# Keys to Treatment Free Beekeeping



## Slow Drone

8. Read squarepegs threads in the treatment free forum.


----------



## JeronimoJC

LOL I tried. 35 pages of posts. Do you have the Cliff Notes so we can add them to post #1?


----------



## K Wieland

You haven't mentioned any monitoring of mite levels. Also, the package bees I got must have been treated, as they didn't have any mites on them. I don't see the drawback in using package bees, as long as you get your genetics from a good queen.


----------



## J.Lee

Captured feral colonies are about the best way to go. You happen to live in Washington State though and I would look seriously at Olympic Wilderness Apiaries. I have ran their stock in my bee yard and had great luck with them. According to their website there is alot of feral blood in their stock. Good queens are crucial if you want to be treatment free. I am treatment free for five years. Can not comment on other hive types. I only run Langstroth hives. I do not think using frames disrupts a hive. They have been around alot longer than me. I do think screened bottoms or bottom boards are great both in resistance to varroa mites and reducing humidity in the hive. I am starting to think North Carolina is becoming a rain forest with the weather we have had in the last five years. I could not agree with you more that swarming is good. It is what bees did LONG before mankind and his manipulations came along. More space will help when the spring expansion comes along. Good luck with treatment free. Hope this helps.


----------



## Clairesmom

J.Lee said:


> Captured feral colonies are about the best way to go.


From Randy Oliver's Scientific Beekeeping website:


_If we were to let Nature play her hand freely, mite-susceptible lines of bees would rarely get strong enough to swarm, and their drones would be hampered in their ability to mate. Therefore, the genes for nonresistant bees would not be passed on to subsequent generations. However, when we rescue these colonies with chemical treatments, we thwart Mother Nature in her ruthless selection process, and thereby perpetuate nonresistant bees in the feral population. Those danged swarms will then come back to haunt us when they eventually collapse, and our managed bees gleefully bring the mites back in the process of plundering the deadouts.

The main mode of mite immigration into colonies appears to be from the robbing out of collapsing colonies, as opposed to by drifting or absconding bees (Goodwin, et at. 2006). As long as we keep restocking the feral colonies with nonresistant swarms, we just create a huge reservoir of mites that will screw up our best efforts at varroa management. Natural swarms produce far more drone combs than managed colonies on foundation. Varroa reproduction is therefore far greater, leading to the relatively rapid collapse of swarms.
_


----------



## Clairesmom

J.Lee said:


> I could not agree with you more that swarming is good. It is what bees did LONG before mankind and his manipulations came along.


um, long before mankind came along, we were not BEEKEEPERS. 

I disagree that swarming is good, if your intent is to be a beekeeper. See my post, above.


----------



## Nordak

From everything I've researched and read, including success and failure stories here on Bee Source, location probably has more to do with success than anything. As with all things beekeeping, and witnessed above, you will get 100 different answers from 100 different beeks, and there is probably some truth to all of it. You just have to learn how to interpret those answers, and figure out what works in your location. I am still in my beekeeping infancy, but having a blast figuring it out. Have fun, and best of luck.


----------



## JeronimoJC

Clairesmom said:


> um, long before mankind came along, we were not BEEKEEPERS.
> 
> I disagree that swarming is good, if your intent is to be a beekeeper. See my post, above.


The term "beekeeper" in your post could very well lead to a relevant discussion on the approach or attitude (dominator, steward, partner, or participant) towards beekeeping. However, I don't think that's where you intended to go. 

Regarding the post you quoted, I interpreted it as supporting that swarming is good. I guess it depends on the point of view. An excerpt from your quote states:



Clairesmom said:


> As long as we keep restocking the feral colonies with nonresistant swarms, we just create a huge reservoir of mites that will screw up our best efforts at varroa management.


The premise here is that the beekeper has a colony of bees that isn't strong enough to fight off mites. Therefore simply letting the bees swarm is not a good thing for the bee population nor for the beekeeping community. 

If on the other hand, the beekeper has a colony that has the right genes to fight off mites then certainly swarming would be a good thing. On one hand swarming would be good for the bee population and the beekeeping community. On the other hand, swarming would also provide the colony with a brood break which can help in breaking the mite cycle. 

So I guess it boils down to whether the colony has good or bad genes and has learned how to coexist with mites. This leads me back to item 6 *(A GOOD QUEEN)*. Feral queens and colonies (as J. Lee pointed out) may be the way to go. These colonies have, one way or another, figured out how to coexist with mites treatment free. 

This also leads me to Wieland's post. 


K Wieland said:


> ... Also, the package bees I got must have been treated, as they didn't have any mites on them. I don't see the drawback in using package bees, as long as you get your genetics from a good queen.


Package bees haven't had to coexist with mites because they didn't have to, as a result of continuous treatments. It may very well be that these bees have great genes, but these bees would be at a great disadvantage the very first time they encounter mites.

Just my 2 cents.


----------



## JeronimoJC

J.Lee said:


> I do not think using frames disrupts a hive. They have been around alot longer than me. I do think screened bottoms or bottom boards are great both in resistance to varroa mites and reducing humidity in the hive.





Nordak said:


> From everything I've researched and read, including success and failure stories here on Bee Source, location probably has more to do with success than anything.


I think Nordak makes a relevant point here. The point I made about frames was related to hive temperatures. Certainly a top bar hive colony would manage temperatures differently than a Langstroth hive. This may make no difference in North Carolina, but it could in Washington. I honestly don't know. 

Screened bottoms could very well follow the same logic. As I pointed out earlier, mites don't do well at the ideal hive temperature. Therefore, I'll do what I can to help my bees maintain those ideal temperatures and it looks like that may include closing the screened bottoms, at least in cold weather.

The other point regarding frames, which I didn't make in the first post, relates to letting bees do what they know is best. Bees will adapt to survive. They would change cell size, comb spacing, comb shape, etc as soon as we let them. The problem is that what bees prefer may not be convenient for humans. 

I'd say that to be treatment free we may need to rely more on the natural instinct of bees. I think you would agree frames are not part of their natural instinct.


----------



## enjambres

I'm sorry but I think swarming is not a good idea, not the end of the world, but not something to plan on doing, for the good of managed bees even if it is a natural occurence in unmanaged bees. 

Aside from the fact that most swarms do not survive, a swarm takes with it your carefully selected TF-promoting queen and replaces her in the second generation with a queen with one-half local genetics, which may very well be more of a commercial strain.

I think the most important thing for a would-be TF beekeeper (and I doubt there is any beekeeper who wouldn't be TF, if they could) to do at the outset is learn how to keep bees as their first goal. That may sound like a silly statement, but TF-bees are still bees and keeping any kind of bees alive, thriving and in good health over the long term is a fairly big challenge all by itself. TF-beekeeping is not easier than conventional beekeeping - no matter what is claimed on the internet.

My bees are all from swarms, some likely to be feral origin since I live in an area with a still-extant feral population, and I am happy to say they are all still alive, thriving and in good health in their fourth summer with me, but it has taken a good deal of effort and intense focus to stay in that happy state. 

The very best advice I got in my first year was to keep things simple, and that meant forgoing any of the fancy hive-styles, arcane beekeeping systems, etc. My bees live in ordinary Langs, on plastic frames, and they are doing extravagantly well largely because I take common-sense steps to keep varroa under control. 

The idea that warmth in the brood chamber, by itself, will even constrain, much less control varroa is incorrect. Otherwise beekeepers in Brownsville, TX, Yuma, Arizona or Miami, FL would be free of mite issues, and they manifestly are not. Bees keep their brood nests at the correct temps for the brood under all natural conditions. There are some devices on the market that claim to heat the brood area to a higher temp, enough to kill or impair varroa, but it is claimed, not harm the bees. This may be true, but it is not TF-beekeeping, nor can anything like it be obtained by the bees themselves, or hive designs. Because if the brood gets too warm, or conversely starts to chill, beyond a very tight parameters they will give up their lives to try and maintain the correct temps.

I'm not suggesting I think TF is impossible, just that it is not something that novices can simply jump into with little experience and good intentions, despite what is claimed on the internet. Some aspects of TF beekeeping are fundamentally sound practices for most, or even all, bees. Some are utter hooey, but novice beekeepers can't tell which is which.

My advice: get some bees, put 'em in a couple of Langs and learn how to keep them alive and and thriving with the minimal intervention needed to suppress varroa in your area. After a few years success with that approach you will be ready to sort through all the TF ideas using your hard-won knowledge of beekeeping and be better able to choose which of the TF approaches may work best in your area. Then all it takes is to requeen your existing colonies with TF-queens and you're in the game. In six weeks all your bees will be TF.

Enj.


----------



## beemandan

JeronimoJC said:


> *SWARMING IS GOOD:* Swarming disrupts the brood cycle, which may give the colony a chance to break the mite cycle.


Whether or not a brood break helps with mite management is still a question in my mind.
But...in my opinion swarming is NOT good. Many swarms will ultimately become a nuisance to your neighbors. They will settle in the walls of houses. They may choose a low entrance to a structure or tree near a path traveled by children. Everybody doesn't want your bees in their face. As a responsible beekeeper it up to you to make a reasonable effort to be a good neighbor.
Just my opinion.


