# Wall Street Journal---CCD Report



## Cyan

I have yet to see any honeybees working the dandelion in Greensburg, Pa, and the only bees seen so far on the farm were mine. On the other hand, the red mason bee & bumblebee populations exploded this spring. Been on a work related trip, so no idea if I have anything in the traps but I doubt it.


----------



## D Coates

Is this the report you're referencing? http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/storie...ME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2015-05-13-09-15-22 CCD isn't referenced in the article though.


----------



## Houstonbees

Yes, thats the report. While CCD is not directly implicated, the report does say that the colony count is higher than last year, but largely due to splits making up for hive losses. I was just wondering how hobbists with generally fewer hives are fairing compared to much larger commercial operations. I know it's like comparing apples to oranges but just trying to get conversation going and see if any interesting or unusual information comes out of the discussion.


----------



## Nabber86

I had the best winter over. Only lost 1 out of 4.


----------



## rwurster

I only lost 2 out of 20 something this winter. Talked to a beekeeper setting up some hives on the side of the road and he said he lost a whole bunch to nosema this year. I also talked to the commercial near me and he said he also lost a bunch to nosema this year. The two I lost were both late season swarms that were fairly small, I suppose I should have combined them. A freak cold snap killed them both, one an inch away from honey.


----------



## BadBeeKeeper

More than 50% loss here, but not attributable to "CCD"...more like bad beekeeping (and spending too much time at my job).


----------



## D Semple

Swarm numbers seem way down here as well, but I'm not sure why. Winter colony survival was good.

May just be to early to say for sure. I know my own colonies are trying very hard to swarm this year.


Don


----------



## kaizen

I've been watching the flowering trees in full bloom and not one bee spotted. several bumblebees wacking into things but no honey bees at all. so its either a great place for my hives or a big problem


----------



## enjambres

Is the Journal report based on the results of the 2014-2015 Bee Informed Partnership survey, which were just published two days ago?

If you all participated in the survey you'd get the results emailed to you! (Hint, hint for next year. Sign up now, they'll email you next April. It's open to all beekeepers, it's free; and it only takes about 20 minutes to complete and it's really is useful data collection from real-world beekeepers.) 

Here's the link: http://beeinformed.org/

I haven't had a chance to study the results in detail, but one of the striking things was that there were a lot of losses during the summer last year, not just during the expected fierceness of the past winter.

And as for actual "CCD", not so much (which has been true for a few years, now.)

Enj.


----------



## Keith Jarrett

BadBeeKeeper said:


> More than 50% loss here, but not attributable to "CCD"...more like bad beekeeping (and spending too much time at my job).


BBK, very honest post, well said. WSJ paper report...... the same blow hard keepers with the same losses, can anyone spell ELAP. Sometimes I don't even say I'm a beekeeper because of this crowd. Bo ho ho


----------



## dgrc

Houstonbees said:


> ...I was just wondering how hobbists with generally fewer hives are fairing compared to much larger commercial operations...


A supplier for hobbyists here in Minnesota just reported he ran out of queens because so many people were splitting colonies. Anecdotal for sure, but it suggests hobbyists are doing OK.


----------



## enjambres

ELAP ?? What's that?

I had no losses in my tiny, 4-colony apiary. For the second consecutive year. I treat. I feed. I insulate because I live in a fierce winter climate. My bees seem to do OK.

(I'd be interested in feeding Nutra-Bee if I could get it small enough quantities.)

Enj.


----------



## D Coates

The report is only as good as the data that was reported. Garbage in, garbage out. We know nothing of those who reported or if what they reported was true. I got the request for information as I'm signed up. However, I chose not to fill it out as I didn't know how my data will be used, especially with no verification. I could report I've got many hives and they all died to skew the numbers one way, or I could claim I've got many hives and none died to skew it the other way. How do you loose hives during the summer unless you're not paying attention? Are these the same folks that are filling out this paperwork?

