# All is Lost..........



## David LaFerney

Did you treat for mites?


----------



## Durstlight

David, I sugar dusted a couple of times and that was about the extent of it


----------



## enjambres

Did you monitor the mite levels in the summer and into the fall? Of course monitoring, alone, doesn't save bees but knowing the levels gives you a good starting point in sorting out what really happened to them.

Although mites are often the culprits, I also think that some times they get blamed when there's other significant contributing reasons. While different decisions re treating might make a difference in the future, not identifying ALL the factors can continue to leave you vulnerable when you unknowingly repeat the same things. But really knowing your mite levels (by using a regular monitoring program) gives you a way to judge if they are likely to be the main cause, or not.

So may I suggest two things to consider for the next season: 1) do regular mite monitoring. I happen to find sticky boards useful and extremely easy to use. I do 72-hour checks at least once per week, and that gives me a very good idea of what's happening with the mites. It doesn't force any action (so it's compatible with TF beekeeping, as well as for a beeekeeper who treats. If you need some tips on how to integrate it into your routine, I'd be glad to describe what I do.

The second thing I have found useful is having shavings-filled quilt boxes on top of each of my hives. These are easy, inexpensive tools for managing moisture within the hive during winter, and are surprisingly heat retentive. I had assumed that they would just function as moisture-regulating tools, but they also seem to have provided my bees with a cozy place to go. I, too, have sugar bricks in my hive (just below the quilt boxes) and on every day that isn't totally frigid my bees moved up into the space around the bricks to hang out (literally in festoons from the bottom of the quilt box), munch sugar bricks and stretch their legs. 

I am north of you, somewhat north of Albany, NY and our winter has been awful, too. Cold, but more importantly I think, an extra 5-7 weeks of deep winter cold since it started so eerly and seems determined to hang on as long as possible. I've been promising my girls that the end of winter is near, but then we go back to frigid, again. I had minus 10 again last night.

I hope you will not interpret my suggestions (which are aimed at next summer/winter, not the past) as things you ought to have done, as I know you must feel pretty bummed by losing your bees. It seems to me that you did what you knew to do (leaving honey, adding sugar bricks, insulating top, etc.) And your bees did better than mine, which scarely made 2 deeps apiece, and one had only a single deep, so it seems your bees prospered under your care. But I'm making my suggestions in the hope they might be of some use to you in thinking through what you're going to do with your new bees (and all that lovely drawn comb - your new bees will be very lucky bugs!)

Enj.


----------



## Tjsegla

I lost my hive this year also and I thought it was due to mites. I thought I did all the right things such as putting two inches of newspapers above for moisture and gave them a candy board I did not wrap my hive. My plan for next year is to be diligent about the mite monitoring I would like to have you describe your mite monitoring routine so I can incorporate it with my new bees this spring. One thing I did do was order a nuc of carnolians that we're raised here in CT I read they were more mite tolerant and being how they will have survived this past winter my chances for success will have increased.


----------



## wildbranch2007

I would start by taking the hive apart and find the cluster. being your first year it may be hard to tell, but how large was it? where was the cluster located in regard to the available 
honey? was there sealed brood located within the cluster? If the cluster was to small or located at the top of a box or at the inner cover, the cold will sometimes stop them from moving to available honey. If there is sealed brood located within the cluster many times the bees won't leave the brood and can't expand the cluster far enough to get to honey and
starve. Other signs to look for are old queen cells that haven't been torn down, this would indicate that the hive swarmed late and may not have had enough bees and/or a queen.
Was there ice or water in the hive, ventilation problem, unless the bottom box is full of snow or ice, then the wind drove the snow into the bottom box and the bees froze.
did you buy all the packages from the same place, down south I assume, when they died all have the same exact symptoms? I have never bought a package, but have seen too many queen problems in packages, so try a couple of local nucs at least to compare against the packages.
good luck


----------



## stan.vick

I am too far south to diagnose you problem, but I would suggest you leave the bees as they are until you can get a local beek with experience to take a look at them, he or she will most likely be able to tell you right away what they died of, and how to prevent it.


----------



## JasonERD

Durstlight said:


> A couple of the hives were still alive about 2 weeks ago (right before this last cold snap). All hives still have a considerable amount of stores.


Just out of curiosity, if it has been so cold out, how can you be sure that they are all dead?


----------



## beemandan

Durstlight said:


> I sugar dusted a couple times for mites


Inadequate, as I'm sure you realize. It has been an exceptionally hard winter for many of us. Heavily parasitized bees are much more likely to fail under that sort of pressure.



Tjsegla said:


> My plan for next year is to be diligent about the mite monitoring


Always a good idea.

Good luck to you both.


----------



## Robbin

Durstlight said:


> David, I sugar dusted a couple of times and that was about the extent of it


According to a UF seminar I went to last week, sugar dusting is the least effective mite control method, and the PHD giving the seminar recommended saving the sugar for baking. He said you couldn’t save your hives by dusting.

I sure am sorry for your loss, I know how I would feel. Chin up, dig in and try again. As for mites, I've tried Dusting, Oils, FGMO and my hives still declined in late summer, I started mite drop counts and they were 4+ times the daily limit warnings of 60, so I treated. Saved my hives, all 6 made it thru the winter, thou I don't have anything like the winter you had.

Good luck.


----------



## BMAC

So besides the obvious mite control monitoring, you should also check for brood in the fall. You might have had a queen issue and never realized it.


----------



## Michael Bush

Look for dead mites on the bottom board. Look for Varroa feces in the brood cells(little white specs). Look to see if the cluster is in contact with stores. Look to see if they were stuck on brood and wouldn't move. Look to see if they ran out of food altogether. Look to see if there was too much condensation (this is time sensitive as they will dry out, of course). Sometimes you see a large ball of ice at the top of the hive if you get there before it thaws.

Often there is a reason. Sometimes it's just the bitter cold and poor decisions by the bees. Or Southern bred queens. I don't see very many packages make it the first year. If they make the first year they have a pretty good shot after that...


----------



## Tenbears

I have been through countless dead hives over the past few weeks. I too am a Pennsylvania beekeeper. the extremely cold winter has had a hand in colony losses, However, in every case of loss mites have at the minimum played a roll in the loss. poor management, be it through technique, timing, or execution are in reality the culprit. inadequate mite treatment, and treatment with timing that is not consistent to wintering parameters within your specific geographic region tend to be the major cause of bee loses as a result of mite related stress.
basically a beekeeper in Alaska cannot follow the same regiment as a beekeeper in Florida and expect the same results. 
Mite loads MUST be reduces and maintained at a level that allows the bees to recover from the stress of a mite load well before the onset of winter. every bee at less than 100% fitness reduces the overwintering ability of the colony. For years we have known that numbers increase the viability of overwintering bees. as each less then fit bee gives it's last to maintain heat within the cluster The individual loss created an exponential decay that will ultimately lead to inadequate numbers to allow the colony to survive. 

You can wrap, feed, insulate till the cows come home, and it will not save a colony carrying the bullets of demise left behind by poor health. 

The beat time to prepare your bees for winter is the first day of spring, and every day thereafter.