----------



## Michael Bush

>LOTS OF HONEY (Oscar Perone)

I don't see how this works exactly... you mean LEAVING them adequate honey? Adequate should be the operative word. Too much may be more than they can guard or use and that's not very beneficial to the beekeeper. You need to take the excess so they don't have to guard it and you get some honey...

>LOTS OF SPACE (Oscar Perone)

I totally disagree. The right amount of space should be the goal.
http://www.bushfarms.com/beesspace.htm

>LOTS OF PEACE (Oscar Perone)
If you mean leaving them alone most of the time, I can't disagree with that, but I don't see that it is directly related to being treatment free.

>PROPER HIVE TEMPERATURE (Various)
The bees take care of this if you let them and don't interfere by trying to give them too much ventilation.

>SWARMING IS GOOD (Various)
For the species? Sure. For the beekeeper? Not at all. If they swarm you not only don't get any honey, but you have less bees. If you would have split them instead they would be in your hive instead of the trees.
http://www.bushfarms.com/beesswarmcontrol.htm

>A GOOD QUEEN (Bernhard Heuvel comes to mind)
Again, this is true of any beekeeping.

>AVOID PACKAGE BEES
This is a recent issue. I used to have very good luck with package bees... but in recent years, not so much.

My bullet points:
http://www.bushfarms.com/beesfoursimplesteps.htm


----------



## Daniel Y

On the topic of Hive temperature and the comment about ventilation. In general how many find it helpful while heating or cooling their homes to open the windows? This does nto sound right to me. The air in the home is conditioned. you want to keep it.

So do the bees "Condition" the air of the hive? Take the issue of heating the hive in winter. many if not most argue that of course they do. that would be the reason to add insulation etc. yet those same comments are often followed by but leave an opening for ventilation. Sort of like turn up the heat and open the door in my opinion.

I personally do not think the bees heat the hive, they heat the cluster. no animal other than man is known to heat the air around them. they heat themselves. Animals do not need warm rooms. they only need to remain warm themselves. We are the only ones that think the room has to be warm in order for us to be warm.

Finally do bees actively cool the hive. I have found several sources that say they do as well as descriptions as to how. once again turn up the air conditioning and open the windows. Given the bees cooling method is evaporative cooling and that even a swamp cooler in a home works better with at least one window cracked. there may be some benefit in this case to some ventilation.

For the most part though I think temperature control in the hive is best achieved with as little ventilation as possible. I make on opening in my hives and want it no bigger than 3 square inches. it is smaller than that most of the time. I want my bees to be able to control the temperature inside the hive. I see problems with this with simple wood hive. I think bees would do better with more temperature stable materials. Mainly ones that do not allow the interior to heat up.


----------



## Michael Bush

>So do the bees "Condition" the air of the hive?

Yes. But there are other factors. They have to evaporate water to cool it. They have to create water (through metabolism) to warm it. They have to get rid of moisture to make nectar into honey. So eliminating moisture from the air is part of the issue.

> Take the issue of heating the hive in winter. many if not most argue that of course they do. that would be the reason to add insulation etc. yet those same comments are often followed by but leave an opening for ventilation. Sort of like turn up the heat and open the door in my opinion.

I agree to some degree. They have to breath (get 02) and they have to get rid of moisture so the door needs to be somewhat open. By keeping it small you give the bees control over the environment.

>I personally do not think the bees heat the hive, they heat the cluster. no animal other than man is known to heat the air around them. they heat themselves. Animals do not need warm rooms. they only need to remain warm themselves. We are the only ones that think the room has to be warm in order for us to be warm.

From late winter on they are rearing brood. And the part of the "room" where the brood is has to be 93 F...

>Finally do bees actively cool the hive. 

Yes.

>I have found several sources that say they do as well as descriptions as to how. once again turn up the air conditioning and open the windows. Given the bees cooling method is evaporative cooling and that even a swamp cooler in a home works better with at least one window cracked. there may be some benefit in this case to some ventilation.

SOME, yes.


----------



## JeronimoJC

Hey guys, I really appreciate all your comments. I would love to address each one specifically, but to attempt to keep the dialog focused on what the key elements are I think it is best I address the specific items rather than the specific posts. I'll update post #1 to try to reconcile the various thoughts. New edits are shown in red. 

Please keep the conversation going. I am learning a bunch here.


----------



## heaflaw

Location

Location

Location

Your neighbor's hives need to be treatment free survivors also. If not, then each supercedure or swarm of your hives will lesson the good genetics that you have. And swarms in your area may or may not be from treatment free stock.


----------



## JeronimoJC

Valid comment, but I think the maintaining a GOOD QUEEN addresses that. In addition, please check out this other post and article:



JeronimoJC said:


> I came across a study you may find interesting. http://pubag.nal.usda.gov/pubag/downloadPDF.xhtml?id=22462&content=PDF
> 
> The study indicated a breeder queen mated with a breeder drone experienced lower bee population growth than a breeder queen mated with a natural drone. There wasn't a firm conclusion as to why, but one theory was: "a problem with the inseminations (e.g., diluting and mixing of semen, an insufÞcient quantity of semen, or queen storage before insemination)."
> 
> 
> Interestingly, the study also conclude a breeder queen mated with a natural drone (openly mated) successfully carried the suppression of mite trait they were testing.


----------



## Nordak

This is regarding daughter queens, which would still carry the necessary traits to combat varroa related issues. The problems would start to arise in the third generation queens and on if no viable mechanisms for resistance exist in the open population, as heaflaw was stating. Dilution into the open population is inevitable. That can be really bad, or not so much depending on your surroundings. To combat a negative mating environment , you would need to keep a line of mother and daughter queens going.


----------



## JeronimoJC

Nordak said:


> To combat a negative mating environment , you would need to keep a line of mother and daughter queens going.


Agreed! There needs to be some sort of measure to maintain "A GOOD QUEEN".


----------



## Nordak

Yes, but what's good for me probably isn't good for a guy trying to make a living off a honey crop. It's all relative to what you view as success. If all you want to do is raise bees off of treatments, I am positive that you could do it conditionally. Just determine what you want, and let that define your actions. There is plenty of room for failure, and learning opportunities.


----------



## Harley Craig

heaflaw said:


> Location
> 
> Location
> 
> Location
> 
> Your neighbor's hives need to be treatment free survivors also. If not, then each supercedure or swarm of your hives will lesson the good genetics that you have. And swarms in your area may or may not be from treatment free stock.


there are 4 other beekeepers that keep bees within flight distance of my bees, me and one other guy guy are the only non treaters and neither of us have any major issues. We flood the DCAs with drones to make up for the medicated bees.


----------



## Nordak

Harley Craig said:


> there are 4 other beekeepers that keep bees within flight distance of my bees, me and one other guy guy are the only non treaters and neither of us have any major issues. We flood the DCAs with drones to make up for the medicated bees.


I think this is a good example of the cooperative effort some have been utilizing in regard to creating TF buffer zones. SP posted about a group in Ohio that was working toward it and having good success. Hopefully he'll update if he ever hears from them.


----------



## JeronimoJC

Harley Craig said:


> We flood the DCAs with drones to make up for the medicated bees.


Where is the like button? Like!


----------



## trishbookworm

Some 2 cents (references to: http://www.bushfarms.com/beesfoursimplesteps.htm)

My understanding is that it is easy to be treatment free for the 1st summer hive... it is the 2nd summer and later hive that you have to watch. That changes the first year picture for me, since a 1st summer hive often has low mite load even if they will get hammered next year. I'm still monitoring but I"m not likely to be faced with the "treat or let nature take it's course...whatever that is" scenario this year. Nice to think that just treating would fix it, right? But, see link above, and...

My reason for TF approach is simple - if the bees do die over the winter, I want to be able to harvest the honey and not wonder whether mite treatment is in it. I should mention I have TBHs so I can't just take a super off; and even for people with boxes, there can be a lot of honey in the brood box that becomes suspect if the beeK treated and then the bees died. I'd rather lose the 2 yr old hive every year (and make splits so I don't feel the loss) that wonder about that.

Of course you can just plan on feeding the deadout's brood frames to the next bees - but I want the choice. Now how to achieve that and not risk flooding the neighborhood with mite-infested bees if things go south... :/ so far mite loads low, 0 or 2 in 300 bees, but it is the first year for my 4 HTBH colonies!


----------



## JeronimoJC

Daniel Y said:


> I personally do not think the bees heat the hive, they heat the cluster. no animal other than man is known to heat the air around them. they heat themselves. Animals do not need warm rooms. they only need to remain warm themselves. We are the only ones that think the room has to be warm in order for us to be warm.
> 
> For the most part though I think temperature control in the hive is best achieved with as little ventilation as possible. I make on opening in my hives and want it no bigger than 3 square inches. it is smaller than that most of the time. I want my bees to be able to control the temperature inside the hive. I see problems with this with simple wood hive. I think bees would do better with more temperature stable materials. Mainly ones that do not allow the interior to heat up.


