# How do you KNOW that mites caused the hive to crash?



## Maddox65804 (Dec 29, 2011)

I have seen several people state that "my hive died due to mites" or some variation on such. How do they tell? I have mites in my hives, like most people. I know that mites help transmit viruses and cause other problems. My question is: HOW do they know mites caused the crash? Is there some diagnostic test I have never read about in the magazines or books? What are the determining criteria? 

I have had many hives die over the years. Some looked real strong and I don't know why they died. Some were weak and I expected them to die. And, there were several cases of the exact opposite of those two scenarios. But, when a hive dies, I find it very difficult to determine exactly WHY they died. So I am curious how these folks can make such definite statements? 

I approach the mite and bee survival by breeding better bee lines for my area. I work hard at tracking my genetic lines, keeping notes and measuring how each hive perfoms so that I can do solid comparasions to determine which lines to continue to breed. My bees survive for years without mite treatments. My marked queens live for 3-4 years (my oldest just died after 4 1/2 years and she was still outproducing the younger queens. Why they superceded her when she was doing so well is a mystery).

I do a lot of cut-outs so I get to see a lot of feral beehives. It has been very educational to see how these bees cope with mites and SHB (I've only seen 2 cut-outs where there were not SHB). The cut-outs also provide me with a wide range of genetic material to work with. Ok, now I'm just rambling.......

Please respond with SPECIFIC CRITERIA/EVIDENCE that helps you make a COD determination. I'm looking for something more than a lot of non-specific responses or "I read this once in a book" type of answers.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

Have you watched a hive crash from mites? Alot of it has to do with viral infections, and seeing Deformed Winged bees being carried out of the hive is one sure sign of high varroa mite populations. Its the mite that vectors the virus into the bees, and the virus that takes the hives down. Before we encountered these waves of viral infections our hives were able to tolerate up to 10% mite loads without death, now our threshold has been lowered down to 3% because of viral infections. Compound that with Nosema, any you have a full plate.

Its not just mites that cause the hives to crash, mites are one of the main factors in the crash.
your asking for specific symptoms, its not that easy


----------



## johno (Dec 4, 2011)

I think a lot of hives sucumb to heavy mite loads in the late fall to winter due to the loss of bees and brood critical to carry them thru the winter, the numbers dwindle DWV is obvious some dead brood and most of the brood frames will have white varoa feces on the sides of the cells . the mites will be aparent in any capped brood opened, that is all I can think of at the moment.
Johno


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

sounds about right


----------



## Mike Gillmore (Feb 25, 2006)

For anyone who does periodic counts on a sticky board, dead mites can be pretty conclusive. If a strong colony rapidly dwindles and dies with a handful of bees left in the box, check the bottom board or sticky board for mites. I've had it happen to me and found thousands of mites on the board. I was fairly confident at that point the hive crashed from mites, or virus' related to mite infestation. Many times you will find their calling card left behind, on the bottom board.
.


----------



## beedeetee (Nov 27, 2004)

If you are looking for the thing that "broke the camel's back", I think that will be difficult to determine most of the time. Back before mites I didn't lose many hives at all. Most of the time it was starvation or a queen that failed over winter. After mites everything changed. They can't deal with other stresses as well. I would bet that over 80-90% (maybe closer to 100%) of my loses have mites as the base culprit. Now they may have died from some other stress at the end, but without mites, most would have made it.


----------



## Ravenseye (Apr 2, 2006)

I'll agree with Mike. I've had colonies start withering away and die no matter what efforts I put in to save them. With screened bottom boards the evidence is not so obvious but I've had boxes with a regular bottom board and there they were. In the long run, I could have diagnosed sooner. Lessons learned......


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

ravenseye, are you saying mites are easier to miss with a screened bottom board? how do you check for them theses days?


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

Maddox65804 said:


> I approach the mite and bee survival by breeding better bee lines for my area. I work hard at tracking my genetic lines, keeping notes and measuring how each hive perfoms so that I can do solid comparasions to determine which lines to continue to breed.


 What do you measure and record? If you are doing _solid comparisons_ then you must be doing some form of objective mite testing.



