# Fall Dwindle Report...What Does it Mean to You?



## Mike Gillmore (Feb 25, 2006)

Seems that way to me too. Probably a combination of factors that are stressing the bees and allowing a virus to overtake them in their compromised condition.

But, I'm still waiting to see a lab report that definitively "rules out" Nosema Ceranae.


----------



## BjornBee (Feb 7, 2003)

I think it will be a combination of things also. Discussions have suggested a fungal outbreak, as the main culprit.

What I would like to know is, was the fungal outbreak the cause for the deteriating events, or were they just a side issue and was it impacted due to other circumstances.

Page seven, comments that almost all live samples from colonies still hanging on, had DWV, BQCV, KBV, some had SBV, all had chalkbrood. While previous bee samples tested indicated some of the viral issues are found in a high number of colonies, I think it shows the compounding impact and stresses that the bees are under.

The report started by commenting on pesticide use, stress of migratory operations, the stress of constant splitting, feed, genetics, and other potential areas to consider.

If you look at a colony in the wild, you have....

*Genetic diversity.
*Culling of weak gentics.
*comb replacement as colonies die out.
*limited pesticide impact in the natural world.
*natural swarming.
*supercedure and selection by nature, with traits different then mans selection.
*Geographic seperation of hives
*And others

With beekeepers, we do have/contribute to....

*Weak genetic diversity and large numbers of colonies with the same makeup.
*Limited culling due to beekeepers intervention to save everything.
*No comb replacement. 20-30-40-? year old comb.
*Pesticide and chemical buildup. Much placed by beekeepers.
*We suppress and try to control swarming.
We don't let mother nature select the best traits, we do!
*placement of large colonies side by side.

I look at something as frogs or other insects and know that the balance of what allows them to survive is a very slim line. Some species have been impacted and destroyed by little changes in the enviroment. Just think what we have done over the years to bees...

We have possible selected strains perhaps weakened to survive in todays world. We bombard them with chemical and pesticides, both as beekeepers and unknowing landowners. (I know more residential people use fertilizers and weed controls than were used years ago. My grandmother years ago had 2 controls in her garden.....Manure for fertilizer, and a fence to keep the critters out. Think about gardening today with all the compounds and sprays....)

I look at beekeeping as a huge cooking pot. Inside that pot is a deadly brew of bad breeding, bad management, pesticides and chemical, introduction of foriegn pests and deseases, and about everything else bad you could think of. Much of this is compounded and magnified by commercial operations, not always by choice, but sometimes by necessity.

How many of these affected operations change brood comb regularly? It has been shown to suppress and elimnate AFB. We know it is a good way to healthier bees. Fungal issues would no doubt be helped. But who really does this? I see comb in some hives older than me.

We are our own worst enemy. This cesspool pot that we call beekeeping will sometimes bubble over, and raise a few smelly air bubbles up. What do we really expect? For this to not happen? Thats like waiting for someone to pinpoint the problem, and tell you what chemical to place into the hives next, so this nasty little die-off will not happen again....Yeah right! Good luck waiting.

 Ok, I'm done for now. Thought I'd get this thread moving....

I sometimes do wish it could be some easily identified item to solve such problems in the industry. Some chemical, some one time fungus or virus easily controlled, with a one step application of some treatment. This is what we have been accustomed too. I just don't see that happening.

The report goes in so many directions. I hope they can focus it down to something to answer questions. My take on this will be, that the final report will suggest overall things to consider, things that may of contributed, and no pinpointed clear answer to be found.

Its too early, and until the final report published, we can only read into it, speculate, and digest the pieces as they come forward. 

Thank you for reading.....


----------



## Barry Digman (May 21, 2003)

> Inside that pot is a deadly brew of bad breeding, bad management, pesticides and chemical, introduction of foriegn pests and deseases, and about everything else bad you could think of.


The report did seem to emphasize stress, moving colonies, continuous splitting, and reusing old brood comb. It didn't suggest much about the timing of this rash of losses, if indeed it is a sudden phenomenon. Seems like the commercial guys have operated the same for a long time, yet all of a sudden these big losses are popping up. 

BTW, where does the Univ. of Montana fit in to this? I thought they were taking the point in this investigation, but the Pennsylvania folks seem to be out front.

[ January 10, 2007, 07:54 AM: Message edited by: coyote ]


----------



## BjornBee (Feb 7, 2003)

Coyote,
I admit that commercial beekeeeping has been around a long time. But think of the pot. You add a few more ingredients every year. A virus here, another years aging of comb, a new pesticide there, and at what point does the camels back get broken? When dealing with old comb, you can't say "thats the same old comb we use every year" without realizing that its the acumulative process involved. 