I came across a study by Clayton Len Farrar that supports your position. 



> 29. ...The cluster does not radiate heat to the unoccupied part of the hive, as a stove radiates heat to a room.
> 30. The entrance of the hive when reduced bears a similar relation to this unoccupied space as an open door does to a full sized room.
> 31. The value of wind protection and hive insulation in reducing the expenditure of bee energy is obtained through the reduction in the rate of temperature changes, thus permitting the cluster to adjust itself gradually; it is not obtained by the retention of heat radiated by the cluster.


Thus, you are correct:
1) Bees do not heat the hive. They heat themselves.
2) The temperature of the unoccupied space is related to the size of the opening (ventilation)
3) "Temperature stable materials" = Insulation (and in my opinion, including comb) helps reduce the rate of temperature changes, which reduces expenditures in bee energy.


----------



## JeronimoJC

Michael Bush said:


> >LOTS OF SPACE (Oscar Perone)
> I totally disagree. The right amount of space should be the goal.
> http://www.bushfarms.com/beesspace.htm


Michael,
I edited post 1 a few days ago to address your comment. I believe the intent with this item was to ALLOW the colony to grow and be of substantial size. The use of followers may be a good practice. 

Your website states:


> "I used to find it very confusing when people would talk about always keeping strong hives. It seemed to me that a nuc or a split was always weak, by definition, but I will offer a new definition. A strong colony is merely a colony with a good density of bees."


This makes good sense too. However, I'd like to add that there are many benefits to having a large colony vs. a small one. One benefit that has multiple positive implications was pointed out by C. L. Farrar:


> Bees die at an earlier age in small colonies than in large ones. The rearing of proportionally large amounts of brood shortens the life of bees below that of bees in colonies where brood-rearing is less intense...


Large colonies => longer bee life-spans. Large colonies require LOTS OF SPACE, but I agree that managed space is even better.

Thanks for your input.


----------



## mike bispham

Harley Craig said:


> there are 4 other beekeepers that keep bees within flight distance of my bees, me and one other guy guy are the only non treaters and neither of us have any major issues. We flood the DCAs with drones to make up for the medicated bees.


I try to dominate my area with force of numbers, and believe my natural approach to selection on the male side makes a big difference. This is: I (don't treat or mess at all and...) run unlimited brood nests on natural cell. That means the stronger hives make many more drones than the weaker ones, and the air is filled with the drones I want. Those whose drone comb is filled with mites of course make way fewer drones.

Its my belief that messing with this natural mechanism could, alone, account for much of the health problem beekeepers experience. Without the strong-make-more stuff going on on the male side you've lost an essential health-maintenance mechanism. Systematically limiting brood nests, using printed wax and even raking out drone cells all fatally interfere with an essential device - a variant of natural selection by strength. 

What I like about my 'management' is I don't have to do anything - what needs to happen happens all on its own!

Mike (UK)


----------



## Riverderwent

mike bispham said:


> That means the stronger hives make many more drones than the weaker ones, and the air is filled with the drones I want. Those whose drone comb is filled with mites of course make way fewer drones.


That makes sense and applies particularly to feral hives which have no artificial restriction on brood comb. Meaning drones available for mating are typically weighted toward any feral hives in the area and particularly toward feral hives with fewer mites. I use mostly foundationless frames in the brood chamber which allows drone cells. But I typically have a queen excluder above only three eight frame boxes for brood. So I don't have unlimited brood chambers. I don't have any rationale for only using the equivalent of 1½ ten frame deep boxes other than that I have been doing that and have not had noticeable colony losses of mature hives.


----------



## Fusion_power

It helps a lot if there are other beekeepers you can swap queens with. Small numbers of queens eventually lead to inbreeding. Bringing in a queen from someone else who is treatment free can significantly increase production and other desirable traits.


----------



## DaisyNJ

I just finished reading a collection of thoughts (word doc) from SamComfort. From what I gather, he is saying the following for successful TF

* Keep splitting (or swarming) and dont target to make the hive too big, crowded etc
* Dont push bees for honey production (not to the level of what one might expect / get from treatment colony)
* Encourage brood breaks (means dont feed during dearth)
* Do feed if they dont have enough winter stores
* Harvest old comb out

Interestingly, I asked our local Nuc producer on why she switched from Russians to VSH Italians / Carnis. Her response was that Russians were swarming crazy and she things that was their primary way of keep mites in check.


----------



## mike bispham

DaisyNJ said:


> I just finished reading a collection of thoughts (word doc) from SamComfort. From what I gather, he is saying the following for successful TF


Much more important than all of these: have resistant bees, and work to keep them resistant down the generations. Monkeying with them to 'help' them cope with mites just means you're masking the problem, and keeping alive bees that ought to be replaced by better adapted ones. 

Adaptation, or resistance, or whatever you want to call, is the key. Its useful to think of this rather like (as is said) a shark has to keep swimming, or it sinks. Similarly, lifeforms have to be subjected to natural (or unnatural) selection, in order to just maintain their capability to thrive in the present environment. As soon as you start messing (unless you are careful to take steps to ameliorate your actions) the gene pool starts sinking...

Mike (UK)


----------



## DaisyNJ

mike bispham said:


> *Much more important than all of these: have resistant bees,* and work to keep them resistant down the generations. Monkeying with them to 'help' them cope with mites just means you're masking the problem, and keeping alive bees that ought to be replaced by better adapted ones.
> 
> Adaptation, or resistance, or whatever you want to call, is the key. Its useful to think of this rather like (as is said) a shark has to keep swimming, or it sinks. Similarly, lifeforms have to be subjected to natural (or unnatural) selection, in order to just maintain their capability to thrive in the present environment. As soon as you start messing (unless you are careful to take steps to ameliorate your actions) the gene pool starts sinking...
> 
> Mike (UK)


While I agree its important to have proper genetics, I am not sure folks who actually did TF for many years agree thats THE most important thing. In that same book Sam cautions against droping TF queens into infested or weak colonies. He also cautions against DWV and other virus spreading if the colonies are pushed / manipulated to keep high in numbers. So management (and setting right expectations) seem lot more important.

BTW, I got few Sam queens this year and put them into Nucs for overwintering. Cant wait to see how they come out of 2017 spring.


----------



## Nordak

mike bispham said:


> Much more important than all of these: have resistant bees, and work to keep them resistant down the generations. Monkeying with them to 'help' them cope with mites just means you're masking the problem, and keeping alive bees that ought to be replaced by better adapted ones.
> 
> Adaptation, or resistance, or whatever you want to call, is the key. Its useful to think of this rather like (as is said) a shark has to keep swimming, or it sinks. Similarly, lifeforms have to be subjected to natural (or unnatural) selection, in order to just maintain their capability to thrive in the present environment. As soon as you start messing (unless you are careful to take steps to ameliorate your actions) the gene pool starts sinking...
> 
> Mike (UK)


What you call monkeying, I see as management techniques. I don't necessarily agree with every single point Sam makes here (most), but I don't think when failure occurs, you can scratch it up to "genetics" every time even when you have the most resistant, prolific bees in the world. Its often the beekeeper that practices poor hive management that results in failure of a colony. My guess here is Sam's style of management is trying to be in tune with the bees natural rhythm in a feral setting.


----------



## DaisyNJ

And BTW, I am not down playing the importance of genetics, just noting that experienced TF keepers seem to suggest very balanced approach between genetics, management, environment and expectations. Many also suggested a very diversified drone population for the queen mating, again, looking for long term species survivability rather than just today's problem. 

On the topic, came across this 

"This study suggests that RHB (Russian Honey Bee) showed some degree of resistant to DWV as shown by no reduction on weight and numerically lower proportion of wing deformity when compared with the other bee stocks."

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1226861516302084


----------



## Nordak

DaisyNJ said:


> expectations


I think that's my worry in regard to new beeks who buy packages and decide to practice the Bond method, only later to claim that TF doesn't work. 

Genetics are the base to which you apply the methods. It doesn't work otherwise. I hope I didn't seem to downplay that. Without the proper genetics, you have a hive that is destined to crash and burn practicing TF management or lack thereof in terms of Bond scenarios.


----------



## mike bispham

Nordak said:


> What you call monkeying, I see as management techniques. I don't necessarily agree with every single point Sam makes here (most), but I don't think when failure occurs, you can scratch it up to "genetics" every time even when you have the most resistant, prolific bees in the world.


If you have reasonably adapted bees then your failure rate will be no greater than is normal for healthy environment-adjusted bees; and that's not 'failure'.



Nordak said:


> Its often the beekeeper that practices poor hive management that results in failure of a colony.


I don't 'manage' - or rather my 'management' is: 'Don't manage'. What is important to recognise is that short-term help turns (unless you are very careful) into long-term damage. Bees aren't pets, they are livestock, and should be managed as such. Trying to save every one, helping every one thrive, doesn't allow you to see which are strongest. And that's something you really need to know, so you can make more from them. 

Of course if you only have a few hives none of this matters a whole lot. But you should recognise then; that you are part of the problem, not part of the solution. If you can join up with more beekeepers in your area, and start improving the health of the breeding pool, then you can make a difference - you can make an adapted strain of bee that others can make use of. 



