cells, grooming, etc.), but it is the queen that carries and transmits the genes for those traits. Consequently, there is no selective advantage to letting poor performing worker bees die out. It is the queen producing the poor performing worker bees, as evidenced by unacceptably high mite level, that must die out. Treating such a hive to knock the mite level down so the new queen will have a fighting chance, and replacing the old queen with a more mite resistant queen (whatever your source may be) should work perfectly well to move the hive towards mite resistance.
> 
> In other words, saving those worker bees by treating gives you a platform to test out another queen. While the original worker bees aren't mite resistant, they will allow the new mite-resistant queen to quickly lay large amounts of brood, and those original worker bees will be dead in a few weeks so the hive will quickly become populated with the new mite-resistant worker bees allowing you to then gauge the success of your new mite-resistant queen sooner than if you had to start a new hive from scratch.
> 
> I am not TF, but the above method is what I plan to do to transition to TF once I get a better grasp on the basics of beekeeping.
> 
> .


I'm also brand-new, as in nuc's are on order and hives are in the mail!  But with all that I've read recently, and my general knowledge of genetics and biology, this is the tack I intend to take. Without any hands-on experience it makes the most sense. Local beeks I've been in contact with are not encouraging of TF, which doesn't surprise me whatever the actual possibilities. I know some who have tried and failed. I will keep an open and hopeful mind, have organic treatments at the ready, and monitor those mites!


----------



## Just Krispy

I think the idea of working TOWARD being TF is a really intelligent way of doing it. Its naive to think a beek can buy a package and just walk away and be TF. Its definately a process that can take several seasons.


----------



## Michael Bush

>I agree with the philosophy of selection (select the fewest number of traits possible to allow variation).

I was simply pointing out what pure breeds are about. They are all about intense selection. I'm not convinced it is a wise course. I'm only pointing out that in the case of pure breed horses, dogs, cattle, chickens etc., it is the entire point.


----------



## squarepeg

as a practical matter losses from mites aren't necessarily obvious until late fall or over the winter, and thus requeening with more resistant stock is not always an option. as michael points out mite counts may not tell the whole story. treatment thresholds are not well established and may vary significantly between different stocks and different locations.

i postulated the approach of identifying and requeening nonresistant colonies a couple of years ago as an alternative to the bond method, which i also considered wasteful and unnecessary at that time. but so far i haven't figured out a way to predict whether or not a colony will survive winter, and all queenright colonies with decent brood patterns on the fall build up are given the opportunity to try.

the other thing i was critical about with the bond method was the spreading of mites and disease from collapsing to neighboring colonies. i rarely see robbing, but do take measures to stop it when i do. the drifting of mites may be another issue, but that one is more difficult to assess and most likely impacts the colonies in my own yard vs. neighboring colonies.


----------



## Beelosopher

Michael Bush said:


> >I agree with the philosophy of selection (select the fewest number of traits possible to allow variation).
> 
> I was simply pointing out what pure breeds are about. They are all about intense selection. I'm not convinced it is a wise course. I'm only pointing out that in the case of pure breed horses, dogs, cattle, chickens etc., it is the entire point.


I agree with you Michael (in that intense selection may not be a wise course). IMO variation and exposure are key to good adaptable stock from humans to dogs to bees. I just don't have the years in to prove it conclusively.


----------



## Lauri

If I was new and inexperienced, Treating a newly purchased colony for mites is something I'd not think twice about doing. Unless you personally know the beekeeper and are familiar with their management practices.

Treating a colony that has been in my possession that had been treatment free for a couple years would be a different matter altogether. I'd be very reluctant to do it. I'd figure out why that colony hasn't kept the mite load in check on it's own and address that issue with natural methods, if intervention was necessary. 

-Simulated swarms, correctly timed brood breaks or requeening would be some of the methods I'd use. 
But if you don't catch it until it is too late in the season, treating may be your only option.
Letting them perrish needlessly isn't in my plans. Allowing the mites to infest the hive, Kill it then move on to other hives also isn't in my plans.

That's why I said I am treatment free..right up until the time I have to treat. _But If I have done my job, I can maintain without it_. 

One other factor I have worked toward is not only keeping my individual colony mite levels low, but keeping overall mite populations as low as possible in my _area_. I won't allow a hive to get infested and perish to prove a point or allow 'natural selection' to prevail. If I was going to go to those extremes, I might as well just let them swarm, unchecked. It makes no sense to do one without the other, if you truly want to see unbiased results of natural selection.

By using natural methods I keep overall mite populations very low to avoid re infestation pressure. Sometimes those manipulations are needed, sometimes they are preventative.Sometimes I do them because they are SO darn productive.
But it keeps me on a regular schedule and keeps the health of my colonies consistent.

With my fairly secluded area, that has been something I've been able to achieve solely do to my good locations. 
Hey, someday I may have a period I can't work my hives as I do now. Then I guess I'll see just how good they are.
But for now I'm still not interested in -Leaving things to chance-
I still work to put the odds in my favor when ever I can.


----------



## Beelosopher

Lauri - you comments echo my intended approach as well - I use the tools I can without treating first. A "hands off" philosophy for me doesn't mean a hands off approach; I am monitoring/managing the bees constantly. It does mean you have to know your hives and keep track of where they are at - very interesting beekeeping. It is a lot of work, especially as you add hives. 

Last year I had about 15-20 nucs going per round of nucs and 4 main larger hives. That is about as much as I want to manage until I can quit my day job. This year will be less.


----------



## Acebird

Lauri said:


> That's why I said I am treatment free..right up until the time I have to treat.


Well thank you Lauri, then I am a beekeeper right up to the time I have to be a beekeeper and then I am not. It is kind of twisted logic but it if works for you then it works for me.


----------



## Acebird

shinbone said:


> but it is the queen that carries and transmits the genes for those traits.


And all drones she mates with. Why do you want to ignore more than half of the genetic make up?


----------



## GusK

Michael Bush said:


> >Why allow colonies to perish just for the sake of selection?
> 
> For selection. Selection is the point. How do you select for bees who can survive without treatments when you are treating? I think it's a mistake to assume that the ones with the most mites or the least mites are the good ones. The ones that survive without treatments are the good ones. I had Russians and they had a lot of mites, but they could tolerate a lot of mites... I think that is probably a good trait, but it didn't keep the mites down. It's some combination of traits that allows them to survive mites and keep the numbers down enough. Until they reach some critical mass of mites, the mechanisms that they use to survive may not even kick in.


Michael, I agree with your point about high mite load/low mite load not telling us everything. But it does say something. Bees can fight varroa, or they can stand the viruses, or they can do both. Low mite loads show potential hygienic traits such as grooming and larva/pupa culling. But that same colony may be extremely susceptible to say, DWV or Kashmir bee virus... You can select by mite load, but unfortunately, for tolerance you have to go bond method. But what viruses are we talking about? Does anyone really know?

I think we overly focus on Varroa and not the virus complex - which is ever changing, from location to location. I don't think there is a beekeeper around that can accurately diagnose every virus that is present in any hive without some very expensive and sophisticated equipment. And I guess that's why all we have to go on is varroa presence.

That's why I think that few can claim to be treatment free experts. More often than not, I think pure serendipity plays a role in successful TF beekeeping. Sure, a TF beekeeper may have bees with the right hygienic traits, even AHB, or traits that make them somewhat immune to a particular virus.

But we're talking about up to 18 different viruses(that we know so far) that varroa may vector. Are these viruses present everywhere in equal proportions? I don't think so.

If it were possible, I would like to know the exact viral load of a TF beekeepers apiary - meaning each virus present. I would like to see which hygienic behaviors are present. That would say a lot to me. It would tell me how difficult the varroa and virus environment is, and how tolerant the bees are. But is that possible? Can we measure such things to a certain degree of accuracy? And if that is the case, how can someone preach TF beekeeping if they don't know how they attained it, or what challenges (virus complex) they really faced? Was there something else in their favor such as abundant pollen and nectar? I've seen hives muddle through the worst of viruses because of pollen availability - nutrition does a lot for a colony in the throes of the varroa-virus complex.

Due to the fact that there are so many factors, such as the number and varieties of viruses and the different traits of bees for each apiary, I just can't believe it's just the beekeeper that is successful. More often than not it may just be the location. The TF beekeeper may have had a hand in it - but the deck may not have been stacked up against him/her either from the get go. That is, the apiary location may not be a disease ridden location, or one where commercial beekeepers pull up once a year and introduce new viruses to the area.

I would like to see a TF beekeeper take his bees to a bee populous area for a year - where the majority of beekeepers need to treat. Would they survive?

I remember hearing a lecture by Randy Oliver. He stated that people constantly send him queens - the best of the best. And you know what? They don't survive TF. He says that they are good bees for their area, not his. Which I would agree.

And so I believe that some areas may have a higher virus complex, for various reasons, and may never be conducive to TF beekeeping, at least, not for a long time.

Because there are so many viruses, and because we don't know if there are lethal combinations of viruses, or for example let's say, if 5 specific viruses are present, plus certain pesticides are used in your area, then BAM!, you have a dead hive, no one can really speak with 100% certitude about TF beekeeping. What I'm trying to say is that there is so much we don't know. We are all in the dark about these things, more often than we realize. 

It reminds me of the Rumsfeld quote - things we know that we know, things we know we don't know, and the worst: things we don't know we don't know.

My fear is that the viruses mutate and we have more virulent strains in the future. I have heard beekeepers lament of a tough varroa year - even when they did everything right. So what changed? Was it the varroa, or the viruses?


----------



## crofter

I see a potential problem in thinking it is a pure success to have bees survive with high mite numbers. Here is why. A person can be apparently sucesssful at this for a period of time but the joker is in the particular package of viruses that those mites carry. What happens when there is a change in the makeup of the virus load. I think there are quite a few examples where resistance was claimed but did not hold up with geographical change. There have been reports too where a TF operation appeared sucessful and almost totally collapsed. There are probably many different mechanisms that could assist in achieving apparent mite resistance in different locations.

I think if you want to evaluate and foster these different mechanisms you need a selection process more discriminating than mere live or die criteria. That is too crude without very good ongoing methods of knowing what caused the demise. As has been pointed out the worker bees dont need to die! I am not sentimental about death but I dont agree with it being used as a symbolic show of dedication to a cause. Most especially so if more practical and efficient means of selection are available! Mites are likely not the last evolutionary hurdle bees will have to make and we dont know what present genetics may be be potentially key to solving those future problems. It may be slack logic to think that narrowing the genetic pool is necessarily a wise move. Simplistic solutions to complex problems are very suspect to my way of thinking.


----------



## shinbone

Acebird said:


> And all drones she mates with. Why do you want to ignore more than half of the genetic make up?


Talking about the genetics a laying queen carries and transmit implicitly includes the genes of the drones which mated to that queen.

And, in talking about killing/treating/etc. a queen which is failing to produce a mite resistant hive, the drones she mated with are long gone, so it only make sense to discuss the queen's fate.


----------



## shinbone

GusK - Excellent post. Thanks!


----------



## laketrout

Lauri thanks for touching on the other pieces of the puzzle.


----------



## squarepeg

GusK said:


> More often than not, I think pure serendipity plays a role in successful TF beekeeping.
> 
> Due to the fact that there are so many factors, such as the number and varieties of viruses and the different traits of bees for each apiary, I just can't believe it's just the beekeeper that is successful. More often than not it may just be the location. The TF beekeeper may have had a hand in it - but the deck may not have been stacked up against him/her either from the get go. That is, the apiary location may not be a disease ridden location, or one where commercial beekeepers pull up once a year and introduce new viruses to the area.





squarepeg said:


> i can't really say what the key has been, but i'll attribute it mostly to dumb luck. after those first few 'inherited' hives crashed, i got lucky by purchasing my subsequent queens and nucs from a long time tf supplier. (to be honest i didn't even know what tf was at the time). i am also lucky to live in an area that supports feral survivors due to a lot of wooded habitat, a temperate climate, and abundant floral diversity. i am able to avoid artificial feeds because of the generous pollen and nectar availability, and i generally get a decent honey harvest. i run single deeps with medium supers and most of my comb was drawn on standard sized rite cell foundation, although i am now introducing foundationless frames to get natural cell. winter losses are averaging less than 20% so far.


i've been thinking for some time now that more attention should be given to investigating tf bees and their habitats to see if any useful common denominators could be gleaned that may be of use to the beekeeping community at large.

we'll be sending some queens to the baton rouge lab this year for evaluation of resistant behaviors, and for anyone who might be interested i plan to chronicle my 2015 season here on the forum.


----------



## shinbone

squarepeg said:


> i've been thinking for some time now that more attention should be given to investigating tf bees and their habitats to see if any useful common denominators could be gleaned that may be of use to the beekeeping community at large.



My thoughts, too. Unfortunately, many who claim to be successful TF beekeepers are claimed to leave the forum because the T beekeepers are mean to them. _If_ those TF beekeepers really do exist and _if_ they stayed and contributed to the forum, we could learn a lot from them. (Some significant "ifs" there.)


----------



## squarepeg

shinbone said:


> My thoughts, too....., we could learn a lot from them.


i was thinking more in terms of what gus was suggesting like looking at viral loads and so on. it would be interesting to compare genetics, wax samples, honey samples, pollen samples, quantifying resistant traits, differences in mites, ect. it would be a great thesis or dissertation project.


----------



## GusK

squarepeg said:


> we'll be sending some queens to the baton rouge lab this year for evaluation of resistant behaviors, and for anyone who might be interested i plan to chronicle my 2015 season here on the forum.


For me, that's what makes beekeeping so addictive. The discovery process. The never-ending learning curve... I'm looking forward to reading about your findings, and your views on them.


----------



## squarepeg

GusK said:


> For me, that's what makes beekeeping so addictive. The discovery process. The never-ending learning curve...


yeah, for me too gus.


----------



## Lauri

SO glad to see a thread on this topic that is informative & full of individual perspective instead of combative.


----------



## Eduardo Gomes

crofter said:


> without very good ongoing methods of knowing what caused the demise. As has been pointed out the worker bees dont need to die!


"Under German conditions, an infestation rate of the winter bees of more than 7% may lead to colony collapse (Liebig, 2001); Delaplane and Hood (1999) suggested a significantly higher economic threshold for the Southern USA of 3000–4000 mites per colony (compare also Currie and Gatien, 2006). Interestingly, Fries et al. (2003), Rosenkranz et al. (2006) found independently that untreated colonies which exceed an infestation rate of about 30% in the adult bees during the summer do not have a chance to survive the following winter." in Biology and control of Varroa destructor, Peter Rosenkranz, Pia Aumeier, Bettina Ziegelmann, Journal of Invertebrate Pathology 103 (2010).

These are some thresholds that I'm collecting for my VSH program. Also makes no sense to me leave my colonies die. According to some data, the anti- varroa mechanisms only "appear" above a certain threshold mites. Act prematurely , treating the colony A, can overshadow my identification of good potential in the colony A. However leave the colony exceeds certain load mites thresholds, condemning the most likely to death, which benefit brings to my program? I have for me, based on what I read so far, that a promising colony is one that is able to spend the winter with a load higher mites 2% ( see mite load tolerated by commercial). However, my idea for now, is that in my initial VSH program colony over 5% load of mites they must be treated. Leave wintering colonies above this threshold, could bee counterproductive, even for other more resistant colonies in my experimental VSH apiary. Kefuss already wrote about this strategy (BAT strategy) and little or nothing to reap through it.


----------



## Eduardo Gomes

GusK said:


> But that same colony may be extremely susceptible to say, DWV or Kashmir bee virus... You can select by mite load, but unfortunately, for tolerance you have to go bond method. But what viruses are we talking about? Does anyone really know?


Gusk beekeeping is very challenging these days because, as has been said by others, the beekeeper of today should also be a scientist (in the broadest sense of the term). For virus and the problems they present some studies tell us that virus are a kind of good villain when isolated from varroa. 

"V. destructor is a vector for various honey bee viruses. So far, about 18 different viruses have been isolated from honey bees (Chen and Siede, 2007) and many of them can be vectored by Varroa mites. This has been proven for Kashmir bee virus (KBV), Sacbrood virus (SBV), Acute bee paralysis virus (ABPV), Israeli acute paralysis virus (IAPV), and Deformed wing virus (DWV) (Boecking and Genersch, 2008). Before the occurrence of Varroa mites, bee viruses have been considered a minor problem to honey bee health (Allen et al., 1986; Bailey and Ball, 1991; Bowen-Walker et al., 1999; Yue and Genersch, 2005). Obviously, the direct injection of virus particles into the hemocoel of honey bee pupae and activation of latent virus infections through the additional injection of foreign salivary proteins of the mite provoke typical disease symptoms. Best known is the DWV infection causing the typical symptoms of crippled wings and shortened abdomen in heavily infested honey bee colonies (Boecking and Genersch, 2008; De Miranda and Genersch, 2010; Fig. 6). Some of the viruses are transmitted horizontally and vertically (Boecking and Genersch, 2008) supporting covert infections in managed honey bee populations. Additionally, Varroa mites may induce immunosuppression in parasitized pupae and, thus, activate these covert virus infections (Yang and Cox-Foster, 2007)." in Biology and control of Varroa destructor, Peter Rosenkranz, Pia Aumeier, Bettina Ziegelmann, Journal of Invertebrate Pathology 103 (2010).

However research is still inconclusive. My experience, at a macroscopic level, tells me that the most notorious virus ( DWV ) and varroa are undeniably linked. Does are emerging virus strains more virulent? A good question.


----------



## Juhani Lunden

squarepeg said:


> we'll be sending some queens to the baton rouge lab this year for evaluation of resistant behaviors, and for anyone who might be interested i plan to chronicle my 2015 season here on the forum.


Same here , samples are going to Switzerland
Institute of Bee Health (http://www.bees.unibe.ch)


----------



## Eduardo Gomes

squarepeg and Juhani: They will investigate the macroscopic level (eg . hygienic behavior of bees) and a microscopic level (eg . DNA)? Do you have any information about what the researchers will analyze in queens?


----------



## Fusion_power

> I still work to put the odds in my favor when ever I can.


 That is what I did to go completely treatment free. But my steps were just a bit different to yours.

1. Find mite tolerant genetics and requeen all colonies with them.
2. Split aggressively and start pushing swarms of mite tolerant bees into the woods.
3. Keep the population of bees closed to outside mite susceptible genetics while bringing in a few select mite tolerant queens.
4. Get beginner beekeepers in the area started with mite tolerant genetics.
5. Do NOT treat any of my bees from that first step on. Do no special manipulations, no queen capture, no special splitting, no drone cutting, nothing except let the bees do things their own way.


----------



## Eduardo Gomes

Fusion_power said:


> 1. Find mite tolerant genetics and requeen all colonies with them.


Fusion power your step 1 for my program is already 3 or 4. How did you find mite tolerant genetics? How did you to prevent less tolerant side had impacts on tolerant strains? You pulled the tolerant colonies of less tolerant?


----------



## squarepeg

Eduardo Gomes said:


> squarepeg and Juhani: They will investigate the macroscopic level (eg . hygienic behavior of bees) and a microscopic level (eg . DNA)? Do you have any information about what the researchers will analyze in queens?


i am not sure what all they will be looking at eduardo, but the person i spoke with was especially interested in their ability to limit mite reproduction.


----------



## Mike Gillmore

Fusion_power said:


> That is what I did to go completely treatment free.
> 
> 1. Find mite tolerant genetics and requeen all colonies with them.
> 2. Split aggressively and start pushing swarms of mite tolerant bees into the woods.
> 3. Keep the population of bees closed to outside mite susceptible genetics while bringing in a few select mite tolerant queens.
> 4. Get beginner beekeepers in the area started with mite tolerant genetics.
> 5. Do NOT treat any of my bees from that first step on. Do no special manipulations, no queen capture, no special splitting, no drone cutting, nothing except let the bees do things their own way.


I have a question for you. 
If #3 and #4 were not attainable, do you think it would still be possible to reach your goal of sustaining a TF operation? 

This is why I ask that question. I am in a region that is very attractive to beekeeping. The local climate is moderate, wildflower pollen and nectar are available in abundance throughout most of the season, and in an average year colonies can be highly productive. This has created an enormous interest in beekeeping locally. Packages in large numbers are shipped in every spring to support the beekeeping community, and to replace winter losses. 

It is fantasy to believe that we could ever restrict susceptible genetics from entering the area in this type of environment. We are saturated with drones from packages and migrant pollination operations year after year, with no end in sight. 

I may be wrong, but I find it hard to believe that a sustainable TF operation could be achieved with #3 & #4 removed from the equation. I'm convinced that TF success is nearly impossible to achieve without a majority control over the local genetics. If *all* of the 5 points you listed above are not achieved, the whole plan falls apart.

I'll be interested to hear your thoughts.


----------



## Michael Bush

I want bees that survive and are productive with no treatments. I don't see how I can select for that if I'm treating and counting mites. All I'll get is bees who have low counts while being treated and that is not what I want.


----------



## Mike Gillmore

Michael Bush said:


> I want bees that survive and are productive with no treatments.


Me too. 
How can I get there in the scenario in the previous post #161?


----------



## Fusion_power

Eduardo, I kept my eyes open until I found one single queen in a swarm back in 2004 whose colony was highly tolerant to mites. I then purchased 10 queens from Purvis which I used to requeen colonies to produce drones. Purvis was heavily selecting for mite tolerance and had the traits pretty well stabilized. I then raised queens from my mite tolerant queen and let them mate in an area with very few other colonies except the Purvis queens. I built up to about 30 colonies and deliberately encouraged them to swarm heavily in 2006 and 2008. I would have done it in 2007 too except that we had a late season freeze that demolished the spring honey flow and thereby totally eliminated all swarming that year. My base stock is all derived from those 2005 and 2006 queens. As a side note, I joined Beesource in January 2005 and posted several times about my efforts to go treatment free. At that time, Michael Bush was one of the few beekeepers on Beesource seriously pushing the envelope by getting off and staying off the treatment bandwagon. I had some losses the first 5 years, but was able to split and catch swarms and rebuild each time. From about 2010, the genetics stabilized enough that my winter losses are no more than 10% and I am back beekeeping the way I did prior to the invasion of tracheal and varroa mites.

Mike Gillmore, I can't say what would work in your conditions. But if you don't start somewhere, you certainly can't succeed.


----------



## beepro

Fusion, this is exactly what Dee Lusby did. She found a resistant colony and requeened 50 hives with this genetics her first year. Then continue to expand her operation with more mite resistant bees. Of course, there are more methods used to sustain her operation too. I have read that in south America because of the AHB one local beekeeper use EHB to form circles in colonies for the virgin queen mating process. Each wider circle has less and less of the EHB genetics influence while the small circles have more. At every circle there are drones all waiting for the virgin to mate with. Looks like a defense shield of hives to me in this set up. Maybe to get the mite resistant genetics this is another strategy to use instead of being diluted by the migratory pollinator bees. As I read on the different techniques and methods by different bee professional before it makes more sense to me. Sugar dusting in the beginning to keep the mite level low until the bees learn to kill the mites off. I'm fortunate to order some good mite resistant queens last season. The 2 colonies experimented positively with low mite counts while the other colony almost fell to the mites. Now is the time to enhance this genetics more by getting more proven resistant queens from another source and flood my local area with this genetics too. It can be done if we know the how to....from selection to nutrition and hive management.


----------



## Mike Gillmore

Fusion_power said:


> Mike Gillmore, I can't say what would work in your conditions. But if you don't start somewhere, you certainly can't succeed.


I did attempt it a while back, and almost all of my colonies died from mite pressure. The few that did barely survive were worthless. 

If I had my hives in areas where I thought there might be a chance of impacting the local genetics and eventually making a difference, I might be more persistent. But I don't see that as a possibility considering the incessant package treadmill that's going on all around me. I'm not a quitter, but I also know the definition of insanity.

I just think it's important for someone who is considering taking the TF path to understand how important the local genetics are to success and to plan accordingly. They can take all of the steps necessary, but if they are in an area similar to mine and do not control the regional genetics they should be prepared for significant losses for a long period of time. 

If I remember correctly, Michael Bush went through this process until he reached a point where he made an impact on the genetics in his area. He suffered years of tremendous losses to get there, but he made it. In my case I would need to move my colonies out of this area to more remote locations where I might have a chance to make it work.


----------



## Acebird

Mike Gillmore said:


> Me too.
> How can I get there in the scenario in the previous post #161?


It is not very hopeful if you yourself believe that you can be treatment free up until you need to treat. You will never convince a commercial operation to be treatment free but you might be able to convince them to do it less. I would explain to newbies what they are up against and leave them with the thought that the more treatment free colonies in the area the better the chances of sustaining the practice.
I believe that abundant forage in your area makes it easier even with the outside influence of treated bees because your bees will be healthier not having to deal with dearths. There will be less robbing situations where the mites can transfer.


----------



## Mike Gillmore

Acebird said:


> I believe that abundant forage in your area makes it easier even with the outside influence of treated bees because your bees will be healthier not having to deal with dearths. There will be less robbing situations where the mites can transfer.


I've found it to be quite the opposite. I'm not at all trying to bash the package industry, don't get me wrong. But it's common knowledge that most of the queens sent up with packages are not bred to be mite resistant. They are bred to be prolific honey producers. Unfortunately, they are also mite producing factories, and without treatment will crash rather quickly. It has little to do with robbing, but more to do with their inability to control the mite population in their colonies.


----------



## Michael Bush

>If I remember correctly, Michael Bush went through this process until he reached a point where he made an impact on the genetics in his area. He suffered years of tremendous losses to get there, but he made it. In my case I would need to move my colonies out of this area to more remote locations where I might have a chance to make it work.

Everyone else remembers my experiences much differently than I do, and much differently than I have expressed.

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


----------



## Mike Gillmore

So, are you saying that you did not suffer major losses while going through the process?


----------



## Acebird

Mike Gillmore said:


> They are bred to be prolific honey producers. Unfortunately, they are also mite producing factories, and without treatment will crash rather quickly.


I have never purchased a package but the nucs I bought had local bees in them and a queen from Hawaii. How did my hives last 3-4 years without any treatment what so ever? I know that people believe that the queen is everything. I don't believe it. A clean hive with plenty of forage has to make a difference otherwise it would be the same as you say for everyone. It would be impossible to get past the first year. I also believe newbie intervention kills a lot more hives the first year then mites.


----------



## cg3

Hawaii queen ≠ local bees


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

> How did my hives last 3-4 years without any treatment what so ever?

Call me _crazy_, Ace, but I seem to recall that you have performed walk-away splits (even _crazy splits_) on your hives. Walk-away splits generally qualify as brood breaks, and are a recognized method of mite control. We even have at least one TF member here at Beesource who is _notorious _for railing against brood breaks as *treatment*! 
 :lpf:


Also, it seems reasonable to note here, since _you _brought the subject up, that at last count, you were down to one hive, and that one was apparently in bad shape. Based on recent posts, it seems that you are expecting to be buying bees in the spring.


----------



## Juhani Lunden

Eduardo Gomes said:


> squarepeg and Juhani: They will investigate the macroscopic level (eg . hygienic behavior of bees) and a microscopic level (eg . DNA)? Do you have any information about what the researchers will analyze in queens?


No idea yet, Dr. Prof. Peter Neumann wants to collect surviving bees all over Europe, probably to find a common genetic dominator. Details are open.


----------



## Michael Bush

>So, are you saying that you did not suffer major losses while going through the process?

The above link is my experience. I had 100% losses from Varroa when continuing to not treat as I had not treated for decades before Varroa. There were no survivors to breed from. I had 100% losses when I treated. There were no survivors to breed from. I got on small cell and natural cell and commercial queens from packages and was losing none to Varroa but too many to winter. I started replacing the commercial stock with feral stock to solve the wintering problem and have had no worse losses than all the other beekeepers around here who are treating and much less than most. No, the solution to my Varroa issues was not huge losses causing selection.


----------



## Adrian Quiney WI

It is not a glamorous method, but splitting is a viable alternative for treatment free backyard beekeepers/sideliners and compensation for those of us living through cold winters.

Here is the recipe for those of us living in the north. 
Take an overwintered colony and grow into into a strong double deep.
Split it a week before swarming (Mel Disselkoen stye) into 4 five frame nucs.
Grow those nucs into 2 stories (Mike Palmer style).
Overwinter, and repeat.


----------



## Eduardo Gomes

Thank you squarepeg and Juhani. I hope that your contributions help us all to get out of this swamp called varroosis.


----------



## AstroBee

Michael Bush said:


> I want bees that survive and are productive with no treatments. I don't see how I can select for that if I'm treating and counting mites. All I'll get is bees who have low counts while being treated and that is not what I want.


You can certainly "count mites" and NOT treat. In fact, seems to me that if you're making breeding decisions, then this is important data that can be used.


----------



## Vance G

Can we at least agree that shutting ones eyes and them being surprised 18 months after you install that new package or nuc when they mysteriously disappear is not a viable solution? One needs to know what is going on with mite numbers. Can we agree that a poor schlub with two colonies living in a sea of treated non genetically mite resistant bees has a snow balls chance in hell of being successful just sitting and thinking proper thoughts? Be constructive instead of self righteous and you will do the newbies a lot more good.


----------



## Acebird

Rader Sidetrack said:


> Ace, but I seem to recall that you have performed walk-away splits (even _crazy splits_) on your hives. Walk-away splits generally qualify as brood breaks, and are a recognized method of mite control.


