# Treatment free success or failure: what makes the difference?



## RiodeLobo (Oct 11, 2010)

I think you have summed it up well. I believe the trick is to start with genetics that have their potential expressed and that are acclimatized to your location. After that it is a matter of good beekeeping practices and growing faster than your loss rate. I will have to let you know how it turns out...


----------



## Andrew Dewey (Aug 23, 2005)

Genetics. First and Foremost. And not believing claims that seem too good to be true.

Location is second - as what has come out of the CCD research is that bee nutrition is super important. So you can have good genetic bees but if they starve, they are still dead.

Trusting your senses - realizing that TF bees suffer queenlessness and other issues just as often as treated bees do - and if you see a situation that requires beekeeper action, and the action falls within your philosophical limits, take it.

Two more points of just about equal value and I hate to have either of them last: Don't assume _without some evidence_ that every swarm you come across is of magical prized "feral" stock and don't be afraid for whatever reason to go into your colonies - have a reason, sure, but don't let fear of a populous hive keep you from knowing what is going on in the hive.

In many ways TF is an extreme application of IPM. There are issues (varroa) for which chemical response is off of the table - but it still helps incredibly to have a knowledgeable beekeeper aware of the challenges going on in his/her hive.


----------



## pgayle (Jan 27, 2008)

Some speculation that I've heard is that the "beginner's luck" is a combination of things.. starting out on new equipment with little or no old comb, etc. That would favor the first year beginners. The second and subsequent years, inexperienced beekeepers might experience more swarming due to poor management, thus breaking the brood cycle. The year we had a lot of swarming, we had all 11 colonies make it through the following winter. The next winter, we lost 3 out of 12 in late winter and spring, with one of those having been a very strong colony. Another thing is that the hobbyists can "afford" to take the losses because profit is secondary. 

Disclaimer: I am a hobbyist beekeeper just finishing my 6th summer, just enough knowledge to be dangerous. I am not treating.


----------



## fieldsofnaturalhoney (Feb 29, 2012)

I would definetly fall under the substantially less experience umbrella, but treatment free beekeeping is all I have ever known. My first year failures were purchasing previously treated bees, and hoping to bring them into my treatment free operation., we all know how well that went. Since, my yearly lost of hives coming out of winter has been around ten percent. I am one who does not necessarily believe that being successful at treatment free beekeeping has something to do with location. If I had a list of things of why I have been successful thus far, many of them you have stated;
1. Its all I have ever known, praticed, & managed 
2. I cutout numerous feral colonies in the season and add them to the apiary (these bees are doing fine without treatment or 
human intervention)
3. Foundationless frames
4. Leave more honey on in the Fall than I take
5. Split from survival hives that has traits that I want to keep in the apiary
6. Overwinter nucs in case I hive a higher than normal winter loss percentage rate (first time this year)
7. I pratice/run IPM principles


----------



## merince (Jul 19, 2011)

pgayle said:


> Another thing is that the hobbyists can "afford" to take the losses because profit is secondary.


I think this is one of the crucial differences. Once your livelihood is at stake, you make decisions differently. You want a protocol with repeatable results over (for a lack of better word) a statistically significant sample of locations, hives and years. And while the TF practice has many trailblazers, I don't think it's quite there yet.

Disclaimer: I haven't treated my hives since I've started keeping bees 4 years ago. However, all my hives get brood breaks.


----------



## schmism (Feb 7, 2009)

rhaldridge said:


> Another reason cited by those who succeed is the genetic makeup of their bees, but I've come to believe that once you've split your colonies several times, your genetics will converge with the local ferals and managed colonies in your area (if your queens are open mated.) So beyond the factor of local adaptation-- for example, the timing of buildup for local conditions and so forth-- I'm not sure that those who succeed really have bees that are more resistant to mites than the background level of resistance.


I think this is a point that is going understated.

Feral bees that have managed to survive without monthly/weekly manipulations by a human beekeeper would seem to be at a much greater advantage than those (ill call them weeker) colonies that require constant maintenance, feeding in the early spring, or treatments by us.

If its popular to take "docile" bees and make many splits of them year after year it becomes easy to see how over a very short period of time that set of kept bees would seem to develop to almost depend on our "support".

Based on that I believe the success or failure of any given no-treatment colony is much more related to how "close" they are to "true" feral bees. (there is much debate about what true feral bees mean also)

NOTE: the above is my opinion on the matter I have little data to back it up. Im not equipped to gather detailed information concerning genetics of my bees (i suppose i havnt payed to have them sequenced) Its a topic that i think needs wide scale data to shed some real light on the topic of natural mite resistance/tolerance.


----------



## Bill91143 (Jun 7, 2013)

I'm with you. I've gone treatment free this year myself. I have several feral hives and a few of my own home grown queens along with some Russian queens I purchased. I have some nucs made up with some left over queens I raised. I am feeding these nucs hoping to get them strong enough to make it through the winter. I will feed if need be, because the lack of their own food is usually my fault due to splitting hives and raising a few queens, but I am determined to stay treatment free.


----------



## Andrew Dewey (Aug 23, 2005)

People are missing my final point - I don't believe there is a strong feral population in my area, and most likely in many other areas too. Those that live in an area with a thriving feral population should be glad but not think that their good fortune is universal.


----------



## WBVC (Apr 25, 2013)

I find it interesting that so many are able to get hold of "feral" stock...swarms, cutouts etc. I have lived in the same area since 1958...with a few away for college. I have never seen a swarm or heard of anyone in the area with feral bees in their yard, home or outbuildings.
I set up a "swarm trap" and it has seen no activity at all.

Are some areas "bee free" or am I just no good at attracting bees to our property?


----------



## Robbin (May 26, 2013)

Hi Rhaldrige,
I work in Fort Walton, live in Laurel Hill. I strongly believe WHERE you are makes a HUGE difference, and you are in a BAD place for pests.
Florida has a very long bee season. 
More brood cycles than further north. 
A long dry dearth.
Long periods of temps in the high 90s with high humidity.

I was treatment free till my drop count reached 150 in my strongest hive and my hives where in noticeable decline. I hope I didn’t wait too long…
Good Luck!


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

Andrew Dewey said:


> Trusting your senses - realizing that TF bees suffer queenlessness and other issues just as often as treated bees do - and if you see a situation that requires beekeeper action, and the action falls within your philosophical limits, take it.


This is a good point. I had one hive this summer, started from a Wolf Creek semi-untreated bees, that went laying worker. If I'd adopted a complete hands-off policy, that hive would now be dead, and I'd be wondering why I couldn't keep bees treatment free. It did take some effort to get that hive requeened, but they have one now. In fact, it took giving them a frame of eggs every week for a month and a half.

It's easy to see why beginners fail at treatment free beekeeping, due to general ignorance, misplaced optimism, and fear of going into hives. What I find more interesting is the examples of longtime highly skilled beekeepers who have failed. Unfortunately, those with lots of hives are rarely willing to risk losing everything, which is certainly understandable. But this results in the majority of non-treaters being young and inexperienced.

I think also that non-treaters need to study up on what some beekeepers have called attrition beekeeping, with the understanding that a certain percentage of your hives will fail to survive, and you have to be prepared to replace them. I was watching that Spivak TED talk earlier today, and she mentioned that a 30% loss rate was now "normal" and she's talking about treated hives.

It seems to me that some beekeepers set up experimental yards to see if non-treatment is possible, and then make no provision to replace their dead-outs. After a few years, all the hives are dead, and they conclude that non-treatment just doesn't work. This strikes me as an unfair trial.


----------



## Edymnion (May 30, 2013)

I believe a lot of it has to do with a combination of signal to noise ratio and self reporting as well.

Those that have successful treatment free years crow about it loudly, but when they suffer large losses they don't go talking anywhere near as loudly about how they lost half their hives at once.

So what you end up with are a lot of people saying it works well because they haven't had it fail yet, and virtually no one that admits to screwing it up royally. Makes it appear at first glance that its this great and easy thing to do because everybody you see is saying it works and nobody is saying it destroyed their entire apiary.


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

Robbin said:


> Hi Rhaldrige,
> I work in Fort Walton, live in Laurel Hill. I strongly believe WHERE you are makes a HUGE difference, and you are in a BAD place for pests.
> Florida has a very long bee season.
> More brood cycles than further north.
> ...


That's rough. Maybe being closer to salt water helps, and we're in an old well-landscaped neighborhood, with lots of irrigated flowers. I tested my hives with a full cup of bees (sugar roll), and my highest mite count was 10. Since (I think) the standard is a half cup, that gave me a mite count of 5. According to Jerry Hayes, for hobbyists in Florida, treatment threshold is 20. These were local bees, by the way, from a fellow bee club member, Joel R. The hive has a terrific queen and has been a bigtime boomer-- lots of frames removed for supporting other hives, making splits, honey harvest, etc.

I'm pretty sure this is just beginner's luck. I do have SHB, but they haven't affected the comb yet. I peeked in all of my hives today, because I'm getting ready to go out of town, and everything looks pretty good.


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

Edymnion said:


> So what you end up with are a lot of people saying it works well because they haven't had it fail yet, and virtually no one that admits to screwing it up royally. Makes it appear at first glance that its this great and easy thing to do because everybody you see is saying it works and nobody is saying it destroyed their entire apiary.


I see a lot of folks saying it doesn't work, because they tried it and failed. Or that a bunch of beginners they know tried it and failed. It's a very common theme here on BeeSource.

But I think you're right that there is some element of self-reporting error involved. If you look at the BeeInformed survey, you see that of those reporting, the non-treaters saw no significant difference in survival. I'm certainly willing to believe that those who tried and failed were not as willing to report their results. But on the other hand, there were actually quite a few beekeepers who reported results as good as those obtained by treating. You'll find plenty of beekeepers here who will tell you flat out that if you don't treat, your bees are doomed. 

Still, if we posit that some of those reporting success are neither lying nor delusional, then it becomes an interesting phenomenon. What is the difference?


----------



## RiodeLobo (Oct 11, 2010)

Edymnion said:


> So what you end up with are a lot of people saying it works well because they haven't had it fail yet, and virtually no one that admits to screwing it up royally. Makes it appear at first glance that its this great and easy thing to do because everybody you see is saying it works and nobody is saying it destroyed their entire apiary.


Well I will. And did it in a short time. Here is a summery of the colonies that went into the winter.
Winter one: one colony (no winter losses)
Winter two: 6 colonies (no winter losses)
Winter three: 8 colonies; 7 died (all winter losses)
Current winter/fall: 8 colonies (1 combined in fall)


----------



## Robbin (May 26, 2013)

All my bees come from Destin.... I had 1 booming hive, and 2 very strong double deep hives, right up until I didn't. fogging didn't seem to help a bit, when my drop count reached 150 I treated the next day. 4 hives on check mite, two hives on OA. 
Good Luck! let us know how it goes.


----------



## cg3 (Jan 16, 2011)

I'm skeptical of the Beeinformed survey. It is heavily skewed toward new backyard beekeepers. I'm not sure that the numbers are realistic, but it is an interesting read.


----------



## Joseph Clemens (Feb 12, 2005)

To answer the question posed by the title -- I wish I knew.

Right after I relocated (more than twenty years ago, now) to Marana, Arizona (a suburb of Tucson), I acquired some new equipment and a starter colony, by doing a cutout from beneath a neighbors mobile home. Then, for about the next decade, I increased my colony count by doing walk-away splits. These colonies were very vigorous and prolific, but difficult to inspect due to their extreme defensiveness and runniness (perhaps they had some AHB influence). I had also attempted to requeen them, on several occasions, but without any success. At the time I was ignorant of the presence of Varroa mites, yet despite my ignorance, I had no colony losses. After learning about the presence of Varroa mites, I took a closer look, and realized that my bees, certainly did have Varroa mites.

When I read about the mites, I also learned that untreated colonies were expected to expire in three years or less. Oops, mine were already more than ten years old, I wondered, why were my bees thriving, despite the mites. I still wonder.

It's been another decade since then, I've managed to completely change the genetics of my bees, several times. I've still not lost any colonies to mites, despite not treating. If the weather cooperates, I can sometimes even go without supplemental feeding.


----------



## Paul McCarty (Mar 30, 2011)

My experience basically mirrors Mr. Clemens. I think our feral bees have a lot more "wild" in them and the desert breeds survivors out of them. I have several colonies from cut-outs that are going on 5 years with no treatments. Most - in fact all, of my losses always seem to be from hives headed by a pedigreed domestic breed.


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

cg3 said:


> I'm skeptical of the Beeinformed survey. It is heavily skewed toward new backyard beekeepers. I'm not sure that the numbers are realistic, but it is an interesting read.


Well, it's true that most of the beekeepers surveyed are backyard beekeepers, and all of the strict non-treaters are hobbyists as well. However, in terms of colony numbers, most of the surveyed colonies are owned by commercial beekeepers. For example, in the 2011-2012 survey, there were 4,572 backyard beekeepers, and only 62 commercial beekeepers. However, the backyard beekeepers only managed 29,511 colonies, but the commercial guys managed 242,470 colonies. What's interesting to me is that less than 5 % of backyard beekeepers are non-treaters in the strictest sense-- no non-bee derived products used in the hives. This group owned less than 1 percent of managed colonies in the survey.

So it's fair to say that data is scarce. Still, these guys do exist, and their bees do survive. So the question is still *why*.

It's my opinion that most commercial operations, especially those which derive substantial income from long-distance pollination contracts, are not good candidates for non-treatment. Those bees are subject to many stresses that do not affect backyard bees to the same extent.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

" all of the strict non-treaters are hobbyists as well. "

I wouldn't agree with that statement. 

"... in the 2011-2012 survey, there were 4,572 backyard beekeepers, and only 62 commercial beekeepers. However, the backyard beekeepers only managed 29,511 colonies, but the commercial guys managed 242,470 colonies."

I'm not sure if the sampling reflects the real stats. I've heard much higher total hive estimates for sideliner/small scale and hobbyists.