Nordak said:


> My guess here is Sam's style of management is trying to be in tune with the bees natural rhythm in a feral setting.


That's fine; but the most fundamental 'rhythm' in nature is natural selection for the fittest strain. If you're not in tune with that, as I say you are part of the problem. 

Mike (UK)


----------



## Nordak

mike bispham said:


> If you have reasonably adapted bees then your failure rate will be no greater than is normal for healthy environment-adjusted bees; and that's not 'failure'.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't 'manage' - or rather my 'management' is: 'Don't manage'. What is important to recognise is that short-term help turns (unless you are very careful) into long-term damage. Bees aren't pets, they are livestock, and should be managed as such. Trying to save every one, helping every one thrive, doesn't allow you to see which are strongest. And that's something you really need to know, so you can make more from them.
> 
> Of course if you only have a few hives none of this matters a whole lot. But you should recognise then; that you are part of the problem, not part of the solution. If you can join up with more beekeepers in your area, and start improving the health of the breeding pool, then you can make a difference - you can make an adapted strain of bee that others can make use of.
> 
> 
> 
> That's fine; but the most fundamental 'rhythm' in nature is natural selection for the fittest strain. If you're not in tune with that, as I say you are part of the problem.
> 
> Mike (UK)


I think your approach is a very black and white one in an environment where there are so many grays. A tired cliche, but I guess a cliche fits here. I have no problems with different approaches, your hard line is fine. By many standards of beekeeping practices, many would view my management as a hard line in regard to management style. I certainly don't see it as a problem. If you do, that's your business. I don't see beekeeping in terms of "I'm right, you're wrong."


----------



## mike bispham

Nordak said:


> I think your approach is a very black and white one in an environment where there are so many grays. A tired cliche, but I guess a cliche fits here. I have no problems with different approaches, your hard line is fine. By many standards of beekeeping practices, many would view my management as a hard line in regard to management style. I certainly don't see it as a problem. If you do, that's your business. I don't see beekeeping in terms of "I'm right, you're wrong."


I'm just trying to keep clear some facts. Some things help the long term process of keeping bees tf in any area - everywhere. Those things are 'right' in that sense wherever you are.

Other things - like 'monkeying' as I put it, might be solutions to the short term and narrow goal of keeping hives alive and helping them 'thrive' (assisted); but, unless you take great care, they're not helpful in the longer term. In fact they can be harmful in the longer term - no better than chemical treatments _to the aim of raising resistance_. Again, that statement is 'right' everywhere, always.

However, if you are bringing in more resistant genes, then overall probably the effect on the local breeding pool might be positive.

I just think its useful to be clear about what helps in the long term. _Just_ leaning hard on 'management' tricks isn't. 

Mike (UK)


----------



## Nordak

mike bispham said:


> I'm just trying to keep clear some facts. Some things help the long term process of keeping bees tf in any area - everywhere. Those things are 'right' in that sense wherever you are.
> 
> Other things - like 'monkeying' as I put it, might be solutions to the short term and narrow goal of keeping hives alive and helping them 'thrive' (assisted); but, unless you take great care, they're not helpful in the longer term. In fact they can be harmful in the longer term - no better than chemical treatments _to the aim of raising resistance_. Again, that statement is 'right' everywhere, always.
> 
> However, if you are bringing in more resistant genes, then overall probably the effect on the local breeding pool might be positive.
> 
> I just think its useful to be clear about what helps in the long term. _Just_ leaning hard on 'management' tricks isn't.
> 
> Mike (UK)


Sounds like we are on the same page, only in the viewing of Sam Comfort's advice is where we differ. I don't agree with all of it, but for a newbie TF beek, it seems like a good game plan. You have to get comfortable with bees before you can get comfortable with doing nothing I would think.


----------



## mike bispham

Nordak said:


> Sounds like we are on the same page, only in the viewing of Sam Comfort's advice is where we differ. I don't agree with all of it, but for a newbie TF beek, it seems like a good game plan. You have to get comfortable with bees before you can get comfortable with doing nothing I would think.


I agree. And you need a few colonies before you can think about selecting for increase. And if you have ferals you have the wind in your sails!

Mike (UK)


----------



## heaflaw

I agree completely with Mike Bispham and Sam Comfort's natural management style of doing as little interference as possible. 

Another point to consider is that in a natural setting, there is a colony every 1 square mile or so. Keeping your hives spread out as much as possible helps limit transferences of viruses and funguses from drifting and robbing. Keep a couple at friend's houses. Rent some for pollination of neighbor's gardens and fruit trees.


----------



## Nordak

mike bispham said:


> And if you have ferals you have the wind in your sails!
> 
> Mike (UK)


So far, they've been great to me, we will see. Sounds like they've equally blessed you. 

All the best, and keep up the good fight. Have enjoyed reading your insight on the forums, though at times it comes across as berating.


----------



## Fusion_power

> I don't 'manage' - or rather my 'management' is: 'Don't manage'. What is important to recognise is that short-term help turns (unless you are very careful) into long-term damage.


 The problem with this is that bees rapidly revert to the mean. The objective of breeding is to improve performance. When bees revert to the mean, there is no longer an improvement in performance. For this reason, what you are practicing is not breeding, it is just a form of leave-them-alone beekeeping. It still has value. Selecting for survival in an extremely hostile environment concentrates small effect genes which over time develops stock that can be selected for enhanced performance in other areas such as honey production. So from my perspective, if you are also focusing some effort into eliminating the least productive colonies, breeding progress can be made. If you are just letting them survive, they are reverting.


----------



## Harley Craig

Fusion_power said:


> So from my perspective, if you are also focusing some effort into eliminating the least productive colonies, breeding progress can be made. If you are just letting them survive, they are reverting.



I think one needs to work on survival first and that be your base, then once you have bees that survive, of those bees you can start selecting for other traits. For example if I want to make a new colony, I look to my oldest surviving colony for genetic material to raise a queen from. Once I have options say multiple 3-4 yr old colonies to choose from, I can then select from the one that avged the most honey, or were the most gentile, etc


----------



## mike bispham

Fusion_power said:


> The problem with this is that bees rapidly revert to the mean. The objective of breeding is to improve performance.


They don't revert to the mean in terms of varroa vulnerability - my force of numbers and relative isolation combined with natural selection sees to that. And I don't know what let-alone mean is (round here) but it may well be that its pretty productive. I've taken around 80 lbs of honey from one feral colony this year!

What believe is that the hives that do well in terms of getting higher are putting out more drones, and that's a natural mechanism which drives the mean toward decent yields. But I'm also helping by taking my maternal genes from the same stocks. 



Fusion_power said:


> When bees revert to the mean, there is no longer an improvement in performance. For this reason, what you are practicing is not breeding, it is just a form of leave-them-alone beekeeping. It still has value. Selecting for survival in an extremely hostile environment concentrates small effect genes which over time develops stock that can be selected for enhanced performance in other areas such as honey production. So from my perspective, if you are also focusing some effort into eliminating the least productive colonies, breeding progress can be made. If you are just letting them survive, they are reverting.


I don't eliminate any queens because I've often seem the hives come good the next year. It may supercedure that accounts for that. But I follow a rule: 'Everything deserves its chance'. That preserves diversity. I haven't seen the need to break it yet.

Mike (UK)


----------



## mike bispham

Harley Craig said:


> I think one needs to work on survival first and that be your base, then once you have bees that survive, of those bees you can start selecting for other traits. For example if I want to make a new colony, I look to my oldest surviving colony for genetic material to raise a queen from. Once I have options say multiple 3-4 yr old colonies to choose from, I can then select from the one that avged the most honey, or were the most gentile, etc


Yes, that's my rule of thumb. I have a formula someplace in which yield is multiplied by age. I also make splits opportunistically - overcrowded nucs get a nuc-sized lift, build comb, then get split in two for example. I'm aiming for about half my increase from the selected hives, and I mark known beekeepers swarms as 'do not reproduce'. 

Mike (UK)


----------



## costigaj

I am a 1st year keeper and have been studying all aspects of beekeeping including TF. For me this tread is helpful. From what I've read and heard that in addition to factors mentioned here, having a fair number of hives is also important. There is survivability in numbers.


----------



## JeronimoJC

I was hoping to update the first post with your contributions, but for some reason I am unable to. Maybe I got MODERATED!?



DaisyNJ said:


> I just finished reading a collection of thoughts (word doc) from SamComfort. From what I gather, he is saying the following for successful TF
> 
> * Keep splitting (or swarming) and dont target to make the hive too big, crowded etc
> * Dont push bees for honey production (not to the level of what one might expect / get from treatment colony)
> * Encourage brood breaks (means dont feed during dearth)
> * Do feed if they dont have enough winter stores
> * Harvest old comb out
> 
> Interestingly, I asked our local Nuc producer on why she switched from Russians to VSH Italians / Carnis. Her response was that Russians were swarming crazy and she things that was their primary way of keep mites in check.



Daisy, thanks for sharing your summary. Any chance you could provide a link to the document you are referring to?