Where is the brood break for the half that still has the queen? For a northerner it is winter like all hives. I think those that are touting brood breaks are speaking of a break during high mite load which would be summer or fall. Never did that.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

Acebird said:


> Where is the brood break for the half that still has the queen?


Lets talk math, Ace. How many "halves" does one of your splits have? Three "halves"? :scratch: :lpf:


Wonder what I am talking about? .... Read this thread you started ...
http://www.beesource.com/forums/showthread.php?282032-Take-the-poll-queenless-or-not


.... three "halves" ....


----------



## Mike Gillmore

Michael Bush said:


> I got on small cell and natural cell and commercial queens from packages and was losing none to Varroa but too many to winter.....
> 
> I started replacing the commercial stock with feral stock to solve the wintering problem and have had no worse losses than all the other beekeepers around here who are treating and much less than most. No, the solution to my Varroa issues was not huge losses causing selection.


My apologies. Thank you for correcting my assumptions. 

So it sounds like you attribute most of your success to Small Cell/Natural Cell, along with proper nutrition and adequate quality stores in the hive. Breeding from feral stock was an added bonus which improved your overwintering percentages.


----------



## Michael Bush

I think overall success will require local adapted bees. Not so much for Varroa, although that may also contribute, but winter survival and local timing. I think you could breed for local bees just by your own selection from commercial bees, but it's probably quicker to get swarms and cutouts. But the SMR, VSH, MN hygenics, B. Weaver Buckfasts, B Weaver All Americans and Russians I had before small cell all died. I did not see any success against Varroa from genetics alone. I did from small cell and natural cell alone. But I'm sure it doesn't hurt to also pursue good survivor genetics. I highly recommend finding local survivors.


----------



## squarepeg

Michael Bush said:


> I highly recommend finding local survivors.


michael, have you considered trying to put together a database of the many tf beekeepers you have been in contact with so someone in a given area might be able connect with and obtain local survivors from those that have them?


----------



## Mike Gillmore

Michael Bush said:


> I did not see any success against Varroa from genetics alone. I did from small cell and natural cell alone.


I appreciate all of your contributions to the beekeeping world. I've actually adopted many of your beekeeping practices myself which has led to great success. All mediums, top entrances, converted to all SC and natural cell comb, and provide a good environment for the bees. It's worked out great. The bees are healthy and productive, and I've had no need to use antibiotics for years. 

I just can't seem to overcome this mite issue. If I don't intervene in late summer with some kind of treatment (I use only acid treatments), by late fall the colonies are overrun with mites and the stress becomes glaringly apparent. When I've let it go in the past most of the colonies don't make it. Not sure what I'm doing wrong, hopefully I'll get it figured out in the next 10 years or so.


----------



## shinbone

Mike Gillmore said:


> I can't seem to overcome this mite issue. If I don't intervene in late summer with some kind of treatment (I use only acid treatments), by late fall the colonies are overrun with mites and the stress becomes glaringly apparent. When I've let it go in the past most of the colonies don't make it. Not sure what I'm doing wrong, hopefully I'll get it figured out in the next 10 years or so.



Location? I.e. local forage, local agriculture practices, micro-climate, and nearby apiaries combine in such a way to make TF beekeeping impossible in that particular location.




.


----------



## squarepeg

Mike Gillmore said:


> If I had my hives in areas where I thought there might be a chance of impacting the local genetics and eventually making a difference, I might be more persistent. But I don't see that as a possibility considering the incessant package treadmill that's going on all around me.





Mike Gillmore said:


> I just can't seem to overcome this mite issue.





squarepeg said:


> welcome to beesource murray....
> 
> i'm guessing that outcrossing is especially problematic in areas like southern california due to the significant presence of non-vsh stock located there. do your customers that pursue a treatment free approach find it necessary to bring in new queens regularly from your breeding program in order to maintain a sufficient level of the trait to remain off treatments?


while murray did not answer my question directly, i'm guessing from what randy oliver and others have reported that it is difficult if not impossible to sustain an apiary off treatments in these environments without the regular requeening from breeder stock.

it appears to be a common denominator among those who have failed with the tf approach.

mike, are you aware of any confirmed feral colonies that have been observed to survive at least a winter or two in your neck of the woods?


----------



## Mike Gillmore

squarepeg said:


> mike, are you aware of any confirmed feral colonies that have been observed to survive at least a winter or two in your neck of the woods?


The few I've discovered in trees seem to crash after a year or two and go quiet.


----------



## squarepeg

Mike Gillmore said:


> The few I've discovered in trees seem to crash after a year or two and go quiet.


i think that would be the acid test. if local feral colonies are unable to survive a winter or two than it seems unlikely to me that one could expect to sustain bees off treatments, and vice versa.


----------



## snl

Michael Bush said:


> .........But the SMR, VSH, MN hygenics, B. Weaver Buckfasts, B Weaver All Americans and Russians I had before small cell all died. I did not see any success against Varroa from genetics alone. I did from small cell and natural cell alone. But I'm sure it doesn't hurt to also pursue good survivor genetics. I highly recommend finding local survivors.


If there is success from small cell and natural cell alone, why are there not more feral bees? Certainly those bees build their own natural comb...


----------



## Mike Gillmore

> i think that would be the acid test.


That's my gut feeling. I've tried to do everything else required, but the missing puzzle piece seems to be good local genetics. 

I blame myself as well for not having the long term commitment it would take to see it through ... I refuse to watch all of my bees perish again, so I treat when I have to and keep them alive.


----------



## squarepeg

snl said:


> If there is success from small cell and natural cell alone, why are there not more feral bees? Certainly those bees build their own natural comb...


"When we breed stock for the benefit of high production, it typically comes at a cost in overall fitness."

from: http://scientificbeekeeping.com/wha...mitotypes-genotypes-and-tradeoffs-in-fitness/

great article. there are lots of challenges for feral bees these days to include loss of habitat, lack of quality forage, environmental toxins, competition for resources, and the introduction of genetics geared more toward production than survival.


----------



## AstroBee

Michael Bush said:


> I did not see any success against Varroa from genetics alone.


My guess is that genetics HAS led you to success. IMO all else is secondary.


----------



## SRatcliff

squarepeg said:


> "When we breed stock for the benefit of high production, it typically comes at a cost in overall fitness."
> 
> from: http://scientificbeekeeping.com/wha...mitotypes-genotypes-and-tradeoffs-in-fitness/
> 
> great article. there are lots of challenges for feral bees these days to include loss of habitat, lack of quality forage, environmental toxins, competition for resources, and the introduction of genetics geared more toward production than survival.


I just read all of his "What's Happening to the Bees" articles over the holiday. It seems that as soon as you take bees from the trees they begin to become domesticated in some way, which disrupts their natural survival skills. Our impact on the environment(segregated agriculture, pollutions, invasive species etc) doesn't help either. I understand that humans are as natural as everything else, but we can do a better job of integrating ourselves into the environment.

That's my hippie rant for the day.


----------



## Mike Gillmore

snl said:


> If there is success from small cell and natural cell alone, why are there not more feral bees? Certainly those bees build their own natural comb...


I recall following a thread a while back centered around this same question. If I remember correctly the small cell supporters believe that most swarms that end up in the trees are from managed hives with normal size (large cell) comb. When the swarms first take up residence in a cavity and begin to build new comb they are not regressed yet and build very little small cell comb. They build the same size comb as they had been building in the managed hive. Due to the lack of small cell in the new "feral" hive in the tree, mites soon overrun the colony and it dies out.


----------



## SRatcliff

Mike Gillmore said:


> I recall following a thread a while back centered around this same question. If I remember correctly the small cell supporters believe that most swarms that end up in the trees are from managed hives with normal size (large cell) comb. When the swarms first take up residence in a cavity and begin to build new comb they are not regressed yet and build very little small cell comb. They build the same size comb as they had been building in the managed hive. Due to the lack of small cell in the new "feral" hive in the tree, mites soon overrun the colony and it dies out.


Are there links to studies about this? Does a swarm remember the size of the old comb and use a size in between? That's funny that they can 'reset' their orientation but not their comb size.


----------



## Mike Gillmore

I'm not sure where the studies can be located, but I do know from personal experience that when I transitioned my colonies to small cell it took a couple of rounds of new comb to "regress" the bees. It was much quicker using plastic 4.9mm PF-100 frames, but they did have a more difficult time with it on the first try. 

Maybe Rader can dig something up for us.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

Start with the references on this page by Michael Bush:

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


----------



## beepro

Yes, it is very informative indeed. 

And Welcome to Bee Source!!!

More and more keepers are joining in everyday. It is nice to know that all beekeepers from different
places can all learn together, here.


----------



## Mike Gillmore

shinbone said:


> Location? I.e. local forage, local agriculture practices, micro-climate, and nearby apiaries combine in such a way to make TF beekeeping impossible in that particular location.


I think it might be the lack of local survivor genetics. This area is saturated every year with bees from the south and west. A lot of these colonies swarm and that complicates things further. If we could get a majority of beekeepers in the area to purchase local nucs and queens more adapted to this climate we would probably see a tremendous improvement.

But every year the locals experience high losses and more bees are brought in from other parts of the country early in the year to replace those losses. The endless cycle continues. Waiting for local stock later in the spring would not work for them, they will miss the spring flow.


----------



## beemandan

Mike Gillmore said:


> This area is saturated every year with bees from the south and west.


None of which would matter if the small cell were doing its job.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

With regard to more information on small cell beekeeping, (besides the page I linked in post # 198) there are extensive articles by Dee Lusby in the Beesource _Point-of-View_ section. Here is one of those:
http://www.beesource.com/point-of-v.../small-cell-size-foundation-for-mite-control/
Refer to the menu on the left of that page for more.


----------



## squarepeg

Mike Gillmore said:


> I think it might be the lack of local survivor genetics...
> 
> But every year the locals experience high losses and more bees are brought in from other parts of the country early in the year to replace those losses.


why do suppose the losses are so high? not treating or not treating correctly?

are the folks in your area familiar with what tim ives is doing? perhaps someone with the right motivation could propagate a bunch of queens from his stock that could be brought in to requeen the packages.


----------



## Michael Bush

>If there is success from small cell and natural cell alone, why are there not more feral bees?

I see no shortage of feral bees.
http://www.bushfarms.com/beesnaturalcell.htm#feralbees

>Are there links to studies about this?

I used to have a very long list. Many of the links I have are now broken. I'm sure they are still out there somewhere, but I'd have to find them all again. These pages with discussions on them have some of the links to some of them:

Male survivorship on smaller cells:
http://www.apidologie.org/index.php...29&url=/articles/apido/pdf/2002/01/Martin.pdf

Several discussion on several of them:
http://beeuntoothers.com/index.php/beekeeping/articles/66-small-cell-studies

http://www.elgon.se/pdf-filer/Small_cell_test_designs13c.pdf

http://resistantbees.com/blog/?page_id=1902#anal


----------



## beemandan

squarepeg said:


> perhaps someone with the right motivation could propagate a bunch of queens from his stock that could be brought in to requeen the packages.


 Even I would have to recognize that in some parts of Ohio there is at least one large honey producer who buys GA packages every spring and at season's end gets rid of them....and starts over with packages again next year. I'm sure that taints the 'local feral' genetics.


----------



## Acebird

beemandan said:


> Even I would have to recognize that in some parts of Ohio there is at least one large honey producer who buys GA packages every spring and at season's end gets rid of them.


I wonder how he is getting rid of them. It could be the mite bomb that is troubling the area if he doesn't fry them. As a business looking at the bottom line there is no way he is frying them.


----------



## snl

Michael Bush said:


> >If there is success from small cell and natural cell alone, why are there not more feral bees?
> I see no shortage of feral bees.


Does anyone agree with this? I'll be darn if I see the number of bees around now that I used to see in my earlier years (60's)


----------



## sqkcrk

Ask him Brian. He's probably writing about HoneyHouseHolder.


----------



## sqkcrk

snl said:


> Does anyone agree with this? I'll be darn if I see the number of bees around now that I used to see in my earlier years (60's)


Anecdotal absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.


----------



## Michael Bush

>Does anyone agree with this? I'll be darn if I see the number of bees around now that I used to see in my earlier years (60's)

See the "sixth assumption" in the link I posted.


----------



## Jim Brewster

snl said:


> Does anyone agree with this? I'll be darn if I see the number of bees around now that I used to see in my earlier years (60's)


Probably depends on your local area. I know when we bought our house in 2006 I saw a lot of bees in the clover and flowering bushes, then they seemed to almost disappear for a couple years before coming back a little the last couple of years. 

I don't think there are many (if any) cultivated hives in a 2-mile radius (long-established suburbia for the most part with patches of forest and meadow), but I could be wrong. I suppose I'll find out more when I meet with the local bee club...


----------



## SRatcliff

Mike Gillmore said:


> I'm not sure where the studies can be located, but I do know from personal experience that when I transitioned my colonies to small cell it took a couple of rounds of new comb to "regress" the bees. It was much quicker using plastic 4.9mm PF-100 frames, but they did have a more difficult time with it on the first try.
> 
> Maybe Rader can dig something up for us.


I was talking more about when a swarm find a new cavity, rather than trying to regress bees in current hives. And maybe my question was still answered by Rader's and Michael's links, I'll go over them later.


----------



## snl

Michael Bush said:


> >Does anyone agree with this? I'll be darn if I see the number of bees around now that I used to see in my earlier years (60's)
> 
> See the "sixth assumption" in the link I posted.


But that's just an assumption (maybe logical tho) and you know what they say when you ASSUME something....... But you stated you "I see no shortage of feral bees." Perhaps that's where you now live.......or do you mean "everywhere?"


----------



## Fusion_power

The feral bee population in my area is healthy as shown by number of swarms in spring and number of bees foraging on flowers. I might add that native pollinators such as mason and bumble bees are also healthy. I can't guarantee that there have been no shifts in species of pollinator, but based on my memories from childhood, most of the bees I see today are the bees I saw 50 years ago.


----------



## snl

Fusion_power said:


> ..... but based on my memories from childhood, most of the bees I see today are the bees I saw 50 years ago.


Wow, 50 year old bees?  Now, that's a record!


----------



## beemandan

Fusion_power said:


> The feral bee population in my area is healthy


Maybe a result of the 'Arnot Forest effect' (a term I just invented), likely the product of isolation, as reported by Tom Seeley.
In my area, long term feral colonies are, in my experience, nonexistent. I can't recall the last time I found a 'feral' colony that was still alive the following season. 
As a young fellow I usually knew the locations of several 'bee trees' at any given time....going from season to season. Today...nada.


----------



## cg3

Acebird said:


> I wonder how he is getting rid of them.


He blows them out and sells them in bulk.


----------



## cg3

beemandan said:


> Even I would have to recognize that in some parts of Ohio there is at least one large honey producer who buys GA packages every spring and at season's end gets rid of them.


Ohio's largest honey producer is TF.


----------



## shinbone

cg3 said:


> Ohio's largest honey producer is TF.


Are you saying the largest honey producer in Ohio is TF because they get rid of all their hives at the end of each honey season, and thus never need to treat?


----------



## beemandan

shinbone said:


> Are you saying the largest honey producer in Ohio is TF because they get rid of all their hives at the end of each honey season, and thus never need to treat?


A bit of a stretch....isn't it?


----------



## cg3

beemandan said:


> A bit of a stretch....isn't it?


Maybe, but it seems to be one model for success.


----------



## shinbone

AstroBee said:


> My guess is that genetics HAS led you to success. IMO all else is secondary.


IMHO, cracking the varroa nut depends on a huge number of factors. For example, genetics, hive manipulation protocols, local forage, local agriculture, to name a few, are all known to impact varroa populations in a hive. There are more known factors, and probably some unknown factors yet to be discovered. If you get enough of those factors tweaked in your direction, either knowingly or unknowingly or some of both, you can be successfully TF.

Further, we know that it is not just one or two factors which can be used to be TF, because, if it was so simple and since we know that some beeks are successfully TF, then the rest of the bee community could simply copy what those TF beeks do and most beeks would be TF. Such success by copying rarely happens, so we know it is more complicated that just a couple of factors.

Also, again, because we know some beeks are successfully TF but others in other locations can't duplicate their results, we know that location, either directly or indirectly, does some how factor into TF success. Consequently, some beeks can easily be TF, some will have to work hard to be TF, and some can never bee TF in their location.

This "huge number of known and unknown factors" is also why different but nonetheless very competent beeks have different results, and then get in huge fights because each one knows what they did and what their results were but can't understand why the other guy "just doesn't get it."

JMHO


----------



## beemandan

cg3 said:


> Maybe, but it seems to be one model for success.


I have to wonder how all of the brood frames and maybe even honey supers were stored between seasons.


----------



## cg3

I'm not sure but it's pretty darn cold up there. Ask him, he's pretty open about his methods.


----------



## DPBsbees

Heck, I'd have virtually zero losses as well if I sold all of my hives after harvest.


----------



## sqkcrk

DPBsbees said:


> Heck, I'd have virtually zero losses as well if I sold all of my hives after harvest.


Yeah. So what is your point?


----------



## shinbone

DPBsbees said:


> Heck, I'd have virtually zero losses as well if I sold all of my hives after harvest.


Exactly - TF and 100% over-winter success. What a great achievement!


----------



## AstroBee

shinbone said:


> IMHO, cracking the varroa nut depends on a huge number of factors.


My reply was in response to MB's statement: "I did from small cell and natural cell alone." I strongly believe that this is not the general case, and further, I don't believe that was the dominant factor that led to his success. Also, I should have been more clear, that my comment "all else is secondary" was with respect to his particular story. However, I do agree with your assessment that universal TF is not easily reached and that too much weight is placed on trying to replicate local success stories in other regions and with different genetics. I believe that everyone who attempts TF needs to enter into it with eyes wide open and not simply try to grab a recipe that worked under potentially very different conditions. Here's a snippet on my TF story.


----------



## shinbone

AstroBee - Thanks for the clarification. Also, thanks for explaining your TF methods in the linked thread. And, not to get too gushy, but you got lots of great info on your website, too.


----------



## Mike Gillmore

laketrout said:


> I've been reading alot on the forums lately how easy we can be treatment free ,


So ... what do you think now? 




laketrout said:


> Not trying to start a war here between the treat crowd versus the non treat ,


This has been one of the most civil and informative T/TF threads I've read. A real pleasure .. thank you all.
As in all things beekeeping, so many different opinions and avenues for success.


----------



## Acebird

sqkcrk said:


> Ask him Brian. He's probably writing about HoneyHouseHolder.


At first I wasn't sure what you were asking so I looked up a thread about HoneyHouseHolder. He is filling up the hive with heavy syrup and then extracting the whole hive in the fall. Doesn't that sound a little shady? I don't consider someone who fills a hive with syrup treatment free.


----------



## beemandan

Acebird said:


> I don't consider someone who fills a hive with syrup treatment free.


I'm sure he'll be grieved to hear it.


----------



## sqkcrk

Acebird said:


> At first I wasn't sure what you were asking so I looked up a thread about HoneyHouseHolder. He is filling up the hive with heavy syrup and then extracting the whole hive in the fall. Doesn't that sound a little shady? I don't consider someone who fills a hive with syrup treatment free.


I don't know what you think you read, but that is not what he does. Certainly not what I was referring to and I was only telling you who he was talking about anyway.


----------



## laketrout

Mike , I agree its been a really good informative thread and answered alot of questions for me about VSH and a whole lot more !!! , I've learned alot about treatment free and all the things that can help someone get there to a point but like everything in beekeeping its not just black and white , do this and do that and your mite problem is over . I have to say I was quite skeptical when I asked the question but I had no idea !!!! I wish we could draw a solid conclusion about small cell and its merits , I was doing pretty good until we got into that discussion , its alot of work to change over especially if it doesn't help the mite problem . It would be nice to hear from M. Palmer and Lauri on this subject and what they have found.


----------



## Lauri

It's funny, if you voice an opinion that is different, it is often seen as a _slam_ to others that make certain claims/have different points of view. Often seen as disrespectful, when it is not meant to be. 

Because of that, I try to be diplomatic about my difference of opinion or stay away from topics that are chronically controversial by nature, like this one.

With only a few years of experience behind me, I have no real leg to stand on when it comes to offering advise and I rarely do so. When threads like this pop up, I am pretty quiet unless I have an opportunity to just simply state _what I do and how it has worked for me_. 

Putting my actual beekeeping experiences aside, my position as a small scale queen producer gives me the unique opportunity to hear from hundreds of people that have been beekeeping for years about their successes or failures in beekeeping. It's allowed me to see patterns others may miss.


Anything is possible. But it is probable and replicatable in all areas & situations? That's where the difficulty lies. That's what people want, it's human nature, but it is rarely attainable, _no matter what the subject_. 

People want to be treatment free and I believe when they are inexperienced they cherry pick and retain bits and pieces of methods that support what they want to hear.They implement only those bits and pieces because frankly, that's probably all they can remember. They soon find out it is much more complicated than that.
While controlling mites is a big concern, there are many more issues at hand for most beekeepers, especially if they have newly purchased stock.

Look at my thread about making the fortified sugar blocks. Folks changed the recipe, cooked it instead of dried it, etc, etc and were highly surprised when it didn't come out the same as my photos show. Some were even a little ticked at_ me_. When it was pointed out they had changed it, they admitted they had totally overlooked those details, and were even actually a bit surprised that they didn't realize that fact until it was pointed out to them. That was a good lesson for me how easily individual interpretation can drastically change the overall result.

Whether or not I believe in the small cell theory is irrelevant. I've already stated my methods in the previous posts.
I believe I have an open mind and am always aware there may be factors I have not considered when I come to conclusions. 
That's what makes beekeeping fascinating. There are always pieces of the puzzle just waiting to be found and put into place.
My puzzle might only have 50 pieces. Your puzzle may have 500, due to your location and specific circumstances.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

:thumbsup::thumbsup:

.
.
.


I'd leave it at just that ... but some might get the wrong idea. 

Its very easy to find supporting evidence for how things get twisted around. Just take a look at any thread that has more than 20 posts or so to see how different the end is from the beginning. :lookout:


----------



## laketrout

My fault Lauri , I shouldn't have dragged you into this one the way I did , this has been a very friendly thread and I hope there are more to come .


----------



## Vance G

If you have small cell frames and give up on the idea there is NO HARM DONE. If they are drawn just mix and match them as they fall. It won't harm a thing. In a normal wild hive, the size of comb varies quite a bit with the smallest at the center of the brood nest--but if it doesn't stop mites and it is good comb, so what? Just use it.


----------



## beepro

Because beekeeping is all location, location and local location specific, I think everyone's result is not the same when trying to 
duplicate another's successful method. So far I have seen on you tube vid of MP and Dee Lusby group pic. during my mite research. 
So it is not just a piece of the small bits and pieces of the puzzle that makes TF possible but a combination of all of them altogether. 
My search led me to many factors including good resistant genetics, nutrition, environmental, and bee density within the hive. 
Having small cells only contribute to the bee density when hygienic behaviors are supposedly formed. So it seems that a healthy dense hive will be 
able to defend themselves against the mites better. There are still many little experiments that I would like to design and test them out. If an experiment
had failed I don't blame the one giving the advice but instead look into my design to see what is missing. How come I will ask? For example, I took the advice
of raising the after the solstice queens. One failed due to the mites but 2 survived and thriving now. Now I want to look into it deeper to see the 'why' of things. I don't go back to blame that the after the solstice queens advice do not work. Don't blame the OP because there are so many factors at play in my area.
But at the moment what matters the most is that your bees are surviving and healthy in your area. Once all these factors come into 
synergy with one another then you will have a healthy hive that can bee treatment free. Only you as a beekeeper know which piece of the puzzle is
missing. And can adjust accordingly to meet your bees' need.


----------



## missybee

Lauri said:


> It's funny, if you voice an opinion that is different, it is often seen as a _slam_ to others that make certain claims/have different points of view. Often seen as disrespectful, when it is not meant to be.


Join a pond forum, the same happens. I moderate two, there are a lot of ponders that do not want someone to do something differently then the way they say it should be done. All ponds are water, but every area the water is different, climate, ph, minerals, etc. So of course what works for x may not work for xx. Some nasty word fights lol, worse than what I have seen on this forum. 

I am totally new here to bee keeping, anything I read, if I decide to try it and it succeeds, yeah, if it fails, my first thought is why and what did I do wrong. In our MD climate our bee keeping is different than hot south florida, cold canada, long nectar season areas, vs our 6 week nectar season. 

Keep posting Lauri, love reading what you are saying and what others say.

We are heading north, after our 3 month stay in south florida, then we will know if our good honey stores, insulated hives, minimal knowledge allowed our bees to make it until now. We just started having darn cold weather. They were flying a few weeks ago. 
Our attempt at removing a hive down here failed, we learned a lot, know now what we did wrong. Knowledge stored away for the next attempt.


----------



## laketrout

The thing about using foundation say 5.4 or 5.1 whatever size , that has always puzzled me is why can't the bee's build out the cell into any size they prefer , building the size cell they need and where they want it . Aren't they doing this already when they build worker size cells in the middle of the frame and drone size cells on the sides of my wax foundation .


----------



## Acebird

Lauri said:


> That was a good lesson for me how easily individual interpretation can drastically change the overall result.


Boy, does that strike a nerve for me. And you should know that when I ask you questions it is because I don't trust my interpretation.


----------



## Acebird

laketrout said:


> The thing about using foundation say 5.4 or 5.1 whatever size , that has always puzzled me is why can't the bee's build out the cell into any size they prefer , building the size cell they need and where they want it .


They will if there isn't a beekeeper involved. Foundation is a blue print. If you build a foundation for a house and then decide to change the floor plan where the exterior dimensions are different it doesn't work so well. Try changing the floor plan after the whole house is built. It will take twice the effort than what it would have taken building from scratch.

When a beekeeper uses foundation and maybe forces the bees to locate their brood nest in a certain location of the hive there isn't much choice for the bees the following years. If you are going to let them do what they want you have to let them do what they want and stop intervening.


----------



## sqkcrk

Then how do you explain drone cells on waxed foundation embossed in a worker cell size Brian?


----------



## Mike Gillmore

laketrout said:


> why can't the bee's build out the cell into any size they prefer , .... Aren't they doing this already when they build worker size cells in the middle of the frame and drone size cells on the sides of my wax foundation .


With foundation the bees will alter the cell size for drones, but I don't recall ever seeing them build the cells "smaller" than the embossed foundation dimensions.


----------



## JasonA

Lauri said:


> It's funny, if you voice an opinion that is different, it is often seen as a _slam_ to others that make certain claims/have different points of view. Often seen as disrespectful, when it is not meant to be.
> 
> Because of that, I try to be diplomatic about my difference of opinion or stay away from topics that are chronically controversial by nature, like this one.
> 
> With only a few years of experience behind me, I have no real leg to stand on when it comes to offering advise and I rarely do so. When threads like this pop up, I am pretty quiet unless I have an opportunity to just simply state _what I do and how it has worked for me_.
> 
> Putting my actual beekeeping experiences aside, my position as a small scale queen producer gives me the unique opportunity to hear from hundreds of people that have been beekeeping for years about their successes or failures in beekeeping. It's allowed me to see patterns others may miss.
> With that experience as a guide, I think MB's information about small cell is often slightly misunderstood or the inexperienced take it as a one size fits all cure all-simple as that. Being misquoted or misunderstood isn't _his_ fault.
> 
> Anything is possible. But it is probable and replicatable in all areas & situations? That's where the difficulty lies. That's what people want, it's human nature, but it is rarely attainable, _no matter what the subject_.
> 
> People want to be treatment free and I believe when they are inexperienced they cherry pick and retain bits and pieces of methods that support what they want to hear.They implement only those bits and pieces because frankly, that's probably all they can remember. They soon find out it is much more complicated than that.
> While controlling mites is a big concern, there are many more issues at hand for most beekeepers, especially if they have newly purchased stock.
> 
> Look at my thread about making the fortified sugar blocks. Folks changed the recipe, cooked it instead of dried it, etc, etc and were highly surprised when it didn't come out the same as my photos show. Some were even a little ticked at_ me_. When it was pointed out they had changed it, they admitted they had totally overlooked those details, and were even actually a bit surprised that they didn't realize that fact until it was pointed out to them. That was a good lesson for me how easily individual interpretation can drastically change the overall result.
> 
> Whether or not I believe in the small cell theory is irrelevant. I've already stated my methods in the previous posts.
> I believe I have an open mind and am always aware there may be factors I have not considered when I come to conclusions.
> That's what makes beekeeping fascinating. There are always pieces of the puzzle just waiting to be found and put into place.
> My puzzle might only have 50 pieces. Your puzzle may have 500, due to your location and specific circumstances.


t:
:applause: :applause: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

I get exponentially more from this site then I contribute. Main reason is I don't have bees yet and I won't have until spring. Lauri, that was well written and couldn't be truer from past experience on other forms where I was giving advice.