Maddox65804 said:


> But, when a hive dies, I find it very difficult to determine exactly WHY they died.


If you are doing any objective mite testing you must have an idea if mites were a significant factor.

Sometimes a collapse by varroa is obvious. Dead mites on the bottom board. But for the most part there is very little evidence left behind.

Mites are a factor in the vast majority of colony failures. Nosema, foulbrood, dwindling and many unnamed collapse syndromes are influenced by varroa. They parasitize bees during development resulting in substantially weakened adults. They parasitize adults. They vector all types of disease. Your bees ability to cope with EVERY other pressure is dramatically impacted by the mite load. And if you aren’t testing in an objective fashion, you are flying totally blind. And if you are testing, you already know the answer to your original question.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

When I find thousands of dead Varroa on the bottom board and white flecks (Varroa feces) in the brood cells, I assume they died from Varroa. When I can't find more than a few Varroa and no feces, I assume it's something else.

If the cluster is not in contact with stores, I assume they starved. If the cluster is very small and we've had some bitter cold, I assume they froze. If the cluster is scattered or many separate little clusters and a lot of "K" wing, I would assume it was tracheal mites.


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

beemandan said:


> if you aren’t testing in an objective fashion, you are flying totally blind.





Michael Bush said:


> When I can't find more than a few Varroa and no feces, I assume it's something else.


Two contradictory sermons. Choose the one you believe will serve you best.


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

Perhaps I am misreading but the tone of the OP seems to be a challenge to prove what he may not accept and that is that varroa kills hives. It may not always do so overtly but it is an everpresent fact of life in beekeeping whether one chooses to accept it or not. Given the fact the op has only kept bees post varroa (his profile says he began in 1998) it is entirely understandable to not be able to completely understand how dramatically beekeeping changed in our apiaries when varroa showed up. We were all pretty ignorant at the time and assumed it would just become a non-factor or a minor pest like tracheal mites were becoming. Many beekeepers went out of business, most resorted to lots of different remedies that may have worked for for a short time only to see infestations return with a vengeance. Having been a commercial operator for nearly 20 years pre varroa and over 20 years since its impact let me say the differences are stark and unmistakable. The beekeepers who have survived in this industry have learned a lot in how to deal with varroa, bees are better able to withstand varroa pressures and there are better tools at our disposal, but the best tool is knowledge. Understanding as much as you can about your adversary and accepting that there is a problem is paramount in learning how to deal with it and deal with it safely and sanely. Many will simply choose never to do mite counts and assume all losses are totally unrelated to the worst pest our industry has ever dealt with. That's everyone prerogative, it's not the path I have chosen. There is lots and lots of information out there about how to identify varroa infestations and evaluate hive deaths you can choose to read it or to ignore it. To each his own.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

Jim, you didnt provide "SPECIFIC CRITERIA/EVIDENCE" in determining your hives died due to mites


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

Ian said:


> Jim, you didnt provide "SPECIFIC CRITERIA/EVIDENCE" in determining your hives died due to mites


Right you are.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

dead mites on the bottom board, mite feces in the brood comb, deformed wings on the dead bees, 

these would all be presumptive and after the fact evidence that a collaspe was mite related.

high mite counts preceding the death of the hive would be a more certain indicator.

most of the time when opinions have been rendered on the forum that 'it was probably mites', it has been after the fact, too late anyway.

i'm beginning to believe more and more that the second most important tool in beekeeping, (second only to the hive tool), is an alcohol or ether jar for taking mite counts. i've got mine.


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

squarepeg said:


> i'm beginning to believe more and more that the second most important tool in beekeeping, (second only to the hive tool), is an alcohol or ether jar for taking mite counts. i've got mine.


Amen brother (sister?)


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)




----------



## Gino45 (Apr 6, 2012)

Michael Bush said:


> When I find thousands of dead Varroa on the bottom board and white flecks (Varroa feces) in the brood cells, I assume they died from Varroa. When I can't find more than a few Varroa and no feces, I assume it's something else.
> 
> I
> Well, Michael, this is a first. Are you saying that you still have hives that succumb to mites? I thought that mite were no longer a problem for you.
> ...


