# Sticky  Treatment Free as a commercial management strategy



## DavidBrown1212

I am an agriculturist, by nature. I have grown quite a variety of things for profit, and quite often at considerable scale. I make my money on small grains and cattle, but some poultry, waterfowl and fruit also help.

So I come to apiculture last year, and I see this mite issue effecting bees, and profit. I see this as quite a familiar issue, for no profitable livestock has ever gone long without parasitic loss... but wow, not only are the losses extensive but the treatment itself can be incredibly profit robbing. 

I dont understand the resistance to moving more towards a "treatment free" or "survivor" or I would put it "cost mitigating" management style, especially by the commercial beekeeping sector. Everyone wins, the backyard keeper keeps more hives, the organic hippie doesn't get chemicals in his bowl, and the commercial beekeeper doesnt have a $8k Apivar bill. 

The main issue seems to be a cultural push back from the commercial growers, and I think its just a lack of organization and understanding. The solutions to reaching treatment free have become well documented and understood, there a number of selectable traits we can track and select for. The trouble is, most commercial guys only see the first couple of years production and give up, without a full understanding of how that could play out in the future.

Let me tell you how we did this in commercial poultry, because we converted almost the entire industry to being treatment free over the last decade. That "no antibiotics ever" chicken was a industry wide effort, and it worked great. We used to feed a collection of antibiotics and growth stimulators, but this was causing a string of problems, with climbing costs. Some small studies showed the existence of "survivor" strains, and a heritable resistance to certain coccidia and bacterium. Then the biggest companies jumped in and we bred some more at great scale and crossed the most resistant strains. Then the killing started, wiping out the majority of genetic lines. Because we killed everything, every single bird with no resistance, we naturally lost production and feed efficiency. It was hard for a couple of generations, but we recovered. Production is largely back to baseline, with slightly lower feed efficiency. Profitability is way up, and management has been simplified. 

How do we do we accomplish this in the commercial beekeeping?


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

Commercial chickens are raised in a "closed" system. Your chickens have no interaction with outside / wild chickens.

How would you achieve that kind of insular system with honey bees?


----------



## ursa_minor

I will hazard a guess to the problem of getting there. Bees, unlike chickens cannot be bred across the board for the qualities they desire, or in the same short time frame. The act of breeding for mite resistance and then selecting for that resistance can be undone by unrecognized superseders with those virgin queens open mating before we even know they exist. Controlling a DCA area is very different from controlling a flock of chickens.

Add to that, we would need every beekeeper in every apiary big and small to adhere to the same restrictions and methods, we cannot get them to agree on top entrance bottom entrance. 

I would like to be treatment free and I do not think it is Commercial guy that is the problem. It is the length of time required to get there. Every commercial person would like to not have to go out with OAV multiple times, not have to look at dead outs, soaring mite loads and the cost of treatments, they clearly understand the problem. Unfortunately they also understand that the length of time to get there is not going to happen in their lifetime.


----------



## GregB

DavidBrown1212 said:


> I am an agriculturist, by nature. ...........
> 
> How do we do we accomplish this in the commercial beekeeping?


Accomplish what exactly?
"Antibiotic-free" bees?

Well, in the US people do not consume bees for food.
Thus you can not sell "ecologically clean" bees at higher mark-up because they are a "better food item".
You see, chickens <> bees in the context of wide market consumable products.

Regarding the honey as food - makes no difference what bees produce the honey.
Honey "purity" is a function of somewhat different parameters.
"Treatment-free" bees do not automatically and by extension produce a "better food item".

Treatment-free bees are not better pollinators.
Rather they are worse due to less dependability (critical in the pollination business).

Treatment-free bees maybe more expensive in the bee/queen sales market.
But the general public cares very little about this (rather small) niche sub-market (beekeeper to beekeeper sales).

I say figure out the nuts and bolts of the beekeeping as an industry and as a process first.
Once understood, make your proposals.
(Not that I understand it, just some kinda-sorta very basics).


----------



## fieldsofnaturalhoney

DavidBrown1212 said:


> How do we do we accomplish this in the commercial beekeeping?


And that is the trillion dollar question?🍿I wouldn't call it a resistance, more like too big of a risk & time consumption? Are there zero TF commercial apiaries that run bees to pollination contracts?


----------



## GregB

DavidBrown1212 said:


> I dont understand the resistance to moving more towards a "treatment free"


Regarding this - you should try the "treatment free" management.
Try it for 3-5 years.
It will be a very educational experience.
You may succeed, it is entirely possible.


----------



## DavidBrown1212

To a certain extent commercial poultry are cut off from each other, but some pathogens they still share with the outside world, like coccidia. No effective quarantine has been done with it, yet it's been wiped out through selection. 
As far as I know, the only pathogen we are currently effectively isolating from is mycoplasma, which comes in two flavors. Influenza seems to be a mixed bag, and killing the entire population is still the common practice. Killing is the only practice for everything else I can think of. 

We will all have to find as many weak bees as possible and kill them. And we won't get very far super fast, but we all work together, or as a group with a common purpose of sustainable apiculture, we could make definitive progress. That first year is going to be rough, huge losses for sure.

I have talked some big time producers doing it, and I have talked to the USDA about it, it seems like these questions have largely been answered in theory and practice, just not accepted. 

The good news, keeping mites from reproducing is not that hard, their reproductive cycle is crazy complex and open to manipulation in many ways.


----------



## msl

DavidBrown1212 said:


> I dont understand the resistance to moving more towards a "treatment free" or "survivor"


The answer is simple, many have tried, there bees died, dead bees don't make $$$$
if $30 (or what ever) in treatments means you make the grade for almonds at $200 a hive... it makes bisnues sense to treat

here is a good look at some one who tryed... had to keep getting bees from his dad, kept taking massive losses and fushing $$ down the drain






if you haven't, read this https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/00218839.2016.1160709
then... keep in mind these points

he kept very small yards by US commercial standards.. 20-25 hives per yard


> Usually 20–25 colonies were maintained in 20 + apiaries


while the paper makes it sound good... by 2010 his son took over


> Time brings change. Kefuss has turned over honey production in the French apiaries to his son Cyril, remarking “It’s easier to lift a queen than a deep super of honey.”


 http://ncbees.org/library/John Kefuss Keeping Bees That Keep Themselves.pdf&.pdf
and then took 70+% losses a while back and was down to 70 hives and the stock is now treated




2016 he was up to 103, 2017 was a bad year Log into Facebook

A far cry form the paper saying


> s. In 2013, 519 non-treated colonies from both groups were being used for commercial beekeeping, and mite populations were very low


now lets not forget his other operation


> His apiary in Chile, Pacific Queens with partner Francisco Rey, has 4,000 hives for pollination, queen rearing and honey production. With opposite seasons, they can provide 6,000 queens to France in February and March. “In 1994 we had European foulbrood, chalkbrood and mean bees. We started to select for hygienic behavior, and in about two years time these problems were eliminated. We’ve been running the Bond test there for over 10 years.”





http://ncbees.org/library/John%20Kefuss%20Keeping%20Bees%20That%20Keep%20Themselves.pdf&.pdf



despite all the work put in, runing bonded TF breeders, the operation needed to treat to stay profitable when the bees were under the stresses of commercial pollination. It just didn't work

as Greg notes, the consumer maters...
they were willing to pay a premium for ainbitioc free chicken... we would need such a premium on honey, and really pollination services
long and short treating makes you a lot more money, till that shifts nothing changes.. I

lasty, the chicken industry had big corporate breeders that send out there stock to be contract raised and returned to them
save 2 cents per bird on medication adds up, (or charge2c more from it being premium) say if your Purdue @700 million chickens a year thats $14,000,000 a year in increased profits!!!!
2 cents more per hive? thats like $60 on a 3k hive operation... never going to see it
even 2c pound more for honey is only $40 more a ton...

now this is what cuba did... you have to buy your queens from the state and sell your honey to the state at the state dictated price and treatments are banned... so they have a strong state run TF breeding program... your just not going to see that level of co op in the states... 



DavidBrown1212 said:


> We will all have to find as many weak bees as possible and kill them.


its been done....








We (usa) have killed off close to 40% a year for the past decade
that's 10,400,000 hives dead in the last 10 years out of 2.6 million alive at any point.. we have killed over 4x the the total population, and no were closer to a solution
it sounds real good on paper...but its just not how bees work

look in to what Randy Oliver is doing its a reansabul plan, but the pace is painstaking slow


----------



## Gray Goose

DavidBrown1212 said:


> I am an agriculturist, by nature. I have grown quite a variety of things for profit, and quite often at considerable scale. I make my money on small grains and cattle, but some poultry, waterfowl and fruit also help. *a good base*
> 
> So I come to apiculture last year, and I see this mite issue effecting bees, and profit. I see this as quite a familiar issue, for no profitable livestock has ever gone long without parasitic loss... but wow, not only are the losses extensive but the treatment itself can be incredibly profit robbing. * hmm I'm treating for a couple bucks a hive, so not "incredible profit robbing" time , fuel, schedule has to be taken into consideration as well. time is money.*
> 
> I dont understand the resistance to moving more towards a "treatment free" or "survivor" or I would put it "cost mitigating" management style, especially by the commercial beekeeping sector. Everyone wins, the backyard keeper keeps more hives, the organic hippie doesn't get chemicals in his bowl, and the commercial beekeeper doesnt have a $8k Apivar bill. *Show us the way, if it works, many can follow*. *Do you presume no one has tried?*
> 
> The main issue seems to be a cultural push back from the commercial growers, and I think its just a lack of organization and understanding. The solutions to reaching treatment free have become well documented and understood, there a number of selectable traits we can track and select for. The trouble is, most commercial guys only see the first couple of years production and give up, without a full understanding of how that could play out in the future. * since you have a fuller understanding go for it, again do it and document. guy has 1500 hives you think he is disorganized? most commercials today are 2nd 3rd or 4th generation. well documented, I keep show those docs to me bees , they die anyway.*
> 
> Let me tell you how we did this in commercial poultry, because we converted almost the entire industry to being treatment free over the last decade. That "no antibiotics ever" chicken was a industry wide effort, and it worked great. We used to feed a collection of antibiotics and growth stimulators, but this was causing a string of problems, with climbing costs. Some small studies showed the existence of "survivor" strains, and a heritable resistance to certain coccidia and bacterium. Then the biggest companies jumped in and we bred some more at great scale and crossed the most resistant strains. Then the killing started, wiping out the majority of genetic lines. Because we killed everything, every single bird with no resistance, we naturally lost production and feed efficiency. It was hard for a couple of generations, but we recovered. Production is largely back to baseline, with slightly lower feed efficiency. Profitability is way up, and management has been simplified. * bees are not chickens*
> 
> How do we do we accomplish this in the commercial beekeeping? *it is being worked on , is the solution here today, not sure.*


comments in line.

so get some bees maybe only 50-100 hives, keep them alive and productive for 5 years, then we can talk. , then scale that x10 and you are a successful commercial beekeeper.
Interesting how after 45 years of keeping bees, I lack understanding.
And how many barrels of honey did you produce last season?

not being disrespectful, but you need a reality check.
not every thing documented works in every Ag Zone.

GG


----------



## ursa_minor

DavidBrown1212 said:


> I dont understand the resistance to moving more towards a "treatment free" or "survivor" or I would put it "cost mitigating" management style, especially by the commercial beekeeping sector.


I don't think the resistance is to treatment free, or survivor stock it is to the obvious inability to prove it's effectiveness on a large scale, or to the backyard keeper who struggles with neighbours who do not wish to control their mites at all. 

The term TF is confusing as it brings up connotations of not doing anything rather than doing what we can with the least harm to all involved. 



DavidBrown1212 said:


> We will all have to find as many weak bees as possible and kill them. And we won't get very far super fast, but we all work together, or as a group with a common purpose of sustainable apiculture, we could make definitive progress. That first year is going to be rough, huge losses for sure.


Oh it will be more than the first year. In the first year those losses can wipe out an entire operation with no guarantee that the ones left have any better genetic traits in dealing with varroa. They could be just lucky that they were large enough to sustain the losses, had a late brood break so varroa was not able to multiply fast enough before the winter, or were not the subject of a mite rich robbing event. 

Bees that survive with low varroa and allow the keeper to do minimal treatment do so partly because of semi isolation and because the neighbouring beekeepers control mites, not necessarily because their stock is better than any other at dealing with varroa. 


If the cure is worse than the sickness you need to find a new cure. That is how I view the TF program as it sits now, they need a new message rather than just 'let them die'.


----------



## crofter

Beside a new message, the movement also need some convincing messengers! Reality trumps ideology!

This is going to be a hard group to sell if the message is low on reality and needs _oodles _of hope to make it fly.


----------



## joebeewhisperer

The number of variables here is vast. I’m all about breeding better, .... well anything, but millions of man-hours have been put in by teams at universities. Many of these folks are not only lifetime, but generational beekeepers. Is there a solution? Partially, but it doesn’t fit with ag biz.

I now run a variety of bees that both myself and USDA believes to be very resistant to mites. But if you need more than a few dandelions pollinated before May, this is not your bee. To use them for early pollination (or an early honey flow), one would need to manipulate them heavily into brooding early.

This is completely against their nature, would be expensive/time consuming, and blows 90% of their chief resistance mechanism, which is long broodless periods.

Throw in open mating of 5 million queens a year with 12-24 drones of various origin, and you start to see the tip of a very large iceberg.

I grew up in an area of small cattle farms, a few small hog producers, and hundreds of broiler houses. A few of these guys would buy sawdust from Dad’s mill and we may have had better insight to what was going on in poultry than the average consumer. I applaud moving commercial chicken forward, largely because it’s better for the consumer.

That said, you picked a good place to get responses. 😂 But it may come off as man-splaining to hundreds of people whose wisdom is based on more time and treasure invested than you are realizing.


----------



## G3farms

If there was a "silver bullet" that would kill mites with one treatment, had a modest cost per hive, was FDA approved to use while honey supers were on and only needed one treatment per hive for the life of the hive............................would you use it?

YES!!............you just blew your treatment free theory.

NO!!..............well the mites will continue to spread.

Then there is the bleeding heart keeper that has a very hard time pinching a queens head off, if that is your neighbor and does not treat, well then you will have mites again also.

These big indoor breeding programs (hogs, chickens, turkeys, etc.) are basically a quarantine area to keep the disease out. Gonna be real hard to get all of my bees to scrub their feet before entering into the hive.


----------



## AR1

DavidBrown1212 said:


> To a certain extent commercial poultry are cut off from each other, but some pathogens they still share with the outside world, like coccidia. No effective quarantine has been done with it, yet it's been wiped out through selection.
> As far as I know, the only pathogen we are currently effectively isolating from is mycoplasma, which comes in two flavors. Influenza seems to be a mixed bag, and killing the entire population is still the common practice. Killing is the only practice for everything else I can think of.
> 
> We will all have to find as many weak bees as possible and kill them. And we won't get very far super fast, but we all work together, or as a group with a common purpose of sustainable apiculture, we could make definitive progress. That first year is going to be rough, huge losses for sure.
> 
> I have talked some big time producers doing it, and I have talked to the USDA about it, it seems like these questions have largely been answered in theory and practice, just not accepted.
> 
> The good news, keeping mites from reproducing is not that hard, their reproductive cycle is crazy complex and open to manipulation in many ways.


Bees are a bit different from chickens. Imagine if half of the chickens in the country were moved by truck to California and then allowed to roam free for a few months every year, and then shipped back to their home farms scattered across the US, where they are again allowed to roam free and mix with all the chickens that didn't go to Cali. What are the odds of diseases running wild? 100%. 

IMO the chances of achieving widespread TF beekeeping in this scenario are essentially zero within the time frame of a single human life.


----------



## JoshuaW

I have Bee Culture issues from 30 years ago (wow, that makes me feel old and I'm 43), when mites came on the scene, and authors were talking about the Genetic-Element-Resistance-Solution.

30. Years. Ago. How close are we, really?

I'm sure we all know on some level that when one trait is selected for, other traits (that likely lead to production/profitability) are diminished. Right now the costs of treating productive colonies is less than the loss incurred by using less-productive "resistant" genetics. Until that changes...

DavidBrown121, my nucs are $185 each, but I don't ship. I recommend starting with two. If you do well, I sell queens too ($45 each).


----------



## LarryBud

This is hitting home today. I've been adding VSH stock, do a lot of washes and only treating when hard test results show need and then treating with organics like OAV and formic. I still get mites. Today I talked with a rather crunchy but pleasant owner of a local organic CSA who wants me to put a dozen or so hives at his farm. The caveat was he wanted NO treatments on his farm-treatment free bees or die! Very pleasant guy-figure I'll never see him again (unless he too sneaks into McDonalds for a Big Mac every now and then). The reality is or maybe my reality is a double deep Lang, couple of supers, with bees is worth around $500 here. Times 12. To kill bees? 

To kill my bees, place equipment where there is no return and then all of the time spent to maintain the bee yards for nothing???? Maybe if he let me paint "Let's go Brandon" on those hives but I regress. I do try to minimize treatments, hopefully a reasonable IPM Plan, trying to breed in VSH genetics. Dave Brown, give me a call when you get your magic bees-I'm a buyer! I'll buy the Burkenstockens then too. Peace out Bro.


----------



## Gray Goose

LarryBud said:


> Today I talked with a rather crunchy but pleasant owner of a local organic CSA who wants me to put a dozen or so hives at his farm. The caveat was he wanted NO treatments on his farm-treatment free bees or die!


hmm
he must be reading the documented methods as well.
Now if I could just find them....

the places I pollinate ask never asked...
I was not aware the bees could contaminate the farm, bee poop I guess, or the bees that drop dead with trace amounts of stuff in/on them.

did you try to explain The cost to him, like if you pay for replacements I'll do the TF?

GG


----------



## LarryBud

It's mind numbing-like having dinner with my son who lives in Park Slope Brooklyn.


----------



## grozzie2

DavidBrown1212 said:


> Let me tell you how we did this in commercial poultry
> ....
> How do we do we accomplish this in the commercial beekeeping?


You skipped the part where the poultry farmer kills off all the livestock after 8 weeks, fumigates and sterilizes the barn, then starts afresh with new chicks. There is no mixing with the wild birds outside, they dont run around and drink water from the ditch, or eat whatever they find laying rotting under a tree. The birds are kept in barns and only given sterile inputs from a clean source.

That's kind of similar to how beekeeping used to be done in the north. Shake packages into the boxes in the spring, get them to build up and produce a honey crop, then gas the bees in the fall, put the equipment into a clean environment for winter storage.

I certainly wouldn't worry about treating my bees if I was going to treat them like the poultry folks do, and just kill them off after a specified timeframe.


----------



## MJC417

DavidBrown1212 said:


> The good news, keeping mites from reproducing is not that hard, their reproductive cycle is crazy complex and open to manipulation in many ways.


Please tell us about your easy method for keeping mites from reproducing. Help us understand the crazy complex reproductive cycle and the manipulations that you use.


----------



## Vance G

Ecclesiastes 10:12


----------



## Jack Grimshaw

David Brown1212
As you can see,your post created quite a s***storm.Don't let it discourage you.
There is not a person in this group that wouldn't be TF if it could easily be done.
It was a common trope with pesticide/Ag folks that beekeepers were on the 
organic/no pesticide side of the fence until mites came along and then they knocked over the fence trying to find the "silver bullet". 
Some oldtimers may remember the toxic brews that were initially tried to control this catastrophe that swept through killing feral,commercial and hobby hives.
Many commercials see the writing on the wall. We now push IPM,a major step in the right direction. Breeding efforts for a more mite resistant bee are underway.

So get some bees and have fun.


----------



## johno

Breeding efforts have been underway for nearly 30 years now and we do not have much to show for that despite the USDA Baton Rouge telling us that they have solved it all about 10 years ago.


----------



## Tumbleweed

@david b, while appreciate how your mind intuitively crunches the numbers to turn a profit, there is another group who is not into bees for profit, which isn’t to say the bees aren’t exploited, they are, but in my case it’s just cause I’ve always liked bees. Honey is a bonus I share with family and friends or anyone who wants to talk bees.


----------



## James Lee

msl said:


> The answer is simple, many have tried, there bees died, dead bees don't make $$$$
> if $30 (or what ever) in treatments means you make the grade for almonds at $200 a hive... it makes bisnues sense to treat
> 
> here is a good look at some one who tryed... had to keep getting bees from his dad, kept taking massive losses and fushing $$ down the drain
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> if you haven't, read this https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/00218839.2016.1160709
> then... keep in mind these points
> 
> he kept very small yards by US commercial standards.. 20-25 hives per yard
> 
> while the paper makes it sound good... by 2010 his son took over
> http://ncbees.org/library/John Kefuss Keeping Bees That Keep Themselves.pdf&.pdf
> and then took 70+% losses a while back and was down to 70 hives and the stock is now treated
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2016 he was up to 103, 2017 was a bad year Log into Facebook
> 
> A far cry form the paper saying
> 
> now lets not forget his other operation
> 
> 
> 
> http://ncbees.org/library/John%20Kefuss%20Keeping%20Bees%20That%20Keep%20Themselves.pdf&.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> despite all the work put in, runing bonded TF breeders, the operation needed to treat to stay profitable when the bees were under the stresses of commercial pollination. It just didn't work
> 
> as Greg notes, the consumer maters...
> they were willing to pay a premium for ainbitioc free chicken... we would need such a premium on honey, and really pollination services
> long and short treating makes you a lot more money, till that shifts nothing changes.. I
> 
> lasty, the chicken industry had big corporate breeders that send out there stock to be contract raised and returned to them
> save 2 cents per bird on medication adds up, (or charge2c more from it being premium) say if your Purdue @700 million chickens a year thats $14,000,000 a year in increased profits!!!!
> 2 cents more per hive? thats like $60 on a 3k hive operation... never going to see it
> even 2c pound more for honey is only $40 more a ton...
> 
> now this is what cuba did... you have to buy your queens from the state and sell your honey to the state at the state dictated price and treatments are banned... so they have a strong state run TF breeding program... your just not going to see that level of co op in the states...
> 
> 
> its been done....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We (usa) have killed off close to 40% a year for the past decade
> that's 10,400,000 hives dead in the last 10 years out of 2.6 million alive at any point.. we have killed over 4x the the total population, and no were closer to a solution
> it sounds real good on paper...but its just not how bees work
> 
> look in to what Randy Oliver is doing its a reansabul plan, but the pace is painstaking slow


Jacob Wustner is still keeping bees treatment free. At least as of the 2021 season when we spoke. Am I misunderstanding your citation of his example? It seems your implying he failed?


----------



## Roland

Mr. Brown - congratulations on your success in the poultry world. You have managed to select genes that can survive a PATHOGEN in relative isolation and ideal surroundings. I therefore offer you a challenge:

Let me into your successful operation every day with a mix of all of the chemicals it took your feed suppliers to raise their crops, and let me coat your birds water , air , , food , and bedding. Oh, and I will only smuggle in a few birds from China every day. They don't eat much.

After a year of that , please report back how well things work.

Oh, and I am also interested in how you can easily outsmart the mites.

Crazy Roland

P.S. Not said to discourage you, just though a man of your accomplishments needed a real challenge.


----------



## msl

James Lee said:


> Am I misunderstanding your citation of his example? It seems your implying he failed?


his words, Solomon's video watch it Take them for what they are worth to you..

he sells "training" not bees or bee products ... learn from those who have extra bees for sale come spring as webster and comfort notes... 
listen to those who's income comes from bee products ... honey, queens, pollination, packages not speaking endgaments, podcasts, teaching and books 

yes he failed by my metric... who flat out lets AFB run lose thinking small cell will cure it?
read some Moses Quimby and you will see fowl brood wipeouts predates foundation. He drank the cool aid 

any one with a swarm catch or other wise importation program can keep bees TF... its the overwintering that is the issue 

give 10 swams, or even packages/nucs of the best TF stock of any choice to 10,000 want a be TF beekeepers
no imports (catching swarms, buying replacements, making nucs of dad's hives, etc) , no treatment
how many have bees in 3 years?

the problem is the different metric of success
for me I just judge a (survival) program by if they are a net exporter of bees or an importer
those who have enough to sell come spring are successful
those who have to buy/swarm trap/other wise import are not

"still keeping bees" has no meaning with out context....queens and nucs sold, tons of honey sold, amount of stock inported in to the operation


----------



## LarryBud

msl said:


> the problem is the different metric of success
> for me I just judge a (survival) program by if they are a net exporter of bees or an importer
> those who have enough to sell come spring are successful
> those who have to buy/swarm trap/other wise import are not
> 
> "still keeping bees" has no meaning with out context....queens and nucs sold, tons of honey sold, amount of stock inported in to the operation


That is so well written on several levels. Do TF keepers understand that we would all love to be TF but we deal in the reality of an investment in hives and bees and keeping them alive? As I make the transition (will need at least 10 more years knowledge wise) from hobbyist to sideliner, I see my own naivety of what I thought beekeeping was to what it is. Spring is when the report cards come out.


----------



## jim lyon

MJC417 said:


> Please tell us about your easy method for keeping mites from reproducing. Help us understand the crazy complex reproductive cycle and the manipulations that you use.


I found his take on this a bit jaw dropping myself. I’ve long felt that control of varroa will never happen by killing them after they’ve already been mated but somehow ”short circuiting” their ability to reproduce. The problem, of course, is that the reproduction happens in an environment free of all but the harshest chemicals.


----------



## JoshuaW

Mr. Parker just quit beekeeping altogether: Solomon Parker quitting beekeeping 2022

I didn't read the thread, but it seems to have caused quite a stir (kinda like this one).

So yeah, he not only failed TF, but he failed to adapt (adopt) management practices to keep the bees alive (whatever that may entail), period. 

I could go on, but I have to go bottle honey.


----------



## crofter

I watched My Beekeepy Journey; how sad but predictable. I saw excuse, after excuse and repeated example of grasping for miracles on the basis of advice from gurus. Poster boy example of the ugly side of treatment free recruitment. Certainly not much value to serious research into effective treatment free management possibilities.


----------



## clyderoad

jim lyon said:


> I found his take on this a bit jaw dropping myself. I’ve long felt that control of varroa will never happen by killing them after they’ve already been mated but somehow ”short circuiting” their ability to reproduce. The problem, of course, is that the reproduction happens in an environment free of all but the harshest chemicals.


My view is that the application of SRamsey's work and discovery on the relationship between vitellogen and varroa mites has not yet been realized.
The fact that the Vitellogen consumed by the Varroa mite when feeding on the Fat Body of the honey bee is utilized directly by the Varroa mite for reproductive egg formation without alteration offers a direct pathway to short circuit their ability to reproduce. rDNA has been discussed, something along the lines of feeding the bees the developed rDNA "miticide" that ends up in the fat body where the varroa mites consume it. This dovetails with his unprecedented work of feeding and breeding varroa mites in the lab. 
One thing I will say is that some entertain the use of vitellogen as a vehicle to transmit 'foreign bodies' to combat varroa since
it it used unaltered by the mite for reproduction.
There are potential practical applications of this research by creating a miticide delivery mechanism via vitellogen. Last I knew Monsanto had shown keen interest. I do not know where any of this currently stands since Ramseys departure from the vanEngelsdorp lab though, and have been waiting patiently for any news on the subject for some time now.


----------



## James Lee

The truth of it all is that TF is not a viable sustainable commercial practice.

The gurus - frequently are not speaking to commercial beekeepers -they are speaking to hobbyists. Maybe I am speaking out of turn in naivete on the matter, but I don't know many "commercial" TF beeks giving advice on being "commercial" beekeepers. There is a threshold between the two that is not negotiable at this juncture. I can admit it - not sure the other side wants to admit it because it always seems that the commercial side thinks the TF side is trying to convert them? If you don't want to practice TF, fine, why do TF have to practice commercial management?

Though oft demonized, the ghost of Solomon Parker will always veer the dialogue in that direction of hostility between us all until that dog is put-down once and for all. Forgive the man, move on. It is what it is at this juncture. Fulfilled prophecy - you were right he was wrong -- but he is not representative of the practice or attitude of most TF beekeepers I know.

To get to that viability on a commercial level, there is a lot left to go and it will only get there if and when there is a significant economy change in the practice of commercial beekeeping that is viable for the beekeeper, the operation, and the demand/supply. That's easy to see. Onus then, is on the TF beekeeper to produce the viable stock - and queen/bee production that can supply a commercial operation with that stock, and commercial operations willing to adapt that stock.

@msl I reached back out to Mr. Wustner, to clarify some of the commentary, simply because I want to right my understanding of where he stands based on what you are indicating. I also don't feel Kefuss' kid taking over his operation is as condemning as made to be - if anything it demonstrates the point yourself and others are making on a regular basis - management practice is essential to success. Clearly, the boy didn't follow dad's footsteps.

Even though I get "we aren't Europe" when I bring it up, the results of the Eurbest study throughout the EU in commercial TF operations is tangible and worth noting/considering. We aren't just talking queen bee availability here in the US, we are talking about philosophy - religion mindset. Dogma lives in both camps. When do we start working together?



EurBeST - Presentations


----------



## ursa_minor

James Lee said:


> The truth of it all is that TF is not a viable sustainable commercial practice.


The truth is it is not a viable hobby practice. I have 3 hives, wish to keep it at the highest 5. How on earth can I keep from having to buy bees every spring if I end up, as had happened, with 0 hives in the spring. I do not have a big enough operation to breed varroa resistant queens or drones nor enough money to continue to import special VHS queens. My DCA is full of other people's drones that are not varroa resistant. So inevitably they will all die. 

The idea that treatment free is easy for anyone, is a stretch. I applaud the small keeper that has the ability to do TF and the funds to keep it going, I wish I was them. IMO the TF movement should move their efforts to Treatment Minimalist, treat when you need, with the least toxicity you can and help keep those bees that are moving to resistance alive. They cannot fight a huge infestation, but they might be able to control a small one, but they cannot evolve if they are dead.


----------



## Akademee

I'm sure there are people with viable TF models, but they all seem to require a significantly larger "hours per hive" than conventional practices. That might be okay at a hobbyist level or maybe even a low-end sideliner level, but at some point it becomes physically impossible to fulfill the time and individual hive attention requirements to make it work once you get to a certain scale. I suppose the solution could be to hire more beekeepers, but that cuts deeply into the profitability of an operation on top of the inevitable higher losses TF tends to incur.

If commercial operations did not absolutely have to spend money on treatments, they wouldn't.


----------



## James Lee

ursa_minor said:


> The truth is it is not a viable hobby practice. I have 3 hives, wish to keep it at the highest 5. How on earth can I keep from having to buy bees every spring if I end up, as had happened, with 0 hives in the spring. I do not have a big enough operation to breed varroa resistant queens or drones nor enough money to continue to import special VHS queens. My DCA is full of other people's drones that are not varroa resistant. So inevitably they will all die.
> 
> The idea that treatment free is easy for anyone, is a stretch. I applaud the small keeper that has the ability to do TF and the funds to keep it going, I wish I was them. IMO the TF movement should move their efforts to Treatment Minimalist, treat when you need, with the least toxicity you can and help keep those bees that are moving to resistance alive. They cannot fight a huge infestation, but they might be able to control a small one, but they cannot evolve if they are dead.


This is an example of one person's experience being the norm for others (otherwise known as dogma). It is not easy. I am also not saying you didn't try hard enough. But, my research tells me it is viable for the hobbyist, and there are people with decades of experience doing it - still doing it without all these maligned attack biases like "they resupply with swarms" and "they buy more bees" etc. et al. These folks aren't doing that and are successful. 