----------



## jim lyon

laketrout said:


> I've been reading alot on the forums lately how easy we can be treatment free , while it seems most seasoned practical beekeepers that have been around awhile use various treatments to deal with mites .The other side of the fence says all we have to do is order vsh queens from a good supplier and your all set no more mite problem !
> 
> Not trying to start a war here between the treat crowd versus the non treat , this is a different idea , this says if we get the right queens there is no more of the two crowds we all have happy bee's without treating and no dead colonies .
> 
> This QUOTE from a VSH breeder relates to what I'm talking about - The development of the VSH line of bees by the team of scientists at the USDA Bee Breeding Lab in Baton Rouge, is a true scientific success story. Through careful observation and experimentation, they painstakingly came to understand the natural defenses that the bees had hidden away in their genome. Selection for these beneficial genetic traits over many bee generations has resulted in not only resistance to Varroa mites, but also to American Foulbrood and Chalkbrood. The hygienic behavior of VSH bees, even extends to defense against wax moths and small hive beetles.
> 
> Queen rearing is one of those high leverage activities, where small actions can have large consequences. By carefully choosing the proper breeding stock to begin with, entire local populations of bees can be transformed into mite destroying armies, getting the upper hand on the many problems Varroa can cause. The development and use of VSH bees show that man and nature can work together for the mutual benefit of both. So whats the catch ? Or are we close to solving this mite problem .


Thought I would pull out the very well written OP to give my take having just sat in on some very informative presentations at the AHPA convention. 
Dennis VanEnglesdorps analysis of the latest BeeInformed information was highly informative. He referred to the information as being an incredibly rich data set that unequivocally tells us that commercials that treat have the lowest incidence of annual losses (I believe 12% of the respondents were treatment free and none were particularly large operations) the subgroup of migratory beekeepers that treat have an even lower rate. Oddly enough more treatments didn't necessarily equate with lower losses as those who treat 3 times per year had the lowest rates of all including those treating 4 or more times annually. The takeaway, pretty much everyone agrees though, is treatments in and of themselves mean little without pre and post treatment analysis to determine how effective the treatment actually was. 
This isn't in any way meant as a knock on TF folks. Most seem to agree that varroa is a much tougher pest than it was 20 years ago and that breeding work on mite resistance is crucial. As I have stated in the past my problem isn't with people trying to be treatment free it's with those who insinuate that doing it successfully is easy.
Also a great presentation by Jeff Pettis on queen longevity and sperm viability was quite interesting. Another topic for another thread.


----------



## beemandan

jim lyon said:


> Also a great presentation by Jeff Pettis on queen longevity and sperm viability was quite interesting. Another topic for another thread.


I, for one, would be interested in what he said.


----------



## jim lyon

A little short on time at the moment Dan but in a nutshell semen viability testing of queens was all over the place. I was left wishing there was historical data for comparison.
Some interesting results from thermocouple readings in shipping boxes and the possibility that unheated cargo holds in USPS shipments may adversely affect queens and the possibility that this may have been more of a problem than we realized through the years. He feels low temps are a serious threat to semen viability in queens. It should be noted that currently most shipments are via UPS.


----------



## Michael Bush

>The thing about using foundation say 5.4 or 5.1 whatever size , that has always puzzled me is why can't the bee's build out the cell into any size they prefer

If you ever watch them build comb in an observation hive, or if you read Huber's New Observations on Bees and see the method they use to build comb, you'll see that no one bee does very much on a given cell. Every bee adds a little to what is there. They CAN rebuild it, but their tendency is to complete whatever was already began by the previous bee. They have to have pretty strong urges to tear down the previous work and change it.


----------



## grozzie2

jim lyon said:


> Some interesting results from thermocouple readings in shipping boxes and the possibility that unheated cargo holds in USPS shipments may adversely affect queens and the possibility that this may have been more of a problem than we realized through the years.


That's interesting, I saw him present preliminary data on this subject at the Field Day in Beaverlodge Alberta early this last summer. He had the temperature data from shipping, but it wasn't broken down by carrier for us. But was highlighted was the various extremes some shipments saw, which were thought to be 'cold in cargo hold of an airplane', and 'hot in the back of a delivery truck in the sun'.

Part of the process at Beaverlodge, in the morning sessions we got a first hand look at how the measurements were done. Sperm from the queen was mixed with two different die compounds, one of which adheres to live sperm, and one that adheres to dead sperm. They made a slide from that which can be viewed thru a microscope, then take a picture of the slide, and feed that into a computer program that counts red and green dots in the photo. Red = dead and green = live. From that, they could work up a hard data measurement as to the viability of the sperm in the queen. In some of the cases where queens had been exposed to both extremes of temperature during shipping, sperm viability was on the order of 40%.


----------



## AstroBee

jim lyon said:


> As I have stated in the past my problem isn't with people trying to be treatment free it's with those who insinuate that doing it successfully is easy.



I agree completely. It simply isn't easy, and to imply so does a disservice to new beekeepers that embark upon that path. It also doesn't do justice to the really experienced beekeepers who try and fail. In these endless discussions we need more of: “this is exactly what I do and it works for me using my methods in my location, etc, however YMMV”,.... and less of: “X & Y are all that you need to do to become TF – just stop treating, its easy!”. I appreciate that sounds critical, but that’s been my observation on how many of these discussions have gone. I think its clear that everyone wants to become TF. Seriously, if you could achieve the same outcomes as treating by only changing a couple of things, then only a fool would spend the extra resources required to treat. Based upon my many years following the commercial beekeepers here on beesource, I don't think there are too many fools in the commercial beekeeping business.


----------



## Michael Bush

>I agree completely. It simply isn't easy, and to imply so does a disservice to new beekeepers that embark upon that path. 

I disagree, obviously. First, keeping bees isn't easy. Keeping bees with treatments is, in my experience, much more difficult than keeping them without treatments. I think people who convince beginners that they have no choice are doing them a disservice and I've met thousands of beekeepers who went to the classes and they were ready to give up on the idea altogether until someone told them it was possible without all the chemicals.

Anyone who tells people keeping bees is easy is probably doing them a disservice... anyone who convinces them they can keep all of them alive all the time is probably doing them a disservice...


----------



## clyderoad

In my area the biggest disservice to new beekeepers is not telling them that they will have to buy new bees every year, or at best every other year, if they choose not to treat.


----------



## Kamon A. Reynolds

If it was easy everyone would be doing it. Succesful commercial/fulltime beekeepers are not stupid. If they could go treatment free they would love to. Its Cheaper, less labor, and less negative press. Doing a small operation is easier, but not that easy. The beekeeper must have a proactive splitting regime combined with resistant stock. Nothing worth doing is ever easy.


----------



## Beregondo

clyderoad said:


> In my area the biggest disservice to new beekeepers is not telling them that they will have to buy new bees every year, or at best every other year, if they choose not to treat.


It's unfortunate that things are so much different a couple hundred miles away downstate than they are in the Southern Tier.

I kept bees for several years in New York treatment free, and never had to buy bees to replace my hives.
In fact, my bees were so vigorous that my apiary expanded considerably.

I think the bees I had might have contributed a fair amount to that.

On moving cross continent to Washington State I was given a nuc (allowed to cherry pick 5 frames from a friend's hive, and and got a virgin queen as well), which I managed similarly to my NY apairy.

It crashed in October, but appears to be recovering untreated.

I don't know whether it is a the learning curve of learning how to keep bees in a different climate, the bee strain, or any one of several other variables, but I am planning do an formic or oxalic acid treatment as soon a I have the materials and temps allow to knock back the mites.

The variables are so many that I suspect it will be a while before I figure out how to repeat my New York success here:

NY:
bees and queen from a cutout in a house wall that had been continuously occupied by the colony for a few years.
all comb was either on small cell foundation or foundationless
some top & some bottom entrances
kept in an area where there were no managed hives I was aware of w/in 2 miles.
Comparatively hot dry summer and dry, subzero winters


WA:
bees from apiary of a local beekeeper
comb mostly on std RiteCell
bottom entrance
several other hives w/in a few miles
Very moderate summer, long rainy winter w/ temps mostly in 30's-40's, with a few days in the teens.


----------



## clyderoad

Beregondo said:


> It's unfortunate that things are so much different a couple hundred miles away downstate than they are in the Southern Tier.


Beregondo, it is what it is. Timely treatments allow the bees to make a honey crop, make it through winter and still be there for spring. 

I have never been to a "bee garden of Eden" where mites are a non event for the bees, like I read about on this forum.


----------



## Michael Bush

>Beregondo, it is what it is. Timely treatments allow the bees to make a honey crop, make it through winter and still be there for spring. 

Your experience with treating and your experience with not treating are quite the opposite of mine.


----------



## clyderoad

Michael Bush said:


> >Beregondo, it is what it is. Timely treatments allow the bees to make a honey crop, make it through winter and still be there for spring.
> 
> Your experience with treating and your experience with not treating are quite the opposite of mine.


yes it is. there is no "bee garden of Eden" here.


----------



## Monie

In the whole TF scheme of things, do you suppose a queen right hive builds excess drone comb to relieve a varroa infestation? It doesn't really get the bug out of the hive, but it would keep the majority of them away from the workers. Whether it's true or not, I don't know. It's something I've pondered, since the bees seem to make decisions in other areas. Perhaps, this is a purposeful decision, too, besides procreation.


----------



## beemandan

Monie said:


> do you suppose a queen right hive builds excess drone comb to relieve a varroa infestation? Perhaps, this is a purposeful decision, too, besides procreation.


I really don't think bees make 'decisions' or 'want' (as in 'let them build what they want') or 'know' ('the bees know what's best'). Bees operate from instinct built on eons of evolution. That evolution doesn't include varroa mites. So, when they are making lots of drone cells it is an instinctive impulse driven by something else.


----------



## Lauri

One fact nobody seems to notice or talk about. 

When you go to foundationless or otherwise change the frames in your hive, you do something _besides_ create the cell size/type comb you want. 

_*You remove frames of comb that may have accumulated toxins from their previous location(s*_)..most likely commercial crops and all that goes with them.

Those frames may not be bad enough to kill your colony outright, but can suck the vigor right out of a colony with their low grade chronic influence on the developing young larva. Personally I think this overlooked fact is a big reason some people have had some TF success, yet they give all the credit to the cell size and don't seem to consider anything else that may be significant contributing factors.

A strong healthy colony can keep a hive in a much better balance than a stressed colony. I don't think anyone can dispute that. 
That of course leads to the colony keeping the mite population in a controllable level more often than not, if your genetics and management methods support it. (Meaning if you do not allow them to swarm you would need to manage them to ether simulate swarming or make up the lack of a brood break in other ways.)


----------



## BeeAttitudes

I've learned a lot from this thread. A big thank you to everyone for participating and expressing what you've learned through your experiences.


----------



## Beregondo

clyderoad said:


> Beregondo, it is what it is. Timely treatments allow the bees to make a honey crop, make it through winter and still be there for spring.
> 
> I have never been to a "bee garden of Eden" where mites are a non event for the bees, like I read about on this forum.


I certainly did not intend to give you the impression back to bees were in some sort of "Bee Garden of Eden."

Not a hundred yards from the apiary was a bee gum continuously occupied by a colony for at least two winters or more in a row. No one treated them.
Assuming that, like managed colonies, feral colonied build up a population of mites over a few years and then crash if they go untreated, there was certainly no lack of mite pressure on my apiary.
Similarly, not far away Drapers had kept and the active yard for many years up until a few years prior to the establishment of my apiary.
About a mile and a half the other direction a commercial beekeeper had maintained anvapiary which a few years earlier (I believe 3 or 4) had been moved.

There was certainly no lack of Mite pressure from untreated bees in the area
There was a substantial population of the parasites nearby.

Typically hives being survive has more to do with management than it does environment provided that there is enough forage for it.

When I started keeping bees, I gathered my first colony from the wall of an abandoned house that had been continuously occupied by the 54 a few years.

I presumed that if they had survived that long without treatment that they probably would continue to do so. Over the next several years that proved to be true.
Of course I did everything I knew to give them the advantage and do well.


Part of management is choice of stock, and part of it is how one manipulates, feeds, and treats or doesn't treat is live stock.
beeline

I am sorry that there are so many might infested tires in your area that a person who has done his due diligence to educate himself on how to manage and then treated hi is unable to cause them to prosper where you live.

I strongly suspect that that is not a typical environment. I strongly suspect that the situation such as mine is more nearly typical. 



I don't think that there are too many areas in the continental United States where one cannot keep bees treated or untreated provided he is willing to manage them appropriately to his goals and the needs of the bees.

Granted, if you chose to raise them in a place where there was no water or porridge, feeding and watering would be quite expensive and inconvenient could certainly be done.

Apparently, you live in one of those environments where one cannot keep bees properly managed and selected, without putting insecticide in his colonies to kill mites and keep bees healthy. 

Perhaps finding in out yard few miles away it would be helpful.


----------



## Monie

Perhaps "decision" was the wrong word. I'll insert "instinct" in it's place, since bees instinctively know when something is wrong and make changes within the hive to correct it. Could it be possible they instinctively build drone comb, as a means to keep varroa at bay, in addition to to developing hygienic behavior? I think it's plausible.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

> Granted, if you chose to raise them in a place where there was no water or porridge, feeding and watering would be quite expensive and inconvenient could certainly be done.


I save lots of money on my porridge by buying the "store brand" rolled oats. No name brands like _Quaker Oats_ for my bees - or me.


----------



## Fusion_power

Building drone comb was researched extensively over the years. Given an open cavity, most bees build about 25% drone comb. Italian bees tend to build about 30% drone comb. Saharan bees were documented as building only 10% drone comb. This is an instinctive behavior that bees naturally express that does not appear to have any relationship to mite infestation or mite tolerance. Interestingly, once bees have built the requisite amount of drone comb, they will suddenly switch over and from that point on will build only worker comb.

You can speculate that one mechanism bees could use to develop mite tolerance would be to produce more drones. Unfortunately, my experience is that more drones means more mites and more mites means the colony collapses sooner.

My experience with mite tolerance is that it is genetic, it involves active disruption of mite reproduction, and it keeps the mite population from reaching that explosion point where mites overwhelm a colony.


----------



## clyderoad

Beregondo said:


> I certainly did not intend to give you the impression back to bees were in some sort of "Bee Garden of Eden."


Maybe you misunderstand what I said.
Hives survive here if they are treated. The history of honey bees thriving on Long Island is a long one, and continues today.

Beginners can be successful here if they treat in a timely manner, even those who locate here from other areas can be successful if they
treat. Beekeepers with experience know how to manage their hives and have good success.

So I'm clear on this, the only unsuccessful beekeepers here are those that do not treat their bees.
It has little to do with choice of bees, forage, environment, or knowledge. It has to do with mites and treating for mites.

Or do I misunderstand you?


----------



## Beregondo

Rader Sidetrack said:


> I save lots of money on my porridge by buying the "store brand" rolled oats. No name brands like _Quaker Oats_ for my bees - or me.


Yeah, when you post from a not-as-smart-as-the-salesman-said-it-was phone sometimes your "forage" is "porridge".

And sometimes my proofing is almost as bad.

But I'm glad of some of the levity it generates though.

And you really ought to try the name brand oatmeal.
You'll winter better with good nutrition.


----------



## Beregondo

clyderoad said:


> Maybe you misunderstand what I said.
> Hives survive here if they are treated.
> ...
> 
> So I'm clear on this, the only unsuccessful beekeepers here are those that do not treat their bees.
> 
> It has little to do with choice of bees, forage, environment, or knowledge. It has to do with mites and treating for mites.
> 
> Or do I misunderstand you?


What I'm saying is, barring a horribly unusual local mite situation, that if one properly selects his stock, and proprly mnages them for their area, situation, and goals-- which often requires divorcing oneself from things he "knows" are true or believes are immutable truths -- one can successfully keep bees, even keep them w/o miticides, once the are in good, stable health, nearly anywhere.

Apparently you have already done all of that and found you live in one of those rare few places that doing so is not possible, based on your statement that I originally quoted above.

I was also trying to let you know I'm sorry you find yourself in that unfortunate situation.

As to your observation that the only beekeepers who are not successful there are those who don't treat their bees, it only shows how extraordinary the place is...perhaps you live in beekeeping Eden after all, and are merely unaware
of it.


----------



## Beregondo

Lauri said:


> When you go to foundationless or otherwise change the frames in your hive, you do something _besides_ create the cell size/type comb you want.
> 
> _*You remove frames of comb that may have accumulated toxins from their previous location(s*_)..
> 
> Personally I think this overlooked fact is a big reason some people have had some TF success, yet they give all the credit to the cell size and don't seem to consider anything else that may be significant contributing factors....
> 
> A strong healthy colony can keep a hive in a much better balance than a stressed colony.


I think that this is quite likely.

Strains of bees chosen notwithstanding, why else would we occasionally hear of a treatment free apiary prospering in the same neighborhood where a treated one may be losing bees to mites?


----------



## clyderoad

Beregondo said:


> What I'm saying is, barring a horribly unusual local mite situation, that if one properly selects his stock, and proprly mnages them for their area, situation, and goals-- which often requires divorcing oneself from things he "knows" are true or believes are immutable truths -- one can successfully keep bees, even keep them w/o miticides, once the are in good, stable health, nearly anywhere.
> 
> Apparently you have already done all of that and found you live in one of those rare few places that doing so is not possible, based on your statement that I originally quoted above.
> 
> I was also trying to let you know I'm sorry you find yourself in that unfortunate situation.
> 
> As to your observation that the only beekeepers who are not successful there are those who don't treat their bees, it only shows how extraordinary the place is...perhaps you live in beekeeping Eden after all, and are merely unaware
> of it.


It sounds as if you are a bit confused about the current state of affairs regarding mites. The 'bee gardens of Eden' are the rare few places where the mite pressures are, for some reason, at a low enough level that there are beekeepers who apparently are able to keep bees without treatment for mites. There are few places like this that exist. Mites are a problem everywhere else. I assume you are already aware of this though. 
All those keeping bees since mites became the issue they are today have learned new bee management strategies as compared to the old ways. Those who transitioned from pre mite beekeeping to post mite beekeeping have had to progress through the process of re-learning how to manage their hives with mites to be successful beekeepers. 
Mites take down good healthy, well fed, well managed bees. Just as they take down weaker colonies.

I'm being generous when saying the horrible truth is that few managed bee colonies survive mites without treatment and most die.
Ignoring this changes nothing.


----------



## Beregondo

I agree that one can properly manage hives and still lose a few to mites.

While this can also happen with entire apiaries, it's a good deal less common.

You've expended a far out of effort in your lecture concerning the need to actively, soundly manage manage an apiary on order to prevent catastrophicite losses.

And I agree, any apiary or hive that is improperly managed is unlikely to survive.

That's true of management employing miticides as well as management practices that do not.

That management practices exist that allow one to have a thriving apiary without the use of synthetic miticides indisputable. 
Only one who is ignorant of the subject be unaware of the existence of such apiaries.

To be aware of them, and write them off to simply being without normal mite pressure is equally misinformed.

Or a reflection of an unwillingness to let reality challenges one's opinion.

It is NOT simply matter of not treating and expecting low or average losses with no additional work.

As I have emphasized on my comments, sound management is required.
And the truth is, it usually requites more work, more awareness of the condition of one's colonies, and a better understanding both of mite and bee biology than a conventionally managed apiary requires.

But the fact that there ARE thriving apiaries (even commercial ones providing the pimary income of their managers) should relegate the tired refrain, "If you want a successful apiary, you have to put poisons in your hive," to the same status as the idea that you can have a thriving apiary by putting bees in boxes and do nothing else but rob honey.


----------



## squarepeg

i can agree with the concept of 'bee gardens of eden', and recognize as well that there exist in contrast some not so bee friendly locations. that the bee gardens are 'rare' is not supported by the data showing feral colonies surviving with uninterrupted matrilines over most parts of the country. i have no way of knowing, but i would guess that locations less friendly to bees would be more rare than the gardens, and those would tend to be where there are large numbers of beekeepers managing large numbers of colonies. i believe harry refers to it as 'beekeeper disease'.


----------



## clyderoad

Do you honestly believe that the methods you elude to have not been tried on a grand scale to combat varroa?
Your discourse has been offered in the past and the practice of it has failed miserably in the field. Enter OA, formic, potassium salts, thymol and the synthetic miticides to help solve the gaping hole hive manipulations leave in fighting mites. 

Please be sure to notify all the bee labs and entomologists that you have the answer to part of the current bee issues we all face as they must be ignorant of all the successful apiaries out there mentioned by you. They'll be surely beating a path to your door!
Maybe even create a management book directed at all the sideliners and commercials with hundreds or thousands of hives and thousands upon thousands of mites.
Good luck with your new bees, hopefully the treatment you'll soon give them will get them through the winter so you can begin your program.


----------



## squarepeg

sorry clyde, looks like we posted on top of each other. i guess by 'grand scale' you are referring to the multi-billion dollar industry that includes almonds and other bee pollinated produce along with honey and other bee products. we have to understand that those experts are not funded so you and i can keep a few hives in our backyards, it's for the support of vast majority of colonies which exist to support that sector of big agriculture. the reason that varroa has been such a tough nut to crack is primarily due to the unique stressors that are associated with keeping and using bees on a commercial scale. where they have been left to their own devices the bees have developed tolerance to the mite.


----------



## Adrian Quiney WI

Clyderoad. What are the gaping holes you are talking about?


----------



## Beregondo

clyderoad said:


> Do you honestly believe that the methods you elude to have not been tried on a grand scale to combat varroa?


As a matter of fact I am quite confident it has not.
My comments were prompted by an assertion that could only have been made by one who knows no better:

"In my area the biggest disservice to new beekeepers is not telling them that they will have to buy new bees every year, or at best every other year, if they choose not to treat."

I'm not addressing grand scales here. 
I said with competent management and proper stock selection bees can be kept without synthetic miticides nearly anywhere and thrive.

Your emphatic insistance that this cannot be so speaks much both of the strength with which you hold your misinformed opinion, and your ignorance of the fact that many are doing just that.

The sarcasm and ridicule you have employed may make you feel secure, but emphasize the absence of any rational persuasive basis for your opinion on this.

A person who has experienced something and knows it to be fact is not much moved by opinion and abuse.
And not only I, but many others have experienced success without using synthetic poisons in our apiaries.

"Your discourse has been offered in the past and the practice of it has failed miserably in the field. Enter OA, formic, potassium salts, thymol and the synthetic miticides to help solve the gaping hole hive manipulations leave in fighting mites."


I've not outlined my management here, only mentioning proper stock selection and proper husbandry can enable one to keep a thriving apiary without use of the synthetic mite poisons.

You may presume to know what that competent husbandry entails, but your presumption is ignorant of my actual practice.
In other words, when you compare my management practices to what has "been tried on a grand scale" and "failed miserably" you simply don't know what you are talking about.

I'm sure those reading will make note of that and give it appropriate weight in their consideration.

"Please be sure to notify all the bee labs and entomologists that you have the answer to part of the current bee issues we all face as they must be ignorant of all the successful apiaries out there mentioned by you. They'll be surely beating a path to your door!
Maybe even create a management book directed at all the sideliners and commercials with hundreds or thousands of hives and thousands upon thousands of mites."


Surely you are not ignorant of the differences between the apiary of a new beekeeper and the management of a pollination contracting business billing hundreds of thousands of dollars, or the management of a honey operation moving hundreds of of tons honey a year, are you?

Competent business management will make allowances for hive health only to the degree it is profitable.

Some such honey operations in Canada have had so little concern for sound husbandry that they have gassed all of their bees and replaced them with package bees the next year to save overwintering prep expense.

Most of these sound husbandry practices I've mentioned would be labor cost prohibitive to the sound financial management of those businesses.

That of course, has no bearing on the soundness of those practices in keeping apiaries healthy without applying sub-lethal doses of poison to the colonies in them.

There are, however, beekeepers with apiaries with hundreds of hives applying similar sound husbandry in their apiaries and making a living from it.



clyderoad said:


> Good luck with your new bees, hopefully the treatment you'll soon give them will get them through the winter so you can begin your program.


If you want to keep treatment free bees, start with competently managed bees that haven't been treated.

If you start with treated bees, treating them to kill the mite population they are carrying may be necessary to lower mite population to levels that can be managed and maintained without commercial miticides

I'm not counting on this hive recovering, let alone being the basis for my west coast apiary.

Stock selection is an important part of any animal husbandry, and these bees likely won't qualify.

But you never know.

I've said far more than I sent out to, and expect I've likely exhausted the useful things I have to say on the topic the OP asked about.
Don't be surprised if this is my last comment on this thread.

The short a answer to that original question is that it is simple, but not as simple as buying a package and not treating it.

And that simple and easy aren't the same thing.


----------



## Fusion_power

> And that simple and easy aren't the same thing.


Knowledge based on reading books is not the same as knowledge acquired by doing. Knowledge acquired by doing is not the same as solid scientifically documented research that establishes the parameters of a living system. There is no research available at this time that meets the criteria of the "solid scientifically documented research" statement in regards to varroa tolerance in honeybees. There is plenty of anecdotal evidence to support the "knowledge acquired by doing" statement. Until every queen breeder is producing highly mite tolerant queens, we will continue to have areas where bees are very difficult to keep without treating for mites.

p.s. I'm being VERY stringent on the statement re research available, anyone here can find published info from the B.R. bee lab, etc. When the research is of adequate quality to covert all queen producers into queen producers of mite tolerant queens, this war will have been won.


----------



## Monie

Ty FP. That was a very thoughtful response.


----------



## Mike Gillmore

Beregondo said:


> A person who has experienced something and knows it to be fact is not much moved by opinion and abuse.


Isn't this true for most of us? We're all partially blinded by facts learned through our own personal experience. Our "experience" is our "truth". I think that's why we see such a vast number of varying opinions in beekeeping on topics like this one. I find it very interesting to see everyone's individual thoughts in print. It's their story.


----------



## sqkcrk

Where is that picture of the guy walking on the rim of a basket which says something about those who can't do something should tell those that are doing it that it can't be done? Or something like that.

Ain't nothing really that easy. Unless you think it is.

http://videos.komando.com/watch/704...&utm_content=2015-01-07-article-screen-shot-b


----------



## Adrian Quiney WI

Mike, additionally the internet provides for a franker discussion than the courtesies that traditional face-to-face discussion allow. This is a mixed bag. One the one hand it can get so heated and personal that it is difficult to read. One the other hand it allows you to actually read what people are thinking.
I am not aware of studies on manipulation based methods. Not everything that deserves to get studied does. Those of us who are having some success keeping bees without medicating them should not hold our breath waiting for the scientists to come and tell us why what we are doing is working. We have to communicate and demonstrate our methods ourselves.


----------



## Acebird

sqkcrk said:


> Then how do you explain drone cells on waxed foundation embossed in a worker cell size Brian?


Looky here Mark.


Michael Bush said:


> >The thing about using foundation say 5.4 or 5.1 whatever size , that has always puzzled me is why can't the bee's build out the cell into any size they prefer
> 
> If you ever watch them build comb in an observation hive, or if you read Huber's New Observations on Bees and see the method they use to build comb, you'll see that no one bee does very much on a given cell. Every bee adds a little to what is there. They CAN rebuild it, but their tendency is to complete whatever was already began by the previous bee. They have to have pretty strong urges to tear down the previous work and change it.


Thanks Mike.

My answer was going to be the urge to reproduce is stronger than doing what a human gave them to start.


----------



## Acebird

jim lyon said:


> He feels low temps are a serious threat to semen viability in queens.


That is interesting when freezing temperatures are use to store sperm for long periods.



> It should be noted that currently most shipments are via UPS.


But they both use the same planes.:scratch:


----------



## Acebird

AstroBee said:


> all that you need to do to become TF – just stop treating, its easy!”.


I would like you to find instances on this forum where that was said even with Raders help. There is a big difference between saying "It is easy to become TF, just stop treating" as oppose to "all that you need to do to become TF - just stop treating, its easy!" One defines treatment free and the other says it is a cake walk with no concern for success.


----------



## jim lyon

Acebird said:


> That is interesting when freezing temperatures are use to store sperm for long periods.
> 
> I think you need to think of the queen as an incubator. While the queen herself may survive lower temps for a short period, perhaps the semen contained in her may not.
> 
> But they both use the same planes.:scratch:


I'm only repeating what I heard Brian. Someone with more expertise feel free to jump in here but my understanding is many USPS shipments may move via commercial jetliners which have both heated and unheated cargo compartments. Dr. Pettis' data showed a single USPS shipment was in the 40 degree F range for about 2 hours though other USPS shipments didn't experience these low temps. 
UPS, on the other hand, is using their own climate controlled cargo planes.


----------



## jim lyon

Acebird said:


> That is interesting when freezing temperatures are use to store sperm for long periods.
> 
> 
> I think you need to think of a mated queen as an incubator of live semen. Temps in the 40's for a short period of time may not actually kill a queen yet it may well affect the viability of the semen.


----------



## sqkcrk

Acebird said:


> Looky here Mark.
> 
> 
> Thanks Mike.
> 
> My answer was going to be the urge to reproduce is stronger than doing what a human gave them to start.


Yeah, well, neither of those really answered what I was asking about. You stated that :
"Foundation is a blue print. If you build a foundation for a house and then decide to change the floor plan where the exterior dimensions are different it doesn't work so well. Try changing the floor plan after the whole house is built. It will take twice the effort than what it would have taken building from scratch." 

Bees do that all the time regardless of the foundation we give them.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

I have personally seen trays of First Class USPS mail getting loaded into the baggage hold of the commercial airliner that I was flying on. But the USPS _also _has had a contract with Fedex to move USPS mail during the 'off-hours' when those Fedex planes were not being used for normal Fedex packages. An article on the Fedex - USPS plane relationship:
http://www.dcvelocity.com/articles/...llion-in-fiscal-2012-internal-documents-show/

I am not an _airplane fanboy_, but my understanding is that commercial (passenger) airliners generally have one cargo hold that _may _be heated at the captains option. This heated cargo hold would carry any pets in that flight, but cargo holds may not be heated unless the carrier is _manifesting _temperature sensitive cargo on that particular flight.


