# Foundationless



## razoo (Jul 7, 2015)

I was reading this article by Michael Bush about foundationless. 
http://www.bushfarms.com/beesfoundationless.htm 

It seems the main concern is build up of pesticides in the comb.
Has anyone ever had evidence in their own hive that repeatedly using plastic foundation has negative effects on their hives health? He mentions life span of the queen as one effect.

Also, if the bees build comb, and keep using it for brood, surely the pesticides would still build up? Or do you remove the wax comb annually?


----------



## bsharp (Feb 5, 2013)

Some one feel free to correct me on this, but from what I understand, the more common pesticides break down over time. Certain mite treatments are said to build up in the comb; I think Apivar and Checkmite+ are the ones. 

Old brood comb can be a vector for the foulbroods and other diseases, which would be my main concern over pesticides. Even in stronger hives, EFB can be present and only emerge if the colony becomes weakened (or if "donating" a frame of brood to boost a weaker hive).

I've seen it written that discarding combs older than 3 years is standard practice. Now that you mention it, I probably have some about a year overdue to be tossed...


----------



## Stephenpbird (May 22, 2011)

razoo said:


> It seems the main concern is build up of pesticides in the comb.
> 
> Also, if the bees build comb, and keep using it for brood, surely the pesticides would still build up? Or do you remove the wax comb annually?


If you buy foundation it probably will contain some pesticides as well as chemicals use to treat for mites. Going foundationless means you start of with a clean slate, but chemicals may build up over time. 
Some chemicals used to treat mites are not absorbed by wax, such as oxalic acid. So at least this way you have some, even if it is limited, control over chemicals building up in your hives.

There is an other way, and that is to make your own foundation from wax from your own hives. I cull 50% of brood frames every year (it's standard practice here in Germany) so I produce a lot of wax but also need a lot of new foundation. The net gain in wax is 25-30% a year. ie the wax gained from 10 frames will make 13 sheets of foundation. 
It should be said that some very respected beekeepers here on beesource, disagree strongly about the need to cull brood combs.


----------



## razoo (Jul 7, 2015)

I hadn't heard of culling brood frames. Do you toss the whole frame, the foundation only, or scrape the comb off and discard just the wax?

I have only ever used OAV in my hives. 
Does that mean I probably needn't be concerned about build up of pesticides in the hive? 

But whether one uses plastic foundation or wax foundation or foundationless, does it make any difference? Wouldn't pesticide build up be the same regardless?
I can't really see why Michael Bush would recommend foundationless as a means to avoid pesticide build up. What am I missing?


----------



## FlowerPlanter (Aug 3, 2011)

There are studies of the pesticides found in wax, I believe many are from miticides and moth balls used by the beekeeper. Going foundationless would keep you from putting another beekeepers' pesticide culled wax in your hive. 

MB from that same site does not rotate out comb, he also uses plastic PF 100 small cell. No treatment mean little to no pesticide/miticide build up in comb. 

IMO The disease is either present or not. Replacing a few frames a year will not prevent disease, if present it can just as easily move to the new frames you just added. It could take 4-5 years to rotate all the comb out, EFB is gone in less than 1.5 years on store comb. Replacing all the frames by way of shook swarm combined with antibiotics is an effective disease control. Anything short of that probably won't work;

Transmission of European foul brood disease by package bees

Transmission of American foul brood by package bees


----------



## Stephenpbird (May 22, 2011)

razoo said:


> I hadn't heard of culling brood frames. Do you toss the whole frame, the foundation only, or scrape the comb off and discard just the wax?


I put the whole frame in a solar wax melter, collect the wax, reuse the frames, toss the cocoons in the compost.



razoo said:


> I have only ever used OAV in my hives.
> Does that mean I probably needn't be concerned about build up of pesticides in the hive?


You need not be concerned about the build up of miticides if you use OA, but pesticides, which you have little control over, might be another matter.



razoo said:


> But whether one uses plastic foundation or wax foundation or foundationless, does it make any difference? Wouldn't pesticide build up be the same regardless?