You can't breed resistance with treated bees, and it is a costly endeavor, which is why it is not viable for commercial.

I would agree with you that for the hobbyist at 1-2 colonies, it is likely not viable either, especially if you are not able to rear queens to support your losses when diseases or mites get the better of your bees. But again, most 1st year beekeepers kill their bees anyway - treating or not treating - its just a fact, or the package business wouldn't be thriving would it?


----------



## joebeewhisperer

ursa_minor said:


> They cannot fight a huge infestation, but they might be able to control a small one, but they cannot evolve if they are dead.


Well said. I came to realize that basic survival of colonies was a bottom-line requirement for my little hobby-bordering-on-obsession. More than honey crops, more than x, y. or z. 

That said, I've done very little treatment ever, .... and killed a fair number of bees. But I don't recall ever telling a customer not to treat. My advice to them is usually pretty simple, if you have mites, you should probably kill them.

To the OP, I don't think we ever need to stop asking questions. I do this at work a lot. I'll meet with higher-ups with decades in sales (or engineers, or whoever) and spout off whatever crazy idea I have. About 80% of these are shot down immediately and, like this thread, examples are given, or a "we tried that". They know I'm not married to any idea and there are no hurt feelings. Occasionally I throw one out that sticks, and that's all I'm trying to do. If 90% are useless, I won't be quiet until I'm told to do so. I'm grateful to work in an environment where this works. 

So is this community. Just be prepared to take a good-natured ribbing or two in the process. 

And now for something completely different: 

Just a thought for the day, and really not trying to drill a rabbit-hole. But varroa weren't created yesterday, they have coexisted with honeybees for eons. I liked the first line in this paper. "Varroa destructor mites express strong avoidance of the Apis cerana worker brood in the field."









A Saliva Protein of Varroa Mites Contributes to the Toxicity toward Apis cerana and the DWV Elevation in A. mellifera - Scientific Reports


Varroa destructor mites express strong avoidance of the Apis cerana worker brood in the field. The molecular mechanism for this phenomenon remains unknown. We identified a Varroa toxic protein (VTP), which exhibited toxic activity toward A. cerana worker larvae, in the saliva of these mites, and...




www.nature.com


----------



## James Lee

Akademee said:


> I'm sure there are people with viable TF models, but they all seem to require a significantly larger "hours per hive" than conventional practices. That might be okay at a hobbyist level or maybe even a low-end sideliner level, but at some point it becomes physically impossible to fulfill the time and individual hive attention requirements to make it work once you get to a certain scale. I suppose the solution could be to hire more beekeepers, but that cuts deeply into the profitability of an operation on top of the inevitable higher losses TF tends to incur.
> 
> If commercial operations did not absolutely have to spend money on treatments, they wouldn't.


This is what I am gettin at - this is at the crux of the discussion. Instead of maligning the ongoing evidence supporting TF endeavors as a whole, pulling the Solomon Parker card, let's discuss transparency. That's what the treating ilk demand of the non-treating ilk - so, the truth is - it's too expensive to support. 

Therefore, as I said, the TF camp has to put the money where their mouth is, develop and provide the stock, find willing operations, and go from there. The original poster may have been looking at it from this angle, but much to his chagrin, became Solomon Parker because he said Treatment Free.

I will cite the Eurbest project again once more - and I really hope folks would take a look at it.


----------



## James Lee

ursa_minor said:


> The truth is it is not a viable hobby practice. I have 3 hives, wish to keep it at the highest 5. How on earth can I keep from having to buy bees every spring if I end up, as had happened, with 0 hives in the spring. I do not have a big enough operation to breed varroa resistant queens or drones nor enough money to continue to import special VHS queens. My DCA is full of other people's drones that are not varroa resistant. So inevitably they will all die.
> 
> The idea that treatment free is easy for anyone, is a stretch. I applaud the small keeper that has the ability to do TF and the funds to keep it going, I wish I was them. IMO the TF movement should move their efforts to Treatment Minimalist, treat when you need, with the least toxicity you can and help keep those bees that are moving to resistance alive. They cannot fight a huge infestation, but they might be able to control a small one, but they cannot evolve if they are dead.


This is in line with your suggestion -however the "treatment minimalist" is the means to the end, not the means as a whole.

I think we are at a crossroads and need to 'redefine' what treatment free means, not what Solomon Parker has made it.






Identifying Varroa Resistant Bees – Westerham Beekeepers







westerham.kbka.org.uk


----------



## Gray Goose

James Lee said:


> This is in line with your suggestion -however the "treatment minimalist" is the means to the end, not the means as a whole.
> 
> I think we are at a crossroads and need to 'redefine' what treatment free means, not what Solomon Parker has made it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Identifying Varroa Resistant Bees – Westerham Beekeepers
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> westerham.kbka.org.uk


So I read the article.
started in 2017, were are they today, is there a 2022 update.
IS there a site that is selling these bees?
some of the places they mentioned have had bad mite issues since then. Example Arnot Forest, Gotland Island 
As I understand Gotland is now treating to prevent wipe out.
Be interesting to see where they are today.










I see loss of 7 then 11 then 14 percent in these 3 years, Not a math expert but don't we want the loss number to get smaller each year. If 2022 is 20% then I do not see the gain.

GG


----------



## G3farms

And the way I read the chart above, they are constantly adding hives to the group, went from 28 to  37 to 51. Why did they just not stay with the hives at hand until all were dead or they achieved their goal?

This is not a very good study, it is across 8 apiaries, not sure what that means, just eight yards in total or eight different keeps each with several different yards. At this rate each apiary only had an average or 3 to 6 hives over the three year period.


----------



## johno

I need a little enlightenment,
If one person's experience is said to be the norm for others and is then said to be dogma, what is one person's inexperience given as a norm for others known as, possibly B/S


----------



## crofter

If Solomon Parker was such a pariah why did the treatment free movement not disown him? As for the viability of raising bees sustainably and economically the success examples seem such a very minor percentage compared to overall numbers that I dont find them convincing. Since the results are so seldom repeatable when transported adds to the incredulity.


----------



## ursa_minor

James Lee said:


> But, my research tells me it is viable for the hobbyist, and there are people with decades of experience doing it - still doing it without all these maligned attack biases like "they resupply with swarms" and "they buy more bees" etc. et al. These folks aren't doing that and are successful.


I hope your research has included where these beekeepers are, situation matters and decades of experience means nothing if they are moved next to a large apiary that does not treat and has many mites, it only applies to their specific place.

edited, pushed enter before I was done. LOL
I realize we need to redefine the term TF. Maybe then there will not be the instant backlash and opposition to posts that suggest TF methods.


----------



## JWChesnut

James Lee is using a "propaganda" framing device by making Solomon the "problem". The genuine problem with the Treatment Free Religious Cult predates Solomon, and unfortunately will continue long after his name is forgotten.

Either James is reinforcing the Dunning-Kruger observation by revealing ignorance of the development of the catechism of "Kill-all-your-Bees", or is deliberately copying the persuasive technique of the Brutus soliloquy on the Death of Caesar.

James Lee is on other forums constantly flogging a tie up with English treatment-free extremists, whose absolutist convictions would make dear Solomon blush.


----------



## ursa_minor

James Lee said:


> This is what I am gettin at - this is at the crux of the discussion. Instead of maligning the ongoing evidence supporting TF endeavors as a whole, pulling the Solomon Parker card, let's discuss transparency. That's what the treating ilk demand of the non-treating ilk - so, the truth is - it's too expensive to support.


Questioning is not maligning and evidence supporting a position is only valid, _in regards to TF methods_, if it can be repeated in many places. Take the TF bees right into the heart of mite country, where there is minimal winter brood break, get some results and if they support the TF methods people will listen.

edited words in italics to clarify.


----------



## crofter

JWChesnut said:


> James Lee is using a "propaganda" framing device by making Solomon the "problem". The genuine problem with the Treatment Free Religious Cult predates Solomon, and unfortunately will continue long after his name is forgotten.
> 
> Either James is reinforcing the Dunning-Kruger observation by revealing ignorance of the development of the "catechism of the Kill-all-your-Bees", or is deliberately copying the persuasive technique of the Brutus soliloquy on the Death of Caesar.
> 
> James Lee is on other forums constantly flogging a tie up with English treatment-free extremists, whose absolutist convictions would make dear Solomon blush.


Well put JWC; I certainly sense being deviously "worked" by his contributions! I have respect for the serious research into the varroa mite / honeybee problem, but none whatsoever for those recruiting new and would be beekeepers with their totally unrealistic promises. Totally unrealistic in the percentage probablilities of success. The positive examples do exist but usually seem to depend on some specific enabling surroundings. Successful examples have shown too many abrupt reversals if they ever stop pedalling. Cherry picked examples are not proof of concept.


----------



## johno

Same old same old, let us judge the concept by the ability to produce excess bees and hive products and not on the ability to notch up postings on beesource only. There are so many experts with thousands of postings that for years have struggled to raise a single colony, a certain bird comes to mind.


----------



## James Lee

ursa_minor said:


> I hope your research has included where these beekeepers are, situation matters and decades of experience means nothing if they are moved next to a large apiary that does not treat and has many mites, it only applies to their specific place.
> 
> edited, pushed enter before I was done. LOL
> I realize we need to redefine the term TF. Maybe then there will not be the instant backlash and opposition to posts that suggest TF methods.


I think you miss my point. We will never get there if we are working together on the solution. If that apiary infested with mites is as bad as you describe it probably isn't going to last long is it? If beekeepers are battling each other then we won't cooperate. 

And again the onus is on the TF beekeeper to provide the solution before it's viable.


----------



## James Lee

johno said:


> Same old same old, let us judge the concept by the ability to produce excess bees and hive products and not on the ability to notch up postings on beesource only. There are so many experts with thousands of postings that for years have struggled to raise a single colony, a certain bird comes to mind.


Yes. Let's.


----------



## James Lee

crofter said:


> Well put JWC; I certainly sense being deviously "worked" by his contributions! I have respect for the serious research into the varroa mite / honeybee problem, but none whatsoever for those recruiting new and would be beekeepers with their totally unrealistic promises. Totally unrealistic in the percentage probablilities of success. The positive examples do exist but usually seem to depend on some specific enabling surroundings. Successful examples have shown too many abrupt reversals if they ever stop pedalling. Cherry picked examples are not proof of concept.


As you resort to ad hominem ...again. what devious promises am I making?

Why is it always the same people with the same anger?

Should we just rename the forum to Treatment Bee Source Only? No dialogue allowed. Only hate.


----------



## James Lee

JWChesnut said:


> James Lee is using a "propaganda" framing device by making Solomon the "problem". The genuine problem with the Treatment Free Religious Cult predates Solomon, and unfortunately will continue long after his name is forgotten.
> 
> Either James is reinforcing the Dunning-Kruger observation by revealing ignorance of the development of the catechism of "Kill-all-your-Bees", or is deliberately copying the persuasive technique of the Brutus soliloquy on the Death of Caesar.
> 
> James Lee is on other forums constantly flogging a tie up with English treatment-free extremists, whose absolutist convictions would make dear Solomon blush.


More ad hominem. If the case is so why is it always Solomon being referenced in the triad of repetitive retorts. Dunning Krueger is legit, but only applicable when true. I know what I know and don't know what I don't know and am not closed to the concept of other practice, unlike the core group of tomato throwing detractors here. 

I won't own the accusation and you can parrot it all you want. Cognitive bias is not unique to Rusty Barlew and your hateful posts. It exists in those with fixed habits and manners with no desire to engage non-affirming information. I'd say the dunning Kruger is your vice not mine.


----------



## James Lee

JWChesnut said:


> James Lee is using a "propaganda" framing device by making Solomon the "problem". The genuine problem with the Treatment Free Religious Cult predates Solomon, and unfortunately will continue long after his name is forgotten.
> 
> Either James is reinforcing the Dunning-Kruger observation by revealing ignorance of the development of the catechism of "Kill-all-your-Bees", or is deliberately copying the persuasive technique of the Brutus soliloquy on the Death of Caesar.
> 
> James Lee is on other forums constantly flogging a tie up with English treatment-free extremists, whose absolutist convictions would make dear Solomon blush.


Which individuals in the Eurbest data are TF extremists per se?


----------



## JWChesnut

The TF cult is undergoing one of its periodic schisms in the wake of the decapitation of its "sottocapo" and the apparent succession struggle.
Cults have an issue with "purity" of the dogma, and an inertia that elevates the "most pure" beliefs, however impractical these purist instincts are.

One one hand there is a small empirically practical group that is using insemination, hygienic evaluation, parasite sampling and microscopic observation to select and distribute bees and queens with best predicted traits.

On the other hand, there is a more pure and righteous "natural" mass recruited by all the propaganda, and constantly reinforced by the newly guilible. At its most extreme, this group argues that bees must be kept in natural tree cavities and inspection and honey harvest is a crime against the bees. The buzz word used is "bee-centric". Right now, the "natural tree cavity" sect is ascendant. Illustrating the trajectory typically observed in extremist cults gravitating to simple and absolutist answers.

At one time TF leaders claimed they harvested honey and experienced similar survival to the evil "others". At this point, some have inverted the badge of honor: Never having any human surplus, and killing off the maximum number of "genetic defectives"

Reminds me of the satire on the most extreme Vegans who only consume "naturally dead and wilted" vegetables.

My own recollection of the rupture between Solomon and BeeSource occurred coincident when I posted an event that shocked me. I had been called to consult with a TF accolyte one county south of me. The TF colonies were afflicted by American Foul Brood. I advised burning the disease. However, the TF did the opposite, she offered the comb to other beekeepers in order they might "build resistance" in everyone's colony.

I expected that sharing the annecdote would encourage the "gurus" too caution against taking the "Let 'em Die" approach to far. However, Solomon defended the "sharing the AFB" comb option. He pointed out Marla Spivak's original hygenic research was on bees clearing AFB. His position caused a division, and coincidentally he exited and started up his "safe" platforms.

I do note that several years after the fact, Solomon reversed course and noted online that he "personally" would burn AFB, rather than distributing it, while still not advising against the practice.


----------



## crofter

I dont think your feel sorry for yourself, passive aggressive rhetoric is going to advance the treatment free concept much. Pull in your horns and go raise some bees successfully, then come back and tell us about it.


----------



## James Lee

crofter said:


> Well put JWC; I certainly sense being deviously "worked" by his contributions! I have respect for the serious research into the varroa mite / honeybee problem, but none whatsoever for those recruiting new and would be beekeepers with their totally unrealistic promises. Totally unrealistic in the percentage probabilities of success. The positive examples do exist but usually seem to depend on some specific enabling surroundings. Successful examples have shown too many abrupt reversals if they ever stop pedaling. Cherry picked examples are not proof of concept.


Looked at this again - I don't remember promising percentages of success or probabilities. Nor do I recall telling others this is the right way to go. I believe I frequently tell others, look to the examples of those who are successful and make your informed decision that way. You'll also see that I am transparent about my losses, and taking them as we speak. I also say if you are going to approach treatment free, be prepared to take losses, and if you can't take losses, be prepared with a strategy for bio-technical management. Short of chemicals, I'm not telling anyone they will be successful. I tell people that bees die, they die in treating apiaries, and they die in non-treating apiaries. 

Give me a break would ya. If you've got some concreted evidence of my dubious teachings -can you provide them here? So I can recant of my inducement of mass psychosis and dunning krueger hysteria?


----------



## JWChesnut

James Lee said:


> Which individuals in the Eurbest data are TF extremists per se?


 The "Northern Natural Beekeeping" group out of England. "Woo" is over the moon among those quaint English eccentrics.


----------



## ursa_minor

James Lee said:


> I think you miss my point. We will never get there if we are working together on the solution. If that apiary infested with mites is as bad as you describe it probably isn't going to last long is it? If beekeepers are battling each other then we won't cooperate.
> 
> And again the onus is on the TF beekeeper to provide the solution before it's viable.



But in the process the TF apiary by it's side will not survive either. The point I have been making is that the TF experience does not work in a mite infested area so therefor all the studies in the world to support TF should be repeated, if they ever are to be believed, within a regular scenario that reflects a regular operation.

The onus is not on the TF beekeeper to provide a solution, it is on them to prove that the TF methods they spout are viable when they put them forth as an option.[/QUOTE]


----------



## James Lee

Gray Goose said:


> So I read the article.
> started in 2017, were are they today, is there a 2022 update.
> IS there a site that is selling these bees?
> some of the places they mentioned have had bad mite issues since then. Example Arnot Forest, Gotland Island
> As I understand Gotland is now treating to prevent wipe out.
> Be interesting to see where they are today.
> 
> View attachment 67420
> 
> 
> I see loss of 7 then 11 then 14 percent in these 3 years, Not a math expert but don't we want the loss number to get smaller each year. If 2022 is 20% then I do not see the gain.
> 
> GG


I requested a forecast of the 21/22 season, and clarification on the method of colony increase. My assumption was splits from survivors to nucs for wintering as the graphics intimated. Will update when they respond.


----------



## G3farms

James Lee said:


> I tell people that bees die, they die in treating apiaries, and they die in non-treating apiaries.


But do you tell them the percentages or show them a whole yard of dead outs?


----------



## James Lee

G3farms said:


> But do you tell them the percentages or show them a whole yard of dead outs?


I just posted this the other day - and I don't have whole yards of deadouts to show them... Im still at 86% as of 2/1/22


----------



## G3farms

86% living out of how many hives?


----------



## James Lee

G3farms said:


> 86% living out of how many hives?


30


----------



## G3farms

Sounds good so far, only lost 4 hives out of 30.

Now I know it is still very cold and snowy up your way, but just because you are seeing bees fly at the entrance, how many frames of bees are still in the live ones?

How much stores did they go into winter with?

How much stores are left?

Have you been feeding, if so what and how much?

How close is the next yard that is also TF or treat?

Did you do mite counts before winter? If so what were you numbers?

If you do not do mite counts how do you know if TF is working?

I hate mites and also hate treating, but that is the only way I see to keep bees strong and ready for spring. Yeah you can bring some bees through the winter but will they produce for you. I can bring an old cow through winter and she will still be just a bag of bones come spring. Bees are nothing more than livestock and have to pay their rent or move on. My bees pay the rent by making a crop of honey. I tried the TF way for several years and man was it a pitiful sight. Biggest loss was 42 out of 44 production hives. I just about gave up that spring but forged ahead and decided to treat and am very happy with the results so far.


----------



## G3farms

I guess Mr Brown count not hang in there.

Must be too hateful of a place LOL


----------



## Litsinger

joebeewhisperer said:


> To the OP, I don't think we ever need to stop asking questions.


Joe:

I found your post especially refreshing. At it's best Beesource is a great forum for longform discussion about bee-related topics, both practical and esoteric. Sometimes we collectively lose focus regarding fostering a platform of discovery and a spirit of goodwill- such that we might dialogue and even disagree in a way that allows for learning.

@DavidBrown1212- welcome to the forum. While I don't have many answers for you, your question is an interesting thought experiment and I hope there will be some engaging responses to your central question of:



DavidBrown1212 said:


> How do we accomplish this [TF] in the commercial beekeeping?


If I were in your shoes and were investigating the best way to embark on a new venture I would start by trying to find folks who are successfully doing what I want to do (or moving in that direction) and try to learn from them. While not an exhaustive list (and in no particular order), I might suggest you start researching the following operations / organizations:

BeeWeaver Honey Farm - Dan Weaver
Champlain Valley Bees and Queens - Kirk Webster
Hall Apiaries - Troy Hall
Le Rucher d'Oc - Dr. John Kefuss
Stevens Bee Company- Cory Stevens
Randy Oliver- Resistance Breeding Experiment
Ontario Resistant Honey Bee Selection Program

And probably the most ambitious platform for treatment-free commercial operations currently is the Hilo Breeding Program:









Hilo Bees


The mission of the Hilo Bee Project is to provide Varroa-resistant honey bees with traits suitable for commercial beekeepers, at a commercial scale.



www.hilobees.com





I think it is safe to say that in all of these examples you will find a fair amount of both soaring success and abject failure while seeking commercially-viable TF bee management at scale.

So I think a clear-eyed perspective on your question might suggest:

There are other folks who have tried or are trying what you are suggesting, so it can be done in certain settings depending upon the approach, goals and willingness/ability to assume significant downside risk.

The results have been decidedly mixed, and TF commercial beekeeping is not mainstream.

There is still much about the nature of bee breeding and the development of resistance characteristics that we do not know, so it is hard to make many definitive statements about what will or won't work in a particular setting based on the myriad locations, ecotypes, bee population densities, forage profiles, bee migratory dynamics and a million other factors that go into how a particular population will respond to TF selection in our specific situation.

I will look forward to your observations and conclusions once you've had the opportunity to hear from others and have learned everything you can about the current state of commercial TF operations in the US and elsewhere.

Again, glad to have you a part of the Beesource forum.


----------



## James Lee

G3farms said:


> Sounds good so far, only lost 4 hives out of 30.
> 
> Now I know it is still very cold and snowy up your way, but just because you are seeing bees fly at the entrance, how many frames of bees are still in the live ones?
> 
> How much stores did they go into winter with?
> 
> How much stores are left?
> 
> Have you been feeding, if so what and how much?
> 
> How close is the next yard that is also TF or treat?
> 
> Did you do mite counts before winter? If so what were you numbers?
> 
> If you do not do mite counts how do you know if TF is working?
> 
> I hate mites and also hate treating, but that is the only way I see to keep bees strong and ready for spring. Yeah you can bring some bees through the winter but will they produce for you. I can bring an old cow through winter and she will still be just a bag of bones come spring. Bees are nothing more than livestock and have to pay their rent or move on. My bees pay the rent by making a crop of honey. I tried the TF way for several years and man was it a pitiful sight. Biggest loss was 42 out of 44 production hives. I just about gave up that spring but forged ahead and decided to treat and am very happy with the results so far.


I won't knock you for that. TF wasn't benefiting your end game - and that's fine. You have a goal.

As you asked:

I'm not just accounting for flying bees, as thats the case, the one with the pile, has a larger pile underneath the snow - and still has bees flying and stores - but they are a goner - no way they're gonna make it. We just got 8" with more coming tonight and some cold weather inbound for a bit.

Average stores for medium 8's were between 40-50lbs based on colony size with some adjustment give or take. Some received supplemental syrup in the fall to get weight, some didn't take it - and starved as a result of my neglect to get sugar on them in time. A conflict in my philosophy as to survival of the fittest, but not an outcome I wanted. 

On my nuc stacks, 3, 5 frame Nucs atop one another, I approached it similarily but went for overall colony weight of 50-70lbs. Some will need sugar on next warm-up. Again, the starve-outs came from these style stacks - I fed them, they didn't take it, which indicates other issues at that time.

I have not presently fed any colonies to this date since fall.

Proximity of other yards? I'm afraid my answer will be lampooned regardless the response, but there are no treating yards within 5 miles of one apiary, and at least 10 in the other 3.

I did count mites mid-summer via drone-frames, and were under threshold, at least average defined 2-3%, but probably were far higher, as one of those counts is the one that perished, and they had plenty of food, no moisture. My Spring 2022 agenda involves assays and periodic monitoring to determine queen rearing trajectory and stock selection. I will engage bio-technical methods on those who need it to keep numbers up while selection is engaged. Swarm retrievals and cut-outs will be put into a new yard, same as last year, away from established colonies.

I know I have some VSH stock based on evidence, notes, and monitoring - and to date they are the strongest and most successful. 

I'm not asking my bees to pay rent. Which permits me the leverage I currently indicate as a differentiating factor between the hobbyist/sideliner and the commercialist. Is it viable for my future? I don't know. If I had to feed my kids based on my bees - I'd treat them - I need to know how much grocery I can buy. I won't ever knock a man's will to provide for himself and others. Still haven't - regardless the abuse that gets doled out here - it's rather shocking.

Lastly, I'd beg the question, maybe one of the commercial keeps could answer here? What is the net gross, and average profit on a commercial operation anyway? is the work/risk/reward benefit worth it?


----------



## G3farms

A commercial operator will tell you it is hard work with long hours and lots of "labor of love".
It is an agricultural endeavor which is risky business at best, unless you are on the gov't pay to play plan. There has to be some profit in it or they would starve out and have a factory job. It is just too easy to work for somebody and draw a check every week, working ag makes you the boss of every move and decision, better make good ones or the factory job looks better and better. I do not see anybody buying a farm and making a go of it unless they are independently wealthy, and then they would be sponging off of daddies money and having someone else run the place and making decisions. The only thing promising in ag is a big chunk of land that appreciated in value over a few years. 
Yes the livestock/crop must pay rent, that is what it is all about.


----------



## James Lee

G3farms said:


> A commercial operator will tell you it is hard work with long hours and lots of "labor of love".
> It is an agricultural endeavor which is risky business at best, unless you are on the gov't pay to play plan. There has to be some profit in it or they would starve out and have a factory job. It is just too easy to work for somebody and draw a check every week, working ag makes you the boss of every move and decision, better make good ones or the factory job looks better and better. I do not see anybody buying a farm and making a go of it unless they are independently wealthy, and then they would be sponging off of daddies money and having someone else run the place and making decisions. The only thing promising in ag is a big chunk of land that appreciated in value over a few years.
> Yes the livestock/crop must pay rent, that is what it is all about.


So what are the averages -that's my curiosity.


----------



## Gray Goose

James Lee said:


> Lastly, I'd beg the question, maybe one of the commercial keeps could answer here? What is the net gross, and average profit on a commercial operation anyway? is the work/risk/reward benefit worth it?


keep your day job.
you say you have 30 go for 60 next year. 90 the year after.
if you get better and better at winter survival each year (%) then consider it then.
go slow build on cash flow, IE sell honey buy frames and foundation.
If year 3 or 4 you need to buy bees to grow, then you still ain't there.

GG


----------



## James Lee

Gray Goose said:


> keep your day job.
> you say you have 30 go for 60 next year. 90 the year after.
> if you get better and better at winter survival each year (%) then consider it then.
> go slow build on cash flow, IE sell honey buy frames and foundation.
> If year 3 or 4 you need to buy bees to grow, then you still ain't there.
> 
> GG


I don't want to be commercial. I want to know what the margins are? Year 3 is now, and I won't be buying bees. I do plan to double this year however, and looking to end with 30-50. This years goal was 10.

For instance - i can make $100 p/h on the side hustle, can I make that with bees? All the management, supplies, treatments, etc - to stay alive in a commercial capacity - will I make $100 p/h?


----------



## Gray Goose

James Lee said:


> I don't want to be commercial. I want to know what the margins are.


different each year and in each "area" /state.
fuel costs how much do you move them.
flow for the Apairy, some here need to feed to keep bees , some do not, so keep alive costs, including treatment.
there is money in pollination, but then you need a truck and likely a lift.
help, labor

I would think each operator, depending on the what , where , how is different.

GG


----------



## G3farms

so you are at 26 live hives now and want to go into winter 2022-23 with 30 to 50 hives after doubling in the summer.

This means you plan on loosing 1 to 11 hives if you just split the living in half.
This does not include the swarms you catch and cut outs you do................or maybe it does.

I hope your hives are not mite bombing your neighbors hives.


----------



## James Lee

Gray Goose said:


> different each year and in each "area" /state.
> fuel costs how much do you move them.
> flow for the Apairy, some here need to feed to keep bees , some do not, so keep alive costs, including treatment.
> there is money in pollination, but then you need a truck and likely a lift.
> help, labor
> 
> I would think each operator, depending on the what , where , how is different.
> 
> GG


So how does one become a commercial beek, started at the bottom and eventually grew to large enough to market - or investment, inheritance? how does that work?


----------



## James Lee

G3farms said:


> I hope your hives are not mite bombing your neighbors hives.


No robbing in my apiaries last year that I observed, and everyone was solid going into fall, save the lackluster feeding on a few colonies.

My neighbors are all TF as well. It's a bit of a co-op. Part of the grand plan I guess you could say.


----------



## joebeewhisperer

How do ya'll feel about solid vs screened bottom boards?


James Lee said:


> For instance - i can make $100 p/h on the side hustle, can I make that with bees? All the management, supplies, treatments, etc - to stay alive in a commercial capacity - will I make $100 p/h?


Pardon my ignorance here but I'm not accustomed to seeing a rate expressed like this. If your question is "can I make $100 USD, per hour worked?" then I would like to share an example. 

Last year I made some money in bees. I was terribly inefficient, but not particularly worried about it as it was just an experiment. I say experiment to avoid the truth that I, once again, let the bees decide how big it needed to grow. 

Several days I left a pretty good paying contract tech gig at lunch to come home and "play with bees". I would say at my tiny scale that I was making somewhere around minimum wage. It really wasn't until I received my tax docs that I realized how much money I had lost, "playing with bees". At the end of the day I did something I enjoyed, and got a lot of exercise. It was fun and thankfully we are not straining to make a mortgage payment. This year I will likely do something similar, less time at work, more time making a smidge of money in bees. 

But if your question is how many beekeepers make $208K annually (100/hr * 40hr * 52wk), then I'd say 1 in 30-40K beekeepers. Rough guess, but easily a 1000:1 shot. 

Again, forgive my ignorance if I misunderstood your statement.


----------



## joebeewhisperer

Litsinger said:


> I will look forward to your observations and conclusions once you've had the opportunity to hear from others and have learned everything you can about the current state of commercial TF operations in the US and elsewhere.
> 
> Again, glad to have you a part of the Beesource forum.


Well said my friend.


----------



## G3farms

And to add to Joe's post, can that keep do it year after year.


----------



## LarryBud

James Lee said:


> So how does one become a commercial beek, started at the bottom and eventually grew to large enough to market - or investment, inheritance? how does that work?


James, you know I like you but...that's a dumb question so... you work! If you have an inheritance, buy a yacht, invite hot Instagram influencers and party. Bees are a sure way on how to make a large fortune into a small one.


----------



## Litsinger

joebeewhisperer said:


> At the end of the day I did something I enjoyed, and got a lot of exercise. It was fun and thankfully we are not straining to make a mortgage payment. This year I will likely do something similar, less time at work, more time making a smidge of money in bees.


Same here, Joe. Does that make us commercial operators?


----------



## James Lee

LarryBud said:


> James, you know I like you but...that's a dumb question so... you work! If you have an inheritance, buy a yacht, invite hot Instagram influencers and party. Bees are a sure way on how to make a large fortune into a small one.


I'm being serious. I can make that on the side hustle. Not a joke.


----------



## LarryBud

Is there a link to Scoobert's "First of 10,000 hives"? Great business plan-like the underware gnomes on South Park.


----------



## JoshuaW

James Lee said:


> I'm being serious. I can make that on the side hustle. Not a joke.


Major props. If I could do that I wouldn't be wasting my time here.

All the overnight successes I know of took 35 years to happen. Or 3 generations.


----------



## Gray Goose

James Lee said:


> So how does one become a commercial beek, started at the bottom and eventually grew to large enough to market - or investment, inheritance? how does that work?


hard work
the short cuts are few.

math start with 2 then 5 then 15 then 25 then 80 then150.
realizing each step is more work and more investment. like at 80 you need to be able to do splits, at 150 make or find cheap hives, then a truck, then some contracts.
I do not recommend borrowing.
working for a commercial for a couple seasons can be enlighting.

GG


----------



## Gray Goose

James Lee said:


> I'm being serious. I can make that on the side hustle. Not a joke.


ok so finally you are serious, we are getting some where.
You will not make 100/hr doing beekeeping. So if you have a side hustle doing that , then I would think you do that for a living
so you are not here for the money ,you also stated you do not want to be a commercial.

So then serious why are you here?
what is it you seek?