----------



## Acebird

sqkcrk said:


> Bees do that all the time regardless of the foundation we give them.


Yes, of course. What choice do they have? Unless you give them a partial sheet of foundation like Lauri does. You can't see the results from her photos?


----------



## sqkcrk

The way you put it your statement made it seem as though given foundation bees will not make drone cells. That's what I was asking you to explain, since it isn't true.

What does Lauri's partial sheet of foundation have to do with what you wrote? Nothing.


----------



## Acebird

jim lyon said:


> I think you need to think of a mated queen as an incubator of live semen.


If you said it was a dose of high temps like setting on the tar mat I would be inclined to believe it but low temps is hard for me to swallow.


----------



## crofter

Mike Gillmore said:


> Isn't this true for most of us? We're all partially blinded by facts learned through our own personal experience. Our "experience" is our "truth". I think that's why we see such a vast number of varying opinions in beekeeping on topics like this one. I find it very interesting to see everyone's individual thoughts in print. It's their story.


 Quote Originally Posted by Beregondo View Post

_"A person who has experienced something and knows it to be fact is not much moved by opinion and abuse."_



I think that what a person feels he knows as fact is often his own constructed reality. It is very difficult for even the most trained and objectivity motivated individual to keep his verdicts clear of subjective weighting of evidence. 

A big part of the audience will then further process the evidence through their own subjective polarizing filters. The speakers presentation skills, his apparent self conviction, his perseverance, his image etc., are often more influential in convincing than the essential content of the message. 

I like to examine a persons potential motivations, both economic and emotional in an attempt to decide if they are influencing his selectivity in what he presents. In simple words, is he cherry picking his collection of talking points or putting selective emotional spin and emphasis to support his case. In the end a persons own subjectivity colors what he takes away from a debate.

Truth is an elusive quarry!


----------



## Lauri

Here's a frame drawn and filled by a colony I made into a simulated swarm with a 2012 twice overwintered queen-direct daughter of my Glenn Carniolan II Breeder. 
Get out your rulers guys. What's the cell size? Center is rite cell 5.4.
Left side is typical for the foundationless area near the top and bottom entrances (Cooler) But what's the back side cell size where they were free to do what they want?




























I guess my reluctance to give small cell much credit is because of all the cutouts I've done that were loaded with mites. That's a glaring fact I just can't ignore. But Hey, I'm relatively new at beekeeping in comparison to some other beekeepers. If I'm incorrect about that observation, someone please fill me in on what I am missing here.


----------



## sterling

>>I guess my reluctance to give small cell much credit is because of all the cutouts I've done that were loaded with mites. That's a glaring fact I just can't ignore. But Hey, I'm relatively new at beekeeping in comparison to some other beekeepers. If I'm incorrect about that observation, someone please fill me in on what I am missing here. 

The cut outs you speak of that were loaded with mites, were the bees still alive or had they been destroyed?


----------



## Lauri

LOL, I had to laugh at that one. Yes, they were alive.

But were they swarms that moved in and out? Was it an overwintered colony? When was the last time they requeened? 
Were they tolerating the mites well because the comb was clean and not exposed to many enviromental toxins? Were they tolerating mites well because they are not inbred and have more vigor?

I know your next question. Yes, I Apivared them in late summer to avoid letting them not only possibly perrish overwinter, but to keep my yard from housing a mite factory. If I had let the overwinter with all those mites and had not allowed them to naturally swarm the next spring, they would have soon died out. That is, if wintering didn't kill them first. That was my thinking at the time anyway.

But Wait!

There is at least _one_ possiblity I may have missed.

When I saw the large mite drop, Did they go through a late summer dearth and brood down so severly they experienced an extensive brood break and the mite drop I observed was the shedding of phoretic mites?
It's possible. But they still had a heavy mite load, even considering that possibility. Heavy at least, in comparison to any other hive on my place.

I know the original queen was heading the hive..I had marked her when I first housed them. But did they have capped brood? I don't remember.
That could have altered my perception of the infestation level? It's possible.

Would they have survived without treatment? Maybe, maybe not. With a little more experience every year, I know now to look for more details that will tell me the true nature of the colonies in the future. I'm not fooled as much, but I have been fooled into treating a few times when it turned out it wasn't necessary. I've been equally as fooled in to NOT treating when it _was _necessary.

Just more information for better future management.

But because they are otherwise an excellent colony, I've kept them around. No VSH traits, but perhaps great hybrid vigor and genetics that would cross well with VSH lines. 

This older natural comb from a cedar tree interior.
(Sorry about the photo size. Enlargement is necessary for visual inspection)
I've lost my information about figuring out cell size-by the inch. Anyone want to figure out how big these broodnest cells are? 




























Remember I'm not telling you what _you _should do or think. I'm just telling you what_ I _do and think. Take it all with a grain of salt & make your own choices


----------



## Lburou

crofter said:


> _
> 
> 
> Beregondo said:
> 
> 
> 
> "A person who has experienced something and knows it to be fact is not much moved by opinion and abuse."
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> _I think that what a person feels he knows as fact is often his own constructed reality. It is very difficult for even the most trained and objectivity motivated individual to keep his verdicts clear of subjective weighting of evidence.
> 
> A big part of the audience will then further process the evidence through their own subjective polarizing filters. The speakers presentation skills, his apparent self conviction, his perseverance, his image etc., are often more influential in convincing than the essential content of the message....


Churchill said, "We don't see things as they are, we see things as we are".

Its part of the human condition.

Churchill also wrote that, "A fanatic is someone who can't change his mind, and won't change the subject".

We live among fanatics in our beekeeping communities.


----------



## sqkcrk

Acebird said:


> If you said it was a dose of high temps like setting on the tar mat I would be inclined to believe it but low temps is hard for me to swallow.


tarmac is probably hard to swallow too.


----------



## sqkcrk

sterling said:


> The cut outs you speak of that were loaded with mites, were the bees still alive or had they been destroyed?


Do you ever do cut outs where the colony is dead?


----------



## Lauri

sqkcrk said:


> Do you ever do cut outs where the colony is dead?


Hee hee, Mark. I've yet to find a use for dead bees.  

Sterling, I know that's not what you meant. But it was funny for a second when I first read your post.


----------



## crofter

jim lyon said:


> Acebird said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is interesting when freezing temperatures are use to store sperm for long periods.
> 
> 
> I think you need to think of a mated queen as an incubator of live semen. Temps in the 40's for a short period of time may not actually kill a queen yet it may well affect the viability of the semen.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Aces analogy is badly flawed.
> 
> Chilling live semen and cryogenically freezing it are completely different scenarios; about 250 F. degrees apart! I did my own Artificial insemination on cattle for a number of years.
> 
> I found the connection between queen fertility questions and temperature excursions during shipping to be a very likey cause and effect possibility.
Click to expand...


----------



## clyderoad

Beregondo said:


> As a matter of fact I am quite confident it has not.
> My comments were prompted by an assertion that could only have been made by one who knows no better:
> 
> "In my area the biggest disservice to new beekeepers is not telling them that they will have to buy new bees every year, or at best every other year, if they choose not to treat."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've said far more than I sent out to, and expect I've likely exhausted the useful things I have to say on the topic the OP asked about.
> Don't be surprised if this is my last comment on this thread....


 there is nothing in your lenghty responses, both in content and in writing style, that has not already been written here ad nauseam. 

"In my area the biggest disservice to new beekeepers is not telling them that they will have to buy new bees every year, or at best every other year, if they choose not to treat" is valid whether you agree with it or can make sense of it or not.


----------



## Vance G

Keeping bees without chemicals is possible! But most are just not willing or able to go to the trouble required. Among those willing, most are not knowledgeable enough to do it. Then it is just so much easier to be successful in keeping bees alive and profitable using miticides. 

Brood breaks ala Mel Disselkoen do work to control mites if one is experienced enough to find the queen which most of the innocents are not. I can't find her on many attempts and I have been looking for queens for fifty years. Drone culling is successful for at least one commercial operation I know of as the primary means of controlling mites, but that is quite a commitment in time and labor. Let Ned Newbie try that and the queen will be in real danger. 

Unless this is a religious matter and not a bee cultural matter, we all need to just let the other guys foibles pass to the extent we can. That said, I will continue advising new beekeepers that much of what is advocated by treatment free beeks are an advanced skill set and should not be attempted by those still fighting desperately to keep their smoker lit!


----------



## Fusion_power

> should not be attempted by those still fighting desperately to keep their smoker lit!


There is still wisdom in doing the due diligence to start with mite tolerant genetics. All else being equal, I would rather start with mite tolerant bees and know that I could treat them if necessary vs starting with known mite susceptible bees and know that I MUST treat them no matter what.

Besides, after 45 years, I still struggle at times to keep my smoker lit. It might have something to do with my smoker being 45 years old. Yes, it is the original smoker that I bought from Tom Hood of Speedy Bee fame back in 1970 or thereabouts.


----------



## sqkcrk

Lauri said:


> Hee hee, Mark. I've yet to find a use for dead bees.
> 
> Sterling, I know that's not what you meant. But it was funny for a second when I first read your post.


Well Lauri, like I often say, the best queens to make splits with are the live ones. Amazing how that almost always illicits an argument. lol


----------



## sqkcrk

Fusion_power said:


> There is still wisdom in doing the due diligence to start with mite tolerant genetics. All else being equal, I would rather start with mite tolerant bees and know that I could treat them if necessary vs starting with known mite susceptible bees and know that I MUST treat them no matter what.
> 
> Besides, after 45 years, I still struggle at times to keep my smoker lit. It might have something to do with my smoker being 45 years old. Yes, it is the original smoker that I bought from Tom Hood of Speedy Bee fame back in 1970 or thereabouts.


Maybe it isn't that you have trouble keeping it lit as much as it may be that you don't light it very often?


----------



## sterling

sqkcrk said:


> Do you ever do cut outs where the colony is dead?


Certainly not that was my point. Even with a heavy mite load they were still alive.


----------



## sqkcrk

Which says what about what? I personally am carrying a heavy load and I am still alive. Many people would say I am not sustainable or healthy, but I am still alive. 

Bees that are not managed may carry a heavy mite load, though how would anyone know, and survive because they swarm which gives the colony a brood break which knocks down the mite load. Them being feral does not make them special or magic by any means.

You don't keep bees the same way a bee tree or a house wall does, do you? I don't. Can't make much honey that way.


----------



## sterling

Lauri said:


> Hee hee, Mark. I've yet to find a use for dead bees.
> 
> Sterling, I know that's not what you meant. But it was funny for a second when I first read your post.


I meant for it to be funny but with the point that they were alive. Many assumptions can be drawn in a situation like this as you have already. They could have died soon, they wouldn't make the winter, a bunch of drones with a lot of mites just invaded their hive or they could have been a swarm that arrived with the mites on em and maybe out bred the mites in the next few brood cycles and they may not have been the ones that drew the comb you were referring to. Just to name a few assumptions.


----------



## Lauri

sterling said:


> Ithey may not have been the ones that drew the comb you were referring to.



I have no doubt they didn't draw out the comb that is under the cage wire, it's probably been in that tree for years. But they did draw out the comb on the right side of it within the frame.
This spring, when I go digging in the hive, I'll take some photos of the comb in the foundationless areas of the new frames. Second generation now, with some of my genetics mixed in.

It's really interesting to see these colonies evolve over time.

That photo of the original queen looks like a young queen to me. Nice thorax, but not the swollen abdomen I usually see in my spring overwintered stock. But that colony was collected 5-16-13. A bit early for a supercedure queen or residual from a swarm colony in my area. They had a lot of capped brood and appeared to be well established.
I had a heck of a time getting them off that old black messy bits of collected comb. Had to wait until overwintering when they finally moved up to the second deep.

That tree had been cut down a few months prior to the land owner stopping by and asking me if I wanted to try to save them.


----------



## Fusion_power

> Maybe it isn't that you have trouble keeping it lit as much as it may be that you don't light it very often?


I actually don't light my smoker very often. In fact, I only light it when it is really needed. That works out to about a dozen times per year.

Many times I do a colony inspection by pulling the top off very gently and look to see what is going on inside. There is no need for smoke with most of my colonies under these conditions. I have often used the trick of blowing air through my unlit smoker which can be enough to calm bees. Just the smell of smoke works. I also don't wear a suit or veil very often. Only when removing honey are they needed. But just so you don't think all is peaches in Alabama, I helped a friend remove honey last fall and was thoroughly glad that I had brought along a veil for the occasion. I took 40 or 50 stings mostly on my arms and hands. But I got the honey off and officially nominated that colony to be re-queened this spring!


----------



## Acebird

Lauri said:


> Anyone want to figure out how big these broodnest cells are?


I would say about 5 but it would be easier if you turn the tape 90 degrees. If you want to get a better average you need to see about 10 inches.


----------



## BeeCurious

Acebird said:


> never mind


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

Lauri said:


> Anyone want to figure out how big these broodnest cells are?


Referencing the photo in post #297, a convenient place to measure is towards the right edge of the photo. Lets start at the portion of the tape beginning at the 5 5/8" mark. Count 8 cells to the right of that mark, and we get to 7 1/4". 

Convert that to decimal from ease of calculating and we have
7.25" - 5.625" = 1.625" = 42.275 mm

42.275 mm / 8 = 5.284375 mm per cell (round that to your preference )

It _may _be that that size is not necessarily replicated throughout the entire frame.


----------



## Acebird

Well you are going over the transition from plastic foundation to foundationless and as Lauri noted in other post the foundation is side ways so the bees made the comb flat on top to pointed on top. Looking at the tape from 6 to 7 there are 5 cells in the foundationless area. I think the cells are bigger on the other side of the foundation.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

Uhhh, _reading _is a skill, Ace ...



Lauri said:


> This older natural comb from a cedar tree interior.




(click the blue arrow in the quote box to see the original post in context - and see the photo)


----------



## Lauri

I didn't realize it until I saw the photo, but when I collected the comb, I installed it crooked in the frame. That's why the cells under the cage wire have a alternated appearance. 
The tree had been cut down months before the the bees had been living on horizontal comb.











Heres a frame fram another cut out . You can see how the collected comb is placed.









That same frame after they worked it. You can see where I got my idea for those frames with partial sheet of foundation in the center.










The comb within the tree was about 10' long in an interior that was about 12"-14" in diameter. You want to talk about an unlimited brood nest?  That queen worked several feet of comb, with small patches of scattered brood almost the entire length. 
As of their collection, there was some residual honey, but no open nectar. A lot of comb was pretty dry. 

Heres a video of that collection for those that haven't seen it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R1u1PMZsDtA


----------



## Acebird

Rader Sidetrack said:


> Uhhh, _reading _is a skill, Ace ...


Are you saying the area that you measured is not a transition from comb that existed to comb that was drawn out afterwards? Some people read words better than others. Some people read photos better than others. I am happy with my skills are you happy with yours?


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

Ace, I am saying that Lauri said that is "*natural comb*" - meaning there is *NO foundation *- contrary to your claim in post #316.

:gh:


... why is this so difficult ... :scratch:


----------



## sqkcrk

BeeCurious said:


> Acebird said:
> 
> 
> 
> never mind
> 
> 
> 
> :lpf:
Click to expand...


----------



## dleemc1

Rader Sidetrack said:


> Note that the quote _laketrout _posted appears to have come from the Glenn Apiaries website, on this page:
> http://www.glenn-apiaries.com/vsh.html
> 
> Also note that the Glenns retired several years ago and their stock is no longer available. Some of Glenn's former customers may have bees/queens that are descendants of those queens, though.


those queens would be worth a fortune


----------



## grozzie2

Rader Sidetrack said:


> I am not an _airplane fanboy_, but my understanding is that commercial (passenger) airliners generally have one cargo hold that _may _be heated at the captains option.


My understanding is a little different, but, I've only flown a few of the many types of aircraft in use for cargo shipments today. In general, any hold located outside the pressure bulkheads will be unheated. Holds inside the pressure vessel, will get _at least_ some residual heat because the pressurization system is fed with hot air from engine compressor stages. I've flown a few where there is no compartment specific temperature control, boils down to 'it is what it is', control cabin temps, and other compartments end up where they end up. I've flown others where we have specific controls to manage temperatures in various holds.

I cant speak for today, haven't worked in this field for a couple of decades, but, when I was flying cargo aircraft, shipments that included live critters of any type were not common. In 10 years of doing it, I dont remember ever having live critters on the manifest other than a few boxes of hatching eggs, and I can say with absolute certainty I never saw live bees on a manifest.

I saw Jeffs presentation on shipping temperatures earlier this year, and it lit off a number of light bulbs in the back of my mind. The biggie for me was that some of the problematic queens had been exposed to temps in the 40f range for a couple of hours. I dont find that at all improbable, even in what is a heated hold. In most cases, a heated hold does not mean 'nice room temperature comfy', it means 'will not freeze'. I dont know what options are available today when shipping stuff like this, but I would not be at all surprised if one digs into it, the 'will not freeze' is still the definition of a heated hold, and to get more precise control than that, would require a lot of extra special handling which not all carriers will be prepared to do.

As an aside on the same subject, family member texted me once this spring after boarding a flight to the bc interior in Vancouver. Apparently there was a cabin announcement for folks to advise them they were travelling with royalty. That box they saw on the front row seat while boarding, contained honeybee queens that could not go into the cargo hold.


----------



## apis maximus

grozzie2 said:


> As an aside on the same subject...


I think the topic of temperature influence on the Queen's reproductive performance is a fascinating topic...Several others on this thread, on Treatment Free, have alluded to it also...being off topic while doing it.

I would suggest we open up a new thread regarding this topic, otherwise, the important information gets diluted and slowly set aside and forgotten.

Not throwing rocks, not criticizing, not being picky either.

Peace


----------



## Bob J

This is such an awesome thread..... As someone just starting their beekeeping journey and very much interested in keeping as many chemicals out of my hives as possible, the candor and frank discussion is much appreciated....


----------



## Nabber86

dleemc1 said:


> those queens would be worth a fortune


If that was true, why didn't Glen sell his queen rearing operations for a fortune?


----------



## Fusion_power

No, the Glen queens would not be worth a fortune. If you do some due diligence, you can find excellent queens with VSH traits and with confirmed mite tolerance with a simple google search. Maybe I should start another thread for suppliers of mite tolerant queens.


----------



## shinbone

Fusion_power said:


> Maybe I should start another thread for suppliers of mite tolerant queens.


Yes! Yes!


----------



## Nabber86

Fusion_power said:


> No, the Glen queens would not be worth a fortune. If you do some due diligence, you can find excellent queens with VSH traits and with confirmed mite tolerance with a simple google search. Maybe I should start another thread for suppliers of mite tolerant queens.


I guess that I am a little skeptical. If VSH queens are so good, why isn't everybody using them exclusively?


----------



## grozzie2

Nabber86 said:


> I guess that I am a little skeptical. If VSH queens are so good, why isn't everybody using them exclusively?


I think a lot of it is historical. A VSH queen will ultimately end up with a fairly spotty brood pattern in a hive with lots of varroa. What do beekeepers do when they find a spotty brood pattern ? They requeen, and get rid of that 'poor performing queen'. Domesticated honeybees have undergone over a hundred years of artificial selection to eliminate that trait, it's not going to magically come back overnight.


----------



## apis maximus

Nabber86 said:


> I guess that I am a little skeptical. If VSH queens are so good, why isn't everybody using them exclusively?


I am more than a little skeptical. I am very skeptical in general.

But, the second part of your statement, which you phrase as a question, is, intentionally or unintentionally, fallacious and even misleading. 

I am not aware of any beekeeper worth a darn, on this forum or even in real life, that would claim that VSH queens can, could or should be used exclusively when one would address Varroa contributing/induced problems. 
Not even the ones working with the VSH trait(s).

I might be wrong and if so, I stand to be corrected.

Peace.


----------



## shinbone

Nabber86 said:


> I guess that I am a little skeptical. If VSH queens are so good, why isn't everybody using them exclusively?


This sounds like a fair question, to me.

And I just figured the answer is, that, VSH queens overall aren't much better than most any other well bred queen which is properly suited for the local environment.





.


----------



## apis maximus

*@shinbone*,

That *edit* feature is pretty cool isn't it?

Going from one answer to another...in a matter of a couple of minutes.
Two statements, made by the same person...yet each one, in the end, mean completely different things. 

Nothing wrong with that...it is called hedging ones bets...or statements.



shinbone said:


> 1.And I just figured the answer is, that VSH queens aren't that good at all...
> 
> 2.And I just figured the answer is, that, VSH queens overall aren't much better than most any other well bred queen which is properly suited for the local environment....



Peace.


----------



## shinbone

Sorry, I don't follow . . .


----------



## Roland

Nabber wrote:

I guess that I am a little skeptical. If VSH queens are so good, why isn't everybody using them exclusively? 

Because they are not worth a hoot for making honey, and that is what pays the bills. When you select for one trait, you often loose others.

Crazy Roland


----------



## Lauri

I believe you need to understand a little about genetics, at least basic dominant and recessive traits and how they are expressed if you want to implement VSH genetics with confidence into your mite management program. Or at least have a queen producer you trust that has a program towards the type of performance you are seeking.

You can fly blindly by name or title alone, but unless you understand where your stock comes from and how it was developed, all you really have is a title. 

You _can_ get too much of a good thing and have very poor results.

Colonies with a high percentage of VSH genetics many times will produce too much hygienic behavior and not allow brood build up due to uncapping. This is especially true of the colony is mite infested and VSH is relied on to rectify it on it's own.

Here's another example with photos so you can better understand:
Look at Paint horses. If you cross two horses that both have one copy of the Frame Overo gene, you have a 25% chance risk of producing a homozygous foal.

This frame gene, when in it's _homozygous_ state, produces a 'Lethal White' foal.

Inheriting one copy of the gene from _both _parents produces a pure white foal with 100% death rate. No exceptions.










This foal will die shortly after birth because the color gene is linked to a malformed gut system. An example of 'too much of a good thing' 

A _single _frame gene will give you a foal with beautiful paint color. 





















I'd say about 25% of VSH expression in workers would be a good average for both mite suppression and overall hive performance and production.
Since the VSH genes are considered to be recessive, that will take a few generation to get your hybrids that have the best balance of both VSH & non VSH traits. Many bees will be a carrier of one copy of the gene, but unless it has 2 copies, the traits will not be fully expressed.

Saying that VSH colonies won't make honey is only partially true and isn't looking at the big picture. Roland, those VSH colonies, or more specifically, the _drones_ from those colonies may have actually been a good addition to your yard,_ if _you do some of your own queen rearing, that is.

Luckily, the time from hatch to maturity is so short with queens you can get a few generations knocked out in a single season. That makes changing the genetics in your yard to the_ correct balance of VSH for the best performance_ possible in a very short time. You can at least make signicant headway. Producing multiple generations in a single season is like looking in the future. Those test daughters are invaluable for selecting the best breeding stock for your next season.

Pure VSH queens are an _ingredient_. Not the finished product.
Here I go talking about recipes again. 
With open mating the best I can do is have plenty of healthy non related stock with both VSH lineage and non VSH for my best chances of producing the best possible hybrids. Those swarms or cut outs I've collected in remote areas near our resident Volcano (Mt. Rainier) have worked out perfectly with my Glenn stock and my newest stock from VP Queens.










Without II equipment and genetic testing, I am only guessing at how much of the genes my bees actually have. But selecting by performance is not a bad thing to do. 
Still, when working with recessive genetics, sometimes your best breeding stock may not be a performer, but an ingredient in a special recipe. That's where selection gets tricky.
There are a lot of times I just go with my gut. Which means I rely on the history and lineage of my stock to make my best guess on possibly hidden or masked genetics beneficial for future mating influence..
That puts the consumer right back to confidence in their producer.










My experiment last season was to buy pure VSH _Virgin _queens from Adam at VP Queens. mated here with my current stock, I am overwintering the first generation of hybrids. The daughters I rear from them this spring will also be mated here and should have the correct expression of mite suppression without negatively effecting production.
And luckily I have had very good longevity with my queens and should be able to evaluate the results effectively before I do too much rearing. Bringing in pure VSH lines will also keep my percentages in my other stock at appropriate levels.
I don't want to change my genetics, I just want to _enhance_ it and keep dominant and recessive traits effectively balanced.

This is something almost anyone can do. (Unless you live in an area with a high influence from poor drone quality you can't control)  
If your reasonably secluded, You just need a plan, enough bees to rear a few queens and a little bit of Beesource education.

This is my understanding of the complexity of the theory of mite control through VSH genetics. Hopefully some others with more insight and experience will chime in too.


----------



## oldforte

Sister Lauri takes on where Brother Adam left off!


----------



## Acebird

oldforte said:


> Sister Lauri takes on where Brother Adam left off!


Yeah, but does sister Lauri have the backing of the Vatican?

Breeding for animals that have one father and one mother is difficult enough to predict the outcome by traits. If you do not have a way of seeing the gene matches that result in bees how can you even come close to predicting the outcome of the next generation?


----------



## crofter

Lauri will do OK with or without the popes blessing!


_Todays diet grows odder and odder; it is a wise child indeeed that knows its own fodder!_


----------



## apis maximus

Lauri said:


> I believe you need *to understand* a little about genetics, at least basic dominant and recessive traits and how they are expressed if you want to implement VSH genetics with confidence into your mite management program.


Lauri,

Thanks for taking the time and making another well thought out post.

It clearly shows, you have taken the time to do your own homework and to then add clarity and original thought to a very hotly debated yet still very poorly understood concept. 

To understand...is a very high leveraged verb. 
I mean, to understand something, anything for that matter is very powerful stuff. Yet, a lot of us will continue to self deceive ourselves because taking the time to understand is indeed a tremendous effort. Just give me the "dummy" version...the "executive" summary...the "idiot's" version...the "abstract"...the "one liner"...
And as such, we fall pray to the bumper sticker talk, hash tags, memes and themes that have absolutely nothing to do with one's capacity to think for oneself. 
We become repeaters of someone else's "logic" and consequently someone else's "rhetoric". We get "impressed" and "mesmerized" by the "authority" of someone's credentials, letters and symbols in front and behind their names, number of postings on a forum and many other nonsensical stuff. 

Nothing wrong with "subject matter experts"...they have a very important role. But that does not mean one has to abdicate the idea of thinking for one self.
We end up putting both our feet in our mouth, not because we are bad people, but simply because we think and act as if we know so much. 
And most of the time is not what we do not know that's killing us...but what we think we do, that simply ain't so. And when someone from outside, points these very facts out, we get offended, we take it as personal attacks and the whole show goes down in murky waters.



Lauri said:


> Pure VSH queens are an _ingredient_. Not the finished product.


Absolutely!!! 
And just like good skills, good nutrition, good basics in understanding bee biology...etc., all, part of the puzzle. 
It's not a one thing. 
It never was, it never will be, despite how much our "modern" Western Culture will try to make us *believe* that it is.



Lauri said:


> This is my understanding of the complexity of the theory of mite control through VSH genetics.


Indeed. And a good, solid position to start with.

Again, thanks Lauri!


----------



## Lauri

Acebird said:


> Breeding for animals that have one father and one mother is difficult enough to predict the outcome by traits. If you do not have a way of seeing the gene matches that result in bees how can you even come close to predicting the outcome of the next generation?


Overwintered test daughters help, but are only an aid in making your best guess. Thorough observation/evaluation is great, but then your season has passed. 

If you're lucky in the_ third + _season, if your original breeding stock is still alive, you can really have confidence in your choices. But then you don't get the full effect of how your lines have evolved with each other over the last couple years.

I graft from my original surviving proven breeders so I retain my base line genetics. I graft from them first thing come spring since they have the highest threat of being superceded.

Next, I graft from young overwintered stock to get those 'evolved' survivor hybrids.

And then later in summer, when I get a couple nice juicy new specimens that knock my socks off in the mating nucs, I graft a few from current season stocks for those test daughters.

That's why I like to give a little larger mating nuc to queens I've hatched out in the incubator I really like the looks of. It's not just to get them mated, it's the first step towards a proving ground.


----------



## Eduardo Gomes

Lauri there is a producer in Europe of resistant lines that can provide me with queen cells or virgin queens at a very acceptable price. I had some doubts in advance in business because I had the idea/presupposition that it was necessary 50 % of resistant "blood". In your opinion is better if we reach 25 % to balance the resistant trait with the productivity trait. I understand correctly your words?

I want to thank you for your contribution to this thread (and others) which I believe was instrumental for it does not derailed.


----------



## Lauri

Eduardo, There are probably many studies on the percentage prefered on VSH genes for both mite control and production performance. 

25% seems about right to me and is what I shoot for when considering my drone populations. I think 50% would still be too much, but would all depend on the efficiency of your bees.

I can pay a young man $10.00 an hour to help me with chores, but I can do twice the work he can in the same amount of time. It all comes down to the efficiency of what you have right in front of you.


----------



## Lauri

Eduardo Gomes said:


> Lauri there is a producer in Europe of resistant lines that can provide me with queen cells or virgin queens at a very acceptable price.