True , but what happens to these combs/wax over time? Some may break, others may have too much drone comb for the beekeepers liking, whatever. These combs or the wax they are made of is valuable stuff and once culled from use, the wax is recovered, often it is used to make new foundation (chemicals and all). The cycle repeats again and again producing wax foundation with an ever increasing chemical content. This is the build up that is of concern.



razoo said:


> I can't really see why Michael Bush would recommend foundationless as a means to avoid pesticide build up. What am I missing?


With foundationless you always start with a clean slate as no wax is reintroduced into the hive.


----------



## J.Lee (Jan 19, 2014)

I am treatment free so the concept of adding some chemical to treat mites and the concept that "OH by the way Billy Bob Beekeeper, these chemicals that are so wonderful, will build up in your comb so be careful". This makes no sense to me. So glad to be treatment free. I have kept bees for five years and have not gotten rid of any comb from a hive that was doing well. As far as foundationless goes starter strips work much better for me. As far as queen life span goes mine seem to do just fine the way I am keeping bees.


----------



## Stephenpbird (May 22, 2011)

J.Lee said:


> So glad to be treatment free. I have kept bees for five years and have not gotten rid of any comb from a hive that was doing well. As far as foundationless goes starter strips work much better for me. As far as queen life span goes mine seem to do just fine the way I am keeping bees.


I am so glad this is working out for you. When i tried foundationless I used wooden starter strips, you only have to install them once and they last for the whole life of the frame. And of course no issues with adding wax.


----------



## razoo (Jul 7, 2015)

I still don't really understand why foundationless prevents pesticide buildup? Whether one is treatment free or not isn't the issue. Wouldn't there be chemical buildup the same no matter whether foundationless or PF or wax foundation. 
Why does MB say that foundationless prevents the buildup of pesticides?


----------



## J.Lee (Jan 19, 2014)

I think he is saying (if I remember when I read his books) the pesticides are already in the foundation when you get it from a bee supply company.


----------



## razoo (Jul 7, 2015)

Stephenpbird said:


> With foundationless you always start with a clean slate as no wax is reintroduced into the hive.


How does one reintroduce wax to a hive? After melting it in your solar wax melter, do you put a lump of wax in the hive for the bees to rework?


----------



## emrude (Mar 23, 2015)

razoo said:


> How does one reintroduce wax to a hive? After melting it in your solar wax melter, do you put a lump of wax in the hive for the bees to rework?


I believe he is making foundation sheets from the melted wax. I would be interested in learning to do this. There are u-tube vids on it.
Stephen, could you go into how you put it back in the hive?

Mary


----------



## AR Beekeeper (Sep 25, 2008)

If my memory is correct, 30 days after clean comb is introduced into a colony it has traces of all the chemicals that are in the area foraged by the bees. There is a study that showed that when the bees draw out the wax foundation the amount of chemical in the wax is reduced by half.

There are hundreds of beekeepers using plastic foundations with no brood problems, just as there are beekeepers that use all wax foundations and have no brood problems. It is my opinion that the wax used in foundations, or foundation coatings, are of little consequence.


----------



## J.Lee (Jan 19, 2014)

Another way of reintroducing wax into a hive is to melt it down and paint it onto sheets of plastic foundation or plastic frames that came wax free from the bee supply company you bought them from.


----------



## blackandtan (Aug 20, 2014)

razoo said:


> I was reading this article by Michael Bush about foundationless.
> It seems the main concern is build up of pesticides in the comb.
> Has anyone ever had evidence in their own hive that repeatedly using plastic foundation has negative effects on their hives health? He mentions life span of the queen as one effect.


The crimp wire wax is full of chemicals. I recently saw a talk by Kim Flottum and he advised to never use wax foundation as the mix of chemicals in the wax are detrimental to the colony. When I use foundation I use crimp wire so I guess I messed that one up, but I doubt I'll buy anymore. You can't keep chemicals out of wax but by using uncoated plastic (coating with your own wax) you avoid the ****tail of pesticides. Regardless I've been advised to remove comb every 3-5 years. That reduces the overall build up of chemicals in your hive.

I honestly don't know why the backyard beekeeper wouldn't go foundationless in the brood area.. It's worked for me anyway. It's cheaper and less work, though I will admit that honey supers can get messy.


----------



## Tortuga (Dec 17, 2014)

This is only my second year but, my thoughts on foundation an fondationless.

First my foundationless. 

