# What's your Treatment Free Survivability?



## mtnmyke (Apr 27, 2017)

I was reading some research recently that showed the VSH or "hygienic" behavior wasn't a dominant gene and therefore wasn't guaranteed to pass on from hives that were surviving treatment free. In fact, the study found that 1 generation was enough to lose it in a large majority of progeny. This has been one of the issues in creating treatment free hives...and why we're still treating - how long after varroa was introduced?

If it were as simple as breeding your survivors and the survivors of those then the mite issue would no longer be an issue.

It also comes down to the diseases and virus' introduced to the bees by varroa. Research shows that eggs and larvae can be "vaccinated" by royal jelly fed to queens and larvae but the bees need to be subjected to those diseases in the first place. If the disease doesn't outright kill them, how do you know they ever had it to select for it?

So in short, you're dealing with more than one issue as a result of mites. Of course, I encourage anyone to go treatment free but also believe you need to be willing to lose a lot of hives, and have the hives to lose in the first place, in order to get anywhere with treatment free.

Further, if someone claimed they were treatment free for X amount of years and wanted to sell queens I wouldn't buy them, but I would buy a nuc from them as it's the immunity of the colony I'd be after and not jus the "genetic" aspect - as it's just not that simple.

For me, a few shots of OAV from a band vaporizer is so easy, why not at least keep on top of mites?

But this is a touchy subject and people will argue one way or the other like a left and right wings of a bee. If you haven't found the treatment free thread, with a LOT of posts, you may want to start there.


----------



## Tim KS (May 9, 2014)

I treat for mites every time I think it might help a bit, so I can't answer the question. But I do have / had 20 colonies of Italians going into the winter. I robbed them pretty severely last fall and have been feeding the 19 colonies that have survived for about a month now. They are building up good and if the weather cooperates, I hope for another good year like last year.

The lost hive, I think lost their queen late in the fall (possibly when I last robbed them) and I didn't find out until too late.


----------



## gww (Feb 14, 2015)

Don't feel like breaking it down more but the basics for me was mostly close to 100 percent survival for four winters with my 5th summer biting me hard and my fifth winter hitting me hard again. except for first winter with three hives, had about ten for the rest of the time. I am starting spring with what looks like 5.
Cheers
gww


----------



## ScubaMark (Jan 6, 2009)

I have had pretty good survival rates 85% plus for about 12 years with the exception of a year after a commercial operation with migratory hives moved in within about a mile and a half of ne. I lost about 50 to 60% that year. Fortunately, they went out of business after only a year. (don't hate on me) The following years, the survival trended back up to the approximate 85% level. I don't know if it was because the migratory hives brought in a bunch of diseases and pests or if they overwhelmed the genetics with commercial queens that are treatment dependent.

I think genetics CAN produce resistance, but not within areas of commercial operations (with commercially produced queens) that dominate the area with bees bred to be optimum producers that are chemically dependent. An antibiotic dependent chicken house broiler chicken would have a very small chance of surviving in your backyard, and grandma's backyard chickens would not be very robust if they were allowed to interbreed with broiler stock. It is just common sense.


----------



## AR1 (Feb 5, 2017)

Up and down. 3 years ago I caught a swarm and ended up that year with 4 colonies. All 4 survived the winter. Last year those 4 swarmed and swarmed and I ended up with 12. I kept 10 of those. Of those ten, all died except one which is all I have now.

I can't swear mites didn't kill those 9 hives that died, or at least weaken them until something else killed them. But for sure 9/10 are dead.


----------



## Gray Goose (Sep 4, 2018)

Mtnmyke

your comment
"Further, if someone claimed they were treatment free for X amount of years and wanted to sell queens I wouldn't buy them, but I would buy a nuc from them as it's the immunity of the colony I'd be after and not jus the "genetic" aspect - as it's just not that simple. "

Is an interesting observation.
I have seen when doing splits, in the realm of 1 hive is now 2 or 3 that the "conditions" seem to follow.
but if I do a shook swarm onto foundation, or just move a Queen Cell there is not nearly as much correlation with the survivability. I am starting to think the micro biome or learned behavior has an impact on the "VHS traits" hence selling VHS queens is not seemingly the key to success.
your comment is something I have also observed, I had a hive survive for 6 years, all the QCs I pulled and placed did not make the first winter, seemed odd to me. I is possible the open mating for me was different than the 6 yr surviving hive whit BTW was a swarm capture.


to the OP 50 to 100% loss over several years was my stats, I now treat with OA my main yard, the out liers either sparingly or none.

GG


----------



## LarryBud (Jul 19, 2020)

mtnmyke said:


> I was reading some research recently that showed the VSH or "hygienic" behavior wasn't a dominant gene and therefore wasn't guaranteed to pass on from hives that were surviving treatment free. In fact, the study found that 1 generation was enough to lose it in a large majority of progeny. This has been one of the issues in creating treatment free hives...and why we're still treating - how long after varroa was introduced?
> 
> If it were as simple as breeding your survivors and the survivors of those then the mite issue would no longer be an issue


I am not quite sure that I agreed with that. I believe from what I'm reading is that hygienic behavior is a genetic trait that was (for lack of a better term) diluted in exchange for more desirable traits such as honey production, growth and other more "desirable" traits during the industrialization of beekeeping. Goals of commercial pollinators were more to produce the maximum number of colonies, trade off for honey production etc. and these commercial "volume" hives impact any local colonies that they interact with either by genetic dilution or by transfer of pathogens. (No disrespect to commercial, they are the backbone of beekeeping) All bees show hygienic traits in just the way they maintain the hives through removal dead bees, un-developed larvae, wax and debris and a dozen other behavioral activities. While active breeding of VSH bees does further develop the trait, dilution through a lack of continuity is inevitable. If I introduce VSH queens to my yards, and someone within the breeding zone is treatment free or worse, a beehaver not maintaining their colonies, it's inevitable that I'll get hit with an overwhelming mite bomb or worse, poor genetics for my f2 progeny. I am not discounting the use of feral bees completely but I believe that survivor colonies are the exception not the rule and allowing for open breeding with other bees, completely dilutes and genetics that might have been developed. The selection protocol for AI VSH breeder stock is quite intense and usually a two year effort for that queen, usually from stock that has at least the support of a previous generation of similar selection. I'm not sure if supporting feral stock, unless well documented longevity, is the answer. A couple months ago in a telephone call with a more knowledgeable beek about VSH, he said you could get a Black Angus out of a Texas Long Horn if you want to wait long enough. Do we have that time?


----------



## crofter (May 5, 2011)

*Do we have that time<* Question is do we have the economic motivation that will impose the conditions necessary to cause the shift. Cows are easy compared to bees. AI is simpler and isolation of breeding is far easier. Bees reproduction habits seem deliberately made to select against it. There is also a great variety of "visions" of what would be the "best bee". The present economic driver of the existence of bees is is the pollination business which sees bees hauled from coast to coast and north to south, spreading disease and mooting any selective breeding program. The bee that will multiply the fastest as long as it is fed regardless of the season is emanently suited.

You *can* create islands of stock with heightened survival traits for local conditions but how do you prevent their contamination by the hordes; especially when their virgin queens are so avidly promiscuous. There are quite a few examples of these pockets but there are probably a thousandfold more examples of failure. The successes are well recorded but the failures for the most part not.

The biggest roadblocks to a concerted genetic shift are probably economic, political, and cultural rather than genetic: Imagine trying to implement the prevention of bee transport across state lines! Heck we have people killing each other over whether or not to wear masks!


----------



## AHudd (Mar 5, 2015)

If the VSH trait was bred out of bees over the last, let's say 200 years, as opposed to it being present for the rest of their time on earth, wouldn't it be reasonable to believe that this trait would be easy to restore in the presence of this incredible pressure from mites of which our bees are being subjected.
Sort of like the claim that 4.7- 4.9 mm being natural cell size. 

Alex


----------



## HTB (Aug 12, 2020)

I'm fairly new at this still but all 19 of mine made it through winter. Most are first year splits made in September though my original two colonies with the original queens are entering their third year with no treatments. They're all in 10 frame deeps. I had mites and mite related issues late summer/early fall and made splits for brood breaks and reduced space in the struggling colonies and feed when needed. I over "wintered" (Florida) several as 5 frame nucs and everything came out of winter thriving. Made 15 splits a couple of weeks ago with capped swarm cells.


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

The reports about survivability are not that useful without:

your zip-code (ok, let's not report the exact address unless someone insists)
significant observation time frame (like 5 years)
significant number of hives reported per each reading (like 5 or more?)
significantly removed bee yards should be counted *separately *(don't average together two yards separated by 50 miles)
Anyway, if you asking for some reporting - then specify your algorithm to follow.
Otherwise, we are back to story-telling... Waste of time.

Heck my first season I did very well too - 50% survived.
Total number of hives was - 2.
Time frame was - 1 winter.
This data point alone is useless to bother with.
Just saying.


----------



## psm1212 (Feb 9, 2016)

mtnmyke said:


> I was reading some research recently that showed the VSH or "hygienic" behavior wasn't a dominant gene and therefore wasn't guaranteed to pass on from hives that were surviving treatment free. In fact, the study found that 1 generation was enough to lose it in a large majority of progeny. This has been one of the issues in creating treatment free hives...and why we're still treating - how long after varroa was introduced?


I was reading a post last night on Bee-L by Randy Oliver stating that his greatest problem in his 5 year long experiment of breeding survivor queens was the lack of heritability of the trait that makes them varroa resistant. He said that he started with roughly 1% of colonies displaying the trait and after intense breeding from those favorable colonies for 5 years, he is only at roughly 7% with the favorable trait. He is frustrated that these good queens cannot seem to pass their varroa-management trait onto their daughters.


----------



## Earthboy (May 16, 2007)

To avoid cross posting, please go here to see my latest post:









treating vs. not treating for mites: opinion thread


gino FWIW, I treat not as often as I should, lose some hives every fall and winter, and basically make up for it each spring with splits made from hives that are approaching swarm strength. Just throwing and ideal out there for the heck of it. I think for honey production michael palmer does...




www.beesource.com


----------



## Kevinf (Oct 2, 2019)

The BIP survey may be the best source for this data - Bee Informed Partnership - National Management Survey.

If you look at the 2019-2020 data for all operations, it would indicate that winter losses for those that used any varroa treatment (a treatment is the application of a biological, organic, or synthetic chemical to control the pest) were 32% while those that did not use any varroa control had 44% losses. You can parse the data (state level, year, operator type, etc.) any number of ways on the website.....

Kevin


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

Kevinf said:


> The BIP survey may be the best source for this data - Bee Informed Partnership - National Management Survey.
> 
> If you look at the 2019-2020 data for all operations, ....... You can parse the data (state level, year, operator type, etc.) any number of ways on the website.....
> 
> Kevin


You absolutely *must *parse the data - otherwise it is meaningless.

Case in point - compare Arizona/Alabama to Wisconsin.
Complete reverse.
With this in mind, nation-wide conclusions are just meaningless.

Like I said - before posting anything useful at all - post your ZIP (ZIP of the bee location, to be exact).
Anyway, here it is not useful to be "collecting" any data.
Story telling - sure and fine.
The forum is mostly about story telling anyway.


----------



## Kevinf (Oct 2, 2019)

And look at the number of responses to see if a valid sample size....


----------



## LarryBud (Jul 19, 2020)

crofter said:


> *Do we have that time<* Question is do we have the economic motivation that will impose the conditions necessary to cause the shift. Cows are easy compared to bees. AI is simpler and isolation of breeding is far easier. Bees reproduction habits seem deliberately made to select against it. There is also a great variety of "visions" of what would be the "best bee". The present economic driver of the existence of bees is is the pollination business which sees bees hauled from coast to coast and north to south, spreading disease and mooting any selective breeding program. The bee that will multiply the fastest as long as it is fed regardless of the season is emanently suited.
> 
> You *can* create islands of stock with heightened survival traits for local conditions but how do you prevent their contamination by the hordes; especially when their virgin queens are so avidly promiscuous. There are quite a few examples of these pockets but there are probably a thousandfold more examples of failure. The successes are well recorded but the failures for the most part not.


Well put! The project envisioned by Lowtech might have impact from migratory and commercial apiaries. Even on the 2300 acres (if I correctly recall without re-reading) they would encounter an impact of surrounding hives. A proper isolation would need at least 80,000 acres or a 5 mile wide containment. However, I am in the Northeast and perhaps a proper isolation are could be the NYC suburbs. I would suggest that there is no/extremely limited commercial agriculture, hence no migratory hives (other than on trucks passing through on the NJ Turnpike) or large bee yards within 20 or 25 miles of the City. (Ok when you done snickering think about it) Is this a better opportunity for small scale expansion of natural selection supplemented by a reasonable introduction of selectively bred bees?




AHudd said:


> If the VSH trait was bred out of bees over the last, let's say 200 years, as opposed to it being present for the rest of their time on earth, wouldn't it be reasonable to believe that this trait would be easy to restore in the presence of this incredible pressure from mites of which our bees are being subjected.
> Sort of like the claim that 4.7- 4.9 mm being natural cell size.


Well , perhaps my example was not the best. It is believe that A. Cerana was able to co-exist with V. jacobsoni by adapting over thousands of years. This was a natural, Darwinian process. I would further suggest that A. mellifera either may have already dealt with V. destructor in ancient history or as a new pest, has the genetic ability's to develop naturally (in a thousands of years timeline) or quickly through selective breeding. My thoughts are that to accelerate the re-development of these traits is not by just a one and done buy a VSH queen but a repeated process of continual introduction of new queens, year after year from different breeder of, let say VSH Italian stock, or VSH Russian. In the first year of f1 queens introduced to a bee yard, how many effectively f1 drones (1005 gene from mother queen) hit the sky in 45 days or so to breed into feral and other local managed stock? In this year, any f2 generation queens would have a higher chance of hooking up (can say that?) with the f1 drones. Year 2, expansion of new VSH, preferable from a different gene pool, F2 girl meets new f1 boy-and so on. My area is at the edge of any serious commercial ag, most migratory stuff is much further south (15-20 miles) and very limited north and east. To the west (+5 miles) are some orchards and berry farms, mostly CSA's and in this area a big farm or orchard has less than 50 acres, most, much less of cultivated land. That's a far cry from thousand (think almonds) of acres in other areas of the Country.