In trying to reconcile opinions I find some of those points are consistent with the points in post #1. 


 "Don't push bees for honey production" = LOTS OF HONEY 
 "Keep splitting (or swarming)" = SWARMING IS GOOD (It should probably say brood breaks are good) 
 "Encourage brood breaks (means don't feed during dearth)" = See item above about brood breaks.

Possible inconsistencies:

"don't target to make the hive to big, crowded, etc." This may seem contrary to the idea of promoting large and strong colonies. 

"Harvest old comb out". This could go against the LOTS OF PEACE concept. Also, it seems other TF advocates believe old comb is good. 


Any chance you could elaborate more on SamComfort's thoughts on these last two items?


----------



## DaisyNJ

^^^ Here is the doc from Sam I was referring. Its from 2010 and not sure if Sam's experiences changed since then. http://anarchyapiaries.org/hivetools/node/17183


----------



## JWChesnut

JeronimoJC said:


> I was hoping to update the first post with your contributions, but for some reason I am unable to. Maybe I got MODERATED!?


Don't be paranoid. Edit permission on any post expires after several days. 

In my opinion, this thread illustrates everything that is *wrong* with TF partisans. 
A guru, such as Oscar Perone, promotes a "system" based on some claim, and without evidence or systematic trial, the naive accept and promote the system.

Recommendations should be evidence based, and subject to controlled testing.

The various "esoteric" practices of the various online champions must be understood as a sociological construct. The naive want "answers" and a practice that recommends some peculiar practice is adopted, simply because it is orthogonal and oppositional to the "mainstream".

The practice then becomes a group identity marker, it is adopted because it is different -- and confirms the membership in the group.


----------



## JeronimoJC

Beeks,
There is another item I've been researching which seems to have sufficient merit to make it to the list. Maybe it isn't accepted or at least widely accepted here, but I feel some discussion on this would be appropriate. 

*8. NATURAL COMB*

Certainly this would go hand in hand with "LOTS OF PEACE" and "PROPER HIVE TEMPERATURE/HUMIDITY", but I think the main selling point relates to cell size and comb spacing. Like I said, I am still researching it, but the things that caught my attention are:
Asian/African bees coexist successfully with Varroa. These bees are smaller and their smaller cell sizes arguably result in shorter capping times. I think we can all agree that shorter capping would result in limiting Varroa reproduction. The question seems to be can smaller cells really reduce capping times? I know Michael Bush and at least one other person in this forum have conducted their own experiments and confirmed this is the case. 

Compact comb (smaller cell and tighter comb spacing) is also said to provide other efficiencies (i.e. less bees per cubic inch of brood). Higher efficiency means some bees can be released to do other things, one of which could very well be hygienic related tasks. 

Last, I've also read that bees in compact comb have a longer life-span.


----------



## DaisyNJ

JWChesnut said:


> Don't be paranoid. Edit permission on any post expires after several days.
> 
> In my opinion, this thread illustrates everything that is *wrong* with TF partisans.
> A guru, such as Oscar Perone, promotes a "system" based on some claim, and without evidence or systematic trial, the naive accept and promote the system.
> 
> Recommendations should be evidence based, and subject to controlled testing.
> 
> The various "esoteric" practices of the various online champions must be understood as a sociological construct. The naive want "answers" and a practice that recommends some peculiar practice is adopted, simply because it is orthogonal and oppositional to the "mainstream".
> 
> The practice then becomes a group identity marker, it is adopted because it is different -- and confirms the membership in the group.


I appreciate your effort "trying to save newbees" from a potential disaster. And I value your experience and insight on all things Bees. However, I am not sure on your comments about group identify etc. 

Not sure about others, but I am going into this with my eyes wide open. If my untreated hives does not make it through winter, then its on ME and no one else. 
I am not doing this because I want to be part of some elite group or save the world from evil chemicals or bees for that matter. I am into this as "scratch that itch" experiment that may or may not work. 

Who knows, I may come out of this with failure and try treatment options the year after. In fact I treated one of the purchased Nucs after heavy DWV, and that Nuc was from a supplier who treats properly. I may be back on these forums complaining about how I lost all my hives and you get to tell me how naive and stupid I was


----------



## JeronimoJC

Thanks JW. All opinions are welcomed!

A random thought here, if a Langstroth beek saw any potential value in some of these thoughts (Lots of Peace, Temp/Humidity, and Natural Comb), but didn't want to change things too much, would he find any value in maybe placing and (leaving undisturbed) a top bar or two in lieu of the outer frames? 

Likewise, if a beek saw potential value in promoting large colonies (Lots of Space), would he consider using three brood boxes with frames in the top box only? Bees would likely extend the comb from the bottom of the frames in the top box to the bottom of the bottom box (Natural Comb). The thought here would be to leave these three boxes more or less undisturbed.


----------



## Nordak

JWChesnut said:


> In my opinion, this thread illustrates everything that is *wrong* with TF partisans.
> A guru, such as Oscar Perone, promotes a "system" based on some claim, and without evidence or systematic trial, the naive accept and promote the system.


I agree with you in the sense to adopt a set of rules, in regard to a particular Treatment Free regiment, is somewhat nearsighted, as there are so many variables at play. There are examples of Perone's "system" where the inverse works equally well. It's hard to quantify exactly what works, where it works, and why. I have no doubt, though, that Perone's system works for him. I have no reason or proof to believe otherwise.



JWChesnut said:


> Recommendations should be evidence based, and subject to controlled testing.


Evidence would be living, growing bees year after year. I have that thus far. Will that work for you? I have no idea if it would or not. According to your own experiences, I am guessing no. How would one recommend something to someone who exists outside of their own microcosmic parameters and personal experience to claim it works universally? I can not make such a claim, and don't believe anyone is in a position to do so. There are guidelines, but like all things, including science, these experiences are fallible when implemented on a broader scale.




JWChesnut said:


> The practice then becomes a group identity marker, it is adopted because it is different -- and confirms the membership in the group.


People enjoy being part of a movement. People outside of the fringe movement feel isolated because their experiences differ. Sometimes the fringe becomes the norm. Time will tell where bees will lead us.


----------



## Riverderwent

Adherence to evidence based practices by its nature regulates against both failure and the innovations that will become the next generation of evidence based practices.


----------



## Nordak

That's what I meant to say....beautifully put.


----------



## Harley Craig

JWChesnut said:


> Recommendations should be evidence based, and subject to controlled testing.
> .


I don't know what kind of controlled testing you want, but the only thing I spend money on each yr is new woodenware and frames, paint and jars to put honey in. I'm running out of room at the house for hives and running out of room in the kitchen to store jars of honey. My definition of success is if I end up with greater than or equal to the number of colonies and honey produced as the yr before, without having to buy bees, sugar, or chemicals then I would say i'm successful at keeping bees without treating them wouldn't you?


----------



## Michael Bush

>My definition of success is if I end up with greater than or equal to the number of colonies and honey produced as the yr before, without having to buy bees, sugar, or chemicals then I would say i'm successful at keeping bees without treating them wouldn't you?

If you didn't measure it, it's just your imagination.


----------



## Daniel Y

Michael Bush said:


> >My definition of success is if I end up with greater than or equal to the number of colonies and honey produced as the yr before, without having to buy bees, sugar, or chemicals then I would say i'm successful at keeping bees without treating them wouldn't you?
> 
> If you didn't measure it, it's just your imagination.


should that be, if you don't measure it my way? Pretty much everything on that list is a method of measure. I still would not agree. First it could be a sign of good fortune. Second what if your goal was to reduce your apiary. I do see it is indications that your bees are succeeding. and you only know what you know. Is it false information or conclusions which is what I believe Michael is saying? But then controlled tests can do the same. We tend to see what we want to see. My most successful year up to the end of summer then resulted in the loss of all my hives. 54 of them. Since then I have gone from 0 to 16. Don't know if that is success or not. it is what is. Since those 54 hives had already provided the highest income for a single year had they already finished what they had to do for me? as far as what I could imagine what they would do, no for what they in fact did, yes. They may have gone on to provide more income. they may have gone on to provide more expense and taken away the income they did provide. To me that is my imagination. Sort of like, I would be doing so much better at beekeeping if only...


----------



## lharder

Riverderwent said:


> Adherence to evidence based practices by its nature regulates against both failure and the innovations that will become the next generation of evidence based practices.


Well put. Evolution and genetic adaptation don't stick to "evidence" based practices. Some experimentation around the edges is necessary as today's success can be tomorrow's failure. 

I don't know where some get the idea that there is "evidence" based beekeeping in the first place. The evidence is that the beekeeping industry has created their own problems with careless movement of bees and their associated pests/pathogens from other continents and other regions within continents. The evidence is that beekeepers are very slow learners and continue to make the same mistakes over and over. They set up a disturbance, are puzzled when a somewhat stable system becomes chaotic, and don't understand the processes of adaptation to the point they actively get in the way of it. "Evidence" based beekeeping espoused by some is scientifically illiterate.