I have 3 hives foundationless. #1 from a cutout, #2 from a swarm removal and #3 moved into my swarm trap. All 3 are thriving, mite counts are supper low with no chemicals, ( Only hive manipulation ). I could not be any more happy. ( except one is bad tempered but thats a different subject)

My plastic foundation, 

2 hives has had 4 colonies so far. First didnt make it through winter and I never figured out why, ( treated and with stores ). They just absconded and left me for dead. 2nd was a nuc that went very very slow, earwigs almost killed them in spring but I babied them with OA and feed. finally requeened (#3) but they still never built and got robbed out late summer. 4th was a swarm cought from trap with gear from first dead out and there neer dead. there fed, manipulated, done more hours for them then the foudationless ones combined.. Even if they survuve without making it without getting robbed out, I dont see them making it through winter.

Now I know it must have to do with location, or difference in genetics between queens or something.. But 3 hives with natural comb and local feral genetics takes me 30 minutes 2 times per month to thrive. Where 3 hives on plastic with bread queens, donated queen takes me an hour 3 times per month to watch them die. 

This may be year 2 luck but I think I will stick to foundationless chemical free bees. Theres allot of watching and work to be chem free natural. but so far in my experience its 1/3 the work of foundation and treatments for dead bees.

P.S. Mite counts are done using alcohol wash from young nurse bees.


----------



## lemmje (Feb 23, 2015)

Tortuga said:


> This is only my second year but, my thoughts on foundation an fondationless.


Of course you know this is anecdotal. Don't be too quick to assign good and bad to either based on that small sample, but keep doing what you think is best. It's kind of like when I was in high school playing baseball and we won eight games in a row when i was wearing a certain pair of socks. Had to be those socks, till it wasn't.


----------



## crofter (May 5, 2011)

I think that if Dadants wax foundation was that ****ably and repeatably proven to be that compromised, there would be multi million dollar lawsuits under way.


----------



## Michael Palmer (Dec 29, 2006)

I'm sorry, but I have to disagree with this whole foundationless business. I've used wax foundation for 40+ years. I see no issues. My survival last winter, a very warm winter, was 98%. The year before, a very cold year, was 88%. This year my apiaries were very productive. If foundation was some kind of problem, I think I would have seen it by now. Now, I'm sure someone will bring up the S word...sub-lethal. Unfortunately that's all fear generating bologna...in my opinion. Show me sub-lethal, and we can have a discussion. If the foundationless sect is going to continually repeat the foundationless dogma, without concrete evidence and numbers, I can't listen anymore. You all can do what you want, and believe what you want, but listening to fear tactics and what ifs isn't doing your bees a bit of good.


----------



## blackandtan (Aug 20, 2014)

Michael Palmer said:


> I'm sorry, but I have to disagree with this whole foundationless business. I've used wax foundation for 40+ years. I see no issues. My survival last winter, a very warm winter, was 98%. The year before, a very cold year, was 88%. This year my apiaries were very productive. If foundation was some kind of problem, I think I would have seen it by now. Now, I'm sure someone will bring up the S word...sub-lethal. Unfortunately that's all fear generating bologna...in my opinion. Show me sub-lethal, and we can have a discussion. If the foundationless sect is going to continually repeat the foundationless dogma, without concrete evidence and numbers, I can't listen anymore. You all can do what you want, and believe what you want, but listening to fear tactics and what ifs isn't doing your bees a bit of good.


I'm glad you gave your opinion, I've always used wax foundation sparingly so it's good to know you have seen no adverse effects. As I mentioned earlier my opinion of wax foundation was pushed over the edge after hearing comments by Kim Flottum. Thanks for giving some push back.

I use mostly foundationless simply as a personal preference but if I had more than 15 or so hives I'm not sure I could do it. It's just a mess sometimes during the honey flow.


----------



## razoo (Jul 7, 2015)

Michael Palmer said:


> I'm sorry, but I have to disagree with this whole foundationless business. I've used wax foundation for 40+ years. I see no issues. My survival last winter, a very warm winter, was 98%. The year before, a very cold year, was 88%. This year my apiaries were very productive. If foundation was some kind of problem, I think I would have seen it by now. Now, I'm sure someone will bring up the S word...sub-lethal. Unfortunately that's all fear generating bologna...in my opinion. Show me sub-lethal, and we can have a discussion. If the foundationless sect is going to continually repeat the foundationless dogma, without concrete evidence and numbers, I can't listen anymore. You all can do what you want, and believe what you want, but listening to fear tactics and what ifs isn't doing your bees a bit of good.