"It's my opinion that most commercial operations, especially those which derive substantial income from long-distance pollination contracts, are not good candidates for non-treatment. "

I would say that they're good candidates for IPM at the very least.

However, I don't think that they want to show up for a contract with hundreds/thousands of hives that are hybrid ferals.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

rhaldridge said:


> What is the difference?


The difference is if you make your bread and butter from bees you are going to do what it takes to make your bread and butter. If you are a hobbyist with three hives you don't have much at stake.

This same scenario is why we have monoculture and why there are no local farms (minuse the organ ones).

If I can make a dollar more than you can by treating your bees, what do you think will happen? If I can make a dollar more than you can by planting GMO corn what do you think will happen?

Treatment free will never be in a commercial beekeepers game plan. Neither will pesticide free fruits and vegetables be in a farmers game plan. Even organic fruits and vegetables are not pesticide free. If you want treatment free bees you have to do it yourself. If you want pesticide fruits and vegetables you have to do it yourself.

Can it be done? Certainly. And it is not hard.


----------



## cg3 (Jan 16, 2011)

rhaldridge said:


> So it's fair to say that data is scarce.


Yeah. I don't have a strong opinion. I just wonder if it's a representative sample. I also wonder what % of ferals are more than a season away from a box.


----------



## Glen H (Aug 17, 2013)

WBVC said:


> I find it interesting that so many are able to get hold of "feral" stock...swarms, cutouts etc. I have lived in the same area since 1958...with a few away for college. I have never seen a swarm or heard of anyone in the area with feral bees in their yard, home or outbuildings.
> I set up a "swarm trap" and it has seen no activity at all.
> 
> Are some areas "bee free" or am I just no good at attracting bees to our property?


Same here, 50 years old and never seen a swarm until this summer, and it was one of my hives that swarmed! Yet now that I'm a beekeeper I sure notice bees on flowers where ever I go.
Maybe I have been oblivious to them, because up until this year bees were not a big part of my life.

Glen


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

If someone asked you what birds come to your area you probably wouldn't have a clue. You take notice if your interested otherwise nature goes about it's business.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

If what I've heard from certain sources is correct, then don't be too surprised when the hybrid swarm comes to your area.

They're basically just mutts. But, they're probably more resistant than some domestic stock.


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

Why does this question keep getting started in a thread? We've been through this.


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

Barry said:


> Why does this question keep getting started in a thread? We've been through this.


Well, did we learn anything useful the last few times the question was asked? When I can't get a useful answer to an important question, I ask it again. I suppose that's why the question keeps appearing.

Many of the "answers" in previous threads take the form of "Treatment free beekeepers are self-deluding idiots." Certainly folks are entitled to hold that opinion. It doesn't shed much light on the matter at hand.


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

Acebird said:


> The difference is if you make your bread and butter from bees you are going to do what it takes to make your bread and butter. If you are a hobbyist with three hives you don't have much at stake.


That's not the question being asked. I understand why some folks would not embark on a strategy that might lead to unacceptable losses. The question is: why do some who actually do attempt it succeed and others fail?


----------



## Kilted Beekeeper (Apr 8, 2013)

I am going treatment free. Of course, this is my first year and I have 1 TBH. I have not seen any SHB and did not check for mites. I have let my bees be, so to speak, and figured they will figure it out. Despite all I can try to learn, I am not a bee and therefore figure they know best. I will keep you posted how they over-winter, but so far, they are going gangbusters on goldenrod. BTW, they are italians purchased from someone who got them from one of the big bee package suppliers down south. I do not know why some succeed and others fail, but I am trying the less invasive method of bee management.


----------



## odfrank (May 13, 2002)

What is the definition of successful treatment free? 100% of hives survive winter? 90%? other?


----------



## jbeshearse (Oct 7, 2009)

I think it is a matter of perspective and how you define success or failure. Most of the TF beekeepers here (or non TF for that matter) have less than 3 years of experience in the field. It is pretty much impossible to declare success or failure in only three years. Yet many do. 

You tell me, look at my numbers for this year, are they a sucess or failure? I started with 18 hives and now have 18 hives. I added three via cutouts so without those I would actually be down 3 for the year. So, success or failure? I split, etc and built up to 28 at one point this year and have bounced between 28 and 18. I neglected basic management during the most important time of the year due to travel. You are aware that we had pretty much 2 solid months of rain. (Im in Panama City, not far from you) I split in August. I took 12 singles from my strong hives and 4 nucs from them. Added queen cells and out of 16, 2 made it, the rest succumbed to robbing and SHB. These were strong singles. I killed two strong hives with pesticide contaminated queen excluders, and I don't normally run excluders anyway.

So you tell me, have I had a successfull year or not? What are my losses? Some will say none, since I am where I started and some will say 18, or more, because that is how many splits, etc died. How well would my hives have been doing had I not split them so heavily? How many did I lose from swarming and then failed re-queening after swarming due to poor management? I can tell you that at least three failed due to failure to re-queen after swarming. I can tell you that overall, I lost about 24 splits this year and am still at 18, the number of hives I started with. I have harvested about 1200 - 1400 pounds of honey this year also.

For all the above, I call the year a bust. Some would call it success as I have what I started with. But for me, I should have about 50 hives right now, not 18. So it is a failure. Did I treat or not? It really doesn't matter, it was poor management that led to my failures this year, not treating timely or not. 

Last thing is the overwintering success. It is not a relevant discussion in TF vs NTF. Treatment free losses (at least for me) tend to be before winter and treatment losses tend to be overwinter. SO it skews the numbers making them irrelevant. The only real comparison, is how many you started the year with, then how many you have the next year at the same time. In my book, if you are even, you have had a bad year. If you or less than what you had, a worse year. To call it a successfull year, you should have twice as many as you had the previous year or sold off enough that the numbers work out the same. (started with 10, ended with 10 and sold 10, or ended with 20). And in our area, you should have average 100# of honey per starting hive number in addition to the honey harvest. 

But as I said to begin with, it is a matter of perspective and how you define success or failure. 

Why do some survive and some fail: Luck of the draw a lot of times. Queenless at the right time to break the mite cycle, Queenless at the wrong time and overun with SHB. Queenless at the right time to avoid overpopulation during dearth, Queenless at the wrong time and miss the flow. In my mind, it really all falls back to the state of the queen in the hive. A fresh queen that is laying like gangbusters all spring, starting early, will almost always result in a successfull hive for that year. That will trump almost all other aspects, treated or not.

Sorry for the length.


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

odfrank said:


> What is the definition of successful treatment free? 100% of hives survive winter? 90%? other?


My definition would be something like: I was able to make up my losses, and make honey and/or more bees, over a period of several years. Of course, this is also the definition of success for those who treat, or so I would guess. 100% survival isn't really happening for most beekeepers, no matter what philosophy of management they adopt.

I don't see why treatment free beekeepers should be held to a higher standard than anyone else, when it comes declaring "success." But often in these threads, I see folks talking about treatment free failures, without referencing the numerous failures among those who do treat. It's a bit of a double standard.

Personally, I expect to lose a lot of my bees. I'm a beginner, and that happens to beginners, even if they follow the conventional book. But I'm hoping to have my Florida bees survive in sufficient numbers that I can make up enough splits to keep going in the spring. We'll see, I guess.


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

jbeshearse said:


> But as I said to begin with, it is a matter of perspective and how you define success or failure.
> 
> Why do some survive and some fail: Luck of the draw a lot of times. Queenless at the right time to break the mite cycle, Queenless at the wrong time and overun with SHB. Queenless at the right time to avoid overpopulation during dearth, Queenless at the wrong time and miss the flow. In my mind, it really all falls back to the state of the queen in the hive. A fresh queen that is laying like gangbusters all spring, starting early, will almost always result in a successfull hive for that year. That will trump almost all other aspects, treated or not.
> 
> Sorry for the length.


Not at all... that's very interesting stuff. I tend to be skeptical of luck as a factor in most things, but in farming, success or failure is often due to luck, because farmers are interacting with the chaos of the natural world. That said, there are farmers who deal with these vagaries better than others.

I imagine that at least some of the folks who believe that treatment free beekeeping is largely impossible, or only possible with extraordinary luck, are forming that belief because most of those who attempt treatment free beekeeping are neophytes like me, who make a lot of mistakes and kill a lot of bees. 

From the 2 hives I started with, I ended up with 3 successful splits out of 4 attempts. One of the original hives went laying worker, and it took a number of frames of eggs before they successfully made a queen. I've used beetle traps of various sorts, all of which worked to some extent. I've managed space within my long hives very carefully-- in fact today I did some condensing of the big hives, moving a couple of undrawn frames out, so that the bees remained at fairly high densities. All this is just basic beekeeping, and I would have done the same if I were treating. I increased my hive count and got a little honey from the two biggest hives.

So I think that i would define success in much the same way that you do. If in the spring I can take a few nucs to the North Country, that will be enough success for me in my first year.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Here's a controversial article:

http://www.hcn.org/blogs/goat/killer-bees-could-help-solve-honeybee-colony-collapse

Its author is advocating turning to Africanized bees to solve the colony loss problem.


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

While I believe there are some successful tf beekeepers, I think they’re mostly a product of management practices.


RiodeLobo said:


> Well I will. And did it in a short time. Here is a summery of the colonies that went into the winter.
> Winter one: one colony (no winter losses)
> Winter two: 6 colonies (no winter losses)
> Winter three: 8 colonies; 7 died (all winter losses)
> Current winter/fall: 8 colonies (1 combined in fall)


I think this is a pretty common scenario: One to three ‘successful’ seasons…then a big loss. Kirk Webster has written about these cyclic dieoffs.
How many of the folks who’ve posted on this thread have been successfully keeping tf bees for longer than three years?


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

rhaldridge said:


> The question is: why do some who actually do attempt it succeed and others fail?


They have a good location that is not heavily influenced by treated bees. I don't believe you can try TF. You either are TF or not. You can't expect someone who is making a living on treated bees just wake up one morning and say I am going to turn my operation over to treatment free and see what happens.

I also believe that in order to sustain treatment free bees you have to take less honey. If you are not prepared to accept less yield from your hives you may not be able to sustain your hive count. If you have to feed your colonies sugar and syrup then I think your location is not strong enough for treatment free bees.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

Since losses according to some surveys, are the same for both groups (TF and not TF) why not look at why some people (treating or not) are losing a lot or a significant amount of their bees and some people (treating or not) are not losing very many at all. Nobody ever seems ask if the people treating are losing bees because they are treating.


----------



## odfrank (May 13, 2002)

>My definition would be something like: I was able to make up my losses, and make honey and/or more bees, over a period of several years.
This describes my scenario, but I by no means do not consider myself a treatment free success._* Half my bees die.*_ That is failure to keep them alive. If they didn't die, the survivors would make a lot MORE honey than the _dead_ ones did, and I would not have any work or expense to replace the dead ones. 

My definition of a successful TF beekeeper is if his bees survive like they did in the good old days, pre-mites. Back then I was shocked if I had ten percent loss in winter.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Michael Bush said:


> Since losses according to some surveys, are the same for both groups (TF and not TF) ...


Then shouldn't we simply be concentrating on being good beekeepers and not being hung up on TF or non-TF?


----------



## JWChesnut (Jul 31, 2013)

Michael Bush said:


> Nobody ever seems ask if the people treating are losing bees because they are treating.


 Michael,
I have an isolated, experimental apiary with hived swarms that I maintain TF. My other yards have the "lighter" treatments (MAQS, thymol, OA).

I find the TF yard has more severe mite expression, despite the care I lavish on it. I would say that my characteristic August-September mite explosion is present in all hives in roughly equal intensity and trajectory, but the treated ones I can push back on successfully. Currently, I do treat and move hives out of the experimental yard when I think the mites-DWV syndrome has reached critical stage. So I actually don't have data if there would be some sort of natural supersedure/recovery of TF in this situation, but my long experience lets me conclude these are terminal without intervention.

I have very low mortality in the treated groups, but I benefit from mild winters and a nectar flow that starts in January. Most of my loss comes from failed supersedure, or over-swarming, beginning in late April. I think drone flight is reduced in my extremely foggy, cool, coastal climate -- and I have failure-to-mate in virgin queens. My observation is TF hives supersedure repeatedly (several times year, due to DWV??) and because of the unique sub-optimal mating in the fog zone, TF hives have much higher risk of queen failure.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

If today's losses/diebacks are the new normal, what does it matter what things were like before? Before mites and before treating for them?


----------



## merince (Jul 19, 2011)

It does matter for the sustainability and survivability of the species.

Here is what it looks like now with the new normal of 30% or so winter loss:

Out of every 10 hives going into winter, 3 are not going to make it until spring. To replace them, the beekeeper needs to split at least 3 of the remaining 7. However on average, only about 70% of queens get mated successfully, so he/she really needs to split about 4 just to recoup winter losses. So you end up with 3 hives that are ready for a crop/pollination, 4 that you used to repopulate losses that may or more likely not make a crop and 4 babies that will need TLC to get them up to speed. This is assuming all 7 are in tip-top shape coming out of winter. I am talking averages here, I am sure skilled beekeepers beat those all the time.

To put it in percentages, only 30% of your apiary is going to be in good shape for the season, and the rest is to make sure you still have those 30% come next spring.

When you look at the industry at a whole, and apply those numbers, no, it does not look sustainable when 70% of the existing bees are needed to perform just to replace winter deadouts.


----------



## Edymnion (May 30, 2013)

rhaldridge said:


> The question is: why do some who actually do attempt it succeed and others fail?


Pure probability.

If something is a one in a million chance and you've got a hundred million people doing it, then you can expect to see roughly a hundred occurrences of whatever it is you were looking for.

Same here. People tend to put more weight on anecdotal evidence than they should. They see a couple dozen people saying something worked, and they assume that there must be tons and tons more out there that just aren't chiming in, which is a fallacy. It is entirely possible that the cases you find of it succeeding really are the majority of cases, and that they are outliers.