It's sad Beekeeping has become so political trying to use us to fit their various agendas.


----------



## camero7

> ELAP ?? What's that?


http://www.fsa.usda.gov/programs-and-services/disaster-assistance-program/index


----------



## enjambres

Cam, thanks for the link. I see it's some kind of government program. No time to wait for the d/L.

But as to who are the people who are reporting, and what is their agenda? Well, I guess you could worry about that, but I don't. I report because I want to ante in my data to the pool since I am interested in other people's results, especially regionally. I learn a lot from studying the published results. I want to do what works for successful beekeepers, because that seems the most efficient way to become, and stay, a succesful beekeeper.

I don't understand what could be "political" about it. The people that run it don't seem to be "political" to me. And what would be the point of falsely reporting, either success or failure? In any survey there's always people who try to screw around with their answers for one silly reason or another. But that's what statisical analysis can help sort out. 

Beekeeping sometimes seems to me to have strong, historical streak of secretiveness. 

There is a lot of reassurance about how the survey is completely anonymous, etc. I don't see why it would make a diffrence, either way. I am above-average in beng concerned about my personal privacy, but I don't think that answering questions about the number of hives I have and how many times, and with what I treated them etc., is a big deal. This survey seems straightforward and it's a pity if somehow it is seen as anything other than a genuine atempt to gather large-scale data about what works, what doesn't, and where.

If you don't choose to contribute your data, that's fine, but I wish you would reconsider next year.
Have you looked over the results for your area (region) and type of beekeeping? Did you find anything interesting or useful from the survey? I always do.

Enj.


----------



## D Coates

enjambres said:


> But as to who are the people who are reporting, and what is their agenda? Well, I guess you could worry about that, but I don't. I report because I want to ante in my data to the pool since I am interested in other people's results, especially regionally. I learn a lot from studying the published results. I want to do what works for successful beekeepers, because that seems the most efficient way to become, and stay, a succesful beekeeper.
> 
> I don't understand what could be "political" about it.


40% bees have died is what they lay person is going to take away from the article. Most are going to say "Oh CCD is still getting the bees". Case in point look how this report was called a "CCD report." No I'm not saying the OP did this intentionally but it happened here. It'll easily happen elsewhere if it happened here this quickly. 

If I'm one of the folks who want to use this to push an agenda I can claim I've got 1,000 colonies and 850 colonies have died. I've only got +/- 30 but it's an anonymous survey, no one is checking. The worse the die off claims the more urgent the cries for action can be. See how easy it would be to anonymously skew the numbers to fit my needs? Some will automatically use this article as proof that the bees are dying to raise funds and push whatever agenda they wish hoping only the "40% of bees have died" nugget is all folks remember. These same folks and groups will use this to try to get the government to act and restrict further freedoms from products they deem as responsible for these deaths (though the evidence isn't there). 

That's how this is political. I've seen it happen too many times to count on whatever the latest "crisis" is claimed.


----------



## kaizen

they are extrapolating that data quite a bit. I'd like to see the raw data and how it compares to actual hives in that state. from a few of their numbers the numbers of hives reported represents less then 20percent of the total. And those keepers that reported had an avergage of 65 hives each from their numbers. with as many contributing factors as there are for a colony loss this seems scant evidence. 
can professional beekeepers count losses on taxes like a loss of crop on a farm?


----------



## BadBeeKeeper

kaizen said:


> can professional beekeepers count losses on taxes like a loss of crop on a farm?


I'm approaching it from the professional angle and filing a Schedule F. My wife is a professional tax preparer and accountant. As far as we have been able to determine, if you have to purchase bees it is recorded as a straight expense, they are not counted as an asset and no other loss can be recorded for them. The hives themselves are recorded as an asset, and depreciated year over year instead of simply expensing them, with the exception of the first year in which the initial hives were expensed as start-up costs.