I would also say, that losses on this scale have popped up over the years. Its not like this has never been seen before.


----------



## Aspera (Aug 1, 2005)

The "big" stresses such as lack of brood comb culling, migrating, and overforaging seem to invite the little ones....pesticides, diseases and poor genetics. I wonder what the next big challenge will be for migratory beeks? I'm geussing that it will be hives from Mexico, complete with a whole new genetic lineage.


----------



## Kieck (Dec 2, 2005)

"If you look at a colony in the wild, you have....

*Genetic diversity. . . .

With beekeepers, we do have/contribute to....

*Weak genetic diversity and large numbers of colonies with the same makeup. . . ." -BjornBee

Where does the genetic diversity in "wild" colonies come from?

"If you look at a colony in the wild, you have. . .

*limited pesticide impact in the natural world. . . ." -BjornBee

OK, so fluvalinate or coumaphos in the "natural" world might not be as concentrated as it is in managed colonies, but other pesticides come into play, I believe. Ever been out in agricultural areas? Ever asked farmers what pesticides they use on their crops? How about homeowners? Ever see what nasty chemicals homeowners throw around to kill a few "bugs?" And what about golf courses? Golf courses use more pesticides and herbicides per acre than almost any other operation.

All of those things wind up everywhere. DDT shows up in polar bears, yet DDT wasn't used where the polar bears live.

All of our bees end up wandering around, picking up contaminants from wherever the bees travel. I certainly can't control my bees to prevent them from foraging in areas that have been sprayed. And even if I could, the residues drift in the wind and move through ground water, and so on.

Overall, I think you're on the right track, Bjorn. I just had to take exception to a couple of your items.


----------



## Barry Digman (May 21, 2003)

"But think of the pot."

I think you're right on target. Does this suggest that there's an economic threshold beyond which the amassing of thousands of hives in a concentrated location combined with moving, medicating, splitting, and practices such as reusing old comb creates a problem? I guess time will tell, but it seems like the accumulative process idea might well be a critical component of this.


----------



## BjornBee (Feb 7, 2003)

Kieck, the nature versus kept hives when talking about pesticides and chemicals is not black and white. Certainly, these other factors impact hives. Golf courses, backyard gardening (I used this as an example already) farming operations, etc. If you understand the impact to nature as a whole when it comes to the daily contacts with man's pollution and chemical tainting of the enviroment, and take that same concept to bees, and just multiply it many times over, by acknowledging the additional chemical and pesticides, then the bees are at a place way down the road in being unhealthy as compared to other insects and creatures in the wild.

Of course even if we keep chem free hives, they will be impacted from the envoroment and the surrounding area. I just think that this is minimal, as compared to the stuff we place in our hives as an industry, and man's introduced problems. We just commpound the problem many times over.

I think for the average beekeeper with a couple hives, it may not be every clear when talking about chems on a commercial basis. I have inspected a number of operations in issueing the needed permits for traveling out of state. It amazes me the amount of treatments they required to maintain and get the hives ready for shipment. This is one reason I have yet to ship bees west.

Aside from pesicides and chems, this is but one of the items in the "pot". I think there are several factors that allow a fungus or viral breakout from time to time.

I wonder if we kept frogs, slugs, earthworms, or about any other insect, with the same criteria we keep bees (chemical treatments, introducing parasites, etc.)....if they would be any better off. I think the bees have been very resiliant and adaptable. But my thoughts are that they have a break point. If you think about it, we ask alot from the bees. And we ignore many of the known factors that could contribute to a healthier industry.

I will back off now. I really want to hear others intake and perspective of what the report suggest so far.


----------



## naturebee (Dec 25, 2004)

*Genetic diversity. . . .
*With beekeepers, we do have/contribute to.(K)

Not much! The contribution here IMO is very small, and concentrated mostly in farming areas. Woodlands here in PA along the Appalachian ridge and several other smaller folds contain vast areas where no domestic colonies exist. And much of PA contains large patches of woodlands which provode perfect habatat for feral honeybees.

Remember the number of domestic colonies in PA comes out to less than 2 colonies per square mile. Some estimates place feral populations at up to 20 colonies per mile.

*Where does the genetic diversity in "wild" colonies come from?-(K)

From over 200 years with hundreds of thousands of feral bees living throughout Pennsylvania.


----------



## BjornBee (Feb 7, 2003)

Exactly Joe.

My comments were more in line that in nature, genetics are spread or diversified by breeding, natuiral culling, and other factors. If you took sample from 100 feral hives hives, the genetic makeup would be vastly different.

I was mainly comparing this to large yards where each colony is headed by the same genetics, due to large scale requeening and purchasing vast numbers of daughters from the same breeder/queen.