The whole idea that somehow foundationless has less pesticides doesn't make sense at all, so I had to ask.


----------



## Stephenpbird (May 22, 2011)

emrude said:


> I believe he is making foundation sheets from the melted wax. I would be interested in learning to do this. There are u-tube vids on it.
> Stephen, could you go into how you put it back in the hive?
> 
> Mary


You are right, I make my own foundation with a press I made using silicon. There are many videos on youtube on how to do it, it works but I think I can do better. I am making a new mold which when finished will produce a water cooled press made out of a cement mixture. I aim to copy what this guy is doing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RgVBFA8unLI


----------



## FlowerPlanter (Aug 3, 2011)

"Beeswax contamination was the result of both in-hive acaricide treatments and, to a much lesser extent, environmental pollution."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17879980

"Pesticide exposure and pathogens/may interact to have strong negative effects on colony health (Pettis et al. 2013)."

"These chemicals may affect the synthesis, transport, action or elimination of natural molecules, such as hormones or enzymes that are responsible for maintaining bee development, immune mechanisms and behavior (Chauzat et al. 2009)."

"Another area of concern is the sub-lethal effects of acaricides used within the hive for the control of Varroa mites (Johnson et al. 2010). Acaricide levels can build up in the wax comb of colonies (Mullin et al. 2010), and low level exposure to these products can impair a colony’s ability to rear queens (Collins et al. 2004), reduce sperm viability in drones (Burley et al. 2008), and impact the development and immune response of worker bees reared in contaminated comb (Desneux et al. 2007)."

http://www.beeculture.com/a-closer-look-bee-health-and-pesticides/


----------



## DavidZ (Apr 9, 2016)

the first articles says MAY MIGHT MAYBE which means NO PROOF.

"Pesticide exposure and pathogens/*may* interact to have strong negative effects on colony health (Pettis et al. 2013)."

"These chemicals *may* affect the synthesis, transport, action or elimination of natural molecules, such as hormones or enzymes that are responsible for maintaining bee development, immune mechanisms and behavior (Chauzat et al. 2009)."


Read the second article where Clarence Collison who is the Emeritus Professor of Entomology and Department Head Emeritus of Entomology and Plant Pathology at Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, MS. 

and he clearly states 

*"No statistical relationship was found between colony mortality and pesticide residues." * 

the arguement is completely cancelled by that statement.

There is no proof positive. Yet.

you all can go ahead and run around shouting "the sky is falling" but seriously have real proof.


----------



## DavidZ (Apr 9, 2016)

not saying doesn't harm them, we just need positive articles


----------



## Michael Palmer (Dec 29, 2006)

Told you the S word would show up. Personally, I wouldn't know a sublethal effect if it bitme on the butt. Would you?

So here I am, having used wax foundation for 40+ years, with my apiaries surrounded by neonic corn. I would think the sublethal effects would be screaming by now. What was it that the National Bee Survey gal said? "You have some mighty healthy bees there Mr. Palmer."


----------



## lharder (Mar 21, 2015)

One needs to be careful with statistical analysis when dealing with multifactorial data sets. Its POWER, which is the ability to discern a true trend from background noise, is weak making it more or less useless in these cases. So someone who makes a definitive statement based on these, doesn't really understand the maths behind it and shouldn't be making these statements. Believe me entomologists are not mathematicians so their statements re significance should be taken with a grain of salt in these kinds of complicated analysis. Other multi factorial analysis is better at picking up structure, but these only open up areas of possible research and don't "prove" anything. Even with human health there are worrying trends. But could luck making definitive links. When one considers the number of permutations possible with chemicals and combinations of chemicals, and their break down products... And how is any sort of baseline possible anyway?

