# 'buzzkill' - dan rather reports on bee deaths among the almonds



## borderbeeman (Dec 16, 2010)

Dan Rather's team produced this 30 minute documentary from California's Almond groves, describing the current bee-disaster - with one bee farmer describing losses of 60% - many more losing 30-50-% of their hives. 

*http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJ5riRX1_3w&feature=youtu.be*

One bee-farmer says: "this may be the last year for large-scale beekeeping in the USA."

Every year, some 1,500,000 bee colonies are trucked from all over American to pollinate 825,000 acres of Almond trees in California's Central valley. The Almonds are the most valuable single crop on earth and generate more cash than California's wine and tourism industries combined.

Since 2006 there has been a catastrophe among the bees with roiughly 30% of America's bees dying each winter with the scientific evidence pointing overwhelmingly toward neonicotinoid pesticides used on corn (maize), oilseed rape. soybeans and cotton, as well as on the almonds themselves.

This year there has been an even greater disaster with some beekeepers losing up to 60% of their colonies. One beekeeper lost 10,000 colonies out of the original 13,000 healthy colonies he took to the Almonds.
This represents $millions in the loss of the bees themselves and $millions more in loss of cash income from almond pollination contracts ( each hive is worth $150 - $200 in pollination contracts).

Veteran CBS Anchorman Dan Rather reports on this agricultural disaster, which has not only crippled the almond crop, but destroyed many of the bees which are needed to pollinate apples, blueberries, watermelons, pumpkins etc, right across the country.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

I wonder how much these diebacks have to do w/ last Summers drought, causing starvation?


----------



## Bill Davis (Jul 16, 2012)

The voice of the beekeeper is not enough, when the almond growers and other fruit farmers start losing out and prices at the stores go crazy then maybe changes can happen.

I agree with one line in the special, " it's not rocket science, its more complicated."


----------



## ericweller (Jan 10, 2013)

I've seen pictures of the almond groves. Nothing for miles and miles but almond trees. I would call that a very sterile landscape. How can a bee expect to survive in that type of environment? Two weeks out of the year there is food and then nothing else. IMHO they need to leave natural hedgerows where there is other forage when almonds aren't blooming and let a natural bee population build. Bringing in 1.5 million hives per year is just exacerbating the problem by spreading disease from hive to hive and across the country. Plus, it has to stress out the bees being locked in a truck for days at a time. I don't think that is what God had in mind when He made the bee. 
My 2 cents!


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Eric, right now God is locking my bees inside their hives for the next two or three days w/ rain and cool temperatures. I guess your are refering to travel stress on the colonies of bees. We have been moving bees for thousands of years. Maybe not on semis and such great distances. But we do do it successfully. Trucking bees may be part of the problem, I guess. But, I still wonder about what happened in the environment during the last 12 to 24 months.

If someone could figure out what killed the colonies that died and why others have not, that wouyld be valuable information. So far, I believe we are grasping at straws.


----------



## red (Jan 15, 2013)

ericweller, This was my first year in the almonds and you can't see reality from a picture. There are ground cover plants blooming in the orchards and this year the bees made some honey. After the almonds there was lots of fruit trees blooming along with mustard and some other plants I haven't had time to look up yet because i'm dealing with hives full of bees.I only split half of my hives down there and should have done them all. So far I haven't seen any disease and there was four different people in the two orchards wear I was at. Also i'm not sure about the truck idea as the ones stopping by my house[the local rest area]only get a couple hours sleep and are back on the road. When I picked up mine I left at 3:00 am and got home the next morning at 2:30 am. I did get a nap for a half hour in the after noon. I'm not sure how the big guy's handle the work load and the stress but I plan on learning it in the near future. So until you get a small sample of pollination your thoughts are some what uninformed. I have to go now as i'm loading bees to head to the pears tonight.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Two drivers.


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

sqkcrk said:


> . But, I still wonder about what happened in the environment during the last 12 to 24 months.
> 
> If someone could figure out what killed the colonies that died and why others have not, that wouyld be valuable information. So far, I believe we are grasping at straws.


Mark, a day or two ago, I saw a piece on the Watertown Fox affiliate about Ted Elk, who I imagine you know. He was pretty gloomy, and said he was losing 35 to 45 percent of his hives every year. Do you know what he believes is killing his hives? The story was pretty light on details.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

I do know Ted. I don't know what has killed his bees. His numbers don't seem unuaual. I should have counted my "Winterloss", but didn't. I hope to go North w/ bees in as many boxes as I came South with. I don't know if it will happen.

Ted's bees come to SC, like mine do. Usually we can make up losses and then some. But I have never been able to double my colony count.


----------



## TWall (May 19, 2010)

> Every year, some 1,500,000 bee colonies are trucked from all over American to pollinate 825,000 acres of Almond trees in California's Central valley. The Almonds are the most valuable single crop on earth and generate more cash than California's wine and tourism industries combined.


I don't believe this is true. Maybe if you add the word legal, or honey bee pollinated crop. I suspect the pot crop is worth more: http://www.neontommy.com/news/2010/10/marijuana-californias-largest-cash-crop-worth-about-14-billion
http://westernfarmpress.com/tree-nuts/california-almond-leaders-predict-continued-prosperity

Tom


----------



## ericweller (Jan 10, 2013)

red, thanks for replying and trying to enlighten me.
I am a bit confused by your comments, however. From what you wrote, it sounds like there is an abundance of forage sources in the almond groves for the bees, is that correct? Of course, "abundance" can mean many things but basically, but I take it to mean that there is sufficient forage for the bees after the almond bloom to survive. If that is the case and the bees can exist in a grove and have plenty of food, why are hives shipped in for pollination? I would think that it would be more cost effective to keep a few hives going in the groves year round than shipping them across country.
I must be missing something critical.


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

sqkcrk said:


> I do know Ted. I don't know what has killed his bees. His numbers don't seem unuaual. I should have counted my "Winterloss", but didn't. I hope to go North w/ bees in as many boxes as I came South with. I don't know if it will happen.
> 
> Ted's bees come to SC, like mine do. Usually we can make up losses and then some. But I have never been able to double my colony count.