Filing the Schedule F can be a little tricky. You can expense the cost of seed, but you cannot take an additional loss if the crop fails- you lost your money for the seed and that's it. For some things, you *can* purchase crop insurance but I do not yet have an answer as to whether or not an expected honey crop can be insured, or what it might cost if it were possible (the cost of the insurance *could* be expensed if it were available and purchased). Don't take my response as gospel, I'm not the expert and I'm just relating it as I understand it. Other people's situations may be different and may require different procedures.


----------



## sqkcrk

kaizen said:


> can professional beekeepers count losses on taxes like a loss of crop on a farm?


Not losses, only the expenses incurred in replacing those losses.

The data in the report is limited to people who are willing to answer the survey and willing to take the time/bother to do so. So it's hard for me to give it much credit. Maybe someone could explain to me why I should.


----------



## rwurster

I answered mine as accurately as I could, I even looked through my notes for the year to verify some answers. I spent less time filling out the report than I spend looking through posts on Beesource. The data set is from approximately 400k managed colonies. I would like to see the breakdown of losses by number of colonies possessed such as losses coming from 1-8 colonies, 8-50, 51-200 colonies etc. The summer losses I just don't understand but I do remember an abscond would count as a loss. I've only ever had winter/early spring losses.


----------



## Kamon A. Reynolds

I have noticed the hard working beekeepers (that monitor the mite levels) consistently have high percentage of colonies go thru the winter. All that whining about CCD is old news and a money racket.


----------



## jim lyon

Listened to a presentation by Dr. VanEnglesdorp at the annual AHPA convention. He referred to last years survey as "an incredibly rich data set" and broke down last years report saying what was clear was that commercials fared better than hobbyists or side liners and that commercials who migrated did better than those who didn't. Migratory commercials who treated for mites 3 times annually had the lowest loss figures of anyone. Interestingly those who treated more than 3 times didn't fare as well. Of course, as with any survey, it's only as good as the quality of the data that goes. I answered it, and answered honestly. I would hope most that participated did so as well. Coincidentally, or maybe not, I treated 3 times last year and was pretty happy with the quality of our bees.


----------



## rwurster

That's exactly what I wanted to know about Jim


----------



## enjambres

Jim's example was one of the things I picked up from last year's survey.

I started out being squeamish about treating for mites (same as the majority of hobbyists, I expect.) The difference may be that I am, by trade, a professional horticulturist and have decades of experience scouting row crops and greenhouses for pests and diseases (what beekeepers call monitoring, we call "scouting"). 

So when I discovered the bee-test methods (boards first and then, rolls) I took to them like a duck to water because it was the _one_ area in beekeeping where I felt a tiny spark of familiarity and, thus, competence. I knew what the theory of the practice was; I knew the purpose of treatment thresholds; I knew the importance of watching the trend lines; I knew how to keep the records. And I was familiar with weighing the treat/no-treat decision against what the field counts were and what the biology of the pest species is. 

But I still was wary of over-treating, so when the breakdown of last year's numbers became available the three-treatment cohort's success caught my eye. I'm still not going to treat without a monitor-confirmed need, but it allowed me to think about mites on the basis of a full-years' mite cycle and to think about what points in the year the three treatment might be both most effective against the mites and least disruptive to the bees. And what materials I could use at those times. The three-(but not more) is-the-most-successful strategy gave me a place to begin to work my program out. (It's not fully clear to me, yet.) 

So a hat tip to all the respondents to last year's survey - the information that came out of it was really helpful to me. I look forward to the survey every year. Sometimes when I'm tired and think to myself why bother with some tedious task, or writing my notes down, I remember the survey and use it as a goad to get on with things I need to do.

On another forum, I was prompted to do the math on the total number of particpants in the survey this year vs. last. And the number of people who bothered to reply was down about 18% and the total number of hives they had under management (not losses) has also down 20%. Only the preliminary numbers are being offered now. Those are the ones getting all the press this week.