----------



## DaisyNJ

Thanks for MB comment on other thread, I came across Dr Tom Seeley thoughts on why honey bees in Arnot Forest may be surviving without treatments. Yet to find the original video / audio of this talk, but here is the summary. 

Interesting to note are his views on colony size and swarming - small and frequent swarming. Also interesting thoughts on propolis. All points Sam made in his pdf doc I referenced earlier. 

Summary from the link mentioned below (credit goes to that author)..

---------
His (Dr. Seeley) take-home messages were:

As beekeepers we help the survival of the Varroa mite by:
Sustaining susceptible bees by using miticides (stop using miticides!)
Fostering virulent mites by having apiaries (have colonies in isolation)
Fostering mites by preventing swarming (let colonies swarm)
--------

http://beekeeperlinda.blogspot.com/2013/05/tom-seeley-on-bees-and-mites-in-forest.html


Edit: Found the video where Dr.Seeley talks about the feral bee survival - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkYxcgiqvbI


----------



## Fusion_power

All human based agriculture goes against nature. Plowing and planting, monoculture, breeding for traits that contribute to producing food for humans all lead to food on our tables. Beekeeping can't be profitable if we go back to harvesting honey from bee trees.

Can we do a better job? Yes, we can stop breeding mite susceptible bees and we can change our paradigm to one that is sustainable.


----------



## mike bispham

Fusion_power said:


> Can we do a better job? Yes, we can stop breeding mite susceptible bees and we can change our paradigm to one that is sustainable.


I think a good understanding of certain key mechanisms of nature helps us comprehend the absolute need to breed well, and shows us how to go about it.

That's just generalising really. What I mean is that 'husbandry' without selective breeding isn't husbandry, and can't possibly be successful.

Mike (UK)


----------



## lharder

DaisyNJ said:


> Thanks for MB comment on other thread, I came across Dr Tom Seeley thoughts on why honey bees in Arnot Forest may be surviving without treatments. Yet to find the original video / audio of this talk, but here is the summary.
> 
> Interesting to note are his views on colony size and swarming - small and frequent swarming. Also interesting thoughts on propolis. All points Sam made in his pdf doc I referenced earlier.
> 
> Summary from the link mentioned below (credit goes to that author)..
> 
> ---------
> His (Dr. Seeley) take-home messages were:
> 
> As beekeepers we help the survival of the Varroa mite by:
> Sustaining susceptible bees by using miticides (stop using miticides!)
> Fostering virulent mites by having apiaries (have colonies in isolation)
> Fostering mites by preventing swarming (let colonies swarm)
> --------
> 
> http://beekeeperlinda.blogspot.com/2013/05/tom-seeley-on-bees-and-mites-in-forest.html
> 
> 
> Edit: Found the video where Dr.Seeley talks about the feral bee survival - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkYxcgiqvbI


Swarming may just be a feature of the environment. Fill up a cavity space and swarm. Has it been any different before varroa? His work also shows a significant bottleneck post varroa. So even in a forested natural environment , bees had trouble coping initially and some genetics adjustments needed to be made. It would be an interesting but appalling experiment to set thousands of hives from almonds in the Arnot forest or any other area with established tf feral bees. I would expect a big set back.


----------



## shinbone

JWChesnut said:


> In my opinion, this thread illustrates everything that is *wrong* with TF partisans.
> A guru, such as Oscar Perone, promotes a "system" based on some claim, and without evidence or systematic trial, the naive accept and promote the system.
> 
> Recommendations should be evidence based, and subject to controlled testing.
> 
> The various "esoteric" practices of the various online champions must be understood as a sociological construct. The naive want "answers" and a practice that recommends some peculiar practice is adopted, simply because it is orthogonal and oppositional to the "mainstream".
> 
> The practice then becomes a group identity marker, it is adopted because it is different -- and confirms the membership in the group.


Spot on!


----------



## Daniel Y

this is now twice I have seen it mentioned that small colonies that swarm frequently are also strains of bees that are resistant to mites. So how does his reflect on beekeeping tendency to promote large colonies and no swarming? I have a general principal that says you can't interfere with everything a bee does and then expect it to excel at a given behavior or two. IN order to produce in any way exceptionally a colony must be exceptional in every way. in in those ways we do not consider desirable.


----------



## bibbster

Very interesting read to this new beek. Following along...


----------



## mike bispham

JWChesnut said:


> In my opinion, this thread illustrates everything that is *wrong* with TF partisans.


Can you give us a specification for 'TF partisans' JW? Am I one? Is anyone who does/tries to do TF one? 

Or does one have to follow a 'guru'? I suppose I largely follow the understanding held by John Kefuss. Would that make me a 'John Kefuss partisan?' Or would his commitment to evidence based beekeeping rule him out as a 'guru'?

Doesn't 'evidence based' automatically include the processes of controlled testing?

Mike (UK)


----------



## Michael Bush

>this is now twice...

I think I've heard it more often than that... so it must be true... 

>So how does his reflect on beekeeping tendency to promote large colonies and no swarming? 

It doesn't. I have no use for small colonies that swarm all the time so I try not to keep swarmy bees and while I like frugal bees (bees that overwinter in small clusters and don't eat as much) I don't want small colonies. I want large colonies that produce honey and bees at the right time.


----------



## JeronimoJC

Daniel Y said:


> this is now twice I have seen it mentioned that small colonies that swarm frequently are also strains of bees that are resistant to mites. So how does his reflect on beekeeping tendency to promote large colonies and no swarming? I have a general principal that says you can't interfere with everything a bee does and then expect it to excel at a given behavior or two. IN order to produce in any way exceptionally a colony must be exceptional in every way. in in those ways we do not consider desirable.


Lots of different concepts being thrown out here, but the starting point was along the lines of large and strong colonies allowed to swarm. The large colony, with plenty of space and resources is presumed to be strong and efficient, thus more bees are free to perform other tasks. One of those tasks could very well be hygienic related tasks. Bees in weaker colonies are arguably too overworked and won't exhibit hygenic behavior until it is too late. 

The swarming part was about allowing the colony a natural brood break, which should have a direct impact on mite reproduction. 

Together, these two concepts are consistent with minimizing interference. This however, may be contrary to maximizing honey production.


----------



## JeronimoJC

It would be nice to have a thread where we can discuss TF ideas without having to attack each other. To this end, it may be wise to simply let unconstructive comments go unanswered. Constructive rebuttals on the other hand should be welcomed and even encouraged. Let's please try to keep this thread on subject. I am personally learning much from most of the discussion here. 

Thank you!


----------



## fieldsofnaturalhoney

JeronimoJC said:


> It would be nice to have a thread where we can discuss TF ideas without having to attack each other.


Or get your partisan attacked, Now what fun would that beopcorn:


----------



## DaisyNJ

Was just watching Marla Spivak and couple of other videos on YouTube. Couple of things mentioned in those videos

* Ensure Good, varied pollen sources 
* Encourage Propolis


----------



## JeronimoJC

^^ Makes sense to me. How does one encourage propolis? I suppose one thing we can do is avoid disturbing/removing it.


----------



## DaisyNJ

JeronimoJC said:


> ^^ Makes sense to me. How does one encourage propolis? I suppose one thing we can do is avoid disturbing/removing it.


* Select in favor of the trait and / or stop deselecting against this trait
* Rough hive interior either by selecting rough cut lumber or purposely scratching up the insides


----------



## Michael Bush

>Makes sense to me. How does one encourage propolis? I suppose one thing we can do is avoid disturbing/removing it.

As Dasy said, stop selecting against it like beekeepers have been doing for almost 200 years...


----------



## beepro

Mix in some Russians genetics to get the propolis up.
Italians X Russians will give you some result. Now I know!


----------



## mike bispham

Michael Bush said:


> >Makes sense to me. How does one encourage propolis? I suppose one thing we can do is avoid disturbing/removing it.
> 
> As Dasy said, stop selecting against it like beekeepers have been doing for almost 200 years...


This is good to know, thanks for passing it on Daisy

Jeronimo J wrote: "Rough hive interior either by selecting rough cut lumber or purposely scratching up the insides"

I use sawn cedar and haven't noticed any surface coating. I have noticed that bought boxes with a rail that the frame ears sit on, leaving a space below, get stuffed with propolis. I think maybe for me its just a thing to watch for, and maybe add to my selection criteria - certainly, as Michael indicates never select against it! To do that I'll need to keep my gear standardised so I can see which have the propensity to propolize, rather than trying to provoke it.

Mike (UK)


----------



## Oldtimer

mike bispham said:


> Can you give us a specification for 'TF partisans' JW? Am I one?


Yes




mike bispham said:


> Or does one have to follow a 'guru'? I suppose I largely follow the understanding held by John Kefuss. Would that make me a 'John Kefuss partisan?


Yes



mike bispham said:


> Or would his commitment to evidence based beekeeping rule him out as a 'guru'?


No



mike bispham said:


> Doesn't 'evidence based' automatically include the processes of controlled testing?


No


----------



## DaisyNJ

Here is the Dr. Marla Spivak lecture on various things including pollen and propolis. 