GG


----------



## joebeewhisperer

Litsinger said:


> Same here, Joe. Does that make us commercial operators?


It makes us something. ... It sure makes us something.


----------



## GregB

joebeewhisperer said:


> It makes us something. ... It sure makes us something.


Surely you voted here. 








Beekeeping hobby goals and motivations.


Pretty soon here (weeks?) our local vendors will be pushing the bee sales for the 2022. As usually, a bunch of new beeks will buy their own first package or a nuc. But a lot of these people never really gave it a thought - WHY is it they are getting the bees. One typical response - be kinda...




www.beesource.com


----------



## Some Bloke

DavidBrown1212 said:


> I am an agriculturist, by nature. I have grown quite a variety of things for profit, and quite often at considerable scale. I make my money on small grains and cattle, but some poultry, waterfowl and fruit also help.
> 
> So I come to apiculture last year, and I see this mite issue effecting bees, and profit. I see this as quite a familiar issue, for no profitable livestock has ever gone long without parasitic loss... but wow, not only are the losses extensive but the treatment itself can be incredibly profit robbing.
> 
> I dont understand the resistance to moving more towards a "treatment free" or "survivor" or I would put it "cost mitigating" management style, especially by the commercial beekeeping sector. Everyone wins, the backyard keeper keeps more hives, the organic hippie doesn't get chemicals in his bowl, and the commercial beekeeper doesnt have a $8k Apivar bill.
> 
> The main issue seems to be a cultural push back from the commercial growers, and I think its just a lack of organization and understanding. The solutions to reaching treatment free have become well documented and understood, there a number of selectable traits we can track and select for. The trouble is, most commercial guys only see the first couple of years production and give up, without a full understanding of how that could play out in the future.
> 
> Let me tell you how we did this in commercial poultry, because we converted almost the entire industry to being treatment free over the last decade. That "no antibiotics ever" chicken was a industry wide effort, and it worked great. We used to feed a collection of antibiotics and growth stimulators, but this was causing a string of problems, with climbing costs. Some small studies showed the existence of "survivor" strains, and a heritable resistance to certain coccidia and bacterium. Then the biggest companies jumped in and we bred some more at great scale and crossed the most resistant strains. Then the killing started, wiping out the majority of genetic lines. Because we killed everything, every single bird with no resistance, we naturally lost production and feed efficiency. It was hard for a couple of generations, but we recovered. Production is largely back to baseline, with slightly lower feed efficiency. Profitability is way up, and management has been simplified.
> 
> How do we do we accomplish this in the commercial beekeeping?


Congratulations on achieving this with poultry, I was not aware of that.

There have been a lot of advances in TF beekeeping but high intensity commercial beekeepers' practises basically breed mites and disease. If they had a bee which was 100% resistant to varroa and DWV they'd push it to new lmits to squeeze more dollars out of it.

In Britain, no one has seen trachael mites for years (we're still trained in how to spot them with microscopes but the trainers haven't seen them either) and CCD was never a thing here. Foul brood is rare after decades of draconian rooting it out rather than masking the symptoms with antibiotics. Then again, many more of us use local bees, migratory beekeeping is on a much smaller scale, our winter losses are about half yours etc.

The bottom line is, if you stress your employees beyond their limits, don't be surprised at a hih turnover rate.


----------



## James Lee

Gray Goose said:


> ok so finally you are serious, we are getting some where.
> You will not make 100/hr doing beekeeping. So if you have a side hustle doing that , then I would think you do that for a living
> so you are not here for the money ,you also stated you do not want to be a commercial.
> 
> So then serious why are you here?
> what is it you seek?
> 
> GG


Why am I where? Beesource? This particular forum? 

This forum - I originally agreed with everyone else that TF is not a viable commercial strategy. After being derided for saying TF is viable for Hobbyist's and not Commercial I got sucked in and now remain.

As to the question - I am serious about inquiry into the financial viability of commercial beekeeping. Generally speaking, most of the responses to the OP question are rooted in the financial failure of said TF proposition - and often TF is maligned because it's messing with people's bottom line. So it is not a "labor of love" as someone else mentioned then, it is about the bottom line. I am fine with that -but if it is so much work, for so little profit, why do you do it? 

That's what I'm serious about, what is the motivation?


----------



## Gray Goose

James Lee said:


> Why am I where? Beesource? This particular forum?
> 
> This forum - I originally agreed with everyone else that TF is not a viable commercial strategy. After being derided for saying TF is viable for Hobbyist's and not Commercial I got sucked in and now remain.
> 
> As to the question - I am serious about inquiry into the financial viability of commercial beekeeping. Generally speaking, most of the responses to the OP question are rooted in the financial failure of said TF proposition - and often TF is maligned because it's messing with people's bottom line. So it is not a "labor of love" as someone else mentioned then, it is about the bottom line. I am fine with that -but if it is so much work, for so little profit, why do you do it?
> 
> That's what I'm serious about, what is the motivation?


thanks for the answer
easier to help folks if we understand what they want or need.
this "site" was my intended Question.

like i offered "how" to be a commercial , then you said you did not want to be one.
So I'd rather not waste both our time, if I know what you want and have input I can offer it.

At this point I am not sure

GG


----------



## James Lee

Gray Goose said:


> thanks for the answer
> easier to help folks if we understand what they want or need.
> this "site" was my intended Question.
> 
> like i offered "how" to be a commercial , then you said you did not want to be one.
> So I'd rather not waste both our time, if I know what you want and have input I can offer it.
> 
> At this point I am not sure
> 
> GG


Well I can bow out of the thread gracefully, and start another, as there was a rabbit trail that warrants as such.

But the site - is not just a "commercial" site, is it? Otherwise, I really enjoy talking about bees. With everyone - whether we keep them the same or not. There's plenty to learn. 

Semper Reformanda..


----------



## Gray Goose

James Lee said:


> Well I can bow out of the thread gracefully, and start another, as there was a rabbit trail that warrants as such.
> 
> But the site - is not just a "commercial" site, is it?


ok ill try again
you found BS you are now "partaking"
what are you seeking?
not about the thread.

the couple time answers were offer to "what was assumed questions" you blew it off and stated I do not want that.
So I am curious as to what do you seek from BS.

questions, answers, entertainment, contacts, there are several legit answers.

no need to bow out of anything
if I spent time answering your post and you really did not want an answer , then why should I??

so hence the why in general

GG


----------



## ursa_minor

Some Bloke said:


> There have been a lot of advances in TF beekeeping but high intensity commercial beekeepers' practises basically breed mites and disease. If they had a bee which was 100% resistant to varroa and DWV they'd push it to new lmits to squeeze more dollars out of it.


Oh dear, while I agree there is a mercenary side to some commercial operations and TF has advanced it has not shown me yet the ability to be effective in many areas of the world. I am beginning to get slightly annoyed at the repeated insinuation that any unsuccessful TF beekeeper is themselves at fault for not trying hard enough. If it is management practices then that beekeeper should be able to keep TF bees anywhere, is there a study that shows this? I am not being snarky, I am being serious it would be a great thing to know.

ETA local stock as a reason is a non starter, we have no local stock, it cannot survive the winter.

gee edited again, need another coffee==== by local stock I am referencing wild colonies.


----------



## Duck River Honey

James Lee said:


> I am serious about inquiry into the financial viability of commercial beekeeping. Generally speaking, most of the responses to the OP question are rooted in the financial failure of said TF proposition - and often TF is maligned because it's messing with people's bottom line. So it is not a "labor of love" as someone else mentioned then, it is about the bottom line. I am fine with that -but if it is so much work, for so little profit, why do you do it?
> 
> That's what I'm serious about, what is the motivation?


My college degrees are in Agricultural Economics and this is something we studied a lot. Most Ag markets are called perfectly competitive - many producers putting out a homogenous product with set pricing, with relatively low barriers to entry and exit. Those conditions favor low profitability, because if conditions improve more people enter the market until profit is diluted.

The more interesting question is WHY do those conditions exist in ag? The best answer I heard was lifestyle. What do you want to spend your life doing? I sit behind a computer all day, and love spending my days in a bee yard. Some folks are willing to trade stability and income for the pleasure and meaning of sore muscles, sunburn, and smelling like propolis.

Love is the answer, in my opinion.


----------



## Gray Goose

ursa_minor said:


> Oh dear, while I agree there is a mercenary side to some commercial operations and TF has advanced it has not shown me yet the ability to be effective in many areas of the world. I am beginning to get slightly annoyed at the repeated insinuation that any unsuccessful TF beekeeper is themselves at fault for not trying hard enough. If it is management practices then that beekeeper should be able to keep TF bees anywhere, is there a study that shows this? I am not being snarky, I am being serious it would be a great thing to know.


ursa
none I have seen

seems move the Apiary, cannot repeat the results

My Mind is wandering to the "dirt" here in Mi we have pockets of cancer or other anomalies. when enough resources are put on the issue, we find PFAS, led pipes, or other explanations. I know of one family had twins, one moved away, and lived happily ever after, the one that stayed and Mom got cancer, could not have children, had a short life , etc.
I know we are not supposed to compare bees to people. But IMO prefect nutrition, can lead to prefect health. Messed up environment can lead to messed up life's. the "locality" vector has to have some components related to the presences or absence of good/great/best pollen and nectars, and the absence of some pollutants.

the blame game is IMO very misguided, we have a complex thing we do not completely understand, yet we feel the need to assign blame to the keeper..
I have done the exact same thing in 2 different yards, with very different results, so it ain't management all the time.

GG


----------



## ursa_minor

James Lee said:


> and often TF is maligned because it's messing with people's bottom line. So it is not a "labor of love" as someone else mentioned then, it is about the bottom line. I am fine with that -but if it is so much work, for so little profit, why do you do it?


Since you asked,IMO beekeeping is like beef farming, you love the lifestyle. But you still need to mitigate your losses simply because even in good years it is not highly profitable. So while TF is doable in certain situations and a good practice, in the end, as with beef, if your practice leads to the death of most of the herd and you have to start from square one because you failed to treat a disease ( in cattle it would be Blackleg), because you were adamant you wanted to be TF, you loose your lifestyle and possibly your very home. 

Not every agricultural business is aimed at making more money, some people are fine when they feel they have 'enough', each person's 'enough' is different.


----------



## GregB

Some Bloke said:


> In Britain, no one has seen trachael mites for years (we're still trained in how to spot them with microscopes but the trainers haven't seen them either) and CCD was never a thing here. Foul brood is rare after decades of draconian rooting it out rather than masking the symptoms with antibiotics. Then again, *many more of us use local bees, migratory beekeeping is on a much smaller scale*, our winter losses are about half yours etc.
> 
> The bottom line is, if you stress your employees beyond their limits, don't be surprised at a hih turnover rate.


You have it good, SB.

Imagine if annually (and year after year) you'd be dumped onto you hundreds and hundreds of packages from Spain and Italy.

And then some of your locals would move their bees for winter into Southern France.
Then for the summer they'd come back.
And so on.

So imagine that mess and what happens to your bees in the middle of it.
Pretty much what we have.

The current UK situation sounds to be much more favorable - to the point of affording the TF management in places.
If the US state-level administrations had some ball$ and blocked the cross-border bee moves, that would only be beneficial. Some do; but it is a general hodge-podge of inconsistent "self-regulation".


----------



## Litsinger

Gray Goose said:


> the blame game is IMO very misguided, we have a complex thing we do not completely understand, yet we feel the need to assign blame to the keeper..
> I have done the exact same thing in 2 different yards, with very different results, so it ain't management all the time.


GG:

As usual, I think you are on the mark. I think the temptation is ever there for all of us to extend our experiences (both good and bad) and attempt to assign universality to them.

Stepping back a bit and thinking about animal husbandry in general, it is clear that different breeds and management practices produce relatively better or worse results in general in specific regions of the globe.

So in my very humble view (and coming back to the specific premise at hand) I think we all do well to be a bit careful to make always/never statements about something as complicated as bee biology/husbandry. 

Thus, while I agree it is presumptuous to think that if TF seems to be working in my little two-bit hobby operation in an isolated corner of Western Kentucky that I can project my experience on anyone else, I also think it is presumptuous to say that TF is a failure because it cannot as yet be reproduced 'cookie-cutter' style in all locations and all forms of bee management. To be fair, there is not even one 'best' way of keeping bees conventionally.

Coming back to the question at hand- is it possible to run a commercial TF operation?

Based on the experience of folks much smarter and skilled than me I think the short answer is 'yes'.

But as all of us who have managed livestock and/or bees for any length of time will concede- the longer answer also includes a long list of, 'but it depends on...'

And in truth, while the list of 'it depends on...' might be shorter when bees are managed conventionally, there are caveats there too.


----------



## GregB

Gray Goose said:


> I have done the exact same thing in 2 different yards, with very different results, so it ain't management all the time.


+1
Not management all the time.
The "luck" factor is huge.
With the understanding that the "luck" is a very wide specter of happenings beyond our knowledge or understanding.
Luck in real life is very different from simplistic coin-flipping type of luck.

GG - PFAS are also big in several Northern WI counties now.
They found massive underground pollution and no obvious solutions to the problem. 
People somehow still have to live there.








‘The middle of a massive contamination’: Residents of Wisconsin region struggle with aftereffects of dangerous ‘forever chemicals’ - Investigate Midwest


Four years after a Wisconsin facility disclosed water contamination in the surrounding community, residents and locals deal with the impact of PFAS or 'forever chemicals.'




investigatemidwest.org


----------



## James Lee

Duck River Honey said:


> My college degrees are in Agricultural Economics and this is something we studied a lot. Most Ag markets are called perfectly competitive - many producers putting out a homogenous product with set pricing, with relatively low barriers to entry and exit. Those conditions favor low profitability, because if conditions improve more people enter the market until profit is diluted.
> 
> The more interesting question is WHY do those conditions exist in ag? The best answer I heard was lifestyle. What do you want to spend your life doing? I sit behind a computer all day, and love spending my days in a bee yard. Some folks are willing to trade stability and income for the pleasure and meaning of sore muscles, sunburn, and smelling like propolis.
> 
> Love is the answer, in my opinion.


I like this answer.


----------



## James Lee

ursa_minor said:


> Since you asked,IMO beekeeping is like beef farming, you love the lifestyle. But you still need to mitigate your losses simply because even in good years it is not highly profitable. So while TF is doable in certain situations and a good practice, in the end, as with beef, if your practice leads to the death of most of the herd and you have to start from square one because you failed to treat a disease ( in cattle it would be Blackleg), because you were adamant you wanted to be TF, you loose your lifestyle and possibly your very home.
> 
> Not every agricultural business is aimed at making more money, some people are fine when they feel they have 'enough', each person's 'enough' is different.


And I will never knock - nor have I ever knocked commercial beeks for that choice. 

And the onus is on the TF beek to put their money where their mouth is - and until the solution is reproduceable - we will have stalemates. Which is why commercial TF beekeeping is currently unsustainable.


----------



## James Lee

Gray Goose said:


> ok ill try again
> you found BS you are now "partaking"
> what are you seeking?
> not about the thread.
> 
> the couple time answers were offer to "what was assumed questions" you blew it off and stated I do not want that.
> So I am curious as to what do you seek from BS.
> 
> questions, answers, entertainment, contacts, there are several legit answers.
> 
> no need to bow out of anything
> if I spent time answering your post and you really did not want an answer , then why should I??
> 
> so hence the why in general
> 
> GG


Sorry to seem as blowing it off. I want to know the particulars. That is the why to the question. Sheer curiosity. It is experience and knowledge I don't have, and I believe firmly in making informed decisions, not just blindly following the loudest voice - as it oft seems I'm accused of


----------



## James Lee

JoshuaW said:


> Major props. If I could do that I wouldn't be wasting my time here.
> 
> All the overnight successes I know of took 35 years to happen. Or 3 generations.


Well - my success at that accomplishment implies I'm capable of rational thought and possibly have some sense. Because I'm certainly not peddling dope.


----------



## James Lee

G3farms said:


> And the way I read the chart above, they are constantly adding hives to the group, went from 28 to 37 to 51. Why did they just not stay with the hives at hand until all were dead or they achieved their goal?
> 
> This is not a very good study, it is across 8 apiaries, not sure what that means, just eight yards in total or eight different keeps each with several different yards. At this rate each apiary only had an average or 3 to 6 hives over the three year period.


@G3farms here is the response:


I asked -

"Greetings.

Curious about the colony increase over the 3 year span, what method did that come by, internal increase or addition by swarms/external package replenishment etc.?

Lastly, any projected information or hypothesis coming out of the current season?

Thanks for your work!"

They responded:

"The 28 hives increasing to 170 that are not treating in the project largely reflects an increase in the numbers of beekeepers involved. This includes our friends in Croydon and Orpington BKAs, as well as Westerham

A lot of the increases from the initial breeding group go to other interested beeks who are looking to benefit from bees with the appropriate hygienic traits.

We don’t look to bring in swarms or external nucs/packages, as most of these are bred to be “mite susceptible” bees, unless a swarm is likely from a feral or unmanaged source. No external bees is important.

We identify the hygienic traits from our own locally adapted bees and breed from them. Mostly using the naturally occurring queen cells using swarm season. Grafting is also used but I’m not convinced we make better choices that’s the bees!

The recent season reaffirmed the key trait is “uncapping / recapping” by the bees to control their own mite population. Virus tolerance is also a newish area we are trying to get our heads around."


----------



## joebeewhisperer

GregB said:


> Surely you voted here.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Beekeeping hobby goals and motivations.
> 
> 
> Pretty soon here (weeks?) our local vendors will be pushing the bee sales for the 2022. As usually, a bunch of new beeks will buy their own first package or a nuc. But a lot of these people never really gave it a thought - WHY is it they are getting the bees. One typical response - be kinda...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.beesource.com


To the best of my knowledge I had not yet taken this survey. But it was actually helpful, as right now, this morning, my goals were therapeutic and backyard science experiment. I begrudgingly checked bee and queen production, not because I don't enjoy them, but because of the stress involved in something that was once a de-stressor. Thanks


Duck River Honey said:


> What do you want to spend your life doing? I sit behind a computer all day, and love spending my days in a bee yard. Some folks are willing to trade stability and income for the pleasure and meaning of sore muscles, sunburn, and smelling like propolis.
> 
> Love is the answer, in my opinion.


While this has not yet struck an accord with most folks, I can tell you that past 50 your body begins to tell you that you have less time in front of you than behind you. And you begin to analyze the years you have invested in X or Y and whether they were necessary, or a complete waste of time you will never get back. At least in this sense they can serve as cautionary tales of things you will not waste time on in the future, and therefore even the negatives will serve a positive purpose.

Dad had a friend (James Yates) who owned an asphalt company, with probably 50 employees. Mr. Yates threw a company picnic every year and during one of these events his best friend (who was also his accountant) "fell face-first into his potato salad" at the annual event. He was dead of a heart attack at 55. Mr. Yates said, "It was at that moment I realized that anything I wanted to do on this earth, I had better get done." - So while I fight off feelings that doing the fun thing is lazy (even if it's extremely physically demanding), I have never forgotten Mr. Yates' epiphany.


Litsinger said:


> So in my very humble view (and coming back to the specific premise at hand) I think we all do well to be a bit careful to make always/never statements about something as complicated as bee biology/husbandry.
> 
> Thus, while I agree it is presumptuous to think that if TF seems to be working in my little two-bit hobby operation in an isolated corner of Western Kentucky that I can project my experience on anyone else, I also think it is presumptuous to say that TF is a failure because it cannot as yet be reproduced 'cookie-cutter' style in all locations and all forms of bee management. To be fair, there is not even one 'best' way of keeping bees conventionally.


One thing that has continually strikes me is just how unconventional the bee thing is, compared to other things. Again, the variables are overwhelming and the comparison that comes to mind is weather. Untold amounts of time and money are invested in being able to predict weather, and it is not until an actual weather system develops and moves toward us that there is any degree of predictability of what will happen.

But as we wrestle to make sense of the world around us we do indeed project experiences as if they are universal.

I'll be so glad when the sun comes back out. .....


----------



## Litsinger

James Lee said:


> We identify the hygienic traits from our own locally adapted bees and breed from them. Mostly using the naturally occurring queen cells using swarm season. Grafting is also used but I’m not convinced we make better choices that’s the bees!
> 
> The recent season reaffirmed the key trait is “uncapping / recapping” by the bees to control their own mite population. Virus tolerance is also a newish area we are trying to get our heads around."


Great feedback, @James Lee. Thank you for running this to ground.


----------



## GregB

Duck River Honey said:


> The best answer I heard was lifestyle. *What do you want to spend your life doing?* I sit behind a computer all day, and love spending my days in a bee yard. Some folks are willing to trade stability and income for the pleasure and meaning of sore muscles, sunburn, and smelling like propolis.


"What do you want to spend your life doing?"

The so-called "lifestyle choice" term is way, way overused as in - "everyone can do what they want".
I call this bull$h!t cultivated by the corporate media (including the gov) and various niche content generators and such.
This is necessary to keep the people occupied by something and out of trouble - nothing new.
The same sh!t is used in many places (take Russia for one - free land is available in Far East for taking for those who want to start their own ag farmsteads - google that one up to see what kind of gov-sponsored scam that is  )

As if ALL people are truly able to choose their own life-style.
Even I can not do it - too many financial liabilities that I carry and people I support will not allow me do it. NOT to mention the absolute necessity in job-sponsored health insurance (for us).
The stability and income are *nothing *to sniff at - not at the absence of any meaningful social protection network at the least.

My freshly college graduated kid in no serious way could make it in the independent ag right now.
It does not matter how strongly he desires that life-style (he does NOT, but he entirely could).
He has no assets.
I have no assets to give to him - no land, no building, no machinery, no nothing.
I also strongly advise him to stay out of debt as much as possible - don't buy into that corporate-sponsored bull$h!t propaganda that you *must *borrow.

At the same very time, he is immediately employable by tech companies and immediately earns good money with very little investment to speak off - a company issued laptop in his very room.

So - the lifestyle choices *in the ag in particular* are only available to very few people - mostly those who already own some assets OR have access to the family assets OR have money to invest. I don't see reasonable people borrowing money so they can pursue this shaky dream of "country living life style" at the present environment.

If you have no assets, this question is mostly irrelevant - "What do you want to spend your life doing?"
You will be doing whatever to earn living - mostly doing NOT what you want to be doing.

Driving Amazon delivery truck, to compare, is a very predictable and stable way to make money (and about the same work volume as in ag).  Not that you are going to enjoy it.

PS: I enjoy my annual stack of "Mother Earth" magazines I pickup from a local library;
they give them to me for FREE at the year end;
it contains lots of useful hacks to learn;
This magazine also projects this fake idea of "independent farm living" which is not really feasible for 95-99% of regular folks. Most of the magazine is also nothing but ads.
But OK, for free I like my collection of the said magazines. 

PPS: OK, several YT personalities seem to imitate a "life style" - they are in consumer content-generation business, to be clear about them; some are doing rather well; others are still trying.
This is a good example:


----------



## James Lee

GregB said:


> "What do you want to spend your life doing?"
> 
> The so-called "lifestyle choice" term is way, way overused as in - "everyone can do what they want".
> I call this bull$h!t cultivated by the corporate media (including the gov) and such.
> This is necessary to keep the people occupied by something and out of trouble - nothing new.
> The same sh!t is used in many places (take Russia for one - free land is available in Far East for taking for those who want to start their own ag farmsteads - google that one up  )
> 
> As if ALL people are truly able to choose their own life-style.
> Even I can not do it - too many financial liabilities that I carry and people I support will not allow me do it. NOT to mention the absolute necessity in job-sponsored health insurance (for us).
> The stability and income are *nothing *to sniff at - not at the absence of any meaningful social protection network at the least.
> 
> My freshly college graduated kid in no serious way could make it in the ag right now.
> It does not matter how strongly he desires that life-style (he does NOT, but he entirely could).
> He has no assets.
> I have no assets to give to him - no land, no building, no machinery, no nothing.
> I also strongly advise him to stay out of debt as much as possible - don't buy into that corporate-sponsored bull$h!t propaganda.
> 
> At the same very time, he is immediately employable by tech companies and immediately earns good money with very little investment to speak off - a company issued laptop in his very room.
> 
> So - the lifestyle choices *in the ag in particular* are only available to very few people - mostly those who already own some assets OR have access to the family assets OR have money to invest.
> 
> If you have no assets, this question is mostly irrelevant - "What do you want to spend your life doing?"
> You will be doing whatever to earn living - mostly doing NOT what you want to be doing.
> 
> Driving Amazon delivery truck, to compare, is a very predictable and stable to make money (and about the same work volume as in ag).  Not that you are going to enjoy it.


To surmise: So those currently in commercial beekeeping likely have inherited assets or capital? And the only way in is through debt?


----------



## ursa_minor

Litsinger said:


> Thus, while I agree it is presumptuous to think that if TF seems to be working in my little two-bit hobby operation in an isolated corner of Western Kentucky that I can project my experience on anyone else, I also think it is presumptuous to say that TF is a failure because it cannot as yet be reproduced 'cookie-cutter' style in all locations and all forms of bee management. To be fair, there is not even one 'best' way of keeping bees conventionally


I agree it cuts both ways, while I do applaud those who can be TF and I do not think TF is impossible, the failure of some of the major players in the _TF Movement _is the inability to recognize that they cannot be transferred into every area.


----------



## James Lee

ursa_minor said:


> I agree it cuts both ways, while I do applaud those who can be TF and I do not think TF is impossible, the failure of some of the major players in the _TF Movement _is the inability to recognize that they cannot be transferred into every area.


Thanks for that acknowledgment. The importance of local mentorship is personified in the latter of your statement.


----------



## GregB

Litsinger said:


> Thus, while I agree it is presumptuous to think that if TF seems to be working in my little two-bit hobby operation in an isolated corner of Western Kentucky that I can project my experience on anyone else, I also think it is presumptuous to say that TF is a failure because it cannot as yet be reproduced 'cookie-cutter' style in all locations and all forms of bee management. To be fair, there is not even one 'best' way of keeping bees conventionally.
> 
> Coming back to the question at hand- is it possible to run a commercial TF operation?


I agree that general answer is - it depends.
Maybe yes; maybe no - it depends and it requires some case by case research.
People should get used to it.

But the key word is - *commercial*.
Does the commercial operator want to be TF so to command higher prices?
Does the commercial operator want to be TF so to save costs?
Does the commercial operator want to be TF so to attract new consumer segment?
Does the commercial operator want to be TF so to develop new products?
What is it?
What is the point of the TF in the commercial operation context?
Why the noises to begin with?

I still fail to see any clear, unambiguous and target-minded understanding in the OPs writings.
Like said - try the TF hands on for 3-5 years.
Come back; share the findings; teach the others; redefine the original question.


----------



## Litsinger

ursa_minor said:


> I agree it cuts both ways, while I do applaud those who can be TF and I do not think TF is impossible, the failure of some of the major players in the _TF Movement _is the inability to recognize that they cannot be transferred into every area.


@ursa_minor. I don't disagree with you on this point.

I will offer that I think that most of this element has either moved on or is frankly a caricature of reality.

At least with the names that I offered above (a few that I could legitimately say are making a sustained push towards TF in a commercial setting- not YouTube pretenders), they seem to be brutally honest about the struggles and challenges they had (and are having) in moving in this direction, and are quick to point out that what they have is a process that is working for them in their situation- not a universal panacea.

Even if folks are skeptical about TF beekeeping (for good reason), I think Kirk Webster is well-worth investing some time in to read and study what he is doing, and why he is doing it. He makes some very compelling arguments (IMHO) and is quick to point-out the challenges he has had, the limitations he has discovered, and the satisfaction he has found in working with a combination of genetics and management to make a living with bees in a TF paradigm. He's by every objective measure a good beekeeper to boot and one can learn a lot about successful bee propagation in Northern climates from him regardless.


----------



## Litsinger

GregB said:


> But the key word is - *commercial*.


You are right, Greg and I thought about this when typing my response. But thought better of opening up the proverbial can of worms.  Because there are a lot of ways that one could develop a legitimate enterprise around TF that would not necessarily involve large-scale migratory operations.

Cory Stevens comes to mind- he is doing a good business selling VSH queens and TF beekeeping is an adjunct to his breeding efforts. So while he might never retire on selling "TF" honey from the house, he might come close to building a nice nest egg selling queens, especially as his reputation for a stellar product continues to grow.


----------



## Duck River Honey

GregB said:


> If you have no assets, this question is mostly irrelevant - "What do you want to spend your life doing?"
> You will be doing whatever to earn living - mostly doing NOT what you want to be doing.


Ag markets have traditionally been perfectly, or monopolistically competitive with low barriers to entry and exit. In some parts of ag that has changed. Row cropping for example...you need big equipment and big acreage to make it work these days. There are fewer small and part time operators every year, and their acreage is being absorbed by bigger and more efficient producers. That is a hard field to break into if you're starting with nothing.

On the other hand, beekeeping is still pretty accessible. A solo beekeeper tending 500 hives can manage to make a living, perhaps with a spouse working an off farm job to keep insurance. I'd argue that it's easier to build a full time ag career in beekeeping than most other areas of agriculture today, because you don't need hugely expensive equipment, or hugely expensive land. Bees are tresspassers, and we don't pay the property taxes or mortgages on the land they forage.

It's a hard road with thin margins. You've got to love it to stick with it. Those who don't love it will be squeezed out during hard times.


----------



## Oldtimer

LOL I had to chuckle

Quote from opening post -
"I dont understand the resistance to moving more towards a "treatment free" or "survivor" or I would put it "cost mitigating" management style, especially by the commercial beekeeping sector".......... "I think its just a lack of organization and understanding". 

The new kid on the block always has a much better understanding and organisation than those who have been doing it for decades 😉. I'll admit to not reading a lot past the opening post because in years past there were so many of these threads and they always went the same way.
Which was, the guy telling everyone how to achieve being treatment free failed at it themselves and eventually gave up.

So because I didn't wade through the whole 6 pages I may have missed if this has already been covered but incase not, there are some "successful" TF operations including at least one commercial one (Dee Lusby). These either have special bees or some other characteristic that has not been able to be transferred to other areas. Which has been tried much, but not succeeded. In addition, despite being portrayed as successful, most of these operations are borderline financially and always on the brink of folding, mostly having other means to keep them propped up.

The "resistance" by commercial beekeepers to treatment free beekeeping is not as described. I do not know a commercial beekeeper who would not love to be treatment free. The "resistance" is more just an acceptance of reality.

The island of Puerto Rico has completely treatment free bees, no bees on the island are treated. I personally would love to be able to get my hands on some of those bees and see if they could live TF somewhere else.

A little video showing the results of Dee Lusby's breeding program


----------



## msl

crofter said:


> I saw excuse, after excuse and repeated example of grasping for miracles on the basis of advice from gurus. Poster boy example of the ugly side of treatment free recruitment


yes, blind faith based beekeeping



James Lee said:


> it always seems that the commercial side thinks the TF side is trying to convert them?


well thats exactly what this thread is about, some one with few hives telling the commercials how it is... every wonder why the commercials rarely post here any more....they were run off by a swarm to backyard TF harpies


James Lee said:


> @msl I reached back out to Mr. Wustner, to clarify some of the commentary,


love to here what he has to say, I am just gong off what he siad in the video


James Lee said:


> if anything it demonstrates the point yourself and others are making on a regular basis - management practice is essential to success. Clearly, the boy didn't follow dad's footsteps.


DING... and there is the rub... if the great Jonh Keffus cant transfer TF to his son and bisnuss partner, what chance does any one elce have? 