I just watched the Dan Rather video, and it's fairly depressing. Another guy I imagine you know, Jim Doan, was on it. I think the guy was practically in tears, and it's hard to blame him. He's one of the beekeepers who are suing the EPA, trying to get it to do its job. I Googled around a little and found an article that has a lot of stuff about Mr. Doan:

http://www.resilience.org/stories/2013-04-04/how-we-could-prevent-massive-bee-deaths-and-save-our-food

Another interesting guy on the video was Lyle Johnston, whose family has been keeping bees in Colorado for a 100 years. He was frankly apocalyptic, saying beekeeping as a profession was pretty much doomed and would be gone in 2 or 3 years. He did not have especially high losses, unlike many of the almond pollinators they talked to, but he keeps his hives in the CO mountains when not in the groves-- away from agriculture. That seems to be a common theme when you start looking into these matters. Jim Doan said the only time his bees looked like bees was while they were wintering in Florida in an area away from agriculture.

It makes you wonder if farmers are going to have to reach some sort of accommodation with beekeepers to limit destructive practices, if they want pollination. It's like now some farmers treat beekeepers like hookers-- the money's on the nightstand, now get out.

One of the most depressing parts of the video was the recent conference held in Washington to discuss the problems afflicting pollinators, in which most of the speakers were pesticide company reps and bureaucrats.


----------



## Nabber86 (Apr 15, 2009)

borderbeeman said:


> Every year, some 1,500,000 bee colonies are trucked from all over American to pollinate 825,000 acres of Almond trees in California's Central valley. The Almonds are the most valuable single crop on earth and generate more cash than California's wine and tourism industries combined.


It's hard to believe anything in the report when there are outright lies in the opening paragraph. 

The California wine industry was worth about $20 billion in 2011 and California tourism brings in about $95 billion a year. While the almond industry only brings in about $4 billion.

I wonder why they always have to lie about these numbers. It really destroys the credibility of the report.

Tourism: http://www.visitcalifornia.com/media/uploads/files/editor/Industry%20White%20Paper_June%20Update.pdf

Wine: http://www.wineinstitute.org/resources/statistics/article639

Almonds: http://www.nass.usda.gov/Statistics_by_State/California/Publications/Fruits_and_Nuts/201205almpd.pdf

Oh and agriculture disaster? What disaster?:



> *A record 2,600-pounds-per-acre *yield has been projected by USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service for the 2011–2012 California Almond crop, an increase of 200 pounds per acre, or 8%, over the previous yield-per-acre record set in 2008–2009. The California Almond objective forecast for the 2011–12 crop year is 1.95 billion meat pounds, which is based on 750,000 bearing acres. Overall, shipments were up 13%, reaching 1.668 billion pounds and marking the fifth consecutive year of record shipments across domestic and export markets.


Dan Rather has lost his mind.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

borderbeeman said:


> The Almonds are the most valuable single crop on earth and generate more cash than California's wine and tourism industries combined.


To supplement the links posted by _Nabber86_, here are USDA numbers for California farm commodities all in one chart:








The chart above is from this document:
http://www.nass.usda.gov/Statistics...ifornia_Ag_Statistics/Reports/2010cas-all.pdf

Its very difficult to take seriously a Dan Rather report that can't get even basic, *undisputed *facts straight! Its quite clear that almonds is not the #1 crop in California.


:ws:


----------



## JRG13 (May 11, 2012)

It's the same as when we had the 'drought' a few years ago. Southern Ca cried their eyes out, yet Agriculture posted record sales receipts.....


----------



## ersatzS2 (Sep 24, 2009)

Nabber86 said:


> Oh and agriculture disaster? What disaster?:
> 
> Dan Rather has lost his mind.


I have high skepticism as well. Dan Rather is an entertainment personality, not a journalist. The 'apocalypse' story is a dependable ratings getter, whether it is Y2K, global warming, dying seals, extinct bees or whatever. I'm not saying there isn't substance to any or all of these stories, but you won't get close to the truth of the matter via popular media.
I was at a lecture this winter by Dennis vanEngelsdorp, http://entomology.umd.edu/directory/faculty/dennisvanengelsdorp
who made the comment "I haven't seen a verified case of CCD in the US for two years." 
This is not to deny the testimony of commercial beekeepers who are losing hives, only to say that one prominent scientist is saying whatever killed them off, it wasn't CCD.


----------



## Nabber86 (Apr 15, 2009)

borderbeeman said:


> _*The Almonds are the most valuable single crop on earth *_and generate more cash than California's wine and tourism industries combined.


Oh my gosh I cut and pasted that quote and zeroed in on the dollar amounts for the various industries. I completely glazed over the *most valuable single crop on earth *bit. That is truely insane. 

Seriously, the *most valuable single crop on earth !?*

I mean really, the *most valuable single crop on earth ?*!

Did I mention that it is the *most valuable single crop on earth ?*!

(Sorry for repeting that phrase. I just want to make sure that I remember that almonds are the *most valuable single crop on earth *next time I am chatting with farmer.) 

:lpf::lpf:


----------



## JRG13 (May 11, 2012)

Really? Is there flakes of gold inside I'm missing out on?? I googled most valuable crop.... anyone want to guess... guess I needed to add 'commodity' to my search.


----------



## borderbeeman (Dec 16, 2010)

Apologies - that quote was not from Dan Rather or the video - that was from me. I picked it up from an American article about the issue and just assumed it was correct. I stand corrected. Dan Rather would not have made that mistake.


----------



## borderbeeman (Dec 16, 2010)

*Dan Rather*

In response to GM Charlie's ad-hominem attack on Dan Rather, which as usual was 'shoot the messenger - don't deal with the content of the report' - I append Dan Rather's entry from Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Rather

As you will see, Rather is arguably the most important anchorman in American TV history - certainly on the same ballpark as Walter Cronkite. He has received no less than 7 Peabody Awards - the top award in American journalism. 
He also received the Edward R Murrow award for distinguished journalism.


Award Year Program Title

Peabody 1975 CBS News 
Peabody 1976 60 Minutes 
Peabody 1994 CBS Reports: D-Day 
Peabody 1995 CBS Reports: In the Killing Fields of America 
Peabody 2000 48 Hours: Heroes Under Fire 
Peabody 2001 60 Minutes II: Memories of a Massacre 
Peabody 2004 60 Minutes II: Abuse at Abu Ghraib 


"Rather retired as the anchorman and Managing Editor of the CBS Evening News in 2005; his last broadcast was Wednesday, March 9, 2005.[46] He had worked as the anchorman for 24 full years, the longest tenure of anyone in American television history, and for a short time continued to work as a correspondent for 60 Minutes. 

