I Don't Treat! I Don't Treat!!! [Archive] - Beesource Beekeeping Forums

BjornBee

10-18-2008, 09:59 PM

Not sure if the thumbs down is about the swarm, or those who do not treat, or are you giving yourself the thumbs down? :s

Your asking who would be proud to have a hive like this, so apparently they could claim they do not treat. :s

I do not treat. Of course, I do not expect the same results and expectations from swarms I caught. I evaluate them, and if they are not up to par, they get requeened. Perhaps you should consider requeening with better stock, instead of just applying treatments to slap a band-aid on the problem. Obviously, those bees are good at breeding mites. Some of the best I've seen in a awhile. ;) So what will change after the treatment if you keep the same queen and genetics? And how will that equate into production or health come spring?

And for those who would like to stop on by this coming year for the picnic, a class, or anything else, my operation is open for all to see. Last unannounced state inspection in mid-September found a high mite count of TWO! No treatments here.

tecumseh

10-19-2008, 06:12 AM

harry vanderpool writes:
Thursday at about 3:00pm I trickled 5ml of heavy syrup that I had lowered the PH somewhat

tecumseh ask:
well harry as you likely know I ain't a purist when it come to the treatment/non treatment question. I would also say... one need to recognize within themselves where the line is drawn in regards to treatment (for example a pest strip inside a hive is a real no go for myself) and to kind of know why you are treating. which is to directly suggest that many random treatments likely are counter productive (and any and all treatments cost something... typically more than most folks might think via casual observation).

so what is the lowered ph all about? that is a new one on me.

BjornBee

10-19-2008, 06:48 AM

Seems since I was the only one that has commented, and your post follows mine, I'll feel somewhat obligated to respond.

So whats so unique about someone catching a swarm or unknown origins and having an issue with mites. I actually see this sort of stuff all the time. Seems swarms and cutouts in particular are seen to have problems with SHB.

I guess controlling my genetics, requeening swarms with bad queens with better one's, using equipment options and management techniques, could be seen by some as "treatments". But that to me is splitting hairs. Oh well.

Anyone reading [edit by mod] about those not treating should consider spending more time with others who do not "treat". ( "treat" - A sometimes self defined term by some, which is manipulated, to then be used to attack others) Here is a group and a meeting coming up... and may I say, I think they know which end of a hivetool is used for what.

http://www.beesource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=221705

BjornBee

10-19-2008, 08:59 AM

how did you lower the Ph? And from what Ph to what Ph level.

Thanks, Larry

Is this a reference to adding water? ;)

deknow

10-19-2008, 09:32 AM

...i do wonder if those who like to shout that they treat when posting here on beesource are as willing to make these claims to their customers....or is it a case of giving different messages to different audiences?

do you think that your own customers would rather buy honey from treated bees or untreated? do your customers assume that nothing is in the hive but wood and bees? (i expect most of them do). would you be happy to share msds information of the substances you use with your customers?

...and by customers, i mean the consumers (not wholesalers/resellers)...people that feed your honey to their children.

deknow (who doesn't treat....and who can open a beer bottle with either end of a hive tool)

dcross

10-19-2008, 11:06 AM

how did you lower the Ph? And from what Ph to what Ph level.

Thanks, Larry

My guess would be he's referring to an oxalic acid trickle.

BTW, Harry, did the hive have a mite problem? Your pictures/post don't really tell us that.

Michael Bush

10-19-2008, 11:13 AM

That's what my hives looked like last time I treated them with Apistan about eight years ago...

stangardener

10-19-2008, 12:44 PM

!!! won't work for me!!! is a copout. if you can't explain it, you're not qualified to attack it!
:)
i think you're part way there. just keep setting a few colonies aside and leave them to make or break on their own. in time some will make it off the welfare system. that will be the stock to expand from.

Keith Jarrett

10-19-2008, 01:48 PM

Well Harry, this is are your fault ! lol :)

BB, I have spent time with those that don't treat, they also have spent time with me shaking my bees to restock thier's. :)

BjornBee

10-19-2008, 01:59 PM

BB, I have spent time with those that don't treat, they also have spent time with me shaking my bees to restock thier's. :)

Sounds to me like the foundation to all their problems to begin with. :)

Keith Jarrett

10-19-2008, 02:30 PM

That's a good one BB, except I never lossed mine. :)

Bizzybee

10-19-2008, 04:29 PM

Thia is not unlike discussions over who to vote for, "pointless"

Fortunalty the decision to treat or not to treat isn't going to affect anyone but the end user. If treating is allowed to affect the public by it's misuse, shame on you! But otherwise who cares?!

Tom G. Laury

10-19-2008, 06:17 PM

No way is it pointless if people share experience& experiments & etc.

But sometimes there is a lot of static & hysteria & Egos

iddee

10-19-2008, 06:49 PM

Cabin fever is incurable and it is just beginning to flare up again.

I TREAT!!!!

I treat for weather with a lid on my hives. It's all in how you interpret treating.

HarryVanderpool

10-19-2008, 07:40 PM

Fortunalty the decision to treat or not to treat isn't going to affect anyone but the end user. But otherwise who cares?!