----------



## gone2seed

Mites.Sugar dusting is not enough.


----------



## Michael Bush

Assuming it's mites is not very useful. Assumptions are often wrong. Looking for mites is logical. It's a very real possibility that was the cause. However, it is not a forgone conclusion. Assuming they starved is just as foolish. Look to see if they starved. See if the cluster was out of contact with stores (which will cause them to starve) or if they are out of stores (which obviously will cause them to starve). Condensation is often the cause of their death. Bees cannot keep themselves warm when it is bitter cold and they are wet. Sometimes you can't find any reason. Sometimes there are no dead mites, no feces in the brood cells, plenty of food, and they are in contact with it...


----------



## beemandan

Michael Bush said:


> Assuming it's mites is not very useful.


Ignoring the prospect is even less useful. I don't automatically assume that mites were the direct cause but I always assume that they entered the equation.


----------



## Paul McCarty

I have never had a package survive. That's why I stopped using them. Those bees have normally been through the wringer before you get them. Local nucs are best in my opinion if you are going to purchase bees. Packages are usually pretty stressed when you get them, at least in my part of the world they tend to be left over from the almond fields.


----------



## Michael Bush

>Ignoring the prospect is even less useful.

As I said in that same post:
"Looking for mites is logical. It's a very real possibility that was the cause."

I always look for evidence of Varroa in a deadout and always recommend looking for evidence of Varroa in a deadout.


----------



## beemandan

Michael Bush said:


> I always look for evidence of Varroa in a deadout and always recommend looking for evidence of Varroa in a deadout.


Where we differ, I believe, is I highly recommend an objective testing method while they are alive. I've frequently found deadouts that I knew had high infestations while alive but showed little evidence after the fact.


----------



## Riskybizz

Last spring I helped a young beekeeper install (3) packages of bees with carniolan queens that he had ordered from California. I mentored him about feeding the bees until they had drawn out the starter frames and became established. His bees flourished all summer and we harvested a medium super from each hives. One colony made an additional box of honey that we left on them in case we needed some extra feed this spring. Last week I inspected those bees with him and they are all very strong. We did not use any type of treatment on his bees. I'm assuming we'll be making some splits on those colonies next month. Yes bees die and yes lots of bees prosper. Who knows if they will make it through next winter.


----------



## Paul McCarty

What is that old saying about beekeepers being professional gamblers?


----------



## WBVC

Different experience than mine. My packages out performed my local nucs. Still waiting to see if I will have live bees come the warmer weather.



Paul McCarty said:


> I have never had a package survive. That's why I stopped using them. Those bees have normally been through the wringer before you get them. Local nucs are best in my opinion if you are going to purchase bees. Packages are usually pretty stressed when you get them, at least in my part of the world they tend to be left over from the almond fields.


----------



## Paul McCarty

Just my opinion, I had better luck with nucs. I totally stopped buying bees when I got to self replicating levels. I try to maintain 20-25 colonies and sell the extras. I lost two this year over winter - that seems to be about average. Our bloom has started and I am about to split the majority of them. The swarms are already flying down here. Looks to be about 3 weeks early.


----------



## tommysnare

Ample ventilation ? Moisture will kill bees before cold temps will.


----------



## gone2seed

Michael Bush said:


> Assuming it's mites is not very useful.


I differ.Assuming it's mites is very useful since mites play a role in most deadouts.It is likely that if the OP had treated for mites,at the proper times,at least some of his hives would still be alive.Yes,there are other causes but mites are almost always part of the problem.Is it likely that all of the hives would be dead if the OP had treated?I think not.No treatment is a worthy goal but those of you who would have beginners start that way do them a real disservice.Learn first then try for treatment free.


----------



## Michael Bush

Those who insist beekeepers have to treat have driven off more people than you know. I have gotten, not just hundreds, but thousands of emails from people who wanted to keep bees, went to classes where all they talked about where all the antiboitics and chemicals and they were ready to give up the entire idea until they found there were people keeping bees without treaments. I wonder how many thousands did not find out there was an alternative and just gave up before they started.


----------



## beemandan

Michael Bush said:


> Those who insist beekeepers have to treat have driven off more people than you know.


Goes both ways, I'm thinkin. Those frightened off by the 'must treat' crowd and those who abandon beekeeping following total losses after listening to some of the needn't treat folks. Funny thing is I continually hear from the latter.
As I try to point out.....no matter which camp you're in or if you fall into neither camp.....you should encourage new and aspiring beekeepers to educate themselves about the enemy so that whichever way they choose to go they won't go blindly.


----------



## Oldtimer

Sorry to hear Durstlight, however you are just another of a long list of beekeepers who has bought into the idea that one can buy package bees that require mite treatment, not treat them, and all will be well. 

Hear this one over and over after the person has lost all their bees.

All or most of the above advice is good. But at it's simplest you have 2 options. Either buy bees that require treating, and treat them, or, buy bees that do not require treating (from a believable and reputable source), and don't treat them. It's either or I'm afraid other than some rare exceptions.


----------



## Dunkel

Michael I agree, but treatment free has kept several out also by telling about disgust with their dead hives. Something beginners hate because they think of them as pets but not aware of all the ends and outs.


----------



## Fusion_power

I think it would be best to educate beginning beekeepers about mite susceptibility of average package bees and let them make informed decisions about the kind of bees they use. If you do not purchase mite tolerant stock and you do not treat for mites, your bees must be closely monitored and treated for mites if needed. Bees should also be chosen for winter tolerance according to the climate where they will be kept.

Durst, please give it another go. This time, be better prepared. This has been an exceptionally difficult winter and you are far from alone in your loss.


----------



## beemandan

Oldtimer said:


> But at it's simplest you have 2 options. Either buy bees that require treating, and treat them, or, buy bees that do not require treating (from a believable and reputable source), and don't treat them.


And...finding 'real' treatment free bees and/or a reputable source isn't always a simple matter. Which is one of the reasons I persist in recommending that folks test their living bees.....no matter where the bees came from or the keeper's treatment philosophy.


----------



## Michael Bush

>Those frightened off by the 'must treat' crowd and those who abandon beekeeping following total losses after listening to some of the needn't treat folks

Or total losses after listening to the "you have to treat" folks. Any difference in the number of lost bees between the treatment group and the non treatment group is probably just a myth. I meet people all the time who were treating religously and lost all their bees. They gave up treating and are doing better now than when they were treating. I think it is difficult to prove that treating improves the odds. It just makes people feel better that they did something.


----------



## Oldtimer

That cannot be true. If they treated for mites but still lost their hives to mites, it means they did not treat for mites properly.

Like this idea you can sprinkle powdered sugar on them and consider them treated. Yes, they are treated, but not properly. Saying they were treated but still died of mites is misleading.
Or, if they were treated with Apistan but the mites were immune to Apistan, they were not treated properly.

I consider my bees treated properly when mite numbers are reduced to near zero. Not when I've been through some ritual such as sprinkling sugar but there are still lots of mites. As a consequence of doing it properly, I do not lose any hives to mites. I do not lose hives to much of anything else either because all other problems are exacerbated by mites and I don't let things get that bad for my bees.