----------



## SallyD (Mar 12, 2011)

squarepeg said:


> i'm beginning to believe more and more that the second most important tool in beekeeping, (second only to the hive tool), is an alcohol or ether jar for taking mite counts. i've got mine.


Can you explain this? What do you do with alcohol for mite counts? I use the sticky board for mite counts.


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

SallyD said:


> Can you explain this? What do you do with alcohol for mite counts?


Hi Sally, this fellow has some pretty good descriptions of varroa testing....including jar sampling.

http://scientificbeekeeping.com/fighting-varroa-reconnaissance-mite-sampling/


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

Sally: Sticky boards are good and they dont kill bees. You will, however, get a more accurate count (assuming your sampling is consistent) with an alcohol shake or ether roll because you physically dislodge the mites and you are working with a finite number of bees plus you get an immediate on the spot assessment without having to return another day. Sticky board counts will vary with cluster size and how active the bees are.


----------



## Maddox65804 (Dec 29, 2011)

Ian said:


> Jim, you didnt provide "SPECIFIC CRITERIA/EVIDENCE" in determining your hives died due to mites


Neither did you Ian except for some very specific tolerance levels. How are you determining the "viral loads"? Are you testing or assuming?

Jim is correct in everything he says except for the assumption that I don't "choose to accept" the mites. I am well aware that mites affect everything (and also aware that he has much more experience). 

The point of this thread is to challenge folks to look beyond mites as the cause of every hive crash. It is just too easy to blame mites and stop looking at the rest of your operation. I was hoping some of you would be able to give us some more specific diagnostic tools to help us see that there may be MORE causes to the hive failures than just "mites". I was hoping for more than assumptions and "I would bet's" and general re-hashing of well known effects of mites on the hives. I think I was hoping for something that would help determine the differnece between when mites were the major contributing factor or when it was something else. It is a lofty hope.

My hives survive and even thrive with mites. I have hives that are over 8 years old. I see feral colonies that also do well for years. So I become a little cynical (sorry) when I see so many people say "mites killed my hives" as if mites were the only contributing factor. I was hoping to encourage them to see not just the mites, but the other things that caused the hive to crash.

If we don't look at mites as only part of the problem, then we are doomed to keep repeating management practices that also contribute to the problem. Mites are a huge problem but they aren't the ONLY problem we have.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

I dont have the facility to test for viral loads, neither does my extensions office. I do however look for evidence of viral infections, visual diagnosis can be done for a few viral infections. Read up on virus in bees and their interaction between the mite, nosema and other viruses.

If you notice, and I dont think you do, most all the posters who have contributed to this thread suggest a common theme. Compounding factors take the hives down, with a focus on the mite. So when someone suggests that mites took the hive down, they initially did, but it usually was the secondary infection that finished the hive off.
Your arguing a point that everyone has already accepted,


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

Jeff: Hey I think we are getting somewhere and I apologize if I was being presumptive. For the record I am not one of those folks who think the Treatment Free folks are on another planet in their thinking. Quite to the contrary, I am intrigued by reading about their experiences with an eye towards learning something. Yes hives have other stresses, no doubt, and yes its impossible in many cases to assess the cause of death of a particular hive in some sort of proportional way as to what may have been the culprit or culprits. The main point I am making is that varroa remains the biggest problem that beekeepers face. To assign the cause of death to a hive that freezes in the winter as simply the cold or a hive that had a specific nosema count as death by nosema while overlooking the biggest known stress that hives face as being at least a contributing cause is not being very realistic. I think its fair to even go as far as to say that every hive (at least in countries where mites exist) faces varroa stress to some degree its just a fact of beekeeping.


----------



## Maddox65804 (Dec 29, 2011)

I am not arguing a point. Just trying to raise awareness.


----------



## camero7 (Sep 21, 2009)

Ian said:


> I dont have the facility to test for viral loads, neither does my extensions office. I do however look for evidence of viral infections, visual diagnosis can be done for a few viral infections. Read up on virus in bees and their interaction between the mite, nosema and other viruses.