The plan I've been working on is to have a central bee yard with, say 12-20 colonies, 4 commercial control and the balance in VSH queens. In this same first year, several satellite yards of 3 to 5 colonies within a mile and a half radius. I have a couple of commercial/Master Beeks on board to help with issues but am planning on performing all the labor myself and I'm self funded (translation Momma's thinking I should be committed and children watching their inheritances vaporize, I'm waiting for JW Palmer to call me Scoobert 2.0) I've already paid for the two pallets of hive boxes and frames and bees have been ordered. In year two, additional stock from different breeders to expand the gene pool and extend the perimeter. At least "Hey get back here" still has faith in me and hell, I've blown more on lesser projects-I got rid of the boat!

Edit note: I have pretty much identified and continue to search for an beekeepers within my project zone (there's no many) and would push, even gift some F2 queens as we get going.


----------



## Earthboy (May 16, 2007)

Larry,

Thank you for sharing your practical, here and right now, daily, real life beekeeping experience.


----------



## gww (Feb 14, 2015)

Since I routinely think myself in circles. I wonder if the case for hard bond as opposed to ipm might not be made in this way. If you only go bee genetics than it makes sense to (ipm)
treat a hive with high counts and then requeen allowing you to not use up your bee resources.

It would seem that with hard bond, you would have some chance of working on the mite and virus as well as just the bee. Hives that die take both of the bad with the good and hives that don't die leave the bad that might not be too bad to be the majority to keep breeding (bee, mite and virus.)
Cheers
gww


----------



## LarryBud (Jul 19, 2020)

Thank you, I kind of hijacked my own thread. I would like to start picking up some hard data on treatment free. Screwed the pooch on this one.

I am on the fence with any hard bond. Our plan is to keep the hive grouping in groups of 4 or so therefore allowing for a weekly alcohol wash of one hive out of the four, effectively all would be tested every month but we would reduced disrupting the all of the hive every week and then there is a time factor. If a group started to exceed an acceptable mite count, we would with draw the hive to another hive and treat with an organic acid (formic or OAV) depending on the measures. Once cured/recovered that hive could be used for resources and eventually requeened then placed back into the test group. waste not want not.


----------



## crofter (May 5, 2011)

I am certainly no expert on improving a stock. I bring in some queens occasionally from the same breeder with perhaps 500 hives. He has an active selection process in choosing his breeders. Gentleness is high on his choice and that program definitely works. I have not given them the opportunity to show how resistant they might be to mites; I take responsibility for that task.

msl has posted some material that suggests that merely breeding from your best 10% will not move the pointer in natural breeding if you do not decidedly cull out (prevent from breeding) all the population that performs below the 30th percentile in regard to the traits you are wanting to favor. Another factor common in would be stock improvement experiments is attempting to simultaneously alter multiple traits, which seriously compounds the degree of difficulty, but as humans we seem to find that enormously attractive.

In the really long range picture that some people say we should concern ourselves with, the varroa mite may be but a bump in the road so we better be careful that our so called improving of the bee does not result in the loss of other inherent abilities that may be crucial to coping with some future bump in the road. Genetic bottlenecking can have warts! 

It is a seemingly silly suggestion and not very enticing but I think we might be much better off messing with the mites genetics than the bees.


----------



## gww (Feb 14, 2015)

Just my take from just a couple of years reading probably with selective intent or preconceived notions and in no way claiming any knowledge past personal thinking based on the above. 

It seems that the bees that moved fastest toward some kind of equilibrium with mites have all been hard bonded. (example bee weaver, arnet forest ect)
The bees living as long after the arrival of the mite have not all used the same method to get to that equilibrium and this has been studied and some methods are not even recognized and some populations it is recognized that they do it different from other populations. (examples like swarming, reducing mite reproduction ect) Their have also been measurable change in mites in at least one study of unmanaged hives.

My belief is that most areas have some kind of wild population. These have now been effected for 30 years and are not all gone and must be adjusted in some way compared to when mites first arrived.

Randy Oliver has shown that feral bees can be genetically separate even in close proximity to managed treated hives and though they probably intermingle some they are distinctly different genetic make up.

They question come to my mind of which has adjusted best and fastest, managed or feral? Which is part of some ipm and which is hard bond?

Not being critical and I know I have no science background but just using my personal reasoning for my personal beliefs so far. I would never question others path based on their work and objectives but do what I do and get what I get good or bad.
I enjoy these discussions and really enjoy msl always throwing out research papers to back his conclusions. I am no where near as organized and do base more on over all feeling that might change daily.
Cheers
gww


----------



## LarryBud (Jul 19, 2020)

crofter said:


> It is a seemingly silly suggestion and not very enticing but I think we might be much better off messing with the mites genetics than the bees.


 Frank; After almost 30 years since the introduction and we're still having 40% overwinter losses if I (and others) are correct, yes, I think we need to work on this. No one is advocating 8 foot wing span mutant bees, just add to all of the desirable traits; climate adaptability, honey production, propagation and indeed, gentleness. The damage incurred by Varroa is not just the mite but it's ability to weaken the colony and vector other diseases. By reducing population, the door is open to darn near everything else that damages our colonies. Baby steps.


----------



## LarryBud (Jul 19, 2020)

gww said:


> It seems that the bees that moved fastest toward some kind of equilibrium with mites have all been hard bonded. (example bee weaver, arnet forest ect)
> The bees living as long after the arrival of the mite have not all used the same method to get to that equilibrium and this has been studied and some methods are not even recognized and some populations it is recognized that they do it different from other populations. (examples like swarming, reducing mite reproduction ect) Their have also been measurable change in mites in at least one study of unmanaged hives.


 My understanding of bee weavers (and Anklebiters) is there has been mixed reviews and the genetic dilution is also a factor. Arnot Forest is a remote location just southeast of the Adirondack Mountains and consider to be in the snow belt (lake effect snows). In the most utilized study, they monitor 8 colonies over 3 years and experience a loss of 3 out of the 8-almost 40%. To see if Arnot Forest bees can suppress the reproduction rate of mites, colonies of Arnot Forest bees and New World Carniolan bees were inoculated with mites from an apiary and the growth patterns of their mite populations were compared. No difference was found between the two colony types. Evidently, the stable bee-mite relationship in the Arnot Forest reflects adaptations for parasite (mite) avirulence, not host (bee) resistance. In other words, we need more of the Arnot Forest mites, the bees are the same as ours. 

I am becoming a bee geek.


----------



## Vance G (Jan 6, 2011)

LarryBud said:


> I've been reading quite a bit on treatment free beekeeping although you can mark me as a skeptic, I'm interested in knowing what your overwinter survival rates are-first and second years? How many hives and what kind of hive do you have?
> 
> For background on me, I am a IPM beekeeper, with 5 Langs, 100% survival and expect to expand significantly over the next two or three years (on my own and surrounding land) with f1 and later AI VSH queens.


When I re entered beekeeping a dozen or so years ago, I thought I would give the IPM treatment free thing a whirl as who wants to put chemicals close to the food supply. So I tried small cell, foundationless, drone culling, brood breaks and enough various essential oils to keep my apiary smelling like some strange french bakery! The only snake oil I neglected was screened bottom boards as that just couldn't pass the giggle test. The butcher bill was about half my colonies failed and died annually and I had a mediocre to pathetic honey crop. I still use the small cell frames as I think them benefical for spring buildup and they are still in good shape. I started treating first with Apivar which immediately made my apiaries productive and my bees survived our long cold winters and I no longer had to buy replacement bees, but produced my own. I rotated that treatment with Apivar and when Apivar became innefective, started alternating Apivar with Oxalic vaporization. My bees survive the winter and I have as much or more honey than I can sell. Life is good. I do not regret chasing the purple unicorn but treating livestock with approved chemicals is better than watching them suffer and die.


----------



## gww (Feb 14, 2015)

larry
I do understand forty percent loss. As a thought exercise though. If we assume that wild populations were knocked down by 90 percent at the arrival of the mite and then in thirty years they are built back to premite numbers and longevity. Does this leave open a management style that can take advantage of that ability to increase that is less work and money then treating? A different way to skin a cat say.

If managed, will there be further improvement along the lines of they thirty year improvement? Lastly, if the premite loss of those same arnet forest bees was also forty percent than what can really be made of that?

Cheers
gww


----------



## AHudd (Mar 5, 2015)

My


LarryBud said:


> My understanding of bee weavers (and Anklebiters) is there has been mixed reviews and the genetic dilution is also a factor. Arnot Forest is a remote location just southeast of the Adirondack Mountains and consider to be in the snow belt (lake effect snows). In the most utilized study, they monitor 8 colonies over 3 years and experience a loss of 3 out of the 8-almost 40%. To see if Arnot Forest bees can suppress the reproduction rate of mites, colonies of Arnot Forest bees and New World Carniolan bees were inoculated with mites from an apiary and the growth patterns of their mite populations were compared. No difference was found between the two colony types. Evidently, the stable bee-mite relationship in the Arnot Forest reflects adaptations for parasite (mite) avirulence, not host (bee) resistance. In other words, we need more of the Arnot Forest mites, the bees are the same as ours.
> 
> I am becoming a bee geek.


My BeeWeaver bees were dying from mite loads before the second Winter.

Alex


----------



## msl (Sep 6, 2016)

LarryBud said:


> It is believe that A. Cerana was able to co-exist with V. jacobsoni by adapting over thousands of years. This was a natural, Darwinian process.


So is extinction... 99.9% of the earths species have gone extinct. One can argue nature selects for change, not survival of a species.

A Cerana is over blown... if it was so great AM wouldn't have been imported in mass.
and they are often treated to avoid absconding.. see this study with a 49% loss rate ..https://www.researchgate.net/publication/268204925_Absconding_Behavior_and_Management_of_Apis_cerana_F_Honeybee_in_Chitwan_Nepal

While it may be great for wild survival, its a loss to the beekeeper the same as a death.

What people are missing is thousands of years of an arms race.. meaning AM is starting out facing a much tougher opponent then AC did..

Did the cheetah and the gazelle start out as fast as they are too day? No, nature selected them bolth to be faster.. the faster one got, the faster the other got.



LarryBud said:


> My thoughts are that to accelerate the re-development of these traits is not by just a one and done buy a VSH queen but a repeated process of continual introduction of new queens, year after year


That is the way of bees, and why requeening every year or 2 has been standard practice for well over 100 years.. usually to maintain gentle and productive hives, but the same is true for any train you wish to matain.

We we have the history here in the us of what it took to change genetics from AMM to AML. More or less the simple switch the 2 traits of black color and feisty to yellow and calm..

and it took a LOT, constantly importing queens for years on a land scape scale with most people doing the something, people realy wanted those Italian bees, and for awhile (1860s) imported queens were selling for the 2020 equilivant of $600.. it no wonder all the "clasic" queen rearing books were from that era.. By the 1890s state side breeding programs were selling them for the $32 equivant.. by the 1920s the AMM had been mostly driven to feral status in the north by constant requeening with southern Italian queens..

It took decades with the majorly of beekeepers working in concert to get it done.



mtnmyke said:


> I was reading some research recently that showed the VSH or "hygienic" behavior wasn't a dominant gene and therefore wasn't guaranteed to pass on from hives that were surviving treatment free


VSH is additive witch is why it sticks around longer then most as it avoids the dominant ressive issues making it easer to select for.. the more of it they have the more its expressed. Witch is handy as VSH x Unselect cross (virgin from VSH breeder) will usably have enuff VSH in her work force to have a significant impact, and she will be throwing pure VSH drones

swinging back around to the topic at hand 
2 years of 100% survival followed by 3 years of 100% loses


----------



## Earthboy (May 16, 2007)

Not wanting to* prove a negative*, for all to see, here is a pic of my untreated hive, already reversed for spring build up, awaiting the flow in a month, picture taken yesterday (3/23/2021)







:

Do what you gotta do according to your specific local conditions. I am not here to covert what works for you. But this is what I do and works for me, and has been for a very long time. *Proving a negative is impossible* and some don't even realize that. So this is best I can do. Take it or leave it. You can blow up the pic and check individual bee's thorax or else where to check mite presence. I know seeing is not always believing, either. Again, I appreciate those who are trying. Please don't give up. Civilization is individual, indeed.


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

Earthboy said:


> Do what you gotta do according to your specific local conditions.


Well, you demonstrated that TF is possible in Shawnee, OK.
I don't question this at all.
Good for you.
Be ready for lots of folks moving in next door so they too can keep the bees TF.


Me not moving though.
We are stuck with what we have on hand.
Bees don't pay for squat anyway (forget the mortgage).


----------



## Earthboy (May 16, 2007)

GregV said:


> Well, you demonstrated that TF is possible in Shawnee, OK.
> Good for you.
> Be ready for lots of folks moving in next door so they too can keep the bees TF.


Thank you, Greg. I already got one, moving in with 20 _treated_ Russian nucs and then some more, I am afraid, within a mile! for crying out loud. There is no law against it, though, and the man is a good person. Plus, I am doing some experiment by mixing queens from a treated queen breeder from elsewhere to see what happens to mite-resistance and most important, to SHB's in next generations. We'll see. Depending on your local ecology, weather, etc, some of you may fail your TF attempt, or may not. But please Neva Surrenda!


----------



## lharder (Mar 21, 2015)

Numbers require context. 

For my early nucs that can undergo proper development with a flow, I have survival in the range of 75 to 90%. Probably lowballing that one. Later started nucs have more trouble. I lose lots, sometimes most of those. 

My second year hives are highly variable even from site to site. Maybe 50%? Had lousy success at some sites and near 100% survival at others. 

I take lots of brood samples both of drones and workers. What I have noticed is that hives without drones (nucs and laggards who take time to build up), don't have many mites. They become more noticeable late fall when concentrated on a last bit of brood in the hive. But the rest of season I'm lucky to see a mite in 100 pupae pulled. I have been doing most of my mite sampling in my big production hives so I am going to more intensively sample my new starts this year to track development. 