James Lee said:


> You can't breed resistance with treated bees,


The science says that's a false hood permoted by TF gurus.. the issue is simple, if some starts to treat a little they quickly see how much better thier bees are and they get out of strict TF and never look back...


> Further research to determine the best IPM procedures to support the full expression of resistant phenotypes would move us more quickly toward ending reliance on acaricides.
Click to expand...

Robert G Danka, Thomas E Rinderer, Marla Spivak, and John Kefuss(2013) Comments on: “Varroa destructor: research avenues towards sustainable control”
These are some of the top people in the feild, they each have brought a resticant line to mass market, and they all agree treatment is use full to support change (ie you need bees come spring)



James Lee said:


> Therefore, as I said, the TF camp has to put the money where their mouth is, develop and provide the stock,


I dissagree, whole heartedly
the best thing TF could do is buy bees form the large programs that our out there. if you support them, they grow. if most hobbyists support them and package producers cant sell packages with almond bees in them they will very quickly change.
Kirk Webster was unsuccessful till he brought in russtians
Sam Comfort brings in hundreds of VSH cells a year


James Lee said:


> I think you miss my point. We will never get there if we are working together on the solution


that takes the TF camp to come to the table... who is the bigest suporters of TF work? not the TF types as they are advised not to buy anything.. Its the big commercials buying $300-$600 breeder queens form the big TF breeders... VP queens, Lashaw apiary's etc so that then can get restiance in there stocks


Litsinger said:


> I might suggest you start researching the following operations / organizations:


I would add








1500 Varroa Treatment Free


South Dakota is Buffalo and Indian land in the northern part of the Midwest. I talked to Chris Baldwin some time ago. He is a commercial beekeeper running about 1500 bee colonies. In summer his b…



www.elgon.es






James Lee said:


> TF is maligned because it's messing with people's bottom line.


YES!!
when you kill some one elces hives with your mite (and in some cases foul brood) bombs your going to be maligned, you not being a ethical nehorbor, when you talk about how you did it on purpose... your going to be maligned even more...
the currant methods being permoted are akin to you having covid, and you know you have covid and you go to several large gathering of people with the plan to help them with catch it in hopes they move herd immunity further

The problem is not TF as a goal (or the few who are doing things right), its the ridged dogma and out right poor (or lack of)beekeeping methods used that are highly unlikely to create what is neeed to meet the goals.. Very few who talk of bond have any understanding of how john made it work (slect breeder queens by mite counts, graft the heckout of them, requeen the rest).. they think he just stopped treatment and made splits, cause that's what some guru said happend and they never read the papers

the time to come to the table and talk about IPM as a middle ground has come and gone, and its moved on past leveing few gens of TF beekeepers have been darwined out and left the hobby since then.. there are a few who were successful ( many of them have come to the table) there were a few more who moved to treatment (such as my self) and many of them have come to the table, then there is a massive pile of dead colony's they left in there wake.

every year, standing on that pile of dead colonys is the next gen of under informed TF beekeepers making a lot of noise and completely sure of thier path, but they have yet to walk it
we ask them to look down and see what the path is paved with, but they wish to look up, sure there success is up there some were, they can see it in there minds eye, as they follow the sirens song of a internet guru right in to the rocks and add there colonys and those of beekeepers around them to the pile.

as greg said


GregB said:


> Come back; share the findings; teach the others;


The problem is the dead don't speak, very few come back after failure, and those who switch to treatmes are often outcast as hericks, witch makes the few successes look biger.. 



> Oldtimer said:
> 
> 
> 
> The island of Puerto Rico has completely treatment free bees, no bees on the island are treated. I personally would love to be able to get my hands on some of those bees and see if they could live TF somewhere else.
> 
> 
> 
> Well they are AHB..... so there is that
> they worked out TF for mites in south Africa as well, then the industry was crushed when they tried to use them TF vs AFB... it went very poorly
Click to expand...


----------



## GregB

Duck River Honey said:


> On the other hand, beekeeping is still pretty accessible. A solo beekeeper tending 500 hives can manage to make a living, *perhaps *with a spouse working an off farm job to keep insurance.


Not only "perhaps" but rather as a per-requisite I would argue.

Once you have a stable spouse with a solid compensation package AND willing to let you do whatever you wish - that is entirely different story. 
A stable income with social stability built-in - once that is available and secured, then you can build many things on top of that, even an apparent "independent business" (which really isn't).

A "solo" should mean exactly that - an independent and free solo.
Of course, independently wealthy and asset-ed people are obvious exception - they can do as they wish.


----------



## msl

GregB said:


> Once you have a spouse with a solid compensation package AND willing to let you do whatever you wish


lol story of my life!!!


----------



## Gray Goose

GregB said:


> The "luck" factor is huge.


here we differ not luck, environment.


if you happened to move in next to Russ in KY and could do TF, would it be "luck"?
clean livin for the bees?
floral sources?
pollen sources?

do you think your long frames are more lucky?

I can work with "locale" I cannot work with luck
if it is luck , why try?

GG


----------



## Gray Goose

Litsinger said:


> GG:
> 
> As usual, I think you are on the mark. I think the temptation is ever there for all of us to extend our experiences (both good and bad) and attempt to assign universality to them.
> 
> Stepping back a bit and thinking about animal husbandry in general, it is clear that different breeds and management practices produce relatively better or worse results in general in specific regions of the globe.
> 
> So in my very humble view (and coming back to the specific premise at hand) I think we all do well to be a bit careful to make always/never statements about something as complicated as bee biology/husbandry.
> 
> Thus, while I agree it is presumptuous to think that if TF seems to be working in my little two-bit hobby operation in an isolated corner of Western Kentucky that I can project my experience on anyone else, I also think it is presumptuous to say that TF is a failure because it cannot as yet be reproduced 'cookie-cutter' style in all locations and all forms of bee management. To be fair, there is not even one 'best' way of keeping bees conventionally.
> 
> Coming back to the question at hand- is it possible to run a commercial TF operation?
> 
> Based on the experience of folks much smarter and skilled than me I think the short answer is 'yes'.
> 
> But as all of us who have managed livestock and/or bees for any length of time will concede- the longer answer also includes a long list of, 'but it depends on...'
> 
> And in truth, while the list of 'it depends on...' might be shorter when bees are managed conventionally, there are caveats there too.


Very well said Russ.
you are much more verbose Than I can be.



GG


----------



## Litsinger

msl said:


> ... the time to come to the table and talk about IPM as a middle ground has come and gone ...


MSL:

Good post. I only hope your statement above is like many good ideas- it needs a few cycles of crashing and burning and learning from the mistakes before it becomes mainstream. If it were possible to find consensus around:

1. Treat only when necessary;
2. Select for/propagate resistance;
3. Do what we can to support local adaptation,

We'll certainly get closer to the place where I think we'd all like to be- less reliance on chemical intervention.


----------



## Litsinger

Gray Goose said:


> ... if you happened to move in next to Russ in KY ...


GG:

You just say the word and we can find you a nice place down here in God's Country.


----------



## Gray Goose

Litsinger said:


> GG:
> 
> You just say the word and we can find you a nice place down here in God's Country.


you do not need to temp too hard or often.
as I age the snow is less fun

GG


----------



## GregB

Gray Goose said:


> here we differ not luck, environment.
> ......................
> I can work with "locale" I cannot work with luck
> if it is luck , why try?


Notice the "luck" in quotes.
As I qualified - the "luck" is really an umbrella term for the unknown.

In fact, the "luck" in terms of this entire thread is exactly that - the unknown and uncontrolled factor (which is a variable for every single talk participant).

The "luck" includes the narrow, random luck factor, but also the environment outside of our control AND the activities of the others around you AND the solar spots and solar storms AND the asteroid that is coming our way (which will render much of any of this beekeeping minutia meaningless) and so on.


----------



## GregB

msl said:


> Once you have a spouse with a solid compensation package AND willing to let you do whatever you wish
> 
> 
> 
> lol story of my life!!!
Click to expand...

I just knew!
Be sure to be making the point of you being an _independent operator_. 
Looks credible on the future business deals. LOL
(kidding of course).

BTW - this "independent operator" ideal is very much akin to the TF ideal too.
Both things are very popular (especially with the younger crowds) and look very so doable UNTIL we start asking just *a few clarifying questions.*
A typical question would be - who pays for all of this?
Doesn't this look so very familiar?

LOL


----------



## Litsinger

Gray Goose said:


> you do not need to temp too hard or often.
> as I age the snow is less fun


In full disclosure, we've got snow too... almost enough to go sledding on.


----------



## Oldtimer

Litsinger said:


> 1. Treat only when necessary;


Been there done that. What I learned is it just doesn't work in a commercial operation.

To give an idea of why, can you imagine the time and expense of testing hundreds or thousands of hives every few weeks to see which ones are over the treatment threshold? After that, the leakage of mites from hives that didn't meet the treatment threshold, to hives that have just been treated.

I ended up having to treat more, as recently treated hives got re infected. Not to mention the whole process taking insane amounts of time.

During the season most commercials are working far in excess of a 40 hour week already, without all that.

Hard lesson I learned is that in a commercial outfit, all hives in a yard must be treated at the same time.

Could work in a hobby outfit though, long as the beekeeper is prepared to put in the time and do it right.


----------



## Litsinger

Oldtimer said:


> Been there done that. What I learned is it just doesn't work in a commercial operation.


Good feedback, @Oldtimer. And I certainly can't argue with your logic and experience.

Since we're kicking around hypotheticals (and it's cold around here in the upper 2/3rds of the Northern Hemisphere), would your feedback change if you were annually re-queening the operation with resistant queens coming from breeding stock that was undergoing the rigorous and time-consuming process of testing and selection?


----------



## Oldtimer

Yes in theory at least.

There would still be the issue of finding enough time to manage things properly. But if the bees were genuinely mite resistant to a point where less time needed to be spent testing, then it could work.

Me, I don't always do everything the best way, as per how the book says it should be done, I do it how I can make the most money, for the hours I put in. 
As probably do most commercial beekeepers wether they actually realise that or not.

It is that conundrum that defeats the best intentions of some commercial beekeepers attempting low treatment, or no treatment.


----------



## Duck River Honey

GregB said:


> Once you have a stable spouse with a solid compensation package AND willing to let you do whatever you wish - that is entirely different story.
> A stable income with social stability built-in - once that is available and secured, then you can build many things on top of that, even an apparent "independent business" (which really isn't).
> 
> A "solo" should mean exactly that - an independent and free solo.


No offense intended, but this seems like petty semantics. If a plumber owns his own job (Greg's Plumbing) and his wife is a schoolteacher with state insurance, how is that any different from Greg's Beekeeping, where his wife is a teacher? Is he any less fully employed?

I think the main difference in our viewpoints is that you take the pessimistic "it can't be done" view, and I take the optimistic "it can be done" view.


----------



## Litsinger

Oldtimer said:


> It is that conundrum that defeats the best intentions of some commercial beekeepers attempting low treatment, or no treatment.


Thank you, @Oldtimer. I value your perspective.

It might also be said that this issue is not constrained to strictly commercial pursuits and can be found in most all of our operations (present company included).

Or as the Apostle Paul once mused, _'For what I am doing, I do not understand; for I am not practicing what I would like to do, but I am doing the very thing I hate.'_


----------



## msl

GregB said:


> Both things are very popular (especially with the younger crowds) and look very so doable UNTIL we start asking just *a few clarifying questions.*


when I was working for my self full time, the biggest problem I found was my boss was an A$$H0l3 and made me do thing I would have never done for another employer 
I rember being sick as a dog but I didn't have any one elce to drive the load to the site and set up the show....
I grabbed a bucket to puke and a pair of the old mans depends and started driving...
any job I would have called in sick... but since is was my company and my gig and my income for the month and my client that came back every year..... I had to do what needed done


----------



## AR1

Litsinger said:


> GG:
> 
> You just say the word and we can find you a nice place down here in God's Country.


Well, my wife is always talking about moving south...
I am afraid to make the jump though, because I know it would reopen old arguments, she wants urban and I want rural. Our current place is far to urban for me, and not quite urban enough for her. If I can find a few cheap country acres to buy nearby, I might go for an urban location.


----------



## AR1

Litsinger said:


> MSL:
> 
> Good post. I only hope your statement above is like many good ideas- it needs a few cycles of crashing and burning and learning from the mistakes before it becomes mainstream. If it were possible to find consensus around:
> 
> 1. Treat only when necessary;
> 2. Select for/propagate resistance;
> 3. Do what we can to support local adaptation,
> 
> We'll certainly get closer to the place where I think we'd all like to be- less reliance on chemical intervention.


I think we need to define what we mean as 'commercial'. If you mean pollinating a few not-too-far-distant orchards or fields, that is one thing. If you mean picking up the whole shebang and trucking to Cali for almonds, that's something different. Far different effects on the neighboring apiaries when you come back. I can see some commercial operations of the first type being able to get away with a TF or low-treatment operation...maybe. I cannot see any Cali almond pollinators doing so. And I think they would be very bad neighbors if they tried. But it's almost a moot point, since the TF Cali guys will be out of business in 2 years, tops.


----------



## Litsinger

AR1 said:


> I think we need to define what we mean as 'commercial'.


So I thought someone like the American Bee Federation might have an 'official' definition for Commercial Beekeeping, but I could not locate one.

I noticed that the National Honey Board defines it as, _...those with 300 or more hives._ And this may be all there is to it.

But in my mind I would use the term as generally defined by Merriam-Webster, _'occupied with or engaged in commerce or work intended for commerce'_

Along those lines, the primary focus of the beekeeping in a commercial setting is in supporting a legitimate business interest, be it pollination, bee products, queen rearing or any combination with a plan to be financially viable.

I did find two interesting resources along these lines while looking:

Overview of Commercial Beekeeping- University of Georgia

Strategic Business Planning- Bee Culture

So at a bare minimum I'd suggest that whether at scale or not the commercial aspect of beekeeping is that which is done with a business motivation rather than strictly a hobby/lifestyle motivation.


----------



## Litsinger

AR1 said:


> Well, my wife is always talking about moving south...


Kentucky is definitely rural- we rank the 8th most rural state in the union.

And tends to rank near the bottom of other matrices, so like most places it comes with its' fair share of advantages and disadvantages.


----------



## msl

Litsinger said:


> I noticed that the National Honey Board defines it as, _...those with 300 or more hives._


as does the USDA




Litsinger said:


> But in my mind I would use the term as generally defined by Merriam-Webster, _'occupied with or engaged in commerce or work intended for commerce'_


there is a big difference in being "for profit" and working at a commercial scale, my home shop makes a few bucks manufacturing and selling a few products.. but has nothing in common with a 100,000SF injection molding plant

a kid with a lemonade stand meets your Merriam-Webster, definition but they are far form the scale a of a canning plant


----------



## Gray Goose

AR1 said:


> Well, my wife is always talking about moving south...
> I am afraid to make the jump though, because I know it would reopen old arguments, she wants urban and I want rural. Our current place is far to urban for me, and not quite urban enough for her. If I can find a few cheap country acres to buy nearby, I might go for an urban location.


AR1
my buddy was in the same boat

he ended up with a condo in the city , walking distance to many features, and a Hunting cam in the UP of michigan.
tractor food plots 100 acres, wood shop.
they do some summer months there and the winter down in Louisville.
so combo is also an option, fish camp, farm, etc and a city condo.

hybrid solution

GG


----------



## jim lyon

As another season of hard work pre almond bloom wraps up it’s interesting to note that, again, American beekeepers have managed to place somewhere close to 2 million hives averaging 8 frames at a time of year when hive populations are typically at a low ebb. 
Enter, on Beesource, some gentleman with commercial poultry experience and (apparently) little to no beekeeping experience to save our industry from its failures. How enlightening. I’m just anxious to hear more about his statement that “the good news is keeping mites from reproducing is really not so hard”. 😆. Actually to a degree he’s correct. Unlike some parasites, varroa will eventually kill its own host.


----------



## Litsinger

msl said:


> a kid with a lemonade stand meets your Merriam-Webster, definition but they are far form the scale a of a canning plant


No argument from me, MSL.

My point specific to the question at hand was simply that I think there is more implied by the term 'commercial beekeeping' than simply managing 300 or more colonies in migratory fashion. 

The bee breeder with 50 colonies who sells 2,000 queens a year (i.e. John Kefuss / Cory Stevens) are commercial.

The beekeeper who runs a largely stationary operation that supports his family (i.e. Kirk Webster / Troy Hall) are commercial.

That said, I agree with the central premise that TF in a large-scale migratory operation presents more challenges than the examples noted above. As Troy hall was quoted when asked, _'Do you recommend treatment free beekeeping to other apiaries or beekeepers?'_

*Troy:*_ I’m always humbled. This is not the solution for everyone. I don’t go around and tell beekeepers you have to do it this way. This is a unique thing, and it’s a testimony to those around us that it can be done. _

Troy recognizes that there are a range of circumstances, business models, and environments that are not so compatible with treatment free beekeeping. He learned from observing Kirk in the early days that beekeeping without chemical treatment required an _“advanced relationship and wisdom of bees, because you can be setting yourself up for failure.”_

Even so, Troy suggests that if things were different, if the industry thought more about the long-term health of the bees and the sustainability of beekeeping, both the bees and the environment may be better off.

*Troy:*_ The sad thing is that more and more commercial keepers gave up because they didn’t think you could have your business if you didn’t treat bees, and there’s truth to that, but I think we could have had greater success if people stuck to the treatment free paradigm and kept fewer colonies. . . I do think we [the industry] can do it, and the more we can do it without chemical input the better for the environment. _


----------



## AR1

Litsinger said:


> *Troy:*_ The sad thing is that more and more commercial keepers gave up because they didn’t think you could have your business if you didn’t treat bees, and there’s truth to that, but I think we could have had greater success if people stuck to the treatment free paradigm and kept fewer colonies. . . I do think we [the industry] can do it, and the more we can do it without chemical input the better for the environment. _


I will say, hard and fast rule: TF cannot be done by Cali almond pollinators. I doubt there is any species on Earth that can concentrate half its population in one small area every year, mix, and then go back home, without major disease problems. I applaud people like Randy Oliver and others like him who are making a determined, long-term effort to breed resistant bees, but I do not believe they will be successful in the context of almond pollination. The best I hope for is that they will create bees that can survive in lower disease burden areas, outside of the pollination industry.

Now, I hope someone will chime in and tell me that they have successfully taken bees to Cali for X number of years and maintained a TF policy, proving me wrong.


----------



## jim lyon

Yes, Randy is an incredible asset to the industry. But there are also so many good beekeepers working on improving their own stock through both selection and bringing in outside breeders, everybody wants better bees and a lot of bright and innovative beekeepers are working hard to those ends. In addition a new focus on how good nutrition plays into the larger picture of bee health.


----------



## msl

Litsinger said:


> The bee breeder with 50 colonies who sells 2,000 queens a year (i.e. John Kefuss / Cory Stevens) are commercial.


disagreed on all points
being a queen rearer is not the same as being a commercial beekeeper, still use bees, but separate displins
being a queen rearer is not the same as being a breeder, if you only have 50 hives your not breeding much at all, epically in johns case as he open mates...
IIRR cory has a lot more then 50, 10 years ago it was around 120 or so, would expect he has gotten much bigger

To me those numbers just don't add up ... Sam comfort runs around 600+ fullsized hives and a massive army of nucs, migrates to extend his queen rearing season and sells around 4k queens a year.

when John was with Pacific Queens they sold about 6k queens a year out of an operation with 4k hives
at the same time (2009) when his Toulouse operation was in full glory (500 hives)he was selling 3k queens


http://ncbees.org/library/John%20Kefuss%20Keeping%20Bees%20That%20Keep%20Themselves.pdf&.pdf



I am not the master beekeeper John Kefuss is, but I just don't see making 2k queens with 50 hives or having enough fullsized hives left for any sort of selection.

Never put pen to paper on this but I found the results instering.. as I am doing better than I thought in terms of production
with 20 hives (or so) I struggle to produce about 100 queens a year
thats 5 queens made per hive
Sams numbers would be 6.6 per hive
johns old operation would be 6 per hive

johns new operation with the numbers you gave would be 40 queens per hive....dose not compute



Litsinger said:


> The beekeeper who runs a largely stationary operation that supports his family (i.e. Kirk Webster / Troy Hall) are commercial.


not supporting his family this year









Reflecting on 2021 from the beeyards - Hall Apiaries


The spring of 2021 brought a new experience or some would call it an adventure my way. I had lost 90 percent of my apiary. In the moment it was trying, and difficult to come to grips with. Looking back now I still have a lot more questions then answers, as to what killed off … Reflecting on 2021...




nhbeekeeper.com





but to your point.. yes troy runs enough hives to be a listed as commercial beekeeper (300+) and webster is there as well


> My esteemed beekeeping neighbor, Bill Mraz, has said many times: "To show that you can really do something with bees, you must do it with at least 500 colonies for at least five years." And he's right. Results of the work to get my apiary back on a healthy footing don't quite measure up to this standard yet - but we're getting close,


 kirk webster march 2005 ABJ


----------



## Litsinger

msl said:


> I am not the master beekeeper John Kefuss is, but I just don't see making 2k queens with 50 hives or having enough fullsized hives left for any sort of selection.


Thanks for your feedback, MSL. I was sorry to read Troy's update- that is disappointing.

You caught me mixing metaphors regarding colony numbers and queen production counts. I understood from Dr. Kefuss that he has about 50 colonies and produces about 2,000 queens and cells per year but I was unaware of Cory's situation.

Your feedback prompted me to follow-up with both, with permission to quote them:

Cory- _'I'm less than 200 colonies. We raise 2,000+ queens each year in the spring. Cells and virgins. And make several II'd breeders.'_

Dr. Kefuss- _I produce virgin queens and queen cells and I run 40- 80 colonies depending upon if I have any problems with the horses that like to eat my honey [see attached photos]. I haven’t had the time to make an exact count of the number of virgins and cells that I produced last year but it is probably close to the value you gave._

When I asked Cory what he thought about producing 2,000 queens from 50 colonies, he commented:_ I don't doubt that at all. If I have a really strong colony in the spring I can usually get 100 good quality queen cells out of it over the course of three weeks. If you have 20 boomers and the skill to manage it, no sweat._

I've also attached Dr. Kefuss' 2022 price list- at the current exchange rate it looks like about $9.75 each for ripe cells, about $12.80 each for virgins and about $900 apiece for breeders. Not a bad side hustle for a semi-retired almost octogenarian beekeeper.


----------



## Litsinger

AR1 said:


> Now, I hope someone will chime in and tell me that they have successfully taken bees to Cali for X number of years and maintained a TF policy, proving me wrong.


It looks like MSL's example of Chris Baldwin fits the bill as a proof of concept:



msl said:


> I would add
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1500 Varroa Treatment Free
> 
> 
> South Dakota is Buffalo and Indian land in the northern part of the Midwest. I talked to Chris Baldwin some time ago. He is a commercial beekeeper running about 1500 bee colonies. In summer his b…
> 
> 
> 
> www.elgon.es


There's a good write-up of his operation in last year's Honey Bee Health Coalition's _GUIDE TO VARROA MITE CONTROLS FOR COMMERCIAL BEEKEEPING OPERATIONS_.

And Kirk Webster provides some perspective on Chris' approach and more general thoughts concerning stock selection and resistance breeding here:






Feral Bees | Kirk Webster







kirkwebster.com


----------



## AR1

Litsinger said:


> It looks like MSL's example of Chris Baldwin fits the bill as a proof of concept:
> 
> 
> 
> There's a good write-up of his operation in last year's Honey Bee Health Coalition's _GUIDE TO VARROA MITE CONTROLS FOR COMMERCIAL BEEKEEPING OPERATIONS_.
> 
> And Kirk Webster provides some perspective on Chris' approach and more general thoughts concerning stock selection and resistance breeding here:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Feral Bees | Kirk Webster
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kirkwebster.com


Hah! I'll take a look at those, and maybe eat my words.


----------



## AR1

Litsinger said:


> It looks like MSL's example of Chris Baldwin fits the bill as a proof of concept:
> 
> And Kirk Webster provides some perspective on Chris' approach and more general thoughts concerning stock selection and resistance breeding here:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Feral Bees | Kirk Webster
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> kirkwebster.com


Looks like both of them just assume large losses and make more nucs to balance that out. Reasonable.

I am not quite clear what the cycle is. It appears bees go from breeders in TX, to S Dakota then to Cali. I am not clear on why the bees coming back from Cali don't collapse that fall.


----------



## msl

Russ as always I appreciate your mesherd and informed push back 

calling a cell a queen is the same as the backyard beekeeper calling them self commercial



Litsinger said:


> We raise 2,000+ queens each year in the spring.* Cells and virgins.*





Litsinger said:


> _I produce *virgin queens and queen cells* and I run 40- 80 colonies depending upon if I have any problems with the horses that like to eat my honey [see _





Litsinger said:


> When I asked Cory what he thought about producing 2,000 queens from 50 colonies, he commented:_ I don't doubt that at all. If I have a really strong colony in the spring I can usually get 100 good quality queen cells out of it over the course of three weeks. If you have 20 boomers and the skill to manage it, no sweat._


I feel they are mincing words...
cells are not mated queens (and john cells a lot of 48 hour cells), virgins are not mated queens
virgins are just cells that incubated 2 days more then the cells.

when we use the word queen, it means a mated queen, if its not mated its a virgin, if it still in the cell its neither

I can do 10+ virgins a week out of my single deep "front range cell builder" (one bar of 16 grafts +failure to start+ piniching about 10% of the emerged virgins) I could bump the up by grafting every 5 days in stead of 7 if I needed(I some times do that to make an extra round of 48s a week on top of the finished cells)

so 30 of those units X 10 virgins and a week season you get 3000 virgins
totally doable, espicaly using bigger hives that can produce more
but thats virgins, not queens

its nothing to make 80+ 48 hour cells strong in a dubble deep cell builder and do that 3x in a week(one reason I permote them so much)
its a different matter to provide the bee power to finish those cells(thow thats not over the top as shown above), and quite another thing all together to provide and stock the 240 mateing nucs those cells need this week, and the next week and then the 3rd week if you on a 3 week cycle
so with those numbers in a 11 week season that's 2 weeks till you plant cells+ 3 weeks in the nuc so weeks 5-11 you colect (say a perfict catch lol) 240 queens... so thats like 1680 queens if you catch is perfict.. more like 1100 in the real world using 720+ mateing nucs.. thats a LOT of bee resources tied up

can I buy that kefuss is selling 3000 48s,ripe cells and virgins combined, sure that math checks out.. its just that they are not queens
I feel I do need to say cory is the real deal, and if he was with in driving distance I would be picking up a few bars of cells, but he is not selling queens

swinging back around, the above numbers show why I have been promoting the use of virgins and 48s
a little guy can spread a lot of good genetics around with very few hives.. an important consideration it TF when some springs theirs not much left.. and as webster has noted the easiest part of an operation to keep TF is the queen rearing, comfort saw the same thing when he worked for an outfit running a commercial mateing yard with standard comerical bees



AR1 said:


> Looks like both of them just assume large losses and make more nucs to balance that out.


more or less the state of beekeeping in general


----------



## Roland

Hey Jim - maybe we have been down this path before. What ever happened tp the Almond company that thought bee rental was too high and went big ( 10K hives) into the bee business for themselves? Maybe 5 years ago?

Crazy Roland


----------



## Litsinger

msl said:


> sorry calling a cell a queen is the same as the backyard beekeeper calling them self commercial


MSL:

Thank you for your feedback. I'll yield to your point about queen production.

In fairness, the thrust of my response to, 'what is commercial beekeeping' was simply trying to underscore that there are folks conducting nontrivial TF beekeeping enterprise at colony counts under 300 and/or in non-migratory fashion- that is all.

Otherwise, I concur with your thoughts about 48's. I've long thought your focus on this is wise.

I also would add that Kirk has made the same observation about nucs being a relatively easy aspect of TF.

It's the transition to overwintering production colonies that the real rubber meets the road.


----------



## msl

Litsinger said:


> to underscore that there are folks conducting nontrivial TF beekeeping enterprise at colony counts under 300 and/or in non-migratory fashion- that is all.


they sure are!!
but sadly they are usaly taking 50% or so losses with some times big ones on bad years.

as kirk notes


> I can still function economically the following year if only 40-50 % of those colonies are still alive and healthy.
> Once that number reaches 70%,I consider the economic potential of the apiary to be fully restored.


 ABJ april 2005

in a business world were margins matter, not many can take the beating, hey great thanks for sticking to your "high ground" but no income this year, and a lot of expenses, and the last few years we just getting by didn't leave much in the bank
the problem is 17 years after kirk wrote this, the losses haven't gotten significantly better, the economic potential hasn't been restored ( arugbuly it hasn't except with very skilled beekeepers and treatments.), and the gentincs and methods haven't proved to be transferable, and for the OP there is the rub


----------



## Litsinger

msl said:


> the problem is 17 years after kirk wrote this, the losses haven't gotten significantly better, the economic potential hasn't been restored ( arugbuly it hasn't except with very skilled beekeepers and treatments.), and the gentincs and methods haven't proved to be transferable, and for the OP there is the rub


Well-said. To my mind this is why (at least in a TF context) one might need to rethink what it means to be commercial. Kirk has made it work all these years with 30% average losses in part by (re)-discovering the art and skill of making resource colonies and overwintering queens in a Northen setting. While I think it safe to say that his approach would likely not transfer to migratory operations, he has found a way to make a living with bees in a TF paradigm.

And in truth, all successful beekeepers have had to learn to adapt- and continue to adapt to the varroa mite and the evolving disease vectors that come along with it.

At the end of the day I think it wise that we learn from these efforts, as they might yield clues about the genetic basises and management techniques which might lead to more widespread and successful bee husbandry without chemical intervention.


----------



## LarryBud

TF business plan from south park

South-Park-Gifs — for steal-a-gun-to-kill-time (tumblr.com)


----------



## msl

Litsinger said:


> (at least in a TF context) one might need to rethink what it means to be commercial.


why?
for most its just a line to cross and crow look at me.
those who have pased the maraz test are just busy working there bees.. not writeing/speaking/selling-permoteing there queens to hobbyists

Sorry all, I might just be in a mood.... geting fed up with what I see as people miss representing them selfs to make them sellfs seem bigger better... be it "I am a sideline beekeeper out of my back yard" (note unless you have a bisnunis license and are paying taxes and deducting expenses, your not a sideliner... businesses pay taxes on profit (net income after expenses) and hobbies pay taxes on revenue (gross income before expenses) or its the wave of "master beekeeper" certificates being issued to people who have 2 hives in the back yard... informed hobiests to be sure... but it dosn't pass the Maraz test 



Litsinger said:


> Kirk has made it work all these years with 30% average losses


I don't beleave that loss number is accurate



Michael Palmer said:


> Kirk lost 50-75% of his bees and nucs again this year.





Michael Palmer said:


> Kirk Webster has a major crash about every other year, and rebuilds his apiary from what is left of his production hives and nucleus colonies.


----------



## Oldtimer

An observation I can make is that when I started reading Beesource, it was confidently predicted treatment free beekeeping would take over as more people went bond and produced tougher bees. In 5 years we would mostly be treatment free, or at the most, 10 years.

What has become clear is that despite the efforts of all, there has been no improvement in mite resistance whatsoever over that time period, and in fact rather than TF taking over, the great majority of those beekeepers are now gone, victims of the Darwinian principle of natural selection. Or should I say, unselection of the least fit.

Kirk for example, one of the most honest TF beekeepers, gets no better survival now than he did 10 years ago despite all those years of bond. Which says something about the theory, vs the reality.