----------



## brownbuff75 (Jul 1, 2013)

I think that there maybe truths in both aspects of TF or non TF. 

I think that there are also many factors involving loss....too many variables to be able to do it a couple of years of one way and then the other, with relativly small number of hives, and be able to get a firm conclusion. I think in order to get a better understanding I think that we as beekeepers need to start recording data religously. not only honey harvesting, or types treatment(or lack there of) and frequency used, genetic lines(to the best of knowlege), how old foundation is, if pesticides in the area was used, varroa counts, but also factors such as temperature of day to day of the area, storms, and other things like that. Also things that may seem trivial like how many times you were in the hive, what feed did you give them for how long and how much or how many times you manipulate the hive. Then take all this data, put it into a single massive database and then see how many correlations match up and then do a bunch of test coleneys to see if those correlations repeat itself. Then hopefully something would stick out. The reason why every beekeeper needs to be envolve because then it would help stifle claims about it being rigged and also it would be cheeper. Think of how many beekeepers there are in just the U.S. thats a huge sample size. no one would have to buy special hives(at least till commonalitys were found) for the testing of these factors.


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

Michael Bush said:


> Nobody ever seems ask if the people treating are losing bees because they are treating.


Yes indeed. For some reason that I don't understand at all, it's hard to get across the idea that using bug poisons to get bugs off bugs might have some serious side effects, that it might weaken a colony, even as it staves off a collapse from mites and disease. It's very hard to convince people that you're avoiding treatment because the negative effects of the available treatments are not well understood, and don't seem to work all that well anyway. I drone on about demonstrated effects of treatment on hive and gut biota, but the reaction I usually get is "Hey hippie, put down the love beads and step away from the patchouli!" I can't even remember what patchouli smells like, though evidently I can still spell it, which is worrisome. 

Apparently, I have fallen under the Svengali-like influence of treatment free gurus like you, and am therefore no longer capable of making rational decisions based on the available evidence. But from my perspective, I can't understand why so many people believe that their bugs will suffer no ill effects from being poisoned over and over.

Ah well. If I were worried about being taken seriously, I'd have had a very different and less interesting life.


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

odfrank said:


> My definition of a successful TF beekeeper is if his bees survive like they did in the good old days, pre-mites. Back then I was shocked if I had ten percent loss in winter.


May I ask why you don't treat?


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

merince said:


> It does matter for the sustainability and survivability of the species.
> 
> Here is what it looks like now with the new normal of 30% or so winter loss:
> 
> ...


It hasn't not been sustainable yet. Just different than it has been.


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

sqkcrk said:


> Then shouldn't we simply be concentrating on being good beekeepers and not being hung up on TF or non-TF?


Well, yes. But bear with me here for a moment. The reasons treaters and non-treaters lose hives are probably very different. The reasons non-treaters lose hives is obvious; mites and mite vectored diseases kill their hives. But treaters lose hives too, and since presumably the treatment does work to keep mites and mite-vectored diseases from killing hives, something else is killing their hives. Is it within the realm of possibility that treatments weaken colonies and make them more vulnerable to death from other causes?

If there's anything to that idea, then good beekeeping means treating as minimally as possible.

It's just a hobby for me, so I can take the risk of not treating at all. But I would bet serious money that commercial beekeepers who practice IPM have better survival rates than those who treat routinely for everything. But of course, that's just a guess, and I could be completely wrong. I just believe that everything we do has pros and cons, and I don't think treatment is any different.


----------



## Rusty Hills Farm (Mar 24, 2010)

> But from my perspective, I can't understand why so many people believe that their bugs will suffer no ill effects from being poisoned over and over.


But the point being missed by both sides of this argument is that there IS a middle ground. Personally I use resistant stock, do monthly sugar shakes so I know what my counts are, do sugar dusting if they get high, and only treat with a chemical once a year IF AT ALL. Most years I don't even need the OA. So I'm not "treatment-free" but I'm not a wild-eyed chem guy either! I'm in the middle.

Now to be completely open here, I lost everything to hurricanes a couple years back and I am just restarting. But I was doing the same stuff then as I am doing now and getting the same results. I fully expect to keep getting those results. And I have to believe there are a lot of folks out there doing much the same stuff as I am and getting the same results because, frankly, I am just not that unique or clever to be some kind of pioneer here! Rather I think you guys battling over your treatment versus treatment-free are making so much noise and dust that our voices get drowned out by your clamor and nobody can see us waving at you from the back of the bus.

JMO

Rusty


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

Edymnion said:


> Pure probability.
> 
> If something is a one in a million chance and you've got a hundred million people doing it, then you can expect to see roughly a hundred occurrences of whatever it is you were looking for.


I don't think so. Everyone has mites in this country. Mites reproduce at known rates. You might get a year now and then when conditions favor bees over mites, but many non-treaters have been doing this for years. Take BeeWeaver, for example. They sell thousands of untreated nucs and queens. The colonies survive and produce honey for the people who buy those bees. If it were a probability game, most of those hives would need treatment to survive.

There are a couple interesting videos on the web about their breeding program.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

rhaldridge said:


> Take BeeWeaver, for example. They sell thousands of untreated nucs and queens. The colonies survive and produce honey for the people who buy those bees. If it were a probability game, most of those hives would need treatment to survive.


OK, I'll bite ...

How do you know that the purchasers of those Beeweaver bees *don't *treat them? :scratch:


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

> Mites reproduce at known rates.

I would not agree. With a 21 day gestation cycle, perhaps. With a 19 day gestation cycle it all changes...


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

rhaldridge said:


> Is it within the realm of possibility that treatments weaken colonies and make them more vulnerable to death from other causes?
> 
> I just believe that everything we do has pros and cons, and I don't think treatment is any different.


bingo.

to your op ray, there's no doubt in my mind that the beekeeper's skill level is as much or more a factor in success as using treatments or not, and that location, genetics, nutrition, availability of feral survivor drones ect. are all essential parts of the equation. 

my impression after hearing about the experiences of jim lyon, oldtimer, jwchestnut and others is that the pro's are outweighing the cons, and that they losing many less colonies in their treated yards than the 30% that is assumed.

perhaps a poll right here on beesource could help us get a better picture of the difference (if any) between losses in treated and untreated apiaries among the population of contributors.

it's tricky coming up with the criterian, and we operate on the honor system here, but it might be interesting if someone wants to take the time to design such a poll.

i like the idea of looking at overwintering losses, because there's not much intervention possible regarding requeening, adding brood, combining ect. using the same cut off dates as the bee informed survey might work.

my treatment free three year average winter loss is 11%. this winter should be interesting now that most of my colonies are 2-3 years old.


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

Rusty Hills Farm said:


> And I have to believe there are a lot of folks out there doing much the same stuff as I am and getting the same results because, frankly, I am just not that unique or clever to be some kind of pioneer here! Rather I think you guys battling over your treatment versus treatment-free are making so much noise and dust that our voices get drowned out by your clamor and nobody can see us waving at you from the back of the bus.
> 
> JMO
> 
> Rusty


Well, I hear you. Just before you posted I said this:




> It's just a hobby for me, so I can take the risk of not treating at all. But I would bet serious money that commercial beekeepers who practice IPM have better survival rates than those who treat routinely for everything. But of course, that's just a guess, and I could be completely wrong. I just believe that everything we do has pros and cons, and I don't think treatment is any different.


But let me ask you this: Why don't you treat routinely for everything, like they teach beginners to do in my bee club? That's mite treatments several times a year, terramycin routinely dumped over the frames, several times a year, GardStar drench for hive beetles, and so on. This is the normal. This is how beginners are taught in most bee clubs. 

How did you learn the restrained and minimally toxic approach that you use?


----------



## Joseph Clemens (Feb 12, 2005)

My expectation is that brownbuff75 has got something there. I can't really put a finger on the reason I rarely lose a single colony. The losses I do experience are due to robbing, and is limited to small mating nucs that don't get assimilated into full-size nucs, before the Autumn dearth causes them to be the target of robbing.

Without knowing the plethora of variables that affect the situation and how they interact to affect the situatioin, all I can go on is the fact that I am very frequently inspecting most of my colonies, and doing what I consider, "micro-managing" them.

For instance, I am frequently tinkering: For example; if I have a nuc that is very strong, with a vigorous and prolific queen, and another nuc that seems populous, but has only recently become queenright, with a queen I think may be a potential, strong performer, but it might take her a bit to get going, I'll swap the combs, so that the bees are occupying the same locations, but will now be living on the combs of their neighbor - giving the new queen a boost, and the already proven queen can repeat her good work. So far I've been lucky, and this has not backfired on me.


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

Rader Sidetrack said:


> OK, I'll bite ...
> 
> How do you know that the purchasers of those Beeweaver bees *don't *treat them? :scratch:


You got me. I can't prove they don't. But the reason they buy them is to avoid treatment, right? And we do know that BeeWeaver doesn't treat, so the probability argument doesn't work.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

rhaldridge said:


> Well, yes. But bear with me here for a moment. The reasons treaters and non-treaters lose hives are probably very different.


Are they really? Maybe they are the same. Other than the large outfits who have large losses seemingly all at once.

Were we to pull the large dieoffs in certain operations, what would the percentage be?


----------



## Robbin (May 26, 2013)

Rusty Hills Farm said:


> But the point being missed by both sides of this argument is that there IS a middle ground. Personally I use resistant stock, do monthly sugar shakes so I know what my counts are, do sugar dusting if they get high, and only treat with a chemical once a year IF AT ALL. Most years I don't even need the OA. So I'm not "treatment-free" but I'm not a wild-eyed chem guy either! I'm in the middle.
> 
> Now to be completely open here, I lost everything to hurricanes a couple years back and I am just restarting. But I was doing the same stuff then as I am doing now and getting the same results. I fully expect to keep getting those results. And I have to believe there are a lot of folks out there doing much the same stuff as I am and getting the same results because, frankly, I am just not that unique or clever to be some kind of pioneer here! Rather I think you guys battling over your treatment versus treatment-free are making so much noise and dust that our voices get drowned out by your clamor and nobody can see us waving at you from the back of the bus.
> 
> ...


I'm with you Rusty. Pay attention and treat when you HAVE to. Don't treat if you don't have to. I want to be treatment free, but I won't take a lot of loses just to say I'm TF.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

rhaldridge said:


> This is the normal. This is how beginners are taught in most bee clubs.


I sure hope not. There certainly is no need to throw TM into a hive once, let alone several times a year. I think you aught to find a different club.


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

sqkcrk said:


> Are they really? Maybe they are the same.


Do treatments work? If they do, then the big die-offs must be from reasons other than mite load.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Could be. How does one tell?


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

sqkcrk said:


> I sure hope not. There certainly is no need to throw TM into a hive once, let alone several times a year. I think you aught to find a different club.


Yeah, not all of us are lucky enough to have someone like you in our club. All of our members are basically hobbyists, and this is a military town, so respect for authority is high. But I kid you not, the new beekeeper demo involved a large shaker of TM.


----------



## Rusty Hills Farm (Mar 24, 2010)

At rhaldridge:


> How did you learn the restrained and minimally toxic approach that you use?


I am an organic gardener. For about 40 years now. Mother Earth News/Organic Gardening is where I learned to garden. It just seemed reasonable to continue those practices when I added bees to the mix. Then mites came along, followed by beetles, and I adapted. But I would no more put those treatments you mentioned in my hives than I ever put Sevin et al in my garden. I like to EAT my honey.

Rusty


----------



## Rusty Hills Farm (Mar 24, 2010)

> Yeah, not all of us are lucky enough to have someone like you in our club. All of our members are basically hobbyists, and this is a military town, so respect for authority is high. But I kid you not, the new beekeeper demo involved a large shaker of TM.


And this is why I have never joined a club. I learned the hard way and probably killed more bees than I should have. But when they died it was because of MY mistakes and not somebody else's. 

JMO

Rusty


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

Rusty Hills Farm said:


> At rhaldridge:
> 
> 
> I am an organic gardener. For about 40 years now. Mother Earth News/Organic Gardening is where I learned to garden. It just seemed reasonable to continue those practices when I added bees to the mix. Then mites came along, followed by beetles, and I adapted. But I would no more put those treatments you mentioned in my hives than I ever put Sevin et al in my garden. I like to EAT my honey.
> ...


Hey, me too. I got my first subscription to OG over 50 years ago, and I still have it today. Sometimes I think that treatment free beekeeping is having to deal with the same things organic gardening had to deal with back in the day. As you probably know, J.I. was a nutcase. He embraced all sorts of weird stuff, like "electroculture." Remember that? Tin cans and wire to make vegetables grow better through attracting electrical energy. But despite his zanier obsessions, he launched a movement that today is pretty much mainstream. Could you have imagined 40 years ago that you'd be able to buy organic carrots and milk in your neighborhood supermarket?

Maybe someday TF beekeepers will reach the promised land.


----------



## Rusty Hills Farm (Mar 24, 2010)

No, and I never imagined the USDA would co-opt it either. I don't recognize what they've done with it, so maybe it's just as well that I can no longer call myself "organic." So be careful what you wish for! 

Rusty


----------



## MJuric (Jul 12, 2010)

*After learning about the presence of Varroa mites, I took a closer look, and realized that my bees, certainly did have Varroa mites.*

This is an interesting line of investigation to me as well. I wonder if it is the actual mite load that causes the problem or whether some varieties may simply deal better with them then others. IOW while a mite count of 20 mite take out one variety over winter another will do fine with a much higher count. 

I did not treat at all for mites my first or second year. First year was a relatively mild winter and I had zero losses. Second year was a rather harsh winter and I had losses ~70%. Unfortunately I never came across a method of checking mites that worked for me so I never got consistent numbers until this year.

This year I have a couple hives that supposedly come from mite resistant lines, but they have "Higher then suggested" mite numbers. I'm tempted to treat one and not the other and see if one survives and the other doesn't. Of course a sample of two is not close to being statistically significantly.