Big productive hives that continually produce lots of drones are another story. Still even so some retain relatively low mite counts compared to others and robustly survive. I will be doing some experiments with brood breaks and controlled drone comb (to limit amount of drones), to see how they compared to controls. Perhaps how a colony manages drones is an important factor (and is this under genetic control?) I took a brood sample this spring (context a box and a half of bees with less than 1 frame of sealed brood) and had less than 1 % in one and 3% in a larval sample. Assuming 80 % of the mites are in the brood one can see there are not many mites at the beginning of the season. 

I see lots of qualitative evidence for VSH in the brood samples, but quantisizing it is hard, even taking lots of samples. I may be able to get a pooled population level estimate at some point. 

But I think part of my woes are self inflicted and there may be some subtle things I can do to improve the nutritional status of the bees going into winter after a summer or fall dearth. This is site dependent and may have a big impact. 

Still learning lots.


----------



## username00101 (Apr 17, 2019)

Here's the parsed data to include all the states in the Northeastern US (this is WITH treatments):

Backyard Sample size:14880 AVERAGE: *44.4%*
95% CI: 43.8% to 45.0%
Sideline Sample size: 506 AVERAGE:* 35.6% *
95% CI: 33.4% to 37.9%
Commercial Sample size: 149 AVERAGE: *29.7%*
95% CI: 26.1% to 33.3%

NO ONE is TF in my area's club. Doubt it's even plausible up here.


----------



## Earthboy (May 16, 2007)

lharder said:


> Numbers require context.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## psm1212 (Feb 9, 2016)

Kevinf said:


> The BIP survey may be the best source for this data - Bee Informed Partnership - National Management Survey.


I support the BIP annual survey and I think many trends can be viewed through its lens. However, it certainly fails to meet a reasonable scientific standard -- at least that is my opinion.

BIP data is self-reported by beekeepers. The annual report states that the surveys were "validated" though I am really unclear as to what, exactly, that means. No one came and checked my bees. 

Beekeepers, like all other humans, have preconceived notions and biases. Many of us are prone to latch on to a dogma or belief system and encourage our selective memories when completing the surveys. Many TF beekeepers are almost evangelical. Likewise, many beekeepers that treat seem hell-bent on proving TF beekeepers misguided fools.

I cannot help but to believe that these biases skew the numbers.

I do think that BIP can show us general trends and regional problems. I do not put much stock in the numbers that seem to compare Treatment v. Treatment-Free survival rates from BIP. I think we should look to controlled, blind, unbiased studies for those numbers. Just my opinion.


----------



## username00101 (Apr 17, 2019)

The sample size for the BIP is quite large, even if 20% are biased, which gives even something as high as a 10% error, that's still 30% losses, with treatment.

Count your hives, count the dead ones, divide the dead by the total....


----------



## psm1212 (Feb 9, 2016)

I read a lot of controlled studies involving treatments. Virtually all of them have a "control group" that remains untreated throughout the study. Virtually all of those studies that I have read reflect a far larger delta between survival of Treated and TF colonies than what shows up annually in the BIP data. 

This observation is admittedly anecdotal in itself. I think the counter would be that those studies used "ordinary bees" not "locally adapted" or "VSH" or "Ankle Biting" or "Russian" or otherwise "Special" bees. 

But if you are using "Special" bees haven't you already sipped on the Kool-Aid? At least a little? I am not saying that these beekeepers believe that they are lying. I am saying that I have little doubt that there is a strong cognitive bias at play when they are filling out the survey. They are invested.

I have a low degree of confidence in some of the data.


----------



## gww (Feb 14, 2015)

username
Though I agree with the math, it does leave out some things that might mean stuff. If I started with ten hives and went into winter with twenty and lost six over winter and come out with 24 hives for the year than how we are counting can be a bit skewed. I mean I know losing six is 30 percent loss but I still come out ahead. The other question that was addressed is how they correlate the losses based on apiary size. I remember this being covered and addressed in a different thread but for the life of me cannot remember if their math took this into account. Say a guy loses one hive out of two that is 50 percent loss but a guy with a hundred hives loses twenty that is only 20 percent loss. Either way, I throw BIP numbers around all the time cause I figure management style can make up the difference of 10 percent between treating and not treating and I might be willing to lose that difference and not treat if I can make it up in some other way. Lose cost of treatment and keep more hives or something like that.
Cheers
gww


----------



## BadBeeKeeper (Jan 24, 2015)

My experience with not treating was poor. Typically, hives would be 'done' by their 2nd Fall and, if not, were unlikely to make it through the tough Winters I get here. The only way to maintain numbers was to keep splitting, sacrificing production in order not to have to buy bees. Sure, I'd save money by not having to keep buying bees, but then I wasn't making diddly selling honey. Putting in the work and not getting any money to show for it doesn't cut it.

Putting in FA strips is far more labor/cost effective and leaves me with honey to sell and turn into booze. I don't have the time/energy/inclination to do all the work and have little or nothing to show for it. I ain't doing this just for the fun of it.


----------



## username00101 (Apr 17, 2019)

_Say a guy loses one hive out of two that is 50 percent loss but a guy with a hundred hives loses twenty that is only 20 percent loss_

You're raise a good point - which is why BIP (in my above post) includes "sideliner" and "Commercial".

Back to the math - by the laws of statistics (which I know have a name, but I can't remember the exact term): Larger sample sizes tend to "normalize" the results. So by definition a sideliner has a higher sample size, and a commercial even higher. Sideliner is the most "realistic" because commercial beekeepers travel, and do other actions which likely increase their success rates - they also have employees and access to chemicals that normal folks do not. For example, some commercials still illegally off label apply Apistan, and Formic acid, and amitraz. They can also get access to oxytetracycline quickly.

The numbers are fairly consistent. 30%+ losses WITH treatment.


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

gww said:


> Say a guy loses one hive out of two that is 50 percent loss but a guy with a hundred hives loses twenty that is only 20 percent loss.


This is why you use weighted averages.
Weight of 2-hive guy is small; weight of the 100-hive guy is heavier - this is the correct way to describe the average loss between the two.


----------



## TheHoneybeesteward (Mar 25, 2021)

LarryBud said:


> I've been reading quite a bit on treatment free beekeeping although you can mark me as a skeptic, I'm interested in knowing what your overwinter survival rates are-first and second years? How many hives and what kind of hive do you have?
> 
> For background on me, I am a IPM beekeeper, with 5 Langs, 100% survival and expect to expand significantly over the next two or three years (on my own and surrounding land) with f1 and later AI VSH queens.


Thanks for your question Larry. I am actually in central France and have an 80% survival rate (8 out of 10) with bees being kept in what I call Natural and Regenerative systems. 
I have been building this apiary since I arrived in France 4 years ago. I bought bees from a local breeder ( buckfast/ Carnica). They did very well in the summer but only had 10% survival over winter without treatment. 
then I started catching feral swarms from a nearby forest and managing in a completely different way. Some of these include minimal intervention,foundationless frames, thick walled hives (3.5 to 4cm thick) , super of honey left for winter, allowing hives to swarm and catching these swarms, timed splits false swarm type, and absolutely no chemicals organic or otherwise. 
I have a friend who builds and installs his custom built, thick walled, permanent tree hives and has a 95% survival rate (Custos Apium). He recently discovered a colony here in France that,according to the farmer has been persistently occupied for 25 years you can see it on the FB group Natural and Regenerative Beekeeping. 
I mentioned all of this because going treatment free requires a different approach to beekeeping which involves some of the methods I mentioned above. 
The survival of feral and low management colonies is quite remarkable. The bees ,when left to themselves revert to their natural systems rather quickly. More and more we are discovering that bees, like all living creatures coexist with everything around them. The more we give them back their natural environment the more productive they can bee.


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

TheHoneybeesteward said:


> He recently discovered a colony here in France that,according to the farmer has been persistently occupied for 25 years you can see it on the FB group Natural and Regenerative Beekeeping.


Can you point to this case on line?
Just to be sure - 25 year occupancy of some cavity does not amount to 25 year long persistence *by the same colony. *
Until proven and documented, this is most likely just a good sounding story.
More typical and reasonable case is - repeated re-occupancy of the same cavity (these happen all the time and nothing unusual).


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

TheHoneybeesteward said:


> Some of these include minimal intervention,foundationless frames, thick walled hives (3.5 to 4cm thick) , super of honey left for winter, allowing hives to swarm and catching these swarms, timed splits false swarm type, and absolutely no chemicals organic or otherwise.


Interested in more details..
Especially the hive/frame construction and the approximate location of the bees on the map.
What is "timed splits false swarm type"?
Photos be great.


----------



## TheHoneybeesteward (Mar 25, 2021)

GregV said:


> Interested in more details..
> Especially the hive/frame construction and the approximate location of the bees on the map.
> What is "timed splits false swarm type"?
> Photos be great.


The bees were in a farm window. The area is near Milla close to Bordeaux. The farmer says 25 years continue occupation by a colony I did not say it was the same queen..the pictures show the colony on the inside of the shutters and outside of the glass window. The guy in the photo is Vincent Albouy. One of the top beekeepers here in France investigating the survival of wild colonies. This colony exists side by side with a nest of European Hornets. First picture. Timed false swarm is making a split with half the hive and removing the queen with it. Timed because it has to be done at peak before they swarm
Hope this answers your questions. .


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

TheHoneybeesteward said:


> The farmer says 25 years continue occupation by a colony I did not say it was the same queen


OK; thanks; great pictures.

So basically this is based on "farmer says" which is not hard evidence.
I am sure the combs were there all these 25 years continuously and likely rebuilt many times over (which for many people means that the bees stayed there for that long - very often erroneously).
This is not confirming that the *same line of bees* stayed there 25 years continuously.
Of course we all understand that the queens do not live 25 years.


----------



## msl (Sep 6, 2016)

TheHoneybeesteward said:


> I am actually in central France and have an 80% survival rate (8 out of 10) with bees being kept in what I call Natural and Regenerative systems.
> I have been building this apiary since I arrived in France 4 years ago. I bought bees from a local breeder ( buckfast/ Carnica). They did very well in the summer but only had 10% survival over winter without treatment.


and this is were the issues often start, magic math
1 year of 10% survival + 3 years of 100% survival = 77.5% so you can't be at 80% survival with the number you have given.
you seem to be doing great, better then people did before varroa, better then bees did in the wild before varroa, witch raises eyebrows, so you have to expect some questions 



TheHoneybeesteward said:


> The bees were in a farm window


What I see is a lot of white wax, indictive of the hive dyeing, and the nest being cleaned by wax moth and reoccupied.

The Idea that a colony lived for 25 years is a bit ridiculous... the odds of it successfully requeening that many times are very much against that. Much less the other factors


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

msl said:


> and this is were the issues often start, magic math
> 1 year of 10% survival + 3 years of 100% survival = 77.5% so you can't be at 80% survival with the number you have given.


In addition, this is asking for the weighted average based on the number of colonies for each year - otherwise can be misleading (be it an honest mistake or by design, which probably happen too).


----------



## Earthboy (May 16, 2007)

GregV said:


> OK; thanks; great pictures.
> 
> So basically this is based on "farmer says" which is not hard evidence.
> I am sure the combs were there all these 25 years continuously and likely rebuilt many times over (which for many people means that the bees stayed there for that long - very often erroneously).
> ...


Except in England.


----------



## gww (Feb 14, 2015)

Greg
Or just rounding as 77.6 is not very far from 80 percent. Seems to be a bit of nit picking going on here. The other thing, if I had a hive that lived five years with out being split and with out being treated, all could say they could have swarmed or some other thing and say what I say could not be true but it would not change what I had seen even if I did not collect verifiable evidence that could prove it to others. Nobody but the farmer really needs to believe the bees were in the window for twenty five years and the fact that no matter the exact bees being there and something new maybe moving in once in a while, they still show that some bees are out there living out side a box made by a bee keeper.
Cheers
gww


----------



## Gino45 (Apr 6, 2012)

Earthboy said:


> Not wanting to* prove a negative*, for all to see, here is a pic of my untreated hive, already reversed for spring build up, awaiting the flow in a month, picture taken yesterday (3/23/2021)
> View attachment 62662
> :
> 
> Do what you gotta do according to your specific local conditions. I am not here to covert what works for you. But this is what I do and works for me, and has been for a very long time. *Proving a negative is impossible* and some don't even realize that. So this is best I can do. Take it or leave it. You can blow up the pic and check individual bee's thorax or else where to check mite presence. I know seeing is not always believing, either. Again, I appreciate those who are trying. Please don't give up. Civilization is individual, indeed.


Nice picture. Lots of bees. I'm wondering if all the smashed bees on the super's edge is because you don't use enough smoke or because it's those ****ed African bees that just won't behave when being manipulated. I'm also wondering if you wear gloves, etc while manipulating these bees.


----------



## TheHoneybeesteward (Mar 25, 2021)

msl said:


> and this is were the issues often start, magic math
> 1 year of 10% survival + 3 years of 100% survival = 77.5% so you can't be at 80% survival with the number you have given.
> you seem to be doing great, better then people did before varroa, better then bees did in the wild before varroa, witch raises eyebrows, so you have to expect some questions
> 
> ...


Nobody said the colony lived for 25 years.


----------



## msl (Sep 6, 2016)

TheHoneybeesteward said:


> Nobody said the colony lived for 25 years.





TheHoneybeesteward said:


> The farmer says 25 years continue occupation by a colony





TheHoneybeesteward said:


> He recently discovered a colony here in France that, according to the farmer has been persistently occupied for 25 years


maybe I am just miss reading you, or its a langue barrier thing. but "colony" is referring to a continuous gentinc line..
if you say nest or location that has been inhabited for 25 years, that's different (at lest to me)
the verbiage and context seems to be carefully chosen to insinuate wild survival and longevity sans treatments (and facts)



gww said:


> Or just rounding as 77.6 is not very far from 80 percent. Seems to be a bit of nit picking going on here.


GWW the point is that would mean 100% survival the last 3 years... most would say "I had a bad 1st year, changed my genetics, and then had 100% the last 3 years" if that was the case.
I am not saying it didn't happen, just trying to be precise.. too many gurus out there making what seem to be very inflated claims... one has taken at least 80% and 100% losses on separate years, and still claims 5% average losses
ie 20 years of 100% survival and 1 year of 0 survival is 5% losses

So my 2 years of 100% survival and 3 years of 100% loss would be a 40% survival rate... 40% doesn't sound "that" bad witch is why I express it as last 3 years were 100% loses... that DOSE sound bad, and it was.
% don't tell the whole, data does


----------



## Earthboy (May 16, 2007)

Gino45 said:


> Nice picture. Lots of bees. I'm wondering if all the smashed bees on the super's edge is because you don't use enough smoke or because it's those ****ed African bees that just won't behave when being manipulated. I'm also wondering if you wear gloves, etc while manipulating these bees.