----------



## beemandan

Michael Bush said:


> Any difference in the number of lost bees between the treatment group and the non treatment group is probably just a myth.


Which explains why such a substantial number of hives currently pollinating almonds are on small cell. And that most of the professional package producers have converted as well.


----------



## laketrout

Can sticky boards be considered an efficient way of monitoring mite loads or are the sugar shake and alcohol wash methods necessary. .


----------



## beemandan

In my opinion sticky boards are better than nothing. Sugar shakes, properly done better than sticky boards and alcohol washes, again properly done, better yet.


----------



## beemandan

Oldtimer said:


> Like this idea you can sprinkle powdered sugar on them and consider them treated.


This is one of many basic flaws in the bee informed survey so frequently cited.


----------



## laketrout

With sugar shakes I used 7 or 8 as the threshold what number are you looking for with sticky boards and what time period .


----------



## Michael Palmer

beemandan said:


> This is one of many basic flaws in the bee informed survey so frequently cited.


And too many other flaws to pay much attention to the results. And if the colony crashed after treating for varroa one could say, "I don't treat and my bees die, I do treat and my bees die, so it must be that treating is a waste of time". 

In my opinion, the majority of beekeepers responding to the survey are beekeepers that don't know how to manage their bees or why their bees didn't make it. So how can a survey of losses have any meaning?


----------



## Gus979

Schedule a time in the fall for your state inspector to come in. They might have a different keeping practices than you, but they have seen so many hives that they will know what needs to be done. It was a relief for me when the inspector did a sugar shake measurement and determined I did not need mite treatments before winter. He also gave me ideas on proper hive ventilation, overwintering, and what hives I needed to immediately feed for them to overwinter. Who you got your packages/nucs from also matters on how well they will overwinter as the inspector did not have high hopes but 3/3 have survived so far.


----------



## beemandan

Michael Palmer said:


> In my opinion, the majority of beekeepers responding to the survey are beekeepers that don't know how to manage their bees or why their bees didn't make it. So how can a survey of losses have any meaning?


Exactly.


----------



## Daniel Y

I treat my bees. and lost one nuc and have one other colony very weak. reduced it to a nuc yesterday. the cause I concluded is robbing. Or in other words to many other strong hives. So look left only to get hit from the right. Otherwise all things look good. I finally got a microscope to look for Nosema. Out of 4 slides I may have found one spore. Not exactly anything I consider worth getting worried about. Now that was from a sample of dying bees on the bottom board of the hive I reduced to 5 frame boxes. Not sure it is goign to make it. it is set back even for being a nuc at this point.


----------



## jim lyon

I think, perhaps, folks should talk more about "achieving mite control" instead of simply talking about whether one did or didn't treat. Too often I hear the same old story that " I treated and they still died". The simple fact that you treated means little. Was it properly applied? We're the conditions favorable? Was it done before damages resulted? Did you monitor the results? In short did it achieve the mite control that your hives were needing? It seems a bit like having a disease and having an antibiotic prescribed. If your sickness continued would you make the statement "I tried an antibiotic but it didn't work" (did you take them all? Did you follow all label directions? If you did, would you just give up? Or would you perhaps seek a more effective treatment. If there is one given I have learned in this business in the last 20 years, it's that hives treated effectively in a timely manner which results in low mite counts are consistently better than hives with higher mite numbers. I see it over and over and over again.


----------



## Michael Palmer

jim lyon said:


> It seems a bit like having a disease and having an antibiotic prescribed. If your sickness continued would you make the statement "I tried an antibiotic but it didn't work" (did you take them all? Did you follow all label directions? If you did, would you just give up? Or….


….or, was it a virus?  As Dan says, Exactly.


----------



## beemandan

One analogy I've used before is....you're in an auto accident. Afterward your arm hurts but you do nothing about it. A week later you begin running a fever but ignore it. When your family finally takes your comatose body to the hospital the ER doc sets your broken arm and they discover that you had developed gangrene. After you kick off....your indignant family insists that you died even though you'd been treated.


----------



## David LaFerney

gone2seed said:


> I differ.Assuming it's mites is very useful since mites play a role in most deadouts.It is likely that if the OP had treated for mites,at the proper times,at least some of his hives would still be alive.Yes,there are other causes but mites are almost always part of the problem.Is it likely that all of the hives would be dead if the OP had treated?I think not.No treatment is a worthy goal but those of you who would have beginners start that way do them a real disservice.Learn first then try for treatment free.


100% agree.


----------



## Michael Bush

>In my opinion, the majority of beekeepers responding to the survey are beekeepers that don't know how to manage their bees or why their bees didn't make it. So how can a survey of losses have any meaning?

I agree but I think it works both ways. Some of the people treating are not following directions or not doing things appropriately. Some of the people "not treating" are just not treating and changing nothing else in which case I would be surprised if they got as good as only 30% losses, I always had 100% when changing nothing else. In both categories you have people who simply don't understand bees and beekeeping. Not all losses are related to Varroa. Some are just poor management. Splits too late. Not enough winter stores. Not enough young bees going into winter etc.

Still I think the number is useful since you have people mismangaging whether they are treating or not, so it should all even out.


----------



## Tenbears

Michael Bush said:


> Those who insist beekeepers have to treat have driven off more people than you know. I have gotten, not just hundreds, but thousands of emails from people who wanted to keep bees, went to classes where all they talked about where all the antiboitics and chemicals and they were ready to give up the entire idea until they found there were people keeping bees without treaments. I wonder how many thousands did not find out there was an alternative and just gave up before they started.


 That is the fault of the instructor, as an educator one needs to offer unto his students every available option, I also think that treatment fee is a poor choice of terms. sugar dusting, and drone comb manipulation is technically a treatment. In my opinion the term treatment free sounds as though a beekeeper leaves to colony to it's own devices and lets the chips fall where they may. Proper management whether it be compound, chemical, or pesticide free or not need to be timely and efficient to be effective. treating a hive regardless of what method in June and then leaving it go, does little to prepare it for winter. There are just as many people who choose not to begin beekeeping because a "treatment free instructor has led them to believe that they are going to have to doo weekly mite counts and sugar dustings, manipulate green comb and spend countless hours fiddling with the bees. 

The reality of life is that not every beekeeper has the same goals, or preferences. not all see thing from the same perspective, and not all believe in the same strategy. neither are wrong for their personal beliefs. Just different.


----------



## beemandan

Michael Bush said:


> Still I think the number is useful since you have people mismangaging whether they are treating or not, so it should all even out.


Many who treat do so improperly and consequently report high losses. Many who are treatment free do nothing and report high losses. So....one should presume these misreported results somehow, mysteriously balance and produce accurate numbers? My brain hurts!


----------



## Barry

Tenbears said:


> I also think that treatment fee is a poor choice of terms. sugar dusting, and drone comb manipulation is technically a treatment. In my opinion the term treatment free sounds as though a beekeeper leaves to colony to it's own devices and lets the chips fall where they may. Proper management whether it be compound, chemical, or pesticide free or not need to be timely and efficient to be effective.