So what are we left with. A broad understanding of biology makes us believe that chemical exposure to some compounds does have negative effect. We also know that biological systems will often compensate, showing resilience under threshold levels. Things may appear to be just fine on the surface, meanwhile the system as a whole is moving towards a state where effects are seen. M. Palmer may be fine with foundation, but he does lots of other things that are beneficial to his bees. His treatments are minimal, he is careful he doesn't introduce things that build up in his wax, he doesn't move them avoiding big exposure to migratory bees, he doesn't bring in large numbers of bees with their pests/pathogens. So maybe chemicals in foundation aren't the biggest factors in his success. 

So what to do in this scenario? My take is to reduce my inputs into the system. I can say to my customers that I do everything in my power to reduce their exposure to pesticides. Including letting them make their own comb for the most part. I have a bit of plastic foundation to help manage comb production in the supers. So far they have done a good job.


----------



## bsharp (Feb 5, 2013)

Michael Palmer said:


> Told you the S word would show up. Personally, I wouldn't know a sublethal effect if it bitme on the butt. Would you?
> 
> So here I am, having used wax foundation for 40+ years, with my apiaries surrounded by neonic corn. I would think the sublethal effects would be screaming by now. What was it that the National Bee Survey gal said? "You have some mighty healthy bees there Mr. Palmer."


I started with wax foundation, and thought the wiring of frames and embedding of wires to be a huge pain. I tried foundationless for the benefits of ease of prep when putting into hives, and admittedly, the idea of commercial pesticide residues not being present in the foundation was a comfort. In the end, I found it too much work to be worthwhile; the work that I saved assembling frames by not having to wire foundation was instead spent straightening comb within the frames. I have a _lot_ of very nice foundationless comb in my hives and stored in my freezer, but it took precious time to get there. In the case of wax foundation vs. foundationless, it's a pay now or pay later in terms of time.

That said, I've found wax-coated plastic foundation to be the perfect balance of both...assemble the frame, snap the plastic in, and it's good to go. I know in some of the early experiments bees would refuse to build on it, or build wonky comb between frames, but that hasn't been my experience and in all cases it seems to be much better now. Do you have any reasoning behind staying with wax foundation?


----------



## pinkpantherbeekeeper (Feb 10, 2016)

This is a very good thread! Enjoying the read of a good peer debate on the issue.



J.Lee said:


> I am treatment free so the concept of adding some chemical to treat mites and the concept that "OH by the way Billy Bob Beekeeper, these chemicals that are so wonderful, will build up in your comb so be careful". This makes no sense to me. So glad to be treatment free. I have kept bees for five years and have not gotten rid of any comb from a hive that was doing well. As far as foundationless goes starter strips work much better for me. As far as queen life span goes mine seem to do just fine the way I am keeping bees.


J.Lee - Have you tested your beeswax for chemical residue? I would gladly stake my life on it that you do have a build up of chemicals in your hive. You may be treatment free, which I am not knocking if done correctly, but just because you are, does not mean your bees forage on "all natural, treatment free, food sources." You might be one of the few people that do not have neighbors in the entire area of the bees forage range, but if you aren't how can you manage where your bees go? Do you know what your neighbors spray on their yard? How about the water source? What potential sub lethal effects from anything like heavy metals to run off are present? Even say a hog farm water runoff/lagoon, could contain a high percentage of the trace chemicals. Are there neo-nic plants near by? Bees will work corn. Oh and corn pollen can travel easily a few hundred to a thousand feet and contaminate other genetic varieties of corn let alone be present on other flowers. How about pesticide sprays from farm operations? Maybe there is some clover near a field sprayed with pesticide that the bees enjoy working. Or how how about that golden rod, sunflower, etc that is in the middle of a field of sprayed plants?

Trying to prove a point. The potential vector for contamination is there virtually regardless what our best intentions are. And without culling comb for over 5 years as you stated?... You are just building up potential chemicals regardless if you are treatment free. So by your own statement, your bees are doing fine regardless of any sub-lethal effects that ARE in your beeswax.



razoo said:


> I still don't really understand why foundationless prevents pesticide buildup? Whether one is treatment free or not isn't the issue. Wouldn't there be chemical buildup the same no matter whether foundationless or PF or wax foundation.
> Why does MB say that foundationless prevents the buildup of pesticides?


Only way foundationless prevents pesticide / chemical build up is two fold. One, you are not using beeswax foundation that most likely contains trace chemicals. The idea about unknown foundation is the wax could contain years or remelted wax with years of chemical build up. Also there is the potential for unscrupulous people (or simply people that dont know why they had a dead out) to melt comb with AFB in it too Second, if you cull your comb regularly, you are not allowing a high build up environmental chemicals and pesticides to build up with in the hive.