I have to respectfully disagree with you there, Bizzybee.
We POUND it into our beeschool students:
"If you don't care enough to maintain your colony health, please do it for the rest of us.
Especially if you are within a two mile radius of our hives.
Sick and abandoned hives can be the basis for localized spread of all kinds of pests and diseases.
When your hives crash as they will without effective pest and disease management, our hives will not only rob them of their SPORES, but also their SPORES, mites, bacteria etc...."

The fine beekeepers that I pollinate with trust setting their hives alongside mine. I have the same fine regard for their colony health maintenance program (s).
If anyone of us were to jump on the "I don't treat" bandwagon, they would find themselves in another line of work.

tecumseh

10-19-2008, 07:48 PM

deknow writes:
...i do wonder if those who like to shout that they treat when posting here on beesource are as willing to make these claims to their customers....or is it a case of giving different messages to different audiences?
tecumeh:
good question.

then deknow writes:
do you think that your own customers would rather buy honey from treated bees or untreated? do your customers assume that nothing is in the hive but wood and bees? (i expect most of them do). would you be happy to share msds information of the substances you use with your customers?
teumseh:
untreated for sure... but what does that really mean? which was really my initial concern. some of my customers are well aware of the problems. for those that have the time and are concerned, I have the time to explain exactly how I treat my bees.

and then deknow writes:
...and by customers, i mean the consumers (not wholesalers/resellers)...people that feed your honey to their children.
tecumseh:
I would assume the further the producer is from the consumer the easier it is to be insulated from questions of contamination.

and finally deknow writes:
deknow (who doesn't treat....and who can open a beer bottle with either end of a hive tool)
tecumseh:
your also an excellent person deknow and by the above description quite talented.

mr jarrett writes:
Well Harry, this is are your fault ! lol

tecumseh:
yea harry it all your fault!

then iddee writes:
Cabin fever is incurable and it is just beginning to flare up again.

tecumseh:
as usual iddee is quite correct.

HarryVanderpool

10-19-2008, 07:49 PM

Well Harry, this is are your fault ! lol :)

Hey! How did your year shape up?
We did VERY well this year but the long, cold spring was tough.
Nice to have a couple of months to work on trucks, build equipment, do some welding.
SPEAKING OF WELDING, I .... oops! am I off topic?

Sorry!

I wouldn't want to interrupt the "I don't Treat Choir"

Everybody ready? a ONE,and a TWO, and a........

Keith Jarrett

10-19-2008, 07:52 PM

Hey! How did your year shape up?
.
SPEAKING OF WELDING, I .... oops! am I off topic?

......

We did ok, although to many bees in my area now.:(

Welding... now were talken, use to do that in another life.

BjornBee

10-19-2008, 07:56 PM

Thanks Harry. I was not sure of your intent for the opening post. At least now, it's very clear.

Sorry it turns out your original post said little, and was nothing more than a vague attempt to attack others who keep bees different than yourself.

Have a good one. Hope those treatments are working well for you. ;)

tecumseh

10-19-2008, 07:57 PM

mr jarrett writes:
Welding... now were talken, use to do that in another life.

tecumseh:
perhaps it is the bead that binds? I'll still burn a rod or two every now and then.

Keith Jarrett

10-19-2008, 08:31 PM

I'll still burn a rod or two every now and then.

Hey Big T,

What are we burning these days, 6011/7018?

And what's up with mr.jarrett??? I also go by Keith

TwT

10-20-2008, 04:42 AM

I have to respectfully disagree with you there, Bizzybee.
We POUND it into our beeschool students:
"If you don't care enough to maintain your colony health, please do it for the rest of us.
Especially if you are within a two mile radius of our hives.
Sick and abandoned hives can be the basis for localized spread of all kinds of pests and diseases.
When your hives crash as they will without effective pest and disease management, our hives will not only rob them of their SPORES, but also their SPORES, mites, bacteria etc...."

The fine beekeepers that I pollinate with trust setting their hives alongside mine. I have the same fine regard for their colony health maintenance program (s).
If anyone of us were to jump on the "I don't treat" bandwagon, they would find themselves in another line of work.

I can understand what you mean Harry, I am one also that doesn't treat my hives, I have worked hard on selection so I wouldn't have to treat, taken loses and improved breeding, I have test yards that I bring new hives to and leave for 3 years at a time before they get moved to breeding yards, on the flip side of what you said above, I would hate for someone to bring hives that have to be treated close to my yards because they would probably wipe out most of my work with their drones, then it probably would happen like you said above.

I know you and others are busy and dont have time to take chances like us "untreated folks", its how you make a living and I understand that. but we also have our side of the story and are trying to raise a bee that doesn't need chemicals to live, maybe one day we can help you guys with a selection of bee's that would save you treatment money and time, and thinking bee's cant make it without treatment is crazy, bet the same thing was said with T-mites, I know some still treat for T-mites but these are the one's that keep them going when so many dont have to.

BjornBee

10-20-2008, 05:38 AM

Migratory beekeepers worried about other peoples hives is somewhat questionable. I see it at a basis for rationale and justification to attack others, and claims and reasoning to degrade others while pretending to protect their business in some round-about way. The migratory beekeepers I know, treat regardless of whether they have afb, mites, or anything else. The treatment schedule for sending them to California is exactly that...a schedule, with treatments used automatically. And if you are routinely treating for every disease...are you really concerned about that so-called "abandoned" hive in the first place. And to use the term "abandoned hive" in association to somehow justify comments on those not treating on this board, who obviously are NOT treating due to their intense involvement with their bees, is absurd.