'Treatment free' doesn't equate to 'management free.'


----------



## ginkgo

Shifting to other clues behind a colony's demise, in my area, excess condensation shows up looking like coffee has dripped down the front of the hive (assuming box was proactively slightly tipped to help direct drips away from the cluster). The inner cover can have gunky stains that appear like coffee, e.g., if you don't have a quilt box on.


----------



## Michael Bush

>So....one should presume these misreported results somehow, mysteriously balance and produce accurate numbers?

I agreed they were NOT accurate numbers. But yes, no mystery involved, since both groups include new beekeepers who are not managing their bees well and since both groups have beekeepers who do not understand how to treat correctly and how to "not treat" correctly, it makes it a little less inaccurate. You're looking at one datapoint and the numbers on both sides of that point are skewed in similar ways for similar reasons.


----------



## beemandan

Michael Bush said:


> I agreed they were NOT accurate numbers..... it makes it a little less inaccurate. numbers on both sides of that point are skewed in similar ways for similar reasons.


Ooooohhhhhh! This is just so messed up I can't decide where to begin. I think the only logical next step is for me to go outside and scream.


----------



## rhaldridge

Michael Palmer said:


> In my opinion, the majority of beekeepers responding to the survey are beekeepers that don't know how to manage their bees or why their bees didn't make it.


That's correct-- they break out those numbers, and most are backyard or hobbyist beekeepers, many of whom probably don't know what they are doing.

However, the vast majority of *colonies* in the survey belonged to commercial outfits, who presumably do know what they are doing. This latter group, which comprises most of the colonies surveyed, is all treated. Their loss rate was lower than the hobbyist loss rate, where many hives were untreated and many beekeepers were probably not competent,

But what surprised me about the survey was that the difference wasn't as great as I'd been led to expect.

It made me wonder if at least part of the difference between treated and untreated was due more to competent management than to the use of treatments.



> Preliminary survey results indicate that 31.1% of managed honey bee colonies in the
> United States were lost during the 2012/2013 winter. This represents an increase in loss
> of 9.2 points or 42% over the previous 2011/2012 winter’s total losses that were
> estimated at 21.9% (Figure 1). This level of loss is on par with the 6 year average total
> loss of 30.5%2.
> 
> On average, U.S. beekeepers lost 45.1% of the colonies in their operation during the
> winter of 2012/2013. This is a 19.8 point or 78.2% increase in the average operational
> loss compared to the previous winter (2011/2012), which was estimated at 25.3%. The
> difference between average loss and total loss is explained by the respondent pool: while
> a majority of the respondents (95%) were backyard beekeepers, they managed a small
> fraction of the colonies represented in the survey (6%). For this reason total loss (which
> is more heavily influenced by commercial beekeeper losses) is more representative of
> national losses.


----------



## Paul McCarty

I would agree - TF-not TF doesn't mean nothing. It's management. Many commercial units are akin to a feedlot operation, so I would assume any gains from chemical treatments would be negated by the large numbers and random propabilities. It is much easier to do TF style stuff if you are smaller and can watch them closer. Costs too much for commercial.


----------



## JWChesnut

Surveys have self-reporting issues and bias. In animal studies, techniques of mark-and-recapture have been refined to get unbiased estimates of demography and survival.

BeeSource has more than a decade of posting history and is conveniently categorized into TF and general forums. One feature of this history, is many "nyms" are active for 2-4 years and then disappear. This feature allows "mark-and-recapture" surveys to be performed on Beekeepers to detect "lifespan". I did a prototype investigation where I selected 30 "nyms" created in the 2003-2008 period. I classed them into three groups "TF diehards", "TF>converting over time to T", and "Treatment-type". I found the "lifespan" of "nyms" in the "TF diehards" cohort was significantly (p= 0.005) shorter than the other two classes. I performed this analysis on both active posting history and "last visit" date -- accessible in the profile. I will note that many posters stop commenting long before the last visit date.

One explanation (and there are others) is that TF apiaries have shorter survival than apiaries managed under other protocols, and this explains why TF enthusiasts post for a period and then disappear with higher velocity than keepers in the other two classes.


----------



## Paul McCarty

Even that survey is a bit biased. It does not account for the people who get fed up and leave because of harrassment.


----------



## Barry

I stopped "promoting" TF a long time ago, even tho I still am today.


----------



## Paul McCarty

I think the issue is "evangalism" and it's various flavours, more so than T or TF. We are all guilty at one point or another as everyone wants to be "right".


----------



## Barry

Once I became friends with Jim, Sheri, Mark, Kieth, Roland and a few others, it made me step back and view beekeeping from a broader perspective that has brought a better balance to my view of beekeeping. I'm happy to share what I do, but have given up on the evangelizing part.


----------



## Paul McCarty

I get tired of all of it from time to time and have to step away from the forums from time to time.


----------



## Michael Bush

> It does not account for the people who get fed up and leave because of harrassment. 

I happen to know a lot of those.


----------



## Paul McCarty

That's what I suspect. I know a lot of big named people in my region who are NOT on this site and have no interest.


----------



## rhaldridge

JWChesnut said:


> One explanation (and there are others) is that TF apiaries have shorter survival than apiaries managed under other protocols, and this explains why TF enthusiasts post for a period and then disappear with higher velocity than keepers in the other two classes.


I think your explanation is probably correct. It would appear, from all the available evidence, that you have to be a better than average beekeeper to succeed at TF beekeeping. I would expect TF beginners to fail at a greater than average rate. Some of us just can't resist a challenge, I guess.

I wonder if you found any nyms that you could label "T converting over time to TF," since this is the approach often recommended to beginners who like the idea of TF beekeeping. As in, "treat until you figure out the basics, then if you still want to go treatment free..." It may be harder to get off that treadmill than folks realize.

If that cohort does not exist, maybe it's not such a good recommendation.


----------



## Oldtimer

A good analysis JWChestnut. I kinda knew it was true for a long time because of the numbers of people some of whom I saw as friends and enjoyed talking to, who have simply vanished. There are some names in my head right now and I thought of them at the time as probably unprepared, should things not work out as they expected. (ie, don't treat but bees do fine anyway).
However it takes someone with a better mind than my own, to be able to formulate that data into a usable format with verifiable results.


----------



## JWChesnut

Ray,
In the small sample I prototyped, no, I didn't find that "T>>TF" conversion being reported. Doing the profile legwork (reading long-dead threads, etc) is time-consuming, I doubt I will carry this much forward.

I, myself, have insistently given that very advice -- start with standards, before you branch out. In my interactions with real humans, I am successful in this advice on Top Bar efforts, but not Treatments. TF tends to arise from a quasi-religious world view and is hermetically resistant to actual evidence. It tends to be selected prior to experience.

I did find several folks reporting side-by-side, or split apiary tests, much like my own investigations. I am firm believer that everyone has to experiment, and their experiments should be paired against a "control".


----------



## beemandan

Michael Bush said:


> I happen to know a lot of those.