2015 Bee Symposium: Helping Bees Stand on Their Own Six Feet

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PDSQPRDtZUA


----------



## DaisyNJ

Another one discussing relationship between nutrition, viruses, colony desertion etc. 

2015 Bee Symposium: Combined Effects of Viruses and Nutritional Stress on Honey Bee Health

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbYlmzHoURk


----------



## DaisyNJ

My hope in posting above links was 

a) Some important points can be extracted and added to "Keys to treatment free beekeeping"
b) Partially answer a typical question "If the <<plug-your-favorite-TF-provider>> are so good, why dont they perform same across the nation" 
c) Partially answer another typical question "Why 'locally adapated' ?"


----------



## squarepeg

thanks for posting the links daisy, looking forward to watching them this weekend.


----------



## JeronimoJC

DaisyNJ said:


> My hope in posting above links was
> 
> a) Some important points can be extracted and added to "Keys to treatment free beekeeping"
> b) Partially answer a typical question "If the <<plug-your-favorite-TF-provider>> are so good, why dont they perform same across the nation"
> c) Partially answer another typical question "Why 'locally adapated' ?"


Thank you Daisy! My intent was to add content to those initial bullet points by editing post #1, but I didn't realize the editing feature becomes unavailable after a while. Nevertheless, I may summarize everything into a new post for those looking for TF ideas. I hope others continue contributing so we end up with a nice summary.


----------



## Nordak

Promoting drone comb. It can work as a mite trap as well as help spread your genetics into the open population. I think this is one of the main benefits of a foundationless approach. If this has been touched on already, apologies. My memory isn't what it once was.

Look forward to watching the posted links above. In terms of propolis, has anyone worked with Caucasian bees much? Just curious what impressions are in terms of overall health of Caucasian colonies versus other bees.


----------



## fieldsofnaturalhoney

JeronimoJC said:


> Nevertheless, I may summarize everything into a new post for those looking for TF ideas. I hope others continue contributing so we end up with a nice summary.


Be sure to think about adding these two important keys. Tell people to :shhhh:, when they say you won't be able to keep bees off of treatments. AND it is much easier to learn how to keep bees off of treatments while you learn how to keep bees (off of treatments) THAN learning how to keep bees (and treating them), and somehow magically weaning them off of treatments, while you learn beekeeping. Now you are ready to learn how to keep treatment free bees:scratch:


----------



## mike bispham

Nordak said:


> Promoting drone comb. It can work as a mite trap as well as help spread your genetics into the open population. I think this is one of the main benefits of a foundationless approach.


Hmmm: usual caution: if you help your bees you can be undermining their natural tendency toward gaining resistance...

Mike (UK)


----------



## Nordak

mike bispham said:


> Hmmm: usual caution: if you help your bees you can be undermining their natural tendency toward gaining resistance...
> 
> Mike (UK)


I think you misunderstand my meaning. Perhaps the word "promoting" was an unintended misuse. I should have stated by allowing bees the freedom to build as much drone comb as desired, this has a two fold effect. It promotes the release of wanted genetics into the open population and gives hygienic bees a place to focus their uncapping efforts, thus potentially lowering mite infestation levels. That is in no way intervening. It's allowing bees to do what they would do. I don't do uncapping, I let my bees do it.


----------



## JeronimoJC

fieldsofnaturalhoney said:


> Be sure to think about adding these two important keys. Tell people to :shhhh:, when they say you won't be able to keep bees off of treatments. AND it is much easier to learn how to keep bees off of treatments while you learn how to keep bees (off of treatments) THAN learning how to keep bees (and treating them), and somehow magically weaning them off of treatments, while you learn beekeeping. Now you are ready to learn how to keep treatment free bees:scratch:


I see the wisdom of your words. The dark side doesn't make it easy at all.


----------



## 1102009

s


> top selecting against it like beekeepers have been doing for almost 200 years...


What amazes me is how fast this wrong selections go backwards if you leave the bees to their natural ways.
I´m doing too much management still.:scratch:

Concerning the use of propolis I realized that every time there is a crisis the propolis gets sticky. Afterwards it`s normal again.


----------



## mike bispham

Nordak said:


> I think you misunderstand my meaning. Perhaps the word "promoting" was an unintended misuse. I should have stated by allowing bees the freedom to build as much drone comb as desired, this has a two fold effect. It promotes the release of wanted genetics into the open population and gives hygienic bees a place to focus their uncapping efforts, thus potentially lowering mite infestation levels. That is in no way intervening. It's allowing bees to do what they would do. I don't do uncapping, I let my bees do it.


Ah, yes and I was to quick to conclude you meant something else! I do the same Nordak. Maybe a little modification to what you've written here to say: unlimited brood nests give resistant/tolerant bees an important mechanism to promote strong genes locally whether that strength involves hygienic behaviour or other mechanisms of mite management; and/or strengths completely outside mite issues.

Mike (UK)


----------



## Nordak

mike bispham said:


> Ah, yes and I was to quick to conclude you meant something else! I do the same Nordak. Maybe a little modification to what you've written here to say: unlimited brood nests give resistant/tolerant bees an important mechanism to promote strong genes locally whether that strength involves hygienic behaviour or other mechanisms of mite management; and/or strengths completely outside mite issues.
> 
> Mike (UK)


:thumbsup:


----------



## Harley Craig

Nordak said:


> I think you misunderstand my meaning. Perhaps the word "promoting" was an unintended misuse. I should have stated by allowing bees the freedom to build as much drone comb as desired, this has a two fold effect. It promotes the release of wanted genetics into the open population and gives hygienic bees a place to focus their uncapping efforts, thus potentially lowering mite infestation levels. That is in no way intervening. It's allowing bees to do what they would do. I don't do uncapping, I let my bees do it.




This makes perfect sense, and could help explain why my bees seem to be doing very well, some of them will uncap the heck outta brood and the fact that I run a lot of foundationless I tend to have more drone comb than " recomended", I always figured the bees knew best.


----------



## mike bispham

SiWolKe said:


> Concerning the use of propolis I realized that every time there is a crisis the propolis gets sticky. Afterwards it`s normal again.


Interesting. Is this just about hive temperature?

Mike (UK)


----------



## 1102009

mike bispham said:


> Interesting. Is this just about hive temperature?
> 
> Mike (UK)


Not to let it be an assertion I looked in my records after your post.
One example: a copy:

datum05.06.2016 19:31
Online SiWolKe

Informationen anzeigen
5.6.2016

Durchsicht.
Trachtwetter, warm, sonnig
Königin gesehen, aber irgendwas stimmt nicht.
Ausbau schlecht.
20 merkwürdige Zellen gesehen, vermute Sackbrut.
Viel klebriges Propolis.

That was when this hive had sacbrood, I wrote: much propolis, sticky.

14 Völker Kleinzellerbienen , Imkerin seit 3 Jahren , Moderatorin
>Fällt dir etwas ein, dann nimm es auf und setze es um – dazu ist es dir ja eingefallen, denn sonst wär ́s vorbei gefallen. (Sepp Holzer)<

86m datum29.06.2016 06:42
Online SiWolKe
Volk : schwarze Biene AMM LaPalma 2014

Datum: 28.06.2016
Standort,Abstand: Wildpark 3km
Königin: Mutter AMM Haplo 15 LaPalma

Datum Ableger: Mai 2016 Königin mit verdeckelter Brut
Wetter: warm, sonnig

Weather the same

Tracht: gut

Aggression: sehr mild
Propolisqualität: normal

They are healthy again, propolis normal, meaning more dry

Wabensitz: sehr gut
Weiselzellen?: nein


Brutwabenanzahl: 6

Brutpause?: eher nicht
Brutqualität: stiftet mäßig
Futtersaft: sehr gut
Brut/Honiganteil: wenig Honig, viel Pollen


Eintrag: keine Überschüsse
Bruthygiene Drohnen: nein
Bruthygiene Arbeiter: nein

Wabenbau 4.9: -

Drohnen?: Drohnenecken sehr gut
Varroen auf Bienen: nein
Def. Bienen: nein
Zittern: nein

Gefüttert: nein
Zargenanzahl: 2, oben keine Bearbeitung
Verschiedenes: Sackbrut nicht mehr vorhanden, in einer Woche nach flächigem Stiften schauen

No more sacbrood

I believe it`s not the weather, it`s a crisis (winter preparations are a crisis, too, to shut down a hive against cold.)


----------



## mike bispham

SiWolKe said:


> I believe it`s not the weather, it`s a crisis (winter preparations are a crisis, too, to shut down a hive against cold.)


Interesting. I'd frame hive temperature (which will always raise stickiness) in terms of a choice, if you like, that the bees make. When it suits them to heat only the brood nest and let the stores cool, that happens; if they want to mould wax and evaporate nectar for example, its worth the cost of heating the cavity. A raised temperature is a guide to general activity levels (and commensurate energy consumption). Would you agree? Can we speculate anything more from that? 