Since retiring, Rather has spoken out strongly about what he perceives as *a lack of courage by American journalists*. On January 24, 2006, Rather spoke to a Seattle audience. Before the speaking engagement, he told a newspaper reporter, _*"In many ways on many days, reporters have sort of adopted the attitude of 'go along, get along.'"*_

_*"What many of us need is a spine transplant",* _Rather added.* "Whether it's City Hall, the State House, or the White House, part of our job is to speak truth to power."* [47]
"


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

borderbeeman said:


> Apologies - that quote was not from Dan Rather or the video - that was from me. I picked it up from an American article about the issue and just assumed it was correct.


And what is the _next _part of your original post that you will retract?



borderbeeman said:


> Veteran CBS Anchorman Dan Rather reports on this agricultural disaster, *which has not only crippled the almond crop*, but destroyed many of the bees which are needed to pollinate apples, blueberries, watermelons, pumpkins etc, right across the country.


If the current almond crop has indeed been "crippled", don't you think the almond growers would know that? :scratch: Instead, that is *not* what almond growers are reporting:


> Observers are reporting that almonds around the region are *developing well* under the influence of the generally beneficial weather conditions experienced over the past week. *Almonds of all varieties are well into the differentiation process*, with three to four sizes visible; the largest of these are breaking free from their jackets while the smallest are being shed from the trees.
> 
> http://almondinsights.com/blue-diamond-almonds-bloom-report-march-25-2013


Gee, "almonds around the region are developing well" doesn't exactly fit with your theory, does it?

:digging:


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

ericweller said:


> If that is the case and the bees can exist in a grove and have plenty of food, why are hives shipped in for pollination? I would think that it would be more cost effective to keep a few hives going in the groves year round than shipping them across country.
> I must be missing something critical.


Yes, you are missing something critical? I don't know if I can explain what that is very well. But, one thing I will say is that Almond Growers are not beekeepers. They can't maintain the numbers of beehives necassary to pollinate their groves. And if they tried to AFB rates in CA would go up.

Apple growers in NY used to own bees. They would buy packages in the Spring and restock their Winterkilled hives not knowing or understanding Bee Diseases.

There is more. Others can add to the list of why not.


----------



## Nabber86 (Apr 15, 2009)

*Re: Dan Rather*



borderbeeman said:


> In response to GM Charlie's ad-hominem attack on Dan Rather, which as usual was 'shoot the messenger - don't deal with the content of the report' - I append Dan Rather's entry from Wikipedia:


ad ho·mi·nem adjective \(ˈ)ad-ˈhä-mə-ˌnem, -nəm\

Definition of AD HOMINEM
1: appealing to feelings or prejudices rather than intellect 
2: marked by or being an attack on an opponent's character rather than by an answer to the contentions

Pointing out ones flagrantly erroneous data is a valid argument and not an Ad Hominem attack. 

*Interestingly enough though, your last post is a perfect example of the argumentum ad verecundiam fallacy. 
*
And you don’t need to tell us, we all know who Dan Rather is. Opinion here, not ad hominem, he was one of the greatest newcasters in American history. The operative word being “was”.

:digging::digging:


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

ersatzS2 said:


> I was at a lecture this winter by Dennis vanEngelsdorp, http://entomology.umd.edu/directory/faculty/dennisvanengelsdorp
> who made the comment "I haven't seen a verified case of CCD in the US for two years."
> This is not to deny the testimony of commercial beekeepers who are losing hives, only to say that one prominent scientist is saying whatever killed them off, it wasn't CCD.


When you really don't know what killed your colonies blaming CCD is rather easy. People need to learn how to say "I just don't know." or "I am not certain."


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

I get the impression that most of those making fun of the video didn't actually watch it. Whatever you think about Dan Rather, if you say there isn't a serious problem, or that the problem is being sensationalized, you're also saying that a lot of pretty good beekeepers are liars.


----------



## Nabber86 (Apr 15, 2009)

I believe that there is a problem, but sensationalism and presenting false data is _not_ the way to solve it. It never is.


----------



## Joel_T (Feb 8, 2013)

ericweller said:


> I've seen pictures of the almond groves. Nothing for miles and miles but almond trees. I would call that a very sterile landscape. How can a bee expect to survive in that type of environment? Two weeks out of the year there is food and then nothing else. IMHO they need to leave natural hedgerows where there is other forage when almonds aren't blooming and let a natural bee population build. Bringing in 1.5 million hives per year is just exacerbating the problem by spreading disease from hive to hive and across the country. Plus, it has to stress out the bees being locked in a truck for days at a time. I don't think that is what God had in mind when He made the bee. My 2 cents!


:thumbsup:


----------



## borderbeeman (Dec 16, 2010)

> Nabber86;917930]It's hard to believe anything in the report when there are outright lies in the opening paragraph.
> 
> The California wine industry was worth about $20 billion in 2011 and California tourism brings in about $95 billion a year. While the almond industry only brings in about $4 billion.




We seem to have contradictory information:

Associated Press Report:
http://news.yahoo.com/almonds-rising-revenues-land-values-soar-194440776--finance.html

"In 2011, for the first time,* the value of California's almond crop surpassed the state's iconic grape industry to move into second place, behind dairy, as the state's top commodity*. Almond producers increased their productivity and their orchard sizes, and shipments more than doubled over the past 10 years, according to the California Almond Board. During the 2011-2012 crop year, California farmers brought in $3.9 billion in revenue.

Almonds also became the top export, outpacing dairy and wine, mostly due to increased demand from Asia and a weak dollar, almond producers say. Two-thirds of the almonds produced today are shipped overseas.
"


----------



## red (Jan 15, 2013)

Eric, there is not enough forage to sustain the bees for a full year or make a marketable honey crop. I went down monday night and picked up my splits and they had new honey in them. They are going to the pears tonight and when they get done there I will put them on wild blackberries until mid July. Then they will come home and sit on clover and rabbit brush until winter. As I stated earlier this is my first year at trying to make money and the experience in Cali. might just be a lucky year but so far it's been great. I don't have many answers for the above article because i'm to new to the bee world [i'm starting my 6th year] but out of the 50 hives I lost last year it was my errors/laziness that caused them. I don't doubt pesticides cause some of the problems as well as moving bees around the country but I think allot of the problems people face are self inflicted.


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

Nabber86 said:


> I believe that there is a problem, but sensationalism and presenting false data is _not_ the way to solve it. It never is.


One of the messages in the research I've done is that beekeepers are the red-headed stepchildren of the agriculture industry. There are only about 1600 commercial beekeepers in the country, according to what I've read, and they are not a powerful enough bloc of either voters or money to influence policy. So what can be done to motivate other voters to care?