You would never see such a scenario in nature. It has vast consequences for the elimination of large populations when desease outbreaks.

Nature has a vast genetic variation for survival reasons. We seem to limit this in our larger operations.


----------



## Kieck (Dec 2, 2005)

Bjorn:

I understand where you're coming from with your comments about pesticides. Your initial comments about keeping frogs was what really made me think. Do you remember reading about school kids finding deformed frogs in Minnesota a few years ago? Turns out, herbicide and pesticide contamination of wetlands has been linked to those deformities in frogs.

So, I think the chemicals in the environment (and not just in the hive) add stress to the bees. I've done commercial applications of pesticides; in spraying insecticide trials, we always consider the pyrethroids to be some of the least dangerous insecticides to handle. Fluvalinate is a pyrethroid. Maybe pyrethroids aren't any less dangerous that some of the others, but what if a small amount of, say, methyl parathion that bees encounter regularly in fields causes more problems than a larger amount of fluvalinate?

Either way, both cause stress on colonies. I still think you're on the right track -- start with stressed colonies, add a new stress or disease or whatever, and that new element might be the straw that breaks the camel's back.

Joe:

Sure, over 200 years of feral bees living in Pennsylvania, but where did those bees come from? And you've reported that all the "ferals" you find look and behave remarkably similarly -- that suggests that the genetic diversity might be low among the "ferals."

I still can't fathom up to 20 colonies of feral bees per square mile -- I'm not denying it, just saying that I can't fathom it. I've been in many areas more favorable for establishing colonies than South Dakota (where, I'll say with confidence, we don't have 20 "feral" colonies per square mile -- I doubt the average would be as high as 0.1 colonies per square mile in SD), and I've only occasionally encountered unmanaged colonies.


----------



## Keith Jarrett (Dec 10, 2006)

Well, I guess I'm one who has a different view than Bjorn,

My bees are stronger than ever, averaging twenty plus on most of them and I'm not talking about twenty hives in my backyard.

Do I treat for mites, YES
Do I feed a lot, YES.
Do I move to better areas in the summer, YES.
Do I cull a lot, YES.
Do I cross with different queens so to limit inbreeding, YES.
Do I have swarming problems in March, YES.
Do I gross over $250, YES

Can someone tell me why the train doesn't run out of tract? I hear all this doom and gloom, the answers on the other side are pretty weak.Across the ocean the keepers have been doing this alot longer with good results. So I question those that put up these weak senereos.

Keith Jarrett


----------



## Kieck (Dec 2, 2005)

Good for you, Keith!

You've never had a larger-than-normal die-off that you couldn't explain, I'm assuming.

How about the report? BjornBee started his post with the same points listed in the report by the "pros."

Do you have any ideas on the cause of this "fall-dwindle?"


----------



## BjornBee (Feb 7, 2003)

Kieth, what part do you disagree? Sounds like your doing some things very good.

Its not an all or a nothing thing. Its not like everyone will have losses at the same time. Sure some will experience losses, and next year it may be someone else.

If you Kieth, feel that the industry is exactly where it should be, then good for you. I personally do not. The loss of colonies every year, the resistance of treatments we do have, an industry that is operating on slim margins for pollination, and many other factors, make this an industry that could hardly be called healthy, thriving, or "on track".

I also kieth, have a deadout rate this year of less than 1%, make money, and generally have a good view of my operation. My own operation hits 6 out of 7, of the points you listed. (I don't treat) So should I ignore obvious problems within the industry?

I think few people could agree that the industry is healthy, void of obvious problems. I do try to be as positive as possible, and make it a daily task. I think discussing problems within the industry, even if you see none yourself, is a little off from what you call "doom and gloom". (If you think there are no end results, no consequences of our actions, then I will assume that you assume no problems exist. Afterall, why change anything, when everything is all roses.)

I persoanlly have seen some of the colonies of those mentioned as losing these hives. I have seen how old the comb is, I have seen the treatments, and I have seen what they put thier bees through. I would think they are a little different from the practice and management you have noted above in your operation.

If you had 1600 colonies, and have 9 left.....isn't that like saying the train has run out of track? I just don't think we all are on the same track. We all have tracks, just going at different speeds, different directions, and some actually are laying tracks ahead, keeping the train running further than the next.......


----------



## Keith Jarrett (Dec 10, 2006)

Kieck,

Right now I'm running a 4% winter loss on my own bees (1300).
On the bees I take from N.Dakota, there running about 20%.
The only different is ,I got the bees from N.D in about Nov,1 this year, so I started putting pollen on then. There was little brood and alot of old bees. If I can get pollen on them early my winter loss is minimal.