 
I think capped cells and virgin queens are one of the most underutilized resource in beekeeping.
You know how fast I grew in just a couple years. Except for some of my breeders, I didn't do it with mated queens.

But you need to be in an area with somewhat controllable, good drone stock. _That's _the catch.


----------



## Eduardo Gomes

Regarding the efficiency of my bees is another problem. I have not the slightest idea. Rarely had losses from varroa, as far as I realized. But I always treat.

But I have to start somewhere and this rate of 25% I think it's feathers be tested by me. If I put a much higher bar, and in my circumstances, it is like climbing Everest without oxygen bottle. Thanks Lauri.


----------



## sqkcrk

Lauri said:


> I believe you need to understand a little about genetics, at least basic dominant and recessive traits and how they are expressed if you want to implement VSH genetics with confidence into your mite management program. Or at least have a queen producer you trust that has a program towards the type of performance you are seeking.
> 
> You can fly blindly by name or title alone, but unless you understand where your stock comes from and how it was developed, all you really have is a title.
> 
> You _can_ get too much of a good thing and have very poor results.
> 
> Colonies with a high percentage of VSH genetics many times will produce too much hygienic behavior and not allow brood build up due to uncapping. This is especially true of the colony is mite infested and VSH is relied on to rectify it on it's own.
> 
> Here's another example with photos so you can better understand:
> Look at Paint horses. If you cross two horses that both have one copy of the Frame Overo gene, you have a 25% chance risk of producing a homozygous foal.
> 
> This frame gene, when in it's _homozygous_ state, produces a 'Lethal White' foal.
> 
> Inheriting one copy of the gene from _both _parents produces a pure white foal with 100% death rate. No exceptions.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This foal will die shortly after birth because the color gene is linked to a malformed gut system. An example of 'too much of a good thing'
> 
> A _single _frame gene will give you a foal with beautiful paint color.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'd say about 25% of VSH expression in workers would be a good average for both mite suppression and overall hive performance and production.
> Since the VSH genes are considered to be recessive, that will take a few generation to get your hybrids that have the best balance of both VSH & non VSH traits. Many bees will be a carrier of one copy of the gene, but unless it has 2 copies, the traits will not be fully expressed.
> 
> Saying that VSH colonies won't make honey is only partially true and isn't looking at the big picture. Roland, those VSH colonies, or more specifically, the _drones_ from those colonies may have actually been a good addition to your yard,_ if _you do some of your own queen rearing, that is.
> 
> Luckily, the time from hatch to maturity is so short with queens you can get a few generations knocked out in a single season. That makes changing the genetics in your yard to the_ correct balance of VSH for the best performance_ possible in a very short time. You can at least make signicant headway. Producing multiple generations in a single season is like looking in the future. Those test daughters are invaluable for selecting the best breeding stock for your next season.
> 
> Pure VSH queens are an _ingredient_. Not the finished product.
> Here I go talking about recipes again.
> With open mating the best I can do is have plenty of healthy non related stock with both VSH lineage and non VSH for my best chances of producing the best possible hybrids. Those swarms or cut outs I've collected in remote areas near our resident Volcano (Mt. Rainier) have worked out perfectly with my Glenn stock and my newest stock from VP Queens.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Without II equipment and genetic testing, I am only guessing at how much of the genes my bees actually have. But selecting by performance is not a bad thing to do.
> Still, when working with recessive genetics, sometimes your best breeding stock may not be a performer, but an ingredient in a special recipe. That's where selection gets tricky.
> There are a lot of times I just go with my gut. Which means I rely on the history and lineage of my stock to make my best guess on possibly hidden or masked genetics beneficial for future mating influence..
> That puts the consumer right back to confidence in their producer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My experiment last season was to buy pure VSH _Virgin _queens from Adam at VP Queens. mated here with my current stock, I am overwintering the first generation of hybrids. The daughters I rear from them this spring will also be mated here and should have the correct expression of mite suppression without negatively effecting production.
> And luckily I have had very good longevity with my queens and should be able to evaluate the results effectively before I do too much rearing. Bringing in pure VSH lines will also keep my percentages in my other stock at appropriate levels.
> I don't want to change my genetics, I just want to _enhance_ it and keep dominant and recessive traits effectively balanced.
> 
> This is something almost anyone can do. (Unless you live in an area with a high influence from poor drone quality you can't control)
> If your reasonably secluded, You just need a plan, enough bees to rear a few queens and a little bit of Beesource education.
> 
> This is my understanding of the complexity of the theory of mite control through VSH genetics. Hopefully some others with more insight and experience will chime in too.


Where have you been all my life? Oh, did I say that out loud?

More insight? That I would like to see/read.


----------



## Eduardo Gomes

Lauri said:


> But you need to be in an area with somewhat controllable, good drone stock. _That's _the catch.


Yes this is the simplest part. I have a relatively isolated apiary. There are no hives in a 2.5 miles radius. And the closest apiaries are very small (3 to 4 hives). It seems to me it will be easy to flood the area with my future resistante drones.


----------



## Sticky Bear

I'm going on my 5th season treatment-free and as others said it's not an easy path but it has helped me raise a bee that is hardy to the extremes of Western Colorado. Winter count as of Jan. 10th leaves us at 34 hives 100% in treatment-free yards. We've lost 7 out of 45 in our treated yards.


----------



## Acebird

Lauri said:


> I can pay a young man $10.00 an hour to help me with chores, but I can do twice the work he can in the same amount of time.


Man or man do I remember thinking like this ... not anymore. If you hire 5 of these guys and you make 5 per hour on their labor you get 25 bucks an hour and it can scale up as you hire more. If you do it yourself you will never make more than 20 bucks an hour. You are worth way more than 20 per hour and you won't have to lift a finger.


----------



## Brandy

Sticky Bear, extreme's? You're in the banana belt don't you know!! But good luck..


----------



## Lauri

Acebird said:


> Man or man do I remember thinking like this ... not anymore. If you hire 5 of these guys and you make 5 per hour on their labor you get 25 bucks an hour and it can scale up as you hire more. If you do it yourself you will never make more than 20 bucks an hour. You are worth way more than 20 per hour and you won't have to lift a finger.


I'm not talking about employees Brian. I hired my Nephew a couple times during the summer a while back (who is in his 20's) to help me clean out the barn, prune trees, weed, pressure wash off wintertime grunge, etc. 

My bees are more of a research and development project at this point. I'm interested in the science behind beekeeping.

I think _you_ think I am bigger than I am.


----------



## Roland

Lauri, is 8 years enough time for the VSH traits to sort them selves out? I stand by my observations. They where at the bottom of the barrel for honey production 8 years ago, and they still are today. We stated the whole yard with packages and VSH queens, and keep them isolated. They have not survived any better than the other yards. Not worth the extra money. Strachan NWC are a far better bee. 

I am happy your results are better.

P.S. we do not use any synthetic miticides.

Crazy Roland


----------



## sqkcrk

Lauri said:


> My bees are more of a research and development project at this point. I'm interested in the science behind beekeeping.
> 
> I think _you_ think I am bigger than I am.


You are​ bigger than some of us in different ways. And tougher too. I'm glad I didn't scare you away back when.


----------



## beepro

Remember that bees are a bit different from other species or animals. 
The main thing is to balance the good genetics with the other traits as well.
If isolated for too long they will not bee as vigor. That is why a yearly plan of incorporating the other bees'
good genetics will do. Then evaluate them further. I'm sure we all know about inbreeding enough to produce the mutants.
Animals, as well as human beings, that inbred for too many generations will create deformities. Take certain dogs breeds for example.
And the isolation of certain minority ethnic group in the mountain for 100s of years for instant. 
So part of my bee program is to continue to select for the mite resistant traits and get the good genetics to mixed in yearly as well while keeping
the other good traits like honey production, gentleness and fast Spring build up. Then flood my local area with these good genetics to hopefully balance out the bad ones. 
It might take awhile to get there but eventually it can bee accomplished. Every specification bee location is different according to its unique environment. The main thing is to balance them all out.


----------



## crofter

Some of the things that are considered "good " genetics in one geographic area or business model carry negative value in other situations. I dont think there will ever be one perfect or even optimum bee. If you hone the traits for a particular scenario you will always be subject to dilution at the borders of your selection zone. Also If we select for instance, for the bee that will produce the max honey in the good year, will it fall on its face in years that tend to either end of the best conditions. If we select for a bee which is resistant to the current selection of vectored viruses, do we handicap it when that variety changes? Here I am thinking of the operator who apparently has done well for a number of years and then has a big decline. Has he destroyed the long term resilience and fitness of the bees in the name of temporary expedience? 

Geographic isolation has been one of natures greatest mechanisms of producing local fitness and limiting epidemic spread of disease or pestilence. We have taken away one of natures most powerful tools; I dont think we are anywhere near having a comparable strength counter measure. I dont think we can rightly say that if we remove all our interference that nature will magically heal the situation. How can nature adapt to opposing demands?


----------



## BernhardHeuvel

crofter said:


> How can nature adapt to opposing demands?


A friend of mine went treatment free, by bringing in into his apiary as different bee genetics as was possible to him. He then introduced bees from everywhere for subsequent years and reproduced from the survivors. (Soft Bond Test-like, see Kefuss.)

A supporting find (or two):
*Queen promiscuity lowers disease within honeybee colonies*
Thomas D Seeley1 and David R Tarpy
Proc Biol Sci. Jan 7, 2007; 274(1606): 67–72. 
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1679871/

*Genetic Diversity in Honey Bee Colonies Enhances Productivity and Fitness *
Heather R. Mattila and Thomas D. Seeley 
http://www.bio-nica.info/biblioteca/Mattila2007BeeGenetic.pdf

Brother Adam (Karl Kehrle) has breed a bee the exact same way, that resists mites. (Not varroa.) He profited from controlled matings by artificial insemination and controlled selection. And diverse genetics.

Also: 
*Role of queen promiscuity in reproductive swarming by honeybees*
Heather Mattila, Madeline Girard, Thomas Seeley
http://sesreview.library.usyd.edu.au/bitstream/123456789/22249/1/P002.pdf

*Museum specimens reveal resilience to disease in feral bees*
Alexander Mikheyev, Mandy Tin, Jatin Arora, Thomas Seeley
http://ses.library.usyd.edu.au//bitstream/2123/11105/2/OR040.pdf


----------



## Eduardo Gomes

crofter said:


> Geographic isolation has been one of natures greatest mechanisms of producing local fitness and limiting epidemic spread of disease or pestilence. We have taken away one of natures most powerful tools; I dont think we are anywhere near having a comparable strength counter measure. I dont think we can rightly say that if we remove all our interference that nature will magically heal the situation. How can nature adapt to opposing demands?


Just in the nail, in my opinion.
Here http://bambuser.com/v/1511682 we can see Prof. Peter Rosenkranz illustrating with two cases (one in Brasil, mark 10:10, an other in Sweden mark 16:00)


----------



## Acebird

beepro said:


> Then flood my local area with these good genetics to hopefully balance out the bad ones.


It might take thousands of hives to do that. I feel the only recourse for a back yard beek is to let nature take its course. A hive that doesn't produce so much may have better survival traits so no genes are lost. As long as you don't have one hive you are somewhat protected.


----------



## apis maximus

BernhardHeuvel said:


> .... by bringing in into his apiary as *different bee genetics as was possible* to him. He then introduced bees from everywhere for subsequent years and reproduced from the survivors. (Soft Bond Test-like, see Kefuss.)


Bernhard,

As always, great thinking sir. Also, great references.

Here is a speech/presentation given by Keith Delaplane in 2013 addressing the importance of "queen promiscuity" when it comes to designing breeding schemes/programs for the bees. 
Probably by now, many have seen it, but I think revisiting it and then adding it to the context that Bernhard's references bring to the table, is a good exercise that many beekeepers, at any level, could benefit from:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=txZtQrMTeag

Because really, in the end, its a push and pull dynamic that we, the beekeepers, try to influence. 
Our own agenda, however one might define that agenda, is clearly at work...and sometimes at odds with the bee's agenda.

Just as *crofter*, very clearly states: 

"*Geographic isolation has been one of natures greatest mechanisms of producing local fitness and limiting epidemic spread of disease or pestilence. We have taken away one of natures most powerful tools; I dont think we are anywhere near having a comparable strength counter measure. I dont think we can rightly say that if we remove all our interference that nature will magically heal the situation. How can nature adapt to opposing demands?*"


----------



## SRatcliff

crofter said:


> Some of the things that are considered "good " genetics in one geographic area or business model carry negative value in other situations. I dont think there will ever be one perfect or even optimum bee. If you hone the traits for a particular scenario you will always be subject to dilution at the borders of your selection zone. Also If we select for instance, for the bee that will produce the max honey in the good year, will it fall on its face in years that tend to either end of the best conditions. If we select for a bee which is resistant to the current selection of vectored viruses, do we handicap it when that variety changes? Here I am thinking of the operator who apparently has done well for a number of years and then has a big decline. Has he destroyed the long term resilience and fitness of the bees in the name of temporary expedience?
> 
> Geographic isolation has been one of natures greatest mechanisms of producing local fitness and limiting epidemic spread of disease or pestilence. We have taken away one of natures most powerful tools; I dont think we are anywhere near having a comparable strength counter measure. I dont think we can rightly say that if we remove all our interference that nature will magically heal the situation. How can nature adapt to opposing demands?


Of course, never will there be a perfect bee forever. Evolution progresses through death, and not directly through better and better genes. Location is a lot of it, as different locations have different selective pressures, but pressures in any location can change(ie. pests, viruses, climate change). Therefore, bees need a diverse arsenal of genetics to adapt. While having bees with a wide range of genes may be less productive than certain bottlenecked lines of genes, the survivability will be much better.

I think its important to have a foundation of locally adapted, as well as diverse, line of genetics, and then build from there. Its even more important to have something to fall back on(preservation of feral populations?), as someone once said "every paradigm at its apparent point of perfection is on the verge of collapse".


----------



## Eduardo Gomes

Eduardo Gomes said:


> Here http://bambuser.com/v/1511682 we can see Prof. Peter Rosenkranz illustrating with two cases (one in Brasil, mark 10:10, an other in Sweden mark 16:00)


There is ironic that nature alone produce mites more "soft" ( Brazil ) and bees more nasty (Sweden ).

However joint/synergistically nature and man ( beekeeper ) can make a very interesting way. In this site http://bambuser.com/v/1512132 we can view Dr. Kefuss tell us what he did and is doing.


----------



## AstroBee

Roland said:


> Because they are not worth a hoot for making honey, and that is what pays the bills. When you select for one trait, you often loose others.
> 
> Crazy Roland


Gotta call you on that Roland. That's such a cookie cutter response. Please describe exactly how much experience (number of colonies and years working VSH) you have managing VSH bees? And then if that number is greater than zero tell me how many of those years were within the last three years.


----------



## AstroBee

Lauri said:


> You _can_ get too much of a good thing and have very poor results.


Of course, and this was at least partially the problem with early Glenn stock, which seems to have tainted everyone's perspective on VSH. VSH has dramatically improved since that stock. 

I'm not going to recount all my previous statements, but here are a couple of posts:

http://www.beesource.com/forums/sho...-bees-and-hybridization&p=1185089#post1185089

http://www.beesource.com/forums/sho...looking-for-suggestions&p=1173117#post1173117




Lauri said:


> I'd say about 25% of VSH expression in workers would be a good average for both mite suppression and overall hive performance and production.
> Since the VSH genes are considered to be recessive, that will take a few generation to get your hybrids that have the best balance of both VSH & non VSH traits. Many bees will be a carrier of one copy of the gene, but unless it has 2 copies, the traits will not be fully expressed.
> 
> Saying that VSH colonies won't make honey is only partially true and isn't looking at the big picture. Roland, those VSH colonies, or more specifically, the _drones_ from those colonies may have actually been a good addition to your yard,_ if _you do some of your own queen rearing, that is.
> 
> 
> Pure VSH queens are an _ingredient_. Not the finished product.


I think 25% from old Glenn stock would be about right, but I've found that colonies with much greater than 50% VSH (from much better VSH stock) can still be great producers. Heck I have II queens, which are 100% VSH and make respectable honey yields. I'm not bashing Tom Glenn, as I feel he provided a great service to the community, but my experience is that early VSH was VERY raw and needed a lot of work. And attempting to advance it without II would be quite a challenge.


----------



## BeeAttitudes

Lauri said:


> I'd say about 25% of VSH expression in workers would be a good average for both mite suppression and overall hive performance and production.


If I recall correctly, any recessive trait will always be expressed at a level of 25% or less if crossed with a population exhibiting a dominant trait. Half the phenotype comes from the male and half from the female. So if we call the recessive VSH trait "V" and the normal, dominant trait "N", then a virgin VSH queen brought in from a good apirary that has the VSH trait from both her mother and father would have the phenotype "VV" and the population of bees in the beeks apiary that doesn't have VSH traits would have the "NN" phenotype.

If you place this virgin queen in a hive in your yard and she mates with your local "NN" drones, then all the offspring would have Phenotype "NV" (V from the mother and N from the fathers).

So you rear a queen that is the daughter of the VSH queen (her phenotype is "NV") and she crosses with drones that have phenotype "NV". Here is how the phenotype of the offspring will turn out:

25% - "NN" (just like you original stock)
50% - "NV" (carriers of VSH but not exhibited since it's recessive)
25% - "VV" (true VSH just like the original queen brought in from the VSH apiary)

I believe these proportions will continue with subsequent generations. Not sure you can do anything about these proportions as long as you have open mating (again, assuming VSH is recessive).


----------



## shinbone

AstroBee said:


> Gotta call you on that Roland. That's such a cookie cutter response. Please describe exactly how much experience (number of colonies and years working VSH) you have managing VSH bees? And then if that number is greater than zero tell me how many of those years were within the last three years.


Astrobee - When asking for such detail, it seems only fair that you respond in kind, including your honey yields for your VSH queens since that is Roland's point. Thanks.


If the VSH queens produce hives which do not need treatments, but still produce a good honey yield, I want some! In fact, I think everyone would want some. That we don't see a huge migration to VSH queens shows that for most beeks, such queens overall don't perform better than any of the other good queens out there.




.


----------



## AstroBee

shinebone,

Please check the links in post 363


----------



## shinbone

I checked both links referenced post #363. You report you have two VSH hives and they both produced a good honey crop this year. . . correct? Sounds encouraging. Can you tell us how much honey and how that compares to your State's average?





.


----------



## rwurster

I have a hive that will have gone 5 years tf in April. By most beekeeper's definition it's a dink. It doesn't boom in the spring and it doesn't produce any surplus honey, yet it persists. I consider re-queening it several times a year. They always have a medium super they never fill and they barely have enough frames of brood to pollinate crops. The upside is that they've not only survived varroa but they've also survived me from my first days as a beekeeper. The question should be how long are these vsh hybrids viable as both having a production capacity thats acceptable and varroa/disease resistance. Buying queens just doesn't appeal to me, it took 4 years to get the bees I have now. The rest of my apiary and outyard can go at least 2 years with no treatment (oav) and do produce good yields and do exhibit some varroa resistance. If you buy vsh queens, keep doing it. You're keeping a breeder in business  I hope to find more bees like my dink hive because it means that bees truly have a shot at long term survival. But I already think they will survive, they just wont be the super bees everyone wants that are calm, big producers, disease and mite resistant, can survive a beekeeper, etc. all at the same time.


----------



## AstroBee

shinbone said:


> I checked both links referenced post #363. You report you have two VSH hives and they both produced a good honey crop this year. . . correct? Sounds encouraging. Can you tell us how much honey and how that compares to your State's average?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> .


No, just showed pictures of 2 colonies. I have approximately 40 VSH colonies with either II, F1 or F2 VSH. In addition to these 40 I have between 15-20 survivor colonies that have been derived from a variety of sources, including some from the old Glenn stock. Virginia is not a great honey state, but I averaged 67 percent higher than the state average for the 2014 season. BTW, that number factors in every bee on board, not just the producing colonies.


----------



## shinbone

Excellent! Thanks for the info.


----------



## Roland

Astrobee wrote:

Gotta call you on that Roland. That's such a cookie cutter response. Please describe exactly how much experience (number of colonies and years working VSH) you have managing VSH bees?

Roland replies: We started 3 yards(20 hives each) in about 2008 with packages containing VSH queens. We paid a premium, maybe 10 dollars more, and traveled out of state to get them. From the get go we where not impressed. Not so good honey production compared to the 300 plus other hives. As their numbers declined, they where consolidated in one yard, with no outside source of queens. I believe that yard had around 15 hives this fall. That counts as about 7 seasons, with a count average of about 30 hives. 

And then if that number is greater than zero tell me how many of those years were within the last three years.

Roland replies: Since "that number" is greater than zero, the number of years in the last three is three.

As for my other credentials, I am a 5th. generation commercial beekeeper, most likely the oldest beekeeping family in Wisconsin. I also have a BA in Biology from Carthage College in Kenosha Wisconsin.

I hope I answered you questions in a kind manner, and look forward to more inquiries.

Roland Diehnelt
Linden Apiary, est. 1852


----------



## Juhani Lunden

Lauri said:


> I've been successful with most of my colonies being treatment free, but I've found it to be labor intensive, requires skill and management experience, very good genetics and the right environment.(Plus a lot of other ducks that have to be in a row)
> 
> My methods of controlling mites are great for rearing queens and making increases. But for honey production, my methods would take it's toll on your overall harvest unless your timing was perfect with your brood breaks and simulated swarms.
> 
> I have total faith in my VSH line of queens, but if you wanted to buy one of my premium queens, expect her to work miracles and drop her in a mite infested hive, I probably wouldn't sell her to you.
> It would be a disservice to that Queen not to give her a decent environment to allow her genetics to eventually persevere with her own brood having the chance to actually hatch without DWV and exhibit their traits.
> 
> VSH genetics are only part of the bigger picture. But are a step in the right direction.
> 
> Understanding the mite life cycle and suppressing them while at the same time providing the colony an environment they can flourish in, is tricky.
> 
> Even when you get a thriving treatment free hive, these hives are always evolving. Success for a short period really doesn't count. You are never out of the woods. Nearly every brood hatch can change the playing field. Your seasonal changes, age of the colony and queen, circumstances within the hive will always be changing and therefore you must also adapt (Anticipate and intervene when necessary) or eventually pay the price.
> 
> My answer to your question ' Is it really that easy' would be a loud 'NO'
> Is it possible?
> That would be a 'Yes'.
> Most of the time.
> 
> I have Apivar on hand in case a hive has been overlooked and I notice too late in late summer, I have enough mites I may need to treat with no time for natural suppression methods.
> 
> I have no issue with treating. Just prefer not to when ever possible. I monitor mites all summer long, not just in late summer.
> 
> I'm over wintering about 230 colonies this year.( Of various sizes) Equivalent to 170 double deeps. I've never allowed my hives to go longer than three years before I break them up into a simulated swarm & nucs.(Or at least gave them a brood break) Not because they needed it, but because I figured they were probably on borrowed time if I didn't. I don't allow my mite population to get out of control, then act. I prevent high mite populations by anticipating their behavior in susceptible (Older) colonies and supressing or preventing it while it is still managable & _before_ issues result.
> 
> I started beekeeping in 2011 with NO experience-no mentor-No club affiliation. All increases from my original purchases of about 35 packages and a couple swarms. I over winter with very little losses. But I have 35 years of agricultural experience behind my madness. There is an awful lot of it that carries over to beekeeping.
> 
> But I don't fool myself. I won't be so stubborn to try to stay treatment free I will allow my investment to perish.
> 
> Although some don't agree, I feel a treatment reduced goal is much more realistic middle of the road stance to take, rather than a die hard one way or the other T or TF.
> 
> I'm treatment free..right up until the time I have to treat.
> 
> 
> Personally I focus on genetics & colony health. A healthy strong colony with hybrid vigor can keep most everything in Balance.


Some comments on Lauris very skilful and well thought system.

1. Good stock from the beginning, VSH and Carniolan. Carniolan bees have a better brood hygiene than Italians. They also make lees brood and have more compact brood areas.

2. She has started 2011 with 35 packages and is now over 200 hives. Lots of nuc making plus all her equipment being brand new has a very positive impact on her beekeeping and keeps mite levels lower.

3. She is culling drone brood on the right moments. As I told there is one beekeeper in Finland who is TF by just having small cells and cutting a lot of drone brood. 

4. She is trapping mites to nucs and then gives them a cell. This makes a brood break, plus new (well mated with good VSH carniolan stock) queens are always more capable fighting mites.

5. When absolutely necessary, she treats. She has no obsession about this (like us men so often tend to have).

6. She has previous breeding experience (horses) and deep understanding in how things work in nature. 

She has made a model how to start a TF beekeeping and thrive at least 4 years. But as she has told mite levels are low, so I don´t see why this system could not work forever.


----------



## BernhardHeuvel

Just one thing: me thinks Carnolians are the weakest bees - weak in resisting varroas - that I ever came across. There is a huge varroa resistance breeding program for Carnolians in Germany and I did get a good bunch of their better queens. Carnolians and dark bees had the highest mite counts and the most losses under my local conditions. 

My first strategy against varroa included using bees with a long lifespan. Carnolians do live longer than other bees. Hence the slow turnover of bees and reduced broodnest. From what I have experienced so far, a longer lifespan is a disadavantage. 

The Buckfast bees I use (a buckfast is not a buckfast) were selected for extended winter brood pause, so they winter good, but do have a good fertility during summer. Those buckfasts do not live as long as do the Carnolians, but the constant turnover of bees makes them much healthier and resistant to brood diseases and external factors like poisonings. Because damaged bees get replaced quickly. Doesn't matter if the damage comes from varroa or external. 

On the other hand I do have queens from another breeder with a completely different buckfast strain, which is _extremely_ fertile and produces brood like mad. Those bees somewhat exaust themself through brooding. Those bees get a lot of varroa, too. 

So you need a hybrid bee, that is fertile in summer, but closes down brooding early enough and does not winter in too big winter clusters. 

The problems with Carnolians is, that they completely shut down brooding when there is an extended nectar dearth. Last May they have been broodless for weeks! Now. All varroa emerges at this time and there certainly is a mechanism, that varroa can adjust their reproduction rates. It makes a difference if varroa reproduces at a rate like 1.6 with every broodcycle - or with a rate like 3. The rate 1.6 per broodcycle was found to be common in Germany. 

I know from long observations, that mites do reproduce faster in swarms, before and after the swarming, so they somehow sense that there will be a broodless period and act accordingly by adjusting their reproduction rate. (Mechanism: instead of waiting longer on adult bees, they shorten their phoretic phase and invade cells at a faster rate.)

So bees with a smaller broodnest and/or extended broodless periods within the brooding season will be more likely to get into trouble as those, who have a better turnover of brood. Of course, the other extreme - too much brood, will lead to a higher infestation also. Also it depends on the local nectar scheme - if you have nectar all year round, you might be better off, even with a Carnolian, since they don't shut down brood rearing.

Just some thoughts/observations I want to throw in.


----------



## shinbone

Roland and Astrobee - sounds like one of you had good results with the VSH queens and the other did not. Which, is quite common in the beekeeping world where a certain type of queen works well for one beek but not for another. No surprises there. In other words, while VSH queens work for some, they are not a universal solution to the mite problem.

And, Astrobee, it is refreshing to see a TF beekeeper who measures success in honey harvested rather than whether a hive just barely survives to the next season.

JMHO


----------



## Acebird

Roland said:


> I also have a BA in Biology from Carthage College in Kenosha Wisconsin.


Is that a teaching degree? Isn't biology science?


----------



## Jim Brewster

Acebird said:


> Is that a teaching degree? Isn't biology science?


I also have a BA in biology, because the liberal arts college I graduated from (SUNY Potsdam) didn't offer a BS. BA or BS, they have fine science departments.


----------



## AstroBee

Roland said:


> I hope I answered you questions in a kind manner, and look forward to more inquiries.


More than kind, and I apologize for how I came across. I never questioned your credentials, as I've been following your inputs to beesource for many years and understand your experience. What I have observed is that those who have attempted VSH in the past have used, either directly or indirectly, material that came through Glenn Apiaries' breeding program, which again, based upon my experience, were very poor honey producers. Again, its hard to say this without sounding terribly critical of their efforts, as I have great respect for them and they really provided a great service with their other bees, e.g., Pol-Line, Cordovan, etc. I believe, and have witnessed first hand, that current generations of VSH are FAR superior than those from greater than 3 years ago. However, I suspect that my comments are not going to change the minds of those who have already concluded that VSH bees are terrible, but I won't hesitate to throw in my observations and experience when appropriate. I believe that VSH from more than 3 years ago were basically raw research material, that out of demand, got thrown out into the public before it was fully baked. The result was that so many who were seeking alternatives got very disappointed, which has really negatively tainted VSH bees. I think this is a very natural reaction, but again, one that may not be accurate with current VSH. 

I do have a few more questions for you Roland: 
Were all queens in these packages from the same source? As I've presented in my posts above, not all VSH are created equal. 
What generation were these queens away from an II mother?
Did you monitor and treat these colonies of varroa? What varroa counts did you observe? 
Have you actively tried to breed from any of these colonies?


----------



## Nabber86

AstroBee said:


> VSH has dramatically improved since that stock.


You may have had good luck, but I think that we are going to need to see some proof that VHS stock has "dramatically improved". The links in post 363 only provide personal anecdotal experience.