Summer losses were higher than winter pushing the total annual losses higher. Winter losses were about the same as last year (or very lightly down). Both of the last two winter losses are much less than the peak which occurred a few years ago. I'm betting the prolonged drought conditions in the west had something to do with the high summer losses as well. It will be clearer when the regional and state break-outs are available. And hobbyist beekeepers (by far the largest category of respondents though with, in the aggrgate, far fewer hives) seemed to have the worst winter losses, not a surprise to any reader of BeeSource.

Even if you don't want to participate in the study, it's worth some study when it finally comes out. Maybe if you find something useful you'll consider paying it forward next year and making a report, too.

BTW, I don't think the survey is either pro or con regarding neonics. It certainly isn't taking an alarmist's position about CCD (no matter what lazy, clueless, reporters write about the survey results). Maybe I'm wrong and maybe I don't know enough about the people behind the BeeInformed Partnership. But they're still welcome to my data, just in case some other beek can find a crumb that helps them out.

Enj.


----------



## rwurster

:thumbsup: enj


----------



## Michael Palmer

Keith Jarrett said:


> WSJ paper report...... the same blow hard keepers with the same losses, can anyone spell ELAP.


Amen Keith. 25% summer loss of commercial beekeeper hives...really?? Where, who, what bees? None of my commercial friends up here in the Northeast. Best wintering in years...<10% dead-outs. A handful lost last summer. If I lost 25% in the summer, I'd be done. I quit filling out the survey each year because it doesn't make sense to me and doesn't fit what I live and see. The results sure do support the need to help those big guys who always lose their bees. PPB!


----------



## jim lyon

I typically have more summer "losses" than winter "losses" but I requeen everything each year. I think of it more as queen failures, though, and it usually falls somewhere between 10 and 20%. These summer queen "flameouts" just seems to be a pretty common refrain among a lot of commercials. I don't usually lose more than about 10% through the winter in Texas. The key is that the remainder are pretty darn good bees so I just factor it all in when I decide how many I want to start the year with.


----------



## sqkcrk

What are we doing by only looking at the loss? What about the increase beyond the loss? I took 472 HIVES to South Carolina last Fall. Turns out that when I got them on the ground and went through them to check to see which ones would benefit from feeding an number of them were unoccupied, aka dead. 

They had been alive when I stripped honey off of them. How alive, who knows. Obviously not functionally so. But had they had no bees in them when I took the honey supers off of them they would not have been loaded on the semi along with the rest of the hives. Being as they were all gathered into the loading yard and stockpiled for about a week before loading and going south, some of these "dead out" colonies could have and probably were robbed. Some appeared to have been drone layers.

So after my hives got south and I went through them there 472 colonies reduced down to maybe 432(?), I'm not sure. Should have counted. By the time I started working them to prepare for blueberry pollination and to replace the dead outs and fill nuc boxes my colony count was 412. Most of the losses, beyond the empty hives found in the Fall, I attribute to starvation and something wrong with the queens, like them being superseded and not taking or being a drone layer.

Since then I have filled those 472 hives, filled another 18 pallets (72 hives), and filled 90 nuc boxes (some of which were not successful at making queens or accepting queens provided them). So, basically from 412 on March 3rd to around 600 plus at this time. I don't recall my colony count last Spring, so saying what my 12 month average colony count is is hard to say. But it seems to me that it is a net gain and not a loss at all.

And among my friends and folks they know I have heard similar stories. There was a package producer who had sales on packages because they had more than they could sell at the time they wanted to sell them. In other words, they had more bees than they knew what to do with. 

So where's the loss? Really.


----------



## sqkcrk

Maybe the first question should have been, "Did you increase your colony count this year?"