My apologies; I do slide my boxes, no gloves and no smoke. All the genetics of bees are in flux, noting fixed in stone. Mines are not African bees at all; they maybe a strain of AHB's, but not those you see on YouTube. I think that corner was where I put the boxes down before sliding. I will be more careful next time. Thanks for pointing out.


----------



## AHudd (Mar 5, 2015)

Well, somebody said,


TheHoneybeesteward said:


> according to the farmer has been persistently occupied for 25 years


And somebody also said.


TheHoneybeesteward said:


> The farmer says 25 years continue occupation by a colony


I thought the message was, these bees had occupied this space continuously for twenty five years sans treatment. I thought that was the point of the story. If not, what are you trying to convey by including this in this particular thread titled, "What's Your Treatment Free Survivability"?

Alex


----------



## Gino45 (Apr 6, 2012)

Earthboy said:


> My apologies; I do slide my boxes, no gloves and no smoke. All the genetics of bees are in flux, noting fixed in stone. Mines are not African bees at all; they maybe a strain of AHB's, but not those you see on YouTube. I think that corner was where I put the boxes down before sliding. I will be more careful next time. Thanks for pointing out.


No smoke explains a lot. Thanks. I'm glad to hear you are able to work the bees with no gloves. I smash some bees also; however, I could see from the picture that something was not right,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,meaning no smoker use.


----------



## Gino45 (Apr 6, 2012)

Gino45 said:


> No smoke explains a lot. Thanks. I'm glad to hear you are able to work the bees with no gloves. I smash some bees also; however, I could see from the picture that something was not right,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,meaning no smoker use.


A bee brush can help with this also.


----------



## gww (Feb 14, 2015)

Msl


TheHoneybeesteward said:


> I bought bees from a local breeder ( buckfast/ Carnica). They did very well in the summer but only had 10% survival over winter without treatment.
> then I started catching feral swarms from a nearby forest and managing in a completely different way


I took it to mean he was talking about two different set of bees. However, he can make his own claim and we can decide as we go. I don't mind the questions and maybe even accusations at some point but am finding it interesting to hear a little more also. I already do things different as my hives are thin and I do use the heck out of smoke. I do think as far as percentages go. there are anomalies that can hurt but might be just anomalies. I have mentioned many times in many threads of a long term treating bee keeper that lost 80 percent in just one year but has an excellent average over all and I am not sure that anomaly should define his bee keeping skills compared to others. I think something bad just came through. He used to be a state inspector. Now of course I did not see it with my own eyes and am taking his word for it.
Nothing wrong with asking for clarification. Nit picking comes later. 😊 
Cheers
gww


----------



## Litsinger (Jun 14, 2018)

TheHoneybeesteward said:


> The bees were in a farm window.


Neat photos, and welcome to the forum. Glad to read about your experiences.

Have you had occasion to get down to see Dr. John Kefuss?


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

gww said:


> Greg
> Or just rounding as 77.6 is not very far from 80 percent.


OR - maybe it really should be 70%, if measured correctly.

Partly why I went on a limb and slogged to thru my own 5-year, 15% survival case (including 0% survival one year).
'Cause it is really hard to believe things anymore.
And you keep thinking - "what am I doing wrong?"
I guess, I am doing best I can and nothing is really wrong - it is the expectation that I am fed with, that's what is wrong.

People toss about +/-10-20% as if it is nothing (or just shy away from the direct question and don't answer).

Well, +/-10% is a very significant diff in most any measurement if approached properly.


----------



## HTB (Aug 12, 2020)

I'm curious if you feed your bees Greg, and also reduce space when they're in decline?


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

Technically, this statement indeed does not say of the same line of the bees staying in the same place:
".........recently discovered a colony here in France that,according to the farmer has been persistently occupied for 25 years......".

However, this is a very subtle point and I am unsure what does it actually mean.

To many this is a clear confirmation of a single colony surviving for 25 years without treatments.
Whereas, indeed, there could be just as well up to 25 different, unrelated colonies that took the residence in the farm windows season after season.
Most likely it is somewhere in between, but here is a good sample source of the unproven stories that come about.


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

HTB said:


> I'm curious if you feed your bees Greg, and also reduce space when they're in decline?


I am pretty darn advanced operator by now.


But the one thing that I don't do is simply treat them - and that is the elephant in the room at my location.
Most all other activities amount to monkey work, if this elephant in the room left not addressed effectively.


----------



## HTB (Aug 12, 2020)

I'm aware of your experience but it seems some of the treatment free folks consider feeding a treatment. I was just wondering if you were of that mindset.


----------



## gww (Feb 14, 2015)

Greg
I read on here one time the assertion that there was a section of Australia that bees could not be kept in. I do not know the truth or this assumption but do believe that what works in one place is not guaranteed to work in another. I read if you planted a maple from florida that was genetically simular to a missouri maple in Mo that it would not do well first generation.
I don't know if it is factual but I believe it is possible. You got to do what you got to do.
Cheers
gww

Htb
When I talk treatment free, I am talking about using stuff to kill mites and not about managing hives. The rules for the treatment free forum explain well of my view and what I think most also consider the definition as a generic starting place of discussion of the topic on this forum as it can be referred to and does not change based on feeling.
Cheers
gww


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

gww said:


> do believe that what works in one place is not guaranteed to work in another.


Exactly.
This is why I don't "globally and forever" agree or disagree with anything I hear.
I try for myself and see what works for me.

Looking back I only regret I wasted some good, worthwhile bees that were "half-way" resistant (maybe even better) and just needed a little help in my harsh conditions.
But that's OK, bees are easy to come by.

By the same token the "global and forever" approval or denial of the TF is not correct.
The correct answer is - it depends.


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

HTB said:


> I'm aware of your experience but it seems some of the treatment free folks consider feeding a treatment. I was just wondering if you were of that mindset.


I don't care, I feed if must.
Always have.

My VSH queen (seems to have survived - knock, knock) would have never made it at all.
This VSH colony is junk, by all beekeeping standards, and would perish if not fed.
Cause all they did all summer long was to pull out the larvae and never really grew and just survived. Their only value is - breeding from, cause they survive the mites.
Had to be fed.


----------



## AHudd (Mar 5, 2015)

gww said:


> I read if you planted a maple from florida that was genetically simular to a missouri maple in Mo that it would not do well first generation.
> I don't know if it is factual but I believe it is possible. You got to do what you got to do.
> 
> Cheers
> gww


Sort of like this.





__





Melilotus alba, M. officinalis






www.fs.fed.us





Many studies report an association between white sweetclover and calcareous soils. White sweetclover was especially common on calcareous soils in Michigan [267], the northeastern United States and southeastern Canada [75], the Gulf and Atlantic Coasts [52], and eastern Texas [272]. During a study conducted in Canada, researchers found that white sweetclover plants grown from seeds collected on calcareous soils grew well only on calcareous soils. White sweetclover plants grown from seed collected on acidic soils grew well on acidic and calcareous soils but grew best on calcareous soils [192]

Alex


----------



## gww (Feb 14, 2015)

Alex
Yes and so watching your own bees and doing what your bees tell you you have to do to accomplish your goal is the only way to fly. I get to pick the goal and then decide how to accomplish it and the bees tell me how I am doing but it is not just the ideal in control of it all. The environment gets a say and even it might change here and there. Mother nature is bigger than me. That said, I am a hard head and always seem to have to see for myself knowing I am big enough to take my lumps as they come cause most are self inflicted. Only thing on my side is that I have always been extra lucky.  

Twenty five years ago, I fertilized and limed and planted a bunch of ladino clover and got one banner year and then nothing forever. Still got volunteer red clover and lespedeza though I have done nothing since.
Cheers
gww


----------



## TheHoneybeesteward (Mar 25, 2021)

Litsinger said:


> Neat photos, and welcome to the forum. Glad to read about your experiences.
> 
> Have you had occasion to get down to see Dr. John Kefuss?


Thank you for your reply. I was beginning to wonder if I’d made a mistake posting here. No I have not met him yet. I have spoken to him on the phone back in 2019. And then the lockdowns came along. I hope to meet up with one day.


----------



## Litsinger (Jun 14, 2018)

TheHoneybeesteward said:


> I was beginning to wonder if I’d made a mistake posting here.


Don't mind us- sometimes we get a little grumpy, but most of it is just looking to stir the proverbial pot a bit to get the conversation going. Feel welcome to give as much as you get, and we are glad you decided to step into the arena.

I do hope you're able to make a trip down to see Dr. Kefuss. Based on what limited communication I've had with him, it seems to me it would be well worth the effort.

I'll look forward to seeing you around the boards (no pun intended).

Russ


----------



## msl (Sep 6, 2016)

TheHoneybeesteward said:


> I was beginning to wonder if I’d made a mistake posting here


Please don't confuse being challenged with being unwelcome, extraordinary claims require a bit more "scrutiny"
you picked a heck of a first few posts, and came in like an old salt.. I know I for one missed it was your 1st day... How is that going ?
but we do get a lot of the blow in, stand on the soap box, blow out types with little experience thinking they found a good idea (both TF and TF types for that matter...dam foggers 🤣 ) not that is you.. but you see the point

so cliff notes on the "welcome wagon" so to speak

I am in "recovery" from the TF cult after 5 years, and have managed my stock IMP/conventionally since 2016 I had bought in to the faith beekeeping/nature will give us a great domestics live stock hard... till it failed, and I spent the time to learn what its really going to take to control and shift bee gentilics

GregV may have hit rock bottom and is thinking about "rehab". His records over the last 5 years are a gut check about what happens in TF non permissive environments that are the rule, not the exception for most.

GWW is a old soul doing his own thing and seeing were it leads, far from the zealot I was, its working for him now, but he is open to change...

Litsinger is having success as well, and is well read up on the realities, actively searching for WHY it works in his location

Some how, despite vastly different angels and results, we have formed a bond based on respect stemming from strait honest talk (some times to the point of brutality)


----------



## gww (Feb 14, 2015)

Msl
We do not always get the same points out of what we have read but I admit to being exposed to many more things done by people willing to do the work in a structured manner through my interactions with you and am thankful for that.
I roll how I roll and watch how others roll for the practices I can steal and try for myself as needed. I want others to do what they do and to tell me about it. Not cause I will do it but because it gives me options if I ever want to.

You guys on this site have made me survive, such as it is, and good or bad from my part, I am better for it.

I have been helped by treaters and non-treaters alike.
Cheers
gww


----------



## AHudd (Mar 5, 2015)

TheHoneybeesteward said:


> Thank you for your reply. I was beginning to wonder if I’d made a mistake posting here. No I have not met him yet. I have spoken to him on the phone back in 2019. And then the lockdowns came along. I hope to meet up with one day.


I just read MSL's apt description of my current condition, "recovery". I don't know how many stages or steps there are before one is cured, but I am trying.
I support the idea of a forum for members to be able to discuss TF without the constant interference from treating members. Anyone will receive push-back when posting opinions outside that forum, not just you. As Litsinger stated, feel free to return fire.
I personally bristle at statements that describe TF as easy as the bees know what is best and will learn to deal with mites if we let them. TF is not easy. The product I purchased did not live up to the hype. The vendor would have a difficult time convincing me that my practices were at fault. Don't get me wrong, they ere good bees, they just could not handle mites.
When I tried TF I had enough experience to know what a strong colony looked liked, the importance of a good brood pattern, etc. I feel sorry for the neophytes that get drawn in by the messages of how wonderful things will be if only we horrible humans will get out of the way.
I applaud those that keep trying, but the fact remains that no one that I know of has yet to sell Queens that produce open mated daughters that are as good as the mother. I'll qualify that by saying outside of their DCAs. We can not verify what happens inside their yards, only what happens to these bees after we spend our money and bring them to our yards. My cynical nature leads me to think that stories of miraculous survivors are the precursors of future Queens for sale. The adage, "One bitten, twice shy", comes to mind.

Alex


----------



## AHudd (Mar 5, 2015)

gww said:


> Twenty five years ago, I fertilized and limed and planted a bunch of ladino clover and got one banner year and then nothing forever. Still got volunteer red clover and lespedeza though I have done nothing since.
> Cheers
> gww


I thought it was a funny coincidence that I had just read again the article about seeds from White Sweet Clover.
I limed about an acre and a quarter and planted Yellow Sweet Clover last fall. I thought the feral pigs had destroyed most of it, but there is much more coming back this Spring than I expected. I filled in the bare spots with white.

Alex


----------



## gww (Feb 14, 2015)

Alex
I believe if we had feral pigs here I would finally get lots more target practice before deer season than I currently do. I broadcast about six lbs of seed of yellow over a small area of grass that the ground was not broke up just to see what would happen and had exactly one plant come up. It has came back for three years but not spread. I do see it in the ditches in places along roads.

I did not try very hard but would have bought more seed if I did not have to work up the field and could broadcast the seed.
I think on the ladino clover is not very drought resistant and one dry year might take it out.

I don't try too hard cause most of my effort was just for deer and I am not really doing anything productive on it but bees. For about twenty years I gave the hay to my neighbor but he died and now I just mow once a year.
Cheers
gww

Ps You will not see me gearing up to sell queens, I am much too lazy and don't ever want another job. I am more of a go for hobby that gives a little so I can keep doing it and it cost nothing. I put very little in and get very little out but it is all profit.


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

TheHoneybeesteward said:


> I was beginning to wonder if I’d made a mistake posting here.


Just to be sure - I will personally interrogate an interesting case that comes along.
This is to NOT shot it down.
This is to collect the data and clarify the situation.
Like I have been ranting, the correct answer is "it depends on the particular circumstance".