If one posts an opinion on a controversial topic and then expects it to go unchallenged they're sure to be disappointed. If one starts a thread with a contentious tone, then that person should expect a thorough, virtual beating. I've taken stands on controversial topics and started contentious threads and have accepted my lumps. I get accused of being anti tf. I challenge anyone to find a post where I so much as suggested that someone expressing a tf philosophy should treat. Yet the accusations persist. I've been accused of lying. I've been included in the 'old timers set in their ways' crowd. 
In the end I evangelize. Test your bees for mites using an objective method. That's my sermon. I decline to sit idly by when I see posts that I believe are misleading to newcomers. I don't fluff my posts up for fear of hurting anyone's feelings. When I get my beatings.....I don't run away crying that I got chased off.
If anyone claims to have been 'chased off' for expressing their opinions, then in my opinion, either their opinion didn't hold up to a challenge or they are cowards. 
If this is too harsh.....I'm sure Barry will delete it.....and I'll understand....but it's my belief.


----------



## Paul McCarty

Some of us simply get tired of the arguing that is seen here. It is not friendly or inviting. I think I have mentioned it before.


----------



## Michael Bush

There are many people in the world who are very thin skinned for whatever reason. Those people don't seem to last long on here. They either find a friendlier place or they don't go online to talk about bees anymore. It doesn't make them cowards, when they find confrontation upsetting and feel life is too short to spend it upset. It doesn't make them wrong that they can't articulate clearly their reasons for their opinions.


----------



## beemandan

Not to put too fine a point on it....if someone is thin skinned or upset by a virtual confrontation....then it is a good idea to avoid controversial topics. I see loads of threads that aren't argumentative. 
The same holds true about arguments not being 'inviting'. Are there ways to have polarized views, to state those without it seeming contentious? 
I believe that adults can have a difference of opinion without getting angry. Truth be told, I cannot ever recall being genuinely angry from an internet discussion...contentious or not. This is the internet after all. How upsetting can a confrontation get? As I've said....I've been called a liar. In the real world, where I live, calling a stranger a liar will often result in physical violence. But....this is the internet. 
Where do these 'chased off' people go? Is there somewhere that beekeepers go where everyone agrees with each other? I am being serious. 
Maybe I'm so thick skinned I just can't see it.


----------



## Michael Bush

>Where do these 'chased off' people go? 

There are several other bee forums. Some of them enforce politeness. Some of them just leave altogether...


----------



## DMLinton

Greetings folks! I guess you could call me one of the "chased off" ones. I debated for a long time before I chose to say this little bit. Also, I do not consider myself chased off but rather smart enough to know when I am wasting my time. Having decided, last August, to take the plunge and bring in my first bees in Spring 2014, I subscribed to several beekeeping forums. The only time I have gotten straight up answers to my questions, except for a few PMs, was in chat on another forum several weeks ago. I was advised that members were not to be asking bee questions in chat. To point out the obvious, I broke the rules in my search for answers. Interesting.

One of my main observations, and tentative conclusions, is that most expert beekeepers on these forums are experts, right enough, but primarily only in their own yards.

Treatment/Treatment Free? Neither exists except as ideals. Bee management exists and depends on the local conditions, climate and several other variables. I grew up a farm boy and I can tell you very clearly what happens if one tries to keep livestock without an effective health management strategy in place. Health management means neither constant medicating nor constant failure to medicate when advisable - it means health management.

Ideally? Yes, I would love to go treatment free. Realistically? The bees must be healthy to be productive. There's a difference.

I willl admit, perhaps unlike a lot of new beekeepers and maybe a few that have been around a while, that I do in fact know everything about bees. In other words, I know so very little that I have no clue as to what it is I do not know. Therefore, in my mind, I know everything.

For another reason newbs disappear have a look at the OP in this thread .... then look at what the topic now is.

I have found a lady with some fairly impressive looking bees to buy queens from in my area. She is the latest generation of her family to continuously propagate from bees originally brought from England by her Great-Great-Grandfather when immigrated to Canada in the mid-1800s. They are still on the same farm and still wintered in the same cellar. The beekeeper has never purchased a queen and, so far as she has been able to find out, neither did any of those who went before her. She does not treat with any of the accepted mite treatments. Except for when someone spayed her hives with insecticide (leaving her with just four queens to rebuild with), her winter losses are typical of what has been considered normal for decades - 10% to 15%. She has been keeping bees for over forty years. Will I forego treating for mites? Not if my health management strategy says to treat.

Okay, I will go back to my chair and keep quiet. Maybe drop around once in a while to see if anything helpful has been posted.


----------



## beemandan

DMLinton said:


> Okay, I will go back to my chair and keep quiet. Maybe drop around once in a while to see if anything helpful has been posted.


Thoughtful post. 
I do agree this thread, like many of its kind, do wind up the same....and yet, I don't think anyone has been impolite or had any sort of bad words for the op....do you?
Good luck to you.


----------



## David LaFerney

I think this has been an excellent thread - a debate about a controversial subject with respected experienced members of the beekeeping community on both sides making vigorous cases while remaining quite respectful.


----------



## Barry

Although Dan did resort to screaming, albeit outside.


----------



## David LaFerney

Nothing disrespectful about going outside to calm down. Seriously, I copied this thread without the less relevant bits, and it's pretty good stuff.


----------



## beemandan

As countless similar threads have done in the past, this one points out how people can view the same events and come to conclusions that are polarized opposites. And no matter how vigorous or long the debate goes on, nobody changes their mind. 
If they would only take my side....all would be well.


----------



## David LaFerney

Actually I think quite a lot of people do change their mind on this thing. Anyway, not everyone has already made their mind up.


----------



## wildbranch2007

all this arguing and the OP hasn't logged in since he asked the question to see all the commotion they caused


----------



## Oldtimer

Yes noticed that. See it quite often actually, someone asks a question, a bunch of people try to help out & the OP does not even acknowledge it.


----------



## beemandan

wildbranch2007 said:


> all this arguing and the OP hasn't logged in since he asked the question


Interesting.


----------



## Dieseltrac

I live in upstate NY and the weather has been as you know down right cold. I had no signs of life from any of my 8 hives I went into winter with. I'm not going to rule anything out just yet. If my hives fail I want to check them for Nosema ceranae.


----------



## beemandan

Dieseltrac said:


> I'm not going to rule anything out just yet. If my hives fail I want to check them for Nosema ceranae.


Did you test for mites last fall?


----------



## Daniel Y

Randy at http://scientificbeekeeping.com/ does an interesting explanation of the possible effect of Nosema on a colony. It fits well with what I see in early spring faltering hives and would also fit well with losses of hives in spring when bees are attempting to build up.

I general he looks at a colony as an entire organism itself. Basically not a collection of tiny insects but as a single animal that grows to approx 12 lbs. He then selected another animal that has had it's growth studied that is comparable weight. what he came up with was the broiler chicken that is grown from hatching to about 7 lbs in 6 weeks.

in just the weight of chicken versus weight of bees the bees blow the chicken away. He then goes on to explain that this weight to weight measurement may still be way off indicating the the bees in fact make a chicken look like it knows nothing about how to grow. basically in the same time a chicken can grow to be 7 lbs a honey bee colony can grow to be around 50 to 60 lbs. Not only that but it will do so while expended vast amount of energy working to find the food for that growth in the first place.