Dave Wick in MT does this for a reasonable price. I'll be using him again this year. Didn't last year and am seeing some evidence of virus issues. Should have used him.


----------



## Maddox65804 (Dec 29, 2011)

Thanks Jim. No worries here. 

Again, you are right that there are many factors in the collapse of a hive. Mites are not the only thing that cause hives to collapse. And, the causes are often very difficult to sort out - dealing with living organisms is rarely easy. 

I was hoping to encourage folks to look, not just at the mites, but also at these other factors.


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

camero7 said:


> Dave Wick in MT does this for a reasonable price. I'll be using him again this year. Didn't last year and am seeing some evidence of virus issues. Should have used him.


Interesting info to be sure but would it have changed any of your management decisions?


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

SallyD said:


> Can you explain this? What do you do with alcohol for mite counts? I use the sticky board for mite counts.


as was mentioned, it's a better way to calculate % infestation.

i.e. 9 mites washed out of 300 bees = 3% infestation.

(if someone doesn't want to kill bees, powdered sugar can be used instead of alcohol. i choose alcohol so i can have a better comparison to others using alcohol)

what's not clear at this stage of the game is what percent infestation is being tolerated by bees in treatment free operations. i know about my own in the next year or two. in the mean time, i'm hoping i can get some numbers from other treatment free beekeepers. the problem is that many of them don't sample for mites.


----------



## AstroBee (Jan 3, 2003)

camero7 said:


> Dave Wick in MT does this for a reasonable price. I'll be using him again this year. Didn't last year and am seeing some evidence of virus issues. Should have used him.


Not sure I understand how you would proceed differently with significantly positive virus test results. Can you elaborate?


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

Maddox65804 said:


> I was hoping for more than assumptions and "I would bet's" and general re-hashing of well known effects of mites on the hives. I think I was hoping for something that would help determine the differnece between when mites were the major contributing factor or when it was something else. It is a lofty hope.


You don’t think this is a viable answer?



beemandan said:


> And if you are testing, you already know the answer to your original question.


In your measuring to see how each hive performs…so that you can do solid comparisons…what method of varroa testing do you use? And when those hives fail and your refer to your notes…how were their mite loads?


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

camero7 said:


> Dave Wick in MT does this for a reasonable price. I'll be using him again this year. Didn't last year and am seeing some evidence of virus issues. Should have used him.


what would he charge for a single sample? How many of the viruses does he look for?
Does he measure the viral infection on a scale of low to high? Do we know enough about viral infections to be able to measure infection yet?

How is knowing the viral infection within a beekeepers operation going to aid in our mite treatment response?


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

Maddox65804 said:


> Mites are not the only thing that cause hives to collapse. And, the causes are often very difficult to sort out - dealing with living organisms is rarely easy.


I am not sure this is what you are looking for but some hives die from mistakes. Last year when I got flustered pulling frames I got the two queens together in one hive. I am sure that killed the other hive even though they both had mites.


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

jim lyon said:


> Perhaps I am misreading but the tone of the OP seems to be a challenge to prove what he may not accept and that is that varroa kills hives.


I think you are in the right neighborhood with this Jim. I'm thinking that he wasn't really wanting ideas...he wanted to express his opinion. If he were really doing any sort of real queen selecting, he'd know if varroa were killing his colonies.
Oh well...got to run. A beekeeping class a hundred miles away. One of the topics for today I call 'the Dark Side of Beekeeping'. I bet you can guess what that covers.


----------



## Daniel Y (Sep 12, 2011)

jim lyon said:


> Sally: Sticky boards are good and they dont kill bees. You will, however, get a more accurate count (assuming your sampling is consistent) with an alcohol shake or ether roll because you physically dislodge the mites and you are working with a finite number of bees plus you get an immediate on the spot assessment without having to return another day. Sticky board counts will vary with cluster size and how active the bees are.


Alcohol wash gives a more accurate count and mites do kill bees. So spare a cup full of bees and kill a colony.