~Matt


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Whereas there may have been a time when heavy mite loads alone killed colonies, since then varroa has become more of a vector for viruses and nosema. And we now have a different strain of Nosema than we had before varroa. So using fumidill to address Nosema is not as effective as once it was.

So we have Varroa destructor making it easier for Deformed wing virus and other viruses to do their work, as well as Nosema ceranae further stressing the bees causing what should not be a deadly time of year seem to be the cause of mortality, Winter.


----------



## MJuric (Jul 12, 2010)

My take...

*The most commonly mentioned reason for failure is locality*

I think this is significant. Keeping bees alive thru nearly 6 months where little food is available and 2-3 months of that cold, wet and damp creates challenges that people in more temperate climates don't face. Having a no treat survive under decent conditions is different then having one survive in harsh conditions.

*Another reason cited by those who succeed is the genetic makeup of their bees, *

Jury is still out for me on this one. I purchased queens that are were supposedly less prone to mites. So far tests are showing little difference between these and my other hives.
*
Another important factor, from my research, is management practices. It's tempting to think that those who fail at treatment free beekeeping are just not very good at it, but that seems unlikely, since many beekeepers with decades of experience have reported failure, and most of these folk know what they're doing.
*

Clearly this is possible as just because a person is successful doing things one way does not mean they will be good another way. On some levels this may lend credence to the idea that "Relative beginners" have better luck then some experienced. I think the two factors here are that the new keeper is learning on a blank slate while the experienced keeper is not. The experienced keeper will likely fall back into some of the habits used while doing regular treatments while the new keeper does not contain this knowledge so will do, more or less, as instructed.

The other issue is that, at least with my understanding, treatment free takes more time per hive. If you're used to doing treatments and spending "X" amount of time per hive you're probably not going to want to spend "X" + per hive, might cut corners etc. 
*
What I'm hoping to hear is stories about success and failure under similar conditions, so we can try to unravel the mystery of why some folks succeed and some folks fail. *

"Non treatment" pretty much failed for me in year two. However I can't say without question whether it was because of no treatments, because of a harsh winter or because I was inexperienced or some combination. 

That being said, and not wanting to head off and buy a ton more packages next year, I'm doing my first year of treatments this year. We'll see how that works. Eventually I would like to get enough hives and enough experience to be able to do some controlled experiments and see if I can actually determine causes. 

~Matt


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

varroa is a vector for nosema? i'm no expert on nosema, but i'm not sure how a gut infection is vectored by a mite piercing the cuticle. 

deknow


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

While Varroa can spread viral infections by feeding on hemolymph from the outside of the bee, it appears that Nosema infections can facilitate viral infections by causing breaks in the bee's gut lining from the inside.


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

deknow said:


> i'm no expert on nosema, but i'm not sure how a gut infection is vectored by a mite piercing the cuticle.


Maybe not but every parasitic pressure causes the bees to be less able to tolerate every other. So, I would imagine that bee colonies that succumb to nosema are likely influenced in that collapse by varroa.


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

beemandan said:


> Maybe not but every parasitic pressure causes the bees to be less able to tolerate every other. So, I would imagine that bee colonies that succumb to nosema are likely influenced in that collapse by varroa.


This is an interesting line of thought to me. It's been demonstrated that treatments do inhibit or kill many of the gut bacteria present in feral bees (real feral bees, not just escaped managed swarms.) That being the case, I wonder if treatment makes a colony more likely to succumb to nosema, in the way that antibiotics lead to digestive problems for other organisms.

This is just an impression I've gotten, so it's pure speculation, but has anyone else noticed that nosema is not usually one of the things that TF beekeepers cite as a reason for colony decline?


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

rhaldridge said:


> That being the case, I wonder if treatment makes a colony more likely to succumb to nosema,


Every effective mite treatment I’m aware of causes stress on the bee colony. So…absolutely….they can contribute to all sorts of collapse...nosema included. 
It’s just that, in my opinion and experience, they are much less likely to drive that collapse than the mites they kill.


----------



## JWChesnut (Jul 31, 2013)

rhaldridge said:


> if treatment makes a colony more likely to succumb to nosema, ...... anyone else noticed that nosema is not usually one of the things that TF beekeepers cite as a reason for colony decline?


This is inverted. Good research that Nosema ceranae has factors to suppress bee immune response -- which of course is a strategy which allows the microsporidian (a fungi relative) to establish in the gut. The suppression of immune response by the agent Nosema leads to host of other disease (largely vectored by Varroa).

My experience with TF zealots (exclusively of the naive novice genre) is that they do not have the depth of experience, intellectual curiosity or microscopes to recognize Nosema, so it is not surprising it is under-reported. These TF types burn through about $1000 (to $50,000) and lose interest in the hobby, so you don't see the "dead-outs" online after the inevitable crash.

Cite: Environ Microbiol. 2009 Sep;11(9):2284-90. doi: 10.1111/j.1462-2920.2009.01953.x.
Immune suppression in the honey bee (Apis mellifera) following infection by Nosema ceranae (Microsporidia).
Antúnez K, Martín-Hernández R, Prieto L, Meana A, Zunino P, Higes M.


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

JWChesnut said:


> This is inverted. Good research that Nosema ceranae has factors to suppress bee immune response -- which of course is a strategy which allows the microsporidian (a fungi relative) to establish in the gut. The suppression of immune response by the agent Nosema leads to host of other disease (largely vectored by Varroa).




Makes sense, but this was not the point I was making. It's well known that benign gut flora are necessary to good intestinal health. Pathogens can be out-competed by benign organisms... but only if those benign organisms have not been wiped out by indiscriminate use of substances that kill these benign organisms.



> “Prolonged exposure to a single broad-spectrum antibiotic imposes strong selective pressure on a microbial community that is expected to result in loss of strain diversity….” the authors conclude. “These shifts could affect host health: in the case of the distinctive gut bacteria of honeybees and bumblebees, metagenomic and experimental studies suggest beneficial roles [of the gut bacteria] in neutralization of dietary toxins, nutrition, and* in defense against pathogens.*”


This was from JAMA. If you Google "bee gut microflora" you'll find lots of information on the inhibitory effects of benign gut organisms. 




JWChesnut said:


> ...the inevitable crash.
> .


You know, I asked those who believe that all the TF folks are charlatans and/or fools to recuse themselves from this discussion. We know your viewpoint, but it doesn't cast any useful light on the subject at hand.


----------



## Paul McCarty (Mar 30, 2011)

Each side thinks the other is a charlatan. Not helpful.


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

I think the use of the word charlatan is inappropriate. A charlatan is someone who is intentionally perpetrating a fraud. I don't see anyone doing anything like that in this thread.
We might disagree...even be polarized in our disagreement but I don't see anyone guilty of fraudulence.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

JWChesnut said:


> I have an isolated, experimental apiary with hived swarms that I maintain TF.
> 
> I find the TF yard has more severe mite expression, despite the care I lavish on it. I would say that my characteristic August-September mite explosion is present in all hives in roughly equal intensity and trajectory, but the treated ones I can push back on successfully. Currently, I do treat and move hives out of the experimental yard when I think the mites-DWV syndrome has reached critical stage.


very interesting jwc.

what percentage of colonies to you find have to be moved, and what's the longest that you have had a colony survive in the experimental yard?


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

I don't think anyone here is a charlatan. But TF beekeepers have been characterized as such, or fools, or self-deluding. This thread was based on the assumption that *all* TF beekeepers do not fall into one or more of those categories. The assumption is that successful TF beekeepers do exist, and that their bees do not inevitably die. If you believe that all TF beekeepers do fall into one of those categories, you should go start your own thread. Dan has started several of those, if I'm not mistaken.

If you believe that non-treatment results in an "inevitable crash" then obviously you put no credence into the assumption on which the thread is based, and you cannot contribute usefully to the discussion, which, I remind everyone, is the difference between success and failure as a TF beekeeper. You have refused to entertain the basic premise of the discussion, which is that success actually does happen sometimes. It's like arguing about microbes with a Stone Age hunter. He's never seen them, so for him they don't exist. Apparently JW has seen no evidence that success is possible, so he argues from the obvious position. He's a smart guy and I always listen to what he says, but from my point of view, he suffers from blinders when it comes to treatment free bee survival.

In this world, we have access to the experiences of many more people than we have time in a lifetime to meet personally. I'm reasonably well satisfied that successful treatment free beekeepers do in fact exist. 

I just want to know how they do it.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

deknow said:


> varroa is a vector for nosema? i'm no expert on nosema, but i'm not sure how a gut infection is vectored by a mite piercing the cuticle.
> 
> deknow


Yer right, I didn't write that right. I haven't actually had anyone explain to me, to my satisfaction, how Nosema really impacts a colony of bees. With some of the highest Nosema counts I have had the best Wintering.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

rhaldridge said:


> I'm reasonably well satisfied that successful treatment free beekeepers do in fact exist.
> 
> I just want to know how they do it.


of course they exist ray. how they do it varies and isn't necessarily reproducible because of all the factors involved.

if it was that straightforward we would have it made.

i question the assertion that there is no difference between losses suffered between treated and untreated colonies. are you interested in helping me design a poll to see how this looks within the beesource community?


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

squarepeg said:


> of course they exist ray. how they do it varies and isn't necessarily reproducible because of all the factors involved.
> 
> if it was that straightforward we would have it made.
> 
> i question the assertion that there is no difference between losses suffered between treated and untreated colonies. are you interested in helping me design a poll to see how this looks within the beesource community?


That's true, of course. Farming of all sorts is an incredibly complex undertaking and bees are no different. But I think it is useful to talk about it. For example, you helped talk me into making mite counts, even though I don't plan to treat for them.

A poll might be useful, but it would suffer from the same problems as any self-reporting survey. I think you should try to get a statistician on board, to help design your poll to be as useful as it can be within the constraints of an online community like BeeSource. I'm about to head north for a couple of weeks, but when I get back I'd be happy to help in any way I could. I think probably the best way to approach it would be an attempt to tease out small nuggets of info, rather than a grand unified field theory of TF beekeeping.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

fine business ray. let's be thinking about it and perhaps we can start a thread along those lines and solicit some suggestions from the community.

i'll also be taking across the yard mite counts for the first time this year, at or about the first frost, and compare those to other metrics such as productivity and survivability in a treatment free setting.

i'm also thinking about sending some samples from the alcohol washes to beltsville to get nosema counts done.


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

rhaldridge said:


> . Dan has started several of those, if I'm not mistaken.


You referring to me? I've started threads that suggested that all tf beekeepers are fools or self-deluding? 
You either have me mixed up with someone else or you haven't read anything I've written.


----------



## Glen H (Aug 17, 2013)

I'm wondering why the big names in TF on this forum have not chimed in yet with their tips?

Glen


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Solomon Parker has been on these Forums for years. deknow, aka Dean Stieglitz, and his Mrs. have written a book on it. Tim Ives has been on the Forums lately explaining his ways. What are you talking about?


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

beemandan said:


> You referring to me? I've started threads that suggested that all tf beekeepers are fools or self-deluding?
> You either have me mixed up with someone else or you haven't read anything I've written.


Maybe you didn't understand the implications of these thread titles:

http://www.beesource.com/forums/showthread.php?288679-21st-century-beekeeping-snake-oil

http://www.beesource.com/forums/showthread.php?283114-HITS-method-of-mite-control

I'd really like to avoid getting sidetracked, if at all possible.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

I have been looking over some papers on mitotypes in the U.S. .

That would be the maternal inheritance (mitochondrial).

There's C and M, which are the European lines.

But then there's also A (African) and O (North African/Middle Eastern).

It seems that the A and O mitotypes correspond well to the resistance genetics that's being reported in the SouthWest.

Perhaps it's the different origins of the Honeybee stock that can make the difference?

http://comp.uark.edu/~aszalan/szalanski_magnus_ahb_usa_jar_2010.pdf
http://www.comp.uark.edu/~aszalan/szalanski.pdf
http://comp.uark.edu/~aszalan/magnus_jas_2011.pdf
http://kelab.tamu.edu/coulson/pdf_pub/pinto_05.pdf
https://bibliotecadigital.ipb.pt/bitstream/10198/2887/1/449.pdf
https://bibliotecadigital.ipb.pt/bitstream/10198/2897/1/Coulsonetal..pdf


----------



## Daniel Y (Sep 12, 2011)

It seems to me, although I may be wrong. That the successful treatment free beekeepers are an exception. And you don't base a method on the exceptions. I also suspect that successful treatment free has more to do with adaptation of the beekeeper than the bees. It would be pretty easy to investigate that. How well would a currently successful treatment free apiary fair under the care of another beekeeper? In addition how successful would a treatment free beekeeper be if they started keeping bees in another location. I also think it would be fairly interesting to have a treatment free beekeeper look at my hives and just see what they notice. I am fairly certain they will see a completely different picture than I do and a different range of solutions.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Interesting point DanielY. I have seen plenty of new beekeepers, and even some experienced beekeepers, who have bought bees from a long established outfit and have those bees not even last much beyond a year if that long. One case in point where a couple bought 300 colonies and those colonies didn't last much more than a year. And they were a couple who were second generation beekeepers themselves. And then another situation where a commercial beekeeper sold out and then took what was left back three years later because the buyer couldn't keep things going well enough to pay off the owner financed contract.

So a lot has to do w/ the beekeeper.


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

I understood the implications when I started those threads. You have gone out of your way to misrepresent or misinterpret them.
The snake oil thread was directed at those who sell ‘so called’ resistant bees to newcomers implying that they needn’t worry about testing or treating.
In the HITS thread I was restating my regular mantra. If you don’t test or treat for mites….and then claim they aren’t a problem when your hives fail…you cannot possibly really know.
Over and over and over again….I strongly advise all beekeepers to test for mites. I’ve never suggested that anyone who chooses tf with an understanding of varroa, it’s lifecycle and its broad impact on bee colony wellbeing….I’ve never once advised ANYONE with that understanding that they were making a mistake…..NEVER…EVER.
I have never believed or suggested _that all tf beekeepers are fools or self-deluding_.
If you believe otherwise…..you so totally missed the entire thrust of my posts that I can’t begin to imagine how your thinking works.
And I resent the accusation.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>With some of the highest Nosema counts I have had the best Wintering. 