Deadbeat beekeepers and an occasional abandoned hive is one thing. To use those situations to come here and degrade, attack, and somehow justify comments about others who do not treat, is wrong.

But I guess as the data and information comes in of the migratory guys shooting themselves in the foot, contaminating their hives, having CCD problems, and feeling somewhat guilty of their actions, I can see how some will lash out at those who are not in those same sinking boats.

tecumseh

10-20-2008, 06:08 AM

BjornBee

10-20-2008, 06:17 AM

bjorn writes:
And to use the term "abandoned hive"

tecumseh:
really bjorn you need to get out of the woods a bit more. perhaps visiting central or south florida, central texas or perhaps california might enlighten you a bit.

all the above are prime locations for some yankee bee keeper to drop a lot of hives and either die or run out of money. even if these stacks of hive were in great condition when dropped (which they usually are not) they quickly turn into a huge pile of junk within a year or so. none of this is exactly recent history... which is to say it was true when I was a lad in central florida 40 years ago.

Geesh, this again!

Yes, Yes....I can see the light....abandoned hives from bankrupt migratory beekeepers are justification to come here and degrade beekeepers who do not use treatments. I guess that logic fits as good as about all the other logic you use. Nothing makes sense, so why should this.

And now its all once again the yankee beekeeper. :cry:

tecumseh

10-20-2008, 06:24 AM

mr jarrett... I mean keith writes:
What are we burning these days, 6011/7018?

tecumseh:
well of course it does somewhat depend on machine and what I might be joining.... but my all time favorite rod (especially in a teaching situation) is a 7014. sometimes called a drag rod.. it is a good rod for beginners and will, with very limited skill, give you a good connection. got a nice mig machine (which sets way too much)... but of course a mig welder is often times seens as a girly man's tool and is unbecoming to a manly welder type.

for my next welding/fabrication project I have been considering (tell me what you might think of this idea keith) converting an old 4 wheel drive blazer into a bee loader. I have been thinking I could hook it up with a toe bar and simply pull it from location to location (local of course).

I do know what ya' mean by the mister thing... some of my close friend's children sometime refer to me as mister ___ and my head pop around wondering who they are referring to...

deknow

10-20-2008, 07:56 AM

Sick and abandoned hives can be the basis for localized spread of all kinds of pests and diseases.

...i'm wondering how you feel about feral colonies? should they be eradicated?

deknow

deknow

10-20-2008, 08:25 AM

teumseh:
untreated for sure... but what does that really mean?

well, it means that bees are bred for survival and productivity....that nothing goes into the hive but bees and wood. pests/parasites/disease are not masked by treatments....no fluvalinate, no fgmo, no sugar dusting nothing.

for customers, it means that although there are certainly some chemicals (pesticides and others) in the hive brought in from the environment, the low hanging fruit...the things that no one wants to eat or feed their children is not put in the hive, and is much less likely to be found in the hive.

do you care to share with your interested customers the data from penn state? that the most widely distributed and highly concentrated pesticides found in hives were fluvalinate and coumaphos? that the nhb conveniently didn't fund for testing the honey in these tests, but did find this to be true with wax, bees, brood, beebread, and even trapped pollen before it even entered the hive? ...i expect not.

the accounts here from those that treat reminds me of a friend. this friend goes to and consults with all manner of "new age healer" types. they are all "wonderful" and "really help" this person......yet there is always a new treatment for a new problem. when your basis is that "bees need to be treated, and those that don't treat are irresponsible" and you ignore the evidence of healthy bees that are not treated (not to mention the 100 million years before we were here or sophisticated enough to synthesize chemicals), it isn't a big mystery why you think everyone should treat.

bees are not humans. i love my bees...but i'm not attached to any one particular genetic line (or hive) of bees. i see losing a hive as progress towards better genetics. this is a long term game, not a short term (ie, 'this year's harvest') one.

now, who do i sue if my bees rob out a treated hive and i end up with high levels of fluvalinate in my operation?

deknow

Keith Benson

10-20-2008, 09:11 AM

I treat for weather with a lid on my hives. It's all in how you interpret treating.

Stop coddling your bees. Next thing you know they will want boxes and bottom boards.

Keith

alpha6

10-20-2008, 11:18 AM

You guys got it all wrong. You are babying your bees. You know how I treat for mites? I wait till there is about a foot of snow on the ground, open the hive, dump all the bees into the snow. Kills the mites and the bees that make it back are survivors to be sure.

Afterwards I make sure there is plenty of hot chocolate and biscuits with molasses for them and come spring they do great. :thumbsup:

For more information about my bee raising techniques read my book - "Keeping the bees the Spartan way" :p

BjornBee

10-20-2008, 12:05 PM

For more information about my bee raising techniques read my book - "Keeping the bees the Spartan way" :p

Hey, I also parade around my beeyards naked. ;)

beemandan

10-20-2008, 12:35 PM

Hey, I also parade around my beeyards naked. ;)
The girls are surely going to need some kind of treatment for that.

iddee

10-20-2008, 12:56 PM

>>>>Hey, I also parade around my beeyards naked<<<<

If they can survive that, they should be able to survive anything.