----------



## WBVC

What is your routine treatment protocol for 3 treatments a year?



jim lyon said:


> Listened to a presentation by Dr. VanEnglesdorp at the annual AHPA convention. He referred to last years survey as "an incredibly rich data set" and broke down last years report saying what was clear was that commercials fared better than hobbyists or side liners and that commercials who migrated did better than those who didn't. Migratory commercials who treated for mites 3 times annually had the lowest loss figures of anyone. Interestingly those who treated more than 3 times didn't fare as well. Of course, as with any survey, it's only as good as the quality of the data that goes. I answered it, and answered honestly. I would hope most that participated did so as well. Coincidentally, or maybe not, I treated 3 times last year and was pretty happy with the quality of our bees.


----------



## rwurster

sqkcrk said:


> Maybe the first question should have been, "Did you increase your colony count this year?"


Well, the survey does cover that along with losses (absconds etc).


----------



## Michael Palmer

jim lyon said:


> I typically have more summer "losses" than winter "losses" but I requeen everything each year. I think of it more as queen failures, though, and it usually falls somewhere between 10 and 20%. These summer queen "flameouts" just seems to be a pretty common refrain among a lot of commercials. I don't usually lose more than about 10% through the winter in Texas. The key is that the remainder are pretty darn good bees so I just factor it all in when I decide how many I want to start the year with.


When moving bees for apples, I always had some come up queenless. I've been told that 10% was about normal, although I never saw that high a %. My question is, hasn't it always been like that. Isn't that about normal? Migratory pollinators take their losses, move the operation back south after summer locations, and re-build. Why now is it something new and a huge problem?


----------



## jim lyon

Michael Palmer said:


> When moving bees for apples, I always had some come up queenless. I've been told that 10% was about normal, although I never saw that high a %. My question is, hasn't it always been like that. Isn't that about normal? Migratory pollinators take their losses, move the operation back south after summer locations, and re-build. Why now is it something new and a huge problem?


Something new? Hardly. Keeping our numbers up has been a yearly challenge as long as I have been in the business. The only difference is pre varroa our losses were primarily winter losses while now we seem to take more losses throughout the summer. 
Bee losses have become so politicized it's hard for the average person with all the sensationalizing, to understand what is happening. Frankly, it's in almost no ones best interest to concede whatever is going on is just part of the cyclical nature of bee health. Bee "losses" are a great story for the media and potential income for beekeepers who have also become a natural ally for environmental groups. Who can be against saving the bees?


----------



## Barry

Here is CBS's take on the situation: http://youtu.be/IvV35zRZBCU

Seems like every time there is a news report on the decline of the honey bee it's always Hackenberg being the spokesperson for the industry. And what is he sliding back onto the top bars at 1:48?


----------



## sqkcrk

CBS contacted me as the President of the Empire State Honey Producers Association for a suggestion of someone they could talk to about this and I gave them a name. By the time I did it was probably too late.

David is a known quantity when it comes to the media. He's probably already in their files when bee stories come up. He is always available and he gives good quotes. That's why he's the spokesperson. There are others, but David is available and doesn't have to clear anything with anybody before he speaks. He isn't constrained by his position or job. He's a free agent.


----------



## Barry

And clearly, from reading the input from other commercial beekeepers in this thread, his experience isn't a balanced representation of the industry.


----------



## sqkcrk

Taken with other input you can get a balanced representation of the industry. I doubt that CBS or the WSJ were going for balance. They go for what sells.


----------



## Barry

Yes, we expect that from the news industry, but I see it also comes from the bee industry.


----------



## sqkcrk

I don't follow you. What do you expect from individuals? "This is how I see things and this is how others see things."? We only know what CBS put in the report.


----------



## Barry

I expect one of the big players in the bee industry to have a good pulse on the industry as a whole and give a balanced report when interviewed. If he was misrepresented by CBS, where is the public statement of this? He's been in the media for years now ever since CCD first came on the scene. He's been in documentaries as well. The repeated message coming from him has always been "the sky is falling." A very different message than what I hear from Keith, Jim, Michael, Mark, etc. I don't know him at all, but I know his message very well. Is it a fair representation of the whole?