The latest research I've heard of on Nosema cerana contradicts all of the concepts of what Nosema does and how it works and even if it's detrimental. I don't know what to make of it...

>I'm wondering why the big names in TF on this forum have not chimed in yet with their tips?

I'm not sure who the "big names" are... but if you want my tips on successful beekeeping there is about 674 pages worth of it (when converted to a book) on my web site that you can read for free... as far as what tips the scale as far as Varroa, I had no luck until I got on small cell and/or natural comb.

http://www.bushfarms.com/beessctheories.htm
http://www.bushfarms.com/beesnaturalcell.htm


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

That's right. I think I failed to include you in my list.

Have you heard that Nosema ceranae is dry and therefore doesn't produce dysentery like symptoms and that Nosema apis is wet and does?


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

Daniel Y said:


> In addition how successful would a treatment free beekeeper be if they started keeping bees in another location.


As I said before it would totally depend on the location. I can't see any way a migratory beekeeper can be treatment free. You can't build immunity by bouncing around the country.


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

Barry said:


> Why does this question keep getting started in a thread? We've been through this.


An interesting point….especially when the thread was started in the bee forum.
I wonder if someone simply hasn’t had enough of the usual conventional vs tf fight


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>Have you heard that Nosema ceranae is dry and therefore doesn't produce dysentery like symptoms and that Nosema apis is wet and does? 

That has been around a while. The newer stuff was on how it permeates the entire body of the bee, not just the gut, and that it permeates the entire body of an infected queen. But what blew me away was that the queen was more productive and lived longer with cerana than without. That made no sense to me... but it seems to point out how little we really understand of it...


----------



## David LaFerney (Jan 14, 2009)

Glen H said:


> I'm wondering why the big names in TF on this forum have not chimed in yet with their tips?
> 
> Glen


Fatigue? Frustration? Because it has become somewhat repetitive and redundant? Because they have better things to do than running over the same old ground?


----------



## Andrew Dewey (Aug 23, 2005)

I think in addition to what I mentioned in my earlier post, TF beekeepers need to really pay attention to their colonies. I know when I had Russians a 1.25 hour drive from my house they were neglected a bit - TF means that medications are off the table as beekeeper options and that regular observation of hives become more important. Example: Just look at all the chalk mummies that hive is dragging out. I guess that queen needs replacing! Wrong! The hive was cleaning out frames of dead bees they had been given and those dead bees were full of chalk brood. There was _*no *_chalk in any of the actively being raised brood.

I have no patience for leave alone beekeepers who lose colonies - though I suppose it is an extension of the bond method.

I would not have known what was going on without going into the hive to check things out. I hadn't realized the frames I had grabbed were in as sad shape as they were. Hopefully I learned the lesson that undrawn foundation is better than possibly introducing disease to the colony. We'll see how well I remember it.

I do not think there is a magic TF bullet that makes TF universally easy. *ALL* beekeeping is local.


----------



## Beregondo (Jun 21, 2011)

beemandan said:


> In the HITS thread I was restating my regular mantra. If you don’t test or treat for mites….and then claim they aren’t a problem when your hives fail…you cannot possibly really know.


If spring comes, and a hive is full of chewd comb and dead bees with no heads, it doesn't take a mite test to diagnose.

It the bees are all head-in to comb, and there's little or no food, no test is required to tell it wasn't mites.

If a hive is empty, and there are scratches on the face of it, and disturbed soil on the ground in front of it, it doesn't take mite counts to see the work of a skunk or possum.

The truth of the matter is, some TF hives do well for years while carrying mite loads above the level often used to determine it's time to treat.
If one reported mite loads on such a hive, and something other than mites killed it, a reasonable person unaware of it's history would conclude the hive was lost to mite infestation, while the same man aware of its history would look for another cause and give the mite load far less weight.

And an unreasonable man, married to the concept that treatment free productive beekeeping is a fantasy, would loudly proclaim mites the cause even if he knows the hives history --his bias blinds him to the truth.

"People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it." - George Bernard Shaw


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

In my opinion….no matter what your beekeeping philosophy, every parasite takes a toll. Varroa are the worst. They suck adult bee blood, vector disease and parasitize developing brood. No matter whether you treat or not. Being parasitized by such an insidious pest takes a toll on their life expectancy….even in a tf colony….and consequently on their ability to forage….on their overwintering hardiness….on their ability to handle other parasites and disease….and on and on and on. That is my claim.



What I understand you to say is that the above is only the case in conventionally maintained hives. Tf hives are exempt. Is that what you are saying?


----------



## Beregondo (Jun 21, 2011)

I completely agree Andrew... both on the need to be attentive, and the _"locality"_ of beekeeping.

What works in one place might not work in another.

My expansion is getting to the point where I am scratching my head about what is needed and what isn't as far as TF practices:

I narrow my end bars for example, and it is getting to be a considerable time consumer.
I'm asking myself, 
"Do I really need to do that? How much does having only enough room for one bee btw combs reduce the required population to cluster effectively?
Is small cell important, or just what everyone does because it worked for Mike and Dean?"

To date my philosophy has been to collect colonies from the wild as much as possible, and mimic nature as much as possible.
Some of that is becoming a bit of work.

I've purchased queens a few times.
Some of them came from Russell, so who knows their real origin, some from Draper's (nearby) sourced from (I think) Heitkam.

The hives from the Russell line have done well (he claimed to treat only in case of dire need) and the ones from Heitkam not as well.
I don't think that it is fair to think Heitkam's bees aren't good; the colonies they went into were highly stressed by being ripped up by a bear attack.

In general, the hives headed by queens descended from collected colonies observed to have been in one place multiple years are more productive for me so far.
I'm not far enough along to say that sourcing bees that way is important, but my hypothesis is that they're better suited.

I'm pretty certain that if these bees were given to Joe Anybody, and he didn't have access to someone TF to mentor him, they wouldn't do well...anymore than a guy whose whole experience was in honey production would well serve a guy starting out in pollinating as a suitable mentor.

And all beekeeping _is_ local -- enough so that I wonder if, when I move back west of the Cascades in Washington or Oregon, my bees will do as well there with what I've learned that's useful being TF here.

One thing I am certain of:
The only people who learn anything are those who are willing to learn.
If one thinks he knows all about something, he won't learn anything.


----------



## Paul McCarty (Mar 30, 2011)

I had a queen that was supposedly a Russell queen, and it led the charge down mite infestation road. My generic bees I collect are way better, just have to make sure they aren't too temperamental.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Beregondo said:


> If spring comes, and a hive is full of chewd comb and dead bees with no heads, it doesn't take a mite test to diagnose.


Dead bees w/ no heads is a sign of what?


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

David LaFerney said:


> Fatigue? Frustration? Because it has become somewhat repetitive and redundant? Because they have better things to do than running over the same old ground?


That's a shame. In my very first post in this thread, I asked those who think TF beekeeping is a fantasy to go be contentious somewhere else. But that was an exercise in futility, I guess, and I'm as guilty of going off-topic as anyone else. 

Still, if you sift through the thread, there are a few posts that try to address the original question, and I'm finding them interesting. I don't believe there's a single silver bullet that can solve the mite problem. I think it's true that it comes down to the skills of the beekeeper, the locale, and the genetics of the bees. It may be that a person can succeed at TF beekeeping if he has at least 2 of these things right.

I know I've said this before, but I like the analogy of trying to keep an old car on the road, something I've had much experience with. A few things can go wrong, and the car will still run, though maybe not very well. But eventually, if you avoid correcting all these small things, the car is going to become a lawn ornament, and you might not be able to tell exactly what single problem pushed that car across the border from functional vehicle to scrap metal.

As someone has pointed out, the scientific approach to developing a TF management philosophy is to start from a baseline, change one thing at a time, and observe the results. Unfortunately, there are two things wrong with that approach, from my personal perspective. One is that I'm old and don't have that kind of time. The other is that the baseline-- conventional beekeeping-- is not doing very well in keeping bees alive, from all reports.

So I'm trying everything that makes any sense to me. I'm using foundationless frames, both to avoid miticide residues in foundation, and to allow the bees to build natural comb. I'm using mostly long hives, so that I can control the size of the cavity and match it to the size of the colony, and also, the long hives make it much easier to keep track of what the bees are up to, because there's no unstacking to get to the brood nest. I've avoided feeding sugar, except for a week or so in newly hived colonies. I've tried a BeeWeaver queen in one of my nucs-- but she was superceded. I bought a package of semi-untreated bees from Wolf Creek, which did well for a while but then superceded and eventually ended up with laying workers. I bought bees from a local beekeeper, and those bees are my most successful hive-- honey and several splits, plus frames of eggs to cure the laying worker hive. So I'm giving more weight to the idea of local adaptation in my view of the process.

Of course, I can't claim any success yet, because this was my first season. But I tested my bees recently using a sugar roll and got mite levels below the treatment threshold, and those bees should have lots of mites after a summer here on the Gulf Coast.

Anyway, there isn't much to be done about folks whose entertainment is finding things to fight about online. They are everywhere. But they can be ignored.


----------



## cg3 (Jan 16, 2011)

A Russell "Buckfast" is the only survivor in my TF experiment.


----------



## Robbin (May 26, 2013)

rhaldridge said:


> Of course, I can't claim any success yet, because this was my first season. But I tested my bees recently using a sugar roll and got mite levels below the treatment threshold, and those bees should have lots of mites after a summer here on the Gulf Coast.


I think if you can go treatment free here in Florida, it can be done anywhere. That said, I think it takes several years to claim success, seems a lot of Beeks trying TF have big failures in the 3 year. I don’t think you can do it, but I’m a newbe and I’m darn sure rooting for you! I agree that it won’t be a magic bullet, but a series of things. I’ve only got one hive that doesn’t have large numbers of mites, but it killed the queen every time I marked her. I stopped after the 3rd one. So they are on their 4th queen this summer and are very small in number. So lots of brood breaks works, but you can’t grow bees or honey with lots of brood breaks. I have not done Forced brood breaks yet, but I’m going to next year, During the dearth. 
Good luck, and keep us informed!


----------



## JWChesnut (Jul 31, 2013)

R Haldridge,
You might want to read my forum post on OA: http://www.beesource.com/forums/sho...wrong-Can-I-treat-again&p=1004954#post1004954

The mode of action of OA is poorly reported (but appears linked to other low toxicity acids such as lactic).
I point out that TF promotes "acidifying syrup" to 4.5 pH -- (supposedly as an analog of honey).
OA's likely mode of action is sharp acidification directed at Varroa. 
I think it possible that ascorbic acid acidification of syrup for feed and OA additions --- can be reduced to the very same mode of action: pH alteration of the Varroa internal hemolymph.

This is a delicious irony, no ? One uses a 2 carbon acid, and the other a 6 carbon acid.


----------



## David LaFerney (Jan 14, 2009)

rhaldridge said:


> ...I asked those who think TF beekeeping is a fantasy...


Do you think that many people really think it is a fantasy - impossible? I certainly don't. People like Michael Bush and Solomon Parker, and all the others would have to be just totally lying about their experience. I certainly don't believe that. Anyway I doubt if there are very many people that think it is all just a conspiracy.

It's kinda like "6 pack abs" desired by all, attempted by many, but pretty rare to see in the real world.


----------



## fieldsofnaturalhoney (Feb 29, 2012)

cg3 said:


> A Russell "Buckfast" is the only survivor in my TF experiment.


Have several of those in my apiary, great producers of honey and propolis


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

JWChesnut said:


> R Haldridge,
> You might want to read my forum post on OA: http://www.beesource.com/forums/sho...wrong-Can-I-treat-again&p=1004954#post1004954
> 
> The mode of action of OA is poorly reported (but appears linked to other low toxicity acids such as lactic).
> ...


Well, one acid is edible, the other not so much.

I'm committed to only feeding syrup in emergencies and to get a split started in times of relative dearth. OA is right out, for me. Not all TF beekepers read from the same bible.

But your post was very interesting. One can't help but wonder if feeding syrup, with its much higher pH, is more likely to promote an environment that favors varroa survival.


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

David LaFerney said:


> Do you think that many people really think it is a fantasy - impossible?.


Yes I do. I've read sentiments approximating this many many times, and not just on online forums. For example, I recently read a hit piece on "natural" beekeeping in one of the journals, by Jennifer Berry. She flat out said that if you didn't intend to treat your bees, you should not even try to be a beekeeper, because it wasn't fair to the bees.

Then there are folks who say that it's all just a roll of the dice, that those who claim to be successful are just extremely fortunate in their location, and that their results have no place in any realistic discussion of beekeeping. I suppose this is somewhat better than complete denial, but it isn't very useful to someone attempting this allegedly near-impossble feat.

Other folks bring up stuff like confirmation bias, and of course there is some truth to it, so it's a superficially plausible way to dismiss all claims of success. Some cite personal experience and the experience of newbie hipsters they know, as if the plural of anecdote is data.

I don't know if you remember that thread that was booming along last spring, about whether or not there were any TF commercial beekeepers. At first there was general agreement that there were none. Then when various examples were brought up, the thread became about the definition of a commercial beekeeper, and from there we got to the "favored locale" argument. Eventually the thread degenerated into a discussion of how poverty-stricken the example beekeepers were... the implication being that if they would simply follow the herd, they would be driving new cars.

So, yes. Many beekeepers evidently do believe that successful TF beekeeping is a fantasy.


----------



## johno (Dec 4, 2011)

(do you really think TF is a fantasy) sometimes reminds me of a fishermans old adage. All fishermen are liars except for you and me, but sometimes I'm not so sure about you 
Johno


----------



## JWChesnut (Jul 31, 2013)

rhaldridge said:


> Well, one acid is edible, the other not so much.


Yup, my great-uncle considers Rhubarb Pie the ambrosia and the elixir of the gods. And Popeye was partial to spinach.