The reason I bother to make this post is really for the new kids on the block, who confidently tell us they know a better way, what we are doing wrong, and how we should be doing it.
And then wonder about the "resistance" to their "new ideas". I for one do not "resist", just shrug my shoulders. I know it's all been said before, all been done before, and been a big fail. In another 10 years the situation will be the same.


----------



## msl

Oldtimer said:


> The reason I bother to make this post is really for the new kids on the block, who confidently tell us they know a better way, what we are doing wrong, and how we should be doing it


I post for the new kids on the block that are reading and learning.. if we leave chaff unchanged its only the voice of youthful enthusiasm that has hasn't been tempered from experience that they see

I have learned that those who speak so confidently will have to hit rock bottom before they will shift there belief system... so I debate them not for thier sake, but for others


----------



## JWChesnut

The "defenders" of mostly vaporous or entirely fantasy commercial TF operations have been quite active on this thread.
I would like to clear up that Kefuss's supposed partner in Chile, Fredrico Rey, (Pacific Queens for export, Colmenares Tia Lola in Chile) has in 2021 been treating with Oxalic due to Varroa troubles.









Fredrico Rey writes in this post:
" With the end of the nectar flows, all the problems begin within the apiary, the biggest of them being varroa infestation.
The Varroa is the hardest pest in beekeeping, whatever you do, it will always be there, so the only thing we can do is control it in the best possible way."
.....
"This year we are using an organic treatment, oxalic acid ..."


----------



## msl

JWChesnut said:


> I would like to clear up that Kefuss's supposed partner in


they parted ways a bit ago
While the breeders were TF bonded for well over a decade, the operation remained treated to matain ecomnic performance under the pressures of migtory beekeeping. when questioned John mentions it in passing in a few video's and quickly moves on.

Its worth noteing there web site say's nothing about mite restiance or TF


----------



## GregB

Litsinger said:


> It looks like MSL's example of Chris Baldwin fits the bill as a proof of concept:


*USDA subsidy information for Golden Valley Apiaries LLC
Golden Valley Apiaries LLC received payments totaling $282,053 from 1995 through 2020'‡';*









EWG's Farm Subsidy Database


EWG's Farm Subsidy Database put the issue on the map and is driving reform. Just ten percent of America's largest and richest farms collect almost three-fourths of federal farm subsidies; cash payments that often harm the environment.




farm.ewg.org





Interesting bit of public info about the subsidies issued to "Christopher Baldwin, Golden Valley Apiaries LLC, Belvidere, SD.
Notice the "*Disaster Subsidies*".

I don't know if this means anything - since many others also get similar subs (IF not much bigger in the amounts).
All of these are public information.
I am still trying to wrap my head around the idea of large scale, fully migratory operation WITHOUT chemical mite control.
Page 17 talks specifically about Chris Baldwin:


> Chris semi-retired in 2018 and sold all but 100 of his business’s roughly 1,800 colonies.





https://honeybeehealthcoalition.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Commercial_Beekeeping_062121.pdf


----------



## GregB

msl said:


> when questioned John mentions it in passing in a few video's and quickly moves on.


Which should be, actually, a rather large and interesting and informative topic IF one to stop, look, and dissect into it. 

Which, btw, makes perfect commercial sense also.
This maintaining a certain brand idea so that the buyers get into this "brand loyalty" thing and believe in the product even if that makes little logical sense.

For example, I have been a devote Subaru cars owner for decades now and probably into the future yet.
Does it really make any sense at the moment?
I don't know.
I could be a complete idiot and don't know it.
I should re-evaluate this when the new car time comes again.
Are the Subaru's any better than the recent Fords?
Probably not - if to be logical and review the recent, statistical data.
Just the brand loyalty thing actually does work.
Same for the bees, why shouldn't it?
The John Doe queens are the best and so on.


----------



## msl

GregB said:


> USDA subsidy information for Golden Valley Apiaries LLC


yikes!!!
now those are commercial scale losses



GregB said:


> , a rather large and interesting and informative topic


yep
I often try to point out (as I did earlyer in this thread) the unbalanced focus on the few hundred TF hives in France kepts in small yards, while most don't know of the 4k TX (treated russ treated... not Texas sorry inside joke) hives in chile

TF is plaged by smoke screens, myths, and miss understanding

IE much talk has been made of kefuss open mating everything, natural beekeping, etc..and the flat out lie that he just split what lived (and most (but not all)of it by tf gurus, not john)
while poking around in photos of Juhani's visit , this appears
It doesn't surprise me at all that a man of his talents has a few II rigs just lyeing a round..
what does spurize me is people think he wouldn't be using the best tech out there


----------



## GregB

msl said:


> while poking around in photos of Juhani's visit , this appears


I really like the photo materials posted on the Internet that way.
If look carefully onto the back scenery and non-essential details in the frame - one can find tons of revealing info (often it is outright OOPS cases).


----------



## Gino45

I just read through several days of ths thread and almost am at a loss for words.
When I had 59 hives years ago and made 16,000 lbs. of honey, was I not commercial? According to this thread I was not; however, it was how I was making my living, even though I was just getting by. I was treatment free also. So what if it was 45 years ago. And now I guess I am not commercial either, even though I keep 50m hives and sell honey to supplement my retirement income and justify my existence. I don't want to just be viewed as a 'taker'.
So when the mites came along I didn't think they'd get my bees. I proved to be wrong about that, but I had lost 3/4 of my bees before I knew what hit me. Since then it's been a struggle as every year I lose perhaps 1/3 of my hives and replace them by making nucs in spring from my strongest hives and provide each with a queen cell raised by various methods from those same hives. I lose a third in spite of my treatments; however, I will admit that I do not treat as often as most commercial beekeepers do
I do agree with our Oldtimer friend both about testing and the fact that TF is not doable given the presence of never ending sources of mites and viruses in others' bees in our territory.
FYI.....my view is that a hobbyist beekeeper is those guys I see at all the farmers' markets who are trying to sell their honey 8 oz at a time. And there are many.
And Greg, one of the first things that encouraged poor landless me to go into beekeeping was the concept that beekeeping offered the quickest and best returns available in agriculture. I took that and went with it and built my apiaries by plowing revenues derived from the bees back into the bees as much as possible.
If I find that I forgot anything, I may be back.


----------



## GregB

Gino45 said:


> And Greg, one of the first things that encouraged poor landless me to go into beekeeping


As soon as I can afford (this not serious!) to drop out of my lucrative and lazy IT gig - I might just do it.
For now it is best to stay in the lucrative and air-conditioned and year-around reliable IT industry.
Made a correct call long ago and sticking to it.
Time to milk my choices now.

Beekeeping?
Neh, it will be awhile yet. 
Even then - it will better "to sell the shovels to the gold diggers". Telling ya.


----------



## Litsinger

msl said:


> geting fed up with what I see as people miss representing them selfs to make them sellfs seem bigger better...


MSL:

My apologies for the delay in reply as I have been on the road for work. I took the time to read the entirety of both threads you posted. While I think I know where you are coming from, I respectfully disagree with the notion that the TF names that are being discussed in this thread are in the habit of misrepresenting themselves. I'll concede that there may be folks out there (present company included) who unintentionally misinterpret their work or results, but I think we would be hard-pressed to find specific examples where Kirk (as an example) has sought to mislead people through his writings, onsite workshops or presentations. If anything, he is painfully honest about the struggles he still has.

As I read through the old posts- two things struck me:

1. There are only a handful of those folks who still participate in our forum- and many (maybe most) of them appear to be very intelligent and thoughtful people.

2. As Solomon (not Parker) once wisely opined, 'There is nothing new under the sun.' What troubles me most about these TF/TX threads of late is they inevitably turn into a critique of a poster's attitude or motives, often with very little to go on. We have recently had two new and admittedly less-experienced beekeepers post some thoughts relative to TF and the replies in my opinion have been far less than charitable. While I enjoy and appreciate a spirited debate as much as the next person, I suppose I am more interested in discussing the relative merits of the topics at hand then seeking to impugn the motives of others, particularly when I have no real rational basis to do so.

While I will reply to Oldtimer's post and hopefully attempt to speak to another aspect of your critique, I think the words of Dar from one of the posts you referred from over a decade ago still seem prescient today:



Fusion_power said:


> Semantics is what turns a piece of half raw castrated bull meat into a sizzling hot juicy rib-eye steak. They are one and the same thing but the meaning is drastically different because of the words used. You can guess which part of that statement describes the current state of this thread.
> 
> I personally feel this conversation went overboard to the point of driving folks away from beesource. That is a very undesirable outcome. Both sides of this issue need to be present if anything valid is to be achieved.


----------



## GregB

Gino45 said:


> FYI.....my view is that a hobbyist beekeeper is those guys I see at all the farmers' markets who are trying to sell their honey 8 oz at a time. And there are many.


Yep.
They are doing it mostly for the fun though.
The negative hourly wage does not matter much.


----------



## Litsinger

msl said:


> I don't beleave that loss number is accurate


When he spoke this fall at Dr. Sharashkin's conference, the 30% annual loss figure is what Kirk shared. What I don't have is the context for this figure- does it include his nucs as well? I have called to talk through this with him and will report back what I learn.



Oldtimer said:


> I know it's all been said before, all been done before, and been a big fail. In another 10 years the situation will be the same.


Oldtimer: I always appreciate the insight you provide, and I cannot argue with your central premise in attempting to determine what objective, measurable advances in TF beekeeping have been achieved in the last decade.

For me personally, I suppose I am motivated and inspired by the glimmers of hope that we see on the horizon and the resurgence of interest in breeding honey bees for resistance.

Whether it is the excellent results that have been obtained by the University of Guelph Low Varroa Growth program, the yeoman's work that Randy Oliver is doing on this front, the optimistic opinion of Dr. Büchler regarding the future for a genetic solution to the varroa menace (starting at the 32:35 mark of the ‘Two Bees in a Podcast’), or the market-driven model of the Hilo Bees program I have reason to be willing to at least keep an open mind about the prospect of a genetic future for resistant bees in my lifetime.

That said, I accept that we all do well to approach this subject with steely-eyed realism. In the older threads that MSL posted, reference was made to a 2008 paper that Kirk wrote entitled, _ A New Paradigm For American Beekeepers_.

In it Kirk lays out a broad vision for a fresh look at the idea of being a successful beekeeper in the post-varroa era.

When I have him on the phone, I'd like to also get his thoughts on this vision almost a decade-and-a-half after he cast it and see if the succeeding years have caused him to reconsider any of the principles he lays down- has his new struggles since 2017 caused any change in priorities or focus, or does the path to sustainability in his mind continue to run through maximizing productivity, minimizing expenses and structuring the operation for resiliency (i.e. significant annual loss).

In summary- I for one appreciate your honest appraisal and balanced input from time-to-time based on both your own personal experience and lengthy participation in this forum.


----------



## Litsinger

msl said:


> treated russ treated... not Texas sorry inside joke


MSL: I deserved this- funny.

Dr. Kefuss specifically discusses his purposes for II in the following video, starting at about the 1:20 mark:






If nothing else, I like Cousin Eddie need to hang around just to keep things lively. I think that's something we can all drink to:


----------



## msl

Litsinger said:


> the 30% annual loss figure is what Kirk shared.


Soloman Parker used to say his were 5%... so I will just be skeptical
losses, honey yield, and fish size, its hard to get to the truth of any of the 3 in most cases



Gino45 said:


> When I had 59 hives years ago and made 16,000 lbs. of honey, was I not commercial


depending on who you talk to ... hobby stops at 10 (state of FL) 25(usda) 50(beeinformed partnership) and commercial producer kicks in around 300. In the middle is sideliners who are engaged in for profit enterprise, but beekeepingis not their sole income and is usaly secondary to a day job
I guess people can self identified as what ever they want these days (but don't buy milk from a farmer that just has bulls) Solomon parker had no problem calling him self a commercial beekeeper



Litsinger said:


> his purposes for II in the following video


good find!
but how many natural mateing fokes have 2 sets of II laying around? just in case for special projects?
well ****, I guess have one lol.....
but the project never appeared, ****ing (insert vertical scope edit) wantabees lol


----------



## Oldtimer

msl said:


> Solomon parker had no problem calling him self a commercial beekeeper


LOL i remember that. He consistently maintained that commercial beekeepers were intrinsically nasty people who were responsible for many of the evils known to man, and the profession itself only attracted conscienceless degenerates who were happy to perpetrate their crimes on the helpless bees.

Next thing he was announcing to the world that he is now a commercial beekeeper 😄


----------



## Litsinger

Litsinger said:


> There's a good write-up of his operation in last year's Honey Bee Health Coalition's _GUIDE TO VARROA MITE CONTROLS FOR COMMERCIAL BEEKEEPING OPERATIONS_.


Dr. Jamie Ellis' and Amy Vu's '_Two Bees in a Podcast'_ series has a good discussion regarding the development and goals of the above guide:

Episode 72: Guide to Varroa Mite Control & Management of Honey Bees

They are joined by two commercial beekeepers who were instrumental in the preparation of the document.

At about the 18:34 mark, Amy asks, _"Are you optimistic that we will beat varroa?"_

Mr. George Hansen of Foothills Honey Company also discusses the use of Hilo stock in his operation and his experience with it.


----------



## Gino45

Gino45 said:


> I do agree with our Oldtimer friend both about testing and the fact that TF is not doable given the presence of never ending sources of mites and viruses in others' bees, I may be back.


Over the years, I had hoped that my bees would get more 'resistant' to varroa, seeing as how I treat less than recommended and I breed from those that survive. They must be improving, right? However, I'm not really able to quantify my results as I do few mite counts. I'm better at observing rather than quantifying. I do break open drone brood sometimes, and it seems that I'm seeing fewer mites there than I used to see. I also see very little DWV which is a common indicator. What I do know is that it remains true that, an untreated hive will eventually die and a treated hive may well die from sudden queen failure as this happens to many of my hives. I am trying to fight this by placing queen cells in the supers sometime after the main flow. The downside of doing this is that it makes it more difficult to select 'resistant' breeder queens. Perhaps I now see more brood being removed prematurely (VRH?), but again, how does one measure this behavior?


----------



## msl

Gino45 said:


> but again, how does one measure this behavior?


open 100 cells and have a look for mites,then run the numbers


http://static1.1.sqspcdn.com/static/f/1461081/27775302/1513012131940/measuring+vsh+April+rev+2018pdf.pdf?token=xMiER0QB2KSTVum3GhIuvF83Z0s%3D



you can also use the pinkilled brood test using my handy PDF templet
Don’t forget to open the print settings and scale it to 100% for 5.2 foundation (most plastic is 5.2) or 103.846% for 5.4 foundation
The procedure is quite simple



> “ 1. A rhomboid frame of a 10×10 cell wide template (Fig. 16, number 2) is placed on a brood comb containing young pupae (Fig. 16, number 1)
> 
> 2. The upper left and lower right cells are marked with a color felt-tip pen (Fig. 16, number 3)
> 
> 3. 50 capped brood cells are pierced (Fig. 16, number 4) row by row from left to right with a fine insect pin (entomological pin size No 2).
> 
> 4. Cell 51 is marked to identify the treated brood area (Fig. 16, number 3).
> 
> 5. The comb is marked on the top bar and placed back to the brood nest in its former position. 18
> 
> 6. After 7-15 hours the removal progress is checked. All cells that are still sealed or contain the remains of brood are counted and subtracted from 50. The percentage of completely cleaned cells is noted in the protocol”




















Taken from Büchler et al (2013) https://www.researchgate.net/public..._standard_methods_for_Apis_mellifera_research


----------



## Litsinger

msl said:


> open 100 cells and have a look for mites,then run the numbers


@Gino45 - I've enjoyed your recent posts. I would only add to MSL's post that you might want to start by generally looking for uncapping/recapping behavior as an initial screening. Per research by Dr. Stephen Martin, he has identified that this trait is common to all the resistant populations he has studied worldwide. If you follow the cookie trail in the quote below, there's a lot of good information there:



Litsinger said:


> Here's a companion article to this study published in this month's BBKA which outlines,_ '... resistant populations from all different regions appear to have the same three key traits in common.'_


Here is a good podcast where he discusses this topic in detail, outlines the prospect for large-scale TF beekeeping in the UK and US and offers a hypothesis why resistant bees often don't do well when removed from their home landscape:

Episode 35: Natural Varroa-Resistant Honey Bees

Finally, here is feedback from Dr. Seeley as to how to perform the assay:
_
... sample ca. 100 capped cells from the frames of capped brood in a colony. This can be done by pressing a patch or two of duct tape down onto a frame of capped brood in a colony, then pulling it up and studying the undersides of the cells’ cappings. By sampling 100+ cell cappings, one can get a good estimate of the % of cells that have been capped and recapped. 

A cell capping that has been capped and recapped is recognized as follows: "The recapping behaviour can be easily detected as a hole in the spun cocoon of the pupated larva ranging in size from one mm to the entire area of the cap. The hole is subsequently covered over with wax by the adult bees. This hole can be seen as a dark, matte spot on the underside of the cell cap distinct from the glossy coating of the cocoon.” _


----------



## msl

Litsinger said:


> @Gino45
> Finally, here is feedback from Dr. Seeley as to how to perform the assay:


Russ have any stocks been brought to market using recapping as a breeding metric? I am not aware of any


----------



## Litsinger

msl said:


> Russ have any stocks been brought to market using recapping as a breeding metric? I am not aware of any


Not that I am aware of either- I offered it as a possible easy screening method before delving deep into VSH assays. As Dr. Martin notes in the presentation, he has observed that high VSH also comports into high uncapping/recapping.


----------



## JoshuaW

Was the Hilo program was turned over to the USDA??

Project : USDA ARS


----------



## Litsinger

JoshuaW said:


> Was the Hilo program was turned over to the USDA?


As I understand it, the program has always existed as a P3- here are some good links provided by @Jack Grimshaw outlining the history and objectives:



Jack Grimshaw said:


> Perhaps you have heard of the bee breeding project based near Hilo,Hawaii in conjunction with the USDA called the "Hilo" bee.


----------



## Oldtimer

msl said:


> Russ have any stocks been brought to market using recapping as a breeding metric? I am not aware of any


Yes it has been done in New Zealand. After an 8 year government funded breeding program where brood was uncapped under a microscope to discover which bees were uncapping mite families and re capping, they were able to produce a bee that could withstand mites without treatment.

Problem was, the government funding the ran out, and so much labor was needed to test the brood (that's properly, not just a dry ice test which has nothing to do with detecting mites in brood), that they were not able to sell enough queens at a price that could sustain the program.

The bees outmated and the trait was quickly lost. Even the first generation outcrossed could not withstand mites without treatment.


----------



## Litsinger

Oldtimer said:


> The bees outmated and the trait was quickly lost. Even the first generation outcrossed could not withstand mites without treatment.


Thank you for the information, Oldtimer. Do you happen to know the names of any of the principal researchers and/or if any of the results were published?


----------



## Oldtimer

I'm not sure if a properly done study or paper was ever published on the project, but there was certainly a steady stream of info on the project coming out as it went.

However much of this seems to have vanished into the mists of time, I can't find much on it now. As I recall, after the government funding ended, the people running the program brought in a number of beekeepers to keep funding it, but they eventually tired of it. The bee stock was then taken over by an entity called Betta Bees who still function now, but have moved away from attempting varroa resistance and just focus on distributing high quality queens to their shareholders.

Anyhow here is a link to an earlier piece by Betta Bees, when they were still continuing the VSH program.

Research — Betta Bees


----------



## msl

Oldtimer said:


> when they were still continuing the VSH program.


to be clear VSH is when the bees open the cell, drag the pupa out and eat it or toss it out the door to stop the mite from reproducing 
what Russ it talking about is uncapping/recapping were the cell is opened, then closed and that some how interrupts the mite reproduction cycle ad the pupa lives....
my point... we have many programs that have brought resistance to market threw VSH testing/low mite growth/ mite biteing/ etc 
recapping uncapping not so much. Yet, perhaps maby later.. but I see no reason to recommend it when there are proven paths


----------



## Oldtimer

msl said:


> what Russ it talking about is uncapping/recapping were the cell is opened, then closed and that some how interrupts the mite reproduction cycle ad the pupa lives....


And that's what I was talking about. As per my previous post, they analysed a hives performance by uncapping brood cells to see if there had been a mite family in there (which could be told by the excrement left behind), but there was now no mite family because the bees had uncapped the cell and let the foundress mite and whatever else out, before any mature mites could result.

Over here at the time, that too was referred to as varroa sensitive hygiene (VSH).

That would need to be understood by anyone following up on the NZ program so they would know what certain terminlogy used could refer to.


----------



## Litsinger

Oldtimer said:


> Over here at the time, that too was referred to as varroa sensitive hygiene (VSH).


@Oldtimer - thank you for the good feedback. I'll make a point to follow-up with Betta Bee to see if any of the research information is still available for public consumption.

For anyone interested, here is a good interview with Dr. Jeff Harris of Harbo and Harris fame discussing the origins of VSH, the confusion in terminology regarding SMR and his thoughts about the future of VSH:

Varroa Sensitive Hygiene- Dr. Jeff Harris


----------



## msl

Oldtimer said:


> That would need to be understood by anyone following up on the NZ program so they would know what certain terminlogy used could refer to.


----------



## joebeewhisperer

Litsinger said:


> Finally, here is feedback from Dr. Seeley as to how to perform the assay:
> 
> _... sample ca. 100 capped cells from the frames of capped brood in a colony. This can be done by pressing a patch or two of duct tape down onto a frame of capped brood in a colony, then pulling it up and studying the undersides of the cells’ cappings. By sampling 100+ cell cappings, one can get a good estimate of the % of cells that have been capped and recapped.
> 
> A cell capping that has been capped and recapped is recognized as follows: "The recapping behaviour can be easily detected as a hole in the spun cocoon of the pupated larva ranging in size from one mm to the entire area of the cap. The hole is subsequently covered over with wax by the adult bees. This hole can be seen as a dark, matte spot on the underside of the cell cap distinct from the glossy coating of the cocoon.”_


I did not know this Russ. I was just thinking back to last May when the state bee inspector was going through my hives. He pulled out a frame with a lot of holes in the caps. He said, "Well, there's signs of mites, but they are dealing with it." 

I was thinking about this colony and wishing I kept better records. They survive until this day, but I did strip them down to one (6-frame) box back in the fall. This was among those treated with Apivar in the fall, but I'm unconvinced as to it's efficacy. I'll keep an eye on them. Of the 30 he inspected, this was the only one where this was observed. I raised several thousand drones from a colony I abused by making them clean up some chilled brood frames. They removed 100% and had great-looking capped brood back in it in 2 weeks. But as I understand it, those who effectively pull out dead brood, and those who recap are two distinct bees, or at least 2 behaviors (which could exist in the same strain).


----------



## Litsinger

joebeewhisperer said:


> I did not know this Russ.


It's all relatively new to me as well. What I find helpful about the uncapping/recapping behavior (at least based on Dr. Martin's observations) is that this trait is common among all stocks that exhibit better than average resistance.

The other thing that is appealing to me is the relatively easy nature of the assay itself- one could pre-cut sections of duct or gaffer's tape to an approximate 100 cell size and pull a quick sample for later evaluation without hardly slowing down an inspection.

The apparent universality of the behavior and easy nature of the assay makes it appealing in my mind as an initial screening tool for resistance.

You've probably seen this one, but the researcher who initially identified this trait was recently awarded a grant to continue study of this trait in Norway:





__





Varroa Resistant Bees Get $1 Million In Norway | Bee Culture







www.beeculture.com


----------



## Litsinger

joebeewhisperer said:


> But as I understand it, those who effectively pull out dead brood, and those who recap are two distinct bees, or at least 2 behaviors (which could exist in the same strain).


@joebeewhisperer- I thought of your comment this morning when this video by Dr. Jeff Harris showed up in my YouTube feed. It is less than two minutes long and shows VSH behavior in action with him narrating what is going on- touching on your comment regarding several different bees working on various aspects of the hygiene itself:


----------



## joebeewhisperer

Well the uncapper/recapper colony I referenced 2 days ago has perished. Obvious mite signs. Did Apivar last fall, and plenty of it, but it didn’t knock them back in this nuc. I figured they were in trouble a while back when I stripped off the top box. That was the only one in the row that I felt might benefit from a smaller space (poly).


----------



## Outdoor N8

Seems it took only 11 days to 'run the OP off '.

Every time I read or hear 'treatment free beekeeping' all I can ever think is --yeah, it will happen one week after the American Kennel Club breeds a Flea free dog.

To conflate a Mammalian Diploid X Diploid program with a Crustacea Diploid X Haploid; shows an approach to agriculture that rivals Walt Disney's realism of the world...


----------



## DavidBrown1212

GregB said:


> Accomplish what exactly?
> "Antibiotic-free" bees?
> 
> Well, in the US people do not consume bees for food.
> Thus you can not sell "ecologically clean" bees at higher mark-up because they are a "better food item".
> You see, chickens <> bees in the context of wide market consumable products.
> 
> Regarding the honey as food - makes no difference what bees produce the honey.
> Honey "purity" is a function of somewhat different parameters.
> "Treatment-free" bees do not automatically and by extension produce a "better food item".
> 
> Treatment-free bees are not better pollinators.
> Rather they are worse due to less dependability (critical in the pollination business).
> 
> Treatment-free bees maybe more expensive in the bee/queen sales market.
> But the general public cares very little about this (rather small) niche sub-market (beekeeper to beekeeper sales).
> 
> I say figure out the nuts and bolts of the beekeeping as an industry and as a process first.
> Once understood, make your proposals.
> (Not that I understand it, just some kinda-sorta very basics).


 This response strikes me because of your signature. I don't think we sell "antibiotic free" chicken for any premium, it's purely a cost cutting measure, especially through management simplicity. No more mill inspections, no more drug handling on site. No sick birds, just dead ones.


----------



## GregB

DavidBrown1212 said:


> I don't think we sell "antibiotic free" chicken for any premium,


Well, certainly when I go to a grocery store I see "cheap chicken" and "expensive chicken".
Typical attributes of the "expensive chicken" are pictured.
So - to whom exactly do I pay that extra margin?
Somewhere, someone is definitely is getting more money for this label - to me it is indeed simple and clear - I see the difference in the receipt.


----------



## joebeewhisperer

DavidBrown1212 said:


> This response strikes me because of your signature. I don't think we sell "antibiotic free" chicken for any premium, it's purely a cost cutting measure, especially through management simplicity. No more mill inspections, no more drug handling on site. No sick birds, just dead ones.


Glad to see you back. I think it's beneficial to all to continue to ask questions, and propose solutions based on our experiences. I'd rather take a deep dive looking at an angle I've never considered and come up empty, than to maintain a set of blinders. 

Many great advancements have come when tenacious people refused to stop trying new things to solve a problem.

Dad once relayed a story his grandfather had told him when he was a boy. They stood before a large stone outcropping. Great-grandpa said, "Son, you can take a claw hammer and reduce that to dust. If you don't give up, it will." - It is with dogged determination that innovators innovate. 

Among beeks, there have been some costly losses, and believing in "the next new TF idea" has left some scars. I get that. But judging an idea (even if to eliminate it) is better than not being introduced to it. 

Last country story of the day: This morning I was talking to Mom and she relayed a story from her beauty shop back in the 1970's. Louise Akins was getting her hair done and Mom mentioned a very sick calf outside that had "scours". Mrs Akins told Mom to get some eggs down the calf. They went outside (with a towel around Mrs Akins rollers) and my mother held the calf's mouth open while Mrs Akins quickly cracked several eggs on its teeth and poured them down the hatch. The calf was on its feet from near-death in a few minutes. After that, Mom and Dad would go to my grandparent's place with 2-3 dozen eggs when there was an outbreak. 

This morning we discussed how many hundred years ago someone thought to put an egg down a sick calf.?.? Don't know where this fine neighbor heard it, but I know we had a live calf instead of a dead one.


----------



## GregB

DavidBrown1212 said:


> This response strikes me because of your signature.


My signature. 

You see I just completed a "treatment-free" experiment - spent 5 years of my time doing in.
I wrote up a post in my thread (talking to someone else in my general region - he went through very similar experience as myself).

Basically, you should evaluate the general situation in your very area and see what is possible and what is NOT possible.
Simple as that - but don't do any quick carpet conclusions until you try this for yourself (does not matter if pro-TF or anti-TF or some sort of hybrid way).









GregV's Alternative way to keep (have?) bees.


Thank you, Gregg and GG, for your valued input. I get these concepts entering my mind and can't always judge their worthiness. I used to be pretty experimental with a lot of stuff that ended up failing in the long run and I now submit some of these ideas for welcome criticism because I want to...




www.beesource.com


----------



## Litsinger

In the latest _'Beekeeping Today'_ podcast, Randy Oliver gives an update on his resistance breeding program starting at about the 29:45 mark:









Scientific Beekeeping with Randy Oliver (S4, E34)


On today’s episode, we are joined by Randy Oliver. If you don’t read Randy’s ABJ column and don’t check in on his you’ve been missing some of the most u…




www.beekeepingtodaypodcast.com





The program started with a fraction of 1% of colonies exhibiting resistance. This year Randy predicts it is approximately 17% overall. 

He notes that two yards this year have 50% of the colonies exhibiting resistance. He is hoping 2022 is a breakthrough year.

In personal correspondence, Randy also made me aware that despite weaker than average colonies for almonds overall, his resistant breeders are so strong and healthy that they had to intervene to forestall swarming.


----------



## DavidBrown1212

I think you're confusing organic and "antibiotic free". You would be hard pressed to find meat chickens in the United States that are not antibiotic free.
Tyson, Mountainaire, Pilgrim Pride, everyone is going that direction.


----------



## GregB

DavidBrown1212 said:


> I think you're confusing organic and "antibiotic free".


Not confusing anything.
I clearly make this visible by use of the *quotes*.

The point being again - there are "cheap" products and there are "expensive" products.
The "expensive" product have certain attributes that make them "special" and thus, pricey.
All it is.

Back to the bees.
Try the TF and see for yourself.
For now this is all nothing but pure speculation on your part.
What is there to talk about?
Just try it and report back.


----------



## DavidBrown1212

msl said:


> We (usa) have killed off close to 40% a year for the past decade"
> 
> look in to what Randy Oliver is doing its a reansabul plan, but the pace is painstaking slow


I really appreciate the time you put into this response. It makes sense. 

The problem is killing 40% is not really enough, we need to kill 85%. That's the reason that Randy's is work is going slow. His work is nothing new, I see it as rehash of what the USDA did in Louisiana in the '90s.

I don't think that anyone should not treat at all. I think testing is important, and no one gets anywhere if the colony collapse in a wave of mites. 

I have seen this method in use in nuc production yards with hundreds of hives, so I know it works on scale. 

I think the migratory pollination sector is always going to be a challenge. 

It seems like the Tracheal mite gives an excellent historical example in how to deal with these, and we should just repeat that.


----------



## johno

I am sorry, I am not going to even kill 20% of my hives so that someone can try to work out some pet theory, so you have no chance of me killing 85% cause if we actually do as some say we will end up killing 100%. Nope best you go and kill your own bees.


----------



## DavidBrown1212

LarryBud said:


> This is hitting home today. I've been adding VSH stock, do a lot of washes and only treating when hard test results show need and then treating with organics like OAV and formic. I still get mites. Dave Brown, give me a call when you get your magic bees-I'm a buyer! I'll buy the Burkenstockens then too. Peace out Bro.


It sounds like we run essentially the same management strategies, except I'm not above using Fluvalinate or Amitraz for a hive in collapse.