ALTHOUGH,...I don't think I would want blind bees. :p

Keith Benson

10-20-2008, 02:46 PM

molasses

How many moles do you go through in a given season . . . .?

Keith

Keith Benson

10-20-2008, 02:47 PM

Hey, I also parade around my beeyards naked. ;)

Hmmmm - nudist beekeeping. That sounds like it would be right up there with frying bacon in the altogether.

Keith

TwT

10-20-2008, 06:01 PM

Hey, I also parade around my beeyards naked. ;)

I myself hope you sealed the entrances, that would be worst than a plane flying low spraying pesticides, them is some tough bee's then, wonder how they find the flowers after seeing that :scratch: , :eek:

tecumseh

10-21-2008, 07:18 AM

deknow

10-21-2008, 08:10 AM

deknow writes:
well, it means that bees are bred for survival and productivity....that nothing goes into the hive but bees and wood. pests/parasites/disease are not masked by treatments....no fluvalinate, no fgmo, no sugar dusting nothing.

tecumseh:
first off you cannot breed dead bees.

ding ding ding ding....

we have a winner!

if, in the end, you want bees that are able to take care of themselves without treatments, you have to _not_ breed from those that are not able to survive without treatments. you can come up with all kinds of criteria for a breeding program...but culling (or allowing nature to cull) those that can't survive without treatments is the easiest and most direct method. those 'dead bees' might have given the beekeeper numbers if they had been treated, but it would also have produced drones (and possibly queens). so, i do agree with you...you can't breed from dead bees...and you don't wan't to breed from bees that would die without treatments unless you are really committed to treating over the long haul.

secondly...sounds like a plan that MIGHT work if you were not raising or keeping bees in an intensive (high density) manner or were keeping bees outside of any commercial interest.
there are all kinds of financial rewards....those that come with high risk pay off big when they pay off. not treating is certainly "high risk"...and even organic standards allow for many treatments, and honey that is produced completely without treatments gets a high price from those that care about residues and the long term heath of the bees. shipping bees around on a truck to pollinate monocrops is also high risk. if you want that pay off, you are welcome to it. i expect risks (and losses) will continue to rise over time. there are lots of things people can do to make money (some of the most profitable are "immoral" or illegal)...i've chosen a way that to me, makes sense and pays off long term. yes, i'm aware that most of the food we all eat is produced in monocrop situations that require migratory pollination...i expect that will change over time without my help...i'm growing in a separate niche.

but saying you do one thing while doing the exact opposite is a different issue. posting in one thread that you do not treat and on another that you treat for this or that problem just makes some folks look very foolish and deceitful.

i'm confused by the above...are you referring to me? i think the last treatment i used was organic acids 4 years ago. i did use apistan and menthol once about 8 years ago. in what thread did i say that i treated?

let me give you an example that is a personal decision from my own experience.... if I was not rearing nucs for folks then I would quite likely not treat for afb or nosema (in regards to afb I have input a significant quantity of hygenic stock over several seasons to somewhat counter this 'problem' via genetics). given that both diseases are long term and persistent and the drugs for prevention are relatively cheap I would feel foolish if a new beekeeper ended up acquiring bees from me that were then effected by either. my feelin's is anyone who kept to this rigid 'I will not treat matra' is simply being penny wise and pound foolish.

i can understand not wanting spread afb or nosema...but using these treatments (i assume you are talking about terramycin and fumidil) leads to problems. terramycin use makes the yeast population in the hive skyrocket (as it's bacteria in the hive that keeps the yeast population in check). we know that afb can become resistant (due to routine use), and there is suspicion that the same is true for fumidil. in addition, if you are using this stuff on your stock (and not just "pre shipment"), you are breeding for less resistance to these problems, and more aggressive strains of pathogens.

ps... in regards to my customers.... as suggested previously most seem very much aware (casually) of OUR problems. those that have the time to discuss the issues and come to some understanding of how I treat or manipulate 'my girls' I have time to share with them what I do. in this regards (unlike some of which you seem to have some issue with???) all my cards are on the tabletop.
...and by your own words, they would prefer honey from untreated bees. you might consider the premium that customers will pay for what they would prefer. ditto with beekeepers buying bees...healthy bees that have not been treated will fetch a higher price from those that don't want to treat their bees. your business is your business, and your customers are your customers. ...but if your customers would prefer something else (like honey from bees that are not treated), someone will eventually 'give the customers what they want'....imho, it might as well be you...but again, that is up to you.

deknow

alpha6

10-21-2008, 08:38 AM

megank

10-22-2008, 03:49 AM

"Keeping the bees the Spartan way" - Getting rid of wasps.

To prevent robbing during the fall from wasps my bees have been trained to rip the heads off wasps they kill. In anticipation of this, in front of each hive I place rows of toothpicks in front of the entrance which my bees then place the wasps heads. It is amazing how effective this is in deterring future robbing. :thumbsup:

I know it sounds a little morbid in the beginning, but no worse then squishing a wasp and getting its guts all over the toe of your shoe.