Keith Jarrett


----------



## Kieck (Dec 2, 2005)

You have "winter" in California?!?  

Of course, this "fall-dwindle" that's being investigated had pretty well happened before you even got the bees from ND, Keith. It doesn't sound like typical winter kill to me, but I don't have any original ideas as to what might be happening to those colonies that have dwindled away, either.

It also sounds to me like those colonies you received from ND are experiencing much more stress than your own bees -- the loss rate is much higher, and you've had to interrupt their plans because they've been moved. By Nov. 1, my bees had no (or very little) brood, the bees were all at least a month old, and they weren't bringing in pollen, either. I didn't give them pollen in Nov., and they're doing fine.

We're not really having "winter" here this year, either, though.


----------



## Keith Jarrett (Dec 10, 2006)

Bjorn,

I think the points you mention are the "differance" between keepers.

I know some down south where laughing about how much pollen I was putting on(ABJ), those same keepers are not laughing now.

I think alot of keepers are flat out lazy, in fact I know they are. Some here haven't look at there bees in two months.

Is the bee business good,?????? well $150 almonds,$80 for bulk bees, thats $230 x 1500= $345,000.00 by May first, ya, the bee business is doomed.

Keith Jarrett


----------



## Keith Jarrett (Dec 10, 2006)

Kieck , wrote you have winter in C.A,

this coming weeks weather where I'm at Lows 20s highs 47

There are plenty that cant keep them alive here too.

Keith Jarrett


----------



## BjornBee (Feb 7, 2003)

Keith, First you used the term "doom and gloom" to characterize another persons views and opinions, and now while inflating your ego, you suggest someone has said the industry is 'doomed'. Before you make any more assumptions while discussing your personal finances, can you tell me who said the industry is doomed?

Persoanlly, I think pollination fees and bulk bee rates are reflections of the market, both good and bad. Hardly a barometer of the health of the bussiness unto itself.


----------



## Keith Jarrett (Dec 10, 2006)

Bjorn wrote,

"I look at beekeeping as a huge cooking pot.
Inside that pot is a deadly brew of bad breeding" ect...

Bjorn, thats doom and gloom

Bjorn also wrote;
"An industry that is operating on slim margins for pollination ,make this an industry that could hardly be called heathy".

I outlined my income to may 1, just as an example, NOT ego.

You flip flop on pollination,( slim margin) TO (hardly a barometer of heath of the business).

Which is it.

Keith Jarrett


----------



## BjornBee (Feb 7, 2003)

Missed the point there Kieth. 

Under your outlook, one could conclude that as beekeepers get out of the business for a vast array of reasons, that pollination fees and bulk bee prices would go up. You equate this into some personal view that the industry is just fine and dandy. I guess my outlook and view goes beyond thinking that, and that my prices that I charge, are are reflection of quality and service, with perhaps supply and demand coming into play.

But I would never equate the health of the industry based on an increased need, impacted by problems within the industry, and thus becuase the prices I charge go up, equating that to a healthy industry.

Certainly as shortages and demand increase, money will be made. I am a business person. However this discussion was based on real problems in the industry. Something not to be dismissed or swept under the rug becuase of your ethusiasm of higher profits. I can make money, acknowledge industry problems, and strive to do things better. They can be discussed on seperate levels. 

Perhaps your excitement at your profit margin, could be best discussed on another thread. I am sure those experiencing real problems in the industry, could possible see your view as a thriving industry differently. I know that as people fail, and demand for my product goes up, I would not view that as something to be concieved as industry health. But thats just me.

[ January 10, 2007, 11:05 AM: Message edited by: BjornBee ]


----------



## Keith Jarrett (Dec 10, 2006)

Bjorn,

Not to beat up this subject but,

I think we agree alot, I think who has to change is the keeper. Some I know seem to refuse to change with the times.

Beekeeping is changing at wharp speed right now, excitement of profits is a result of a ton of work. Not long ago I didn't have to spend that kind of dedication to them, but in todays environment you must.

I don't sit around an whine and complain much, I look for future answers to all these problems. Many keepers don't want to put out much effort, they would rather ask other keepers what they are doing.

Keith Jarrett


----------



## naturebee (Dec 25, 2004)

--Sure, over 200 years of feral bees living in Pennsylvania, but where did those bees come from?--(Kieck)

The majority of these bees probably comprised of escaped domestics from the 1700 and 1800s having been hundred years of born and raised in the north to become established. Remember now, the transporting of non acclimated southern stock did not begin in earnest till late 1800s or early 1900s and grafting in the late 1800s also.