To judge by this thread, a lot of folks would rather nitpick facts that are not really relevant to the story than to pay attention to what the beekeepers in the story said. I don't much care what Dan Rather has to say about it, but I find it hard to ignore the things that actual beekeepers are saying. I don't care whether almonds are the number two crop or the number three crop in California. I do care that many highly skilled beekeepers are saying that this winter has been a disaster for them, and that they don't know what will become of their profession, if something isn't done to protect beekeepers. That's scary, and I'm just a hobbyist.

I can understand that many folks who have not yet experienced these catastrophic losses would prefer to believe that it can't happen to them. That's a common theme in most of these threads. Before he got hit, John Miller attributed massive CCD losses to PPB-- Piss Poor Beekeeping. After he lost a few thousand hives, he got a bit more humble.


----------



## BlueDiamond (Apr 8, 2011)

California's 780,000 bearing acres of California almonds http://tinyurl.com/bqv6vug was still adequately pollinated according to this March 6 article: http://tinyurl.com/d44g639

Blue Diamond Growers is by far the largest almond processor in California. Here are their "In The Field" reports for 2013: http://www.bluediamond.com/applications/in-the-field/index.cfm?navid=101 No mention is made of any nut set problems caused by a lack of enough honeybees. The almond growers are much more worried about the yield impacts of cuts in their irrigation water allocations; e.g. http://www.bluediamond.com/applications/in-the-field/index.cfm?orchardID=1402 "Growers receiving their water from the federal Central Valley Project have been advised that deliveries will be limited to 75% of contracted amounts" 

A couple years ago almond farmers in the western San Joaquin Valley were forced to let their almond orchards rot due to irrigation water cuts: http://disturbedsociety.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/PHO-09Oct29-184673.jpg http://mountainrepublic.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/congress-created-dust-bowl-3.jpg


----------



## BlueDiamond (Apr 8, 2011)

Nabber86 said:


> I believe that there is a problem, but sensationalism and presenting false data is _not_ the way to solve it. It never is.


True, sensationalism and presenting false data will not solve bee health problems, but a few opportunistic beekeepers could potentially get rich via creating a donation supported dot org group and filing lawsuits: http://pollinatordefense.org/site/?page_id=674


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

borderbeeman said:


> One bee-farmer says: "this may be the last year for large-scale beekeeping in the USA."


I've been hearing someone say this, every year.





rhaldridge said:


> a lot of folks would rather nitpick facts.


If by that you mean be honest, get the facts correct, call me and most of us here, nitpickers.




rhaldridge said:


> I don't much care what Dan Rather has to say about it, but I find it hard to ignore the things that actual beekeepers are saying.


Every year, out of the claimed 1600 commercial beekeepers, there will be a few that had a disastrous year and that has to happen, statistically. The skill of a sensationalist journalist, is to find those ones, interview them, build a compelling story with great headlines, and not report on the ones who did well as that would ruin the story.


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

Here is a fly for the ointment:
http://www.beesource.com/forums/showthread.php?280257-Is-their-a-new-way-to-treat-mites
Word on the street is that a lot of the larger operations have been using offlabel Amitraz...but since Tactik was taken off the market, the supply for this last season was not available.
Now, what beekeeper is going to tell Dan Rather that their bees aren't doing so well because they had trouble getting the illegal treatment they are used to using?

deknow


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

rhaldridge said:


> I get the impression that most of those making fun of the video didn't actually watch it. Whatever you think about Dan Rather, if you say there isn't a serious problem, or that the problem is being sensationalized, you're also saying that a lot of pretty good beekeepers are liars.


Many of us pay close attention to the data as it becomes available.
What does Dan Rather bring to the table?

deknow


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

deknow said:


> Here is a fly for the ointment:
> http://www.beesource.com/forums/showthread.php?280257-Is-their-a-new-way-to-treat-mites
> Word on the street is that a lot of the larger operations have been using offlabel Amitraz...but since Tactik was taken off the market, the supply for this last season was not available.
> Now, what beekeeper is going to tell Dan Rather that their bees aren't doing so well because they had trouble getting the illegal treatment they are used to using?
> ...


Actually that may be a very good point Deknow. In my country Apivar (the legal form of Amitraz bee treatment) is available and widely used, it is a great mite killer. With few other really great options available in the US, if Amitraz could no longer be obtained it could well be an issue. Having said all that, I have no idea whether these guys would have done anything illegal anyway, but when your back is against the wall, who knows.
I really do not understand why Apivar is not available in the US, seems rather foolish.


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

I always make good points...you just aren't always so good at noticing 

This was a point I was trying to get at with the Commercial TF thread. The contention was that TF beekeepers are somehow secretive about what they do and their results when compared to the mainstream commercial beekeepers.
Obviously, some good percentage of these commercial bees are managed in ways that are not public....if Dan Rather was doing "journalism", he would be looking into this aspect of the story...questioning his sources on the matter. "Reporting" what beekeepers think is killing their bees does no one any good.

deknow


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

deknow said:


> What does Dan Rather bring to the table?
> 
> deknow


Well certainly a good story. As a beekeeper though I found it very little use, no useful data given. It said nothing of hive management, I have no idea what program those hives have been on, nothing to form any kind of opinion to what may be happening. Course I wouldn't expect such a story to have a lot of technical data, it's primary purpose is to entertain the non beekeeping public.
What I have noticed over the years, is most of this stuff, in the end, mites are involved to some extent as part of the puzzle, so when you posted about the lack of Amitraz this season, kinda fit. Particularly as one of the big players who lost more than 1/2 his hives, made comment that they've had masses of mites this year.
All seems to fit.
The other thing the program brought out but did not give enough data on, is the almond groves are still expanding, but it did not say by how much. This creates demand for more bees, which could in itself be the problem rather than less bees.
Also, I could not help but notice the size of some of those beekeepers at that meeting. Just wondering how many hives they actually work themselves, and how much of the healthcare of their hives is left in the hands of low paid labor. I mean, a large guy, and 18,000 hives, who's actually ensuring each hive is healthy.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

deknow said:


> I always make good points...you just aren't always so good at noticing
> deknow


Or perhaps, I do notice, IF the points are good. 

In this particular case, we don't KNOW that these guys ever did anything illegal. It could explain a few things, but as you or I do not actually know, running around slandering folks is perhaps not the best kind of point to be trying to make. 

