# Confused



## mochilaur (Oct 11, 2011)

So, as a new beekeeper trying to find my way...
Treatment free means NO treatment right? Or does it include powdered sugar shakes and essential oils and such?

Thanks!


----------



## Andrew Dewey (Aug 23, 2005)

While you need to decide for yourself what treatment free means for you, this forum has settled on a definition of treatment free. Under the forum rules powdered sugar shakes and essential oils are treatments.

"The users of this forum have decided to agree on a single definition for "Treatment-Free Beekeeping" for the sake of context in posts and threads in this forum.

*Treatment: A substance introduced by the beekeeper into the hive with the intent of killing, repelling, or inhibiting a pest or disease afflicting the bees.*"

No one is holding a gun to your head to follow this definition. But you should read the sticky post to see what the special forum rules are. http://www.beesource.com/forums/showthread.php?253066-Unique-Forum-Ru


----------



## RiodeLobo (Oct 11, 2010)

Agreed, that is the definition here, but decide for yourself what your management philosophy will be. If you want to be treatment free, be prepared for colonies to fail. It is not as simple as not treating bees, and collecting honey.

I think this is a great thread to read.
http://www.beesource.com/forums/showthread.php?281640-Going-Treatment-Free-step-1


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

As mentioned, the forum definition is for the forum. It is not a national standard or a law or rule or anything. It is for here. If I say I keep bees treatment-free, that means I do not use any of the things listed in the Unique Forum Rules. Many people do dip in to the softer treatments. I on the other hand go the other way. I don't use any of the manipulation or management methods either. That's my definition. It fits the forum definition perfectly but goes beyond it as well.


----------



## zhiv9 (Aug 3, 2012)

RiodeLobo said:


> If you want to be treatment free, be prepared for colonies to fail. I think this is a great thread to read.
> http://www.beesource.com/forums/showthread.php?281640-Going-Treatment-Free-step-1


I really find statements like this frustrating. Replace "treatment free" with "a beekeeper" and this statement is also true. The options aren't:

1) treat and all of your colonies will survive

or

2) don't treat and all of your colonies will die

It would be fair to say that nearly all of the members of my local beekeeping club treat. The club averaged ~50% losses by the April meeting.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

National surveys show that using known varroa control products results only 7 fewer colony losses per 100.

All beekeepers have colonies that fail. The data shows that TF beekeepers lose a few more, but the differences are surprisingly small.


----------



## mochilaur (Oct 11, 2011)

Thanks everyone - wish I had read the rules for the forum first which would have answered my question - but the wisdom of you all is much better anyway .


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

zhiv9 said:


> I really find statements like this frustrating. Replace "treatment free" with "a beekeeper" and this statement is also true. The options aren't:
> 
> 1) treat and all of your colonies will survive
> 
> ...


This is a classic example of a false dichotomy. In my local club, everyone treats. They still had high losses-- some folks lost most of their hives. And that's here in subtropical Florida, where it didn't even freeze this winter.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

It would be much better stated and accurate by removing the word "all".

The idea very commonly passed around is that by treating, you remove the possibility of bees dying of disease. And if you don't treat, your bees will die. The data shows that if you treat, some of your bees will die. If you don't treat, some of your bees will die. If you have a small number of hives, you risk a greater probability that all or most of your bees will die in any single winter.

If you have good genetics, good conditions, and a good beekeeper, chances are very few of your colonies will die.

If you have bad genetics, poor conditions, and a novice beekeeper, the probability increases correspondingly that you will lose hives in substantial proportions. It is for these reasons why I suggest catching local swarms and buying local nucs to start down the good genetics path. Set up your hives and manage in ways that do not frustrate the bees to help with conditions. And I humbly offer my advice and apiaries to anyone who would ask or visit to learn, to help beekeepers get practiced and mature in their skills.

There is no such thing as luck. There is chance and skill. Chance is what happens to you that is out of your control. Skill is how you've prepared and what you do with it. 

In my college days, I said it this way: Chance is the questions on the exam. Skill is the number of answers you have.


----------



## RiodeLobo (Oct 11, 2010)

zhiv9 said:


> I really find statements like this frustrating. Replace "treatment free" with "a beekeeper" and this statement is also true. The options aren't:
> 
> 1) treat and all of your colonies will survive
> 
> ...