I have seen significantly lower mite counts in 4/5 of my "Pol-Line" bees vs commercial Italians. That's how I got here, I have so much more cash in my Italian queened hives after the first year. 

Then I saw this on a big scale, running hundreds of hives a yard. It just seems like good business, no berkenstocks, lol.


----------



## DavidBrown1212

joebeewhisperer said:


> The number of variables here is vast. I’m all about breeding better, .... well anything, but millions of man-hours have been put in by teams at universities. Many of these folks are not only lifetime, but generational beekeepers. Is there a solution? Partially, but it doesn’t fit with ag biz.
> 
> I now run a variety of bees that both myself and USDA believes to be very resistant to mites. But if you need more than a few dandelions pollinated before May, this is not your bee. To use them for early pollination (or an early honey flow), one would need to manipulate them heavily into brooding early.
> 
> This is completely against their nature, would be expensive/time consuming, and blows 90% of their chief resistance mechanism, which is long broodless periods.
> 
> Throw in open mating of 5 million queens a year with 12-24 drones of various origin, and you start to see the tip of a very large iceberg.
> 
> I grew up in an area of small cattle farms, a few small hog producers, and hundreds of broiler houses. A few of these guys would buy sawdust from Dad’s mill and we may have had better insight to what was going on in poultry than the average consumer. I applaud moving commercial chicken forward, largely because it’s better for the consumer.
> 
> That said, you picked a good place to get responses. 😂 But it may come off as man-splaining to hundreds of people whose wisdom is based on more time and treasure invested than you are realizing.



Great response. 
I definitely see the work done at the universities as big progress over the last 27 years.
I agree migratory pollenation sector is a problem with no current solution, I see that in the build up. 

I didn't mean to come off as "mansplaining", I talked to the same USDA people you probably did, and I asked why not everyone is using their bees. They said it's mostly because poor adoption, and lack of understanding. After reading through this thread, that seems to be a big factor. I now understand the look on his face when I ask this question. 😂


----------



## LarryBud

DavidBrown1212 said:


> It sounds like we run essentially the same management strategies, except I'm not above using Fluvalinate or Amitraz for a hive in collapse.
> 
> I have seen significantly lower mite counts in 4/5 of my "Pol-Line" bees vs commercial Italians. That's how I got here, I have so much more cash in my Italian queened hives after the first year.
> 
> Then I saw this on a big scale, running hundreds of hives a yard. It just seems like good business, no berkenstocks, lol.


I have two unopened 10 packs of Apivar in the freezer, still good but un-used. I'd really need to think about it it before I used them but hope I don't have to decide. With a break in the weather here last week (60'sF and sunny yesterday-20'sF snowing today) i got into all 31 hives and found I lost 3 so far this winter. Time was of the essence with a short window, so I feed, adjusted and replaced insulation in anticipation of the cold this week. I lost 3 hives to mites, 2 from spring splits and 1 spring nuc that came with Apivar. I have 6 yards, some with as few as 2 hives, some up to 12 and I do washes on alternating single hives of each yard every month. I showed little (0-2) mites on my last washes in November, but it appears all three loses were mites-3 different yards and each had sister colonies 2 feet away on each side that were unaffected. Mites' matter and so far, a 10% loss. 

I've got 15 Poly Lines queens ordered for Late April to support early spring splits and to expand genetics. My 10 best hives will be split, in house queens hopefully, after the flow/mid-July and fed to build up for our late summer-all will be open mated. Still learning but I believe Berkenstocks are dangerous in the bee yard, stung toes might be uncomfortable.


----------



## Litsinger

So in light of this thread I asked Dr. Kefuss what he thought the indispensable elements of his breeding program were. He responded:

_'Anyone who completely stops their treatment recreates the Bond test. There are probably a lot of different ways to get resistance and I am not certain what is “indispensable”. The main thing is that whatever you have works even if you don’t know how it works. When I board a plane at night to fly from Toulouse to Paris I don’t know what the plane looks like or how it's motor works. The main thing is that I get to Paris.'_


----------



## crofter

Litsinger said:


> So in light of this thread I asked Dr. Kefuss what he thought the indispensable elements of his breeding program were. He responded:
> 
> _'Anyone who completely stops their treatment recreates the Bond test. There are probably a lot of different ways to get resistance and I am not certain what is “indispensable”. The main thing is that whatever you have works even if you don’t know how it works. When I board a plane at night to fly from Toulouse to Paris I don’t know what the plane looks like or how it's motor works. The main thing is that I get to Paris.'_


He didn't give you a very valuable takeaway, did he?


----------



## johno

Maybe he means, take care of your bees at night so that cause in the dark it does not matter if you know what you are doing or not.


----------



## Litsinger

crofter said:


> He didn't give you a very valuable takeaway, did he?


One thing I really respect about Dr. Kefuss is that he is humble regarding his results and always willing to offer his input. I think the context for his comment is spelled-out in his 'World Varroa Challenge' article:

_'There is one point, however, you should always remember. Due to different environmental conditions what works for us may not work for you and vice versa. So it is important to select for resistance under your own conditions while maintaining as much genetic variability as possible. You can select for resistance without knowing which of the many different resistance factors you are selecting for. My associate Maria Bolt told me that “selecting for resistance is just like flying on a plane. You don’t need to know how the motor functions. The main thing is that you get to your destination.” From time to time you should count the amounts of adult, daughter and immature mites in the capped brood to see how your selection is progressing.'_

Or as he is quoted in 'Keeping Bees That Keep Themselves', _'Perhaps one reason Kefuss eschews being called a scientist is that he is more practical than analytical. “It’s not important to know” just why a particular strain is surviving (although he is assiduous in recording how). “You flew here to Europe and didn’t know the mechanics of the plane, but you got here.”'_

And this is the message that Randy Oliver took away from Dr. Kefuss' work that now informs his breeding program. In 'Bee Breeding for Dummies' Randy remarks, _Practical application: you don’t need to understand how the bees do it, only that they do it (you can later leave it to the scientists to figure it out). What I suggest is not to tell the bees how to do the job, but rather to simply give them the job description, and fire all those that aren’t up to snuff._


----------



## joebeewhisperer

DavidBrown1212 said:


> Great response.
> I definitely see the work done at the universities as big progress over the last 27 years.
> I agree migratory pollenation sector is a problem with no current solution, I see that in the build up.
> 
> I didn't mean to come off as "mansplaining", I talked to the same USDA people you probably did, and I asked why not everyone is using their bees. They said it's mostly because poor adoption, and lack of understanding. After reading through this thread, that seems to be a big factor. I now understand the look on his face when I ask this question. 😂


I skipped through a 30ish minute video earlier by another RHBA breeder which was done in 2015. I was probably looking into these bees by around 2017-18. One issue she pointed out (at least in 2015) is the rarity. If I remember correctly, there were 7 (of 15 then, currently 10ish) members who produced queens as far back as 2007. The other members produce honey and are really just interested in keeping/improving the lines. 

So on the issue of adoption, I think there was a real bottleneck in production. With several million new colonies produced in the US each year, you would need to have production capacity of a few 100,000 to make a serious splash. But that's also a chicken/egg thing. If you don't have the market, you can't really crank them out. And like you said, with pollination being such a large part, no large commercial apiary is going to change stock that is working (even if large acaricide doses are required). Additionally you would have to raise these bees in Orlando to have sizable clusters for almonds. At that point they would fill up 3 brood boxes in a month and/or swarm. They're just not wired that way. 

So for hobby-sideline-backyards they are great. And of the apiaries running largely TF that I've seen in videos or read about over the past few months I've heard statements like "it was the introduction of the Russians bloodline that turned it around for us". As for me, they suit me well. But I'm not relying on them to make a mortgage payment. If I were, it would be straight Italians, lots of sugar for Christmas, and a chem war on mites like WWI.


----------



## Litsinger

Litsinger said:


> When he spoke this fall at Dr. Sharashkin's conference, the 30% annual loss figure is what Kirk shared. What I don't have is the context for this figure- does it include his nucs as well? I have called to talk through this with him and will report back what I learn.


I had the opportunity to speak with Kirk late last week and he and I spent an hour-and-a-half on the phone discussing his TF experience, his philosophy and his goals for the future. I was really honored that he would take this much time out of his schedule to talk with a two-bit hobbyist like me.

While there was much I took away from the conversation, for the purposes of this post, he clarified that his 30% loss number represents the total annual average losses apiary-wide, between his production colonies, side-by-side nucs and mini nucs. He was quick to point out that there have been years where the losses are double this, but also years where he experiences 5 - 10% losses.

In preparing for his 2019 Apimondia talk (below) he shared that he actually went back and computed his average losses from 2002 - 2019 and indicated that the cumulative average was right at 30%.

He also advised that his losses since 2017 have been generally higher, averaging around 40%. He lays the blame for his recent struggles on treated corn pollen - make of this what you will.








Litsinger said:


> When I have him on the phone, I'd like to also get his thoughts on this vision almost a decade-and-a-half after he cast it and see if the succeeding years have caused him to reconsider any of the principles he lays down- has his new struggles since 2017 caused any change in priorities or focus, or does the path to sustainability in his mind continue to run through maximizing productivity, minimizing expenses and structuring the operation for resiliency (i.e. significant annual loss).


We spent a lot of time discussing this concept, and he shared that this approach is still what he espouses. He encouraged me to read his most recent Bee Culture article (attached) which he feels best captures his focus, goals and philosophy concerning treatment-free apiculture. In it he spells out in some detail how the 30% annual loss figure helps to support his operational goals and selection efforts.

Finally, for what it is worth Kirk shared that since he began his TF experiment in 2002 he has had good years, bad years and middling years in terms of financial performance but that his income has exceeded his expenses every year- thus for his goals and his lifestyle he considers his work a success.

I will also note that he told me I was free to share the crux of our conversation here on Beesource.


----------



## Litsinger

Litsinger said:


> The program started with a fraction of 1% of colonies exhibiting resistance. This year Randy predicts it is approximately 17% overall.
> 
> He notes that two yards this year have 50% of the colonies exhibiting resistance. He is hoping 2022 is a breakthrough year.


And here is the latest e-mail update from Randy:

*Our selective breeding program for mite resistance*
_After 5 years of strong selection for mite resistant bees, it appears that we are making progress! We've worked up to around 15% of our colonies new exhibiting near complete resistance to varroa.

But heritability has been nearly nonexistent, making me suspect that the critical alleles have been provided by one or more of the drones that the queens of fully-resistant colonies happened to mate with (and thus are not passed on by the queen to any extent). The good news is that this year, 24 of 48 daughter colonies of one queen exhibited resistance, suggesting that we have finally gotten the critical alleles fixed into a bloodline. I plan to move those 24 colonies to one our isolated mating yards this summer to try to capture the genetics._

What is interesting about the 50/50 result is this seems to comport with Conlon's findings of Dr. Kefuss' stock:



Litsinger said:


> We screened four honey bee colonies, three (Mother; Daughter 1; and Daughter 2) resistant and one (Daughter 3) susceptible. The mother colony was produced in 2015 while the 3 daughters came from 2016. None of the resistant colonies varied significantly from a 50:50 distribution of resistant:susceptible pupae.
> 
> …only the nonresistant colony exhibited significant variation from a 50:50 ratio of Resistant:Susceptible pupae, with no intermediate levels of resistance, supported the previous identification of a single resistance-linked locus in this population and suggests Mendelian inheritance of the resistance trait.


----------



## Litsinger

msl said:


> swinging back around, the above numbers show why I have been promoting the use of virgins and 48s
> a little guy can spread a lot of good genetics around with very few hives..


MSL:

You've probably seen it, but I thought of this context when listening to Cory Steven's recent conversation with Shibu Raj (below).

Starting at about the 1:25 mark he outlines his rationale for focusing his efforts on selling virgins rather than mated stock- interesting and helpful perspective:


----------



## AR1

Litsinger said:


> And here is the latest e-mail update from Randy:
> 
> *Our selective breeding program for mite resistance*
> _After 5 years of strong selection for mite resistant bees, it appears that we are making progress! We've worked up to around 15% of our colonies new exhibiting near complete resistance to varroa.
> 
> But heritability has been nearly nonexistent, making me suspect that the critical alleles have been provided by one or more of the drones that the queens of fully-resistant colonies happened to mate with (and thus are not passed on by the queen to any extent). The good news is that this year, 24 of 48 daughter colonies of one queen exhibited resistance, suggesting that we have finally gotten the critical alleles fixed into a bloodline. I plan to move those 24 colonies to one our isolated mating yards this summer to try to capture the genetics._


Hmm. Gotta think a bit about this. If it is really a single genetic locus and simple Mendelian transmission of the resistance trait, then under a breeding scheme of a simple species like any mammal, one father and one mother, it would be easy-peasy to breed for that trait. Bees, with 30 or more drones breeding one queen, it is rare luck, 30/1 odds, that one specific drone turns out to be the 'father' of one daughter queen. Even if it is simple Mendelian inheritance, makes it hard to select for the trait. Unless you have lots of hives and are strictly observing, as in RO, or are fortunate in having an isolated breeding population. 

Nothing new in that observation, wiser heads here have been telling us for a long time about how impossible it is for the backyard beek to select for resistance. This observation simply clarifies the idea for me.

Randy makes a similar point at minute 34-35 in a round-about way, noting that one drone father is responsible to 1/30 (or however many) daughter worker bees that may show the trait that allows them to detect mites. So 1/30 'mite resistant' worker bees in a hive may be enough.


----------



## Litsinger

AR1 said:


> Randy makes a similar point at minute 34-35 in a round-about way, noting that one drone father is responsible to 1/30 (or however many) daughter worker bees that may show the trait that allows them to detect mites. So 1/30 'mite resistant' worker bees in a hive may be enough.


Good point- I think this is why he is looking to Progeny Testing as the 'tell' which allows him claim that he is making advancement in selection. It's not enough for the queen to be resistant, but we need some percentage of her offspring to be resistant as well in order for the phenotype to express itself successfully and (hopefully) in a reliably repeatable manner.


----------



## AR1

Litsinger said:


> Good point- I think this is why he is looking to Progeny Testing as the 'tell' which allows him claim that he is making advancement in selection. It's not enough for the queen to be resistant, but we need some percentage of her offspring to be resistant as well in order for the phenotype to express itself successfully and (hopefully) in a reliably repeatable manner.


I feel like a kid in January, already getting jumpy to see what he's getting for Christmas in 11 months! I want to see RO's report for NEXT spring...now! Will his carefully selected isolated yard maintain resistance...or not. Will the carefully marked super-resistant colonies that went to the almonds come back healthy and clean...


----------



## AR1

Litsinger said:


> Good point- I think this is why he is looking to Progeny Testing as the 'tell' which allows him claim that he is making advancement in selection. It's not enough for the queen to be resistant, but we need some percentage of her offspring to be resistant as well in order for the phenotype to express itself successfully and (hopefully) in a reliably repeatable manner.


Assuming RO is on target...I guess the follow-up question is...how any of these resistant drones do you need? Is 1/30 enough...2/30?

Then, next question is, if he does get it to show up consistently in the QUEEN line, what then? Is that sufficient, or even 'too much'? 

Does it have different effects if passed down the queen line than down the drone line? I have to think if it is in the queen line, 100% (or nearly so) of the progeny workers would show the trait. Heterozygous different from homozygous? 

Are the bees spending so much time killing mites that they don't get anything else accomplished?


----------



## Gino45

AR1 said:


> Hmm. Gotta think a bit about this. If it is really a single genetic locus and simple Mendelian transmission of the resistance trait, then under a breeding scheme of a simple species like any mammal, one father and one mother, it would be easy-peasy to breed for that trait. Bees, with 30 or more drones breeding one queen, it is rare luck, 30/1 odds, that one specific drone turns out to be the 'father' of one daughter queen. Even if it is simple Mendelian inheritance, makes it hard to select for the trait. Unless you have lots of hives and are strictly observing, as in RO, or are fortunate in having an isolated breeding population.
> 
> Nothing new in that observation, wiser heads here have been telling us for a long time about how impossible it is for the backyard beek to select for resistance. This observation simply clarifies the idea for me.
> 
> Randy makes a similar point at minute 34-35 in a round-about way, noting that one drone father is responsible to 1/30 (or however many) daughter worker bees that may show the trait that allows them to detect mites. So 1/30 'mite resistant' worker bees in a hive may be enough.


So if there is semen from 30 drones in a queen, is it all mixed up and used randomly or does the semen get used sequentially? I've read that somehow the queen decides these matters, even to the level of choosing to lay a drone egg; however, I do not believe everything that I read.


----------



## Litsinger

AR1 said:


> Does it have different effects if passed down the queen line than down the drone line? I have to think if it is in the queen line, 100% (or nearly so) of the progeny workers would show the trait. Heterozygous different from homozygous?


While I welcome anyone to weigh-in on this, I'll take a stab at it.

As I understand from Randy's writings and presentations on his resistance breeding approach, he hypothesizes that resistance may be able to be maintained by as few as one or two patrilines expressing the trait. He touches on this concept during the progeny testing discussion in the above _Beekeeping Today_ podcast starting at about 34:25. The key principle here from my humble vantage point is that resistance is ultimately a colony-level trait expressed by the progeny. The best description I have found of the concept of progeny testing in the context of honey bees is in the paper,  Managed Pollinator CAP Update: Recollections of European Apis Mellifera Germplasm for Honey Bee Breeding where it is defined as follows:

_... progeny testing, whereby the “outcome” of specific crosses can be evaluated and then the parental sources can be retroactively “scored” as to their value for future breeding._

So the takeaway as I understand it is that we can only really evaluate the suitability of our breeding efforts retroactively once we see the colony-level results of our selection.

As regards resistance being a queen or drone effect or the result of dominant or recessive gene(s), I think this is still an open question as far as I know. The best description of this paradigm I have found is on Glenn Apiaries site:

Principles of Honeybee Genetics

_For a recessive trait to be expressed, a worker needs to be homozygous for the gene. Homozygous means that it gets the same_ _allele from the mother and father. Heterozygous means that the bee has one of the alleles and so is a carrier, but the trait is not expressed.

In this example we're starting with a queen homozygous for the hygienic traits and mating her to non hygienic drones. The offspring will not express the hygienic trait, but they will be heterozygous and so be carriers of the trait. It's important to remember that when you're dealing with recessive traits, it will not show up in the first or F1 generation. But if you have patience and continue with the program, you'll be successful in getting the trait into the following generations.

After a few generations of selecting and breeding from the colonies that express the trait, it can become fixed in the population. Then all the bees in that population will express the trait.

Dominant traits are easier to get established into your population because the first generation will express the trait. The trait will be expressed equally by bees that carry the gene for the trait on one or both of their chromosomes. You would prefer to breed only from queens homozygous for the trait. But there's no easy way to tell the homozygotes from the heterozygotes. For this reason it's actually more difficult to fix a dominant gene in the population, than it is for a recessive trait._

As to whether we can have 'too much of a good thing', I think the results of Dr. Marla Spivak's Minnesota Hygienic program is a good case study for how it is possible to amplify a trait to such a level that it is no longer beneficial - but this is likely improbable in an open-mated, population-level program. As Tom Glenn observes in his Breeding Beneficial Bees (in speaking about VSH):

_Dr. Harbo believes this naturally occurring trait can probably be found in low frequencies in any population of bees. He also thinks that SMR (now VSH) is an additive trait.

An additive trait is controlled by neither dominant or recessive genes. SMR/VSH is probably determined by more than one gene. So the more of these genes are present, the more of the trait will be expressed. This is lucky for us because by starting with queens inbred for the trait, a breeder can easily import the trait into his stock at the 50% level. So if we are careful, we can keep the good bees we have but add this SMR/VSH trait to them. As time goes on and more drones in the population carry the trait, resistance should become more common in our bees and in feral colonies. The return of the feral bees will be a good indicator of the bees gaining resistance. _


----------



## Litsinger

Gino45 said:


> So if there is semen from 30 drones in a queen, is it all mixed up and used randomly or does the semen get used sequentially?


I think near as we know right now, it is assumed there is an initial skewing of patrilines in the first days/weeks/months of a queen's life followed by a relatively consistent representation of patrilines over the remainder of her life:









Praternal Makeup of a Hive


I understand the queen goes out and mates with multiple drones, possibly over a few days. She then resigns herself to the egg laying duties. I understand the queen may carry out laying fertilized eggs for two or three years. The question I have is: Has anyone ever looked at the genetics of a...




www.beesource.com


----------



## Litsinger

msl said:


> why?


While I have no interest in poking the bear, here are two good talks in my very humble opinion by folks who are espousing a different way to approach commercial apiculture. Not saying this is the 'right' answer, but simply a possible different way to look at being a commercial beekeeper.

Honey Marketing with Jay Williams, William's Honey Farm

_His philosophy starts with “What is your time worth?”, and follows that with telling stories to get the customer involved, getting his message out, using social media, finding and catering to his niche market of local honey users, knowing your costs, staying ahead of the curve with bees, beekeeping and beekeeping products, being ready to fail but getting up and figuring it out, and making it all work together._

Honey Bee Researcher & Author, Dr. Mark Winston

_Dr. Mark Winston wrote the definitive book on honey bee biology in 1987 and is a science communicator extraordinaire. His writings have appeared in the New York Times, Orion Magazine, and the Globe, and he’s a regular contributor to 2 Million Blossoms. He’s currently the Simon Fraser University Library Nonfiction Writer in Residence where he emphasizes the power of non-fiction writing to share knowledge.

Listen and hear his bee origin story and why his book on honey bee biology has endured through the ages. He has seen a lot of changes to the beekeeping industry throughout the years. We talk about some surprises he’s witnessed along the way and the future of pollination._


----------



## Outdoor N8

DavidBrown1212 said:


> Let me tell you how we did this in commercial poultry, because we converted almost the entire industry to being treatment free over the last decade. That "no antibiotics ever" chicken was a industry wide effort, and it worked great.


Bird Flu Outbreak Hits U.S. Chickens

Bird flu detected at multiple chicken and turkey farms in Midwest, South; over 300k affected

USDA Confirms Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza in a Flock of Commercial Broiler Chickens in Kentucky and Non-Commercial Backyard Flock (Non-Poultry) in Virginia

Antibiotics and pesticides are a needs driven component of Agriculture.


----------



## Litsinger

Outdoor N8 said:


> Antibiotics and pesticides are a needs driven component of Agriculture.


The first detected outbreak of avian flu this year was found in a domestic chicken operation a county over from me. As fate would have it, one of my colleagues also happens to have a family poultry operation in the same county.

When I asked him what the outbreak meant, he indicated it means destruction of the entire contents of the barn and then a through cleaning. There are no treatments for avian flu.

According to my coworker, one of the key components to mitigating avian flu is minimizing cross-contamination. He mentioned these outbreaks often begin when someone who has come in contact with wild fowl (think duck/goose hunting) carries the pathogen back to the chicken barn.

Once the outbreak began here locally, they began testing wild waterfowl for the flu and determined they were carrying it. Ironically, wild fowl tend to be largely asymptomatic:

Updated CDC Article: H5N1 Bird Flu Virus in U.S. Wild Birds & Poultry








Avian Influenza in Birds


Learn more about avian influenza (bird flu) in birds




www.cdc.gov


----------



## Jack Grimshaw

Outdoor N8 said:


> Bird Flu Outbreak Hits U.S. Chickens
> 
> Bird flu detected at multiple chicken and turkey farms in Midwest, South; over 300k affected
> 
> USDA Confirms Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza in a Flock of Commercial Broiler Chickens in Kentucky and Non-Commercial Backyard Flock (Non-Poultry) in Virginia
> 
> Antibiotics and pesticides are a needs driven component of Agriculture.


Antibiotics do not control a ( flu) virus.


----------



## Litsinger

Litsinger said:


> The other thing that is appealing to me is the relatively easy nature of the assay itself- one could pre-cut sections of duct or gaffer's tape to an approximate 100 cell size and pull a quick sample for later evaluation without hardly slowing down an inspection.


Regarding this assay I was recently in an e-mail exchange with Dr. Büchler and I asked him about the specific product they employ for uncapping/recapping assays. He indicated that after trying several options, they settled on the Isana brand depilatory strips as the best solution.

It does not appear that we have the Isana brand strips available domestically, but it looks like Rossmann also makes the Veet brand.

A search for 'Veet Cold Wax Strips' produces a lot of results.

This looks like a good potential solution from three perspectives:

1. The strips are all the same size and thus have built-in control relative to the test area.
2. They are relatively low cost.
3. They seem to be easily procured.

I plan on experimenting with this in my own yard this season as a potential future evaluation tool.


----------



## crofter

Litsinger said:


> Regarding this assay I was recently in an e-mail exchange with Dr. Büchler and I asked him about the specific product they employ for uncapping/recapping assays. He indicated that after trying several options, they settled on the Isana brand depilatory strips as the best solution.
> 
> It does not appear that we have the Isana brand strips available domestically, but it looks like Rossmann also makes the Veet brand.
> 
> A search for 'Veet Cold Wax Strips' produces a lot of results.
> 
> This looks like a good potential solution from three perspectives:
> 
> 1. The strips are all the same size and thus have built-in control relative to the test area.
> 2. They are relatively low cost.
> 3. They seem to be easily procured.
> 
> I plan on experimenting with this in my own yard this season as a potential future evaluation tool.


I picked up a roll of tape sold for repairing damage to wrappings on silaged hay bales; I dont know whether it would suit or not but I have never seen another tape with such a grip. No comparison to run of the mill duct tape. Available at Tractor Supply Stores.


----------



## Litsinger

crofter said:


> Available at Tractor Supply Stores.


Good suggestion- I'll have to check this out. Sounds like the 'Gorilla' tape I use when regular chewing gum, duct tape and bailing wire won't do.


----------



## crofter

Litsinger said:


> Good suggestion- I'll have to check this out. Sounds like the 'Gorilla' tape I use when regular chewing gum, duct tape and bailing wire won't do.


Gorilla tape is quite mighty too, but this bale tape has it beat. I dont know if a certain amount of flex is necessary to meld into the capping surface. That was a brand new technique when I read about it recently. My first bees were pretty zealous uncappers and one of the 6 nucs was carrying a high mite load and they were uncapping as quick as the queen could lay. I had been told that first season nucs did not need treating. Opening and recapping is an interesting mechanism; not all parts of the behavior in the same bee.


----------



## Litsinger

crofter said:


> Opening and recapping is an interesting mechanism; not all parts of the behavior in the same bee.


The whole spectrum of resistance factors that are being identified is fascinating. Here is a good video presentation by Dr. Małgorzata Bieńkowska from the Lyson Beecome conference outlining the mechanisms evaluated as a part of the EurBeST study, including uncapping/recapping:


----------



## Litsinger

For those not monitoring the Bee-L listserv, Randy Oliver posted a detailed description of his resistance breeding program recently, along with his progress to-date:



> _I've been selectively breeding queens for many years.
> Breeding for color, gentleness, or AFB resistance was easy.
> Ditto for tracheal mite resistance, as well as no longer seeing collapses
> due to Nosema ceranae.
> 
> Breeding for varroa resistance has proven to be far more difficult, despite
> running a serious selective breeding program in which we control the vast
> majority of our matings.
> 
> After five years of replacing every one of the queens of our 1500 colonies
> each year solely with daughters of queens heading completely mite-resistant
> colonies, we've only worked up to 15-20% of our colonies exhibiting strong
> varroa resistance.
> 
> We run a "breeding population" program, flooding our mating yards with our
> own drones when our colonies return packed with drone brood following
> almond pollination. Every drone a grandson of a selected breeder.
> 
> I've spent hundreds of hours these past months running huge Punnet square
> series (up to 50 x 50 grids) to figure out the genetics involved in order
> to match our actual progress. I've run simulations with single alleles,
> double alleles, dominant or recessive alleles, epistatic dominant or
> recessive effects, etc. But every single simulation suggests that even if
> the trait came originally from the rare drone, that by breeding only from
> mothers whose colonies demonstrate full resistance, that we "should" be
> seeing more rapid progress.
> 
> Frustrating to not understand the genetics, but encouraging that we had
> over 150 colonies (out of 1000 taken to almonds) this season that did not
> require a single mite treatment for an entire year. All of our 30 chosen
> breeders this year had mite wash counts of zero or 1 at the one-year mark.
> 
> I have not investigated all the actual mechanisms used for resistance, but
> uncapping-recapping behavior is prevalent.
> 
> The take-home messages are:
> 1. There can be colonies (as opposed to queens) that are bulletproof for
> varroa, strong, gentle, and productive.
> 2. It's not easy to fix that trait into an entire breeding population,
> even with meticulous and extreme selection of each season's breeders.
> 
> This summer I plan to try absolutely closed population inbreeding matings
> in some high-elevation locations that do not have any other feral or
> managed honey bee colonies or drones present. _


----------



## GregB

Litsinger said:


> _*(Quoting Randy Oliver)*_ After five years of replacing every one of the queens of our 1500 colonies
> each year solely with daughters of queens heading completely mite-resistant
> colonies, we've only worked up to 15-20% of our colonies exhibiting strong
> varroa resistance.


Which also makes me feel better that under the circumstances similar to mine, the treatment-free is virtually impossible (total anarchy vs. Randy substantially controlled setup).

Last Tuesday I went to our local bee club - I was asked to talk about swarm trapping.
There were less than 15 people - I roughly estimate this is about 10-20% of the actual total beekeeping community of the county.

I learned that many attendees bought packages/nucs again.
The imports are of various untold genetic lines anywhere from Italian/Carni to VSH to ankle-biters to Russians to Buckfast to Saska).... 

People don't like to advertise their failings but just quietly continue importing the bees into here. Beekeeping anarchy state is here and now.


----------



## jtgoral

it is Randy Oliver who said that


----------



## Rader Sidetrack

jtgoral said:


> it is Randy Oliver who said that


Yes. I modified the quotes in two posts above to make that more clear.


----------



## GregB

GregB said:


> (total anarchy vs. Randy substantially controlled setup).


Correct - that is Randy's statement (quoted by Litsinger).
As I stated - "Randy substantially controlled setup".


----------



## Jack Grimshaw

Litsinger said:


> For those not monitoring the Bee-L listserv, Randy Oliver posted a detailed description of his resistance breeding program recently, along with his progress to-date:


I too follow Bee-L (in the digest form to keep it a little organized)

Later in the day,Allen Dick (a retired Canadian beekeeper now reclining on his boat in Mexico) posted this important point about Randy's quest.

Quote from Bee-L: The arrow denotes Randy's statement.

Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2022 18:05:10 -0400
From: Allen Dick <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Resistance Breeding



> After five years of replacing every one of the queens of our 1500 colonieseach year solely with daughters of queens heading completely mite-resistantcolonies, we've only worked up to 15-20% of our colonies exhibiting strong varroa resistance.[\Quote]
> 
> What about the rest? Are they at all remarkable compared to other local stock?
> 
> I would imagine that rejecting losers from breeding, more than selecting for the 'best', has raised the general tolerance and resistance level and reduced the number of 'mite farms' in the yards -- and also the total of all mites in your yards. So, so comparing best to worst will be comparing a narrower range than when you began.
> 
> It seems to me that although the focus is often on perfection, even a slight improvement in resistance in the general population makes a huge difference to where the problem becomes much less.
> 
> We have seen that with AFB. Just raising resistance slightly across the board and reducing the number of susceptible individual hives that become a reservoir has made what was once a scourge much less of a threat.


----------



## crofter

Yes, you do not need a "mite proof" bee to be able to live much easier with varroa. The femal mite only manage to create ~ 2 viable female mites per cycle. Cut that figure in half somehow and it makes a huge difference in their ability to overrun the bees reproductive rate.