We know illegal use of Amitraz has been discovered. That does not mean every beekeeper in the country has been doing it.

But let's imagine they had, wouldn't the results of stopping this year, kind of run counter to the clamour of non commercial beekeepers saying the commercials should stop treating? If your theory is true and they did stop treating, look what happened.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

Oldtimer said:


> I really do not understand why Apivar is not available in the US, seems rather foolish.


The situation with Apivar changed last month. See this thread for more details about Apivar now becoming available in all 50 US states.

http://www.beesource.com/forums/sho...pivar-Section-3-registration&highlight=apivar


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Oldtimer said:


> Actually that may be a very good point Deknow. In my country Apivar (the legal form of Amitraz bee treatment) is available and widely used, it is a great mite killer. With few other really great options available in the US, if Amitraz could no longer be obtained it could well be an issue. Having said all that, I have no idea whether these guys would have done anything illegal anyway, but when your back is against the wall, who knows.
> I really do not understand why Apivar is not available in the US, seems rather foolish.


One complaint I have heard from fellow commercial beekeepers is, "Why don't beekeepers get treated like other farmers who get to buy chemicals and mix our own treatments?"


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

...but Amitraz found in pollen the last few years indicates illegal use...by the beekeepers who's pollen was sampled.

If Dan Rather were practicing journalism, this would be part of his story. He is not....he is presenting a story to an eager public that wants to hear about evil corporations.

deknow


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

deknow said:


> The contention was that TF beekeepers are somehow secretive about what they do and their results when compared to the mainstream commercial beekeepers. deknow


I know my memory isn't what it should be, but I don't recall you stating that in those words. Which Post was that?


----------



## Nabber86 (Apr 15, 2009)

borderbeeman said:


> We seem to have contradictory information:
> 
> "In 2011, for the first time, the value of California's almond crop surpassed the state's iconic grape industry to move into second place, behind dairy, as the state's top commodity. "


Did you stop to think before you posted that the _grape_ industry consists of _grapes_ and the _wine_ industry consists of _wine_. Grapes are a commodity that is used to produce wine. Maybe you don't understand this because they haven’t produced wine in your area since the Medieval Warming Period.

Anyway: 


Almonds are a $4 billion dollar-a-year industry (as I said),
California Wine is a $20 billion dollar-a-year industry (as I said), and apparently
Grapes must be something more than $4 billion dollar-a-year industry.


You said in you first post:


borderbeeman said:


> Almonds generate more cash than California's wine and tourism industries combined.


That is a lie.

You also said:


borderbeeman said:


> The Almonds are the most valuable single crop on earth


That is shear lunacy

Dan Rather reported that this was an "agricultural disaster", but the last part of you post above raves about how almonds are outpacing other crops:


borderbeeman said:


> Almonds also became the top export, outpacing dairy and wine, mostly due to increased demand from Asia and a weak dollar, almond producers say. Two-thirds of the almonds produced today are shipped overseas.


And before you go on about "outpacing dairy and wine" phrase, dont forget to read the word just before the comma - "export". That word means sending goods out of the US to other countries and doesn’t take include domestic consumption. 

So there we have what 4 or 5 instances of sensationalism, inconsistencies, lies, and fallacies in your posts? I don’t know because I lost count on page 1. 

As somebody said earlier in this thread: sensationalism and presenting false data is not the way to solve a problem.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Rader Sidetrack said:


> The situation with Apivar changed last month. See this thread for more details about Apivar now becoming available in all 50 US states.


OK well that's great news for you guys.
I use Apivar (Amitraz) quite a bit so I've got one piece of advice. It does not kill the mites outright, rather it paralyses them. If they get enough of a dose they fall off the bees and over a few days, starve to death. The downside of this somewhat round about way to kill mites, is that some of them hang on long enough to get back into a brood cell and lay eggs. So it can take several brood cycles to get nearly all mites.

If you want good success with Apivar, be sure to use enough, (two strips per brood box, ie, 4 strips in a 2 brood box hive), and leave it in for 10 weeks. At ten weeks, according to the manufacturer, the strips are still giving off 1/2 as much Amitraz as when new, which is still enough to do the business with the mites.

I might do a thread on this once people start using it.


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

Mark, the contention I posted above is the opposite of what I've said here and on the other thread. When I tried to bring up the offlabel use (especially of Amiztraz), no one (including you) was willing to address itl
http://www.beesource.com/forums/sho...ree-Commercial-Beekeepers&p=914311#post914311


> Now, if we want to talk about being honest and forthcoming, can I assume that since we don't read about offlabel use of Amitraz by commercial beekeepers that none of the commercial beekeepers who participate in this forum were using Amitraz at all while it was not permitted? What standards of full disclosure are being expected of whom?


...never answered, never commented on.

deknow


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

I remember that, and there was no way you were going to get a reply. Anybody innocent of it would have nothing to say, and anybody guilty of it would have nothing to say.

But hey, Amitraz in it's properly designed slow release form suitable for bees (Apivar) is a great, non residual product. If there has been a lot of illegal use in the form of fast release not bee appropriate forms, this may mean there could be resistance. Sad if that's the case.


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

Mark appears to have discussed this with his "fellow commercial beekeepers".

deknow


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

deknow said:


> Many of us pay close attention to the data as it becomes available.
> What does Dan Rather bring to the table?
> 
> deknow


Oh, I don't know... maybe giving these beekeepers a national forum on which to air their grievances?

Are you saying that beekeepers are such a politically powerful group that they don't need to get any messages out to the public?

I have to admit that while I've always wanted to keep bees, one of the factors that made me decide to actually do it was the sensationalized coverage of CCD. I would think that as a person who wrote a book encouraging neophytes to keep bees without chemical inputs (excellent book, by the way-- I have it on Kindle) you would see the value of publicizing the fact that many beekeepers are having a tough time keeping their businesses going, _despite_ the widespread use of miticides and other treaments. Even if they are incorrect about the reason for their difficulties, surely there is some value in letting the public know that these difficulties exist.

Maybe I'm wrong.


----------



## Joel_T (Feb 8, 2013)

Oldtimer said:


> I might do a thread on this (Apivar) once people start using it.


Why wait, might be boring then. I've no desire to use *any* treatment, but if push comes to shove, I'd like to understand the lesser (?) of the many evils. Is it safe?


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

rhaldridge said:


> Oh, I don't know... maybe giving these beekeepers a national forum on which to air their grievances?
> Are you saying that beekeepers are such a politically powerful group that they don't need to get any messages out to the public?