----------



## Ian

In some beekeepers eyes the sky is falling and they are screaming to get help to hold it up. In other beekeepers eyes they know the sky is falling but find a way to hold it up themselves. 
I think we need both types. The ones bringing the industry awareness and others who find solutions internally. Some of the media hype is crap but even I am using it as leverage to push my 'local' campaign. I don't believe it but I use it and it has helped gain public support to greatly reduce ditch spraying of my RM ditches.


----------



## Daniel Y

We had well over 50% losses but I attribute it to serous drought last summer. poor quality queens as a result that simply could not make it through winter. Hives that did make it are struggling this spring. As far as making any money I could call it very near 100% losses. To split to make up for any of the losses would come at the price of sacrificing any honey production.


----------



## Barry Digman

Barry said:


> Yes, we expect that from the news industry, but I see it also comes from the bee industry.


About that "industry" thing...

Beekeeping used to be an industry which encompassed the diseases and pests associated with the actual keeping of bees. CCD has become an industry unto itself, along with the need to generate the inputs needed to sustain itself separately from beekeeping.


----------



## sqkcrk

Barry said:


> I expect one of the big players in the bee industry to have a good pulse on the industry as a whole and give a balanced report when interviewed. ... Is it a fair representation of the whole?


I just got through talking to a friend of mine who is perhaps the second largest beekeeper in NY State. He says that the report and Dave's POV is pretty much right on for large commercial operations, that they replace queens more than once a year, and that easily 40% of managed colonies die during any 12 month period.

I don't know any better than anyone else. I am skeptical by nature, you know me. BIP has good intentions, but what's the up side? What is the magic bullet? What is the management practice that has to be changed or implemented to change the outlook? I don't see that coming from anyone. Back in 2010 the ABF Conference was all about "Keeping The Hive Alive". Catchy logo. But I don't recall anything that improved the situation.

Shoot, one of the biggest outfits in the Nation is selling out to an Almond Grower. What does that tell you? Cut and run, perhaps? I'm sure Dave Mendes doesn't see it that way. But it's easy enough to look at it that way.


----------



## jim lyon

Barry said:


> I expect one of the big players in the bee industry to have a good pulse on the industry as a whole and give a balanced report when interviewed. If he was misrepresented by CBS, where is the public statement of this? He's been in the media for years now ever since CCD first came on the scene. He's been in documentaries as well. The repeated message coming from him has always been "the sky is falling." A very different message than what I hear from Keith, Jim, Michael, Mark, etc. I don't know him at all, but I know his message very well. Is it a fair representation of the whole?


I don't know Barry, I just don't know. I can only say the tone of the CBS report doesn't reflect the beekeeping world I live in. I am a bit surprised at the tone struck by Mr. Delaplane. Queens (even newly mated ones) have been going out in the summer at a higher rate for quite some time. I didn't realize that was an alarming new development I've been hearing beekeepers grumbling about poor queens for quite some time. I think some folks have some pretty good theories on the queen failure rate as well. I generally find bees that go into the winter strong usually come out strong. That's my story and I'm sticking to it. 
BTW is anybody aware of any crops that didn't get pollinated anywhere (including almonds) in the past year because of a shortage of available hives to rent? Am I the only one that finds it remarkable that the industry is able to come up with somewhere around 1 1/2 million strong hives each February and quite a few more stay in Florida chasing a citrus crop. Sorry, but I'm just not hearing the alarm bells going off yet.


----------



## sqkcrk

"BTW is anybody aware of any crops that didn't get pollinated anywhere (including almonds) in the past year because of a shortage of available hives to rent? Am I the only one that finds it remarkable that the industry is able to come up with somewhere around 1 1/2 million strong hives each February and quite a few more stay in Florida chasing a citrus crop. Sorry, but I'm just not hearing the alarm bells going off yet."

Jim, that's something I have been pointing out for the last half dozen years or so. If there is a shortage of bees how is it taht all the crops get pollinated?