Seriously, both are toxic at increased concentration. LD50 of Ascorbic is about 1000x that of Oxalic. Coincidentally (or not) the acidifying power of Oxalic is about 1000x that of Ascorbic.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

(nods head up and down)


----------



## Beregondo (Jun 21, 2011)

sqkcrk said:


> Dead bees w/ no heads is a sign of what?


A small mammal predator in the hive, such as a pygmy shrew. 
(When the dead bees are found inside the hive)

They are also a sign of beekeeper complacency, neglect or oversight, having not properly restricted the entrance.


----------



## Beregondo (Jun 21, 2011)

beemandan said:


> What I understand you to say is that the above is only the case in conventionally maintained hives. Tf hives are exempt. Is that what you are saying?


That's a foolish assumption to make.
I'm curious what you base it on, as I certainly did not say it.

"Some treatment free beekeepers" means_* s o m e*_ ,


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Beregondo said:


> A small mammal predator in the hive, such as a pygmy shrew.
> (When the dead bees are found inside the hive)
> 
> They are also a sign of beekeeper complacency, neglect or oversight, having not properly restricted the entrance.


I c. I thought you were connecting that to varroa.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

I've noticed that no one has made the observation that the most common European lineage of Honeybees in the U.S., the C mitotypes, also have the most problems.

Perhaps it's the other lineages, A, O, and M that makes the difference between treatment free success or failure?


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

WLC said:


> I've noticed that no one has made the observation that the most common European lineage of Honeybees in the U.S., the C mitotypes, also have the most problems.
> 
> it's cause everybody else is out working with their bees instead.
> 
> seriously, if you have the time wlc, start a thread about that and educate the rest of us, please.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

I checked the bees too. I'm not going to winterize them just yet.

In plain English, maybe the resistant bees are from a different lineage than the usual commercial stock.

It's possible you know.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

thanks. you'll either have to explain the lineages to me or provide a link, sounds like worthy of a thread of it's own......


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

JWChesnut said:


> Yup, my great-uncle considers Rhubarb Pie the ambrosia and the elixir of the gods. And Popeye was partial to spinach.
> 
> Seriously, both are toxic at increased concentration. LD50 of Ascorbic is about 1000x that of Oxalic. Coincidentally (or not) the acidifying power of Oxalic is about 1000x that of Ascorbic.


Well, your great-uncle can like whatever he wants, but oxalic acid isn't really good for him. Oxalic acid is why rhubarb leaves are considered poisonous. But fortunately OA is degraded in cooking, and even if you eat spinach raw, as is often the case with me, you'd have to eat a whole lot of it for the OA to affect your calcium uptake. It's the dose that matters. Even water will kill you if you drink enough of it.

So what do you think about the possibility that feeding sugar syrup might result in a hive environment more hospitable to varroa?


----------



## JWChesnut (Jul 31, 2013)

rhaldridge said:


> So what do you think about the possibility that feeding sugar syrup might result in a hive environment more hospitable to varroa?


Seems like an easy test to pursue. Syrup is inverted by the enzyme bees (invertase) provided by the bees, and the resulting fructose/glucose mixture (raw unevaporated honey) is acidic, as fructose/glucose solutions are hydrogen donors to a mixed equilibrium, crystal fructose is different than fructose in solution (which represent a dynamic equilibrium of acids and their conjugate bases.) 

The metabolic cost of the enzyme (all amino acids in a long chain) could be considered. A comparison could be made with bees fed HFCS (already inverted), etc. This is off-tread to your original question.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

If there is something to what rh is asking, why did it take 20 years to come into effect?


----------



## Beregondo (Jun 21, 2011)

I see Mark.
No, my intent was to illustrate that just because one hasn't tested for mites doesn't mean he can't figure out what killed a hive.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>So what do you think about the possibility that feeding sugar syrup might result in a hive environment more hospitable to varroa?

I wouldn't say it's impossible, but it seems unlikely. I think the actual reproductive rate and reproductive success would be more dependent on the gestation cycle than syrup. I other words it takes Varroa a certain number of days to hatch, grow to maturity and get mated. I'm not aware of anything that would change that.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Beregondo said:


> I see Mark.
> No, my intent was to illustrate that just because one hasn't tested for mites doesn't mean he can't figure out what killed a hive.


I understand.


----------



## Tim Ives (May 28, 2013)

David LaFerney said:


> Do you think that many people really think it is a fantasy - impossible? I certainly don't. People like Michael Bush and Solomon Parker, and all the others would have to be just totally lying about their experience. I certainly don't believe that. Anyway I doubt if there are very many people that think it is all just a conspiracy.
> 
> It's kinda like "6 pack abs" desired by all, attempted by many, but pretty rare to see in the real world.


Successful TF and 6 pack abs. I have both, neither came easy....


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

With great trepidation I will break my silence to make just a few points. I think Ray is sincere in his op but of course it seems inevitable that animosity will ensue. First of all as to why some have had varying degrees of success without treatments my answer is they are the only ones qualified to answer because I don't have a clue and aside from Mr. Bush's claim that small cell is the reason it seems like there aren't many theories from the tf folks either. I would love to hear some specific spring to fall mite counts particularly on second year hives but specifics always seem to be elusive. I don't mean that in a negative way, that's just my observation. For those folks who say " I don't know, it just works", my answer is "works, compared to what"? 
Here is the reality that I have experienced. I tried going sans mite treatment with a load of 512, 1 1/2 story bees out of the almonds about 15 years ago and lost every last one of them while my treated bees did fine. After seeing resistance I swore off fluvalinate, Coumaphous, and vowed to never use Amitraz. We went to oxalic acid, thymol, formic acid (one year) and across the board spring brood breaks with all new queens. We have never had large unexplained die offs and have been able to consistently increase our hive numbers each year since. This past spring I sold queen cells to two different beekeepers, one who went treatment free with 300 hives and one about 30 hives. Each one had lost all of their treatment free hives. They weren't too keen on trying it again.
We have bees on about 120 locations. We record the dates and what is done to each yard on a daily basis. As you might imagine its impossible to get the perfect treatment window for each yard when it may well be as much as a month between visits. We see a definite correlation, year after year between poorer bee quality and treatments that miss the optimum window but we are only able to make these observations for a few weeks in the fall before they are hauled in, pooled, trucked, pooled and redistributed down south. This year we will be tagging each hive with a number indicating the location the hive came from so that we can track the hives after they are moved south in the winter. This is going to make it possible to make a further correlation, as the winter progresses, as to hive quality vs. the fall treatment times and any other variables a location may have had. I would gladly leave even an entire yard untreated as a test but it isn't possible to keep those inevitably higher mite count bees segregated from our treated hives while being held in two different holding yards and a loaded semi. A number of prominent Beesource contributors who normally treat have tried tf on a limited basis for comparison. I think that is great. Has any devoted tf beekeeper volunteered to try some sort of treatment program for even a hive or two for comparison with their tf hives? If so I missed it. I don't mean that to sound like a taunt because it was not meant in that vein at all. Maybe a few have. I'm just trying to make the point of how you really know what the "other side" is experiencing with no basis for comparison.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

jim lyon said:


> it seems like there aren't many theories from the tf folks either. I would love to hear some specific spring to fall mite counts particularly on second year hives but specifics always seem to be elusive. I don't mean that in a negative way,


no taunt from Jim, 
BUT I second his comments and taunt those tf beekeepers to show a little bit more of their hand before yelling from the back of the room with stories of success,
Im not interested in seeing those abs, I want to see the gym!


----------



## Beregondo (Jun 21, 2011)

It might be very beneficial to split a three deep hive, and designate one box as tf and the other not, and over the next year or two manage both those hives and any splits out out of them consistently according to the two philosophies.

That way the variables of individual bees and equipment would be eliminated.
Ideally, I think being in the same apiary would also be wise, but I for one would be lathe enough to contaminate the equipment in the treated hive, let alone have bees carrying chemical residue in and out of neighboring TF hives.

I have two yards that are only 2 miles apart, but forage in each is substantially different, so location introduces a second variable.
Perhaps one of the neighbors where the forage is similar will consent to letting me use a small plot for a bee yard.

The expense of a new fence and charger is a consideration as well -- left unfenced the treated hive would certainly not survive the local bear population.

I might consider doing this next spring, and continuing through four springs and three winters to see which is more productive in terms of colony multiplication and hive production after three winters spread over four calendar years.

Multiple years should both eliminate "weird weather" variable as well as any criticism that the study is of too short a duration to be meaningful.

If there's real interest in such a study from the forum, I'll contact Cornell University which is not terribly far away, and see if they are interested in being involved.

Total hive count, honey production or bee sale income are pretty objective metrics, I think.
I'd appreciate suggestions.


----------



## JWChesnut (Jul 31, 2013)

---Really grumpy rant removed --- 
I certainly can get incensed.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

JW:

Just leave a trailer load of empty hives out in the desert southwest, in an area with plenty of feral colonies, bring them back to your yard when full.

Does that sound about right?


----------



## Beregondo (Jun 21, 2011)

If someone's getting conned because the philosophy of treatment free beekeeping exists, I'd like to suggest that blaming TF advocates for those frauds is somewhat akin to blaming civil engineers for causing the Brooklyn Bridge to exist and enabling crooks to exploit it for that fabled con.

In both cases all the folks have done is cause a thing (the bridge in one case, and the practice of TF beeking in the other)to exist and brought before the public.

There are hysterical voices on both sides of the fence.
It is not "Untreated" advocates who are making irresponsible claims, and more than it was the "treated" advocates who informed me my first year that if I didn't treat my bees would all die and that i would be responsible for spreading dreadful diseases and predators throughout the region.

In both cases it is irresponsible individual beekeepers misrepresenting the truth, who happen to either treat or not, not a group action.

On topic with this thread Jim's presented the idea of an A/B split comparison beginning with untreated hives.
I think it's a good idea and may be in a position to accomodate that experiment.

Instead of blustering off topic insistances, do you have any constructive comments concerning topic, or perhaps how the test Jim suggested might better be accomplished than with my ideas above?


----------



## Daniel Y (Sep 12, 2011)

WLC said:


> JW:
> 
> Just leave a trailer load of empty hives out in the desert southwest, in an area with plenty of feral colonies, bring them back to your yard when full.
> 
> Does that sound about right?


Actually when I got my first hive many years ago that is almost exactly what I was told to do. Just clean it up, set it up and wait.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Beregondo said:


> If there's real interest in such a study from the forum, I'll contact Cornell University which is not terribly far away, and see if they are interested in being involved.
> 
> I'd appreciate suggestions.


Suggestions? Find another University to work with. Nic Calderone won't be there much longer and who knows whether their bees will be there much longer either. If they have any left.

Besides that, I think you would have to start w/ all new equipment and feral bees, otherwise the bees and the equipment, in other words the comb, has already been treated. Best wishes.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Why would we need to test for treatment-free/resistant bees when it has already been done?

You could simply ask Tim Ives, etc. .

We already know where a significant number of the treatment-free colonies come from. 

Collected feral Honeybees.

Now if you actually wanted to conduct a research study on why those TF bees are resistant, beware. Scientist are still trying to unravel VSH/hygienic genomics+.

PS-The folks who might be interested in testing resistant bees are in another part of the country:

"Mitochondrial DNA characterization of Africanized honey bee (Apis mellifera L.) populations from the USA" Allen L Szalanski1* and Roxane M Magnus1, 1Social Insects Genetics Lab, Department of Entomology, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701, USA.

"Feral honey bees in pine forest landscapes of east Texas" Robert N. Coulson a, b, Corresponding author contact information, E-mail the corresponding author, M. Alice Pinto c, Maria D. Tchakeriana, Kristen A. Baumd, William L. Rubinke, 1, 
J. Spencer Johnstona a Knowledge Engineering Laboratory, Department of Entomology, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843-2475, USA b Knowledge Engineering Laboratory, Department of Forest Science, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843-2475, USA c Departamento Florestal, Escola Superior Agrária, Instituto Politécnico de Bragança, Campus de Santa Apolónia, Apartado 172, 5301-854 Bragança, Portugal d Department of Zoology, 430 Life Sciences West, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK 74078, USA e Beneficial Insects Research Unit, Honey Bee Group, USDA-ARS, Weslaco, TX 78596, USA


----------



## JWChesnut (Jul 31, 2013)

WLC said:


> JW:
> Just leave a trailer load of empty hives out in the desert southwest, in an area with plenty of feral colonies, bring them back to your yard when full.


This is done. Africanized bees maintain multiple queens, and seem to split/swarm spontaneously when a new hive space is discovered. They are always swarm ready. 

Some of the new Almond Pollination gold diggers are doing this. Placing trailer loads of trap hives near the cotton/tamarisk/mesquite, and they do fill up with very aggressive bees. 

These bees are not suitable for backyards, NYC rooftops, or human friendship.


----------



## brownbuff75 (Jul 1, 2013)

I have been thinking, a couple of things that would be interesting to know about the TF camp. One is how many hives did they have together or in close contact with each other. Because if, lets say you were doing a TF operation and you had a bunch of hives together and they had varroa but are able to mantian with the levels of the vorroa that they currently have. Then one starts to go downhill, be it varroa cause or some other diasese that weakens it so it doesn't fight off varroa as well that would would make it a breading ground for varroa and then spred to the other hives which might cause the mite number to rise to a level that the other hives cannot handle thus causing the whole yard to die off. Second I wonder what there mite loads were before they started ther TF operation, becuase if it was low to non existant before that would explain success for several years before there hive die off. 

I think bees ability to handle varroa themselves depends on a lot on genetics. Just like some people are more prone to getting sick more then others or even when people get sick some recover from the same sickness faster than others. Location also plays a factor just like with humans and sickness. Finaly i think that luck plays a part also. Like for instence, I don't get sick often, a cold or 2 a year thats usually it. Last year I got the flu a couple of times, the second time I got it it knocked me out for almost a month. It was a crappy year for me. Bees can be no different. As far as how pepople deal with there hives(TF vs non TF)I think they should approach it like they would themselves. Start of with preventitive measures, like some say going small cell helps, or doing brood breaks.(just like with us washing our hands or taking vitamins), if varroa numbers are increasing then step it up with slightly more invasive treatment like FMGO, OA, powdersugar dusting. If after that numbers are still riseing or not going down then hit it with the hard stuff.(like when we take anti-biotics).