----------



## AstroBee

Nabber86 said:


> You may have had good luck, but I think that we are going to need to see some proof that VHS stock has "dramatically improved". The links in post 363 only provide personal anecdotal experience.



Post 369 gives more information, but is still my "personal anecdotal experience". I'm not an entomologist running a research program, just a sideline beekeeper. That said, I believe that my experience is equally as valid as anything else I've seen offered up to the contrary. When you read the links that I posted, you'll see that I've been working with VSH for a relatively long time, so I probably have more experience than most in this community. What exactly are you asking me to provide?


----------



## Nabber86

AstroBee said:


> Post 369 gives more information, but is still my "personal anecdotal experience". I'm not an entomologist running a research program, just a sideline beekeeper. That said, I believe that my experience is equally as valid as anything else I've seen offered up to the contrary. When you read the links that I posted, you'll see that I've been working with VSH for a relatively long time, so I probably have more experience than most in this community. What exactly are you asking me to provide?


When you said dramatic improvement, I thought there was some study somewhere, or maybe somebody had developed a new strain that was commonly accepted or proven to be superior. 

You are right though, if you have been working with them for that long, you probably know more than most (certainly me). I just don't like the idea of purchasing queens in general (VHS or not). Seems like an unnecessary expense in a large hole that I have already dug.


----------



## apis maximus

@AstroBee,

Thanks for sharing all the information. 

Also, I cannot help myself but observe with admiration and applaud your civil and diplomatic way of handling "white noise" coming into play, so typical and so predictable, every time a serious and potentially very informative topic is discussed. But, I digress...

A few questions for you if you do not mind, please. 

In a similar thread/post you mentioned getting VSH semen from the USDA program in Baton Rouge...could you elaborate a bit on that? What, if any, is the way to go about it, to get some? 
Any information on how the semen is collected, processed, stored, then ultimately shipped to you?
Is it from drones coming out of VSH x VSH crosses or some other mixtures?

Would you be willing to exchange/sell some drone germplasm from your own drone producing colonies? 

If talking in an open forum about this kind of stuff, is not the the right place, I understand. 

Thank you.


----------



## AstroBee

Nabber86 said:


> When you said dramatic improvement, I thought there was some study somewhere, or maybe somebody had developed a new strain that was commonly accepted or proven to be superior.


No quantum jump, just continued improvement of what was once very raw material. My experience suggests that about 3 years back VSH started to become more than just an interesting trait and much closer to a viable bee for production. There are still major hurdles, like persistence of the traits and good commercial sources of quality VSH stock. I'm certainly not suggesting that VSH is the final answer to varroa for everyone, but it certainly is not a freeloader that will eventually dwindle away like was common 6 to 7 years ago. Prior, the economic cost of the hygenic behavior was far too great. Breeders, like John Harbo, and the USDA have made big strides in producing a bee that can produce honey and keep varroa to low levels.

Is treatment free easy? No way. Is it possible (for everyone)? Perhaps eventually.


----------



## AstroBee

apis maximus said:


> @AstroBee,
> 
> Thanks for sharing all the information.


My pleasure. I'll send you a PM.


----------



## Roland

Astrobee asked:

Were all queens in these packages from the same source? As I've presented in my posts above, not all VSH are created equal.

Roland: To the best of my knowledge, they where from the same source. They all appeared and acted very similar, with few outliers.

What generation were these queens away from an II mother?

Roland: I do not know.

Did you monitor and treat these colonies of varroa? What varroa counts did you observe?

Roland: We do the drone brood "scoop", and saw no significant difference between these yards and he rest. It was rare to find 2 mites total in 3 scoops. It is all possible that our methods control mites well enough that the levels too low to show an effect of the VSH behavior. The Cordovan bee showed similar levels of mites.

Have you actively tried to breed from any of these colonies? 

Roland: Yes, there is always a "Star" hive in the yard that is the brood donor for splits. 

I am aware that we may have a "moving target", and that I should re-evaulate the bred. From whom should I purchase some queens?

Crazy Roland


----------



## Fusion_power

> From whom should I purchase some queens?


That is the $64,000 question. I am aware of 12 queen suppliers who claim significant mite tolerance. There are probably others. The difficulty is that mite tolerance, high honey production potential, and excellent wintering do not usually go together.


----------



## beepro

"The Cordovan bee showed similar levels of mites."
Now where can I go to get these Cordovan vsh too?

Fusion, the post you did that Barry deleted about
the VSH breeder queens, where can we go to get some?
And would you give us the name list of the 12 suppliers also?
Are they the gentle type vsh bees too?


----------



## Juhani Lunden

BernhardHeuvel said:


> Just one thing: me thinks Carnolians are the weakest bees - weak in resisting varroas - that I ever came across. There is a huge varroa resistance breeding program for Carnolians in Germany and I did get a good bunch of their better queens.
> 
> The problems with Carnolians is, that they completely shut down brooding when there is an extended nectar dearth. Last May they have been broodless for weeks! Now. All varroa emerges at this time and there certainly is a mechanism, that varroa can adjust their reproduction rates. It makes a difference if varroa reproduces at a rate like 1.6 with every broodcycle - or with a rate like 3. The rate 1.6 per broodcycle was found to be common in Germany.
> 
> So bees with a smaller broodnest and/or extended broodless periods within the brooding season will be more likely to get into trouble as those, who have a better turnover of brood.


Thanks Bernhard.
It is very hard nowadays know, what have the original bee races looked like, before the influence of man. 

Take example of my limited experience of Carniolans: in early 1990´s I had some Singer Carniolans from Austria, they looked and behaved just like Carniolan bees are supposed to do. I did not like them, they had too little brood areas. The next experience was 15 years later, I tried Carniolan bees from Germany. They were very good bees, with big brood areas. If they were not darker, I would have difficulty separating them from my own Buckfast. 

Because of this huge human impact on bee races, I was referring to Brother Adams findings. (Pdf table was too big, tried to upload) He gives 3/6 to Italian and Buckfast bees in resistance to brood diseases, Carniolans get 5/6.

6=best 
5= very good
4= better than average
3= average
2= below average
1= bad
1= worst


----------



## AstroBee

Roland said:


> I am aware that we may have a "moving target", and that I should re-evaulate the bred. From whom should I purchase some queens?


I believe that if you really want to evaluate VSH, you need to get a breeder queen. Of course to do that justice, you'd have to graft lots of queens and do some selection. For breeders, Dr. John Harbo is a one source and VP queens is another. I've had Harbo queens and they are productive with good resistance. Full disclosure, I have never purchased queens from Adam at VP Queens, so I cannot provide first-hand experience. I do know he is very knowledgeable in VSH bees and has been doing varroa resistant bees for a long time. Johnny Thompson (Broke-T) rears lots of VSH queens using VSH breeders. Seems that he gotten good reviews. Perhaps you could get some F1 daughters from Johnny?


----------



## AstroBee

beepro said:


> "The Cordovan bee showed similar levels of mites."
> Now where can I go to get these Cordovan vsh too?


I believe that Adam at VP queens has produced Cordovan VSH. I'm not 100% on that, so it would be best to contact him directly.


----------



## camero7

Roland-
Velbert raises VSH dark [Carniolan] queens. Got a few from him last summer. They turned out pretty good.
http://www.vlwbeequeens.com/


----------



## AstroBee

Lauri said:


> Since the VSH genes are considered to be recessive, that will take a few generation to get your hybrids that have the best balance of both VSH & non VSH traits. Many bees will be a carrier of one copy of the gene, but unless it has 2 copies, the traits will not be fully expressed.


Lauri,

I love your post and not trying to bust you here, but VSH is not a recessive trait, like in the 'Lethal White' foal example you posted. VSH is additive, which means you will get some VSH performance regardless whether both parents are VSH. The percentage of VSH expression is of course dependent upon the lineage of the offspring. This additive feature makes it much more viable, as true recessive genes would be nearly hopeless to propagate, while still achieving a broad spectrum of other good traits.


----------



## apis maximus

AstroBee said:


> ... but VSH is not a recessive trait, like in the 'Lethal White' foal example you posted. VSH is additive, which means you will get some VSH performance regardless whether both parents are VSH. The percentage of VSH expression is of course dependent upon the lineage of the offspring. This additive feature makes it much more viable, as true recessive genes would be nearly hopeless to propagate, while still achieving a broad spectrum of other good traits.


*AstroBee* is correct.

Understanding genetics...even at a basic level, is not an easy thing to do. When one gets into the areas of *qualitative* and *quantitative* genetics, things get really complicated in a hurry. But that is the realm one has to dig into and learn to understand. A very deep rabbit hole indeed.

*Lauri* stated right from the get go in her very nice post: "_*I believe you need to understand a little about genetics, at least basic dominant and recessive traits and how they are expressed if you want to implement VSH genetics with confidence into your mite management program."*_

A great point to start...but it's just a start.

In genetics, you can divide all the traits into two categories based on their effects on an organism's phenotype: *qualitative* and *quantitative*. Every single genetic trait that an organism has, fits neatly into one of these two categories. One could correctly argue that between these two there is a *threshold* category...kind of like an area where things could be quantitative but sometimes could be seen as qualitative...the gray area so to speak.

The Lethal White Foal syndrome, falls into the realm of *qualitative* genetics. A *qualitative *trait is one that's either/or... Yes/No: if you don't have the "right" gene, you don't have the trait. 
Inherited diseases in humans and animals, caused by single mutations are good examples of *qualitative* traits. Another example would be blood type transmissions, in humans and animals.
The environment has very little influence on the phenotype of these traits. 

VSH in bees, falls into the category of *quantitative* genetics. A *quantitative* trait shows continued variation. This is because the trait is the sum ( aka: addition) of several small effects caused by the gene(s). *Quantitative* genes are all about how much of the trait you have. This is where *additive* effects come into play.
For example, the effect of genes on human height is *quantitative*. We all have height, but genes influence how much of it we have.

Even on Glenn's site there is a paragraph in the Q&A, mentioning:
_*"The VSH trait is thought to be controlled by more than one gene, just how many is uncertain at this point. These genes are neither dominant nor recessive. They are what is called "additive" which simply means that the more of them that are present, the more strongly the trait will be expressed."*_

Harbo and Harris state:
_" *Results suggest that there may be two genes involved in the SMR trait (see figure) and that the alleles may be additive. However, two is only a working hypothesis and estimate. The strongest case for 2 genes is the 1:2:1 distribution."
*_
Harbo, J.R., Harris, J.W. 2005. The Number of Genes Involved in the SMR Trait. American Bee Journal 145(5):430

Potential practical application? Well, one that jumps right out, and I will close with this, is just what *AstroBee* points out:

"*VSH is additive, which means you will get some VSH performance regardless whether both parents are VSH. The percentage of VSH expression is of course dependent upon the lineage of the offspring. This additive feature makes it much more viable, as true recessive genes would be nearly hopeless to propagate, while still achieving a broad spectrum of other good traits."
*


----------



## Lauri

Great post! 
I know the genetics of the bees are not near as simple as I described them. I try to post in a way most can understand, even if they are beginners. My example of the Lethal White Syndrome was just to show you can have 'too much of a good thing'. 

But there are a few things you posted I _didn't_ know.  I thought the general consensus was VSH traits were recessive in their nature. The information you just gave me alone will greatly change the way I look at my rearing efforts. Dealing with homozygous recessive genes is a lot more daunting than dealing with genetics that are considered an 'additive'.

Most notably, I'll be more focused on selecting for performance and less focused on the chance there may be 'hidden' or masked genes that could contribute to future mating combinations. 

Between that and the info about the older Glenn stock needing work, that has helped me understand how the changes I've seen here with my subsequent generations have evolved the way they have.

This kind of information is what I hoped the thread would produce!
I am very grateful


----------



## Eduardo Gomes

I'll get me a little in this conversation, with all humility, because I am no expert. 

A few days ago I found an article that stated that the resistance to varroa can be related to a *epistasis effect*. Quoting: "_If we had not used haploid drones in this study but diploid workers instead, we would have missed very likely the significance of the *strong epistatic interactions* que drive the phenotype is Varroa resistance . _" (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3287329/#b26 )

*1) Aditivity or 2) epistasis?*
1) This can be the case when multiple genes act in parallel to achieve the same effect or 
2 ) Epistasis within the genomes of organisms occurs due to interactions between the genes within the genome(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistasis ) .

My question: is already perfectly determined whether the VSH trait is the result of aditivity or can we be in the presence of epistasis, as seems to happen in the resistant bees of Sweden?

The issue is not just theoretical. If the effect is epistatic the prospects for the varroa resistance breeding program are probably more optimistic: "A further advantage of the use of this trait in selection programs is that the effect on the phenotype can directly be controlled by analyzing the Varroa mite's reproductive success in the honey bee brood. It may therefore be highly rewarding to select for this trait in breeding programs for Varroa resistance. Because few genes can have major effects on this trait and individual genomes can be easily screened, marker-assisted selection (MAS) will facilitate breeding efforts more easily than for other traits that rely on complex behaviors of diploid workers (e.g., hygienic behavior). We strongly recommend taking advantage of haploid drones in mapping studies and suggest using them as a routine tool for implementing MAS in breeding programs of the honey bee. (please see again http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3287329/#b26).


----------



## Lauri

I read this book last hunting season when I have some quiet time to do so. I would recommend it to anyone, even if you have little biology experience. It was quite easy to understand and put a lot of interesting factors into perspective.

Evolution in Four Dimensions: Genetic, Epigenetic, Behavioral, and Symbolic Variation in the History of Life

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0262525844/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o04_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

I liked it so much, I recently bought a second book on the same subject.

Epigenetics: How Environment Shapes Our Genes

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/039334228X/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s02?ie=UTF8&psc=1


----------



## Lauri

Eduardo Gomes said:


> (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3287329/#b26 )


Thanks! Good information, but as I skimmed through it and felt a little depressed. So many resources for the scientests, so little control for the folks like me.:v:

How come Beesource doesn't have a 'flying by the seat of my pants' icon?


----------



## laketrout

Now you guys are getting in pretty deep !!! but very interesting and very complicated !!! I haven't heard anyone mention the B. weaver or R. weaver line of VSH bee's which I see advertised alot and found especially interesting that Roy weaver did get together with brother Adam at some point and if I understand correctly offer some of those traits from years ago in his bee's . But from what I can gather brother Adam didn't have varroa to deal with in his time so that lineage wouldn't have varroa resistances but does offer other good traits . Are there some beeks on here using the weaver vsh line of bee's .


----------



## Fusion_power

Yes, there are several contributors who have Weaver's lines. I do not at present have any, but am getting a few this year to evaluate in comparison with the mite tolerant line I have.

Keep in mind that the queen mates with an average of 17 drones. To get good mite tolerance, some of the drones must contribute genes for tolerance. To get good production, some of the drones must have genes for production. My experience is that about 3/8 is the right ratio of mite tolerant vs production genes. This will change over time as more mite tolerant lines and traits are added to the mix. VSH is NOT the only story here!


----------



## laketrout

When you put the drone equation into the mix it seems real doubtful that a small hobbyist has much of a chance with developing a good quality vsh strain in his yard even if he has vsh queens ! I thought more of the queens traits held over in comparison to the drone gene , but I'm sure the drone has to have some vsh hiding in there somewhere too .

For the hobbyist its starting to seem like collecting wild feral colonies that have survived for 3 or 4 years might be just as good an option to buying expensive vsh queens or cells .


----------



## Brandy

I believe what hurt the Weaver lines was the potential for the Africanized gene being expressed in addition to the others...


----------



## Eduardo Gomes

Lauri said:


> Thanks!


You are welcome Lauri. I'll try to make it simplest.
In Europe it seems to me that the focus on development of resistant lines is not only focused on VSH mechanism. One of the mechanisms that are very focused are factors which contribute to a lower rate of reproduction of varroa .

This particular study focused on the genetic evaluation of resistant drones. What are resistant drones for this study ? Drones pupae infested with only a single mite with no offspring. In contrast to non-resistant drones: those with at least three viable offspring mites.

The researchers then wanted to know/understand what distinguished these two classes of drones puppae. They concluded that the drones that are resistant have differentiating aspects on genes 4, 7 and 9. In a further analysis also allowed them to conclude that the interaction between the genes 4 and 7 had a very similar effect to the resistance level than the effect of the 3 genes added, in other words, the interaction of two genes (4 and 7) contribute the same manner to the drone pupae resistance as the sum of the three genes. I hope I have not misunderstood the study.

In practical terms for us beekeepers I believe these results extend our hope because it takes fewer genes (2 instead of 3) because the epistatic effect (beneficial interaction between two genes) has a similar effect in controlling the offspring of varroa in drone puppae.

Another very interesting aspect to me is the following: the drones offspring of F2 (generation used in this study ) still have about 25 % of drone pupae resistant.


----------



## Lauri

laketrout said:


> For the hobbyist its starting to seem like collecting with wild feral colonies that have survived for 3 or 4 years might be just as good an option to buying expensive vsh queens or cells .


I wouldn't call it an option, but an excellent _addition_ to some good stock from a reputable producer


After several years of breeding livestock, I soon realized if I had spent just a _little _more money in the beginning on better quality breeding stock, instead of going the cheaper route and trying to _breed in _the quality and traits I was looking for, I'd have been years ahead and would have saved a siginificant amount of money in the long run.

When I started up with bees, I was already in my 50's so combined with what I had learned over the years and the fact I didn't want to wait around for 20 years to achieve something, I jumped into it with a couple extra bucks to get better breeding stock right from the start. Darn glad I did that.

In my experience, Collected colonies can be the best bees you've ever had or the worst. It depends on where they came from. If you collected them from remote areas with no hobbiests around you may be in good shape.

Collected near town? Odds will not likely be in your favor.


----------



## Lauri

I wonder what is most importaint to beekeepers in general? (Seperating hobbyists & more commercial beekeepers.)

-Is successfully overwintering a priority?
-Longevity of the colony next?
-To be totally self sustaining and not have to ever buy bees again?
-Good tolerance to mites with less treatments?
-Excellent disease resistance and overall good health?
-Ease of maintinence-less swarming and a generally mild temperament?
-Where does honey production fall on your list? First? Last? Somewhere in between?
-What attributes listed above would you give up if you had to?
-WHat would you give up for a bumper crop of honey?

(From a post contributed to my facebook page: "We need to meet bees half way instead of trying to bend them to our every desire.")










I guess what I am asking is, what really IS it you want from your stock? 
And when you buy queens, what is it you actually expect from them?

Of course everyone wants it all. But if you had to prioritize...I curious to see, if it came right down too it, what your choices would be.
This thread's OP addressed the question, 'Is treatment free as easy as it seems?' But really, how important is that to you, when faced with these choices?

If staying totally treatment free was absolutly #1 on your list, would you give up some of the other attributes listed, if odds are, that might be the case?

Roland tried some new stock and wasn't impressed:


Roland said:


> Because they are not worth a hoot for making honey, and that is what pays the bills. When you select for one trait, you often loose others.
> Crazy Roland


So what will you be satisfied with to obtain a more mite resistant colony, if sacrifices must be made?

All one has to do is read beesource for some time to see, while folks may _say _they want to be totally self sustaining and never have to buy bees again, but their management methods show being totally treatment free is actually a priority, over everything else. 
And that's OK, as long as you understand what you may be giving up. Maybe nothing. Maybe everything.

Not promoting treating here, just being real.

(This might be a better post for a new thread. Someone can move it if they wish)


----------



## Acebird

laketrout said:


> For the hobbyist its starting to seem like collecting with wild feral colonies that have survived for 3 or 4 years might be just as good an option to buying expensive vsh queens or cells .


I felt that was the case after having bees for two seconds.
I feel you can do the same thing by buying anything package, nuc or queen and growing your own because local drones have the same genes you want as the egg layer.


----------



## Acebird

Lauri said:


> I wonder what is most importaint to beekeepers in general?


Assuming a hobbyist is someone with a fix number of hives I would say getting them to overwinter is the priority. I don't see why honey production would ever be an issue. Just up the number of hives if you want more honey. Lets face it Michael Palmer says to overwinter nucs. You don't get honey from nucs. You get bees or the assurance that you will not lose the number of hives you want. Commercial is something completely different. A hobbyist wants to sustain a certain amount of hives. A commercial beekeeper has to make a living or get out.


----------



## squarepeg

i think there are some examples of survivor bees having other qualities that are antagonistic to the beekeeper in terms of temperament and honey production. 

my personal experience with survivor bees is an example of where that is not the case. 

i wouldn't describe my bees as overly aggressive, but they cannot be worked without protection. i am usually gloveless until i eventually take a sting to the hand. then i slip on some thin nitriles and that's the end of it.

production wise i do see a lot of variability but it has more to do with whether or not swarming was prevented. i think i am at or above average for harvest per hive for my area and that is in the context not using syrup and leaving honey for the bees. i.e. these bees are more than capable of producing 100+ with a little beekeeper intervention.

it's one of those beekeeping is local situations. i think you just keep propagating from your best. my experience has bee that the best survivors end up being the best producers too.


----------



## squarepeg

Lauri said:


> Of course everyone wants it all. But if you had to prioritize...I curious to see, if it came right down too it, what your choices would be.
> 
> This thread's OP addressed the question, Is treatment free as easy as it seems? But really, how important is that to you, when faced with these choices?
> 
> If staying totally treatment free was absolutly #1 on your list, would you give up some of the other attributes listed, if odds are, that would likely be the case?


not trying to evade committing to giving you an answer to your hypothetical, but i'm not sure i'm convinced that the choice to select or give up any of those traits is totally within our control. i really think that they are mostly mutually inclusive.

an exception would be the trait of strong build up in response to artificially feeding in the off season. that one doesn't really gain the bees as much survival advantage as does adjusting brooding a few weeks before anticiapted flows and dearths, but is very desirable for those achieving to have colonies at a desired strength as a specific time.


----------



## Sticky Bear

Brandy said:


> Sticky Bear, extreme's? You're in the banana belt don't you know!! But good luck..


Thanks for the encouragement Brandy, however the memo hasn't reached Mother Nature about us living in a Banana belt since yearly we stand to fall into an inversion for 6-8 weeks with near zero to sub zero temps at night and not reaching the lower 20's during the day. So far this year no inversion, so our days are 40's to 20's at night which offers another set of problems. The possibility of an inversion settling in after this warm spell is still likely. With the bees spending their days trying to rob their neighbors and consuming their stores in the process an inversion can decimate what was a strong hive. Good luck over on the Front Range I hear it is like living in Florida.


----------



## laketrout

Weaver has a short video that talked about the africanized gene that they had to deal with and how they wanted the good traits from it but not all the bad that went along with it .


----------



## Roland

I was not precise in my writing, forgive me. I stated tht the Cordovan bee showed similar mite levels to the VSH bee. That was a run of the mill commercial bred Cordovan, NOT a VSH Cordovan. My apologies.

Someone wrote:
The difficulty is that mite tolerance, high honey production potential, and excellent wintering do not usually go together. 

From a commercial standpoint, a mite tolerant bee that dies over winter after making honey is expensive. A mite tolerant bee that does not make honey, but lives over winter is still expensive. A hive that makes a good crop of honey, and survives the winter, can pay for mite management. Look at the dollars. A honey crop should be over a hundred dollars. The cost of a package is over a hundred dollars. What does it cost to treat mites, chemically or non-chemically? I believe far less than 100 dollars.

Crazy Roland


----------



## Fusion_power

> What does it cost to treat mites, chemically or non-chemically?


Whatever it costs, it is more than I pay. I also sold a decent crop of honey this year. Granted I am not in a super cold climate so I don't deal with Wisconsin winters.


----------



## Acebird

Roland said:


> A honey crop should be over a hundred dollars. The cost of a package is over a hundred dollars.


A beekeeper that has 500 hives is looking at 50,000 total revenue? I would hate to work with those numbers.


----------



## Mike Gillmore

Acebird said:


> A beekeeper that has 500 hives is looking at 50,000 total revenue? I would hate to work with those numbers.


I think you missed the point he was trying to make.

But in answer to your question .. I'm sure honey sales is only one segment of a commercial business plan. With 500 colonies I would expect to see additional revenue generated from nuc and queen sales, wax products, pollination fees, etc.


----------



## Acebird

Mike Gillmore said:


> I'm sure honey sales is only one segment of a commercial business plan.


Yes, I would expect that too but if you are making 100 per colony for honey you have to be making close to that for the other items. You are not going to make 100 per colony for honey and another 100 per colony for the other things on the same colonies. If you are than it is not 100 per colony is it?


----------



## sqkcrk

Acebird said:


> A beekeeper that has 500 hives is looking at 50,000 total revenue? I would hate to work with those numbers.


The key word in Roland's statement was "over". Over $100.00. Someone with 500 hives should be able to generate $100,000.00 in Income.


----------



## sqkcrk

Acebird said:


> You are not going to make 100 per colony for honey and another 100 per colony for the other things on the same colonies.


Well you can. Maybe not you personally, but another beekeeper. If you managed things correctly and things worked well and you knew what you were doing and did what was necessary when necessary and all, you could make as much as $500.00 per colony. Had you been at the Fall Meeting of the Empire State Honey Producers Association back in November 2014 you would have heard a talk on how to do that.

So $100.00 for honey is only a figure that Roland tossed out as a "for instance" sort of thing.


----------



## Mike Gillmore

> The key word in Roland's statement was "over"


That's a good point. If the honey wholesale price is $2.50/lb that's only 40 lbs per colony to generate $100.


----------



## Acebird

sqkcrk said:


> Someone with 500 hives should be able to generate $100,000.00 in Income.


That seems more reasonable. So now that equates to 200 per hive and it make sense that you could profit by buying packages every year vs. the chemical warfare on varroa.


----------



## sqkcrk

Mike Gillmore said:


> That's a good point. If the honey wholesale price is $2.50/lb that's only 40 lbs per colony to generate $100.


Yup


----------



## Acebird

sqkcrk said:


> So $100.00 for honey is only a figure that Roland tossed out as a "for instance" sort of thing.


He was comparing the income per hive and the cost of a package being the same and that is not the whole story.



> you could make as much as $500.00 per colony.


I think Brother Adam would have trouble hitting this mark.


----------



## sqkcrk

Yes, he was, and, yes, you are correct, it is not the whole story.

I don't know if he would or not and I don't know why you think so. It takes work and knowledge and time and focus and desire. I know a guy near me who makes a lot more honey per hive than I do. He puts in the time and effort to manage his hive intensely. But saying that is only stating part of the difference. It leaves out the details.

Many are capable. Few are willing.


----------



## Mike Gillmore

Acebird said:


> He was comparing the income per hive and the cost of a package being the same and that is not the whole story.





> Roland: What does it cost to treat mites, chemically or non-chemically? I believe far less than 100 dollars.


If you can treat a colony for say $20 rather than replacing it with a package for $100 you are generating an additional $80 per colony of revenue. From a business standpoint that is significant. I don't want to put words in Roland's mouth but I have a feeling that's the point he was trying to get across.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

Acebird said:


> He was comparing the income per hive and the cost of a package being the same and that is not the whole story.


There is that _READING_ thing rearing its ugly head again, Ace.

Roland said HONEY, not INCOME! :lpf:


Roland said:


> A honey crop should be over a hundred dollars.




... reading is FUNdamental ...


----------



## Acebird

Mike Gillmore said:


> If you can treat a colony for say $20 rather than replacing it with a package for $100 you are generating an additional $80 per colony of revenue. From a business standpoint that is significant.


If you don't put the chemicals in you can potentially make more from each hive so it is not so cut and dried economics as is implied.


----------



## clyderoad

Acebird said:


> If you don't put the chemicals in you can potentially make more from each hive so it is not so cut and dried economics as is implied.


How?


----------



## Mike Gillmore

In this case if a significant number of colonies perish without treatment .... then it is pretty cut and dried.

This is a mans livelihood, not a backyard hobby.


----------



## Juhani Lunden

Lauri said:


> I encourage good populations of drones in my hives and those big hives thrive. _*With correct timing*_, I think both removal of capped drone brood and available drone rearing areas are more importaint to the hives balance than most people think. Don't take out all the drone brood, just take it out when it has the most impact.


Lauri might have a very good point here.

"Varroa tolerance in Africanized bees explained"
authors Stephen Martin and Luis Medina
year 2003 or younger

Couldn´t find the original with Google, I have the paper on my desk.

Nice model of AFB and EHBs and how the presence of drone brood affect mite levels. The worst option is, very unexpectedly, when there are no drones at all, mite levels go rocket high.


----------



## apis maximus

Juhani Lunden said:


> Lauri might have a very good point here.
> 
> "Varroa tolerance in Africanized bees explained"
> authors Stephen Martin and Luis Medina
> year 2003 or younger
> 
> Couldn´t find the original with Google, I have the paper on my desk.
> 
> Nice model of AFB and EHBs and how the presence of drone brood affect mite levels. The worst option is, very unexpectedly, when there are no drones at all, mite levels go rocket high.


Yes, *Lauri* does have a very good point here.

So do you *Juhani*, 

Here is the full text on the paper you mentioned:
http://www.researchgate.net/publica...neybees_have_unique_tolerance_to_Varroa_mites


----------



## Juhani Lunden

apis maximus said:


> Here is the full text on the paper you mentioned:
> http://www.researchgate.net/publica...neybees_have_unique_tolerance_to_Varroa_mites


I found that one, it is not the same, very much same topic and authors though.