Ok, than be frustrated, but your interpretation was not what I intended. I did not say that all of the colonies would fail. I did say that there will be failures. It is common to hear so and so say they have been TX free for X number of years and have lost no colonies. It was certainly the impression I got when first starting out. While that may happen, I think it is the minority.


----------



## zhiv9 (Aug 3, 2012)

RiodeLobo said:


> Ok, than be frustrated, but your interpretation was not what I intended. I did not say that all of the colonies would fail. I did say that there will be failures. It is common to hear so and so say they have been TX free for X number of years and have lost no colonies. It was certainly the impression I got when first starting out. While that may happen, I think it is the minority.


I hear you, but I only see this discouraging sentiment expressed towards people intending to go tx free. It is not expressed in the same way towards other beginners. All beekeepers lose colonies for many reasons.


----------



## RiodeLobo (Oct 11, 2010)

To true, and I do not mean for it to be a discouragement. The issue is getting to a point where you are sustainable, with good beekeeping practices, knowledge and experience, bees that are adapted to your environment and express the traits that you desire. I believe it is more likely for those of us who are treatment free to have more losses before we reach that point.

Personally I am still in this phase. This past winter I lost 7 of my 8 colonies, 5 of which were headed by supposed resistant treatment free queens. This year I am restocking as well as putting out swarm traps (in areas that have never seen hived bees) . I am buying northern queens this year from "resistant" stock, as I know of no local source of bees that are not commercial and wintered in California. We will see.


----------



## btmurph (Aug 7, 2011)

RiodeLobo said:


> ... I know of no local source of bees that are not commercial and wintered in California. We will see.


Boy, you are in EAST Oregon! What about around Boise? That's somewhat close isn't it?


----------



## RiodeLobo (Oct 11, 2010)

About 2 hour drive, and 4 months longer growing season. To the west there are bees to be had, but they also have about 3-4 months longer growing season. Both average 6-9 degrees warmer than here. I do not consider any of them local, it is however where I end up buying my packages and nucs.


----------



## btmurph (Aug 7, 2011)

Ah, interesting how close but so different...


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

RiodeLobo said:


> Ok, than be frustrated, but your interpretation was not what I intended. I did not say that all of the colonies would fail. I did say that there will be failures. It is common to hear so and so say they have been TX free for X number of years and have lost no colonies. It was certainly the impression I got when first starting out. While that may happen, I think it is the minority.


I got an entirely different impression from my reading, but I did a whole lot it. I learned that if I went treatment free, I would very likely lose my initial colonies, especially if my colonies had poor genetics (non-local, treated packages, etc.) If I want to have bees next year, I have to plan for and expect these losses.

I'm planning to make a nuc from my stronger hive soon, and hope to make another from the other before the summer is out. Of course, none of that is a guarantee that I'll have bees next year, but the brood break should help.

There is some unrealistic promotion of treatment free beekeeping, but I suppose there's even more promotion of the idea that if you just follow all the treatment regimens that conventional beekeepers prescribe, your colonies will survive. 

The way I think about it is this: how long can we go on trying to treat the symptoms of unhealthy bees successfully? The treatment free route is not easy, but I see little evidence that the other path is truly sustainable.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>It is common to hear so and so say they have been TX free for X number of years and have lost no colonies. 

That is an interesting perception as I can not remember anyone, treatment free or not, saying they have lost no colonies... unless it's a beginner who hasn't had bees more than a year or so... 

It is important to pay attention to the actual words, and not just your impression of them...


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

I have been treatment free for ten years and I have lost like.......well, I lost 15 in the first five years, lost five in 2009, lost one last winter, one this winter. And despite characterizations of TF beeks, I never bought bees to replace deadouts, only to expand. I never lost all of them at once and I haven't bought any nucs or packages since 2010.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Michael Bush said:


> >It is common to hear so and so say they have been TX free for X number of years and have lost no colonies.
> 
> That is an interesting perception as I can not remember anyone, treatment free or not, saying they have lost no colonies... unless it's a beginner who hasn't had bees more than a year or so...
> 
> It is important to pay attention to the actual words, and not just your impression of them...