Now whether your agree with this assessment or not there is no denying that bees can and will grow at a tremendous rate. and disruption of the process of nutrition would be devastating to such growth. And disruption of processing nutrients is exactly what Nosema does.

I thik it is a valuable idea to keep in mind when I find that hive that is just not keeping up. Disruption to that need for nutrients becomes far more serious if I think about it.


----------



## Dieseltrac

I did not test for mites.


----------



## beemandan

Dieseltrac said:


> I did not test for mites.


I'd add it to my list.


----------



## TalonRedding

So, basically, all of you are saying that there is more than one way to keep bees? There is more to keeping bees than people ever imagined? A beekeeper should know what's happening with his/her bees? Are you all saying that it's beneficial to learn the ins and outs of the pests and diseases just as we do with the bees themselves? I have to apply what I read, observe, and learn to keeping bees? You mean there is real work involved?  :ws:

All of you are hitting the nail on the head. It's frustrating when I see folks trying to put everything in life inside a box. Then, they expect those things to act within the parameter of the box, which they created. It's madness. Beekeeping is no different. 
All you have to do is be observant, and know what you need to be observant for. If one cannot do this, then it will be to their demise. In a sense, natural selection doesn't just apply to the bees, but it also applies to Beekeepers who fail to observe and act on what they find. There are MANY ways to act. Stop putting beekeeping in a box (lol...no pun intended!). :gh:


----------



## Cloverdale

Dieseltrac said:


> I live in upstate NY and the weather has been as you know down right cold. I had no signs of life from any of my 8 hives I went into winter with. I'm not going to rule anything out just yet. If my hives fail I want to check them for Nosema ceranae.


I, too, live in upstate NY....I will admit to babying my bees; this is my first winter. I started with 2 packages from TX, and one local. We harvested around 180 lbs. of honey last year, and the thought of "maybe" losing the hives was not acceptable without doing all I could. So I treated (a little late) made up a sugar board with a small pollen patty buried in it. Wrapped in black roofing paper, then when the below temps were predicted strapped foam board around 3 sides. So far they are still alive and eating the sugar. One hive had excess moisture and saw that we had wrapped too high and the hive was not ventilating properly, so we cut some of the paper away from near the outer cover and that seemed to help. Now a retired NYS bee inspector, Joe Hewitt, told me in March he would put a piece of bubble wrap (or something similar) on top of the bars, just in the middle of them, not completely side to side, for warmth to help control the fluctuating temps of March. I guess this seems excessive, but if has worked so far.


----------



## Cloverdale

I was monitoring varroa with SBB. Still have to work on my timing. Also, I did not use any QE, hence the ton of honey and a good flow for us last year. I actually HAD to harvest honey!


----------



## Dieseltrac

I am entering my fifth year of beekeeping and I have come across allot of different things that that all us beekeepers come up against. From 300 plus Ib black bears to little mites that appear as tiny specs of a reddish brown on the side of a bee. An then there was that second swarm I caught was all excited to get them going so I feed it with a division feeder only to check on them about 10 days later to see the wax moth had taken out 4 frames of comb. That same hive was taken out by a bear shortly after. So I had since made investments in fencing and so far I have been able to deter the bear. I had two hives coming out of Winter last year, I split one to build a nuc and wanted one as a honey production hive but did rob a few frames of drawn comb to help out some packages I started. Both of my over wintered hives swarmed, this was my fault for not completely going through the entire hive and catching Queen cells. Last years build up was super fast for me but on the bright side I caught two of the swarms. The nuc I put together swarmed as well. Swarmy year? Being it was my fourth year I look back and see allot of mistakes I have made. 

Two packages on the way with Russian queens this spring.


----------



## Dieseltrac

Oh yeah I am trying to be TF but have feed global patties in the spring.


----------



## wildbranch2007

here is a link to the head bee inspector in Main about how to diagnose a dead out.

http://mainebeekeepers.org/information-for-beekeepers/when-disaster-strikes/


----------



## Oldtimer

Good link. Should be a sticky.


----------



## Cloverdale

Dieseltrac said:


> I am entering my fifth year of beekeeping and I have come across allot of different things that that all us beekeepers come up against. From 300 plus Ib black bears to little mites that appear as tiny specs of a reddish brown on the side of a bee. An then there was that second swarm I caught was all excited to get them going so I feed it with a division feeder only to check on them about 10 days later to see the wax moth had taken out 4 frames of comb. That same hive was taken out by a bear shortly after. So I had since made investments in fencing and so far I have been able to deter the bear. I had two hives coming out of Winter last year, I split one to build a nuc and wanted one as a honey production hive but did rob a few frames of drawn comb to help out some packages I started. Both of my over wintered hives swarmed, this was my fault for not completely going through the entire hive and catching Queen cells. Last years build up was super fast for me but on the bright side I caught two of the swarms. The nuc I put together swarmed as well. Swarmy year? Being it was my fourth year I look back and see allot of mistakes I have made.
> 
> Two packages on the way with Russian queens this spring.


Well, we'll see about those bears; I don't really think the fence I have will keep them out if they really want to get in, I am hoping they don't come down to us and keep themselves up on the mountain…I have 3 pckgs. coming, and two Buckfast queens from Canada. I am sure I will make a ton of mistakes, but hopefully nothing too drastic; but you never know with the bees!


----------



## Cloverdale

wildbranch2007 said:


> here is a link to the head bee inspector in Main about how to diagnose a dead out.
> 
> http://mainebeekeepers.org/information-for-beekeepers/when-disaster-strikes/


Great link, thanks.


----------



## Dieseltrac

Yes Thank you for the link.



wildbranch2007 said:


> here is a link to the head bee inspector in Main about how to diagnose a dead out.
> 
> http://mainebeekeepers.org/information-for-beekeepers/when-disaster-strikes/


----------



## Dieseltrac

Today hit 53 degrees I think or around that. Confirmed my fears all my hives lost. I need to take pics to display the damage.


----------



## Cloverdale

Dieseltrac said:


> Today hit 53 degrees I think or around that. Confirmed my fears all my hives lost. I need to take pics to display the damage.


----------



## mike bispham

beemandan said:


> I've been included in the 'old timers set in their ways' crowd.
> In the end I evangelize. Test your bees for mites using an objective method. That's my sermon. I decline to sit idly by when I see posts that I believe are misleading to newcomers.


And then what? What is the next part of your sermon?

How do you teach moving toward tf to those who want to explore tf?

Mike (UK)


----------



## mike bispham

DMLinton said:


> I grew up a farm boy and I can tell you very clearly what happens if one tries to keep livestock without an effective health management strategy in place. Health management means neither constant medicating nor constant failure to medicate when advisable - it means health management.


DM what part does selective propagation play in your health management of animals?

Mike (UK)


----------



## mike bispham

David LaFerney said:


> I think this has been an excellent thread - a debate about a controversial subject with respected experienced members of the beekeeping community on both sides making vigorous cases while remaining quite respectful.