--And you've reported that all the "ferals" you find look and behave remarkably similarly -- that suggests that the genetic diversity might be low among the "ferals."--(Kieck)

Not necessarily, Carnelians looks and act similar, Italians look and act similar, and AHB look and act similar. This does not in any way suggests inbreeding, but instead traits associated with a race of bee, or traits selected in a breeding population in response to pressures. From catching so many ferals over a vast area, I am seeing traits in populations of ferals that are sometimes associated with feral honeybees found in one micro habitat and not the other. Last year. In fact, when I placed traps in areas where I have trapped and assessed ferals from before, I accurately predicted what traits I would find in ferals captured from these areas that are of particular interest. 

--I still can't fathom up to 20 colonies of feral bees per square mile I'm not denying it, just saying that I can't fathom it. I've been in many areas more favorable for establishing colonies than South Dakota (where, I'll say with confidence, we don't have 20 "feral" colonies per square mile -- 

Populations of honeybees are habitat dependant, and highly dependant on adequate voids of acceptable size. Here in Pennsylvania there are abundant voids in old growth trees, silos, farmhouses and old structures providing many sites to choose from. Seeley reported in his swarm study that swarms often danced for over 40 distinct nest sites, so adequate voids are present here in this region. Bee Culture recommends to choose apiary sites that can support at least 40 domestic colonies, and here in PA most recommendations are that a bee yard will support about 30 colonies. So being that adequate voids are present here in PA, and knowing that feral colonies are often 1/3 the size of a domestic colonies, it is highly plausible that the estimate of 10 to 20 feral colonies per square mile is a fair estimate, and that 10 to 20 ferals per square mile may be levying in this great bee habitat found here in the state of Pennsylvania. 

A relative of mine complained no honeybees were found in his area, and he never sees any bees. I went over and beelined two feral colonies on his 3 acre lot. One colony was found to be in the tree right out side his front door!

There are many more ferals existing than we think. Ever hear that saying, If a honeybee colony swarms and nobody sees it swarm, did it really swarm?


----------



## Michael Palmer (Dec 29, 2006)

>The majority of these bees probably comprised of escaped domestics from the 1700 and 1800s having been hundred years of born and raised in the north to become established. Remember now, the transporting of non acclimated southern stock did not begin in earnest till late 1800s 

Aren't you assuming an awful lot? Like...the bees that inhabited the forests of PA now are the same bees, genetically, that inhabited the forests in the 1700's and 1800's. Could they really have remained the same genetically over all that time, and not been effected by a constant influx of swarms? I mean, how did they get there in the first place? Swarms, wasn't it?

And, is there really any difference in breeding from feral colonies, and selecting stock from survivors? Isn't it really the same thing?


----------



## naturebee (Dec 25, 2004)

---Aren't you assuming an awful lot? Like...the bees that inhabited the forests of PA now are the same bees, genetically, that inhabited the forests in the 1700's and 1800's. Could they really have remained the same genetically over all that time, and not been effected by a constant influx of swarms? I mean, how did they get there in the first place? Swarms, wasn't it?--M. Palmer)

Hello Michael!

Yes, and maybe over 200 years they can still remain separate. Researchers have found in genetic of feral honeybees that "37% were descendants of a race (A. m. mellifera L.) that was imported between 1620 and the 1860s" And this seperation in spite of the south being a HUGE bee breeding zone! 

The ferals, having gone feral a hundred or more years ago have remained genetically differentiated from the commercial lines of today. There is restrictive gene flow between ferals and commercial honeybees, keeping them distinct from each other. I have supporting references from researchers that has found ferals are significantly different from commercial lines, (below are some supporting references):

Schiff & Sheppard (1995) report that "commercial 
bees...[are] significantly different than the feral population of the 
southern United States, where 36.7% of 692 feral colonies had the A.m. mellifera/iberica haplotype (Schiff et al. 1994). The lack of A.m. mellifera[/iberica] haplotypes in the commercial population is indicative of restricted gene flow between feral and commercial populations. 

Daly, H. V. et al. (1991): "Feral honey bees in California are mongrel populations, partially differentiated in 
morphometrics from managed colonies as well as from European 
subspecies...The geographic variation is presumably adaptive...[and] points to an underlying genetic differentiation among feral populations in California." ["Clinal geographic variation in feral honey bees in 
California, USA"; Apidologie 22:591-609. 

A preliminary analysis by Mozer, T. (2002) of Florida "ferals" found in the vicinity of ports-of-entry points to similarities in reports of the survival of feral bees with "non-commercial" lineage, suggesting naturalized "New World" ecotypes that are conceivably descendants of the earliest introductions. ["Observations on feral honey bees in Florida, USA"; 

--And, is there really any difference in breeding from feral colonies, and selecting stock from survivors? Isn't it really the same thing?--M, Palmer)

IMO yes there is a tremendous difference! 
There are two distinct paths to varroa resistance that I have observed in commercial lines and ferals. One path is to lower fecundity which suppresses varroa production. This is the observation made by many beekeepers when complaining about the poor brood patterns exhibited in survivor stock. The likely cause here is that commercial lines are selected for traits of economic value and therefore have little survival traits to draw resistance from thru selection.