----------



## Lauri

Lauri said:


> I wonder what is most importaint to beekeepers in general? (Seperating hobbyists & more commercial beekeepers.)
> 
> -Is successfully overwintering a priority?
> -Longevity of the colony next?
> -To be totally self sustaining and not have to ever buy bees again?
> -Good tolerance to mites with less treatments?
> -Excellent disease resistance and overall good health?
> -Ease of maintinence-less swarming and a generally mild temperament?
> -Where does honey production fall on your list? First? Last? Somewhere in between?
> -What attributes listed above would you give up if you had to?
> -WHat would you give up for a bumper crop of honey?
> 
> (From a post contributed to my facebook page: "We need to meet bees half way instead of trying to bend them to our every desire.")
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I guess what I am asking is, what really IS it you want from your stock?
> And when you buy queens, what is it you actually expect from them?
> 
> Of course everyone wants it all. But if you had to prioritize...I curious to see, if it came right down too it, what your choices would be.
> This thread's OP addressed the question, 'Is treatment free as easy as it seems?' But really, how important is that to you, when faced with these choices?
> 
> If staying totally treatment free was absolutly #1 on your list, would you give up some of the other attributes listed, if odds are, that might be the case?
> 
> Roland tried some new stock and wasn't impressed:
> 
> 
> So what will you be satisfied with to obtain a more mite resistant colony, if sacrifices must be made?
> 
> All one has to do is read beesource for some time to see, while folks may _say _they want to be totally self sustaining and never have to buy bees again, but their management methods show being totally treatment free is actually a priority, over everything else.
> And that's OK, as long as you understand what you may be giving up. Maybe nothing. Maybe everything.
> 
> Not promoting treating here, just being real.



Here are a few replies from beekeepers around the country to this same post from my _facebook page_:

- For me, overwintering is first. A hive that doesn't overwinter is an investment of time and money gone. Most other problems with longevity I can deal with directly. Treatment free or minimal is second. I don't distinguish between mites and diseases in this regard. The less I have to treat, the better, but I'd rather treat than have to replace a hive lost. Ease of maintenance next, especially low swarming. Then comes honey production. Honestly as long as it's at all decent I'm fine. I have no desire to be self-sustaining, but it would be super cool if I could get 2 or 3 years out of a queen.

-I'm small time. I live in the deep south, so winter is not the same priority as it is for the northern folks. My number one priority is for the bees to be self sustainable. I don't particularly care for agreesive bees but I'll take them over none at all.

-Overwinter is crucial as stated above investment is then lost. Whayvkeep doing it for several hundred over and then start again. Then disease/pest control... All benefits are good pollination and honey collection is great.

-Commercially: it would be brood production. "Italian queens" because without large amounts of brood it's hard to keep numbers up. Personally I prefer brood control "carnolians" basically I don't like dumping a ton of food into the hives weekly. Mites are always a priority if not the biggest priority. Got to keep the hives from crashing as they are active almost all year long. Foulbrouds are controlled by treatments or just burned. Swarming control is only addressed for a month or two for honey production otherwise everything else is kept balanced the rest of the year to control it.

-I have come full circle. There was a time when I wanted to be treatment free. Find the right bees(russians,VSH, hygenic, mongrels, ferals) and everything would fall info place. Well good luck with that. I live in a area where agriculture has progressed to the point where there is no common points with years past. My bees build up in the spring, produce some honey, however once the doldrums of July hit, the starve for protein. It took me 20 years to figure what was going on. What I want is a hardy bee. One that I can work with, and given a little help from me, can handle our winters. My bees are my livestock. You feed them, you water them, you shelter them. That is MY responsibility. When a animal gets sick, you help them. When maggots get into sheep, you dip them. I have been reading the ongoing debate about treatment free and treating beekeepers. All I can say, I will help(treat) my bees when they need help. I have lost too many hives, too many times. I want to bring in as many different queens as I can afford. Allow them to make as many drones as possible and hopefully diversify the surrounding populations. I'm seeing progress. Slow but sure.

- Also a Southern beekeeper so overwintering is not an issue: 
-I just want bees that will live
-Honey production but not necessarily a bumper crop
-And I prefer not to put chemicals in my honey but would be willing to compromise some for bees that lived.

-I'm not quite there yet, but I feel that if I get to the point that I'm successfully overwintering, I'm ahead of the game. I've been able to stay ahead of mites & disease (treating only as needed) and I'm somewhat self sustaining, giving me the opportunity to raise queens for the traits I desire. Excellent honey production traits would be high on my trait list, but not necessarily desired in my own apiary - my goal is to be able to produce a small amount of quality local queens for others here in Utah.

-As a hobbyist, keeping them alive cuz I don't want to have to continually replace colonies. Honey is nice but not a priority to have to sell. Hardy, prolific queens a must at this point and I don't mind buying. I treat for mites but SHB are my biggest problem in central Fl.

-Getting through winter has to be number one. You can't examine the contents of the hive when it is below freezing so you are dependant on your autumn preparations and a little luck. Any other time of the year you can examine and react to the conditions in the hive. Still on tenterhooks!

-Overwintering, disease resistance (inc mites), attitude (I like mine w attitude), & then crop yields. Can't have happy bees if they're dead.

- 2 years ago my first year my holy grail was a honey crop. Now it is to over winter and not have to buy bees. Become self sufficient in bees. Maybe someday have a few nucs to sell. I am cheap enough to not want my investment of bees to die.

-All my wants fall under one heading: Genetic Improvement.

-Looks like most folks want bees that will overwinter. In my experience, (in my climate) three things kill bees during the winter: they starved, queen failure, and/or mites. If your bees starved, it is the bee keepers fault, if the queen failed, it might not be the keepers fault, is mites got them, it is the keepers fault. I guess what I am saying is that if you take care of your bees, they will usually make it through winter.

--My first priority is to overwinter.My second priority is to limit imputs. This is agriculture in the modern age. I don't want to have to buy bees, medicine, fuel, etc. etc. Of course you must spend money, how ever, costs must be kept under control or you won't be in business the next year.


----------



## Fusion_power

> mites got them, it is the keepers fault


This is where we differ. If mites got em, it is the bees fault. If they can't take care of mites on their own, I don't want them. Yes, I'm a hardliner on this issue. Yes, I agree that it can't be done with most commercial bees that beginners start with. But in the end, my bees are alive and all the mite susceptible colonies die.

Otherwise, I agree re queen failure and inadequate stores being the major killers of overwintering colonies.


----------



## Acebird

clyderoad said:


> How?


If you do not put chemicals in your hive then your honey could be worth three times more just on that fact alone. So now you are talking about 300 per hive not 100 per hive.


----------



## squarepeg

Fusion_power said:


> The difficulty is that mite tolerance, high honey production potential, and excellent wintering do not usually go together.


dar, by 'usually' do you mean that when these traits do go together it is more the exception than the norm? would you say that this view is representative of that held by the beekeeping community at large and does the data support it? are the bees that you, astrobee, myself, and others are keeping that don't follow that pattern outliers?


----------



## laketrout

Interesting post Lauri and it got me thinking , I'll have to admit my priority's have changed in the two years since I started . I think alot of new beeks my self included start off looking for that first jar of golden honey but with loosing hives and dealing with mites are priority's change . I don't like putting anything in my hive thats not natural and even substances like oa and formic aren't my idea of pure honey but we do what we have to do to keep them alive .So now number one is good tolerance to mites less treating , with that I think overwintering success would fall in place along with a general tolerance to disease .Self sustainable seems like something we all want but seems to me like that falls on the beekeeper to learn and low and behold now honey sneaks in last , isn't it funny how things change along the way !!!! I realize this is from a hobbyist point of view and wouldn't work for someone trying to make a living on honey .


----------



## clyderoad

Acebird said:


> If you do not put chemicals in your hive then your honey could be worth three times more just on that fact alone. So now you are talking about 300 per hive not 100 per hive.


Nope, not in the real world.


----------



## AstroBee

Fusion_power said:


> The difficulty is that mite tolerance, high honey production potential, and excellent wintering do not usually go together.


Correct, they don't usually go together, but I contend, and have tried to suggest in this thread that they CAN go together. I am very optimistic that the spectrum of traits that you call out is achievable. Perhaps I'll be proved wrong someday. Perhaps my results are not transferable to other regions - I don't know. In the meantime, I plan to stick to my plan of advancing these three traits. 

For the record, and to reply to Lauri's list, here are my top three things:

1) Winter survival
2) Honey Production (this would be #1, but dead bees don't make honey) 
3) Mites & disease resistance

I also seek to improve:
1) frugality 
2) gentleness (gotta admit that my long-term survivors (non-VSH) are a bit twitchy, still very workable, but protection is required)


----------



## beepro

Laketrout, I thought that oa and formic are natural. Isn't it?
Frankly, I don't know if oa is derived from the natural source or the
synthetic source. 
I agree with you on more mite tolerance and less treatment. Only treat when necessary at the time of low mite population before the flow. Keepers should know that a healthy bee population with more bees that survived means more honey for the hive. And for us too. There will be no honey if every brood cycle that hatched is full of crawlers, right. This was my experience so far in dealing with the mites. I have now installed a bottom board to treat the mites all year long when needed.


----------



## laketrout

Yes they are naturally occurring just not in the hi concentration that we have to put in the hive to treat with, kind of like a glass of wine might actually be good for you once in awhile but keep drinking 6 bottles every day and it's not good for you anymore .


----------



## sqkcrk

Acebird said:


> If you don't put the chemicals in you can potentially make more from each hive so it is not so cut and dried economics as is implied.


What kind of economics is it?


----------



## Roland

Acebird wrote:

If you do not put chemicals in your hive then your honey could be worth three times more just on that fact alone.

Then you will by 10K lbs from me at 2x market(#2.35 x 2 x 10,000 = 47,000 dollars), and you sell at 3x market? You can make a quick 23,500 dollars. Let's see you put your money where your mouth is. 

Crazy Roland

P.S. Sqkcrk and others spoke for me well.


----------



## squarepeg

AstroBee said:


> Correct, they don't usually go together, but I contend, and have tried to suggest in this thread that they CAN go together.


thanks ab. if that's the case then i'm even more appreciative for how my locally adapted hybridized survivor mutts have performed so far. they really do seem to be pretty well rounded on the survival-production-workability continuum even in the hands of a novice like myself. the one trait that i suppose is part of their package that makes keeping them productively a challenge is that they are very good at swarming. hopefully i will be able to offset that by becoming better at management and with careful breeder selection.

your response to lauri's list makes a lot of sense. it sounds like both of you are already making excellent progress with your breeding programs toward propagating bees having the right mix of traits advantageous to the beekeeper. congrats.


----------



## Fusion_power

Here is the list of problems with the line of mite tolerant bees that I am using:

1. The swarm too much.
2. When they swarm, they typically produce 2 or 3 afterswarms.
3. They are more aggressive than I like. This trait has a lot of variation, culling queens from aggressive colonies helps.
4. They make more brace and bridge comb than I prefer.


Most of the problems with managing them revolve around keeping them from swarming in early spring. I split strong colonies just as soon as the weather breaks, usually about March 25th. Mites and beetles are pretty much a non-issue and can be ignored. With effective management, I usually get 60 to 120 pounds of honey per colony which is pretty good for this area. They build very nice combs and readily enter supers to store surplus.

Squarepeg, my experience with mite tolerant bees from years ago includes Russians which swarm and VSH which fail to build up in spring. I have not yet seen a productive VSH colony. I am told they exist, just have not seen one. The more VSH a colony expresses, the less honey they tend to produce. When I say that mite tolerance, honey production, and good wintering don't usually go together, I am referencing these bees.

I remember the production of the Buckfast bees I got back in 1991 and there is literally no comparison with the bees I have today. One of the Buckfast queens in the spring of 1991 had 18 frames of brood in a double brood chamber and produced 7 shallow supers of honey plus filled one of the brood chambers plug full of honey. I have not seen so much brood and that much production since.


----------



## kilocharlie

laketrout said:


> Yes they are naturally occurring just not in the hi concentration that we have to put in the hive to treat with, kind of like a glass of wine might actually be good for you once in awhile but keep drinking 6 bottles every day and it's not good for you anymore .


But YOU drinking six bottles of MY mead is good for my sales...


----------



## squarepeg

understood dar, many thanks.

it's likely that you and i are working with a similar localized strain. resistance appears to be via other than a strictly vsh mechanism. i'm hoping the folks in baton rouge will be able to shed some light on how they are achieving it. would you be interested in sending a couple of queens down there this season, and are you noticing that your queens will typically be superceded in their second year? perhaps we could exchange some queen cells this spring.


----------



## Acebird

Roland said:


> Then you will by 10K lbs from me at 2x market(#2.35 x 2 x 10,000 = 47,000 dollars), and you sell at 3x market? You can make a quick 23,500 dollars.


Roland so sorry I neglected to mention it has to be single source. Buying and selling where you don't know what the source did usually is a turn off. Buying from large sources in general is a turn off. They just can't be trusted when there is that much money at stake.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

_Roland_, I think this just about covers the situation ....



Acebird said:


> Practically everything that I suggest is speculation with the intent that someone will correct what is wrong with the idea.


----------



## apis maximus

squarepeg said:


> resistance appears to be via other than a strictly vsh mechanism.


I would definitely subscribe to that thought. 
The only thing I would add is strictly a matter of defining terms, as in, I would say Resistance/Tolerance...but I understand exactly what you meant *squarepeg*. 
So, I am not trying to split hairs.
Good stuff.


----------



## Lauri

Fusion_power said:


> I remember the production of the Buckfast bees I got back in 1991 and there is literally no comparison with the bees I have today. One of the Buckfast queens in the spring of 1991 had 18 frames of brood in a double brood chamber and produced 7 shallow supers of honey plus filled one of the brood chambers plug full of honey. I have not seen so much brood and that much production since.


That sure reminds me of the germination rate for purchased veggie seeds these days. I've had horrible germination, in the last couple years. I thought, after all these years, what could I possibly be doing wrong? I started some _home grown and saved seeds_ and WOW, immediately, it was like the good old days. 

Everyone's comments about the poor experiences they've had with VSH bred queens really surprises me. I've had great success with mine. Granted I have no idea after all this time exactly how_ much _of the genetics are in play. Perhaps my vigor, productiveness, low swarming, no messy comb, gentle temperanment etc.. is due to other factors. 
Although I do manage my bees with some deliberate methods, I can't take all the credit. Do they do well because of what I do, or in spite of it? For someone who is relatively new to beekeeping, I don't believe I could have achieved what I have if I didn't have good bees.

How would they perform with the stresses of a commercial setting? I have no idea.


----------



## apis maximus

Lauri said:


> Although I do manage my bees with some deliberate methods, I can't take all the credit. Do they do well because of what I do, or in spite of it? For someone who is relatively new to beekeeping, I don't believe I could have achieved what I have if I didn't have good bees.


C'mon Lauri...modesty is good no doubt, but don't sell yourself short.
I think they do good, for both reasons you mentioned....for what you did and also in spite of it. Hard to figure out how much of those two things play into it. And , yes...good stock to start with, also critical. No one would dispute that.



Lauri said:


> How would they perform with the stresses of a commercial setting? I have no idea.


Well, if you would like to know, why not try it out? I am sure you would have no problems finding a respectable, reasonable commercial beekeeper that would be delighted to let you tag along with 10-20 hives. Then you'll have your answer.

But now, if your intention is to remain a stationary beekeeper, regardless of the operation size you might have in mind, in the end, stationary and commercial migratory beekeeping are two, very different animals.


----------



## Acebird

Lauri said:


> That sure reminds me of the germination rate for purchased veggie seeds these days. I've had horrible germination, in the last couple years.


We have had trouble from time to time with this. Sometimes a whole packet of seeds were duds. Then I read an article about seeds do better when they are local. Somehow the germination gets in sync with the local climate. It is beyond my understanding but based on the volunteers we get there has to be something to it.


----------



## chickenia

Lauri Miller has some of Glenn's stock I believe, she is on FB and used to be a moderator on BSource


----------



## grozzie2

Lauri said:


> I guess what I am asking is, what really IS it you want from your stock?
> And when you buy queens, what is it you actually expect from them?


I thought I knew what I wanted originally, then the real world stepped in and gave us some lessons on what matters. When we first started with our bees, we did like most, packages dumped into a box with fresh new frames. Like most clueless newbs, our expectations were, throw the bees in a box with a feeder full of syrup, wait 6 weeks, add another box, wait 3 weeks, put on a honey super or two, then wait for fall, and harvest honey. What can go wrong with this? It's so simple. Wind the clock forward a few years, and here are some of the lessons we have learned.

a) A dead hive in the spring, gives us nothing, except a box of moldy comb that may or may not be useable.
b) A colony that doesn't build up well in the spring, wont have enough bees to take advantage of the flow when it arrives.
c) The amount of honey we get from a colony, is proportional to the population via an exponential function. Double the population gives 4x the honey.
d) Special queens are only special, if they are still alive the next spring.
e) I can manage a colony for swarms, I cant manage a dead colony.

In our second season, we bought some 'special' queens, because after endless reading online, I was convinced our 'package queens' must be bad. Those awful package queens everybody complains about, gave us swarms in year 1, and by year 2 in the spring, we had 4 live colonies, all daughters of the original package queens. So, we decided that we must do something, so we bought some special queens, and used them to requeen a few splits. Guess what happened, hint, reference item d) above. The dead colonies gave us nothing, while those that wintered well and built up strongly in the spring, gave us supers of maple honey we were extracting by the end of April that year.

Do we notice a trend yet ? We had some nice weather over the last few days, so I did some checking. All of the queens we have out back have two things in common right now. First off, they are mutts, descendants of our original packages. The second item, they are all alive. Turns out, at this time of year, that appears to be the ONLY thing that matters to us.

One of our plans for this year, is to do significant increase, so I did a bit of a number crunch over the early part of the winter, based on last years prices on packages, for our area. A NZ package ran $165 last spring, for a 1 kilo box of bees with a queen. That size package will have roughly 7000 bees, and the queen is worth $25, so do the math, a live bee at the beginning of april is worth about $0.02. A dead bee has no value. Folks can debate all the other niceties endlessly, but, this is the number that's immediately apparent. When late spring arrives, if I have to many live bees, I can cash them out for $0.02 each for the surplus. If I dont have enough, it's going to cost me $0.02 to replace them. As the season progresses, priorities will change to some extent, but, a colony that doesn't have enough bees, wont produce much / any honey, while a colony with a good healthy population of bees, will produce a good crop of honey. Managing that population, is my task, as the beekeeper. I have to keep them strong enough to gather in nectar and pollen, but, keep them just under that threshold where they want to swarm. If they are building up well, I have room to maneuver when managing them, but, if they aren't building up, my options become limited and possibly non-existant.

So where this all leads, and some of my conclusions after spending a few years pondering much of this. Bees that winter well, and give me a good strong population in the spring, give me the tools I need to manage everything else thru the year. Those are my two fundamental building blocks, and without them, I dont have the tools to work with in an attempt to produce a crop of some type. It doesn't really matter what my crop is intended to be, wether it's bees for sale, pollination services, or honey, it all boils down to having the right tools for the job. And in this case, the right tool is a live colony, building up a strong population in the spring. Without that, the rest is just fluff to talk about.


----------



## Roland

Ace wrote:

Roland so sorry I neglected to mention it has to be single source.

It is. Clover. White. No miticides. Wisconsin Certified Honey, lic. WCH-0001. Passed ISCIRA analysis. Try another excuse.

As the posted above stated so well, it is the priorities. The loss of the more important traits when searching for VSH traits is not valuable to everyone.

Crazy Roland


----------



## Latestarter

Thanks to all for a very informative (and not overly combative) thread. :applause: Took basically all day to complete reading it (links are great, but time consuming), but very much worth the time invested. :thumbsup: No personal experience here. I purchased two 10 frame Lang hive set-ups and ordered bees for late April delivery. Was leaning toward zero foundation installed and small cell and letting the bees draw what they thought best (seeking some edge against the varroa threat) based on @Michael-Bush & studying his website. Then thought about a central frame with foundation and leaving the rest empty (to help form nice vertical comb). Having seen Lauri's example has me leaning to partial sheets in about 1/2 the frames. 

Would love to be TF, but also agreeing with Lauri (& others) if it means a dead out, I will treat. So much more to know and so little time to get as much as I can. There is a farm with an apiary dating back to the late 18 hundreds (they have a sign out front) about 1/2 a mile from me and I noticed that they have gutted/remodeled and rented the farm house and removed the hives they had alongside their barn, so I have no idea what effect that will have on me. Don't even know if the hives will be back or where they may have been moved to. I have about 50% agricultural, 25% residential and 25% natural lands in a 3 mile radius around me. I have no idea how many other apiaries are nearby (aside from the "maybe" one), GMO crop distribution, or pesticide usage nearby. I have seen honey bees in my yard on flowers and fruit trees, so know they are around, but have no idea where they are hived. I don't know any of the flow pattern/times, but do know that a local farm grows crops of herbs and flowers, so that should help.

I've joined the local bee club (attended one meeting so far) included membership in the state bee keepers association, and look forward to their knowledge and mentorship (is that a word?). I have also tried to do extensive reading, mostly online and this site has been awesome! All in all, it is becoming readily apparent that this is not going to be an inexpensive or non-time consuming hobby :scratch: b ut I'm still very enthusiastic and excited to get started. They are amazing insects! 

Anyway, thanks again one and all!


----------



## Oldtimer

grozzie2 said:


> d) Special queens are only special, if they are still alive the next spring.
> e) I can manage a colony for swarms, I cant manage a dead colony.


Ain't those the truth!

Great post Grozzie.


----------



## oldforte

"Double the population gives 4x the honey."

What's the logic behind this statement?


----------



## Fusion_power

You have to think in terms of how many bees are available to forage and how many are tied up tending brood. As the population in a bee colony peaks in the range of 50,000 to 60,000 bees, roughly the same number of bees are tied up in the brood nest as in a colony with only 30,000 bees. Think of it like this:

30,000 bees = 20,000 in the brood nest, 10,000 foragers.

60,000 bees = 20,000 in the brood nest, 40,000 foragers.

Note that the colony population doubled, but there are now 4 times as many foragers gathering honey.


----------



## Mike Gillmore

Wonderful explanation FP. 

It also makes it very easy to see how splitting colonies or swarming can have such an impact on honey production.


----------



## Eduardo Gomes

oldforte said:


> "Double the population gives 4x the honey."
> What's the logic behind this statement?


You can see here http://www.myetymology.com/encyclopedia/Rule_of_Farrar.html the Rule of Farrar. FP is correct. The Farrar rule states that the progression is geometric. Eg . 30,000 bees produce 3 squared and 60,000 bees produce 6 square.


----------



## Michael Bush

>What's the logic behind this statement?

A bee colony is an economy. You could think of it as a business. There is a certain amount of overhead to maintaining the brood nest and guarding the hive and cleaning house. Once you cover your overhead, then you make your profit.


----------



## Oldtimer

LOL I've just been pulling honey out of 3 frame nucs cos the queen can't lay! 

But yes, I agree with the general concept a standard lang needs to pass some critical mass before it can really power into some serious honey storage.


----------



## Acebird

Fusion_power said:


> 30,000 bees = 20,000 in the brood nest, 10,000 foragers.
> 
> 60,000 bees = 20,000 in the brood nest, 40,000 foragers.


As long as we are winging it, who is to say that there aren't 40,000 bees in the brood nest to maintain 60000 bees so the doubling is just doubling.


----------



## sqkcrk

Fusion_power said:


> You have to think in terms of how many bees are available to forage and how many are tied up tending brood. As the population in a bee colony peaks in the range of 50,000 to 60,000 bees, roughly the same number of bees are tied up in the brood nest as in a colony with only 30,000 bees. Think of it like this:
> 
> 30,000 bees = 20,000 in the brood nest, 10,000 foragers.
> 
> 60,000 bees = 20,000 in the brood nest, 40,000 foragers.
> 
> Note that the colony population doubled, but there are now 4 times as many foragers gathering honey.


What makes you think it happens that way? How do you get to twice the total population with out doubling the nurse bee population?


----------



## squarepeg

the broodnest size here increases coming out of winter and peaks just before our main flow. this is when swarming commences. huge colonies that are prevented from swarming will reduce the broodnest at that point to about half of what it was at the peak of the build up, thus freeing up the bulk of the population for foraging. and yes, those colonies will make an insane amount of honey.


----------



## beepro

sqkcrk said:


> What makes you think it happens that way? How do you get to twice the total population with out doubling the nurse bee population?


That's an easy one! You nuced them all. Then combine 3 hives into one young queen. Take away the original hives so that
all foragers go into the one. Instant population growth bypassing the nurse bee population stage. Wonder how much honey
they will produce. You want to try it?


----------



## Fusion_power

> What makes you think it happens that way? How do you get to twice the total population with out doubling the nurse bee population?


What makes you think it doesn't? This is a simple classroom exercise. Read the research by C. L. Farrar in 1932 and 1936. The most significant parts of it are covered in The Hive and The Honeybee. I'm not about to debate something so simple that any commercial beekeeper should know, however, out of courtesy, I will give you the key to figuring it out.

What does the ratio 1:2:4 have to do with beekeeping? 3 days as an egg, 6 days as a larva, 12 days as sealed brood. Understanding this ratio and how it applies to colony development should be taught in every basic beekeeping course.


Red Bird, You are winging it. I'm standing on solid ground with research that has been around for nearly 85 years.


----------



## beepro

I always like solid grounds to stand on, mind you.
So the ratio: 1:2:4 is it [1]x3=3; [2]x3=6; [4]x3=12, correct?
But I still don't know how to use them?

Now where can I goto find some basic beekeeping course to
study to expand my basic bee knowledge?


----------



## Acebird

Fusion_power said:


> Understanding this ratio and how it applies to colony development should be taught in every basic beekeeping course.
> 
> 
> Red Bird, You are winging it. I'm standing on solid ground with research that has been around for nearly 85 years.


This is funny. Now a beekeeper needs to be a mathematician. There are people who teach and people who do. I will side with the people who do when it comes to what you need to learn for productivity. It is not just the size of a colony that matters it is how many colonies you can get to a nectar source at the right time. According to your classroom exercise commercials should be bringing 1/4 the number of colonies to almonds that are 4 boxes high instead of 1 box high. And the recipient should be paying 4 times as much for each hive. I don't think that is going to happen.


----------



## beemandan

sqkcrk said:


> How do you get to twice the total population with out doubling the nurse bee population?


Look at it from this perspective. The greatest amount of brood that can be produced in a hive is limited by the queen's ability to lay fertilized eggs. 
In the springtime buildup brood production peaks (a vigorous queen at 1500 - 2000 eggs /day) and the nurse bee population will remain at the number to support that amount of brood while the total population of the hive will increase until the balance between new bees and dying bees has been reached.


----------



## sqkcrk

Y'all have taught me something I probably should have known already. Thank you.

Maybe the number of nurse bees needed to keep brood incubated properly isn't as crucial as the days get warmer?


----------



## deknow

Imagine some rectangular blocks that are 2x longer than wide.

Stand 2 of then on end and notice that you can lay a third block horizontallt across them and cover their tops.

This is the basic math at play. Each nurse bee walking across the comb can basically cover 2 cells of brood. 

Brood mostly needs enough nurse bees to keep them covered. This is why every brood cycle (if population is expanding and there are no other issues at play)..Every 3 weeks you can expect twice the brood.

I think once you have a picture in your head of why this works (brood and nurse bees offset by 90 degrees) it makes more sense.


----------



## BernhardHeuvel

BernhardHeuvel said:


> ...Carnolians are the weakest bees - weak in resisting varroas - that I ever came across.



Just stumbled upon: _"This research provides the first evidence that immune response profiles of different honey bee stocks are induced by Varroa parasitism."_

*Differential viral levels and immune gene expression in three stocks of Apis mellifera induced by different numbers of Varroa destructor*
Kitiphong Khongphinitbunjonga, Lilia I. de Guzman, Matthew R. Tarver, Thomas E. Rinderer, Yanping Chen, Panuwan Chantawannakula
Journal of Insect Physiology, Volume 72, January 2015, Pages 28–34,
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022191014002248


----------



## oldforte

"The greatest amount of brood that can be produced in a hive is limited by the queen's ability to lay fertilized eggs."


Dan has it right....the queen, and the variance of her egg laying cycle, controls the number of brood, nurse bees, and forgers at any given time. Accordingly, the use of simple math to determine any of the numbers is useless....the queen is in charge.


----------



## deknow

Dan's statement is true...as long as there isn't some other limiting factor, like the number of bees, available food, and the number of bees needed for other jobs.

It's rather obvious that a queen with 1 lb of bees could not produce to maturity the same amount of brood as 5lbs of bees with the same queen.

You simply won't go from 3 frames of brood to 12 in 2 weeks...unless you have extrodinary circumstances.

In practical terms, how many weeks in a row do you see the actual maximum amount of brood in the hive? Doesn't it build up over time rather than all at once? Is the number of eggs a queen can lay changing between when there are 3 frames of brood and 12 frames of brood?


----------



## Fusion_power

> According to your classroom exercise commercials should be bringing 1/4 the number of colonies to almonds that are 4 boxes high instead of 1 box high. And the recipient should be paying 4 times as much for each hive. I don't think that is going to happen.