----------



## Gino45 (Apr 6, 2012)

AHudd said:


> I just read MSL's apt description of my current condition, "recovery". I don't know how many stages or steps there are before one is cured, but I am trying.
> I support the idea of a forum for members to be able to discuss TF without the constant interference from treating members. Anyone will receive push-back when posting opinions outside that forum, not just you. As Litsinger stated, feel free to return fire.
> I personally bristle at statements that describe TF as easy as the bees know what is best and will learn to deal with mites if we let them. TF is not easy. The product I purchased did not live up to the hype. The vendor would have a difficult time convincing me that my practices were at fault. Don't get me wrong, they ere good bees, they just could not handle mites.
> When I tried TF I had enough experience to know what a strong colony looked liked, the importance of a good brood pattern, etc. I feel sorry for the neophytes that get drawn in by the messages of how wonderful things will be if only we horrible humans will get out of the way.
> ...


I think that many of us have tried to be treatment free with less than stellar results. Maybe we have gone to treatments, or maybe we have gone to treating as little as possible to still be successful as beekeepers. Perhaps we view the treatment free threads because, deep down, we wish to be treatment free. But in my case, I wouldn't have any bees were I treatment free. At the same time over years of attempting to raise queens from 'the survivors', hopefully our bees are evolving to better handle the varroa and viruses which accompany the presence of varroa in our hives.


----------



## BadBeeKeeper (Jan 24, 2015)

AHudd said:


> ..._I personally bristle at statements that describe TF as easy as the bees know what is best and will learn to deal with mites if we let them._ TF is not easy. The product I purchased did not live up to the hype. The vendor would have a difficult time convincing me that my practices were at fault. Don't get me wrong, they ere good bees, they just could not handle mites.
> When I tried TF I had enough experience to know what a strong colony looked liked, the importance of a good brood pattern, etc. _I feel sorry for the neophytes that get drawn in by the messages of how wonderful things will be if only we horrible humans will get out of the way.
> I_ applaud those that keep trying, but the fact remains that no one that I know of has yet to sell Queens that produce open mated daughters that are as good as the mother. I'll qualify that by saying outside of their DCAs. We can not verify what happens inside their yards, only what happens to these bees after we spend our money and bring them to our yards. My cynical nature leads me to think that stories of miraculous survivors are the precursors of future Queens for sale. The adage, "One bitten, twice shy", comes to mind.


It seems to me that some people think that they can 'evolve' bees that can handle mites. Evolution can occur rapidly in something like a virus that replicates many of thousands of times in a short period. More complex organisms require much more time, if any 'evolution' occurs at all, from tens of thousands to millions of years. We currently have species that exist in a form that is relatively unchanged from 100 million or more years ago.

We humans have taken some 2 million years or more to evolve from ignorant, gibbering proto-humans to what we are now...and as has become increasingly obvious in recent years, some of us haven't come all that far from that. Some species, in fact, the _majority_ of species that have existed since this planet formed life did not evolve at all and they became extinct. Selection pressure does not always result in evolution, it often results in extinction.

I think that the idea of 'evolving' mite-tolerant bees is...misguided...at best, in any sort of time-scale less than thousands of years. Artificial genetic modification would seem more promising to me.


----------



## gww (Feb 14, 2015)

Badbeekeeper
The thing that makes it seem possible is that we don't have to wait a thousand years when people like randy can have 7 percent of a population able to do it now. Granted, 7 percent is an anomaly in the big picture but also shows that some bees can handle it now and not a thousand years from now. That makes it more then a possibility but some doors are still locked. It also seems to show that extinction is probably not in the cards for bees due to mites as long as nothing new is added. Extinction of bee keepers maybe for a while but not bees.
Does not mean I think I can do it and this is just my big picture over view.
Cheers
gww


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

BadBeeKeeper said:


> I think that the idea of 'evolving' mite-tolerant bees is...misguided...at best,


Such bees exist as we speak - no need to wait another thousand years.
Waiting for another 1000 years, now *that *is misguided IMO.
We need to be developing management methods with material available on hand right now.

I don't buy into these talks of the necessary "evolution" (the "evolution" already happened and keeps happening and goes rather quickly).
I have the resistant bees on hand as we speak - this very moment - as simple as that.
But doing anything practically useful with them (at my location, for example) is problematic because they barely survive due to the mite pressure.
Keep posting this picture over and over - this is what VHS brood looks like:

However, there issue is not black-and-white. 
It is not binary at all as some people imagine.

Very simply put but here - it is rather that the
1)level of the mite-resistance is a relative term (from 0% to 100%) and
2)degree of mite infestation in the area is also a relative term (from 0% to 100%).
The end result is the intersection of the two matrices.
Probability of 0 or 100 are near zero, but most values in between that are in the play.

And so (simplistically) if your bees are 60% resistant and the mite pressure at your location is 20% - you have a good chance of the bee survival.
If you have it backwards (20% resistance vs. 60% mite pressure), your bees will die.
Most situations around are like this.

So, this is the layman-level essence of the issue on hand as I see it.


----------



## little_john (Aug 4, 2014)

I have to disagree - natural evolution *does* take thousands, if not millions of years ... but not for individual honeybee colonies to change though - that could, by lucky chance, occur within a season or two - the extensive time requirement occurs during the process of a mutation entering the wider gene pool.

The reason for this is something called 'fecundity'. Fecundity being the ability to produce an abundance of offspring, and is a term often applied to the egg-laying performance of a female.

For comparison - if we briefly examine the fecundity of 'bait fish' such as mackerel, herring or sardines, we see figures of anywhere between 10,000 and 1 million eggs laid by each female fish - any one of which could contain a chance genetic mutation which could either render it non-viable, or in some way provide the emerging fish with a competitive advantage relative to every other fish of that species. But it's not just the increased likelihood of an advantage occurring as a result of such numbers which is so pronounced. Should this indeed occur - then when it came time for that particular fish to mate, then it's improved genetics would be passed on by at least 10,000 and perhaps as many as 1 million individuals - and that's the important bit. That advantageous mutation would spread like wildfire.

Honeybees are right at the other end of the spectrum. A Queen may well lay a similar number of eggs each year as many fish, but of those only a tiny number - perhaps one or two, a half-dozen at most - proceed to carry any advantageous mutation on to the next generation of bees. Perhaps we could call this 'genetic fecundity', although that would be an invented phrase.

With such a low genetic fecundity, unfortunately the chances of a beneficial mutation passing into the wider gene pool by a natural evolutionary dynamic within a reasonable timescale must be considered as very low. Human interference in the form of selective breeding would overcome this obstacle of course, but then the prospect of unintentional selection of other, perhaps undesirable characteristics as by-products becomes a real possibility.

Humans have become obsessed with 'evolution' and 'evolutionary change', and - as products of evolutionary development ourselves, we understandably view this as being highly desirable - whereas the mechanisms of reproduction are geared towards providing *exact* replication in order to maintain stability. Evolutionary change could be viewed as being evidence of faulty biological replication.
'best,
LJ


----------



## Earthboy (May 16, 2007)

little_john said:


> I have to disagree - natural evolution *does* take thousands, if not millions of years ... but not for individual honeybee colonies to change though - that could, by lucky chance, occur within a season or two - the extensive time requirement occurs during the process of a mutation entering the wider gene pool.
> 
> The reason for this is something called 'fecundity'. Fecundity being the ability to produce an abundance of offspring, and is a term often applied to the egg-laying performance of a female.
> 
> ...


Excellent and thoughtful and measured post! Many thanks. I often thought that v. mites have been here toughly 30 years. if a colony swarms, say, twice a year, that means 60 generations of bees trying to "accommodate" and "react" to mites.

EB


----------



## Earthboy (May 16, 2007)

gww said:


> Badbeekeeper
> The thing that makes it seem possible is that we don't have to wait a thousand years when people like randy can have 7 percent of a population able to do it now. Granted, 7 percent is an anomaly in the big picture but also shows that some bees can handle it now and not a thousand years from now. That makes it more then a possibility but some doors are still locked. It also seems to show that extinction is probably not in the cards for bees due to mites as long as nothing new is added. Extinction of bee keepers maybe for a while but not bees.
> Does not mean I think I can do it and this is just my big picture over view.
> Cheers
> gww


Another excellent comment! Thank you.

Earthboy

All beekeeping is local and all beekeepers are loco.


----------



## AHudd (Mar 5, 2015)

In the bait fish example, the female passes advantageous traits on to her thousands of offspring that will hopefully survive to become reproductive females able to pass these traits on to their offspring as well. One male fish can fertilize many females in his lifetime.
Not so with the Queen bee and her mates. She passes these traits on to a precious few reproductive females. Also, in the wild _many_ Drones mate _one_ time with _one_ Queen. 
I think trying to change the evolution of the Honey Bee in the laboratory is a daunting task, indeed. In the backyard, forget about it. That magic Queen could come and go unnoticed by even by the most astute observer.

Alex


----------



## msl (Sep 6, 2016)

I feel the fish example to be slightly flawed as it doesn't take the survival rate in to consideration or reproductive age
if one fish passed it genes on to 1,000,000 a generation we would never run out of fish the sea..

herring become reproductive at 4 years, bees much faster.. so the bees can do 8 cycles in 4 years easily(much more withthe hand of man, but thats not common).. the fish only 1

and that's really were the mites bite us..

They have a much shorter reproductive cycle then the bees, and they are easy spread/distributed.

Ie in the UK it was one mite that got a mutation for pyrethroid reissuance, mainland Europe was one, the the US was 2.
4 different mutations, 4 different mites, that's gentnicks then spread...
beekeepers didn't develop restiance in their own yards, they "caught it" from other beekeepers and then selected for it to be come the dominant type, at witch point lack of rotation causes mite bombs and the mites are spread ... rinse and repeat its every were in a few years, much in the same pattern as the mites 1st spread. 

the 1st thing people need to square with is Varroa (Varroa/virus interaction) has adapted to kill its host, that is it primary mode of spreading/reproducing (viewing a colony of varroa as unit)..It has no instrest in striking a balance and living peacefully, the ones that do that don't spread. 
The ones that kill the host before flight weather ends have a leg up (higher reporductive success do to seeding hives all around them with thier generics) over the ones that don't kill the host, or those who don't kill the host till after its to cold to fly.

The 2nd is if you feel the bees can adapt, why do you feel the mites won't adapt to the bees new defense?.. with the shorter reproductive cycle they would be predicted the winner. And the fact that they are more or less clonal means the genetics don't get lost in out crossing... any adaption that alows them to kill the hive (be it against treatments or against genetics) will be quickly redistributed... 

relying solely on genetics is as dangers as relying on single chemicals.. letting mite bombs go (no matter tf/tx)rewards hive killing mites(+viruses)..and that's the really big issue.


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

little_john said:


> I have to disagree - natural evolution *does* take thousands,


I just have to point out my usage of the term - "evolution" (in quotes).



> I don't buy into these talks of the necessary "evolution" (the "evolution" already happened and keeps happening and goes rather quickly).


Frankly, I have not a clue of all the myriads ways the organisms survive - both short-term and long term.
And really nobody does.
I don't care what they say.

So, back to the poorly understood "black box".
Definitely, there are more than enough honest examples of the demonstrated resistance in front of us.
However the issue is not black and white, as often argued about.


----------



## crofter (May 5, 2011)

_The 2nd is if you feel the bees can adapt, why do you feel the mites won't adapt to the bees new defense?.. _ Well mother nature fulfills mankind's dreams, does she not?


----------



## JWPalmer (May 1, 2017)

AHudd said:


> That magic Queen could come and go unnoticed by even by the most astute observer.
> Alex


The magic queen could also be able to survive only a portion of the mites thrown at the hive and still succumb to a mite bomb by the beekeeper down the road who is adamantly hard Bond. We need to make sure the queens that demonstrate resistance are given a chance to reproduce.


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

JWPalmer said:


> a mite bomb by the beekeeper down the road who is adamantly hard Bond.


Or a mite bomb by a beekeeper who treats his bees *incorrectly*.
Like this self-inflicted wound (of course someone else is at fault).
Pay close attention starting at 12:00 about the exact treatment that was done.


----------



## msl (Sep 6, 2016)

I agree 100%
the internet killed his bees....
what happened... this happened




after 3 years of using apaivar and being successful he switched to an Oct OAV in 2019.... didn't get a great kill do to brood , didn't do a brood less treatment in the winter, came in to spring with more mites they he was used to, by Aug 2020 his video shows lots of robbing in the yard, mostly uncontested robing, showing the hives were far along in failing 
hives were "dead men walking" by the time the fall OAV came around..
had he done a brood less OAV last winter he may not have clasped this winter.. for what ever reason I have been seeing a LOT people lately suggesting a fall OAV and completely skipping the winter brood less one..witch I feel is very fool hardy if nature gives you that brood break, you should be taking advantage of it 

Prefect example of what happens when you don't control your mites, even the purchased Russian queens were over run by the mite bombs.
I don't know how any one can look at the results and say , yep... no treatments at all for me, I will be happy with those results (or worse) cause thats what most get


----------



## AR1 (Feb 5, 2017)

Interesting video. Particularly how he was finding multiple mites on the tiny dead clusters. Last fall when I had a bunch of hives wither and die, I had to really hunt on the floorboard to find even one or two mites, and found none on the dead bees. This actually makes me hopeful, if his experience is normal. I believe that yellow jackets murdered my hives, but have not been able to shake the idea that I am kidding myself and it was actually mites. 

Has anyone else seen what this guy says, with lots of mites on the last few bees?


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

msl said:


> what happened... this happened


All kinds of expensive toys.
My wife would kill me for even thinking (not that I am thinking). 
I like your OA dribbling method hands down, MSL.


----------



## Gray Goose (Sep 4, 2018)

gww said:


> Msl
> We do not always get the same points out of what we have read but I admit to being exposed to many more things done by people willing to do the work in a structured manner through my interactions with you and am thankful for that.
> I roll how I roll and watch how others roll for the practices I can steal and try for myself as needed. I want others to do what they do and to tell me about it. Not cause I will do it but because it gives me options if I ever want to.
> 
> ...


Almost exact ally my take, roll how I roll offer, take,, what can be of use.