----------



## wildbranch2007 (Dec 3, 2008)

here is the BVS web site which gives some information, but to get most of the info. you need an id. If I remember correctly they were set up by dr. jerry bromenshank as part of the work he was doing with the army. But what to do when you know you have a virus? I would treat for mites again?

http://www.bvs-inc.us/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=17&Itemid=25


----------



## Daniel Y (Sep 12, 2011)

Ian said:


> Jim, you didnt provide "SPECIFIC CRITERIA/EVIDENCE" in determining your hives died due to mites


Actually he does. Hive losses before and after mites.


----------



## Daniel Y (Sep 12, 2011)

Maddox65804 said:


> The point of this thread is to challenge folks to look beyond mites as the cause of every hive crash. It is just too easy to blame mites and stop looking at the rest of your operation.
> 
> I was hoping some of you would be able to give us some more specific diagnostic tools to help us see that there may be MORE causes to the hive failures than just "mites".
> 
> ...


I see plenty of looking beyond the mite as a problem with bees. It may be you that is fixated on the mite. I see far more winter prep conversations. splitting in the spring conversation. feeding. inspection and many other management issue targeted toward many bee health and colony strength issue. Mite management tends to be a part of most issues as well.

As for other monitoring. In addition to the evidences offered for mite determination in a dead colony. a microscope to monitoring nosema levels and tracheal mite levels. I have not seen anything on monitoring deformed wing virus or any of the other minor diseases of the colony. There area also some fairy well documented techniques for foul brood, chalk brood etc.
Mites get rehashed and will until a solution is found . and that is as it should be.

If it is true that colony can thrive with just an infestation of mites. this would be evidence that it is not the mite that is the problem for the bees. As others have said. the mite may very well be only the carrier of what is fatal to the colony. The presence of the mite is still the cause of the problem. I do agree that at least to some degree more exact and in depth discussion of exactly why the mite is a problem. and that discussion does not necessarily begin with "If the mite is a problem".

I have seen two symptoms among my bees that caused me to be concerned about mite levels.

1. I would from time to time see a few bees, although very few. with deformed wings.
2. far more frequently But still mot a lot, I would see bees unable to fly running across the ground. the impression was that they where being attacked by something and extremely frantic. They would fall over and roll around on the ground then start running again. always directly away from the hive. (Tracheal Mites?)

I have no link to say that either has any connection to mites. I did pull drone brood from it's cell and found a very high mite load. So this confirms that mites can be present in high numbers in an otherwise nearly completely healthy hive.

I do agree on this principal. You cannot keep doing the same thing expecting different results. I believe the results of current methods are well known and almost utterly poorly reported. They are exaggerated in one direction or the other. And even with that very little if any actual documenting or track of of actual results are found.

That results vary widely indicates the problem is far more complex than is currently being looked at. I believe the related factor may span as far as environmental conditions where bees in a drought will be effected more than those on a flow, etc. Humidity may play a part. average temperature. a colder or warmer than normal winter. a hotter or cooler than average summer.

Yet suggest doing one thing different and it is met with venomous rejection. "We are doing it as our forefathers did it". So what your forefathers would be bankrupt and keeping rabbits by now.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

Daniel Y said:


> Yet suggest doing one thing different and it is met with venomous rejection. "We are doing it as our forefathers did it". So what your forefathers would be bankrupt and keeping rabbits by now.


I dont see any of that right now. 
Conventions are full, ideas are being shared, this discussion board is active. 

What is this "old" method of beekeeping people keep referring to


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

Ian said:


> I dont see any of that right now.
> Conventions are full, ideas are being shared, this discussion board is active.
> 
> What is this "old" method of beekeeping people keep referring to


I plan on being at the AHP convention next week to catch up on the latest old stuff. Whatever it takes to avoid "venomous rejection".


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

try to keep a low profile jim :lookout:


----------



## Daniel Y (Sep 12, 2011)

Ian said:


> I dont see any of that right now.
> Conventions are full, ideas are being shared, this discussion board is active.
> 
> What is this "old" method of beekeeping people keep referring to



You keep bees in a hive that was designed well over 100 years ago. made of the same material that it was made of 100 years ago. That alone is just a start.
In comparison how many things that where in use 100 years ago will you still find in use today? Made from the same materials and used for the same purpose? The hive box has not been altered even enough to match today's dimensions in lumber.