DavidZ said:


> the first articles says MAY MIGHT MAYBE which means NO PROOF.
> 
> "Pesticide exposure and pathogens/*may* interact to have strong negative effects on colony health (Pettis et al. 2013)."
> 
> ...


Dead on! The amount of scientific evidence to prove that the sub-lethal effects are detrimental and which ones are, has yet to be proven. From various studies about sub-lethal contamination on various organisms, there is absolute potential for concerns and issues to arise. Hence why it is studied. However each organism is different. A ****roach can withstand thousands of times the lethal thresh hold of radiation for a human. 

So as Michael Palmer points out about the S word, there is much speculation, fear mongering, contradiction from years of beekeepers which haven't had issues, and scientifically unproven data to date. 

Is there build up? Sure. How do they interact with bees by being in beeswax? Are any harmful with the simple fact they are bound in beeswax? How much is harmful in beeswax? Which chemicals are harmful? 

Personally... I will cull my comb on a regular basis. Use foundation. And get a good night's sleep!


----------



## razoo (Jul 7, 2015)

This is a good article but we do need to be careful about taking statements and drawing our own conclusions thereby contributing to fear mongering. 



FlowerPlanter said:


> http://www.beeculture.com/a-closer-look-bee-health-and-pesticides/


This line from the article adds to the point many here are making, that pesticides or fungicides are out of the beekeepers control:

"Research has also shown that bees consuming pollen with high fungicide loads have an increased probability of Nosema infection (Pettis et al. 2013). "



pinkpantherbeekeeper said:


> Personally... I will cull my comb on a regular basis. Use foundation. And get a good night's sleep!


Pink Panther, how often do you cull your comb?
I presume you don't reuse it or give it back to the bees? Making ones own foundation would surely be putting contaminated wax back into the hive.


----------



## spud (Sep 12, 2016)

I'm a newbie at beekeeping and I just harvested 25 pounds out of my hive. I started with two super's as brood and then a honey box. It took the bees a while to build up the foundation but in the last 8 weeks or so they made me honey. I extracted the honey and then put all 10 frames back in the honey box. Is this the right thing to do? Some have told me that I should have removed the honey box and queen excluder for the winter months. My thought was there might be enough time for the bees to make a little more honey before winter and that would only help them during the winter. What should I do?

Spud


----------



## lharder (Mar 21, 2015)

Sublethal is not fear mongering, its biological common sense based on sublethal effects of chemicals on not only bees, but almost everything else that has been looked at. The more these things are looked at, the more that is found. The story doesn't get better, it gets worse. That is the context. It just shouldn't be blown out of proportion, but it is there.


----------



## Michael Palmer (Dec 29, 2006)

Help me out here. How does one recognise or measure sublethal? Dr. Jim Frasier from Penn State said if you have 2 colonies in an apiary, and one is strong and one is weak, the weak one is because of a sublethal effect of pesticide.

I do hope someone will come up with something better than that.


----------



## razoo (Jul 7, 2015)

Are you referring to this article? 

http://articles.extension.org/pages...their-involvement-in-colony-collapse-disorder


----------



## Michael Palmer (Dec 29, 2006)

I'm referring to what he said to the group, at our summer meeting last year.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>Also, if the bees build comb, and keep using it for brood, surely the pesticides would still build up? Or do you remove the wax comb annually?

If you don't put pesticides in, then there is very little to build up. Most of what has been found in beehives comes from beekeepers. I do not remove any comb unless it is really badly drawn or eaten by wax moths etc. I don't put pesticides in my colonies.


----------



## J.Lee (Jan 19, 2014)

Pink Panther Beekeeper- I agree. WE, our bees included live in a toxic nightmare.I live in the middle of thousands of acres of trees but there are soybean and tobacco farms within two miles. Chemicals galore. I also live a few miles from a massive coal powered electrical generation plant. I always found it interesting that no swarms ever leave and go in that direction. The point, or a least as I took it, was that if you went foundationless or starter strips that you would not get any contaminants from the foundation in the first place but this did not give you any protection from the contaminants that were being brought in later on. Back to your point I am sure I have contaminants in my beehives. I also have them in my lungs, the walls of my house and probably everything else in my life. And yes, thank the Lord my bees are doing fine.