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

Beregondo said:


> That way the variables of individual bees and equipment would be eliminated.
> Ideally, I think being in the same apiary would also be wise, but I for one would be lathe enough to contaminate the equipment in the treated hive, let alone have bees carrying chemical residue in and out of neighboring TF hives.


If the two hives are managed in the same area non of the variables have been removed IMO. Both are influencing each other.


----------



## Beregondo (Jun 21, 2011)

I agree that if they're a few feet from each other drifting will tend to dilute the treat/no treat distinction.
I didn't express what I was talking about as well as I could if I'd slept first instead of posting at 2 AM.

By "in the same apiary" I'm not contemplating putting them near each other, but on opposite sides of a very large yard, where casual drifting isn't likely.

Foreign drones are going to be present in both as a matter of course as they are in most hives given the wandering nature of drones.

Thanks for the input, Brian


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

Beregondo said:


> I agree that if they're a few feet from each other drifting will tend to dilute the treat/no treat distinction.
> I didn't express what I was talking about as well as I could if I'd slept first instead of posting at 2 AM.
> 
> By "in the same apiary" I'm not contemplating putting them near each other, but on opposite sides of a very large yard, where casual drifting isn't likely.
> ...


I think that would do just fine. Prudent beekeeping can eliminate robbing concerns and casual or drone drift is just part of beekeeping as I see it. Because all treatments are not equal any "side by side" test would need to have mite counts of both groups including before and after tests of the treated hives to confirm that your mite control program has, in fact, been effective. It is only with such data that you can truly make a comparison between untreated and EFFECTIVELY treated hives. A follow up comparison of spring hive strength and summer productivity would also further the comparison.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

I really feel that the only way you could have any conclusive answers to what makes the difference is to go to the apiaries that are having success with treatment free and see what is different. Unfortunately, the reasons for success may be different for different areas or apiaries.

I am convinced that TF survival is based on building immunity and that can only happen if the hive isn't treated for a long period of time. It certainly isn't going to happen in a 3-5 year trial period right alongside other hives that are treated be it in the same apiary or others close by (5 mile radius).

I am also convinced that buying a super breed is a short term fix unless that is all you buy. And even then, putting the super breed in a different location then where it came from is bound to have negative results.


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

I know of no researchers, labs, or studies that have ever looked at untreated bees as diffetant from treated bees, with the exception of the Moran lab.

Deknow


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

jim lyon said:


> It is only with such data that you can truly make a comparison between untreated and EFFECTIVELY treated hives.


The process of counting mites is a huge variable. It is an intervention into the hive with out knowing what the repercussions are. Nobody is counting mites in feral hives that are surviving. I don't believe the number of mites matters until it crashes. At that point you can take your recording of data.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

Acebird said:


> I don't believe the number of mites matters until it _*crashes*_.


And in the context above "_crashes_" means a _*dead hive*_? 

:ws:


> At that point you can take your recording of data.


Then what will you do with that data that you just recorded?

:gh:









.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

"These bees are not suitable for backyards, NYC rooftops, or human friendship. "

I would simply say that they're feral. Let's not 'color' all feral colonies as being 'Killer Bees'.


"I know of no researchers, labs, or studies that have ever looked at untreated bees as 'different' from treated bees, with the exception of the Moran lab."

I would favor a study by those working with feral populations that compares them to domestic stock.

It's going to be the 'C' mitotypes vs the 'A', 'O', and 'M' mitotypes. Studies comparing nuclear markers would also be most welcome.

That being said, does anyone really think that Scientists are going to spend the time to hive resistant stock, and then develop a functioning TFB operation?

That takes years of effort to do.

I think that the most direct route is to make the hypothesis: Resistant Honeybees carry non-EHB, non-'C' mitotype, genetics. for starters.

The testing is relatively straight forward. However, it's best done by labs that have already published in that field of research.


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

I agree that the most direct route towards testing your pet hypothosis du jour is to test that hypothesis.

Deknow


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

But arent labs that have already published in that field biased by definition?


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Do you want Seeley examining the TFB issue again?

The right people for the job are those that can, at the very least, examine the genetic lineage of any TFB/resistant colonies.

Frankly, I think that South Westerners have a more realistic view of these feral colonies. They're not complacent while at the same time they know a genetic 'gold mine' when they see one.

Please remember that I have Italian-Buckfast hybrid queens, that have been open mated with the 'Hybrid Swarm' (they're Texans).

They're not actually feral, but at the same time, they're not quite domestic either.

It's an interesting way to hybridize/blend genetics. The queen is domestic, the workers are mixed hybrids (domestic and feral).


----------



## Baja (Oct 11, 2012)

WBVC said:


> I find it interesting that so many are able to get hold of "feral" stock...swarms, cutouts etc. I have lived in the same area since 1958...with a few away for college. I have never seen a swarm or heard of anyone in the area with feral bees in their yard, home or outbuildings.
> I set up a "swarm trap" and it has seen no activity at all.
> 
> Are some areas "bee free" or am I just no good at attracting bees to our property?


Unfortunately you live in Vancouver where as far as I know there is virtually no feral bee population. I think it is because there has been very little beekeeping here and when a colony swarms it is quickly detected and removed. I have caught swarms in Vancouver and have friends on the city call list who catch several swarms each year. It would be nice if we developed a feral population.


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

If researchers want to look at a thing (like untreated bees), they must either have that thing or they have to aquire it. One would think it would be easier, cheaper, and more reflective of the actual claimed success to work with a beekeeper that is keeping untreated bees than it is to develop their own from scratch.
I dont know of a tf beekeeper that hasnt been enthusiastic to work with researchers.

Deknow


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

jim lyon said:


> With great trepidation I will break my silence to make just a few points. .


Jim, excellent post, and thanks for weighing in.

Yes, it does seem a bit lopsided, when all the side by side comparisons have been done by those who treat. I suppose some who don't treat now did treat in the past, but that's not the same as a side-by-side comparison. One problem, I imagine, is that there is a bit of faith-based science in the nontreating philosophy. That's probably true of me to some extent. As a lifelong organic gardener, I have gotten a lot of positive reinforcement in practicing that approach to gardening, so I'm predisposed to see treatment as a crutch. From that perspective, it's a bit like using so-called "organic" pesticides, like pyrethrins, to keep your plants alive until your soil is good enough that you'll no longer need pesticides of any sort. And that does happen, very reliably, if you take care of the soil and feed it properly.

I think about this stuff a lot. I've decided that there isn't a lot that small time beekeepers can do about the genetics of their bees, aside from using localized bees. It's hard to see how you can make much difference in the mite resistance of your stock if you're raising your own open-mated queens. However, I think that bees in general have more resistance than they did 20 years ago, and that this may partially account for the recent increase in numbers of successful TF beekeepers. My theory is that although commercial beekeepers do treat, they still lose a lot of bees, and the ones that survive are usually the ones the operators breed from. So despite my belief that this evolution wouldl go more rapidly were everyone to avoid unnecessary treatment, I think the bees must be evolving resistance to mites, or if you don't like the term resistance, tolerance.

One thing I've noticed is that there are few if any migratory beekeepers who can get away without treating. It makes me wonder if California is a particularly tough state to keep bees in, because of the genetics and the mite populations that move in there so massively every spring. This may account for JW's observation that no one can keep bees TF in coastal CA.

I believe the greatest advantage that TF beekeepers may have over conventional operations has to do with hive microbiota. I've recently been reading a terrific book by Michael Pollan, called _Cooked._ This book is not about bees, but the section on human gut microbiota has many parallels to bees. 99% of the DNA in your body is not human. The microbes that co-exist in a human body are an extremely successful evolutionary strategy, because they can exchange genetic material very easily. This flexibility is one reason we can eat so many different things, for example, and still get some nutrition from that diet. Bees also have an extremely complex inner ecosystem, and the complexity is multiplied when you consider the micro and macro biota that live within the superorganism, the colony. It seems very likely to me that treatments have a negative effect on this biological safety net. One small example is the fermentation of pollen, which, it seems to me, must be negatively affected by agents that reduce the population of microbiota in the hive. Even in humans, the science of commensal or symbiotic organisms is in its infancy.

Maybe I'll have to do a side-by-side comparison, if I can figure out how to avoid treatment and still keep bees alive. I don't expect this to happen overnight. But I do hope to avoid buying bees in my second year. You're right that it would be a very interesting comparison, but it would be much more interesting if the beekeeper running the comparison was first successful at keeping TF bees alive. One of the problems I have with stories of TF failure from conventional beekeepers is that it's a comparison between failure and success. What I would most like to see is a comparison between successful TF colonies and successful treated colonies, to see what concrete differences can be detected in things like productivity, survival rates, supercedure rates, etc. In this case, I would define success as losing no more hives than the national average. Apparently that's around a 30% attrition rate.

Anyway. I'm off to the North Country tomorrow, so I won't be here to stir stuff up for a couple weeks.


----------



## JWChesnut (Jul 31, 2013)

WLC said:


> I would simply say that they're feral. Let's not 'color' all feral colonies as being 'Killer Bees'.


Listen, Victor/WLC
I have attended funerals of experienced beekeepers in Costa Rica (I lived there for three years) and Guatemala. 
You may pretend to have a vast store of "armchair" knowledge. But don't try to lay none of your boogie-woogie on me. 
I have lived, grieved and dealt with your so-called "feral mitotype"

Thanks for listening and acting on my advice.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Who is Victor?


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

The victor is the one who wins every argument...at least in his own mind.

Deknow


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

rhaldridge said:


> My theory is that although commercial beekeepers do treat, they still lose a lot of bees, and the ones that survive are usually the ones the operators breed from. So despite my belief that this evolution wouldl go more rapidly were everyone to avoid unnecessary treatment, I think the bees must be evolving resistance to mites, or if you don't like the term resistance, tolerance.


By the same token you are breeding stronger mites and that is one of the reasons I feel the two groups can't be together.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

JWChesnut said:


> Listen, 'deleted'/WLC
> I have attended funerals of experienced beekeepers in Costa Rica (I lived there for three years) and Guatemala. You may pretend to have a vast store of "armchair" knowledge. But don't try to lay none of your boogie-woogie on me.
> I have lived, grieved and dealt with your so-called "feral mitotype"
> Thanks for listening and acting on my advice.


JW:

First of all, the South Western U.S. is considered to contain hybrid AHB/EHB rather than the 'full Monty' AHB.

Secondly, we aren't on a first name basis. It is always 'WLC' on the forum.

There have been an average of 2 AHB deaths per year in the U.S. . These were unfortunate people who happened on a feral AHB colony.

More people are killed each year in the U.S. by their pet dogs, than are killed by AHB. Pitbulls being the worst. Do you know how many times a year I walk by someone holding a pitbull on a leash here in Manhattan? Dozens.


As for mitotypes, how about the O and M mitotypes? Would you characterize them as killers as well?

No, I am not advocating that TFBers keep 'Killer Bees' because of their resistance. I'm talking about hybrid ferals.

There is a difference.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

deknow said:


> The victor is the one who wins every argument...at least in his own mind.
> 
> Deknow


Grow up already.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>I would love to hear some specific spring to fall mite counts particularly on second year hives but specifics always seem to be elusive.

http://www.bushfarms.com/beescerts.htm

Here are the health certificates for mine for the last decade. The number next to "Varroa" is actually the number of hives in which he found ANY varroa mites of the ones he sampled.


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

Michael Bush said:


> >I would love to hear some specific spring to fall mite counts particularly on second year hives but specifics always seem to be elusive.
> 
> http://www.bushfarms.com/beescerts.htm
> 
> Here are the health certificates for mine for the last decade. The number next to "Varroa" is actually the number of hives in which he found ANY varroa mites of the ones he sampled.


Two things jump out at me about these. What does a visual assessment actually consist of and do you have any fall data when mite numbers typically explode? To me spring numbers when the hive is flush with brood is when I find it difficult to even find a mite in 1/2 cup ether rolls. There is one early August assessment here but again...visual?


----------



## Tim Ives (May 28, 2013)

jim lyon said:


> Two things jump out at me about these. What does a visual assessment actually consist of and do you have any fall data when mite numbers typically explode? To me spring numbers when the hive is flush with brood is when I find it difficult to even find a mite in 1/2 cup ether rolls. There is one early August assessment here but again...visual?



What does a visual assessment consist of?? Looking at the same LIVE hives, year after year after year after year after year after year after year.

I can post pretty much same results. Don't care.......


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

I don't think we do either.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

Michael Bush said:


> >I would love to hear some specific spring to fall mite counts particularly on second year hives but specifics always seem to be elusive.
> 
> http://www.bushfarms.com/beescerts.htm
> 
> Here are the health certificates for mine for the last decade. The number next to "Varroa" is actually the number of hives in which he found ANY varroa mites of the ones he sampled.


Micheael, you got to throw it in their face. You must of paid off the inspector. he,he, he, he,


----------



## cg3 (Jan 16, 2011)

sqkcrk said:


> Who is Victor?


Uh, oh...:shhhh:


----------



## ashb82 (Apr 22, 2010)

It's the queen and breeders. Here is normal run of the mill Italian vs beeweaver queen sugar roll test results today. These hives are inches apart from one another. All my beeweaver russian and Nwc have 0 to 2.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

Jim, South Dakota and Nebraska, are you that far away. Go see if he is lying. I don't think he is. I met Michael. Nothing that I could tell gave me that con artist ring.