As someone who gets yelled at a lot, I agree. Very thoughtful.

I think lots of arguments are born of a difference in conversational style, and sheer clumsyness. I tend to assume others understand that I want to 'argue' my points but that doesn't mean I'm deliberately being offensive. Constructive argument for me is a tool. I can be polite, but tend to return rudeness when its persistent - and then things escalate. 

I do think some people positively and systematically try to stop conversations about raising resistance. Its that topic that seems to set off fireworks, and there's definately a 'usual suspects' list.

Mike (UK)


----------



## mike bispham

TalonRedding said:


> All you have to do is be observant, and know what you need to be observant for. [..] There are MANY ways to act.


And of those ways, some will result in a healthier long term outlook, and some will will simply be managing the problem, and even making the outlook worse in the long term.

Telling which is which, and having a scheme to move toward the former, should be at the heart of any system of husbandry.

How can that not be central to any discussion of 'treatment free'? 

Mike (UK)


----------



## jonathan

mike bispham said:


> I do think some people positively and systematically try to stop conversations about raising resistance. Its that topic that seems to set off fireworks, and there's definately a 'usual suspects' list.


So when you want to argue it is simply to make a point yet when others want to contest that point it is to systematically 'stop conversations about raising resistance'

It is in part this conspiracy nonsense which encourages many posters to challenge your views.
The same thing happens in response to the single issue neonic campaigners many of whom are not even beekeepers.
The stuff is all over your website - conspiracies involving the manufacturers of bee medication, the magazines which take their advertising etc.
A lot of the regulars here seem to be people who think and argue according to the science and the evidence.

Stick to the facts and reference them and your arguments will get a lot further.


----------



## mike bispham

jonathan said:


> So when you want to argue it is simply to make a point yet when others want to contest that point it is to systematically 'stop conversations about raising resistance'


Its the fact that it happens all the time, utterly predictably. This is another example. Its like 'Arrgghh, he's here again, the raising-resistance man - STOP HIM!!!!' CALL THE FIRE BRIGADE!

Raising the temperature dramatically seems to me to be a strategy to achieve that. 



jonathan said:


> It is in part this conspiracy nonsense which encourages many posters to challenge your views.


I'm not sure I've raised the idea of conspiracy at all - though others have have accused me of doing so. 



jonathan said:


> The same thing happens in response to the single issue neonic campaigners many of whom are not even beekeepers.


I can imagine that where the topic is not pesticide poisoning that would be irritating. But in the tf forum (which is where this generally happens) the topic is ways of doing tf beekeeping. And raising resistance is central to that topic. So its unclear to me why people should work so hard at preventing discussion of that, and in that space I'm not alone is suspecting some murky motives.

[


jonathan said:


> The stuff is all over your website - conspiracies involving the manufacturers of bee medication, the magazines which take their advertising etc.


Where exactly? Are you referring to this page?

http://www.suttonjoinery.co.uk/CCD/the politics.htm 

Here I explore how the accumulative result of thousands of people simply trying to earn a living and feed their families results in a focused pressure that shapes way people think and act. There is no mention of a 'conspiracy' - its about how the different parties contribute to the situation we have.



jonathan said:


> A lot of the regulars here seem to be people who think and argue according to the science and the evidence.
> 
> Stick to the facts and reference them and your arguments will get a lot further.


That's not my experience. Science and evidence is on my side, and I'll always supply references when asked nicely. Everyone claims science is on their side, but saying it doesn't make it true. The core science here is that rooted in the realities that flow from the facts of heritable traits. I can understand many people finding those facts unpalatable for one reason or another. But shooting them down, or shooting down the messenger, doesn't alter them. 

The last time we met Jonathon I made a series of polite and detailed responses to questions you'd raised about my positions. http://www.beesource.com/forums/sho...ee-adequate-to-the-task&p=1073371#post1073371 I had no thanks, acknowledgement, or rebuttal. You simply ignored the fact that I'd supplied effective explanations to your questions. That isn't how to have constructive discussions in my book. 

Mike (UK)


----------



## jonathan

I didn't realise you were waiting for a reply to your comments regarding to poor content of a lot of bee books. I have no disagreement there.
The point I originally made was that beekeepers have been treating bees for decades, since well before the varroa era.
Someone made a point earlier in this thread about how good husbandry of livestock involves treatment when necessary.
My father is in his 80s and still manages about a dozen colonies as a hobbyist. It is interesting talking to him about beekeeping practice in the 40s and 50s as he helped my grandfather when he was growing up on the farm. Talk to the old guys in your area. They will all have used treatments on their bees. Acarine/trachael mite was a huge problem in the 1970s but is less of an issue now.
Beekeepers have been treating bees for a long time. Whether you think that is a good thing or a bad thing is a separate issue.


----------



## D Semple

Paul McCarty said:


> Even that survey is a bit biased. It does not account for the people who get fed up and leave because of harrassment.


Hard to be everything to everybody, many former TF posters are still out there just at different sites. I would like to facebook to take advantage of some of them, but have to big of a family. 



Barry said:


> Once I became friends with Jim, Sheri, Mark, Kieth, Roland and a few others, it made me step back and view beekeeping from a broader perspective that has brought a better balance to my view of beekeeping. I'm happy to share what I do, but have given up on the evangelizing part.


As a business man I like reading about the business of beekeeping and enjoy learning the commercial perspective also. Whole different world from those of us that just play with our bees. 

Don


----------



## mike bispham

jonathan said:


> I didn't realise you were waiting for a reply to your comments regarding to poor content of a lot of bee books. I have no disagreement there.


I just normal to acknowledge things in my world Jonathan, especially when, in the course of a discussion, a point has been carefully made that corrects a position. When someone shows me I've been mistaken, or said something that adds insight, I say, ah, yes, you're right, thank you. When there is no acknowledgemnt, and then furthermore, the person comes back later acting like their position remeains sound, its downright rude. And dishonest. 

For example (again) you accused me of having a website riddled with conspiritorial theories. I've pointed out that isn't so, and invited you to show me otherwise. In my world there's a standing implication: make good your claim or retract it - preferably with an apology. To not do so is bad manners at least. If you later repeated it it would _awful_ manners, and deeply offensive. And now a deliberate fib too. 

These are some of things I mean by different conversational styles. My approach is broadly academic/scientific - objectivity rules; if it hurts its probably doing you good; always make sure that everybody is clear that you understand when you've been corrected. Fess up, or lose all credibility. 

This make it doubly galling when you suggest I be more scientific in my approach!



jonathan said:


> Beekeepers have been treating bees for a long time. Whether you think that is a good thing or a bad thing is a separate issue.


And its always been contentious - rightly so. See Manley talking about 'Isle of Wight disease' in the 1940s for example.

My point to you was that we'd got away with it up till varroa. Then the systematic manner of treatments combined with the decimation of feral created a trap - of exactly the kind Manley speaks of (he is less than sympathetic to the 'live and let die' types of his time btw). This trap is treatment-addiction. 

Lets continue that conversation back there if you want to carry on with it. Its off-topic here.