----------



## razoo (Jul 7, 2015)

Michael Bush said:


> >Also, if the bees build comb, and keep using it for brood, surely the pesticides would still build up?
> 
> If you don't put pesticides in, then there is very little to build up. Most of what has been found in beehives comes from beekeepers. I do not remove any comb unless it is really badly drawn or eaten by wax moths etc. I don't put pesticides in my colonies.


Michael, 

This is from your website,
Why would one want to go foundationless?
How about no chemical contamination of the combs 
Which i read on this page http://www.bushfarms.com/beesfoundationless.htm

Help me with understanding your theory here. 
1. Pesticides in hives are there because beekeepers put them in
2. Foundationless has no chemical contamination 

If a beekeeper is putting pesticides into his hives, then I can't see that foundationless would make any difference. The pesticides will build up in any wax comb they have built including on foundationless comb.

If a beekeeper is not putting pesticides into his hives, then I can't see that foundationless would make any difference. There are no pesticides to build up, so with or without foundation makes no difference. 

I ask this question, as I was reading from your website and am trying to understand your theory that the reason to go foundationless is for no chemical contamination. 
It would appear that chemical contamination in a hive has more to do with what pesticides a beekeeper might put in his hive, and not to do with the type of foundation used.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>1. Pesticides in hives are there because beekeepers put them in

Yes. That and they are on the founadtion.

>2. Foundationless has no chemical contamination 

It starts that way.

>If a beekeeper is putting pesticides into his hives, then I can't see that foundationless would make any difference. The pesticides will build up in any wax comb they have built including on foundationless comb.

Well, it will make a difference in cell size, but not in the amount of pesticides in the comb.

>If a beekeeper is not putting pesticides into his hives, then I can't see that foundationless would make any difference. There are no pesticides to build up, so with or without foundation makes no difference. 

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

>I ask this question, as I was reading from your website and am trying to understand your theory that the reason to go foundationless is for no chemical contamination. 

I do not treat. I do not recommend it.

>It would appear that chemical contamination in a hive has more to do with what pesticides a beekeeper might put in his hive, and not to do with the type of foundation used.

If you do no treatments, then it makes a difference as far as clean comb, but the other impact is the cell size.


----------



## razoo (Jul 7, 2015)

Michael Bush said:


> >1. Pesticides in hives are there because beekeepers put them in
> 
> Yes. That and they are on the founadtion.
> 
> ...



So are you saying that foundation purchased from a reputable supplier already has pesticides or other chemical contamination in them?


----------



## lharder (Mar 21, 2015)

Michael Palmer said:


> Help me out here. How does one recognise or measure sublethal? Dr. Jim Frasier from Penn State said if you have 2 colonies in an apiary, and one is strong and one is weak, the weak one is because of a sublethal effect of pesticide.
> 
> I do hope someone will come up with something better than that.


Really? Quite a bit of work has been done re sublethal neonics and lots of argument about what it really means. But the studies are there. There is a recent thread in things scientific on this site. 

I'm not arguing for a primary role for neonics or other pesticides in colony stress. As far as contaminants are concerned we may not even be targeting the right things. I think other factors are more important. For instance I heard a talk of yours recently where you argued against import of bees from New Zealand to Canada. I strongly agree and we would have far fewer problems if we stopped moving bees all over the place. However, I can eat right, get lots of sleep, get my exercise, and still get cancer (or other ailments) from the 50s on. So what proportion of that is from genetic predisposition, and what proportion is from chemical exposure to carcinogens? If I get sick early enough it certainly will have an impact on my life long productivity. 

Sublethal is an interesting concept in biology and shouldn't be discounted.


----------



## lharder (Mar 21, 2015)

In Canada there is a move to improve record keeping and tracking with beekeepers by providing templates. While not explicitly stated, I think at least in part, this is to help beekeepers manage chemicals introduced into hives and reduce consumer exposure. 

As a TF keeper, on mostly foundationless, this is one aspect that I can have some assurance that my customers are getting minimum exposures to hive chemicals. I would like to see some surveys done where honey from every apiary was tested every few years to get a local and regional pesticide profile over time.