Ferals do not need to lower fecundity to control varroa and tend to suppress varroa by utilizing adapted traits that were developed from many years of natural selective pressures. Therefore, lower fecundity is not needed to control mites and the ferals will thrive aided by the increased fecundity.

From my observations, Ferals are not what I call survivors. Survivors are surviving, surviving by NO means is thriving. Ferals have the traits needed to thrive, out competing those only just surviving

[ January 10, 2007, 03:17 PM: Message edited by: Pcolar ]


----------



## naturebee (Dec 25, 2004)

Here's an intresting quote to show how genetic flow can be restrictive between populations of honeybees for a hundred years. In spite of being in the honeybee breeding south.

"37% were descendants of a race (A. m. mellifera L.) that was imported between 1620 and the 1860s"

http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=3329316

Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) and allozyme analyses of 692 feral honey bee, Apis mellifera L., colonies revealed significant genetic population structure (heterogeneity) in the southern tier of the United States. Analysis of mtDNA haplotypes showed that 61% of the colonies were maternal descendants of the European races most commonly used for commercial beekeeping and 37% were descendants of a race (A. m. mellifera L.) that was imported between 1620 and the 1860s, but is no longer used commercially. Twelve colonies from five states exhibited an African haplotype associated with the race A. m. lamarckii ****erell introduced from Egypt > 100 yr ago. Several electrophoretic alleles not previously reported from U.S. populations were detected, and malate dehydrogenase allele frequencies for the 692 colonies were determined to be Mdh[65] = 0.47, Mdh[80] = 0.33, and Mdh[100] = 0.20


----------



## kensfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

"What does it mean?"

That migratory pollination w/ honey bees is a "buffet" for the exchange of desease & virus's & mites. 

You might have had only one problem when you got there.. but you left w/ a sample of everyone's problems. 

Might be some logic to killing all the bee's after pollination.. instead of spreading it throughout the U.S. on the return trip home from CA to Fl.

Look at what happened on the Eastern Shore of Maryland w/ the chicken industry & bird flu. They shut down MD borders.. no fairs.. no shows.. no sales.. then made it a law for mandatory registration of all types of birds in MD.. backyard flocks included. 

Why.. not because they are worried about my health from the dozen chickens I own.. but to protect the $ of the big industry companies.. and to have an efficient culling list on hand.. if/when bird flu is found.


----------



## George Fergusson (May 19, 2005)

A quickly moving thread. Nice. Has everyone's attention. Nice.

>The report goes in so many directions. I hope they can focus it down to something to answer questions.

It's clear from the initial report that they started out taking a bird's eye view of this problem, which is a good thing. Focusing too early or concentrating on a hunch (or pet agenda) is a good way to reach a dead end in a hurry. They're clearly leaving no stone unturned. Top-down. I wouldn't want their research into this problem to proceed any other way.

>The report did seem to emphasize stress... It didn't suggest much about the timing of this rash of losses, if indeed it is a sudden phenomenon.

I got that too coyote. I think this train of thought gives credence to Joe's "fitness" theory which to be honest, I didn't give much stock at first. I still think it's more than just a matter of fitness and foraging success, but clearly, fitness is compromised, stress is added in, then something bad happens.

>I would also say, that losses on this scale have popped up over the years. Its not like this has never been seen before.

Yes!! This is not to say that this current situation is "the same" as what's happened in the past, but it's possible, even likely that there are many common factors. It appears we've been setting ourselves up for this for a long time.

>Across the ocean the keepers have been doing this alot longer with good results.

Some of the most devastating colony losses in recent years have been in Europe. They're in no better shape than we are, it appears.

I guess I'll go read the report again.


----------



## Joel (Mar 3, 2005)

I read this report at 0600 over some Coffee and decided to digest throughout the day and then respond. (Thanks Joe W for sending it along) 

1st. Thanks and Kudo's to Dennis V and the Crew. To have gotten this type of helpful information gathered, examined and out in a usable form in this time frame is nothing shy of a small miracle. I hope Bjorn and Joe pass that along. I will be sending Dennis an apology for a previous disagreement relating to his Cornell time, obviously I misread action there as his responsiblitiy and now can see I was clearly wrong. Exceptional effort and Job, we all owe them a great deal of thanks!