Anyway...stay tuned for more hints and helpful tidbits right here on Bee Source.

My method of treatment involves using black and red magic markers by first making a black circle, then drawing a red mite in the middle with a black line crossing out the mite. This has the effect of mites knowing they're not welcome in my hives such that they hop off before the bee lands on the bottom board. Problem solved!

This method has worked for me for fifteen years, and I've yet to loose a hive due to mites.

tecumseh

10-22-2008, 06:50 AM

deknow writes:
i'm confused by the above...are you referring to me?

tecumseh replies:
nope.

thanks for the comment #41.

as suggested previously by myself and touched on at a bit deeper level by yourself (#41) all treatments are not created equal. which is to say that the cost and benefits for any treatment may project much futher into the future than just tomorrow.

Barry

10-22-2008, 08:03 AM

secondly...sounds like a plan that MIGHT work if you were not raising or keeping bees in an intensive (high density) manner or were keeping bees outside of any commercial interest.

Perhaps you missed this thread?

http://www.beesource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=222759

NeilV

10-22-2008, 09:33 AM

BjornBee

10-22-2008, 09:57 AM

Bjorn says: "I do not expect the same results and expectations from swarms I caught. I evaluate them, and if they are not up to par, they get requeened."

Can you describe how you evaluate? What makes a new swarm up to par or not?

thanks,

Neil

Hello Neil,
I evaluate them by time, over wintering them without treatments, and testing with such items as paper towels soaked in oil and a trigger mechanism such menthol or thymol. You may find something good or something needing requeening. You can do sugar shakes and a host of other evaluation checks such as brood pattern, visible DVW, and other brood problems.

If a swarm is seen with SHB, DWV, or the queen lays a bad pattern, or has a shotgun pattern, then she gets replaced.

My point for making that comment was that you should not expect all swarms to be healthy, productive, or worth keeping. How you evaluate may be different. Some just throw them in a nurse yard and wait till spring to see what’s left.

I control my genetics as practical as possible and anytime you bring a swarm home of unknown genetics, you should monitor and take corrective actions if needed.

tecumseh

10-23-2008, 05:22 AM

barry writes:
Perhaps you missed this thread?

tecumseh:
you are quite correct barry I did miss that thread. thanks very much for the 'take a look here'. 'preciate that. are you a big promoter of small cell? (just a curiousity thingee)...

after reading all the comments there barry.... I must say I do suspect my VERY GOOD NEIGHBORS down the road would not have been so kind in regards to someone's poorly contrived and speculative argument which to me sounds like more of the same... OPINION based on NO EVIDENCE and WISHFUL THINKING. quite evidently some folks (by what is said at the first of the thread) do have some problem with reading comprehension.

but what the heck barry.... karma does have a way of leveling those with self imposed importance.

Barry

10-23-2008, 08:12 AM

after reading all the comments there barry.... I must say I do suspect my VERY GOOD NEIGHBORS down the road would not have been so kind in regards to someone's poorly contrived and speculative argument which to me sounds like more of the same... OPINION based on NO EVIDENCE and WISHFUL THINKING. quite evidently some folks (by what is said at the first of the thread) do have some problem with reading comprehension.

but what the heck barry.... karma does have a way of leveling those with self imposed importance.

I see it's difficult for you to leave all the little personal jabs out of your posts.

I give you an example of someone who has been keeping their non-treated hives mixed in with commercial treated hives and you take the role of cutting it apart as to the "why". Disagree all you want with the why, it changes not the fact that his hive are not treated and have done well mixed in with commercial hives.

tecumseh

10-23-2008, 05:52 PM

barry writes:
see it's difficult for you to leave all the little personal jabs out of your posts.

I give you an example of someone who has been keeping their non-treated hives mixed in with commercial treated hives and you take the role of cutting it apart as to the "why". Disagree all you want with the why, it changes not the fact that his hive are not treated and have done well mixed in with commercial hives.

tecumseh:
humm... my goodness barry all the stuff happening must have you setting on pens and needles. right now I can not imagine what I said that may have suggested anything about why?

in regards to your comment only two entities comes to mind..... did my suggestion that some folk's criticism of my good neighbors down the road (on a thread that you suggested might enlighten) seem like ridicule? I certainly wasn't demeaning or belittling (or even referring to) anything that bee wrangler did or reported in the thread (which really sounded quite interesting)?

I guess my simple question as to your interest in small scale will remain unanswered.

If I did offend (which quite evidently in your eyes I did)??? then I do apoligize.

Barry

10-23-2008, 06:01 PM

are you a big promoter of small cell? (just a curiousity thingee)...

No. I do use small cell but don't promote/push it much. I'm curious as to why you ask in light of me pointing your attention to the thread Dennis started? This thread sure isn't about small cell. AFAIK, I'm staying on topic here.

Barry

10-23-2008, 06:08 PM

did my suggestion that some folk's criticism of my good neighbors down the road (on a thread that you suggested might enlighten) seem like ridicule?

No, but after rereading your post, I'm confused!:D I took what you wrote one way, and now I'm not sure if it was meant to be taken that way. Some of the vague references to "people" that you didn't name names might be different than the ones I think/thought you were referring to. I'll repost and ask for clarification.