Well that impression is given all the time, you sure you guys have really been missing it? Here's a random from couple days ago -



arthur said:


> Since I started in 2007, I never once treated my bees for anything. Helps when you start with stock that isn't treated for mites either (Bee Weaver). Haven't lost a single hive to pestilence. And I don't do small cell either. And I don't do drone frames or anything like that.


The claim that nubees are given the wrong impression is on target.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

But you didn't read the WORD.

"Haven't lost a single hive to pestilence."

They did NOT say they had not lost a hive. They said they had not lost a hive "to pestilence".


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Yeah but you didn't read that was just one random quote within the last couple days. 

The beginner could certainly conclude, just from that post, you won't lose anything to pestilence if you don't treat.

It's about perception. Cos the beginner acts on what he perceives.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

How exactly does "I didn't" translate to "you won't"?

It seems to me that there is a whole lot more "I did and you will."

To think one applies and the other doesn't is naive. What's the saying, "The optimist thinks the future is full of possibilities, the pessimist is always right."

Is there an actual newbee who is making the case that they were deceived or is it just the veterans claiming the newbees are deceived? Because I've seen a whole lot of the latter and very little if any of the former.


----------



## Andrew Dewey (Aug 23, 2005)

Sol - I talked with a bunch (maybe 4) new beekeepers at bee school this year who were bound and determined to keep bees without treatments and were convinced that it would be easy. I broke their bubble telling them about my Russians. I think we are starting to ride a crest of organic & local food production and the new converts don't want to realize or won't hear that it took much work to get where we are now.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

I didn't say anything about "easy."

I would imagine that the easiest thing to do by its very definition is nothing. Doing nothing is easy. Certainly doing nothing is easier than doing something. And doing less is easier than doing more.

A thing can be done easily and still be an abject failure.

Ultimately though, the word I used was 'naive' and I think that is the word that is applicable in the case of these maybe 4 new beekeepers, none of which apparently post on Beesource, which is the context of what we've been talking about.

I've avoided using the word "Acebird" thus far because if one person actually matches these accusations and characteristics, it was him. Fortunately, his approached has softened of late, and that's a good thing.

If these newbees exist and currently post on Beesource, then they haven't been paying attention, and haven't been weighing all evidence. Personally, I do not approach much of anything with such optimism and my backstory and history bears that out. Like you, I have met people out and about who think such things and I don't know of one who still has a living hive. But they didn't post on Beesource and are therefore irrelevant to the accusations made here on the forum about treatment-free proponents.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>The beginner could certainly conclude, just from that post, you won't lose anything to pestilence if you don't treat.

And that would be consistent with my experience. I have lost no bees to Varroa or other pests or other diseases for a decade. I have lost them to starvation and winter and mismanagement (or lack of management) and queenlessness...


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Well there you have it.


----------



## Tango Yankee (Mar 15, 2013)

As a new beekeeper (three whole days now! ) I decided early on that I would go top-bar and treatment free; later I may try Warre and/or Langstroth hives with foundationless frames. I did a lot of reading of books and online and have come to the conclusion that I may or may not lose colonies and the losses may or may not be related to being treatment free. It is my belief from my readings that CCD is probably caused by lots of little things that, taken separately, wouldn't be an issue but piled on one on top of the other and eventually something gives. It probably isn't the same combination of things every time, either. Some I can't exercise any control over.

But some I can, in the sense that I can avoid adding stressors to the colonies in the form of treatments and other things. I'm starting out, quite by accident, with bees that are "treatment free" (though not by the guidelines of this thread--"soft" treatments with essential oils may have been used) raised on small cell and a standard package of bees from Georgia. I don't intend to try to come to any conclusions next year based on which hive survives the winter and which doesn't or if both or neither do. We just like the idea that if we're successful we might be helping to strengthen the genetics of bees in our area.

As for my reaction to those who say that if you don't treat be prepared to lose colonies, that does sound scary but I figure I would need to be prepared to lose colonies either way. 

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## bilder (Oct 7, 2012)

I am wanting to go as natural as possible, but have been debating on if I should go treatment free or use natural treatments on my bees. This thread has been able to clarify a few things for me.

Thanks!


----------