Mike (UK)


----------



## mike bispham

D Semple said:


> As a business man I like reading about the business of beekeeping and enjoy learning the commercial perspective also. Whole different world from those of us that just play with our bees. Don


And from those of us whose main motivation is escaping the treatment-trap as much for conservation purposes as for reasons of personal gain. 

Mike (UK)


----------



## Paul McCarty

The "stopping conversation" part sickens me. It reflects the political divisions in the USA as well.


----------



## jonathan

mike bispham said:


> For example (again) you accused me of having a website riddled with conspiritorial theories. I've pointed out that isn't so, and invited you to show me otherwise. In my world there's a standing implication: make good your claim or retract it - preferably with an apology.


OK.
Lifted straight from your website, a section titled 'The politics'



> First, the journals. Print media has to make money to remain in existence. In the case of the bee magazines a proportion of this money comes from subscribers, but the greater part comes from advertisers. You need only look at what is being advertised to understand that the proprietors of these business are terrified by 'natural' beekeeping.





> It is a forth factor that I want to present here. It is not in the interests of the broad beekeeping industry to promote the 'natural' solution.





> Their articles and editorials are carefully chosen to support not the bees, not even the small beekeepers, but to promote the parasitic industry that support their own business, their own livelihoods.





> Fifth are the pharmaceutical companies making the medication, and often funding, and directing the 'research'. To ask what interest they have in understanding and publicizing 'natural' beekeeping would be foolish. It is in their interest to have permanently sick bees.





> This outlines the business-political nexus that ensures that there is no funded research into 'natural' methods,





> And it shows too the way forward. The 'natural' and 'organic' keepers must act firmly to counter the machine.


----------



## mike bispham

jonathan said:


> OK.
> Lifted straight from your website, a section titled 'The politics'


Now show me the word 'conspiracy'. Or any synonym. 

And/or explain to me how you get to the idea of a conspiracy from those quotes. 

Its an explanation that specifically sets out to account for the situation without need for a proposition of conspiracy. Its an alternation explanation to the - lazy and paranoid assumption - 'conspiracy'.


----------



## jonathan

I think the claim that articles in the beekeeping magazines are 'carefully chosen' to support the 'parasitic industry' could quite safely be called a conspiracy theory.

I was reminded of this when you started making slurs about Barry and the Beesource Forum advertisers the other day.
Old habits die hard.

Or maybe you have some real evidence to back up that claim!


----------



## lenny bee

I check for mites by placeing a board or cardboard same size as screen bottom smeared with a thin coat of vasilian ,use reg.without the baby smell. an place it under my screen bottom board for 3 days .Then assess from there. I know there will be mites, but the amount will tell me when to treat. This year I treated two weeks earlier than last year.


----------



## jonathan

Taking a sample of 300 bees and shaking them in a mesh topped shaker with icing sugar dislodges all the mites and gives an accurate count.
Shake over a bowl of water and the sugar dissolves and the mites float.


----------



## Rolande

> Originally Posted by jonathan:
> Beekeepers have been treating bees for a long time. Whether you think that is a good thing or a bad thing is a separate issue.





mike bispham said:


> And its always been contentious - rightly so. See Manley talking about 'Isle of Wight disease' in the 1940s for example.


Hi Mike, out of interest could you give us the specific Manley quote/s which you refer to; as you'll know, other than writing three books he was also a prolific contributor to the magazines of the time as well as being quite a letter writer.


----------



## enjambres

lenny bee said:


> I check for mites by placeing a board or cardboard same size as screen bottom smeared with a thin coat of vasilian ,use reg.without the baby smell. an place it under my screen bottom board for 3 days .Then assess from there. I know there will be mites, but the amount will tell me when to treat. This year I treated two weeks earlier than last year.


You might try just using ordinary cooking oil (corn oil, olive oil, etc.) on the boards. It's easier to apply than Vaseline (and to remove - it just washes off in warm water). And I find it catches the mites just fine. Also its a good re-purposing for any oil from your kitchen that's gotten a little beyond its prime for cooking. I mostly use olive oil. I think the "sticky" part of this method is a holdover from when some proposed that sticky boards might be used in the hives to entrap mites in the same way that oil basins do SHB. Unfortunately I don't think mites spend a lot of time wandering around within the hives like SHB do. So the mites that wind up on the board are the ones that have fallen, or been groomed off the bees. Which makes the sticky boards useful devices for monitoring mite levels but not for reducing the population. 

And what makes the boards useful is that alive or (mostly) dead, the mites don't need to be stuck to the boards with anything particularly glue-y. I did some tests with live mites on simply-oiled boards and just a moderately thin,, even coating of olive oil stops them in their tracks. 

I'm an very keen on sticky boards. Certainly for small scale, backyard, or hobby, beekeepers I think every hive should be set up so it can be tested regularly throughout the season. Once-a-season sticky boards are less than useful since they are best used to assess trends, not events. But unlike the various "roll" methods, they can be done with no disruption to the bees, so regularly repeated tests have the potential to actually be done on schedule - and can be done by the most inexperienced beekeeper, with excellent accuracy. 

No matter what you choose to do about the mites you have, not knowing the level of infestation is just plain foolish, IMO. 

Enj.


----------



## mike bispham

jonathan said:


> I think the claim that articles in the beekeeping magazines are 'carefully chosen' to support the 'parasitic industry' could quite safely be called a conspiracy theory.


The media is constantly shaped by its advertisers. That's just a fact of life. My characterisation of the 'beekeeper support industry' as 'parasitic' is a viewpoint. 

Hardly 'all over the website' is it?

Its a thinkpiece, its meant to challenge people to look at the structures they take for granted as being somehow helpful and generous and be a bit more hard-headed. Industries write narratives that support their agendas. Challenging them is healthy.

Anyhow, enough of this Jonathan. This thread is not all about me. If you want to continue I suggest you take it elsewhere.


----------



## mike bispham

Rolande said:


> Hi Mike, out of interest could you give us the specific Manley quote/s which you refer to; as you'll know, other than writing three books he was also a prolific contributor to the magazines of the time as well as being quite a letter writer.


Hi Rolande, 

Sure: its in Honey Farming, p 264. He discusses the issue for 4 full pages. Its very interesting to see him work through the same arguments we have today.

BTW I'd highly recommend this book for beekeepers at all levels. It's written by a practicing and experienced commercial beekeeper deeply connected to his peers, familiar with the literature of the day. Yet it is conversational in tone, making the subject matter very accessible. 

Mike (UK)


----------



## Rolande

mike bispham said:


> Hi Rolande,
> 
> Sure: its in Honey Farming, p 264. He discusses the issue for 4 full pages. Its very interesting to see him work through the same arguments we have today.


Thanks Mike, for those who don't have the book but would like to read the passage you refer to:
http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rc...=rm8EwJo_YHjeGBkviCUfUA&bvm=bv.62922401,d.d2k


----------



## mike bispham

Rolande said:


> Thanks Mike, for those who don't have the book but would like to read the passage you refer to:
> http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rc...=rm8EwJo_YHjeGBkviCUfUA&bvm=bv.62922401,d.d2k


Its on the pdf page 198. You can search for "there is another aspect"


----------