I didn't notice that there was a lack of coverage on the bee die offs.




> I would think that as a person who wrote a book encouraging neophytes to keep bees without chemical inputs (excellent book, by the way-- I have it on Kindle) you would see the value of publicizing the fact that many beekeepers are having a tough time keeping their businesses going, _despite_ the widespread use of miticides and other treaments.


You are missing the point. Why are these beekeepers being paid $200/hive for 2 weeks of pollination? Here is a hint....you are likely to get paid to go somewhere and to do something that you wouldn't want to do otherwise....if the job is in a dangerous war zone, the pay is likely pretty good. So far, no one has offered to pay me to go to Disneyland. What paradise do beekeepers who send their bees to the almonds expect?

The issue with the Amitraz is important...it shows that in fact, that the LACK of an illegal miticide seems to have caused real damage...that none of the things that the "industry" publicly tells the non-commercial beekeepers will work seem to be working for the part of the industry that is talking to Dan Rather....what has been working is something other than what the industry has been willing to admit they were using.
It would be like someone telling the media that their financial success came from the stock market, when in fact they were selling crack to make their money. The take home message would be, "work hard and trust the market and you will come out ahead", when the real message is, "sell crack and don't get caught....and definitely don't admit it."



> Even if they are incorrect about the reason for their difficulties, surely there is some value in letting the public know that these difficulties exist.


Not if the message is to take action that won't solve the problem....diverting attention from things that actually are causing problems.

deknow


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

OK well some of this is speculation leading to more speculation. As I've been a party to a little of this direction of the discussion I want to disassociate myself from some of the last few posts, to law abiding beeks this could be pretty offensive.

When varroa arrived in my country 13 years ago, the government looked at what was being done in other countries, and discovered mite resistance was occurring because the governments would sometimes allow only a narrow range of treatments, meaning they got use over & over, till they didn't work. Other treatment types that were not available, could only be used illegally in a form not designed for bees, also leading to resistance. So what happened here as a matter of deliberate policy, was a wide range of treatment types were approved for use, allowing rotation and less over exposure. In the main this has worked, although one area of the country now has Apistan resistant mites, because of a group of beekeepers there who used Apistan only, twice a year, every year, till it didn't work. :scratch:



Joel_T said:


> Why wait, might be boring then. I've no desire to use *any* treatment, but if push comes to shove, I'd like to understand the lesser (?) of the many evils. Is it safe?


Is it safe? No poison is safe. However the beauty of Amitraz compared to other synthetic strip miticides, is it is non residual. Once it gets out of the strip & into the hive, it is chemically unstable and has a 1/2 life of only a few days before it breaks down. So it does not leave a permanent residue of insecticide in the wax like say, Apistan. Or more correctly, it leaves the break down product, but that is a non issue as far as any potential negative effect.

So, in an ideal world, we don't treat. But if we have to treat, in my opinion Apivar (Amitraz, and not to be confused with Api Life Var), is a fairly friendly option. There is pretty much no method of mite treatment though, that does not have some side effect. Amitraz has in an experiment, appeared to shorten bees memories. Not that I've ever seen a noticeable effect on the performance of a hive.

Yes closer to the time I'll do a thread on it in the diseases section.


----------



## Joel_T (Feb 8, 2013)

Oldtimer said:


> Amitraz has in an experiment, appeared to shorten bees memories. Yes closer to the time I'll do a thread on it in the diseases section.


Well, I suppose a balanced relationship is Ok. They'll forget me about the same time I forget them 

In the meantime....looking forward to your thread.


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

deknow said:


> I didn't notice that there was a lack of coverage on the bee die offs.deknow


I certainly hope there's plenty of coverage. Just today, in that well-known bastion of yellow journalism, NPR's Science Friday, they were discussing the bee die-offs. I don't see how this is a terrible problem. 

It seemed to me that the main value of the Rather piece was to put human faces on those who are in trouble.



Y


deknow said:


> ou are missing the point. Why are these beekeepers being paid $200/hive for 2 weeks of pollination? Here is a hint....you are likely to get paid to go somewhere and to do something that you wouldn't want to do otherwise....if the job is in a dangerous war zone, the pay is likely pretty good. So far, no one has offered to pay me to go to Disneyland. What paradise do beekeepers who send their bees to the almonds expect?deknow


So... it's the beekeepers' fault? They should just stay home and try to make a living competing with Chinese honey? I guess the almond growers could import 747s full of Chinese bees.




deknow said:


> Not if the message is to take action that won't solve the problem....diverting attention from things that actually are causing problems.
> 
> deknow


I wish I could believe that any action was being taken, or recommended. I thought the sad little message of the piece was that no one was willing to do anything other than catch flak for the pesticide industry.

Am I understanding you correctly that you think a better story would be that the beekeepers are doing it to themselves? That might be true. I've been researching neonicotinoids, and there are treatment free beekeepers in the middle of corn country who are doing fine. That story, however might be a harder sell. But it could be coming. Outliers in a disaster are always interesting to journalists, and at some point they may discover this stuff.

When I read The Beekeeper's Lament, about migratory beekeeper John Miller, I was astonished to see that the journalist who wrote it had no idea that it was even possible to keep bees alive without treatment.


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

I think its rather ironic that not a single beekeeper from the U.S. posting on Beesource seems to know anything about Amitraz. Speculation, perhaps...but it simply isn't believable that no one knows anything.

From: http://www.aphis.usda.gov/plant_hea...ees/downloads/2011_National_Survey_Report.pdf



> Thymol and 2, 4 Dimethylphenyl (a metabolite of Amitraz), both detected in 27.3% of
> the samples...


...metabolite of Amitraz found in almost 30% of hives tested? ...in 2011 when the use of Amitraz was illegal?
...at an average of 100ppb levels?


> Alabama, California, Colorado,
> Florida, Idaho, Indiana, New York, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas and Wisconsin.
> We received 99 samples from these states


...this was pollen collected from brood comb (not trapped pollen).
If we extrapolate this data to show the prevelence of things stuffed into the hive by the beekeeper, we see Fluvalinate, Coumaphos as the most prevelent, and thymol and Amitraz tying for third. Of the 4 of these, one wasn't legal to use in any form in beehives in the U.S. in 2011.
As I said before, Amitraz was in short supply this past year....I've heard rumors that some commercials couldn't get the stuff, and it was their treatment of choice.
Of course this isn't every commercial or every migratory commercial....but I don't believe for a moment that the commercial beekeepers on this list don't know about it.
Let's hear some details.

deknow


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

How residual is Thymol in a hive Dean?