I think the conclusion, even though not conclusive comes around to a very basic principle that Bjorn and I have both posted here before that I think sets the stage for everything we do from here and for me uncomplicates the issues.

Dr. Shiminoko (formerly of Belstsville Bee Lab) based his lectures on bee health on the concept that Bees are not surving individuals but acutally an organism (like a human body) as an entire colony that lives, thrives, suffers or succumbs as whole. He taught that virtually every colony, as in the human body, is a host for all those parasites, fungus, bacteria and viruses that have the ability to destroy the organism (colony) if they are allowed to reach a point where the organism no longer is able to employ the defense mechanisms such as hygenics and most of the other eusocial behaviors required to make and keep a strong healthy hive.

A couple of things the report said to me:

1) It's not the Aussie Bees. Although they are in the thread the queen sources came from a wide variety of the usual locations including Hawaii which is isolated from much of the difficulties we see on the mainland.(this could in intself be a weakness). I don't consider the Aussie bees have been here long enough and in quanitity to have this much wide spread impact this fast.

2) It's not pesticide (as a fundamental cause)as the pestide mentioned also has not been on the market for a long time and does not explain the organic issues found (except possibly as a contributing factor.)

3)A rather wide variety of chronic organic related issues were identified and one acute which appear to have been compounded by environmental stresses such as migration and a poor season complicated by crowding which is a common practice in migratory operations.

4) Old comb jumped out at me as a factor. I have seen this statement before regarding the effectiveness of small cell related to a clean brood nest and general practices to rotate old disease, pesticide harboring combs out.

5) This may be a temporary outbreak caused by all the factors discussed coming together for a bad year or we may be importing alot more honey bees if there is any hope of the industry surviving.

What to do???

It seems to me, with the limited information it;s all about getting back to some basic beekeeping practices but in a manic kind of way. Here's my plan for the coming season

1) #1 Focus will be to begin the season with strong hives. Strong well fed populous hives give me the best chance of fighting off the variety of invaders. Weak hives will be combined well before the start of the season and monitored closely to guage progress. 

2) Struggling hives will monitored and requeend quickly with a pinch. 

3) I will be quick to isolate and move hives that either stuggle or show any uncommon symptoms of combined organic factors. 

4) I will be certain all the hives are well ventilated by providing upper entrances for good air flow.

5)Keep smaller yards, put some distance between them and any known outyards, mine or anyone elses.
If I do get the "bug" at least I may minimize my losses.

6)I will provide preventative treatments for mites (trachael and varroa), AFB and even Nosema which I haven't done for years. This will eliminate as many of the stress factors as possible and allow the organism to gain strength to survive on it's own.

7) Continue to intermix stock and continue to work on my own stock to give me the best genetics I can while working within the commericial market that has and will continue to provide the queens I need to succeed every year

8) We have replaced 60% of our combs in the last 3 years and will continue aggressively.

I'm sure I've overlooked something but know we have enough talent here to fill any blanks.

My Goals, like Keith and others will be to continue to surive and move forward in a difficult industry. I also will not be a victim to the gloom and doom of how terrible we are doing by reasonable treatments. The totally natural voice at this point is at that 2% level. That does not make it invalid, only impractical at this point. I don't have the luxury of running an experiment in my back yard, my family lives and eats on a large part because of the success or failure of my bees (1/2 our gross income). 

I know some will bemoan the evils of the treatment. I applaud those efforts and will continue in that direction. The reality is nature has never had a society of any specices kept outside the natural paramenters that has survived without the checks and balances of the natural world which are disease, parasites and the competition for space. It's hard to argue with a couple hundred million years of life on this planet where 99% of all species ever found are now extinct because they could not survive in the natural world. 

In 2007 I want to be a survivor.

[ January 10, 2007, 06:47 PM: Message edited by: Joel ]


----------



## Jeffzhear (Dec 2, 2006)

Joe, Thanks for the copy of the report that you sent me. I enjoyed reading it the first time. I look forward to re-reading it and digesting the data even more. A few initial thoughts come to mind, the first being my realization of how little I know and how much there is to learn. I was thinking to myself how I would love to be in the shoes of my eldest son, a freshman at Penn State, because I know I would be majoring in Forest Biology and Entomology, with an emphasis on the EHB. 

As future revisions of the report are made available, I would appreciate the opportunity to read those also.

And, to Joel, thanks for posting your "What to do" items. While I hadn't written mine down, many of your items I had planned to incorporate into my everyday beekeeping practices. Others I will give serious consideration to. 

One thing for sure, I will keep clean yards, isolate them from other yards as best as I can, watch them closely and react accordingly.