GG


----------



## Gray Goose (Sep 4, 2018)

AR1 said:


> Interesting video. Particularly how he was finding multiple mites on the tiny dead clusters. Last fall when I had a bunch of hives wither and die, I had to really hunt on the floorboard to find even one or two mites, and found none on the dead bees. This actually makes me hopeful, if his experience is normal. I believe that yellow jackets murdered my hives, but have not been able to shake the idea that I am kidding myself and it was actually mites.
> 
> Has anyone else seen what this guy says, with lots of mites on the last few bees?


when cleaning the dead outs, I tap the comb on the table, cells down a couple times each side.
Some dead outs none some 100's
the 10 or so I lost this year were 70% mite, 20% queen issue, and 10% starvation.
I did wash some dead bees that were still in cluster and also found mites.
I would think the mites try to survive as well, they need heat to survive and would try to get to a live bee from a dying bee if possible.

GG


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

JWPalmer said:


> We need to make sure the queens that demonstrate resistance are given a chance to reproduce.


+1

First, such queens need to be identified, even if suggestively.
So the current mite status monitoring does matter.

Looking back, this was one of my mistakes (taking a binary approach - the bees either live or they die - very much an unproductive approach because I always ran out of the bees).


----------



## msl (Sep 6, 2016)

> We need to make sure the queens that demonstrate resistance are given a chance to reproduce.


Not just given a chance to reproduce, mass reproduced and distributed
Restiance has LOTS of negative selection pressure, its lacking in the positive.

To Gregs point, spreading queens that are incrementally better then imports lowers the area mite load and improves the done pool... lower the areas mite load and lines that would have died in a pass/fail test now can be kept TF (or lowT/non cem ipm). This is why many feel hard bond can cause the loss of vaubue traits that will serve us well once we get the pressure down 
Improve the drone pool and you start to have breeding based improvement rather then just picking the best out of the natural variability and making a bunch of daughters, next year repeat.


----------



## Earthboy (May 16, 2007)

msl said:


> Not just given a chance to reproduce, mass reproduced and distributed
> Restiance has LOTS of negative selection pressure, its lacking in the positive.
> 
> To Gregs point, spreading queens that are incrementally better then imports lowers the area mite load and improves the done pool... lower the areas mite load and lines that would have died in a pass/fail test now can be kept TF (or lowT/non cem ipm). This is why many feel hard bond can cause the loss of vaubue traits that will serve us well once we get the pressure down
> Improve the drone pool and you start to have breeding based improvement rather then just picking the best out of the natural variability and making a bunch of daughters, next year repeat.


I agree. You do raise some salient points about "spreading queens." This will be my first to see what happens when you bring in foreign (out of my area) queens in my feral mix. I would like to know if the generations of new bees from these new queens will imitate what the ferals have been doing or not: say, is grooming behavior (to knock off mites) inheritable (nature) or learned (nurture), to generalize the idea roughly. Oddly though, we have identified AHB _strains_ (not pure AHB's) in our area in 1991, but there was not a single mass stinging incient. So I must assume whatever we in my area has commingled with EHB stocks over and over again, just as there is no such thing as pure Italian, Carnica, Buckfest, whatever nowadays--only by dominant percentages. They behave like normal EHB and the defensive ones behave like EHB during inspection on a cloudy day.

Just a thought.

EB


----------



## msl (Sep 6, 2016)

Earthboy said:


> This will be my first to see what happens when you bring in foreign (out of my area) queens in my feral mix.


I thought you brought in some FL queens in the past few years and they rapidly failed?


----------



## AR1 (Feb 5, 2017)

Earthboy said:


> Oddly though, we have identified AHB _strains_ (not pure AHB's) in our area in 1991, but there was not a single mass stinging incient. So I must assume whatever we in my area has commingled with EHB stocks over and over again, just as there is no such thing as pure Italian, Carnica, Buckfest, whatever nowadays--only by dominant percentages. They behave like normal EHB and the defensive ones behave like EHB during inspection on a cloudy day.


There will be a year or two with fewer strongly AHB strains in Oklahoma and TX, after the big freeze this spring.


----------



## Earthboy (May 16, 2007)

Earthboy said:


> I agree. You do raise some salient points about "spreading queens." This will be my first to see what happens when you bring in foreign (out of my area) queens in my feral mix. I would like to know if the generations of new bees from these new queens will imitate what the ferals have been doing or not: say, is grooming behavior (to knock off mites) inheritable (nature) or learned (nurture), to generalize the idea roughly. Oddly though, we have identified AHB _strains_ (not pure AHB's) in our area in 1991, but there was not a single mass stinging incient. So I must assume whatever we in my area has commingled with EHB stocks over and over again, just as there is no such thing as pure Italian, Carnica, Buckfest, whatever nowadays--only by dominant percentages. They behave like normal EHB and the defensive ones behave like EHB during inspection on a cloudy day.
> 
> Just a thought.
> 
> EB





msl said:


> I thought you brought in some FL queens in the past few years and they rapidly failed?


 They all failed within a season, unbelievable! Foreign queens are hit and miss, and I missed on that batch. I saw a few ferals move into these queen-right colonies and there was no fight at all. Odd!


----------



## Earthboy (May 16, 2007)

AR1 said:


> There will be a year or two with fewer strongly AHB strains in Oklahoma and TX, after the big freeze this spring.


I am worried about the polar vortex spill we had this spring and its impacts on feral population. By now I should be seeing lots of feral bees coming to my yard, snooping around, but I have not seen any other than my own. To make the matter worse, plums, Bradford pears, etc, they skipped blooming this year due to the sudden "budget cut" rendered by the almost three weeks of polar plunge.

A few years back when we had a severe drought, the feral population dropped quickly and it took many years for them to come back. Around year 2000, I would get about a dozen swarm calls per season and that number has trickled down to three lately, if I was lucky. I have bee observing one walled colony for about four years now and they seemed to have escaped the chill all right, though. Nothing is easy in agricultural endeavor: rain, drought, diseases, and bugs, etc. Even the privets were "burned" in the wintry blasts. Hope you all are doing better in your hood than I am.


----------



## BadBeeKeeper (Jan 24, 2015)

gww said:


> Badbeekeeper
> The thing that makes it seem possible is that we don't have to wait a thousand years when people like randy can have 7 percent of a population able to do it now. Granted, 7 percent is an anomaly in the big picture but also shows that some bees can handle it now and not a thousand years from now. That makes it more then a possibility but some doors are still locked. It also seems to show that extinction is probably not in the cards for bees due to mites as long as nothing new is added. Extinction of bee keepers maybe for a while but not bees.
> Does not mean I think I can do it and this is just my big picture over view.
> Cheers
> gww


I'm not sure who you are referring to, but given the length of time we've been at this, 7% seems a rather dismal figure to me. And, contrary to your view, it indicates to me that extinction is a very real possibility without continued intervention.



GregV said:


> Such bees exist as we speak - no need to wait another thousand years.
> Waiting for another 1000 years, now *that *is misguided IMO.
> We need to be developing management methods with material available on hand right now.


Sure, they exist. The USDA/ARS began importing and breeding the Primorsky bees in the '90s. It's been nearly 30 years, and what do we have to show for it?

What we have is a queen breeders association making money selling 'special' bees that don't solve the problem. Despite some of the representations that have been made, the ARS says _The ARS Russian honey bees are not immune to V. jacobsoni. Given enough time, many of them will succumb to the mites." _They go on to say that the program may be useful as a way to reduce the level of treatment necessary, but not eliminate the need for it.



> I don't buy into these talks of the necessary "evolution" (the "evolution" already happened and keeps happening and goes rather quickly).
> I have the resistant bees on hand as we speak - this very moment - as simple as that.
> But doing anything practically useful with them (at my location, for example) is problematic because they barely survive due to the mite pressure.


As I see it, "barely surviving" is equivalent to "on the verge of dying". No, not useful at all.

We do have some bees that have evolved over a long span of years, in an isolated geographic area. But outside of that isolation the necessary trait is not retained.



Earthboy said:


> Excellent and thoughtful and measured post! Many thanks. I often thought that v. mites have been here toughly 30 years. if a colony swarms, say, twice a year, that means 60 generations of bees trying to "accommodate" and "react" to mites.


Twice a year? Not here.



AHudd said:


> In the bait fish example, the female passes advantageous traits on to her thousands of offspring that will hopefully survive to become reproductive females able to pass these traits on to their offspring as well. One male fish can fertilize many females in his lifetime.
> Not so with the Queen bee and her mates. She passes these traits on to a precious few reproductive females. Also, in the wild _many_ Drones mate _one_ time with _one_ Queen.
> I think trying to change the evolution of the Honey Bee in the laboratory is a daunting task, indeed. In the backyard, forget about it. That magic Queen could come and go unnoticed by even by the most astute observer.


We have the 'magic' queens, but there is a problem- you need 'magic' drones to keep the magic alive. If I remember my last class correctly, the trait is recessive, and without the alleles being passed by both the male and female the trait is rapidly masked/lost.



crofter said:


> Well mother nature fulfills mankind's dreams, does she not?


If only that were true...but nature doesn't give a rip about 'mankind'. In fact, lately it seems that she thinks we are a plague that needs to be eliminated and keeps sending others with the intent of doing just that. (Not that I actually consider 'nature' to be sentient.)



JWPalmer said:


> The magic queen could also be able to survive only a portion of the mites thrown at the hive and still succumb to a mite bomb by the beekeeper down the road who is adamantly hard Bond. *We need to make sure the queens that demonstrate resistance are given a chance to reproduce.*


I would add that the other edge to that strategy would be to eliminate those that don't. Unfortunately, it would seem that the might-bombs are far more prolific than resistant queens (and drones).



msl said:


> Not just given a chance to reproduce, mass reproduced and distributed
> Restiance has LOTS of negative selection pressure, its lacking in the positive.
> 
> To Gregs point, spreading queens that are incrementally better then imports lowers the area mite load and improves the done pool... lower the areas mite load and lines that would have died in a pass/fail test now can be kept TF (or lowT/non cem ipm). This is why many feel hard bond can cause the loss of vaubue traits that will serve us well once we get the pressure down
> Improve the drone pool and you start to have breeding based improvement rather then just picking the best out of the natural variability and making a bunch of daughters, next year repeat.


And therein lies one of the big problems.


----------



## Earthboy (May 16, 2007)

For those wanting tables and charts and graphs, here are two examples of TF or v. mite resistant attempts going on in England where v. mites have been for about 30 years, long enough time for the bees to come up with something against the devil:









Developing Varroa Resistant Bees: Steve Riley's Guest Blog.


Steve Riley. You're in for a treat this week: Beelistener subscriber Steve Riley shares with us how he




www.beelistener.co.uk













Winter survival surveys show ‘treatment-free’ works


Each May OxNatBees surveys our members for information on winter losses. This graph shows losses year by year, compared with other surveys. The stand-out point is that our losses for untreated hive…




oxnatbees.wordpress.com





EB

Since all beekeeping is local, all beekeepers are loco.


----------



## Litsinger (Jun 14, 2018)

Earthboy said:


> For those wanting tables and charts and graphs, here are two examples of TF or v. mite resistant attempts going on in England where v. mites have been for about 30 years, long enough time for the bees to come up with something against the devil:


Dr. Kim:

Nice find. I enjoyed reading about the experiences of a few other TF practitioners on the other side of the pond.

While the Riley piece was worthwhile in its own right, the dialogue between Steve and Dr. Seeley in the comments section is quite insightful.

Glad to have you back contributing to the forum.

Russ- Western Kentucky


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

Litsinger said:


> While the Riley piece was worthwhile in its own right, the dialogue between Steve and Dr. Seeley in the comments section is quite insightful.


Good catch, Litsinger.

As always with such project I read:
.................Locally adapted bees only – don’t disturb local genetics with “outside” bees....................

This is just killing me here, right on the spot. 
I don't even know what is the "locally adapted bee" should be.


----------



## crofter (May 5, 2011)

There is a million "local" areas in the country! is that path not contrary to a unified effort to achieve a survivor bee. This too, just in regard mainly to varroa mite. Do you concurrently breed for resistance for the other plagues commonly being kept in check by treatments or must they be conquered consecutively. If the secret to one is the africanized bee what about the colder parts of the country. If the cllimate does not impose the brood breaks necessary to make it fly and forced queenlessness is required will the commercials buy into the extra complexity? Lots of questions that fly in the face of the simple solutions.


----------



## Earthboy (May 16, 2007)

Litsinger said:


> Dr. Kim:
> 
> Nice find. I enjoyed reading about the experiences of a few other TF practitioners on the other side of the pond.
> 
> ...


Thank you, sir, for your kinds words. I started TF a while back, as you might know, and am still picking shrapnel embed in my bones. But there are more of us now and that is rather comforting. What really boils down is greed, which is said to grease the world to go around. I trust in the army of amateur TF beeks around the globe to save the ferals since it is not unnatural for the bees to thrive in nature, untreated. Or so dare I think.


----------



## msl (Sep 6, 2016)

Earthboy said:


> I trust in the army of amateur TF beeks around the globe to save the ferals


The feral don't need saved, they are doing just fine, its the beekeepers that are in trouble..
wild loses of the "thriveing" ferals is too high for most keepers (66%) and keeping in bees in feedlot deniestys increases the pathogen loads and thus losses (even 2-3 in the back yard)..



Earthboy said:


> But there are more of us now and that is rather comforting


Quite a few less then 10 years ago... natural selection at work only those in the best locations lasted and the movement lost market share do to unwise and long proven to create high failure rate methods that were permoted to gain an initial market share 
BIP numbers
2010-2011 70% of backyard beekeepers were TF with 62% of the hives managed TF and it dropped every year since
2019-2020 its 27% with 13% of the hives managed.




GregV said:


> I don't even know what is the "locally adapted bee" should be.


its black box, you go were the data tells you
This is what the Colorado state Beekeepers Association is doing




__





Log into Facebook


Log into Facebook to start sharing and connecting with your friends, family, and people you know.




www.facebook.com
 



survived 2 winters and the lowest mite growth followed by the best hygienic score you find.


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

Some prospective...
Here is a conventional beek.
50 units on a wintering yard #1 - survival 2/50 (4%).
#1 is going up to 3:00 where he quickly does the OAV on the two survivors.

After 3:00 - the yard #2 - the survival # was not spelled out (just stated it was "not good").
Most likely issue again - treatments without consistent and correct system (most likely late fall when it is too little/too late).
Incorrect treatment is just as bad as no treatment.


----------



## Litsinger (Jun 14, 2018)

crofter said:


> Lots of questions that fly in the face of the simple solutions.