----------



## jwcarlson (Feb 14, 2014)

Aren't there commercial guys who migrate all over the country, treat their bees, and don't replace combs unless damaged?



lharder said:


> I would like to see some surveys done where honey from every apiary was tested every few years to get a local and regional pesticide profile over time.


Who's gonna pay?


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>So are you saying that foundation purchased from a reputable supplier already has pesticides or other chemical contamination in them?

Yes.

http://www.ent.uga.edu/bees/personnel/documents/Berry2008December.pdf

Maryann Frazier has also done research on this topic. The link I had to some of her work on the topic is broken...


----------



## lharder (Mar 21, 2015)

jwcarlson said:


> Aren't there commercial guys who migrate all over the country, treat their bees, and don't replace combs unless damaged?
> 
> 
> 
> Who's gonna pay?


It could be part of a general toxicological survey of landscapes. Much needed as part of public policy. Perhaps other methods would be better for overall levels, but in terms of pollinators, which provide much public good, it should be done to help shape agricultural policy. Then there is the safety of the honey as well. 

It doesn't mean blanket sampling every year. A bit of intelligence should reduce sampling and costs.


----------



## Michael Palmer (Dec 29, 2006)

lharder said:


> Sublethal is an interesting concept in biology and shouldn't be discounted.


Obviously true. But should we assume there is some harmful sublethal effect going on in our bees that are surrounded by neonic corn, and attack the farmer's use of it...without some kind of measurable proof? I think not, and that is my only point. Until someone can convince me, and as long as my apiaries are as productive as they are, I'm on the fence. At this point, I lean toward loss of forage as the biggest culprit in any reduction in apiary productivity. Not sublethal effects from anything.


----------



## lharder (Mar 21, 2015)

I saw some work about how bees dislike contaminate neonic nectar, so no doubt some compensation is going on. Seen it suggested that the effects of neonics are worse in areas where alternative forage isn't available. So perhaps your bees just aren't exposed for a number of reasons. I also don't discount the idea that bees can overtime become somewhat resistant to some pesticides over time. 

But its not just about the bees. Work was done in Saskatchewan about effects on other aquatic insect populations, song birds, contamination of surface water etc. 

Eventually the argument boils down to do we want to make environments less toxic, do we care about other critters who happen to be not human, and how do we make agricultural practices more sustainable over time, how much should we leave for the rest of living things?


----------



## Gypsi (Mar 27, 2011)

I only got through the first page, and it is very interesting, but I have to go to work. 

My experience: I do not have time to install foundation in frames so I never have. good bad or indifferent it is a time and money expense

I run plasticell wax coated from dadant alternating with foundationless frames, and in honey supers medium Illinois foundationless. I have not had a problem with them falling apart in the extractor. I have learned the hard way that deep frames absolutely require either 20 lb test weight fishing line or wire for reinforcement in the comb, a busted comb in a deep frame that I tried to remedy ended with one of my hives getting robbed out, and they had a great queen. I have pulled all deep foundationless and tossed in shed til I have time to string them.

as far as chemical buildup, they are getting whatever pesticides are in surrounding areas forage, not many. and I used oav last fall for mites. 

Old comb from an underperforming hive has a tendency to go in the wax melter if I'm not sure why they were underperforming. I need to make some candles as I don't make foundation.


----------



## FlowerPlanter (Aug 3, 2011)

>Aren't there commercial guys who migrate all over the country, treat their bees, and don't replace combs unless damaged?

I have no idea what they do with their comb. The USDA recommend a comb rotation. But that might explain why some commercial queens are getting a bad rep. Or why many packages don't even make it to winter let alone through it. It may not be related at all or it may be one small piece of the puzzle. 

If for no other reason; I don't like the smell of moth balls, I don't like the idea of eating honey stored in moth balled comb. If there is an easy way to keep it out of my hive I will. If it also saves me a buck a frame then so be it.

FYI if interested many of the bees supply companies will make you foundation with your wax.


----------



## lharder (Mar 21, 2015)

Certainly OAV is helpful re wax contamination and preventing accidental customer (sublethal) poisoning. Formic acid and OAV is just making inroads making inroads around here now.


----------