----------



## tecumseh (Apr 26, 2005)

darn pcolar where did you hook up with that frenchy address. woowee...

then pcolar sezs:
This is the observation made by many beekeepers when complaining about the poor brood patterns exhibited in survivor stock. The likely cause here is that commercial lines are selected for traits of economic value and therefore have little survival traits to draw resistance from thru selection.

tecumseh replies:
this could also be, not a question of the queen's egg laying ability, but also might suggest the display of hygenic behavior.

my brother george adds:
The report did seem to emphasize stress... It didn't suggest much about the timing of this rash of losses, if indeed it is a sudden phenomenon.


tecumseh adds:
physiological stress (well at least I am certain I spell it wrong)... quite common in the animal husbandry trades... it seems to me 'shipping sickness' (cattle) was though to be of this nature.

I guess the idea is that the host lives fairly well (likely does not proper) with any number of parasite/organisms.. but when stressed by being first worked, then loaded onto trucks and then moved some distance the animals would display signs of sickness and fever.

sounds like joel has a plan.


----------



## Keith Jarrett (Dec 10, 2006)

Tecumseh wrote; "sounds like Joel has a plan"

Sounds like full steam ahead, positive outlook ,the best is yet to be.

Joel, anything I can do to help, feel free to give me a shout.

Keith Jarrett


----------



## naturebee (Dec 25, 2004)

--Dr. Shiminoko (formerly of Belstsville Bee Lab) based his lectures on bee health on the concept that Bees are not surving individuals but acutally an organism (like a human body) as an entire colony that lives, thrives, suffers or succumbs as whole.--(Joel)

Great quote!
Similar to one of my favorite quotes from Brother Adam:


In the case of the honeybee however the breeder is confronted not with isolated individuals but with a society, or to put it more scientifically, with a superorganism, an extraordinarily well regulated and well ordered system and a structure whose individual parts operate in perfect harmony. Moreover this social organism is in itself immortal, by which I mean that a colony of bees never dies of old age but only because of some misadventure due to external causes. (Brother Adam)


----------



## Mike Gillmore (Feb 25, 2006)

Joel, 
You have a wonderful action plan outlined above. The steps listed will cost the beekeeper very little in time and expense but has a positive impact on the colonies well being. But I do wonder about #6.

>> 6)I will provide preventative treatments for mites (trachael and varroa), AFB and even Nosema which I haven't done for years. This will eliminate as many of the stress factors as possible and allow the organism to gain strength to survive on it's own.

I want to preface this by stating that I am not against the use of treatments. I hope to one day be in a position with my colonies that treatments are not necessary... but until then I'll sustain them with the lowest impact treatments possible.

I am just wondering if there have been any studies done that measure the negative impact that treatments have on the bees... including shortening of lifespan, colony disruption, physical damage to the bees. 

If we treat preventativly for symptoms that are not clearly evident, are we adding more stress to the colony than if we did not treat at all?

If symptoms are being displayed, then there is no choice. But treating prophylactically... could that be adding stress unnecessarily?

Not trying to be a pain...just wondering









[ January 11, 2007, 05:16 PM: Message edited by: Mike Gillmore ]


----------



## Joel (Mar 3, 2005)

The inevitiablity of disease in any overpopulated society of species (every yard with 3 hives or more) to me makes the value of well timed and applied, as low impact as possible treatments the right choice. This is even more prudent in the light there is a potential bubonic bee plague lurking out there. Each of us will have to make choices that will shape our place, or lack there of, in a rapidly changing industry. Both Dr. Shiminoko and Dr. Delaplane are propronents of preventative treatments as the standard after years of research. I know the years when my mangement, including treatments, is textbook, have been my best years. In 2007 I think I need to be textbook plus.
I have to trust that their recommendations, especially with and industry where it is today, will give me the best balance.


----------



## naturebee (Dec 25, 2004)

>> 6)I will provide preventative treatments for mites (trachael and varroa), AFB and even Nosema which I haven't done for years. This will eliminate as many of the stress factors as possible and allow the organism to gain strength to survive on it's own.--<<

How I eliminate stress factors it to keep bees that can deal with the stress. I have no problem in my colonies with TM and varroa, and have no need to take action against them. Colonies with AFB get eliminated, colonies with nosema get eliminated or sometimes get a reprieve with a warning, one more screw up and your gone!.


----------



## naturebee (Dec 25, 2004)

Is there something in the report about seeing crystalline arrays on some slides, or gut abnormalties?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxalic_acid

"Thus, oxalic acid also combines with metals such as calcium, iron, sodium, magnesium, and potassium in the body to form crystals of the corresponding oxalates, which irritate the gut and kidneys. Because it binds vital nutrients such as calcium, long-term consumption of foods high in oxalic acid can lead to nutrient deficiencies."


----------