Good point, Frank. I think it is 'Primum non nocere', but even that is hard to define and may depend quite a lot on the local dynamics. And then again, what is local?

p.s. This is one of the reasons I have really enjoyed the current BIBBA webinar series- they are attempting to answer the question of how do we acheive local adaptation on a large-scale with a strictly voluntary approach. In short, encouraging folks to:

1. Stop importing bees
2. Rear your own queens
3. Work with your neighbors and local bee associations on 'locally adapted' bee improvement


----------



## crofter (May 5, 2011)

Counting all the ones that die and the ones that swarm they are going to have to up their game a fair bit to be able to quit importing bees. Improving means being able to cull and select winners with enough merit and numbers to move the pointer. It will take hard running just to maintain those gains. I dont recall what Randy Olivers numbers were but it did not project to easy improvements even under excellent, deliberate, management of thousands of colonies. 

How many in the proposed army have done, or are willing to do the amount of studying to get threshold knowledge. Saying it would be easily doable seems to assume a skill and dedication level something like that of the frequent posters here now and past. 

I have seen a lot of the exuberance and enthusiasm of a black lab puppy but a similar attention span. The mechanics of the breeding program is not the sticking point; the human engineering and logistics necessary to make it happen though are colossal. The herding of cats! The ones easily attracted I think are not what it would take.


----------



## Litsinger (Jun 14, 2018)

crofter said:


> Counting all the ones that die and the ones that swarm they are going to have to up their game a fair bit to be able to quit importing bees.


No argument here- it sounds a bit like turning the RMS Titanic.

What does seem reasonably plausible is the idea of a local/regional improvement guild that also maintains a teaching apiary and/or breeding yard. The association then works together toward a similar aim and goals- generally around the theme of bee improvement (TF or otherwise).

While this might not work in all situations and circumstances, I can see how this could work in a lot of locales where the average hobbyist just wants a hive or two in the backyard and the guild can work together to make up winter losses while simultaneously tipping the scales a bit on the local adaptation front.


----------



## crofter (May 5, 2011)

Yes; a guild. Selling points for a membership; Definitely a reduced price for queens. Suggestion of a commitment of so many hours labor to the collective. Quid Pro Quo.

What is an enemy of getting people to invest time and money is the many charlatans telling how easy and guaranteed TF beekeeping is! Heck you just have to quit treating and it will happen. It is certain! It only fails when people lack determination etc. Maybe they think that if the show a realistic prognosis it will scare them off. I think a better approach is to start out with the idea of treating as necessary to keep bees alive while using a selection method for signs of resistance and pointing such bees into the breeding program. A lot of bees are needed to raise bees for the selection program but those support bees do not need to be treatment free at all. There are methods to assure selection for breeding drones.

I think their would need to be some concerted organization structure to prevent pulling in opposite directions. Knowing bee keepers that is an inherent problem! It will take someone with a convincing plan that smacks of practicality not utopian delusion. Nothing would turn me off quicker than someone obviously making rose colored glasses projections and having no rain day plans. Many examples out there that I think amount to little more than virtue signalling or slactivism activities. 

_Slacktivism_ is a good one to google if you are not familiar with it.

As previously, I think the greater difficulty by far is in the people skills department, not bee knowledge at all.


----------



## gww (Feb 14, 2015)

Msl
Here is one for you on the mighty mite bomb.  








Accelerated Varroa destructor population growth in honey bee (Apis mellifera) colonies is associated with visitation from non-natal bees - Scientific Reports


A leading cause of managed honey bee colony mortality in the US, Varroa destructor populations typically exceed damaging levels in the fall. One explanation for rapid population increases is migration of mite carrying bees between colonies. Here, the degree to which bees from high and low mite...




www.nature.com




Cheers
gww


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

gww said:


> Msl
> Here is one for you on the mighty mite bomb.
> 
> 
> ...


 MSL beat you to it.








Robbing screens as an IPM tool lower mite loads


This study suggests putting a robbing screen on a hive significantly cut the fall mite growth by blocking incoming mites https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-86558-8 Direct measures of Varroa infestation on adult bees from alcohol wash samples showed receiver colonies with and without...




www.beesource.com


----------



## gww (Feb 14, 2015)

Greg
And here I thought I was paying attention.  
Cheers
gww


----------



## BadBeeKeeper (Jan 24, 2015)

msl said:


> The feral don't need saved, they are doing just fine, its the beekeepers that are in trouble..
> wild loses of the "thriveing" ferals is too high for most keepers (66%) and keeping in bees in feedlot deniestys increases the pathogen loads and thus losses (even 2-3 in the back yard)..
> 
> 
> ...


And to add to this, in a study on 'beekeeping economics' presented at the 2021 American Bee Research Conference, the profitability of conventional and organic treatment regimens was compared with TF. 144 colonies were followed for 2 1/2 years. (Underwood, Kelsey, & Lopez-Uribe, Penn State)

Conventional and organically treated colonies had a >80% Winter survival rate, TF hives did poorly with high mite levels and a low survival rate. Interestingly, honey production was significantly higher in organically treated colonies.

As well, in addition to profit from surplus honey, both organic and conventionally treated colonies provided additional profit from the sale of excess colonies from Spring splits. With the TF colonies, splits had to be kept in order to make up for the Winter losses (no profit). Overall, the organic system was the most profitable, while the TF system was not profitable at all due to high mortality.

So, the long and the short of it is, if you want to make money from bees you have to treat and keep mites under control. On the other hand, if you just want to play with spend all your time making and killing bees instead of making money, then TF can work for you.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Another study presented (Ellis & Rangel, Texas A&M) showed that bees stressed by either cold or excessive mite loads had significantly shorter life-spans and tended to self-remove themselves from the hives in significantly higher numbers than the controls. This provides a major clue for those asking the question "Where did my bees go?" when they find their hives empty and blaming it on 'CCD'.


----------



## msl (Sep 6, 2016)

That would be the COMB project COMB
they haven't updated the site in quite some time, do they have anything published?


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

> On the other hand, if you just want to play with spend all your time making and killing bees instead of making money


If everyone kept thinking of short-term making money, we'd be all in deep sh*t.
Fortunately, this is not the case.


----------



## BadBeeKeeper (Jan 24, 2015)

msl said:


> That would be the COMB project COMB
> they haven't updated the site in quite some time, do they have anything published?


I don't know about 'published', it's a simplification of their 2021 ABRC presentation.


----------



## BadBeeKeeper (Jan 24, 2015)

GregV said:


> If everyone kept thinking of short-term making money, we'd be all in deep sh*t.
> Fortunately, this is not the case.


You're kidding, right? It's the money that drives the whole thing. If it weren't for the money, no one here would have any bees.

You know, generally speaking, I HATE government regulation and interference...but I am beginning to believe that there might, perhaps, be some benefit to more oversight regarding pathogens and parasites in beekeeping. And that's something, considering it's coming from someone whose political leanings fall just short of anarchy. (Not that this is intended to degenerate the thread into a political discussion, merely to to inform that, while I am against overly-intrusive government, I recognize that 'some' government is necessary because not everyone can be relied on to exercise common-sense, responsibility, and do what is beneficial to the whole.)


----------



## Litsinger (Jun 14, 2018)

crofter said:


> A lot of bees are needed to raise bees for the selection program but those support bees do not need to be treatment free at all. There are methods to assure selection for breeding drones.


Frank:

My apologies for the delay in reply- I have been working feverishly the past couple days to hopefully minimize losses in my nascent orchard relative to the hard freeze that is anticipated tonight. This will be two years in a row where all the stone fruit trees have come into full bloom only to be blasted by subsequent sub 28 degree F temperatures.

Now that my bellyaching is out of the way, I think you raise some very salient points. It is why I really respect the yeoman's work that folks like Dorothey Morgan with the Kentucky Queen Bee Breeders Association and our own MSL with the CSBA Club Level Queen Rearing Program are carrying out. They are doing the hard work of educating, advocating and persuading. Definitely not slacktivism.

As regards BIBBA's approach, a recent presentation by Mr. Kevin Thorn discusses many of the possibilities and challenges of maintaining an informal, volunteer-lead community bee improvement program- with a bonus bit about dipping one's toes into TF at about the 1:03 mark:






Finally- as to how the British Isles (and maybe much of North America by adaptation) can make up enough colonies to supply the local/regional demand without relying on sustained imports, Roger Patterson is convinced that it is diligent and focused colony increase efforts at the local association level that will turn the tide:



http://www.dave-cushman.net/bee/rogerpattersonmethod.pdf








This also assumes a level of local/regional collaboration that might be hard to come by without significant leadership and investment.


----------



## crofter (May 5, 2011)

BadBeeKeeper has a point about how hard it is to get people to act in their own better interests. Of course they are led astray by professional enticers that represent big money interests that are reaping the benefits.


Litsinger said:


> This also assumes a level of local/regional collaboration that might be hard to come by without significant leadership and investment.


The silly "save the bees" with their pastoral depictions of the fancy garden hives that you only have to view and admire to solve the bee problems, is what I classify as slactivism. Their ads. make good copy for the magazines etc.$$ The corporations who put token behives on their roofs to hype their "green" image is classic. It would take someone clever to get them to contribute to an organized effort to reduce the need for the import and trans country traffic in bees. Something that would in reality do something to improve the lot of bees as a whole. 

Most of the message we see on the popular media do not identify the problems or realistic solutions. Undoubtedly I do view the situation with a somewhat "jaundiced eye", but I think the brainstorming needed is on how to promote a shift in identifying foundational problems. There are oodles of exchanges of techniques that could be implemented at the bee/ beekeeper level but I think that that is not the key impediment to progress.

The country has so many critical issues presently looming large that it will be quite a task to compete with. Knowledge of the right buttons to push might be something not common in beekeepers. Are we more handwringers than button pushers?


----------



## crofter (May 5, 2011)

Russ I am just venting frustration. It seems to me that we are _again re arriving at the same place_. "If beekeepers would just get together"! Seems a bit like saying,"Why can't we all just be nice to each other".

I would like to see brainstorming about how to make that happen. To solve a problem the first course of action is to identify the foundational impediments to the necessary changes. I dont see this happening; I think we are jumping ahead to what we think should or could be done to, and with, the bees genetics. 

A side note but related: I followed the grounding of the Ever Given container ship That blocked the Suez Canal and read some on the history of the construction of the canal that goes back thousands of years amid great ups and downs of finagling with conflicting human interests. Financing of it was another angle that required its own specialized motivational skill set! *The main actual digging of it only took 10 years or so.*


----------



## LAlldredge (Aug 16, 2018)

LarryBud said:


> I've been reading quite a bit on treatment free beekeeping although you can mark me as a skeptic, I'm interested in knowing what your overwinter survival rates are-first and second years? How many hives and what kind of hive do you have?
> 
> For background on me, I am a IPM beekeeper, with 5 Langs, 100% survival and expect to expand significantly over the next two or three years (on my own and surrounding land) with f1 and later AI VSH queens.
> [/QUOTE
> TF is an advanced skill. Very VERY location dependent. They usually employ brood breaks as well. The biggest mistake I see people make when they have their first year of success is expanding too much too soon. Think carefully about workload and what you have time for. If you were going to change your mite treatments I would consider going all organic first. (Like OAV only) If your goal is sustainability then a baseline of 5 is a minimum. You had such a good year that I wouldn't want to see you change too much and go backwards. I would really listen to GregV's responses. He's been at this for a while.


----------



## Earthboy (May 16, 2007)

but *I think the brainstorming needed is on how to promote a shift in identifying foundational problems*. 

"Greed is the grease that makes the world go round," as they say. Nobody wants to or will kill his/her cash cow or golden goose for a long term sustainable gain. Life must be here and right now and for me, and me only. Money and more money is at the bottom of nearly everything.

That recognized, nevertheless, I'd say "Civilization is individual."

EB


----------



## AHudd (Mar 5, 2015)

For whatever reasons, some people can afford higher losses in their apiary. People that depend on income from their bees can't afford to lose that income stream to reach for something that is unattainable but for a very few. It is easier to take chances when one has steady dependable income stream from another source.
Personally, I just hate to see colonies weaken and die. I do whatever I can to help them survive the Winter, whether that be treating them or combining weak colonies in the fall.
Money is not inherently evil, as we all know it takes money just to live.
The *love* of money is the root of all evil, not money.
Greed is much more relative and harder to define for me.

Alex


----------



## crofter (May 5, 2011)

Greed or self interest is a very large determinant in the agregate of human activity. It is not a modern or isolated phenomenon. The sad part is that much of our action is not in our long term best interest. It seems that delayed gratification is not intuitive. We strongly discount the value of future events in deference to immediate pleasure. Perhaps it is a remnant of survival mechanisms valuable in the past when life was short and brutal. Tribalism is another enemy of large collective action. Another instinctive behavior valuable in the past but one that flies in the face of concerted action in situations greatly broader than the local tribe but solvable only collectively.

It seems that it is only when the danger is causing *immediate and undisputed* suffering to all, that we will sacrifice a bit of our self interest and act collectively. Recent events shine a harsh light on how well our instincts are serving us. Culture can modify instincts to some extent but that seems slower to respond to change than the accelerated events of the last few generations. 

Who is the character that said, "_I have seen the enemy sir, and we are it_"


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

crofter said:


> BadBeeKeeper has a point about how hard it is to get people to act in their own better interests.


People nearly ALWAYS act in "their own better interests".
The issue is
1)their perceive their own interests differently from how you perceive the same
2)the interests change over time
3)circumstances change over time
4)reality perception is subject to influence
5)reality perception may change over time too

I don't know what is BadBeeKeeper's point outside of - I want make money and do it now.


----------



## crofter (May 5, 2011)

GregV said:


> People nearly ALWAYS act in "their own better interests".
> The issue is
> 1)their perceive their own interests differently from how you perceive the same
> 2)the interests change over time
> ...


Geg; I should have worded it "how hard it is to get people to act in their own *long term* best interests"
The devaluation of future events vs. the present is a factor in their cost/benefit analyses.


----------



## msl (Sep 6, 2016)

crofter said:


> Are we more handwringers than button pushers?