----------



## Litsinger

As JFK made famous, 'A rising tide lifts all boats'.


----------



## jtgoral

I read TF discussions to motivate me to order OA at Amazon ASAP when I am low on it....  Somehow it is easier to get temperature resistant bees then mite resistant bees. My mutts fly at 40F


----------



## LarryBud

Vax and mask the CHICKENS


----------



## Litsinger

A couple recent updates from Bee-L. One of the best descriptions from Randy regarding his program that I have read in response to questions posed to him (in quotes below), and additional commentary from Dick Cryberg regarding Randy's progress relative to other selective breeding efforts:

From Randy:

_'I'm simply walking the walk to determine the plausibility and cost of engaging in a "traditional" breeding program with a dedicated breeding population of at least a thousand hives, with the vast majority of the drone pool being controlled, and not using instrumental insemination, brood dissection, marker-assisted selection, or any other lab techniques. The goal is to develop a commercially-desirable stock that exhibits consistent high resistance to varroa.'_



> I understand that the method is monitoring EACH hive? how often?


_'All colonies get monitored before or around the summer solstice of their first year after being started with nucs given an oxalic dribble. We wait until some colonies start hitting infestation rates of above 5 mites per half cup of bees, so that there is enough variation in a yard to select for those whose mites counts have not increased.'_



> Which thresholds to say this colony doesn't comply? does it varies over season?


_'Strong colonies still exhibiting mite counts of 1 or zero are tagged as potential breeders. The rest are treated. We then rewash the potential breeders roughly monthly, and remove them from the program if their mite counts increase above 1. In late fall as the last of the brood emerges, I allow the count to climb to 7-10 (around 3% infestation rate). Come early spring, we wash again for final selection. To make grade, that colony must have put on a good honey crop in almonds, look strong and healthy, be gentle, and have a mite count of 1 or zero (most breeders exhibit counts of zero after a full year without treatment).'_



> Then what? Kill the queen and put a queen cell (grafted from those selected mothers)? What about the drones?


_'We simply treat colonies that need it. We cull the queens of any extremely-high mite colonies that we happen to detect. Since the queen of every colony was the daughter of a resistant colony, that colony's drones reflect the genetics of that mother, so they provide the drone pool for the next year, and prevent excessive bottlenecking of the gene pool.'_



> Or do you have a parallel operation for mating queens and then change old queen for newly matted (on a controlled drone environment)?


_'There is no special movement or management of potential breeders, other than in spring when we bring them to the home yard for grafting. They receive zero mite treatments. When we bring 1000 hives back from almonds, they are chock full of drones which are grandsons of selected breeders. Our drones completely dominate the drone pool.

I hope to use some honey-bee-free isolated mating yards this summer for Brother Adam style fully-controlled mating yards for two of our queen lines whose daughter colonies exhibited high mite resistance across the board (progeny selection).'_



> what else?


_'Nothing else. I'm simply running a proof of concept experiment to determine plausibility, cost, and rate of progress. I'm not telling anyone "how to do it," just seeing whether a simple traditional breeding program, using around 1000 colonies, will work.'_

From Dick:

Following I list some real world breeding results.

_'Corn - Corn yields have gone from about 35 bushels/ acre to a bit over 200 in 85 years. Corn breeders get three generations a year. Thus the breeders have seen improvement of 0.75%/generation assuming all the increase is genetic which is not the case.

Soy beans - 35 bushels/acre to 60 bushels/acre in 40 years and again three generations/ year. This is an improvement of 0.5% per generation and is mainly or entirely genetic.

Racing homers - Distance a young bird will have a decent chance of flying home the day of release has gone up by a factor of 10 in the last 120 years. Somewhat less than one generation/year. The improvement has been a 2% increase/generation and is entirely genetic. But pigeons are easy to breed as both maternity and paternity are easy to control.

In the above examples improvements have been slow and steady without sudden big improvements. In all three cases the populations to select from are close to infinite compared to honey bee breeding programs. In the corn case some is due to so called hybrid vigor but remember we really have no clue what causes hybrid vigor and most people think it is far more universal than it really is. The chance of seeing it in any honey bee breeding program is just about zero. In fact it often fails entirely to show up even in corn.

So, how has Randy's mite resistant program gone by comparison? He has seen a factor of 6 or a bit better improvement in terms of % of stock that proves resistant in about 10 generations. That is a 10% improvement per generation. Far better than any of the above results. Way better than homers which were improved following exactly the same breeding model.'_


----------



## Litsinger

Update from Randy in the most recent ABJ (Part 1 of a 3* part series). 
*- EDIT Randy advised me it will actually be published in 3 parts.

Lot's of interesting observations, but two in particular caught my eye:


----------



## Litsinger

Part 2 of 3 of Randy's resistance breeding program posted in the July 2022 ABJ.

Here is the key take-away (IMHO).

He also talks about using waxing strips to test for uncapping behavior. I wonder where he got this idea from...


----------



## Litsinger

Part 3 of 3 of Randy's resistance breeding program posted in the August 2022 ABJ.

Many very interesting observations from the final installment, but a few in particular caught my eye:

1. An intentional focus on maintaining diversity- He mentions that they graft off a minimum of 30 queens each season to ward against excessive bottlenecking.

2. The unique (and daunting) effort to try to fix resistance traits in a population:



















3. And finally, what is the backyard beekeeper to do?










But...


----------



## GregB

Litsinger said:


> Part 3 of 3 of Randy's resistance breeding program posted in the August 2022 ABJ.












Actually, I am trying exactly this as we speak.
While there is no illusion about *controlling *the area, but *significantly impacting it* is a completely different proposition.
What is a significant impact anyway?
30% drones?
10%? 50%?
For sure it is less than 100%.
The real question is how little is significant enough.

This is exact reason I attempt mating few queens at the remote yard where resistant drones of different lineages *significantly impact* the location.
The owner of the place thinks he even actually *controls *the area skies - due to his large presence.


----------



## AR1

GregB said:


> View attachment 70357
> 
> While there is no illusion about *controlling *the area, but *significantly impacting it* is a completely different proposition.
> What is a significant impact anyway?
> 30% drones?
> 10%? 50%?
> For sure it is less than 100%.


Besides, Mother Nature is helping right along, culling the _imported_ genetics every year. It's a running battle. There are plenty of efforts to breed commercially viable resistant bees. Eventually the scales may tip, and it may not be that long a process. By 'not that long' though, I mean a few decades, not a few years!


----------



## GregB

AR1 said:


> Besides, Mother Nature is helping right along, culling the _imported_ genetics every year. It's a running battle. There are plenty of efforts to breed commercially viable resistant bees. Eventually the scales may tip, and *it may not be that long a process. By 'not that long' though, I mean a few decades, not a few years!*


As long as the desired trends take place.
Like - repeatedly buying/selling the bees of local production - year after year.
That would be the trend required for some locally desired traits setting in.
One of the more important local traits - seasonably suitable brooding patterns - which in turn contributes into slowing the mites down and better wintering.

In our location this is not a trivial issue as I often lament.
To fight the bee imports back, the locally produced bees/queens must be made easily available around the seasonal clock (so to mirror the southern season).

In my location this should mean NOT early unseasonal reproduction which some people try to push up here (undesired and hard to do anyway), but rather wintering of large numbers of small marketable colonies (nucs) and also wintering queens of local production on large scale.


----------



## Gray Goose

for the "diversity"
several of us could get together and have a swap meet.
queens making the winter AND showing a high degree of VSH would be candidates to bring.

In the past I generally order 4 to 6 from somewhere to allow different genes into the apiary.
this past year I actually did obtain some queens from Cory Stevens, with @Litsinger help.
winter is their next test.

I was a little bummed at the 30 queen mothers to have an effect.
I guess with several neighbors we may be close.

Back to the "community mating yard" idea

I have a "place" if enough folks have gas money..........

GG


----------



## Litsinger

GregB said:


> In my location this should mean NOT early unseasonal reproduction which some people try to push up here (undesired and hard to do anyway), but rather wintering of large numbers of small marketable colonies (nucs) and also wintering queens of local production on large scale.


I've already commented to the effect, but I really think you're on to something here, Greg. If you had 40 - 60 overwintered mini nucs available in April? where you're at it serves the multi-faceted advantage of being both locally produced, overwintered and presumably at pricing on par with a Southern sourced package. With a little education, it would not be hard for most serious novice beekeepers to grasp the advantage that this affords them on many levels.


----------



## Litsinger

Gray Goose said:


> I was a little bummed at the 30 queen mothers to have an effect.


Consider the scale- Randy is re-queening his whole operation from 30 breeders. I am not sure how many colonies they are running, but the 30 queens still represent a small fraction of his total operation.

Also, he's doing this more to maintain diversity- trying to strike the balance between vitality and trait fixing. So we can probably approximate the same goals with far less breeders assuming a fair amount of diversity in the landscape.


----------



## squarepeg

Litsinger said:


> Consider the scale- Randy is re-queening his whole operation from 30 breeders. I am not sure how many colonies they are running, but the 30 queens still represent a small fraction of his total operation.


plus he is flooding his area with the queen daughters of these breeders by the selling of 1000 or so nucs each season to nearby beekeepers, in addition to giving free queens and queen cells to anyone in the area in need of such.

still, and after several years, it is rather disappointing to see how little of the trait of natural mite resistance has been fixed in his population. something like only 10% was the last number i saw him report, but it's been awhile since i've looked at that.


----------



## squarepeg

i believe randy overwinters about 1000 colonies, taking a big percentage of them to almonds in february, and then goes into queenrearing and nuc production after almonds. last i heard his sons were thinking about trying some honey production, but historically randy hasn't fooled with harvesting honey.


----------



## Litsinger

squarepeg said:


> still, and after several years, it is rather disappointing to see how little of the trait of natural mite resistance has been fixed in his population. something like only 10% was the last number i saw him report, but it's been awhile since i've looked at that.


I think that's the number, SP. He does refer in the most recent article of having some signs of turning the corner- time will tell:

_'In the case of selecting for a dominant allele, one must perform “progeny testing” — tracking the performance of the colonies of daughter queens, looking for queen mothers for which half of their daughter colonies exhibit resistance (Figure 4), and then going back and breeding off them or the original mother. Last year was the first time that we saw this happen. We’ve got those resistant daughter colonies identified, and plan to move them to isolated mating yards this summer to attempt to “fix” the winning genetics into maternal bloodlines. Keep your fingers crossed! Figure 4 shows the expected results of what we’d expect to occur if we got lucky (2 chances out of 50) and happened to graft from either of the two daughters above that carried the R allele in their maternal bloodline. In this case, not only would half the workers in her colony carry the R allele (and the colony likely exhibit strong resistance), but half of her daughter colonies would also be expected to exhibit resistance. Practical application: In one of our yards last season, 24 out of 48 colonies exhibited resistance. We’re crossing our fingers that we may have hit the jackpot!'_


----------



## DavidBrown1212

MJC417 said:


> Please tell us about your easy method for keeping mites from reproducing. Help us understand the crazy complex reproductive cycle and the manipulations that you use.


It turns out I wasn't the only one who saw mites this way, and there are actually a bunch of people with the same ideas. Some people in Switzerland have a pheromone disrupter that seems to work pretty well. Here locally, I met a professor who seems to be close to a commercial product with a pheromone analog.


https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...wQFnoECA8QAQ&usg=AOvVaw3X5KMP1zC4022AEwgGAxoZ[/URL]


msl said:


> The answer is simple, many have tried, there bees died, dead bees don't make $$$$
> if $30 (or what ever) in treatments means you make the grade for almonds at $200 a hive... it makes bisnues sense to treat
> 
> here is a good look at some one who tryed... had to keep getting bees from his dad, kept taking massive losses and fushing $$ down the drain
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> if you haven't, read this https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/00218839.2016.1160709
> then... keep in mind these points
> 
> he kept very small yards by US commercial standards.. 20-25 hives per yard
> 
> while the paper makes it sound good... by 2010 his son took over
> http://ncbees.org/library/John Kefuss Keeping Bees That Keep Themselves.pdf&.pdf
> and then took 70+% losses a while back and was down to 70 hives and the stock is now treated
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 2016 he was up to 103, 2017 was a bad year Log into Facebook
> 
> A far cry form the paper saying
> 
> now lets not forget his other operation
> 
> 
> 
> http://ncbees.org/library/John%20Kefuss%20Keeping%20Bees%20That%20Keep%20Themselves.pdf&.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> despite all the work put in, runing bonded TF breeders, the operation needed to treat to stay profitable when the bees were under the stresses of commercial pollination. It just didn't work
> 
> as Greg notes, the consumer maters...
> they were willing to pay a premium for ainbitioc free chicken... we would need such a premium on honey, and really pollination services
> long and short treating makes you a lot more money, till that shifts nothing changes.. I
> 
> lasty, the chicken industry had big corporate breeders that send out there stock to be contract raised and returned to them
> save 2 cents per bird on medication adds up, (or charge2c more from it being premium) say if your Purdue @700 million chickens a year thats $14,000,000 a year in increased profits!!!!
> 2 cents more per hive? thats like $60 on a 3k hive operation... never going to see it
> even 2c pound more for honey is only $40 more a ton...
> 
> now this is what cuba did... you have to buy your queens from the state and sell your honey to the state at the state dictated price and treatments are banned... so they have a strong state run TF breeding program... your just not going to see that level of co op in the states...
> 
> 
> its been done....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We (usa) have killed off close to 40% a year for the past decade
> that's 10,400,000 hives dead in the last 10 years out of 2.6 million alive at any point.. we have killed over 4x the the total population, and no were closer to a solution
> it sounds real good on paper...but its just not how bees work
> 
> look in to what Randy Oliver is doing its a reansabul plan, but the pace is painstaking slow



I think you are underestimating the level of culling needed, in poultry it was about 85% of genetics wiped out. In bees, we could easily double that and still be viable. 

I think you hit the nail on the head with the business aspect. In Big Ag, we have a huge machine, a lot of cooperation and a more singular vision. Beekeeping has not adopted the modern agricultural concepts like other food production. There's no big companies with long term profits goals, just a bunch of little guys who can only afford to look a few years out. There's no budget for this in the industry, it's all run by universities.

I have had a chance to talk with some good size operations, and it seems like treatment cost is a major component of overhead. I have yet to meet a commercial beekeeper in real life who wasn't looking to reduce treatment costs. In a chat with Bob Binnie, he seemed to agree that resistance/reduced treatment was 'the future.'

I wonder why there is so much resistance here?


----------



## birddog

I'm sure Bob was resistance to the idea of killing off 85% of his bee stock in the name of progress 
no one here is against a super bee that is 100 % mite resistant problem is that silver bullet doesn't exist 
Let me ask how many of the last 20 years have you run your grain operation without any insecticides or herbicide


----------



## William Bagwell

DavidBrown1212 said:


> I have had a chance to talk with some good size operations, and it seems like treatment cost is a major component of overhead. I have yet to meet a commercial beekeeper in real life who wasn't looking to reduce treatment costs. In a chat with Bob Binnie, he seemed to agree that resistance/reduced treatment was 'the future.'
> 
> I wonder why there is so much resistance here?


Lingering bitterness over what was said years ago. (Possibly still is on FB and elsewhere.) Saw it just recently on BEE-L, criticizing Beesource for zealots who were long gone when I showed up here three years ago. 

Resistance to resistance makes as much sense as believing treatment free is free.


----------



## msl

DavidBrown1212 said:


> I think you are underestimating the level of culling needed, in poultry it was about 85% of genetics wiped out. In bees, we could easily double that and still be viable


needs to be much more then that, much much more, like 98-99%
and its all ready being done, approx 97% of commercial and 89% of sideliners hives (BIP 2021 data) get requeened yearly.. That's a massive culling



William Bagwell said:


> Beesource for zealots who were long gone when I showed up here three years ago.


well some may be gone, and a few of us have worked hard to push fact/data based beekeeping, but riddle me this, what's the most active BS sub forum?

this thread is a example of the BS/BeeL disconnect
A new beekeeper with one winter under his belt and a lot of enthusiasm hops on to the commercial forum to start telling the commercial beekeeping world they are doing it wrong

Many BS posters are under experienced, under informed, and only have experience keeping a few hives, yet have large opinions...
there is noting wrong with that, but it often gets in the way of higher level discussions




DavidBrown1212 said:


> I wonder why there is so much resistance here?


past history of failures, almost no long term successes at commercial scale, lack of exportable results from one operation to another

than and, well its all ready being done.... plenty of resticant lines out there that would crush the mites/virus of old. But, the mites are resisting the restiance faster then we can increase the level of restanace.




DavidBrown1212 said:


> I have yet to meet a commercial beekeeper in real life who wasn't looking to reduce treatment costs


yep, and those bees are out there in mass all over the country, why do you think large operations buy the $600 II breeders from TF operations like Latshaw and VP?
there is a BIG difrance between adopting the " treatmem free let them die" aproch VS baising your IPM pyramid on a foundation of getnic restiance


----------



## AR1

msl said:


> yep, and those bees are out there in mass all over the country, why do you think large operations buy the $600 II breeders from TF operations like Latshaw and VP?
> there is a BIG difrance between adopting the " treatmem free let them die" aproch VS baising your IPM pyramid on a foundation of getnic restiance


And, there is a big difference between a bee that will survive treatment-free in a small backyard apiary in rural areas, and one that will survive transport to the almonds and still survive TF. We are not that far from the first, at least in low mite-pressure areas. I think we are decades away from the second. If ever!


----------



## squarepeg

outstanding thread, i am late to joining it, and many thanks russ for providing the pdf's for the three part series!

can't wait to read them, and will also go back and review this thread from the beginning.


----------



## Michael Bush

> As JFK made famous, 'A rising tide lifts all boats'.


Actually I had no idea JFK ever said it. I'll have to research that. I've always tried to credit the originator when I can and that is one of the sayings that I find to be true quite often. Best I can track it down that the expression originated (in print) in religious publications. 

The earliest of these sources (from January 1910) credits the saying to a Commissioner McFarland, who may be the author of the third article cited below.

From "Never Paralleled in New York," in The [New York] Christian Advocate (January 20, 1910):
"Many ministers have heartily indorsed the [Laymen's Missionary] Movement and will support it with their indispensable influence. With their cooperation failure is impossible, and it is the universal post-convention report from the other cities that all local causes have been helped on by the new impulse of the Movement whose watchword is "For the Other Man." As Commissioner McFarland said at the Astor dinner, The rising tide lifts every boat!"
From "Japanese Church in Wonsan, Korea," in The [Nashville, Tennessee] Missionary Voice (May 1911):

"Now the building of the church in Wonsan [Korea], of course, was not entirely, or maybe even mainly, responsible for the building of the great church at home. But at least it did not hinder, and who doubts that the enlargement of heart that came to them through that unselfish thing, the spiritual swing developed in that enterprise abroad, hastened and helped on the larger thing they would do at home? "The rising tide lifts all boats," and "the light that shines farthest shines brightest at home." "
From Henry B. F. McFarland, "The Man by Man Rise of a Race of Men," in Association Men (January 1915):

And yes, I agree, in many things, and certainly in breeding mite resistant bees, "A rising tide lifts all boats."--Henry B. F. McFarland


----------



## Litsinger

Latest update from Randy Oliver via Bee-L:

_We can't yet claim that we have consistently "mite resistant" stock, but this August when I asked my sons for some hives with measurable mite levels (for a trial), they said sorry, they had just performed mite washes across the 1500 hives in the operation, most were zeroes, and they rarely observed a count over 2 (less than a 1% infestation). 

They had treated earlier with an oxalic application, but were wondering how much the low counts were due to resistance, and how much to the treatment. FWIW, earlier in the season, a few of the hundreds of untreated "zeroes" that had been labeled as" potential breeders" were later rejected due to their mite counts exploding (which is why we can't yet claim resistant stock).

My point: We don't need to achieve 100% resistance in order to keep the mite under control with inexpensive, easy to apply, "natural" treatments.

And yes, it may take a while, and it will take consistent monitoring of the colonies in a breeding population every single year for development and maintenance of the trait. But I'm encouraged by what I've seen so far._


----------



## AR1

Litsinger said:


> Latest update from Randy Oliver via Bee-L:
> 
> _We can't yet claim that we have consistently "mite resistant" stock, but this August when I asked my sons for some hives with measurable mite levels (for a trial), they said sorry, they had just performed mite washes across the 1500 hives in the operation, most were zeroes, and they rarely observed a count over 2 (less than a 1% infestation).
> ng population every single year for development and maintenance of the trait. But I'm encouraged by what I've seen so far._


Particularly impressive seeing that these are hives that go to almonds every year, probably the harshest mite/disease environment in the world. Of course, that's part of what makes it such a great environment for breeding for resistance. I'd love to get some of those bees!


----------



## Litsinger

AR1 said:


> I'd love to get some of those bees!


You might try emailing him- maybe you could by a few production queens after almonds?


----------



## AR1

Litsinger said:


> You might try emailing him- maybe you could by a few production queens after almonds?


Honestly I am not a diligent enough beekeeper to warrant the effort.


----------



## ursa_minor

Litsinger said:


> They had treated earlier with an oxalic application, but were wondering how much the low counts were due to resistance, and how much to the treatment. FWIW, earlier in the season, a few of the hundreds of untreated "zeroes" that had been labeled as" potential breeders" were later rejected due to their mite counts exploding (which is why we can't yet claim resistant stock).


I wonder when they applied the OA and how, by dribble or the slow release method. One treatment applied with these results is good news. Anything that decreases the need for constant monitoring or repeated rounds of the application of OA would be a start.


----------



## Litsinger

Great article with Troy Hall in this month's BC. This seemed as good a place as any to hang it.


----------



## david stern

Russ. Page two is blank. Would you try again?


----------



## GregB

david stern said:


> Russ. Page two is blank. Would you try again?


Works for me. 
That 3-page PDF is fine.


----------



## david stern

Great. Thanks. I will download it again.



I will try again. Thank you.











Thanks. I'll try again.


----------



## david stern

Oops


----------



## david stern

There's a problem with the file format and this phone. I'll read it when I get behind a pc. Thanks again. David


----------



## Oldtimer

DavidBrown1212 said:


> I dont understand the resistance to moving more towards a "treatment free" or "survivor" or I would put it "cost mitigating" management style, especially by the commercial beekeeping sector.


There is no resistance to it from the commercial sector. A good number of these commercials who "lack understanding" have attempted to achieve treatment free bees or certainly reduced treatment bees. Many of them include mite resistance or tolerance as one of the selection criteria in their breeding programs. And a small number of them have succeeded and are in fact treatment free.



DavidBrown1212 said:


> The main issue seems to be a cultural push back from the commercial growers, and I think its just a lack of organization and understanding.


LOL. The guys doing this for a living are a disorganized rabble who lack understanding of their jobs. But you of course, do understand .




DavidBrown1212 said:


> The problem is killing 40% is not really enough, we need to kill 85%. That's the reason that Randy's is work is going slow. His work is nothing new, I see it as rehash of what the USDA did in Louisiana in the '90s.


Bees are not chickens, the same methods do not apply. Unlike with chickens, to change my bees from one strain to another I do not have to kill 85%, 40%, or any%. I just have to requeen them. Randy's work is going according to you "slow", not because he isn't killing 85% of them, in fact he selects his breeders from only 5% of them. His work is not going as fast as you think it should be going, because getting bees to deal with the varroa parasite is a whole lot harder and more complex (and less financed), than selecting disease resistant chickens from a flock.



DavidBrown1212 said:


> It seems like the Tracheal mite gives an excellent historical example in how to deal with these, and we should just repeat that.


Not so simple to "just repeat that". The AMM strains that were susceptible to tracheal mites were wiped out entirely and are for practical purposes extinct now, although snippets of their DNA still exist in other bees. In Britain, the British AMM strains were almost the only bees there. As their extinction began the Brits had to import huge numbers of bees from overseas, some of these being other AMM variants but not susceptible to tracheal mites. Tracheal mites spread to many countries and in all those countries exterminated the susceptible AMM variants. But other strains were unnaffected by tracheal mites and they are the bees we have now. There was no breeding program or anything like that, the problem sorted itself as the susceptible AMMs went extinct. In Ireland and a few places there are groups dedicated to trying to prove that tiny populations of the "old English" or "old Irish" bees still exist, but the issue is clouded because of the importation of many strains of bees that appear similar.

End of day, for as long as I have been on Beesource, I have been seeing commercial beekeepers being told how they should be doing their jobs, by people who have never been one, and mostly are one or two year beekeepers with a handful of hives.
I do take a keen interest in being told what to do by people who have actually succeeded in taking their own advice. But much of this is just the same old dead horse being flogged by people who know it all but have not succeeded themselves.


----------



## Gray Goose

Oldtimer said:


> End of day, for as long as I have been on Beesource, I have been seeing commercial beekeepers being told how they should be doing their jobs, by people who have never been one, and mostly are one or two year beekeepers with a handful of hives.


I find myself oddly in 100% agreement with you OT. 

David,, Randy O requeens his hives, (95%) from the 5% breeding stock, that is at least 85% is it not.
Letting them die is poor planning IMO, IF you do not like "that hive" for whatever reason, a requeen is the same as Hard bond, just, better planning, keeping the comb covered with bees, not needing to deal with a dead out, and with out the loss of a hive.

Try clean out a couple hundred dead out hives a few springs in a row and your "let them die" would likely change.

GG


----------



## GregB

Oldtimer said:


> Unlike with chickens, to change my bees from one strain to another *I do not have to kill 85%, 40%, or any%. I just have to requeen them.*


This is one of those fundamental things with the beekeeping.
I painfully tried this in practice - killing off some bees (as was prescribed by the gurus).

To only realize - *it takes bees to make bees.*
Once you killed off most of your bees - you cannot rebuild around the few remaining good bees either (!!!!because no resources left!!!!).


----------



## GregB

Oldtimer said:


> *Bees are not chickens,* the same methods do not apply. Unlike with chickens, to change my bees from one strain to another I do not have to kill 85%, 40%, or any%. I just have to requeen them. Randy's work is going according to you "slow", not because he isn't killing 85% of them, in fact he selects his breeders from only 5% of them. His work is not going as fast as you think it should be going, because getting bees to deal with the varroa parasite is a whole lot harder and more complex (and less financed), than selecting disease resistant chickens from a flock.


Triple-like.

It is probably a good #1 question to ask any presumed expect - are the bees like chickens (or the infamous mountain sheep)?
Then proceed depending on the answer.


----------



## crofter

GregB said:


> This is one of those fundamental things with the beekeeping.
> I painfully tried this in practice - killing off some bees *(as was prescribed by the gurus).*
> 
> To only realize - *it takes bees to make bees.*
> Once you killed off most of your bees - you cannot rebuild around the remaining good bees either (!!!!because no resources left!!!!).


Yep, prescribed by _*gurus*_ with a touch of the _*messiah complex*_!


----------



## AR1

GregB said:


> I painfully tried this in practice - killing off some bees (as was prescribed by the gurus).
> 
> To only realize - *it takes bees to make bees.*


I never '_tried_' to kill off the bees. They just did it. 
If all it takes is to let millions of beehives die, then the last 30 years in the US should have solved the problem.


----------



## GregB

AR1 said:


> I never '_tried_' to kill off the bees. They just did it.
> *If all it takes is to let millions of beehives die,* then the last 30 years in the US should have solved the problem.


One key phrase needs to be added - *in coordinated fashion.*
Here and now even routine elections cannot be done in "coordinated fashion" - let alone letting the bees die in "coordinated fashion".

Like it or hate it - many things are nearly impossible to accomplish in the US (by very nature - a very un-coordinated place).
Doing the same locally on small scale is not working too well.
Doing it piece-meal and alone against the overwhelming currents is not working either.
Been there.


----------



## Litsinger

With several engaging discussions recently on the topic of resistance breeding in various contexts and offshoots concerning management, treatment thresholds and population-level dynamics, I thought this would be a good place to hang the following presentation that just dropped from Dr. Jeff Pettis at this year's National Honey Show:






While the whole talk is great, the discussion starting at about the 20 minute mark gets into the nitty-gritty of his two-year study of the treatment-free AMM colonies of Isle de Groix.

Several interesting observations follow, but a few of the more salient findings IMHO are:

1. There are between 30 - 50 wild colonies on the island (approximately 3 km X 8 km) and they co-exist amongst the managed colonies.

2. The managed colonies are not 'off the charts' relative to any specific mite management phenotype (i.e. Hygienic Behavior, VSH, Uncapping/Recapping or Mite Biting) so he suspects their resistance is the result of a suite of traits working synergistically.

3. The bees are resistant- they demonstrate a pattern of keeping mite population growth in check.

4. They found all the usual suspects regarding bee viruses - including three strains of DWV.

At about the 46:45 mark the question is posed, _"Are we nevertheless breeding a stronger varroa rather than a stronger bee?"_ The ensuing discussion from there to the end of the presentation is great in my very humble opinion and well worth the listen.


----------



## ursa_minor

While looking to move towards TF, I am starting to think that the focus on changing the bee rather than the mite, while it is a good thing, is going to be a very, very, long drawn out process for which I don't think I will see wide spread success in my lifetime. 
Advances have been made for sure but it will take such a coordinated effort across the continent (because bees don't respect boarders) that IMO it is a long shot. All it will take is one state/province/country without the the same regulations and all will be lost within a short period of time. 
This is a jaded point of view for sure but it will take a herculean effort to get widespread resistant bees. 

I know some scientists are studying the mites but IMO that is where the most focus should be. Find the achilleas heel of the mite, maybe traps with pheromones resembling that in a drone cell. There must be some reason they hop off into those cells right before they are capped and I don't think they have time to measure them first although that might be what they do. 

I am just throwing spaghetti at the wall now


----------



## JWChesnut

The Pettis observations of Varroa level in the test hives on Ilse de Groix are enormous. If these are actually "percent" of 100 bees, his data is throwing 18% and 16% infection levels.

This argues that "hygiene" or "grooming" is not removing mites.


----------



## Litsinger

JWChesnut said:


> This argues that "hygiene" or "grooming" is not removing mites.


That's the part I find most interesting about the study- there are lots of intriguing selection parameters we can utilize in our efforts to produce a resistant population - but are they the most appropriate?

Seems to lend more credence to Randy's use of Blacquière's Black Box selection.


----------



## JWChesnut

Alternatively, the "miracle" of the resistant bees on the little island is just "denialism" by the folks that are promoting the story.

My jaundiced ear hears about small colonies that swarm a lot and produce not much honey. That indicates to me a resistance mechanism that resembles the Apis Cerana swarming 6-8 times a season. The island is "oceanic" and has a moderate climate that reduces winter kill. Much like we see "miracle" bees in extreme southern Alabama without the stress of winter kill.

Fundamental to population genetics: the rate of reproduction is selected for survival, and high reproduction (swarming) predicts high mortality. This is the "bic pen" falacy: if you see high reproduction without balancing extreme mortality, you would have a situation of bees hanging from every lamp post. High reproduction gets selected against in cold winter areas, because the swarms created do not survive the winter. High reproduction has an advantage where the climate provides a buffer.


----------



## Litsinger

JWChesnut said:


> Alternatively, the "miracle" of the resistant bees on the little island is just "denialism" by the folks that are promoting the story.


Possibly. Or maybe an opportunity to unlock some factors that might move us forward.