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

My house is 125 years old. Still doing what it was designed to do. :digging:


----------



## Daniel Y (Sep 12, 2011)

And it has been upgraded how many times?
So you have no electricity. running water. indoor bathrooms. are still lighting the house with oil lamps. No wall to wall carpeting. No washer no dryer. no kitchen sink. no refrigerator, you still have to jump out of bed int eh morning and light a wood stove and put warm rocks at the foot of your bed to keep from freezing at night? is that what you are saying?

No I think you house is doing a lot better job than it did when it was built.

want to make an attempt at listing advancements in beekeeping.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

Daniel Y said:


> .... and light a wood stove ...


I would bet that 125 years ago Barry's house in _Illinois _was heated with *coal*, not wood.


----------



## beeman2009 (Aug 23, 2012)

And the fact that it's 125 years old and still going no mater how many upgrades still testifies to quality, quality that last! Besides all of the upgrades mentioned were NOT neccesary, only wanted.

BTW, water is still made the same as it was in the beginning, do you refuse to drink it? Sure some treatments have been made to make it safer, or is it?


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>Well, Michael, this is a first. Are you saying that you still have hives that succumb to mites?

No I am not.

> I thought that mite were no longer a problem for you.

They are not. But I always examine any losses looking for causes and before I regressed I lost ALL of them to mites several times.


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

Daniel Y said:


> No I think you house is doing a lot better job than it did when it was built.
> 
> want to make an attempt at listing advancements in beekeeping.


It's still doing the same job. Still keeps one protected from the elements. Still has heat, water, bathroom, as it did 125 years ago. Old stuff gets replaced as it wears out, just like with hives.


----------



## Daniel Y (Sep 12, 2011)

wrong thread


----------



## Maddox65804 (Dec 29, 2011)

Wow, this thread has gone completely off topic – but I guess that is natural. 

Thanks for all the replies. I’ve taken my share of personal attacks here and have gotten several good replies as well. In the end, I don’t think that I managed to get my intention across clearly in the OP because only a few of these replies are addressing the point I thought I was trying to make. My fault. Perhaps I shall try again later.

I appreciate the many folks here who are willing to share their experiences and their wisdom. And I am especially appreciative of those who can have a discussion, even when we don’t agree, without personal attacks.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

Daniel Y said:


> You keep bees in a hive that was designed well over 100 years ago. made of the same material that it was made of 100 years ago. That alone is just a start.
> In comparison how many things that where in use 100 years ago will you still find in use today? Made from the same materials and used for the same purpose? The hive box has not been altered even enough to match today's dimensions in lumber.


Im not following your logic here, alot of how things are done, is basically just because thats how things were initially started. 
Your suggesting changing the dimensions of the equipment will improve our , bee health? or, improve, . . . ?

I know it would totally wipe the slate of what we are doing now, new boxes, new frames, new extracting equipment, . . . 
none of that has anything to do with hive health

Looking at my key board right now, why do they have the keys arranged as they do? Goes back to the typewriter days. To change things over to a more practical key board , would require too much waste in resources to switch over. 
And then there is the argument that this keyboard arrangement is the most efficient way to type.

Daniel, I hope I dont come across the wrong way, you and I are alot alike in our thinking, but we do differ hugely in one aspect of our beliefs. 
I believe agriculture is working and you believe agriculture is broken.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

Jeffery, as far as I can see your thread is completely on topic. 
From what I could gather from your initial post, this is pretty much the discussion you wanted,.?


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

Maddox65804 said:


> I think I was hoping for something that would help determine the differnece between when mites were the major contributing factor or when it was something else. It is a lofty hope.





beemandan said:


> In your measuring to see how each hive performs…so that you can do solid comparisons…what method of varroa testing do you use? And when those hives fail and your refer to your notes…how were their mite loads?