In our discussion about the "40% loss", I asked my friend "What would happen if instead of 40% of the bees dying off annually we had 40% of the commercial beekeepers die in one year, where would we be then?" "The other 60% would fill the gap." is what my friend said.

It isn't biology/ecology, it's economics. The economics of modern commercial beekeeping is what keeps things going.

As per "the beekeeping industry", this is a term that many beekeepers, hobbyist mostly I believe, reject. They don't see themselves as part of the Industry. I don't know if I could define today's beekeeping industry. Anybody want to take a stab at it?


----------



## beemandan

jim lyon said:


> I am a bit surprised at the tone struck by Mr. Delaplane.


What did he say?.
Edit: No need to reply Jim....I found it.


----------



## aunt betty

If my livelyhood depended on almonds, I think I would also become a beekeeper. 

Naw...that's too much work, just hire other people to do it and tell them to take their bees and leave when I'm done with them. Trucking bees all over the world is why we have a problem. 

I just bought packages from...another state and when I got them there were no inspection tags, nothing. Is there anybody out there watching this stuff? The check got cashed so...


----------



## sqkcrk

Then I guess you will be "Buying Local" next year, aunt betty?


----------



## camero7

> I just bought packages from...another state and when I got them there were no inspection tags, nothing. Is there anybody out there watching this stuff? The check got cashed so...


Good luck buying local packages in Illinois.


----------



## Daniel Y

aunt betty said:


> If my livelyhood depended on almonds, I think I would also become a beekeeper.
> 
> Naw...that's too much work, just hire other people to do it and tell them to take their bees and leave when I'm done with them. Trucking bees all over the world is why we have a problem.
> 
> I just bought packages from...another state and when I got them there were no inspection tags, nothing. Is there anybody out there watching this stuff? The check got cashed so...


Seems to me you would be watching. That is how I've always kept animals. That is why it surprised me a bit that there are no quarantine measures when it comes to bees. But then when they area all sick and everyone has pretty much resigned themselves to that fact it begins to make some since.


----------



## sqkcrk

Quarantined at the border into CA? They do travel with health certificates and are inspected at the State Line. Why quarantine them?


----------



## Michael Palmer

jim lyon said:


> I generally find bees that go into the winter strong usually come out strong. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.


I'm with you.


----------



## jim lyon

Ag departments have neither the manpower or the funding to do much more than token inspections. My experience is maybe 1 in 500 even get opened up. Sometimes they might just ask for a sworn affidavit that you are controlling infectious disease. Mostly they are trying to spot poorly run operations. If you have a history of running a clean operation inspections and permits are mostly formalities. In the case of California, they are much more concerned about what is on the hives than what's in the hives.


----------



## sqkcrk

Maybe in SD, but in NY, supposedly 10 out of 100 get looked at before Health Certificates are issued. I maintain that's too low to know. Disease is too easy to miss inspecting 4 out of 40 hives per yard. But that's what they say they are doing. And when I was employed to do it, that's what I did.


----------



## jim lyon

South Dakota has something "north" of 250,000 hives placed for honey production each year and no more than maybe 3 or 4 inspectors and they spend much of their time refereeing spats between beekeepers.


----------



## beeware10

when I inspected for ny we had to inspect 100%. that was a lot of fun in aug with 4 plus deeps with the summer crop on. don't miss those days.


----------



## sqkcrk

jim lyon said:


> South Dakota has something "north" of 250,000 hives placed for honey production each year and no more than maybe 3 or 4 inspectors and they spend much of their time refereeing spats between beekeepers.


I bet that's time consuming. Spats get kicked upstairs in NY.


----------



## sqkcrk

beeware10 said:


> when I inspected for ny we had to inspect 100%. that was a lot of fun in aug with 4 plus deeps with the summer crop on. don't miss those days.


Didn't you also work in crews and with the beekeeper and crew present?


----------