Most are hobbyists with no skin in the game siting around complaining about people who make their living with bees and how they do it, and that if the big guys "just took some losses" for a few years is would allow the hobbyists to keep bees the what they feel they should be kept

Latshaw TF II breeder queens $590 each, min order of 4!! overwintered breeders $800
VP queens TF II Breeders $250-275
Stevens "untested" (not laying yet  ) TF II breeders $200, hand selected TF II breeders $500
and these guys are always SOLD OUT

Were do all these treatment free breeder queens go? big commercial outfits, they are the ones paying the $$ to support TF/ resistant breeding efforts, not the complaining TF hobbyists chasing swarms and endlessly splitting.
the problem is.... these aren't the bees used to make packages or early queens..
Thinking back to a Bob B video a bit ago a FL queen breeder is talking about having to mix in some Italian blood lines to his base stock so they would brood up in time for him to meet the demand for early queens and packages

$$ makes the world go round, producers make what sells... and the hobbyist market gobbles it up before the chance of it being sold out happens...
ever herd some one say " I will skip buying packages this year as there is no BLANK" available?
nope, its a sellers market do to people refusing to take proper care of thier bees


crofter said:


> "_I have seen the enemy sir, and we are it_"


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

crofter said:


> Geg; I should have worded it "how hard it is to get people to act in their own *long term* best interests"
> The devaluation of future events vs. the present is a factor in their cost/benefit analyses.


Certainly, I prefer my kids to NOT be working in Subway/McDonalds immediately upon graduation from the high school - because, you know, they get to make money right away.

We prefer taking a long and hard and expensive slog here - before making any money at all.


----------



## BadBeeKeeper (Jan 24, 2015)

crofter said:


> Greed or self interest is a very large determinant in the agregate of human activity. It is not a modern or isolated phenomenon. The sad part is that much of our action is not in our long term best interest. It seems that delayed gratification is not intuitive. We strongly discount the value of future events in deference to immediate pleasure. Perhaps it is a remnant of survival mechanisms valuable in the past when life was short and brutal. Tribalism is another enemy of large collective action. Another instinctive behavior valuable in the past but one that flies in the face of concerted action in situations greatly broader than the local tribe but solvable only collectively.
> 
> It seems that it is only when the danger is causing *immediate and undisputed* suffering to all, that we will sacrifice a bit of our self interest and act collectively. Recent events shine a harsh light on how well our instincts are serving us. Culture can modify instincts to some extent but that seems slower to respond to change than the accelerated events of the last few generations.
> 
> Who is the character that said, "_I have seen the enemy sir, and we are it_"


I think that was in the old 'Pogo' comic strip.

Unfortunately, even "immediate and undisputed suffering" seems not to be visible to some folks.


----------



## BadBeeKeeper (Jan 24, 2015)

GregV said:


> I don't know what is BadBeeKeeper's point outside of - I want make money and do it now.


Wow, that's not what I said at all.



GregV said:


> Certainly, I prefer my kids to NOT be working in Subway/McDonalds immediately upon graduation from the high school - because, you know, they get to make money right away.
> 
> *We prefer taking a long and hard and expensive slog here - before making any money at all.*


Why? That doesn't make much sense. Why not aim for making money immediately? You invest a certain amount of money, make a positive return on that investment as quickly as possible, then re-invest a portion of the profits to increase your business in order to increase your profits without going into debt- you make the business pay for itself rather than servicing debt, which comes at an additional cost against profits and/or prevents you from making further investments for further profit. You have to consider the Time Value of money.

And why would you not want your kids to work as soon as possible? I started when I was 7 or 8 years old, with one paper route. I saved money from that, which allowed me to buy a used bicycle that gave me the ability to deliver more papers in a shorter time period, which enabled me to eventually build up to four routes with three different papers. Some of the money earned from papers was put into the purchase of flower and vegetable seeds, and greeting cards, which I re-sold while delivering papers...a lot of them to the customers who already got the papers.

When I was 11, I went to work alongside the grown men for the Summer and Fall harvests, doing the same job and making the same money. At 12 I got a full-time job as a janitor, and at 15 I went to work in a garage/service station pumping gas and learning to be a mechanic...and I still went to school, graduating from HS at 17...I actually had enough credits to graduate at 16, but I lacked a single English class that I needed to take the following year.

A kid going to work early learns responsibility that can serve him/her very well later in life. Frankly, I think a lack of that is a big part of the problems we see today.

As far as making money with bees, this is my 11th year, and I started making money the first year. All of my equipment is paid for, no debt, and I have about 1,000lbs of honey from last year that is still waiting to be extracted and sold. I lost my day job a year ago because of the 'Rona but I still have a fat bank account, months worth of food in the pantry, I'm ahead on my mortgage payments and just sold a piece of property that will provide enough money to carry me through to retirement if I never get another job again. The bees will provide a part of my retirement income, and part of the profits from that have been put into planting an orchard to provide additional income from apples and cider...although Ma Nature seems to be fighting me tooth and nail on that one with windstorms snapping young trees and the deer eating the ones that were left...I'm gonna need a new freezer to hold venison.

Now, to get back to my previous statement which you didn't seem to understand- If there was no money in bees, no one would have any bees- it's a simple enough fact, if it were not for the economic value of honey bees they would never have been given valuable cargo space on the ships from Europe. If there did not continue to be an economic value to honey bees, there would not continue to be an industry centered around them and they would cease to be anything but a novelty. No money, no bees.


----------



## Litsinger (Jun 14, 2018)

crofter said:


> I would like to see brainstorming about how to make that happen.


Frank:

Thank you for your follow-up. Let me apologize for my delay in reply as I have been away from the computer dealing with the late freeze and also several heavy lifts at work.

I understand and appreciate your points. The reason I brought up the club-level breeding programs and Kevin Thorn's example is that these are practical real-life examples of folks who are trying different avenues to make participation worthwhile (i.e. self-serving) on a volunteer basis. Two quick anecdotes:

Ms. Dorothey Morgan just offered a grafting seminar to all Kentucky beekeepers- those who are a part of the Breeders' Association were offered half-priced admission and everyone who came with a queenless nuc (or five) was allowed to take their grafts home in them free of charge. Further, Dorothey had the foresight to get the Kentucky Agricultural Development Fund to support the bulk of the cost. The association got the benefit of getting some of their survivor-stock genetics out in the general population, and the participants learned how to graft and came away with as many charged nucs as they could support.

Mr. Kevin Thorn (in the video above) discusses how the increase in the community apiary is effectively community property. As such, club members are able to replenish their winter losses from overwintered queens and nucs from the apiary at no cost. He mentioned how there are several members who do not directly participate in the breeding program, but rather cut the grass, do the accounting, etc. and the benefit to them is the opportunity to learn and collaborate in the breeding efforts, but also have a ready source to replenish losses should the need arise.

Coming full-circle- I think ultimately this is the crux of Roger Patterson's message to BIBBA- clubs should learn to get good at increase while working to improve genetics. If there is plenty of overwintered resources available for the local beekeeping community, it will help lessen the pressure to bring in imports. Which in-turn should have some benefit (at least locally) of helping to support local adaptation.

Good discussion on here- a lot of thought-provoking considerations.

Happy Easter to you all-

Russ


----------



## msl (Sep 6, 2016)

crofter said:


> Greed or self interest is a very large determinant in the agregate of human activity.


Well, what other reason is there to keep bees in the US ?

They don't benefit nature (native flora/fauna) so its not conservation

humans keep bees for human reasons...self interest, the same reasons they plant rose bushes or rows of corn, or keep a pet
sure some may think they are saving the bees or what not.. but it boils down they are keeping bees because it makes them feel good, or other wise fills a need/want they have..

Were the slope starts to slide is when the feedback loop and conformation bias reinforces peoples feeling of intellectual superiority...
"how can commercial beekeepers be SOOO stupid" etc
Then very quickly thier reasons become superior or "more inghtend" and there for their methods, weather they are actually working or not become the moral high ground...
welcome to the cult.. been their, it was ugly




Litsinger said:


> If there is plenty of overwintered resources available for the local beekeeping community, it will help lessen the pressure to bring in imports. Which in-turn should have some benefit (at least locally) of helping to support local adaptation.


yep...
And if you look at what's going on, the path is fairly clear (BIP 4 year average)
















the hobbyists are not controlling their mites, only 28% are using 2 or more chemicals (right cemical for the right time of year ) and their survival rate show it.. 

in areas that its hard to keep bees, its hard to keep TF, and its hard to have locally adapted stock and it starts a feedback loop/self and its going to take treatments to turn that tide and break the loop

compare Greg's location









to Russ's








Even a treating keeper with solid mite control (for a hobiest) in Wisconsin is going to have higher loses than a TF keeper in KY


----------



## AR1 (Feb 5, 2017)

GregV said:


> Certainly, I prefer my kids to NOT be working in Subway/McDonalds immediately upon graduation from the high school - because, you know, they get to make money right away.
> 
> We prefer taking a long and hard and expensive slog here - before making any money at all.


Do not entirely agree here. I taught high school for 3 years, classes for kids with 'low academic achievement'. Many of these kids lives would have been much improved if they could have been working, even slinging hamburgers. I doubt that your kids are of the low academic achievement group... Almost ANY job is an excellent learning experience. One thing you can learn is that you don't want to be slinging hamburgers your whole life. I did dangerous and dirty farm work as a teen. As a new college grad I worked in a Central American country for a few years at very low pay. Both experiences taught me a fair bit about the value of labor and of money.


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

AR1 said:


> Do not entirely agree here. ... Almost ANY job is an excellent learning experience.


Sure thing.
But it is best to be strategic when you are an amateur - one ought to be thinking of learning first, NOT making quick money.

I told my college kid to not even think of waiting the tables - that would be waste of his time (I'd rather pay for an extra class if comes to it).
Now after three years of working the tech support as his college side gig - he is thankful after realizing that actually *he gets paid* for learning some relevant stuff. If he wants to go and work for free in Nepal for a time - I fully support that too.
Flipping hamburgers or packing potato chips (my personal way) is a pretty obvious way to avoid (unless you have been cornered by the circumstances - happens too).


----------



## LAlldredge (Aug 16, 2018)

Money isn't the problem. Greed is just another word for losing perspective and balance. There is no real satisfaction in greed. It creates more want, thirst and distortion of priorities like a hungry ghost. 

I live in a beautiful place with clean air and water. Most of what I have here is free. How much would we value a perfect sunset or a great conversation? 

Perfection is not interesting and has no fresh air in it. Freedom is fundamental. Having the freedom to choose. That's the principal to die for and many have. It's the one thing I cannot live without.


----------



## crofter (May 5, 2011)

I agree in many respects but unfortunately many people are not in a situation to pursue those lofty (fundamental? ?) valuables. Cant remember the source or exact quote but it was something to the effect of "Idyllic satisfactions are best enjoyed upon a full stomach? People are worked upon by professionals to act against their better interests; not surprising that many do. They buy lottery tickets as a would be retirement investment. Whose problems is that solving? Sad!

Google up Edward Bernays who was a paid professional motivator. Hired by nations to convince people of the official line and another dandy the biggest of tobacco companies Imperial Tobacco. How many of us remember the add "You have come a long way baby" purveying a tall and sexy woman with a cigarette when smoking was not yet chic for females. Our man Edward was an american born nephew of Sigmund Freud. Initially he felt he was doing a service to mankind but in later life recanted I think, feeling that he himself had been out witted and used. I am not great on conspiracy ideas but have little doubt about the benificence of organized consumerism!


----------



## gww (Feb 14, 2015)

I can't remember the quote but it is something like working for nothing is better then not working but for a hungry man the working for nothing just makes you hungrier. 
My rephrasing it is not as smooth as the original but you get the point.
Cheers
gww


----------



## crofter (May 5, 2011)

gww said:


> I can't remember the quote but it is something like working for nothing is better then not working but for a hungry man the working for nothing just makes you hungrier.
> My rephrasing it is not as smooth as the original but you get the point.
> Cheers
> gww


Something a bit akin to saying "Its not hard to keep a man on his knees once you get him there"


----------



## BadBeeKeeper (Jan 24, 2015)

GregV said:


> Sure thing.
> But it is best to be strategic when you are an amateur - one ought to be thinking of learning first, NOT making quick money.
> 
> Flipping hamburgers or packing potato chips (my personal way) is a pretty obvious way to avoid...


Actually, you can learn quite a lot working at Mickey D's. I know because I've done it. Working in any business you teach you very valuable things that can be applied to other endeavors...if one is willing to learn. Any job can be an education...if one is not too short-sighted to realize it.


----------



## GregB (Dec 26, 2017)

BadBeeKeeper said:


> Actually, you can learn quite a lot working at Mickey D's. I know because I've done it. Working in any business you teach you very valuable things that can be applied to other endeavors...if one is willing to learn. Any job can be an education...if one is not too short-sighted to realize it.


Sure thing, I learned how to hit my daily quota while loading trucks at Frito-Lay and to not get fired. Then worked for Frito handling dangerous chems.
Did I really learn anything else?
Not much.
No particular skills to brag about.
Did damage my body though; still hurts.
But I had to do it for a while because I was cornered.
I guess I reconfirmed one should avoid such jobs - which most people know from the get go anyway (nothing new).
So talking of the valuable McD's experience is just a good sounding cliche (probably invented and disseminated by the McD's themselves - LOL).


----------



## Litsinger (Jun 14, 2018)

Litsinger said:


> Coming full-circle- I think ultimately this is the crux of Roger Patterson's message to BIBBA- clubs should learn to get good at increase while working to improve genetics.


... and Roger has finally gotten around to discussing some practical recommendations for establishing and maintaining bee improvement groups.

A lot of good practical and philosophical ideas included in the talk, but the three main take-aways for success:

1. Include as many folks as possible- he suggested making the group as informal as possible and with as broad a focus as possible to increase the participation. Ultimately, he points out that the first goal is to minimize the amount of imported stock coming into an area- thus if someone participates by little more than getting local queens or overwintered nucs from a club member rather than having them mailed-in you are already one step closer to helping to foster local adaptation.

2. Make the group community-minded- i.e. schedule time in the midst of the bee improvement slog to have a cook-out and time for fellowship.

3. Get as many ripe queen cells and virgin queens out into your area as possible- even if you have to give them away. His opinion is that this will do more for improving the local population than attempting to flood the DCA's.


----------