Barry

10-23-2008, 06:26 PM

I must say I do suspect my VERY GOOD NEIGHBORS down the road

Who are the "VERY GOOD NEIGHBORS"?

in regards to someone's poorly contrived and speculative argument

Who is the "someone" here?

OPINION based on NO EVIDENCE and WISHFUL THINKING.

Who's opinion?

quite evidently some folks (by what is said at the first of the thread) do have some problem with reading comprehension.

I hesitate to ask who you are referring to here as making a negative comment about a persons reading comprehension can feel quite belittling.

but what the heck barry.... karma does have a way of leveling those with self imposed importance.

Can this be said in a different way? There are several ways I can interpret what you wrote and perhaps I took it the wrong way.

tecumseh

10-23-2008, 06:35 PM

barry writes:
I'm confused!

tecumseh:
most days I am also.

although almost every day I really don't wish to make your job here any more difficult than it already is... which I guess is my off handed way of saying, I do admire what you are doing here.

tecumseh

10-23-2008, 07:07 PM

barry writes:
Who are the "VERY GOOD NEIGHBORS"?

in regards to someone's poorly contrived and speculative argument
Who is the "someone" here?

tecumseh replies:
in regards to the first question:

that would be beneford weaver and family. I do hold beneford and his entire operation in great regards (an evaluation made via contact over a goodly number of years and for numbers of reasons).... so when someone else (whose resume seems a bit thin) belittles my neighbors reputation and seems(???) to demean a life time of effort toward beekeeping I am more than just a little bit offended. some people may consider everything everyone says as simple marketing spin... but there are folks and familys who consider what they say and their family name and reputation important.

perhaps this very personal value is simply a hillbilly thing?

in regards to the second question:
based upon my comments above I do suspect you can connect the dots in regards to this question.

then barry ask:
reading comprehension

tecumseh:
I am as quilty as everyone else here barry. I am tossing stones...while living in a glass house.

it does seems alot of conflict is created by folks reading what they think people (members) are saying rather than reading what they actually say and leaving it at that.

like I said.. I am quite as quilty of this as anyone else mention or alluded too...

Barry

10-23-2008, 08:09 PM

OK, in light of your further clarifications, I misread the first time around on some of it. I thought you were referring to a different post, so I understand now. Filling in some of the names helps me know the rest of it. Thanks.

> humm... my goodness barry all the stuff happening must have you setting on pens and needles.

There could be some truth to this!

HarryVanderpool

10-23-2008, 11:47 PM

adamf

10-24-2008, 07:02 AM

No medications in your hives?
It's all in how you justify it; right?
Well I am so happy that almost all of the beehavers are well beyond the 2 mile radius of my VERY HEALTHY HIVES.
Its a free country. (at the moment)
Let your hives die in your own fashion.
:p
From Harry's quote above, I assume he's saying that if one doesn't treat their bees,
that they will harbor disease and eventually die. If I'm incorrect Harry,
please correct me.

I have not treated the colonies I run for ten years. I still have bees,
still make honey (when the Weather is good!) and raise queens. I vowed to
follow this management style and have remained faithful to it. I
concentrate my efforts on selection and breeding from my chemically free
population and I test and evaluate queens from others' populations, and if
they are good, add them into my population, gradually.

I lose colonies. I don't loose many, but every now and then I do. Last
season I had some intense acute paralysis virus in some colonies. Replacing
the queens heading those colonies solved the problem.

I spend lots of time observing and testing my population. More time than
most people spend with their bees. I also use Instrumental Insemination in
my breeding program. This requires even more time and plenty of planning and preparation.

Harry, we don't treat our bees, but we DO spend huge ammounts of time managing
them and working to keep them healthy through selection and breeding. This
isn't for everyone. But, it can be done.

Adam Finkelstein

www.vpqueenbees.com

Michael Bush

10-24-2008, 07:17 PM

I am baffled by the implication that untreated hives are full of diseases and parasites as well. I don't treat, and have my bees inspected every spring. The inspector doesn't think they are harboring diseases:

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

deknow

10-24-2008, 09:05 PM

...our untreated bees are also inspected annually. This last year, the inspector said that he did see 1 mite (out of 16 or so hives inspected)....no other disease problems.

deknow

Oldbee

10-25-2008, 03:42 PM

"I am baffled by the implication that untreated hives are full of diseases and parasites as well. I don't treat, and have my bees inspected every spring. The inspector doesn't think they are are harboring any diseases." --Michael Bush.

What about in the fall; are your bees inspected then, when mites are increasing in population? My colonies have been inspected spring and fall two years running now. OB.

"our untreated bees are also inspected annually. Last year, the inspector said that he did see 1 mite [out of 16 or so hives inspected]..no other disease problems.--deknow.

deknow, Michael Bush?? As just an average 'keeper' of four colonies of bees, but reading as much as I can, these statements seem pretty AMAZING to read considering all the 'stuff' we read about with beekeepers losing colonies to mites or other diseases.

[1],... One MITE out of 16 Hives or so Hives Inspected--deknow. Is the MOST amazing comment of all.

OK!! So what the heck is going on here??