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

I asked a legitimate question and I felt I did so respectfully. I don't know what a Nebraska inspector does or what he or she feels is the significance of a visual inspection for mites particularly one done in the spring. In South Dakota the state does late summer to early fall ether rolls. This time of year I am constantly doing ether roll assessments as well. I did counts on 50 potential breeders this spring and found 47 negatives and three hives with a single mite. It was nice to see but I sure didn't interpret that as not having any mite issues but mostly that early in the year you don't find many phoretic mites. Why would I bother? Well I sure don't want to use a hive as a breeder if perchance it does have a high count.


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

Jim asks a perfectly legit question and two members jump all over him. I'm confident that there are many of us wondering the same thing that Jim asked. Testing for mites on one day out of 365 days a year is extremely limiting in its conclusions. What would be very telling is to do this same inspection once every quarter.
Ace, it's not an issue about him lying.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

Tim Ives said:


> Looking at the same LIVE hives, year after year after year after year after year after year after year.


just curious tim, and actually i'm taking a poll, but can you share how many hives you wrapped up for winter last year and how many of those still had bees in them when you unwrapped?


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Barry said:


> What would be very telling is to do this same inspection once every quarter.


Maybe if they were in FL, but in IL? I don't really think you thought that through Barry. Do you want someone going into your hives in January to do a mite check?

The annual life cycle of varroa mites is pretty well known, I believe. So I don't see much of a point of doing mite checks until soon before one might apply a treatment, or not.

Too bad we don't really know what 2 mites in an ether roll sample means in relation to total number of mites in a colony. Leastwise I don't.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

squarepeg said:


> just curious tim, and actually i'm taking a poll, but can you share how many hives you wrapped up for winter last year and how many of those still had bees in them when you unwrapped?


Is this what would be called pirating or pimping? Not enough traffic on your Poll squarepeg?


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

Mark - the modern term is _networking_! :lookout:

Since SP didn't include a link to the thread in question, he certainly isn't being pushy ...


Here is a link to the thread:
http://www.beesource.com/forums/sho...and-overwintering-success&highlight=squarepeg


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Whadaya expect? I am 60. :lpf:


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

sqkcrk said:


> Is this what would be called pirating or pimping? Not enough traffic on your Poll squarepeg?


are your feelings hurt because i excluded migratory colonies mark? 

hoping to end up with 20 or more beekeepers and 500 or more colonies in each category, can't believe it's not been done before with as much back and forth that goes on here between the two camps.


----------



## Tim Ives (May 28, 2013)

squarepeg said:


> just curious tim, and actually i'm taking a poll, but can you share how many hives you wrapped up for winter last year and how many of those still had bees in them when you unwrapped?


2007 10 packages lost all,15 swarms lost , +1 2004 Russian Q package. 
2008 15 increased to 22 lost 3
2009 19 increased to 40 lost Zero
2010 40 increased to 90 lost 4
2011 86 increased to 132 sold 30 splits, lost 8
2012 94 increased to 148 sold 30 splits, lost 9
2013 109 increased to 155-160ish plus 30 2 story nucs. 

If I was to knock them triples down to singles, I could have 465-480..


----------



## cg3 (Jan 16, 2011)

Rader Sidetrack said:


> Here is a link to the thread:
> http://www.beesource.com/forums/sho...867138&highlight=greenhouse+winter#post867138


And how old are you?:lpf:


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

(need to fix the link graham)


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

many thanks tim.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

squarepeg said:


> are your feelings hurt because i excluded migratory colonies mark?
> 
> hoping to end up with 20 or more beekeepers and 500 or more colonies in each category, can't believe it's not been done before with as much back and forth that goes on here between the two camps.


I got nothing for ya.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

sqkcrk said:


> I got nothing for ya.


graciously accepted.


----------



## Tim Ives (May 28, 2013)

7 other guys in area with similar hive setups. 152 hives with 13 lost past winter. All TF and sugar free. 

The rest of the MBA area 27% losses of 436 hives. MBA been keeping track of winter losses since 06'- 30%+/-3%.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

> And how old are you?:lpf:

I have been a beekeeper since March of 2012.  :lookout: I'm coming up on two. :gh:


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Me too.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

> (need to fix the link graham)

Oops!  
I fixed the original post, here is the corrected link to _squarepeg's _survey again.

http://www.beesource.com/forums/sho...and-overwintering-success&highlight=squarepeg


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

yep, working right now, thanks for the plug.


----------



## Fusion_power (Jan 14, 2005)

I treated my bees for several years to control varroa after losing all of my colonies in the winter of 1993/1994 and having to re-stock with feral and purchased bees.

I stopped treating in 2005 after identifying some feral stock with high levels of mite tolerance and purchasing some stock from Purvis to cross breed with. I purchased some queens from Mike Carpenter this year, again to diversify my stock, after seeing signs the genetic base was too narrow.

I have 9 healthy hives of bees that have been treatment free since the winter of 2004. This year, I also gave several colonies to a local beginner to get him started with mite tolerant bees. I have deliberately pushed my bees to swarm so that feral colonies would get established. The result is pretty obvious, I catch several feral swarms each year. This year, I only got 1 feral swarm, but I had 6 swarms from my own colonies, one colony swarmed 4 times. We had an exceptionally wet summer with nectar available until early August. This gave bees very high potential to swarm.

Do I have varroa? Not at a detectable level. I pull drone brood several times near the end of summer just to check the mite load. Rarely do I see even one. Would a sugar roll find varroa? If they are not in drone brood, then a sugar roll will find very few.

I'll go so far as to say that genetics are 90% of the battle and the other 10% is management. I am using small cell and narrow gauge frames with 11 frames in a deep brood chamber. The reason for the narrow frames has more to do with spring management than with varroa. Bees on narrow frames build up 2 weeks earlier and are ready to split before bees on regular frames.

For beekeepers considering going treatment free, please get some tolerant stock to start with.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

interesting dar. i'm letting some swarms fly around here for the same reason, and i also had one swarm 4 times this year.

are you saying that you overwintered nine colonies last year with zero losses?


----------



## Fusion_power (Jan 14, 2005)

My bees here at home overwintered 100%, but I lost 2 colonies caught as swarms from commercial bees. A local farmer had planted pumpkins and had a beekeeper bring in about 30 colonies for pollination. He placed them about 1/4 mile from my mother's house which is 150 miles from here. Turned out that his bees were better at swarming than mine. I had bait hives out so they moved in with no fuss and no muss. I deliberately left them untreated just to see how they would do over winter. They loaded up with mites and by spring were deadouts. I replaced them this spring with splits and mite tolerant queens.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

interesting dar, thanks for the reply.


----------



## imthegrumpyone (Jun 29, 2013)

#193 post, no solutions, and more than likely scared the crap out of a bunch of newbee's. Thanks a lot. I'm gathering for all the reading I've been doing, that it's a matter of choice, there is know right or wrong way. As for me, late start this year, no bees, we'll start in spring, no idea what I'm doing, but I read this site everyday and learn something most of the time. Treat or not, I don't have a clue, bees where here long before we were.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Well, that settles it, doesn't it? Let the bees sort it out.


----------



## imthegrumpyone (Jun 29, 2013)

sqkcrk, sense being a "novice" ha, ha, I'm glad to be of some help on the subject. :lookout:


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Well, at least you know enough to know you know nothing. Usually someone w/ as much experience as you knows everything. lol

"Treat or not, I don't have a clue, bees where here long before we were."? If by "here" you mean "the World", you are right. But not here in the USA. What is more important to know is that varroa mites have not been on our honeybees, apis mellifera, but a mere 50 years maybe. Varroa's original host lives in SE Asia.

I hope you do find time to learn. There's a lot to know. Beekeeping isn't just putting bees in boxes. Welcome to beesource.


----------



## imthegrumpyone (Jun 29, 2013)

The world, not USA. . And yes I know nothing, never claimed to know, got my box to late to start this year, but come spring I'll see how bad I can screw things up. Months of reading this site I already know there's a lot of BS here from people who think they know. You find that all over, you ask three people the same question, and get three different answers. I hope to learn enough in the long run to not kill or loose my bees and keep them fairly happy. Hope any of my post never offend anyone, not my intention, but looking at some of the questions asked, and the snide answers given back, I expect shots taken, not the first won't be last. I read this site everyday, several times a day for it's knowledge from all bee keeps, a wealth of knowledge and experience, you all keep up the good work, I can tell it's more than a hobby to most.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

The knowledgeable folks in the South West have made some headway in identifying the genetics of the ferals that they are hiving and keeping treatment free.

In the rest of the country, all that they can say about there treatment free bees is that they're Apis mellifera spp. or some kind of Apis mellifera ssp. . They don't really have a handle on the genetics yet.


----------



## cg3 (Jan 16, 2011)

imthegrumpyone said:


> you ask three people the same question, and get three different answers.


You ain't seen nuthin' yet!


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>Two things jump out at me about these. What does a visual assessment actually consist of

When I have been there (and I'm not always there) and the inspector was doing his assessments, in every hive he did a sugar shake and uncapped a bunch of drones. He asked me if I wanted to do a ether roll, but I didn't want to kill the bees.

> and do you have any fall data when mite numbers typically explode?

I get them inspected so I can sell queens. So that happens in the spring. Every September after the state fair for several years I would have the people who were interested in becoming beekeepers come out to my home yard with the state bee club and we would show them equipment bees etc. I would always try to find some dead Varroa on the trays (which I usually have in the hives by then) and most years I can't find any. Some years I can find a few. That is a month or so of mite drop on the trays... It's been many years since I bothered to try to count Varroa mites.


----------



## imthegrumpyone (Jun 29, 2013)

Can I get an Amen to that !!! Now I'll read some more, soak up the experience and knowledge,a few useful tips and forge on. After a little toying around with a swarm in my neighbors yard last summer, (that a beek spent hours stringing the comb into a hive and we left standing for a few days to try in make sure we caught them all) I just snapped and the wife and I decided that we'd try our hand at keeping a hive or two. I spent the money foe equipment, set it all up than it was to late to acquire ant bees, looked from one end of the country to the other. Oh well second mistake, first was I hadn't read enough. I'll order sees for spring shortly, read some more during the winter and hope to be ready in a few months foe and exciting adventure. Buy the way, the beek that spent hours collecting, stringing to try and save that swarm, well you guessed it they didn't make it but a couple weeks after he picked them up, but we tried.


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

Michael Bush said:


> >Two things jump out at me about these. What does a visual assessment actually consist of
> 
> When I have been there (and I'm not always there) and the inspector was doing his assessments, in every hive he did a sugar shake and uncapped a bunch of drones. He asked me if I wanted to do a ether roll, but I didn't want to kill the bees.
> 
> ...


Thanks for the background Mike. I find it odd that they would refer to a sugar shake as a visual assessment. It also seems that a drone assessment would be really arbitrary unless one is always analyzing the same number and same age of drone pupae. I guess in the final analysis all assessments are visual though huh.  If I were a bit more "tech savvy" I would scan and post a few of my yearly assessments from the state of South Dakota as well. They are always done in the late summer and give some nice information including nosema readings but they are what they are and that is just a snapshot of what is going on in one apiary on a given date. I do far more readings on my own. Last September the state of SD had 20 of 22 positive varroa readings in 4 different apiaries with an average count of under 2% (a single 6% reading skewed the results somewhat as19 of the 20 readings averaged 1%). I was pretty pleased with those results given the time of year. 
Despite not treating for nosema in 4 years only 6 of 24 nosema results were positives averaging 1.5 nosema spores per million.


----------



## Fusion_power (Jan 14, 2005)

Drone brood can be assessed any time after capped, but best results are from pupa to purple eye stage. If I find 1 varroa to 20 drones, that translates to an overwhelming load of varroa in a normal colony. As I previously stated, my bees have given minimal varroa counts for several years. I do not treat. They survive. I've seen plenty of dead colonies that were overwhelmed with varroa. I lost all of my colonies to varroa 20 years ago. Fortunately, I caught a swarm in a bait hive that I did not know about until the next spring. I split that one colony into 3 colonies and within a few years replaced all I had lost.

I did not make significant progress with varroa tolerance until I caught a swarm 9 years ago that was exceptional in several ways, but hotter than homemade hoo hoo. Selection over a few years eliminated the excess stinging and left me with a line of bees with very high levels of varroa tolerance. The genetics were too narrow so I purchased some queens from Purvis.

I don't need any further proof and for my part, discussion of treatment free is a waste of time. Varroa tolerance is a very real and very useful trait. Bees have it. Make use of it.


----------



## Honey Hive Farms (Nov 1, 2012)

Honey Hive Farms, we treat for mites in our hives several different ways, we also believe/assume they are in every hive.
NOTE:
There are natural ways to treat for mites, one fogging them with mineral oil, etc. (not saying count on this or do it, telling you what we work with) some of our customers want chemical free bees, so that is what we give them.

Our hives we treat with fogging and Apiguard. If you get into the contents in Apiguard, it isn't that bad, in comparison with other treatments and or loosing the bees.
Our queens / bees have a gene to help with mites. We do not use/sell or support the Minnesota Hygh. as the term is used in Missouri way to loosely and no genetic proof to back it up.


I know and speak to a lot of people and some think the small cell foundation will help, not sure I am sold on this yet, but like the thought.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Honey Hive Farms said:


> some of our customers want chemical free bees, so that is what we give them.


So where do you get them from if you treat your hives?


----------



## Honey Hive Farms (Nov 1, 2012)

Different bee yards, we have our bees/honey production, pollination, etc and we have bees and nucs for sale. several different/separate/more then one bee yard. 
Honey Hive Farms doesnt mix say swarms with other genetics so again several different/separate/more then one bee yard. 
Good stock and we do rotate genetics after 2 to 3 years helps honey productions.
Also bees die off in 5 weeks and what you do with that new bee, chemicals or not. There is several more options and ways to do things and all beekeepers have there own way and opinion and this is how we do it. 
What is really comes down to is that we care and want our customers to have the best we can give them, chemicals or not, real wax or plastic.. STRONG HIVE IS A STRONG HIVE..


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

sqkcrk said:


> So where do you get them from if you treat your hives?


From the smoke!


----------