----------



## msl

Litsinger said:


> maybe an opportunity to unlock some factors that might move us forward


Have to wait till he publishes, but I am not holding my breath

looks like the bees hold the mite numbers at about the same as the Inland of Fernando de Neronha bees

So once again we see a closed inland pop, so the big question is.... like happend at Inland of Fernando de Neronha, has a vuriant strain of DWV just not developed yet do to the small sample size?

the test is simple, move some bees to the main land, Correa-Marques et al.(2002) moved Fernando de Noronha queens to Germany, were the hives showed no restiance compare to commercial stocks.. and given Ilse de Groix hasn't become a worlds famous sorce of breeding stock.... well I think I know were to put my money



> Here we show that despite Varroa feeding on a population of 20-40 colonies for over 30 years on the remote island of Fernando de Noronha, Brazil no such activation has occurred and DWV loads have remained at borderline levels of detection. This supports the alternative theory that for a new vector borne viral transmission cycle to start, an outbreak of an overt infection must first occur within the host. Therefore, we predict that this honey bee population is a ticking time-bomb, protected by its isolated position and small population size. This unique association between mite and bee persists due to the evolution of low Varroa reproduction rates. So the population is not adapted to tolerate Varroa and DWV, rather the viral quasispecies has simply not yet evolved the necessary mutations to produce a virulent variant.





https://www.researchgate.net/publication/316024861_Oldest_Varroa_tolerant_honey_bee_population_provides_insight_into_the_origins_of_the_global_decline_of_honey_bees


----------



## Litsinger

msl said:


> the test is simple, move some bees to the main land, Correa-Marques et al.(2002) moved Fernando de Noronha queens to Germany, were the hives showed no restiance compare to commercial stocks..


We've been down this road before- what if resistance is not transferrable? 

What if local adaptation creates unique genotype/behavioral/mite/virus complexes that reach a relative stasis that is thrown back into upheaval when the bees get relocated to a different biome?


----------



## Oldtimer

Litsinger said:


> We've been down this road before- what if resistance is not transferrable?


Then it's no practical use as a commercial management strategy.


----------



## AR1

msl said:


> Have to wait till he publishes, but I am not holding my breath
> 
> looks like the bees hold the mite numbers at about the same as the Inland of Fernando de Neronha bees
> 
> So once again we see a closed inland pop, so the big question is.... like happend at Inland of Fernando de Neronha,
> 
> 
> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/316024861_Oldest_Varroa_tolerant_honey_bee_population_provides_insight_into_the_origins_of_the_global_decline_of_honey_bees


I read somewhere that they have the Japanese variant of the mite, which is less virulent. Don't recall where I read that.


----------



## Litsinger

Oldtimer said:


> Then it's no practical use as a commercial management strategy.


Maybe not a migratory strategy, but stationary perhaps.


----------



## Oldtimer

No.

Things in the commercial world are very different Russ, and they have to be. Very few "stationary" commercial yards, if such things do even exist, are run like a backyard hobby site.

I'd love to see some of the guys like you go work for a commercial for a year, and see how the assumptions and perspectives would change with more understanding.


----------



## Oldtimer

Just to flesh that out a bit, I was a hobbyist for 3 years, got my first hive aged 12, I was naturally good at it and my bees outperformed everyone I knew, and by age 16 I was ****y and thought I knew it all.

That's when I got a job with a 4,000 hive commercial. The first day was a rude surprise, and by the end of the first week I had learned more than I learned in my 3 hobby years. I was also questioning if I had made the right decision, taking up commercial beekeeping. It was tough.

Commercial beekeepers are there to make money. That's just how it is, because if they do not make money they will not be commercial beekeepers very long. To achieve that, they have to be innovative, smart, and nimble. Most of them lay awake at night strategizing and planning.

They have to know that they can move their hives any time, for any reason, and their bees will not drop dead as a result. Cos dead bees do not make money. Perhaps you are correct Russ and mite resistance is not transferable, and in fact we see evidence for that over and over. Even Solomon Parker demonstrated it.

It could be that if we one day get to where resistance is transferable, we would see more TF commercials.


----------



## Litsinger

Oldtimer said:


> Things in the commercial world are very different Russ, and they have to be.





Oldtimer said:


> Commercial beekeepers are there to make money.


@Oldtimer:

Thank you for your feedback. I always appreciate your insight.

First, let me offer that I am not espousing TF commercial beekeeping - at least as we typically understand 'commercial'.

One of the interesting discussions that has come out of this thread is the question of what does it mean to be a 'commercial' beekeeper?

While I don't take any objection to the typical definition utilized for at least the last 50 years, there have been several examples shared in this thread of folks like Kirk Webster and Troy Hall who make their living with TF bees but do not run the numbers not participate in the migratory approaches common to commercial-scale operators.

I have no illusions that a resistant stock of bees will be developed that can simultaneously meet the production and management needs of migratory beekeepers while simultaneously being able to withstand the unrelenting challenges of novel and frequently changing pest and disease dynamics.

What I am heartened by are the examples of fairly stable genetic populations (i.e. the current study in question or Cuba) which suggest there might be a viable path forward for stationary operations which work within the confines of a locally-adapted population.

So to me, it's not an either/or but a both/and.

Dr. Pettis shares the following insight in his presentation which I think is well-worth considering:

_'There’s a big dynamic and I hear it from different sides... Here’s the completely no treatment people over here and here’s the ones - we’ve gotta treat varroa – if not our colonies are going to collapse – there’s room for both types of beekeeping. Certainly if you let things go and let the varroa have pressure on the bees you’ll get to some type of equilibrium – that’s what Isle de Groix shows. But we can’t all do that – so we can accommodate both kinds of beekeeping.'_


----------



## Roland

I would like to see a genetic comparison between the isolated mite AND virus, and a commercial beekeeper's mite and virus. Per personal conversation with Randy Oliver at the Dadant's 150th party, he claimed that the genetic of the bee on the island off Denmark??? had changed, but could not speak of the mite's or virus genetics. I felt that testing only the bee's genetics and saying "Look here" was a case of unscientific beekeeping

I may be crazy, but I contend that the rate of genetic change in an organism will be in proportion to it's speed of reproduction.

Crazy Roland


----------



## Litsinger

Roland said:


> I would like to see a genetic comparison between the isolated mite AND virus, and a commercial beekeeper's mite and virus.


Take a look at these, @Roland:









Varroa Mite Population Genetics


A recent discussion over on Bee-L concerning anecdotal variability in amitraz resistance piqued my interest as to any recent scholarship into varroa mite population genetics. While this is by no means exhaustive, here are three recent publications addressing the topic: Investigating amitraz...




www.beesource.com







Litsinger said:


> There have been a few recent studies which have examined the genetic make-up of varroa mites in two resistant populations (Gotland and Toulouse) in an attempt to understand whether:
> 
> The genetic signature of the mite populations in resistant colonies differ from susceptible colonies and;
> 
> The relative diversity of the mite population impacts their virulence.


----------



## Oldtimer

Litsinger said:


> One of the interesting discussions that has come out of this thread is the question of what does it mean to be a 'commercial' beekeeper?
> 
> While I don't take any objection to the typical definition utilized for at least the last 50 years, there have been several examples shared in this thread of folks like Kirk Webster and Troy Hall who make their living with TF


As I stated a day or so ago in some thread or other, there are already a small number of commercial beekeepers who are TF. I could add some others that I know of to your list.
Generally they operate in a unique to them way that they have made work for themselves and their lifestyles. This is why it is rather incongruous for commercial beekeepers to be all defined as one group all doing exactly the same thing, and often portrayed as an ignorant bunch of fools who should be taking their advice from 2 hive hobbyists.



Litsinger said:


> One of the interesting discussions that has come out of this thread is the question of what does it mean to be a 'commercial' beekeeper?
> 
> While I don't take any objection to the typical definition utilized for at least the last 50 years


We do not need this thread to tell commercial beekeepers what it means or how they are defined.
Other than a few outlier commercials like myself who actually take the time to follow some of these discussions, the average commercial beekeeper has no interest in what the latest internet definition of themselves is. They just are one by virtue of doing it, and care not whatever label someone not in the trade defines them as being or not being.


----------



## JWChesnut

The Pettis presentation has as map of 2022 "Situation" prepared by Christian Bargain (the key individual on Ile de Groix.). 
The map identifies 13 "Ruchers de non adherents". (or "Apiaries of *NON* adherents") and 24 Apiaries of the association ASAN.GX and "adherents".

Comparison with the similar map prepared for 2008 of surviving and abandoned apiaries shows a significant number of the surviving locations from 2008 are now occupied by "non-adherents".

I am not completely sure what constitutes a "non-adherent" but the ASAN.GX protocol includes non-treatment and non-feeding. 

I would want to know what the "non-adherent" perspective on the "triumphalist" accounts of surviving bees are. It seems likely to me that beekeepers on the ground, including many sites (and presumably experienced beekeepers) DO NOT accept the proscriptions of the ASAN.GX group.

The map Pettis presents on feral colony locations have spring and fall tallies for recent years: Wild/Feral colonies peak at 51 in the autumn, but drop to 34 in the following spring -- indicating overwinter die off on the order of 35%.


----------



## Litsinger

Oldtimer said:


> This is why it is rather incongruous for commercial beekeepers to be all defined as one group all doing exactly the same thing...


Alastair:

I have no interest in being confrontational- I am interested in discussing the nature and advances in honey bee resistance and tolerance trends in every context.

In this thread I've offered feedback concerning the efforts of various beekeepers who operate in a commercial enterprise of beekeeping while pursuing resistance in their operations and have stopped well short of making any predictive statements that these approaches will work in other contexts.

They are simply data points and opportunities to take or leave the results as each sees fit.

So I am always willing to discuss the relative merits of each case in good faith, but I haven't the energy or interest to participate in gamesmanship.


----------



## JWChesnut

When I cross correlate the apiary placements shown on the 2008 map with the 2022 map, I detect 5 apiaries with continuity which are "adherent" and 2 apiaries with 2008-2022 continuity which are "non-adherent". All other apiaries mapped in 2022 were not mapped as living in 2008 (though some placements were "abandoned" in 2008 and have restarted).

I maintain the level of "churn" observed in apiaries starting and blinking out is similar to the "churn" you see in Treatment Free hobby beekeeping in North America. 
If "resistant" or "resilient" is defined as a beekeeper staying in the game for more than 14 years, then the Ile de Groix data says this in *not* the case.


----------



## Oldtimer

Just trying to give some balance Russ.

You see, for the almost decade and a half that I have been on Beesource I have seen young hopefuls posting studies from the internet claiming success in treatment free bees. But in the real world nothing much has changed in that time.



Litsinger said:


> I have no interest in being confrontational.....
> I haven't the energy or interest to participate in gamesmanship.


That's a great claim and pleased to hear you say it. Let's see you live it. Posting a meme of a person with a stick in his hand flogging a dead horse, with my name pasted onto him, would be confrontational or gamesmanship, whether or not it's later claimed to be a funny joke. No?

Using data that has nothing to do with what I said but making it appear it applied to what I said, purely in order to debunk me with fakery, would be gamesmanship, no?

Look, I expect this kind of behavior, it's the internet. But every so often I rebel and post my own truth. We are after all, a democracy. My views are at least truthfully based on my own experience and why should I be demonized for expressing them.

To me, this constant stream of studies, that are often poorly done, and never lead to anything real world, are the dead horse, and it ceaselessly gets flogged.


----------



## Litsinger

Oldtimer said:


> My views are at least truthfully based on my own experience and why should I be demonized for expressing them.


Your views carry a lot more weight than mine, so you need not worry about being demonized for them, leastwise by me.

I sincerely apologize if the image I shared came across as less than charitable- that was not the intent. 

I do however take umbrage to you stating that I have willfully mischaracterized any statements you've made. Could I have misinterpreted them? Certainly. Have I sought to twist your words? Absolutely not.

I think the challenge with this format is both the inability to truly gage intent- and the temptation to apply blanket suppositions to various positions or approaches based on our own personal experiences.

For example, when referring to the _'constant stream of studies, that are often poorly done'_ it is hard to know how to interpret that.

Are you suggesting that most of the peer-researched scholarship that has been lately posted on BS is poorly-done, or is that constrained to this particular thread or to a particular subject?

Again, I apologize if the 'dead horse' image offended you- it was genuinely offered in good humor.

Now, if you'd like to offer a reasonable critique of any of the studies I've posted, I'll be reading.


----------



## Oldtimer

Didn't read any of them cos I gave that up after years of reading the poorly done studies to which I referred.

Waste of time and I have concluded that the authors have to make a living. So they look around for something to do a study on then apply for grant money and then hey, they got an income for the next year or two.

When I used to follow these things it was often quite plain what the conclusion would be based on how the method was structured there would only be one result and I could have told them it myself, before they spent all the money doing the trial. Some trials are so simplistic as to be laughable.



Litsinger said:


> I do however take umbrage to you stating that I have willfully mischaracterized any statements you've made. Could I have misinterpreted them


Since you asked, an example would be when I referenced my experience running a treat as required program and spoke to the poor economics of it. What I said was my own experience, and 100% truthful. You then attempted to debunk what I said by giving data from a breeder selection program run by Randy O, but did not make clear the data was from a breeder selection program, not a treat as required program like I was referring to. When I pointed that out, instead of fessing up you doubled down, and even had the temerity to say you were just trying to keep things balanced. Using unrelated data to debunk someone is hardly balanced.

Why do that anyway? The thread is titled "treatment free as a commercial management strategy". But any input from actual commercial beekeepers is clearly not wanted unless it conforms to your own pre formed opinions.

At this point I thought back to some of our other exchanges and realised you have just been following me around, trying to debunk everything I say, for the heck of it.

I did not want to have to say all this but you asked. I have let you have the last word most times but you keep flogging this dead horse so I responded this time.

However I will again give you the last word.


----------



## Litsinger

Oldtimer said:


> Didn't read any of them cos I gave that up after years of reading the poorly done studies to which I referred.


Fair enough. But one can't truly determine if they're poorly done unless one reads them?

If we are to have an informed discussion on their merits (or lack thereof), all participants in the discussion have to be discussing the experiment or field trial which lead to the conclusion.


----------



## JWChesnut

I've identified on Google Earth satellite images most of the six apiaries studied by Pettis on his visits to Ile de Groix. The historic imagery function of Google Earth allows you to watch the development of these over time. Several of these are relatively recently established (ie no colonies at the yard site before 2016 and no vehicle or foot paths leading to the eventual apiary site detectable). Some current "research" apiaries were undisturbed shrub scrub in prior years.

The number of satellite resolvable hive boxes in the apiaries has fluctuated but trended upward. The pattern resembles a "exponential growth" expansion of colony count -- where maximum effort is devoted to raising and boxing young colonies. This growth pattern allows you to outrun (and generally discount) baseline mortality. I believe Solomon Parker named this "Expansion Model" beekeeping and thought he had tamed the unicorn.


----------



## Snarge

Oldtimer said:


> Didn't read any of them cos I gave that up after years of reading the poorly done studies to which I referred.
> 
> Waste of time and I have concluded that the authors have to make a living. So they look around for something to do a study on then apply for grant money and then hey, they got an income for the next year or two.
> 
> When I used to follow these things it was often quite plain what the conclusion would be based on how the method was structured there would only be one result and I could have told them it myself, before they spent all the money doing the trial. Some trials are so simplistic as to be laughable.
> 
> 
> 
> Since you asked, an example would be when I referenced my experience running a treat as required program and spoke to the poor economics of it. What I said was my own experience, and 100% truthful. You then attempted to debunk what I said by giving data from a breeder selection program run by Randy O, but did not make clear the data was from a breeder selection program, not a treat as required program like I was referring to. When I pointed that out, instead of fessing up you doubled down, and even had the temerity to say you were just trying to keep things balanced. Using unrelated data to debunk someone is hardly balanced.
> 
> Why do that anyway? The thread is titled "treatment free as a commercial management strategy". But any input from actual commercial beekeepers is clearly not wanted unless it conforms to your own pre formed opinions.
> 
> At this point I thought back to some of our other exchanges and realised you have just been following me around, trying to debunk everything I say, for the heck of it.
> 
> I did not want to have to say all this but you asked. I have let you have the last word most times but you keep flogging this dead horse so I responded this time.
> 
> However I will again give you the last word.


Sweet, sweet Oldtimer 

I believe I was the primary recipient of the meme. I only perceived it as offered in fun; but mostly that it was in deference to you (who was actually quoted as being the smartest member of the group). I didn’t pick up on any subvertive digs at you, in fact quite the opposite. My impression of you as someone that, both Frank, and Russ look up to was cemented even more. It made me realize that you have a deep history and friendship together with mutual respect for one another. Personally, I would consider it a compliment if someone took the time to include me in a meme.

I agree that the discussion of RO’s mating yards and testing protocols was a little confusing, each participant making assumptions, but it was a journey that reached an understanding, I thought. That is the challenge and beauty of using our written words to adequately convey complex ideas. Sometimes it’s quite challenging.

As far as the research studies that Russ shares, I find them interesting regardless of their, possible, pre-chosen outcomes. They all contribute to the elaborate mosaic of mostly unknowns.

Please keep having these respectful discussions with one another to sort out any misunderstandings. It’s like watching Mummy and Daddy reach a mutually beneficial understanding and is healthy for us kids to observe. 

Just as Frank got caught got in a little cross-fire between Greg and I, feel free to view me as a common thorn in your sides, if it helps. Love you both.


----------



## HarryVanderpool

Without getting overly wordy, please let me simply state that I am 100% in tune with Oldtimer's perspective.
Doesn't mean I'm right!
But most defiantly align with his (our) experience.
Dead bees do not pollinate our food or make honey.
We are not in the business of living the dream world. We live in the REAL world.
The proof of this is found in the THOUSANDS of packages and nucs sold to the other side each and every year from commercial operators.


----------



## crofter

I am undoubtedly polarized against acceptance at face value any information that has a hint of being faith based or tinted by optimistic projection.

I sense that some studies have areas that call question to the main thrust. The purest of objectivity should be free of apparent preconception of the outcome. It is impossible to identify every possible item of potential influence, but if it appears little attempt is being made in that direction it is easy to become a bit jaded.

I thought the beating of a dead horse was probably directed at me. Russ and I have parried a few times about optimism vs pessimism and wherein lies reality.


----------



## Snarge

crofter said:


> I am undoubtedly polarized against acceptance at face value any information that has a hint of being faith based or tinted by optimistic projection.
> 
> I sense that some studies have areas that call question the main thrust. The purest of objectivity should be free of apparent preconception of outcome.


So true, Frank…in a perfect world.

Personally, I am truly thankful to researchers who take the time to delve deeper into the various aspects of beekeeping, regardless of their motivations or financial backings. Research is extremely tedious, for the most part.

Just because a paper is published~and is in black and white~doesn’t mean it represents the whole truth. That is for us to determine and to, consequently, make our own judgements. I’d just as soon have the opportunity to read these papers, because then we can mull them over and discuss their merits, or lack thereof.

As a hobbyist, Oldtimer, I really have very little concept of the rigors, and extreme pressures, that commercial beekeepers are subjected to. You have helped open my eyes so I can take a glimpse at the hardships and differences. Please keep trying to bridge this gap for me, as you see fit.


----------



## Jack Grimshaw

Harry, First let me say that I have the greatest respect and admiration for commercial beeks.They are a valuable part of this nations agriculture. Many give time and bees to state and federal research.All that I have met personally have been very generous with their time and knowledge.
I worked for a small family business for over 40 yrs so I know what it's like to be
"on the job" 365 days per yr( at least in your head)

But.....
Your last sentence expresses the unique issue we have in the US.

"The proof of this is found in the THOUSANDS........."

This is the "Real" world that we live in. Bees that spent a month in almonds end up spread across the US,along with latest pest or pathogen. (Maybe not the same bees but you know what I mean). And it's because of the demand,just like our society is addicted to cheap tech devices from China.
If no one wanted bees in early spring in CT,my friend XXXX would not haul bees up from GA every spring,or XXXX pick up 100's of pkgs ML ships from CA.That late March pkg can produce a crop of honey before it crashes in Nov.Why wait for a local nuc that isn't ready until near the end of the flow in late May?

Here is why I chuckle reading some of the latest comments here.The reason "island bees",(whether off the coast of France,Gotland or the Arnot Forest,) that apparently live in harmony with Varroa is isolation.
And that isolation is from viruses,the REAL killer of bee colonies.The constantly changing,steadily evolving,increasingly more virulent viruses.


----------



## msl

Litsinger said:


> We've been down this road before- what if resistance is not transferrable?


more to the point there was (Fernando de Noronha ) NO gentnics bee restiance to transfer, just tolerance do to the lack of virulent virus strains.. We keep seeing location not genetics
the COLOSS GEI shows this well, when they moved normal bees to Avignon, home of a famous TF line, they lived 771 days with out treatment, when moved they were no better then anything elce


> The average survival period ranged from 80 days for the test location “Probistip” in Macedonia, where all colonies were lost during the first winter period, to 711 days for the test location “Avignon”, located in France






Litsinger said:


> Certainly if you let things go and let the varroa have pressure on the bees you’ll get to some type of equilibrium – that’s what Isle de Groix shows.


he is very caliver saying equlibulim is a guarantee. But sure maybe, I guess, at some point perhaps the bee dentistry would get so thin the epidemic would burn out for lack of hosts, the big question is such an equlibulim up to the task of bees being kept as viable live stock?
let us not forget the varroa was used to kill off all the honey bee colonies on the island of Santa curze, no equlibulim

that said, do we have any sources about what happened when varroa arrived on the island? Were there massive losses?



Roland said:


> he claimed that the genetic of the bee on the island off Denmark???


sounds like gotland...the mites changed and there was genetic resiance in the bees



https://www.researchgate.net/publication/334989496_Population_genetics_of_ectoparasitic_mites_suggest_arms_race_with_honeybee_hosts


Inheritance of reduced Varroa mite reproductive success in reciprocal crosses of mite-resistant and mite-susceptible honey bees (Apis mellifera) - Apidologie
but in the end it failed, and the bees needed treated to preserve them as a research subject




JWChesnut said:


> he map Pettis presents on feral colony locations have spring and fall tallies for recent years: Wild/Feral colonies peak at 51 in the autumn, but drop to 34 in the following spring -- indicating overwinter die off on the order of 35%


that seems like a very low swarming rate doesn't it? I would expect 2 prime swarms and 3 or so casts out of a feral colonly, with a good chance of the 1st prime swarm, swarming... maybe that points lack of nest cavity's keeping the denieinsty low



JWChesnut said:


> I believe Solomon Parker named this "Expansion Model" beekeeping and thought he had tamed the unicorn.


Sam Comfort..but he sells queens, we see that in websters work to as he feels the esist part of beekeeping to go TF on is queen rearing.

is this population worth protecting and studying, yes for sure.. but let us rember its a few hobby scale beeekeepers on an inland.. we see this happen faily regularly, and it has little to know bering on commercial (US standard) beekeeping

Its worth to rember, the fokes paying the bills for (and writing ) the study have an agenda.. to force everyone on the island to be TF and feed free, use only the local AMM stock, no artificial section (ie grafting) etc, etc, etc


https://www.pollinis.org/admin/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/pollinis-groix-appel-bd-1.pdf










TOGETHER, LET'S MAKE THE ISLAND OF GROIX A HAVEN FOR ALL POLLINATORS!


Despite the conservation efforts of the local authorities and beekeepers, the survival of local bees on the island of Groix is threatened. Help us convince the French State to take strong legal measures to protect this precious bee and its environment!




action.pollinis.org


----------



## Roland

MSL - good job, that paper is from 2019, I spoke with Randy in person in 2011. My point is that it was too early to claim bees will adapt to the mites - it is only part of the picture. I claimed to him that the mites changed faster and more. than the bees.

JWChestnut - See any corn fields? Any Soybeans? ANY row crops??? I suspect not many. Sure, I could keep bees treatment free if there where no sprays .

I agree with Oldtimer. most papers have fatal flaws, but every once in a while they make a mistake and print a whopper. Someone just noted that caged bees live half as long now as they did in the 60's. Who said dead bees don't pollinate or make honey? (Harry must have posted one more post than me). I wonder if anyone will try to figure out why.

There is some good research. I have faith in Judy Wu-Smart at UN-L. They seem to be digging in the right direction.

Crazy Roland


----------



## HarryVanderpool

Roland said:


> (Harry must have posted one more post than me).
> Crazy Roland


You left out the most important part:
"That makes his opinion beyond dispute! "


----------



## Roland

How could I forget.. It won't happen again.

Crazy Roland


----------



## msl

Roland said:


> I claimed to him that the mites changed faster and more. than the bees.


that is of course the elfant in the room on restiance breeding ... how fast can the mites adapt to the bees adaption that provides the restiance and in the end do we just create a stronger mite that then dose more damage to less restive bees stocks, or when traits fade in out crossing


----------



## jim lyon

Sigh. Always nice when someone hops aboard to enlighten us but this ground has been covered over and over and over……The industry has done a pretty good job of overcoming AHB, AFB, EFB, SHB, Acarapis Woodi, and Nosema but varroa (a pest that breeds incestiously in a sealed environment) then spreads like a wild fire carrying different viruses, we’ve learned is a “horse of a different color.”


----------



## crofter

msl said:


> that is of course the elfant in the room on restiance breeding ... how fast can the mites adapt to the bees adaption that provides the restiance and in the end do we just create a stronger mite that then dose more damage to less restive bees stocks, or when traits fade in out crossing


We dont know that the above scenario is a given but it is easily perceived possible compared to the supposition that our favored competent, the bee must of course, outrun the mite and its vectored viral and bacterial companions. Mother Nature does not have a favorite team.


----------



## ursa_minor

crofter said:


> Mother Nature does not have a favorite team.


And not all species adapt, some go extinct.


----------



## msl

ursa_minor said:


> And not all species adapt, some go extinct.


most in fact


> 99% of the four billion species that have evolved on Earth are now gone.


|Extinctions
in fact... The native honey bee of the Americas (_Apis nearctica_ ) long ago went extinct...




crofter said:


> Mother Nature does not have a favorite team.


arugbuly she does, and that team in named change 

"balance" in nature as we see it is an artifact of our short observation window


----------



## A Novice

Litsinger said:


> Fair enough. But one can't truly determine if they're poorly done unless one reads them?
> 
> If we are to have an informed discussion on their merits (or lack thereof), all participants in the discussion have to be discussing the experiment or field trial which lead to the conclusion.


Well, if you buy radishes at the farmers market every week, and every time they are tough and bitter, after a while you stop buying radishes.

And you get annoyed at people who keep saying "Look at those radishes! You should buy some! Those are good radishes! and so on.


----------



## A Novice

Well , TF didn't work for the American Chestnut, or the American Elm. It doesn't appear to be working for the White Ash or the Butternut. Don't know if the Black Ash is doing any better.

Just because Honey Bees are numerous doesn't make them immune to the effects of predation.

Realistically, western honey bees (AM) have developed mite resistance/tolerance comparable to what eastern honey bees (AC) have developed over thousands of years of dealing with varroa.. They survive fairly well in subtropical climates in small colonies that swarm frequently. That sort of survival is pretty much all that is needed to assure the future of the species. Maybe over time they will get smaller and build even smaller colonies. Small cell (utter nonsense to anyone who investigated the history of foundation development) may have been prescient. Small cell in small colonies (half pound to 1 pound of bees) may be the future of feral bees. Their range may be restricted to +/- 30 degrees latitude, but that is still a pretty big range for a species.

We may develop frankenbees that are immune to varroa, but the chance they will be anything but domestic seems small. Just my opinion.


----------



## crofter

I have seen _carte blanche _dismissal of all research projects, citing monetary and many other possible conflicts, or simply that all such research is tainted. I think almost everyone here can quickly dismiss any such blanket claims. I will say though that it is sometimes true to some degree or another but that most inaccuracies are oversights. None the less to proof or seriously evaluate a proposal, could take a lot of time and a fairly high knowledge in the subject area, to critically examine an issue for truth, bias or poor control of conditions. Often that would require doing extensive research in the area and even into other research papers in the same topic area.

What I am getting at, and which has been stated many times is that research looking for support of a preconceived concept can certainly return positive results. Often it is only when someone else does a deeper search that information arises that might be less supportive or even contradictory.
Many things can call question to an hypothesis. It is especially easy to miss such things if there is emotional investment.

I think the mood and quality of information on the forum has come a long way from where it was 12 years ago.


----------



## Litsinger

I think there have been some very salient points raised.

I wanted to quickly comment that I am not ignoring the legitimate concerns raised, questions posed and feedback provided but recognize there is nothing further I can contribute that will be helpful or advance the discussion.

I have learned a great deal on the forum and will continue to read and glean from the considerable knowledge of our amazing membership.

It's been a sincere honor and privilege to connect with many of you here through this forum.


----------



## HarryVanderpool

Beekeepers come from many different backgrounds.
For example, I know at least 8 beekeepers that were teachers and took up beekeeping as a perceived summer job.
I know many, many beekeepers that "a buddy" got them interested.
For me, I began vocational agriculture classes beginning in the 9th grade back in the early 1970s.
I had to show up an hour earlier than everyone else to attend the class as it was an elective.
In the 10th grade we continued the class and stayed after school for "AG Shop" repairing farm equipment.
My tenth-grade job was as a hired hand on a dairy 
It was there that the term, "Animal Husbandry" became real.
As a commercial beekeeper, it is more real than ever.
Monitoring every aspect of the bee's welfare is just simply DOING MY JOB!!
There is no amount of hocus-pocus or wishful thinking that will ever replace honest, earnest love and care for one's livestock.
THAT'S where I come down on all of this.


----------



## AR1

Litsinger said:


> I think there have been some very salient points raised.
> 
> I wanted to quickly comment that I am not ignoring the legitimate concerns raised, questions posed and feedback provided but recognize there is nothing further I can contribute that will be helpful or advance the discussion.
> 
> I have learned a great deal on the forum and will continue to read and glean from the considerable knowledge of our amazing membership.
> 
> It's been a sincere honor and privilege to connect with many of you here through this forum.


I hope this doesn't imply you are withdrawing from here. Though you are a busy guy from all I can see.


----------



## GregB

AR1 said:


> I hope this doesn't imply you are withdrawing from here. Though you are a busy guy from all I can see.


I think Russ was just piled on a little bit.  

To be fair, the American model of commercial beekeeping pretty much assumes extensive seasonal migration and large scale.
At this rate it is hard to discuss any meaningful bee localization and attached to it local resistance development.


----------



## Roland

Watch out!! There are still some stubborn Germans out there that keep bees the same way since the late 30's, and do not migrate.

Crazy Roland, 5th gen beekeeper
Linden Apiary, est. 1852


----------



## Oldtimer

GregB said:


> I think Russ was just piled on a little bit.


Agree with you Greg, in hindsight I was overly lippy and overly aggressive.

My apologies to you Russ.


----------



## A Novice

Litsinger said:


> I think there have been some very salient points raised.
> 
> I wanted to quickly comment that I am not ignoring the legitimate concerns raised, questions posed and feedback provided but recognize there is nothing further I can contribute that will be helpful or advance the discussion.
> 
> I have learned a great deal on the forum and will continue to read and glean from the considerable knowledge of our amazing membership.
> 
> It's been a sincere honor and privilege to connect with many of you here through this forum.


Russ!
Don't even think of disengaging!


Litsinger said:


> I think there have been some very salient points raised.
> 
> I wanted to quickly comment that I am not ignoring the legitimate concerns raised, questions posed and feedback provided but recognize there is nothing further I can contribute that will be helpful or advance the discussion.
> 
> I have learned a great deal on the forum and will continue to read and glean from the considerable knowledge of our amazing membership.
> 
> It's been a sincere honor and privilege to connect with many of you here through this forum.


Russ!

Don't even think of disengaging!

Sorry if I am excessively negative at times.

Jon


----------