I used it for the first ever time this year and have been wondering.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

deknow said:


> Mark, the contention I posted above is the opposite of what I've said here and on the other thread. When I tried to bring up the offlabel use (especially of Amiztraz), no one (including you) was willing to address itl
> http://www.beesource.com/forums/sho...ree-Commercial-Beekeepers&p=914311#post914311
> 
> ...never answered, never commented on.
> ...


Thank you. I knew, since you wrote so here, that you had written something along those lines. I used the Amitraz strips when they came out in 1990, or whenever they came out. Miticure was their name, if I recall correctly. 

As far as addressing offlabel use, what would you have me say? I have already written that beekeepers want to be treated the same as other farmers.


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

Oldtimer said:


> How residual is Thymol in a hive Dean?
> 
> I used it for the first ever time this year and have been wondering.


I don't know...I know one commercial treatment free beekeeper that loaned some supers to a "natural" beekeeper. Supers came back stinking of thymol. I don't assume treatment was applied properly (when supers are not on the hive) or appropriately (an appropriate amount of thymol).

Bill Petch told us that as a bookbinder, the paste from the gluepot would always turn moldy. Every bookbinder has a tin of thymol crystals next to the glue pot. A single crystal dropped in the pot (with tweezers), would stink up the room (well, probably a better stink than the glue pot without the thymol), and the paste would never mold.

I've never used it.

deknow


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

deknow said:


> You are missing the point. Why are these beekeepers being paid $200/hive for 2 weeks of pollination? Here is a hint....you are likely to get paid to go somewhere and to do something that you wouldn't want to do otherwise....if the job is in a dangerous war zone, the pay is likely pretty good. So far, no one has offered to pay me to go to Disneyland. What paradise do beekeepers who send their bees to the almonds expect?
> 
> deknow


Dean,
Do you know any beekeepers who take or send bees to almonds in CA? Have you talked to them?

I can't say that I know what they expect, other than to get paid for good strong colonies. I know what some of them find when they get their bees back. One friend who sent 5 loads to CA has all of his hives back and is making splits from them. Some of which have enuf bees and brood to take two nucs out of and leave a colony which will be ready for apples in NY or Blueberrys in ME. That's a guy, actually three guys, here in SC.

Another person I am "FRIEND"s w/ on Facebook is from WA and he is finding them in similar good shape.

This is not uncommon from what I have heard and seen over the past 5 or 6 years, so, whether they expect this sort of outcome or not, they prepare to take advantage of this sort of result.

But, maybe you were thinking of something else?


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

sqkcrk said:


> As far as addressing offlabel use, what would you have me say?


Anything would suffice. After all the demands made of me in the other thread (the finances, medical history, and numbers of all treatment free commercial beekeepers), and the general consensus that what conventional commercial beekeepers do is an open book (as opposed to the secretive world of treatment free beekeepers who won't post on beesource), I think you could talk about what you hear/see people doing without naming names.
You certainly don't have to...that's your business.



> I have already written that beekeepers want to be treated the same as other farmers.


...required to follow label requirements?

deknow


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

deknow said:


> I think its rather ironic that not a single beekeeper from the U.S. posting on Beesource seems to know anything about Amitraz. Speculation, perhaps...but it simply isn't believable that no one knows anything.
> 
> Let's hear some details.
> 
> deknow


Is there something specific you want to know, which we can discuss on beesource.com? It's my understanding that discussion of off label use of miticides is verbotten on beesource.com. So, what do you want to know?


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

deknow said:


> ...required to follow label requirements?
> 
> deknow


Go to any orchard, vegetable field, dairy, etc. and you will find 5 gallon jugs of chemicals that those farmers mix themselves for application. That's what I was refering to. Many commercial beekeepers find manufactured strips onerously expensive. Compared to what it would cost to make strips or other delivery devices themselves.


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

sqkcrk said:


> Is there something specific you want to know, which we can discuss on beesource.com? It's my understanding that discussion of off label use of miticides is verbotten on beesource.com. So, what do you want to know?


Well, I think there are two things you could clarify. You doubtless know more commercial and migratory commercial beekeepers that I do. Not everyone reading has the resources to know if I'm just making things up. There are 2 things I've been saying that could use a general confirmation, denial, or clarification:

1. That for years, Amitraz has been popular among some circles of commercial beekeepers....offlabel (not registered for bees at all)

2. That Tactik was a formulation that beekeepers were using to mix their own mite treatments...and that the fact it has been taken off the market was perceived as a problem by these beekeepers going into this past winter.

These two points are important, because if the above contributed to the bee die off this year, then we should not be putting all the blame on neonics...or pinning the solutions on banning neonics.

I'm certainly not ruling out the contribution of neonics...in fact, look at the last page of that survey I posted with the pollen contamination. Imidacloprid in 9.1% of samples...at an average level of 30.8ppb!!!! That is pollen/beebread taken from the comb, not trapped pollen...that's what is in the brood nest.

But having Dan Rather talk about the bee die offs, and not talk about what beekeepers are adding to the chemical equation, and what they are actually doing doesn't serve any real purpose...but to sell advertising on the news.

deknow


----------



## hpm08161947 (May 16, 2009)

deknow said:


> But having Dan Rather talk about the bee die offs, and not talk about what beekeepers are adding to the chemical equation, and what they are actually doing doesn't serve any real purpose...but to sell advertising on the news.
> 
> deknow


I suppose it is ok to talk about amitraz these days on Beesource since it has been "OKed". TakTic was taken off the market nearly a year ago and would have been unlikely to contribute to the problems that many commercial beekeepers have had, rather the absence of Amitraz....


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

1. Yes, I would say that that has been true.
2. Yes, true for those who hadn't stocked up before hand.

I agree w/ your 4th paragraph.

"The medium is the message." Someone smarter than me wrote that. I think I recall him being from somewhere in Canada.

Have you written to Dan Rather explaining your disappointment?


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

hpm08161947 said:


> ...would have been unlikely to contribute to the problems that many commercial beekeepers have had, rather the absence of Amitraz....


Exactly.

What did they use instead?

deknow


----------



## Keith Jarrett (Dec 10, 2006)

What a total BS story that was, a complete waste of time. I have bees in crows Landing, with in a mile on either side of Perez ranch that the yellow boxes were shown, I wish Dan would have stuck his nose in one of those blue boxes to find out how the CCD was doing.