#1. You have been allowing your hives to die off and requeen from survivors for the last 10 years or more?
# 2. You have been using small cell or 'variations' for 6-10 years?
# 3. Your colonies are 'isolated' from other 'diseased' colonies?
# 4. You are an expert 'genius' at beekeeping and the rest of us are just [chemical] fools or,.. haven't been keeping bees long enough?

One MITE out of 16 hives!! What is your,. 'secret'?? OB.

deknow

10-25-2008, 04:54 PM

OK!! So what the heck is going on here??

#1. You have been allowing your hives to die off and requeen from survivors for the last 10 years or more?

well, this is the plan, but we've been at it for less than 10 years...see below

# 2. You have been using small cell or 'variations' for 6-10 years?

we basically started over with our bees last spring (2007), and regressed them immediately. we did loose some colonies, but none since feb or so (and the ones we lost were largely, imho, due to ventilation issues that were my own darn fault). after regression (with hsc), we only introduced empty frames with no foundation. probably less than 10% of our combs are hsc, the rest are wax drawn without foundation (and without the chemical contamination that comes with commercial foundation).

# 3. Your colonies are 'isolated' from other 'diseased' colonies?

absolutely not. i've gone along with the bee inspector inspecting at least 20 or so hives in flight distance of mine. these are pretty much all managed conventionally (large cell size, regular treatments, spring and fall feeding with sugar syrup, etc). some have even had bad afb.

# 4. You are an expert 'genius' at beekeeping and the rest of us are just (chemical) fools or,.. republicans at best??

...if it's genius to realize that treating bees short circuits the natural selection of bees that can survive without treatments, then perhaps. but let me add that virtually every non-beekeeper i talk to about this (several hundered people a week) sees this as making sense. it's only beekeepers that assume that untreated bees will simply die. where did bees come from in the first place? how did they survive (and evolve) over 100 million years without humans to synthesize fluvalinate?

ONE MITE OUT OF 16 HIVES!! WHAT is your,. 'secret'?? OB.
...no secret at all. we are pretty open about what we are doing (posted mostly on the organic list and on our own website). last year i wrote an extensive article for our local county club newsletter to describe what we were doing, and what we were trying to accomplish. imho, this is important...it's much easier to wait until one has worked out all the kinks and made all the mistakes before sharing what one is doing...but this way is more honest, more immediate, and i think, more interesting (to be able to follow the process through it's ups and downs rather than read how successful it was after the fact).

I hope it's NOT like the difference in 'philosophy' between the 'Democrats and Republicans';..is it??
i'd like to attempt to keep politics out of this...but it is worth looking at "live and let die" vs "care for the weak". this is more extreme than conservative vs liberal, but the same concept.

it's also worth mentioning that we went through about 600 of dee's hives in april (making up about another hundred in splits), and i spotted 1 mite...and 1 more in a photo after the fact. i posted the following on the organic list this morning wrt a group of dee's yards that were officially "ccd" last fall (and that we worked with her this last april):

going through these yards in april was inspiring. on the one hand,
there were lots of deadouts (about 2/3 of the hives). the first phase
of going through any one of these yards was identifying and preparing
the deadouts to split into...always depressing. but then, going into
the survivors, and seeing really (really) strong hives ready to split
(many 3 ways) was incredible.

although there is always sadness when looking at dead hives, seeing
the survivors, and knowing that they had come out the other side of
whatever killed the rest was an explicit example of "nature at her
best". nature is cruel...she culls ruthlessly, kills the weak
(sometimes in gory detail)...yet, it is what leads us to the wonderful
variety of life we see all around us...something that would be
impossible if all life could be magically "saved" by nature "playing
nice".

these kinds of 'losses' are necessary to move forward. the weak would
have been killed by nature whether the bees are in a box, or in a
tree. we must see losses like these as "progress"....and realize that
our years of intervention have led us to the point where there are
significant numbers of hives that must be culled. personally, i don't
know enough to know which should live and which should die...i leave
that to mother nature...she knows best :)

Michael Bush

10-25-2008, 05:43 PM

>deknow, Michael Bush?? As just an average 'keeper' of four colonies of bees, but reading as much as I can, these statements seem pretty AMAZING to read considering all the 'stuff' we read about with beekeepers losing colonies to mites or other diseases.

I know.

>[1],... ONE MITE out of 16 HIVES OR SO HIVES INSPECTED--deknow. Is the MOST amazing comment of all.

For the last five years inspections (see the link above) my inspector has found NONE, which is roughly the same results.

>#1. You have been allowing your hives to die off and requeen from survivors for the last 10 years or more?

I haven't lost a hive to Varroa since regressing. I have moved to more of feral offspring as I have gone along. I only started regressing back in 2001. I lost plenty before and know what the piles of dead bees and mites look like when they collapse from Varroa.

># 2. You have been using small cell or 'variations' for 6-10 years?

Not I. Dee has been for about 18 years. I have been for about 6 or 7 years, but not 10 years.

># 3. Your colonies are 'isolated' from other 'diseased' colonies?

I don't know. But I do find a few Varroa mites in the fall. Very few.

># 4. You are an expert 'genius' at beekeeping and the rest of us are just [chemical] fools or,..
republicans at best??