Are you having some difficulty with this Jeffery?
Does it seem like a personal attack when someone points out that you already ought to have the answer to your initial questions right in your own hands?
I think I asked some pretty fundamental questions….and you’ve failed to answer.
I believe that it is Dean (deknow) who likes the term ‘straw man question’…..but in this instance I think this is what we’ve seen.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

it was a good initial question, strawman or not.

these threads do sometimes twist and turn, but in the end it's really good discussion. i am getting a lot of education and enjoyment from all this.

i think part of the difficulty is the forum format, it's not perfect.

we are trying to have a discussion not unlike we would have at a gathering, but the dynamics change with the written word.

not having the luxury of facial expressions and other body language causes the reader to assume the 'tone' of the poster. 

i think i have been misunderstood in that regard once or twice.

on the other hand, maybe this way is safer, and avoids our discussions ending up in a knock down drag out.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

dig dig dig, squarepeg out for the count LOL


----------



## jwbee (Aug 8, 2012)

beemandan said:


> I think you are in the right neighborhood with this Jim. I'm thinking that he wasn't really wanting ideas...he wanted to express his opinion. .


No , I think he was just asking if anyone had some hard data on the death of hives due to mites ,I think it's impossible to say.

If you have some facts danno , share with us.


----------



## Maddox65804 (Dec 29, 2011)

JWBEE is closer than most (Thanks JW). I was looking for hard data and SPECIFIC diagnostic tools, not assumptions even though they are well grounded assumptions.

I didn't start this thread to solve my own problems. There seems to be the impression that I am having problems with mites in MY hives. I'm not. I'm sorry if I didn't make that clear. So insinuating that I should know the answers or questioning my methodologies is not the point.

I was trying to encourage others to look not just at the mites, but at the other factors as well - and it seemed I failed for the most part. Mites are bad, and as Jim Lyon stated early in this discussion, they seriously changed beekeeping. However, they are not the the only cause of hive problems. It seems like many BKs get hung up on mites and don't look past the mites for causes of problems in their hives.


----------



## Maryland Beekeeper (Nov 1, 2012)

has anyone tried an entrance w/ broom ceiling/screen bottom to brush mites off/catch ? 
Cheers,
Drew


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

Maddox65804 said:


> I think I was hoping for something that would help determine the differnece between when mites were the major contributing factor or when it was something else. It is a lofty hope.





Maddox65804 said:


> I was looking for hard data and SPECIFIC diagnostic tools, not assumptions even though they are well grounded assumptions.


It seems to me that you aren’t sure exactly what you want. To answer the first quote…testing will let you know if ‘mites were a major contributing factor’. 
There isn’t any such ‘SPECIFIC diagnostic tool’…and I’m reasonably sure you already knew that….i.e. strawman question. 




Maddox65804 said:


> There seems to be the impression that I am having problems with mites in MY hives. I'm not.


What is evident is that you don’t really know.



Maddox65804 said:


> It seems like many BKs get hung up on mites and don't look past the mites for causes of problems in their hives.


There are also those who are in a state of denial….that unless there is an absolutely SPECIFIC indication that their hives failed from varroa….then it must have been something else.


----------



## Maddox65804 (Dec 29, 2011)

Wow. Don't know what has made "BEEMANDAN" so offensive towards me. Is he always like this?


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

Maddox65804 said:


> Don't know what has made "BEEMANDAN" so offensive towards me.


Jeffery, you must offend pretty easily.
I asked you twice what methods you used to test for mites and how those results coincided with your failed hives. You didn’t reply to either of those.
If you make contradictory statements, if you make claims you can’t support and if you express opinions for which there is an equally good claim on an opposite pole…and when someone challenges you on these…you think it is offensive….all I can say is tough noogies.
Now....go put on your big boy britches.


----------



## Ravenseye (Apr 2, 2006)

Please post more towards the thread title and less towards personal comments.


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

withdrawn voluntarily by poster.


----------



## Davidnewbeeboxbuilder (Oct 6, 2012)

It could be yearly conditions like no late nectar flow in combination with ever one breeding to shut down with out a nectar flow. New viruses spread through like a plague . Queen gets parasited enough that to weak to lay new workers or a queen gets sick and dont lay at all.


----------