You are mixing apples and oranges. Pollen collection depends directly on the amount of "open" brood in the hive. The farmer wants more colonies with smaller populations for pollination because smaller colonies collect more pollen relative to their size. When a colony has about 6 to 8 frames of brood and roughly 30,000 adult bees, it collects the maximum amount of pollen for the number of bees foraging. As colony strength increases, more bees forage, but the percentage collecting pollen decreases and the percentage of nectar foragers increases. When pollination is the product, the farmer should be paying for the number of frames of OPEN brood, not the number of bees in the colony! Now apply the ratio above. 7 frames of brood means there is roughly 1 frame of eggs, 2 frames of open brood, and 4 frames of sealed brood. 1:2:4 When a farmer pays $160 for that colony with 7 frames of brood, he is really paying $80 per frame for the 2 frames of open brood. The rest of the colony is adult bees to collect pollen to feed those 2 frames of open brood, sealed brood that hatches into adult bees to feed those 2 frames of open brood, and eggs that will become frames of open brood to keep the cycle going. Now do you see the significance of the 1:2:4 ratio?


----------



## deknow

...let me add...this is a rule of thumb. I like to compare it (and the ratio between eggs, open, and capped brood) to the rule that says trees grow straight up and have symmetrical branches.

....it is almost never totally true, but it is how things tend to be. 

Where an individual tree varies from this rule, there is always a reason (which isnt necessarily a problem).


----------



## deknow

Dar, I'm sure there are specific crops with specific charateristics.....but I'm inclined to believe that pollenation tends to be accomplished by foraging bees if they are collecting pollen or nectar. After all, the nectar is very metabolically expensive to produce, and provides no other function than to attract pollenators.


----------



## Fusion_power

Deknow, it is crop dependent. Foragers rapidly learn to avoid anthers and collect only nectar if that is what is needed in the hive. Almond blooms are very amenable to side workers who slip their tongue in from the side of the bloom to suck up the nectar. The almond producers quickly learned that the number of frames of brood in a colony determines how aggressive the foragers are at collecting pollen. Once a colony's pollen needs are met, more foragers become side workers which defeats the purpose of paying for bees to pollinate the blossoms. There are plenty of flowers that are structured such that it is impossible to get the nectar without also pollinating the blossom, but almonds and apples are very easy for side workers.


I was asked to summarize Farrar's research: 

When a queen is laying at her max, she can produce 2 to 3 thousand eggs per day for about 3 weeks. This amounts to filling up a frame with eggs every 2 or 3 days. If a queen is laying enough eggs to fill 2 frames in 3 days, she is pumping out about 4500 eggs per day. I've only seen one queen in 45 years that laid at that rate. What Farrar found was that when a colony hit roughly 30,000 bees, the queen was already laying at her max. The brood nest was already as big as it could get. As the brood hatches, the adult bees in the colony increase to the maximum of about 60,000. The brood nest does not increase because the queen is already at her limit. So it takes roughly 20,000 bees to maintain the brood nest in a colony with 30,000 adult bees and it still takes roughly 20,000 bees to maintain the brood next when the colony peaks at 60,000 bees. The queen's ability to lay determines the size of the brood nest.


----------



## grozzie2

sqkcrk said:


> Y'all have taught me something I probably should have known already. Thank you.
> 
> Maybe the number of nurse bees needed to keep brood incubated properly isn't as crucial as the days get warmer?


And on this one, I can step up with some hard data, which I gathered last season from the scale hive. Granted, only one colony, in my location, but the numbers were extremely consistent.

All temperatures in Celcius. This is data from April thru to July. On days when the day high was less than 18C, the foraging force leaving was less than half a pound of bees, and the colony NEVER put on any weight. On days when the day high was between 18 and 22C, it was a bit of a toss up. Foraging force varied between half a pound and a pound (based on morning weight drop), colony weight at the end of the day, always within plus or minus a half pound of where it started. BUT, on days when the day high went over 22C, foraging force would skyrocket, between a pound and 3 pounds departing in the morning as it warmed up, and colony never failed to put on weight for those days, best day overall was 9lb gained in a single day. Dont remember the exact number off the top of my head, but, temps got up into the low 30's that day.

Later in the summer, I ended up talking to an old time beekeeper in clover country, and he mentioned 'need good warm weather for the clover to produce', and that got an interesting conversation started. Do we need the warm weather to trigger nectar flow from the clover? Or is the real issue, when the weather gets nice and warm, far more bees leave the hive to go fetch nectar? And they are leaving, _because they can_, it's warmer, so takes less bees to keep the brood at temperature. Another interesting anecdotal (not measured) observation, on those warm days when my scale hive was putting on weight rapidly, we would see significant beards in the evening. Rarely saw beards on days when it wasn't gaining weight.

For me, this has opened up a bit of a chicken and egg conundrum, and I haven't yet figured out a way to get an answer to my question thru measurements.


----------



## oldforte

" The queen's ability to lay determines the size of the brood nest." Quote from FP

Yep... you got that right....don't know how you counted the 4500 eggs per one day


----------



## beemandan

grozzie2 said:


> For me, this has opened up a bit of a chicken and egg conundrum, and I haven't yet figured out a way to get an answer to my question thru measurements.


I've seen researchers use capillary tubes to determine the amount of nectar in various flowers. One could sample a number of clover blooms at varying temps to see if the available nectar changed significantly.


----------



## sterling

Clarence Collison

Clarence Collision
Professor of Entomology
Head, Department of Entomology and Plant Pathology
Mississipi State University
Mississippi State, MS 

In an advanced beekeeping class Mr. Collision gave these numbers concerning the available foragers.

10,000 BEES = 2,000 FORAGERS
20,000 BEES = 5,000 FORAGERS
30,000 BEES = 10,000 FORAGERS
40,000 BEES = 20,000 FORAGERS
50,000 BEES = 30,000 FORAGERS
60,000 BEES = 39,000 FORAGERS

His class was on how to increase honey production and his point of course was big colonies.


----------



## Acebird

grozzie2 said:


> For me, this has opened up a bit of a chicken and egg conundrum, and I haven't yet figured out a way to get an answer to my question thru measurements.


It doesn't make sense to me that the size of the brood nest is going to remain the same. Flows are different everywhere. The colonies goal it to build up and fill the cavity so it can multiply. Some colonies don't get to fill the cavity and yet they still swarm. Some colonies fill the cavity and don't swarm. Doesn't the queen have the same capacity to lay eggs in the winter as she does in the summer? It seems to me there are a whole lot of variables that control nest size.


----------



## grozzie2

Acebird said:


> It seems to me there are a whole lot of variables that control nest size.


Except my question has nothing to do with size of the nest, and everything to do with the relationship between temperature and nectar gathering.


----------



## Oldtimer

Thanks Grozzie that was an interesting post, don't think I've seen the subject dealt with in that way before, very pleased you did the research.

In my country the most valuable crop and the one everyone obsesses over is Manuka. It flowers early but yields no nectar till daily highs average over 17 C. Better when they are in the 20's. Having dissected Manuka flowers, each one has a very tiny amount of nectar, it is a bee labour intense nectar to gather. After reading your post I'm wondering if the reason is not what we here have supposed, it's more a function of needing a temperature high enough to get a high enough ratio of the bees in the hive out collecting, to end up with more nectar in the hive than was consumed.

It's always puzzled me why Manuka will flower for weeks but yield no nectar. What is the point of flowering? Perhaps there is a point but we don't see the results in the hives till a high enough % of bees are working them.


----------



## apis maximus

Oldtimer said:


> It's always puzzled me why Manuka will flower for weeks but yield no nectar. What is the point of flowering? Perhaps there is a point but we don't see the results in the hives till a high enough % of bees are working them.


More than likely sir. Emphasis mine...I am thinking along the same line. Hope you do not mind, me sharing in your thought. Your words, speak for themselves. Very clear. Thanks.


----------



## Oldtimer

apis maximus said:


> Hope you do not mind, me sharing in your thought.


I am delighted you sharing in my thought, it's a discussion isn't it?


----------



## grozzie2

Oldtimer said:


> Thanks Grozzie that was an interesting post, don't think I've seen the subject dealt with in that way before, very pleased you did the research.


Don't read to much into it, I did qualify the observation for the period April thru July, when we have lots blooming. After blooms died down, we had plenty of nice warm days where hive lost weight, but, there was nothing for them to work on in that period either. This observation was interesting to me tho, it applied like clockwork thru the time of the year when we had lots in bloom, ie no shortage of things for the bees to work on. The warmer the day, the more bees left to forage, and the more bees that went foraging, the more nectar they stored. But after adding the rest of the year data into the mix, a plot of 'weight change vs temperature' looks like a totally random scatter plot.

But another tidbit that I also found interesting. There were 7 days where total gain for the day was 3 pounds or more, for a total gain of 34 pounds in those 7 days. Those 7 days came over a calendar period of 10 days, we had a couple days of drizzle intermixed. Graphic proof of what old-timers tell us, bees can fill a super in a week on a good flow. We usually get about 35lb of honey from a medium super with 10 frames, and this colony put that much in over 7 days of good flow.


----------



## Roland

Oldtimer - I believe Farrar did an experiment many years ago to prove just that point. I believe it was questioned how much nectar was available in apple trees, which bloom while it is still cool. He took a few average hives(three?), and combined them(removing extra queens) about 3 weeks before apple bloom. They made a good surplus of honey, which no one believed would happen.

Maybe someone can find the real article, and correct my inaccuracies of memory.

Crazy Roland


----------



## BernhardHeuvel

Full text of: TWO-QUEEN COLONY MANAGEMENT FOR PRODUCTION OF HONEY
C. L. Farrar, 1958 edition
Read online: https://archive.org/stream/twoqueencolonyma48farr#page/n1/mode/2up
PDF (download): https://ia801904.us.archive.org/8/items/twoqueencolonyma48farr/twoqueencolonyma48farr.pdf


----------



## Fusion_power

Just to keep interest going, how many eggs does a queen lay per minute when she is clicking out 3000 per day? What about the mythical incredi-queen that lays 4800 eggs per day?

24 hours times 60 minutes per day = 1440 minutes in a day.

3000 eggs laid in 1440 minutes means she is laying just over 2 eggs per minute non-stop day and night.

Ramp that up to 4800 eggs per day and she is clicking off 3.3 eggs per minute. Think about a queen laying an egg every 20 seconds. She can lay 3 eggs by the time you read and comprehend this message. If you read slow, she might get 6!

The queen is an egg laying machine, but she does stop to rest several times per day. The usual pattern is to lay eggs for about 30 to 40 minutes, then take a few minutes rest to eat, then get back in the groove and click off 3 or 4 eggs per minute until she needs another break.

How relevant is this to going treatment free? Well, once you get bees that control mites on their own, you can get back to the basics of working with the instincts of bees and within their normal patterns of behavior to produce a crop of honey or a service such as pollination. Get back to basics and help the bees do what they naturally and instinctively choose to do.


----------



## Michael Bush

At 4800 she would lay one egg every 18 seconds. At 3000 she would lay one egg every 29 seconds. I've watched lay faster than that, but they eventually take a break too. And no, she would not even lay one in the time it took me to read your post... Maybe one if I read it twice...


----------



## sqkcrk

Bees rest more than myth would have you believe.


----------



## jim lyon

Go by the end results. My experience is 12 frames of brood is about the max for any hive and taking away the corners and a few missed cells here and there and it would probably reduce down to more like 10 to 11 frames. An egg every 30 seconds means a full frame in roughly 2 days. Divide that into a 21 day gestational cycle and........yup, that sounds about right to me.


----------



## Acebird

Michael Bush said:


> And no, she would not even lay one in the time it took me to read your post... Maybe one if I read it twice...


He was probably thinking of me Mike.


----------



## oldforte

just curious...what would be the average number of frames of brood one would find in a good laying period? Not a long time keeper but I've never scene anything near that.


----------



## sqkcrk

On what day of the year? Exactly where, geographically? In whose hive, hobby, sideline, or commercial? In what kind of hive? And under what sort of management scheme? oldforte, there is no easy answer to your question the way you phrase it.


----------



## squarepeg

oldforte said:


> just curious...what would be the average number of frames of brood one would find in a good laying period? Not a long time keeper but I've never scene anything near that.


jim's bees are in texas and being fed as much as they will take for the purpose of maxing out the populations in the hives in preparation for pollination. so given a prolific queen, unlimited feed, warm enough temps, and room in the hive it's possible achieve broodnest sizes at their upper limit like that. otherwise the nest size is determined by a number of factors as mark has suggested. mine peak at the end of spring buildup just prior to swarm season but i have never quantified them.


----------



## sqkcrk

Not to forget that if Jim's hives (which Jim is this?) do not have the "right" number of frames of brood in them he might move brood so they do.


----------



## Oldtimer

By "good laying period" if you mean when things are at their peak, in my hives the queen has a 2 deep broodnest with 10 frames a box, I would expect most hives to have 8 frames of brood per box, 16 total. Of course not all those frames would be full, the middle lower ones may be totally full, most of the other ones would also contain honey and pollen so a few of the upper outside ones may be down to 1/2 full of brood only.

Right now our main flow is drawing to an end. After a lousy start to our season, one of the worst in years, it suddenly all came together at Christmas time and there has been one of the fastest heaviest flows ever. So as at yesterday when I was attempting to harvest brood to make nucs I found many hives with the second brood box totally clogged with honey and brood only in the bottom box, despite having several honey supers per hive, also full. This would be a slightly less common thing most years this time though. However with many bees not having to rear brood now they live longer, it is likely those bees will also go on to fill the empty boxes I was putting on yesterday before the season is out.


----------



## BeeAttitudes

So are two 8 frame deeps sufficient for brood area?


----------



## sqkcrk

Yes


----------



## Oldtimer

Me I've never messed with 8 frame boxes so wouldn't know. However they are 20% less frames. Maybe the queen will mostly be able to lay as much as she wants but if she does, you then got to make the hive into a higher stack.


----------



## oldforte

OK Mark...let me phrase it this way...mid Tn...non commercial ....eight colonies...mid June.. average abt 50#/hive ... never have I seen 5+ med frames completely full of capped brood.


----------



## grozzie2

oldforte said:


> OK Mark...let me phrase it this way...mid Tn...non commercial ....eight colonies...mid June.. average abt 50#/hive ... never have I seen 5+ med frames completely full of capped brood.


3 days eggs, 6 days larvae, 12 days capped. If you have 5+ frames of capped, then you should have another 3 or so of eggs and/or larvae. That makes 8.


----------



## sqkcrk

Have you seen 10 medium frames partly filled with brood in June? How many medium depth supers do you run per hive? For the brood boxes.

I would think that in midJune in midTN that you should be seeing brood on ten frames. If not, I don't know what to say.


----------



## sqkcrk

Maybe it's the "fully capped" thing that's throwing a wrench into the works, so to say. What do you see?


----------



## AR Beekeeper

In my area from mid April to mid May when the nectar flow slows and you use a brood chamber of double deep boxes it is not unusual to see 14 deep frames 60 to 70 percent brood, if you have good queens. This is if you have well drawn worker cell comb. If you have comb that is poorly drawn, or filled with pollen and stores, the queen will spread brood over more frames of comb. If you use a brood chamber that is small you will not know if the queen is capable of laying more frames than that chamber contains.


----------



## Acebird

This is funny. Beekeepers arguing about how many frames of brood a colony should have. If if doesn't have what you think it should have what are you going to do kick their ass?


----------



## Mike Gillmore

Perhaps they will "intervene" and correct the deficiency.


----------



## sqkcrk

Somebody hear a bird tweeting? Or is that my tinnitus?


----------



## Roland

I would inspect the hive, determine the limiting factor, and rectify the limitations, hence allowing the queen to reach her potential. And then repeat 14 days later, untill no longer needed.

As for box size, with proper manipulations, a 10 frame deep brood chamber is adequate to support 16 frames with brood. Give her room.

Crazy Roland


----------



## Fusion_power

> If if doesn't have what you think it should have what are you going to do kick their ass?


 If needed, boot the queen and get one that will lay her butt off. Think of it like this. A non-productive colony costs more to maintain that one that produces a huge surplus. So letting a colony sit and consume your time and equipment is a down hill drag. If a new queen can turn that colony into a producer, then you are ahead on maintenance and you are ahead with a crop of honey. This is one that Roland can tell you about in spades. A commercial operation has NO room for a non-producing colony.


----------



## beemandan

Fusion_power said:


> If needed, boot the queen and get one that will lay her butt off.


Which can only be done if you're an 'interventional' beekeeper.


----------



## Acebird

Fusion_power said:


> A commercial operation has NO room for a non-producing colony.


I think that is a dream that could never exist. There is always a balancing act between how much time and resources is worth spending on a hive. Am I to believe that a commercial operator goes through every hive he owns to count brood frames? Maybe I am wrong but I would think a 5 generation beekeeper would be able to tell from the outside looking at a thousand hives which ones were the weak ones that need attention and only intervene on those hives. 
Where would a queen come from? If the operation has a bank of queens then those queens are not productive until they are put in a hive.
There has to be a small amount of equipment in inventory that is not used (not being productive) or the beekeeper could run into problems manipulating the hives that are productive or could be productive.


----------



## oldforte

"This is funny. Beekeepers arguing about how many frames of brood a colony should have. If if doesn't have what you think it should have what are you going to do kick their ass. "

Practicing* non-intervention *beekeeping !!!

Yes...it would be funny and also non-sense for one with this kind of practice


----------



## BeeAttitudes

If one is trying to ensure there is sufficient space for brood, is switching to small(er) cell foundation as valid a technique as adding frames? For instance, suppose an 8 frame brood box with small or smaller cell foundation has the equivalent cell count to a 10 frame box with traditional "large" cell foundation.....are these equivalent setups as far as maintaining an equivalent number of workers in the hive?


----------



## Oldtimer

Well that would be about packing more brood into the same area. But whether there is advantage having more bees, if they are all correspondingly smaller, has not been shown.


----------



## Roland

Ace wrote:

Am I to believe that a commercial operator goes through every hive he owns to count brood frames?

Most do not, but we do. When you only have a single deep brood chamber, the "Bull of the Woods" gave you 4 minutes a hive.
We have varoa now, so it takes 6 minutes a hive. How many hives can a work on a 2 week cycle?.

Ace:
Maybe I am wrong but I would think a 5 generation beekeeper would be able to tell from the outside looking at a thousand hives which ones were the weak ones that need attention and only intervene on those hives.

Of course I can, anyone can, but by then it is TOO LATE!!!!! The key is to catch problems BEFORE they get bad. Look at the resources you have, manipulate to minimize limiting factors. You get out of a hive(yard) in proportion to what effort you put in. 

Crazy manipulating Roland


----------



## oldforte

Roland: " As for box size, with proper manipulations, a 10 frame deep brood chamber is adequate to support 16 frames with brood. "

How can a 10 frame box hold 16 frames?


----------



## sqkcrk

Obviously he is talking about two ten frame boxes and not bothering the outside frames. Twenty minus 4 being 16.


----------



## jim lyon

I don't think so Mark. My understanding is that Roland rotates brood frames above an excluder on his single deeps pre main flow to keep plenty of empty comb in front of the queen and to maximize his honey crop. Ian does something similar by Putting a medium under the excluder above his single in the buildup to the honey flow and then (before the main flow begins) blows the bees back down into the deep and leaves them as an excluded single deep the rest of the summer. An excellent, though labor intensive, way to maximize bee populations and honey crops.


----------



## squarepeg

i wonder how it would work if instead of blowing or shaking the bees into the bottom box the queen was found and just placed down there below an excluder, assuming plenty of empty comb is there for her to lay in and assuming the temperatures were warm enough that the bees wouldn't leave her there alone by clustering above the excluder.


----------



## jim lyon

squarepeg said:


> i wonder how it would work if instead of blowing or shaking the bees into the bottom box the queen was found and just placed down there below an excluder, assuming plenty of empty comb is there for her to lay in and assuming the temperatures were warm enough that the bees wouldn't leave her there alone by clustering above the excluder.


I suppose it would be fine if you don't have too many to do, but in that scenario you need to know where she isn't rather than where she is. Could be you would be spending a lot of time searching frames in a box that dosent even contain a queen. Once you were set up I would think you could blow a box out in the time it would take to thoroughly check a frame or two.


----------



## squarepeg

makes sense jim, many thanks. i am considering trying this on a case by case basis. the manipulation would follow a full inspection and discovery that the brood nest located in the two medium supers above a single deep, and finding that single deep pretty much empty. the timing would be just prior to swarm season and main flow. i'm hoping that by the time a new nest is established in the deep that the brood will have emerged in the supers making room for incoming nectar, and that by then we will be far enough into the season that the colony will be less likely to swarm. the inspiration for trying this comes from roland's and ian's approaches, and i see it as a potential alternative to reversal in a single deep set up with those hives that have moved the nest up to the top.


----------



## sqkcrk

jim lyon said:


> I don't think so Mark. My understanding is that Roland rotates brood frames above an excluder on his single deeps pre main flow to keep plenty of empty comb in front of the queen and to maximize his honey crop. Ian does something similar by Putting a medium under the excluder above his single in the buildup to the honey flow and then (before the main flow begins) blows the bees back down into the deep and leaves them as an excluded single deep the rest of the summer. An excellent, though labor intensive, way to maximize bee populations and honey crops.


Yeah, I'm always getting myself in trouble answering for others.


----------



## Roland

No problems SQKCRK, Jim figured it out.

By keeping the queen down, we do not have to spend time looking for her.

Another approach would be to add an empty deep, with the excluder above it, then as the flow hit, don't look for the queen, but just slide another excluder between the 2 deeps she could be in. On the next inspection, you will know where she is, and can adjust accordingly. I have discussed this with StevenG, using 3 mediums(weight issues) and later 3 excluders. 

Crazy Roland


----------



## xphoney

Fusion_power said:


> 30,000 bees = 20,000 in the brood nest, 10,000 foragers.
> 
> 60,000 bees = 20,000 in the brood nest, 40,000 foragers.
> 
> Note that the colony population doubled, but there are now 4 times as many foragers gathering honey.


Help me understand how this works with Ethyl Oleate. Its my understanding that foragers contain this pheromone in abundance and it suppresses the development of nurse bees to foragers. When foragers die, then there is less in the total hive, and thus some nurse bees develop into foragers to take their place. If this were true, then wouldn't 40k foragers maintain enough Ethyl Oleate to keep more young bees at the house bee level?

I am not disagreeing in any shape or form, it is fairly common knowledge that larger hives produce more honey than two hives with the same number, I am just trying to understand the mechanisms involved.

In your example is it possible that Ethyl Oleate only comes into play until the queen has reached her max and then another pheromone comes into play?

Andrew


----------



## Fusion_power

Bees are more flexible than that. When they need honey to feed brood, nurse bees will convert to foragers earlier than normal. When the main nectar flow is on, they will even neglect brood so as many bees as possible can go out and collect nectar. When there aren't enough nurse bees, foragers will convert to care for brood. There are some limits to this behavior, but as a generalization, bees adapt to whatever needs doing. So don't get caught up in rigid thinking. Bee behavior is not set in stone.


----------



## Roland

Xphoney - Do you really think that the field bees in the 4th deep above the excluder really have much odoriferous effect on the brood chamber so far below? If all the brood work is covered - off to the fields with you.

Crazy Roland


----------



## xphoney

Roland said:


> Xphoney - Do you really think that the field bees in the 4th deep above the excluder really have much odoriferous effect on the brood chamber so far below? If all the brood work is covered - off to the fields with you.
> 
> Crazy Roland


The mechanism as I understand it, yes. The primer pheromone is passed via the nectar from bee to bee. I would expect it would it to circulate throughout the hive easily, but I am no expert which is why I asked.

The closest answer I can find on this is on Randy Oliver's site. If it is rainy and all bees are in the hive then Ethyl Oleate causes the nurse bees to stay young and stack up in the hive. So in the example you would have maybe 30k and 30k nurse bees to foragers. When it gets sunny then the foragers go out into the field, some being gone all day, and thus the conversion starts to happen, maybe 25k to 35k.

This is a know mechanism but I am sure there is more to it. The beauty of the mechanism is that it creates a good balance between foragers and nurse bees without anyone actually making any decision. And in reality, this makes more sense than some intelligence kicking bees out to the field.

Andrew


----------



## Oldtimer

Not all chemicals are easily transmitted upwards. This can be demonstrated by selecting a hive with a queen excluder over the brood nest, and 2 or more honey supers above that, and plenty of bees in the hive. Take a comb with eggs from the brood nest and put it in the top box, there is a good chance the bees will build queen cells on it, which presumably indicates a lack of queen substance getting up there. The taller the hive the greater the chance of queen cells being built.


----------



## xphoney

Oldtimer said:


> Not all chemicals are easily transmitted upwards.


This is likely very true, but my question is how does Ethyl Oleate affect the numbers Fusion_Power quoted. The better we understand this mechanism, then the better we can plan for hive longevity during dearth times and winter time. It can also allow us to stack surplus nurse bees up before flow so they get the maximum number of days to fly during the flows.


----------



## Roland

I agree Oldtimer, we can consistently get cells in the 3rd deep above he excluder. With upper entrances on ever deep super, the added ventilation and nectar not passing thought the brood chamber, makes me doubt that it is all one hive from an smeller stand point.

Crazy Roland


----------



## Acebird

Oldtimer said:


> Not all chemicals are easily transmitted upwards.


Is it the direction or the distance? Obviously you witnessed this in a Lang will it happen in a top bar hive?


----------



## Oldtimer

Done it in long hives also, I experimented with using long hives as cell builders, the queen was kept in one end by a vertical excluder. I was surprised how you only need a few honey combs from the brood, and put a brood frame on the other side of that & they will raise queen cells.
Just something though, this may have little to do with the Ethyl Oleate that Xphoney was talking about actually I have never heard of Ethyl Oleate and know nothing about it.


----------



## crofter

Isnt there several queen pheremones at play. One gets exchanged and spread by food sharing and another, the queen footprint from the tarsal gland requires her movements to track it around. A stretch of cold and rainy weather seem to start my bees making cells that they often tear down. What is that all about?


----------



## BernhardHeuvel

More insulation, more warmth, more queen movements...?


----------



## Eduardo Gomes

xphoney said:


> This is a know mechanism but I am sure there is more to it.


xphoney from what I am reading and watching there are several means of communication within the hive: some of mechanical nature (trophallaxis , dances, etc. ) and other of chemical nature (pheromones ). It seems to me that some of these mechanisms are redundant. The advantage of redundancy is perhaps associated to increase the effectiveness of communication to both individual level and at colony level.

Some data seem to point in this direction with regard, in particular, the recruitment of bees to harvest abroad.
"According to Grozinger, in addition to signaling queen bee reproductive status and quality, queen bee pheromones regulate how fast workers mature and transition from taking care of developing larvae to foraging outside the hive." (you can see more here http://www.futurity.org/honest-pheromones-may-explain-decline-queen-bees/)


----------



## BernhardHeuvel

Eduardo Gomes said:


> several means of communication within the hive: some of mechanical nature (trophallaxis , dances, etc. ) and other of chemical nature (pheromones ).


And don't forget electrostatic fields. See:
http://www.ontariobee.com/sites/ontariobee.com/files/Proc. R. Soc. B-2013-Greggers-.pdf

The team around Randolf Menzel (in Berlin) is currently looking into what it does when waggle-dancing.

In German: http://www.neurobiologie.fu-berlin.de/menzel/Pub_AGmenzel/Menzel Elektro_Okt2013.pdf

Discussed in 1976:
http://www.hese-project.org/hese-uk/en/papers/warnke_bee_world_76.pdf


----------



## apis maximus

Thanks Eduardo and Bernhard!

Some very interesting points you both bring forth.
A lot we know... a lot more we do not. Someone, a few days ago, posted a nice presentation, right here, on this very forum, with 
Dr. Seeley on some of these fascinating signals used in the hive for communication. By the bees that is. Highly recommended. I learned a lot from it. And even Dr. Seeley has, still, a few unexplained bee signals left in his question bag. Wow.

What amazed me was that Dr. Seeley mentions Dr. Karl von Frisch, scratching his head:scratch: , while trying to interpret what at that time was still and what remained a puzzle for him.

Enter Dr. Seeley, so many years later, on another continent, looking to find something, bee behavior related, and yet in the process, he finds the correct explanation of what von Frisch could not at that time. His time that is.
Namely, "_*the beep signa*_l" another form of direct, vibratory, tactile and more than likely a pheromonal signal, all rolled in one behavior.

Also worth noticing, Dr. Seeley has 2 very popular books out there. One is The Wisdom of The Hive and the other is Honey Bee Democracy. 
Wisdom and Democracy. Wow. Heavy, loaded, meaningful words. Full of deep meaning. Bees. The greatest teachers.

Never occurred to me, well until now, why Dr. Seeley would not join the book selling campaign/marketing of the ever popular series "for dummies'". Or "idiot's guide". 

It would have been a massive pain to put the words Wisdom and Democracy in those type of titles. That's just me now. Pondering.
Shoo, that Wisdom of the Hive book, is north of $100.00. Yeah.

And Bernhard, that neurobiology stuff...wow mama!:applause:


----------



## beepro

The 2 books that you mentioned, on you tube there are 2 vids on them.
Do a search on Dr. Seeley and you will see the vids there.


----------



## apis maximus

Yep. Do a search. Then, research. As in search again. 
It never ends. Yeah, the learning thingie. Bees rock. We, sleep.


----------