Mike (UK)


----------



## Oldtimer

opcorn:


----------



## 1102009

mike bispham said:


> Interesting. I'd frame hive temperature (which will always raise stickiness) in terms of a choice, if you like, that the bees make. When it suits them to heat only the brood nest and let the stores cool, that happens; if they want to mould wax and evaporate nectar for example, its worth the cost of heating the cavity. A raised temperature is a guide to general activity levels (and commensurate energy consumption). Would you agree? Can we speculate anything more from that?
> 
> Mike (UK)


Sure, if Oldtimer is entertained

I always thought the bees keep hive temperature at the same level? Am I wrong?

Whenever I check it`s not only one hive but 2-3 in a row. The propolis consistence and amount changes from hive to hive. Concerning selection it`s important to me they have much propolis to fight disease. So I´m always recording how sticky it is.
Starting beekeeping I thought this depends on the special colony. But no. My records show that the consistence changes with health conditions.
Sometimes very quickly. 
But I don`t know how they do it. Mix with water? Evaporate water in the hive? Collect some more? Use heat?

To know about this, I compare between hives which have the same bee density. Weak hives have other priorities, the foraging for pollen to feed the brood.

After making splits of equal size those with queens had less propolis than those queenless.
I believe those with queen ,which goes on laying, forget about all work except expanding brood again.

To be without a queen is a severe crisis. They are likely to be robbed (closing up the hive so others bees can´t smell this, maybe) and they have more honey to defend, no brood to nurse after some time, later on no pheromones from open brood.
Everybody can hear this crisis from the sound.
So far I had no queenless hive with dry propolis. Always sticky.

The moulding of wax and heating of brood nest....
It`s locally done I believe. The bee can heat it`s body itself using energy from nectar and honey. With my big dadant boxes it`s not possible to heat the top box with body heat up to a certain degree, but the top is sticky like in bottom brood box even more sticky sometimes. Well, heat goes up...

In my opinion nectar water content evaporates mostly with ventilation. If nectar is freshly put in cells you can hear the ventilation from far away.
But surely they need some temperature or they would take syrup in a warm winter.


----------



## mike bispham

SiWolKe said:


> The moulding of wax and heating of brood nest....
> It`s locally done I believe. The bee can heat it`s body itself using energy from nectar and honey. With my big dadant boxes it`s not possible to heat the top box with body heat up to a certain degree, even though the top is sticky like in bottom brood box even more sticky sometimes.[/queen]
> 
> What follows is speculation on my part...
> 
> As they are hanging there must be lots of ventilation between them. So without an enclosed space it might pay to tie up more bees with a local clustering to keep the workspace warm. But taking advantage of a warm cavity would free up bees - an advantage.
> 
> 
> 
> SiWolKe said:
> 
> 
> 
> In my opinion nectar water content evaporates mostly with ventilation. If nectar is freshly put in cells you can hear the ventilation from far away.
> 
> 
> 
> I'd image the bees locate an optimum between temperature and humidity at which evaporation is most rapid, and ventilate to produce that. Since water will evaporate much more readily into a dryer atmosphere, and since warm air holds much more vapour, controlling the relative humidity to optimise evaporation will be advantageous. That means finding the balance between warmth and humidity....
> 
> Brooding too is easier if you can free bees from the job of keeping brood warm, and heavy brooding will raise temperature in an enclosed space toward the brood temperature.
> 
> There must be some science somewhere about hive temperatures, the whys and wherefores!
> 
> Mike (UK)
Click to expand...


----------



## JeronimoJC

SiWolKe said:


> Concerning the use of propolis I realized that every time there is a crisis the propolis gets sticky. Afterwards it`s normal again.


One of the videos Daisy linked talks precisely about how propolis increased (more collection) after the researcher introduced a disease into the colony. The video audio wasn't great, but there was a ton of great info.



mike bispham said:


> Brooding too is easier if you can free bees from the job of keeping brood warm, and heavy brooding will raise temperature in an enclosed space toward the brood temperature.
> Mike (UK)


Freeing bees up (reducing work load & stress) sounds like a great strategy. I've read reduced work load (or a large workforce) permits bees to perform other tasks that they may neglect otherwise (i.e. hygenic tasks). 

As for temps/humidity, the colony will spend energy and resources to keep the brood nest at the appropriate temp/humidity levels. Too little insulation or too much air draft could overwork the colony and have adverse effects (so I've read).


----------



## mike bispham

JeronimoJC said:


> One of the videos Daisy linked talks precisely about how propolis increased (more collection) after the researcher introduced a disease into the colony.
> 
> As for temps/humidity, the colony will spend energy and resources to keep the brood nest at the appropriate temp/humidity levels. Too little insulation or too much air draft could overwork the colony and have adverse effects (so I've read).


I had a thought: humans and other mammal raise their body temperature in order to combat infections (because many bacterial and viral agents are more sensitive to temperature than we are). I wonder if bees have discovered the same trick?

Following advice from a UK commercial beekeeper I lightly ventilated my hives last winter. He says he'd rather feed a little more and reduce the risk of finding mouldy comb in the spring. It didn't seem to do any harm; but we had a cold wet spring and the bees didn't build enough to take full advantage of the spring flow... I might think again this winter.

Mike (UK)


----------



## Redhawk

Many thanks to you, Jeronimo, & everyone else, for another great topic. I read all of squarepeg's experience & have to say it has helped me in understanding just how TF works on a "daily" basis. And this threat is expanding on the knowledge base for this new year TF keep. I only hope every new beekeeper will read both of these threads. Hat off to all of you.


----------



## Redhawk

The idea of humudity raises a question for me. We just had an extremely hot & humid summer. Nothing would dry out. Green mold was taking hold wherever allowed. My 1st hive was robbed a month ago, in the "thick" of the heat & humidity. I luckily found a wax moth issue in time & pulled the damaged frames, but never found the queen. A numbers of members here said most likely she was gone & add that to what I've read I had to accept it. Went back in a week later to re-queen & found her. No brood in any stage anywhere. I watch her for some time & she just roamed from one side of the frame to the other, always moving. I had no choice but to pinch her. At that point, I'd thought it better togive them a few days before introducing a new queen. But as I was closing up, I turned to look at the new queen where I'd left her & she was covered in bees. I watched & they showed no signs at all of aggression, but it was more as a celebration, so I placed her & last week the brood is filling frames again & all appears healthy again. Now I'm understanding how the weather in our location has possibly played a larger role in colony health than. But how does one, or should one even attempt to, counter such an issue? Other than regular inspections (intrusions) of the colony?


----------



## 1102009

Thanks, daisy,
a wonderful video of the symposium.

After watching I decided it`s not the temperature that makes it sticky but the amount of it and how the bees work it.
Seems to me it`s drying out after some time so they have to forage again in a new crisis. Very good to know!
makes me realize how important density is.


----------



## BernhardHeuvel

Tom Seeley on bees in the wilds and varroa survival. A talk held in Germany this summer. Talks in English.





https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NVj4A6F1D_s


----------



## squarepeg

bernhard, many thanks for posting that link, i had not seen this presentation yet.

sibylle, dr. seeley does a much better job at explaining what i was trying to say in my last post on your thread.


----------



## mike bispham

squarepeg said:


> Tom Seeley on bees in the wilds and varroa survival.


Thanks for this Bernhard. Nice to hear Dr. Seeley give pretty definitive statement on the effect of treated hives on ferals (at 1:15-1:17. He may say more in the middle - I skipped to the end for conclusions and heard questions)

I'm currently trying to find out what studies have been done on the consequent effect on native ecology. I guess this doesn't really apply to the US, but in Europe where honey bees have always been present I think its an important question. If anyone can point me toward relevant literature I'd be very grateful indeed.

Mike (UK)


----------



## JeronimoJC

The video above debunks item 2 "LOTS OF SPACE" item in post 1. In video, Tom Seeley makes the case that smaller hives maintained varroa populations at lower percentages than larger hives. Colonies in smaller hives outlived colonies in larger hives. The reason given was smaller hives swarmed more often. This reinforces item 5 "SWARMING IS GOOD" in post 1. 

The downside of having small hives is you don't get as much honey. For the TF honey producing beekeeper, the logical conclusion maybe to promote artificial swarms.


----------



## mike bispham

JeronimoJC said:


> The video above debunks item 2 "LOTS OF SPACE" item in post 1. In video, Tom Seeley makes the case that smaller hives maintained varroa populations at lower percentages than larger hives. Colonies in smaller hives outlived colonies in larger hives. The reason given was smaller hives swarmed more often. This reinforces item 5 "SWARMING IS GOOD" in post 1.
> 
> The downside of having small hives is you don't get as much honey. For the TF honey producing beekeeper, the logical conclusion maybe to promote artificial swarms.


It depend what you want to achieve. Decide first: Do I want to promote resistance in my bee population, and my local population, or not? 

If Yes: run bees as hands-off as you can in the conditions you want to keep them. Those that do well in those conditions will contribute their genes to each new generations; those that don't won't. You can help them along by keeping more and reproducing those with a record of good health and good production.

That's husbandry, in its proper sense - 'husbanding the gens down the generations'.

Anything else will undermine the emergence of broad-based independent health. Artificial acts just mess up the process.

Get good bees and keep them good. That's the key. Its _all_ in the genes. 

Mike (UK)


----------