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

A few notes from the video:
25:30-Shop towel treatment?
28:10-Shop towel treatment between boxes?
29:24-Same

What was on the shop towels?

deknow


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

deknow said:


> A few notes from the video:
> 25:30-Shop towel treatment?
> 28:10-Shop towel treatment between boxes?
> 29:24-Same
> ...


You'd have to ask the beekeeper. Any other answer would be speculation, not knowledge. Unless someone actually knows. I don't.


----------



## hpm08161947 (May 16, 2009)

deknow said:


> A few notes from the video:
> 25:30-Shop towel treatment?
> 28:10-Shop towel treatment between boxes?
> 29:24-Same
> ...


I can not say with 100% certainty......but with enough certainty to make a wager on it. Those- all of them - are not shop towel treatments.... they are the remains of pollen patties.....


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

oh....that well could be. I've never used a pollen patty, so I don't really know what the remains look like.

Apologies to all.

deknow


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

deknow said:


> A few notes from the video:
> 25:30-Shop towel treatment?
> 28:10-Shop towel treatment between boxes?
> 29:24-Same
> ...


I went and looked and what I saw was protien patty paper and an uneaten protien patty.


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

Ramona googled Jim Doan and found this video:




...at about 2:35 there is a blue shop towel being dunked into something....not pollen.

deknow


----------



## hpm08161947 (May 16, 2009)

It would not surprise me that the lack of a good miticide, or at least an economically viable one, significantly contributed to these deaths.


----------



## hpm08161947 (May 16, 2009)

deknow said:


> Ramona googled Jim Doan and found this video:
> 
> ...at about 2:35 there is a blue shop towel being dunked into something....not pollen.
> 
> deknow


Is someone suggesting that commercial beekeepers have never used TakTic on shop towels?


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

deknow said:


> After all the demands made of me in the other thread (the finances, medical history, and numbers of all treatment free commercial beekeepers), and the general consensus that what conventional commercial beekeepers do is an open book (as opposed to the secretive world of treatment free beekeepers who won't post on beesource),
> 
> deknow


Ha Ha, got to say that's a little Rich, Deknow. 

Please let me refresh your memory. Although these questions or "demands" if you want to call them that, were posed, they went unanswered by the "secretive" treatment free beekeepers.

(Your claim, Amitraz effects memory).

So how does the secret world of treatment free commercial results, somehow translate, into traditional commercial beekeepers have to be an open book?

LOL! I love the debate on this place.


----------



## Slow Modem (Oct 6, 2011)

What's the frequency, Kenneth?


----------



## cg3 (Jan 16, 2011)

Slow Modem said:


> What's the frequency, Kenneth?


That's several times today I've literally laughed out loud on Beesource.


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

Oldtimer said:


> Please let me refresh your memory. Although these questions or "demands" if you want to call them that, were posed, they went unanswered by the "secretive" treatment free beekeepers.


What was unanswered? I posted quite a bit about what Kirk, Dee, and Bob do....Chris Baldwin posted his own information. Both Kirk and Dee have readily available writings talking about what they do. I corrected a lot of misinformation.

Outside of the kind of financial and operational numbers that we also don't know from conventional beekeepers, what is "secret"?



> (Your claim, Amitraz effects memory).


I was joking because somhow no one remembered the migratory, almond pollinating treatment free beekeeper that had posted earlier in the thread.



> So how does the secret world of treatment free commercial results, somehow translate, into traditional commercial beekeepers have to be an open book?


I don't have time to dig through and produce quotes at the moment...on my way out. There were several claims that the conventional commercial model was an open book, and that any number of ways to run an operation were transparant in a way that the treatment free folks weren't.
But if a sizeable percentage have been using off label treatments and not talking about it. _and_ if the commercial beekeepers participating in that thread knew what I was talking about but wouldn't acknowledge....what is the open book? That the treatments that are available and recommended work? ...well enough that there is no wide scale use of illegal treatments by the commercial beekeeping community?
The contention was that there was nothing to compare...that we knew what the conventional beekeepers were doing, but not the treatment free. This was a false contention.

deknow


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Well what I was interested in was their production results. None were forthcoming. Just to refresh your memory.  

That's what I was referring to, as I am sure you are aware.

And although it's somewhat nosey to ask such a question, really, when people such as Dee are fairly insistent we should do things a certain way, some kind of yardstick should be held up to show it works. Mere survival of the bees is not a suitable yardstick to a commercial beekeeper. Production is, as it is that that makes a commercial outfit viable, or not.

I'm not insisting that question be answered, it's personal, particularly if the results in question are nothing to write home about. The right to remain silent is there I didn't quibble with that. Likewise, if you are accusing somebody of breaking the law, it's hardly realistic to expect somebody to come along on a chat site, and fess up. But, if you want to keep trying, please go ahead....

Just pointing out that the argument that you answered some questions (but not the important ones) re management, so therefore somebody has to fess up to doing something illegal, is a rather weak argument, and is unlikely to translate into reality.

However to the thread OP, I would say, this thread may show, if you read it properly, how things do not always turn out as they may seem. Hence the initial scepticism of some members, to some of the claims on the video. Not everybody, always, says everything they know.


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

Keith Jarrett said:


> What a total BS story that was, a complete waste of time. I have bees in crows Landing, with in a mile on either side of Perez ranch that the yellow boxes were shown,


So he actually did better than a 4.1 frame average having your bees within distance working his bloom!


----------



## Keith Jarrett (Dec 10, 2006)

Barry said:


> 4.1 frame average having your bees within distance working his bloom!


LOL....Barry, what did you think of that 30 minute disaster.


----------



## hpm08161947 (May 16, 2009)

Keith Jarrett said:


> LOL....Barry, what did you think of that 30 minute disaster.


I'm not Barry.... but I just gotta ask... Was it really that tough out there this year getting good bees?


----------



## Keith Jarrett (Dec 10, 2006)

hpm08161947 said:


> Was it really that tough out there this year getting good bees?


For the growers it was, for "the beekeepers" it wasn't, for "the box haulers" slop fest was in full swing.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

deknow said:


> and not talk about what beekeepers are adding to the chemical equation,
> 
> deknow


I totally agree , I think we have to take a good look at ourselves to find the solution to our problems
alot of beekeepers like playing the blame game


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

deknow said:


> ...at about 2:35 there is a blue shop towel being dunked into something....not pollen.
> 
> deknow


looks suspicious, but I also know of producers using the blue shop towel with menthol,


----------