I don't know what republicans have to do with it. Dee Lusby is the one who came up with the concept of small cell. After I lost ALL of my hives to Varroa AFTER treating with Apistan, that was the last straw for me. I couldn't see the point in putting poison in the hives AND losing the bees anyway. I've never liked putting anything in the hives, but I got desperate when the Varroa came. But once I realized they would die with the chemicals as well, I knew there had to be a better way.

tecumseh

10-25-2008, 07:11 PM

sound to me (this is really a question) like the state inspectors test could be different depending on which state the bees reside???? and possible the permit issued???*

I guess what I am really asking here is... deknow and michael bush have suggested some fairly significant sample of hives have been tested for varroa mites... soooo what kind of test do the state boys use in your state?

*I would suspect (speculating for sure) that health permits to move bees across state lines and the uncertainty associated with this requirement is an issue that really does not apply to most of us here but likely is very significant for someone like harry (and by extension all commercial migratory beekeepers).

Oldbee

10-25-2008, 08:14 PM

"varroa mites...soooo what kind of test do the state boys use in your state"?.- tecumseh.

They use the sugar/rock n' roll. So far, both spring and fall, they have found MORE than 1 [one] mite per hive that's for sure, lol. I am not on 100% small cell yet though.

Thanks for taking the time to make comments, Michael Bush and deknow; enlightening.

For what it's worth, I did notice something interesting at the new hive established from the [wild drones] public hunting grounds; Sept. 08. There were about 8-10 bees that seemed to be wrestling with other bees on the landing board but didn't seem to be trying to sting each other. I notice this at other times that the bees seem to move,.. 'excitedly' around a bee like they are grooming it or something. It didn't look like robbing. This was only one time and only one day of course, but I did not see this activity at the other hives that day.

"But once I realized they would die with the chemicals as well, I knew there had to be a better way.- Michael Bush. I can go along with that; OB.

tecumseh

10-26-2008, 06:41 AM

old bee writes:
"varroa mites...soooo what kind of test do the state boys use in your state"?.- tecumseh.

tecumseh:
well I do know that in the field the state inspectors use the starting fluid method.

for sample obtain and taken back to the lab for the issue of certain permits I really don't know what they might use in a lab setting. I suspect??? in most places if no permit (legal paper) is issued the state boys may be telling folks what they wish to hear (the line of least resistance).

I personally rarely see a bee with a mite. A bit more often I see effects of what I suspect is varroa. I do know if I did not look or I looked in the right (wrong) place I would never see a mite.

to date my strategy is two fold.... but will likely change as time goes by.

first detection and monitoring and a good deal of drone scratching (mechanical control) in the very early spring. for keeping an eye on the problem (in a very loose and unencumberd way) I like to pluck drone cells but will attempt the use of homemade sticky boards (plus tobacco smoke) in the near future. in the past I used sugar roll but am troubled but the inconsistancies in this approach... reading has reinforced the understanding that the error term in every approach mention in this thread is often time so great as to mask any real result.

in conjuction with the monitoring I strategically use oxalic... otherwise in regards to varroa I use no treatment what so ever. the strategy employed is to test and mark hives as significant vs insignificant levels of varroa. the 'insignificant' hives have absolutely nothing done to them... the significant get treated (sometimes twice mostly depending on my available time) and then are used for increase purposes.

at the present time I estimate I need to make up 1/3 of my desired number in new starts yearly just to stay even with my loss.

adamf

10-26-2008, 06:59 AM

Varroa mite levels in bee colonies under a "non-treatment" management
scenario is important. There are several methods to keep track of
mite populations throughout the season. This method works very well:
http://gears.tucson.ars.ag.gov/publ/tolerant2.html and gives you an
idea of the level of phoretic mites in your colonies.

When we committed to non-treatment, we used survival as the
indicator for selection. Mite levels per colony or per year remained
unknown for many years. We just selected from colonies that performed.

Once we had a population that was maintaining vigor and producing honey while
surviving we ran the Tuscon test (see link above) out of curiosity.

The results were pretty amazing: our colonies averaged ~ 5 mites/100
bees over the season. Some had more, some had less although the variation was fairly slight.
The varroa population fluctuates seasonally and yearly--but the colonies we tested
performed under the load, regardless of the mite levels.

Determining what makes the population hardy is less important now then
keeping the population hardy. Maybe in the future, mechanisms will be
discovered explaining the way bees handle mites and remain productive and
methods could be developed to select for these mechanisms in bee breeding.

Adam Finkelstein
www.vpqueenbees.com

Michael Bush

10-26-2008, 11:40 AM

>I guess what I am really asking here is... deknow and michael bush have suggested some fairly significant sample of hives have been tested for varroa mites... soooo what kind of test do the state boys use in your state?

The inspector gave me the choice and I wanted to NOT kill the bees so he did the sugar roll.

HarryVanderpool

10-26-2008, 04:02 PM

"I treated all of my hives with Apistan and they all died."

What comes to mind when you read that statement?
Here's my answer: Someone does not know what they are doing.
And this is one good example of where I actually agree with the "I don't treat choir".
Throwing any treatment at a honey bee hive, let alone ALL of your hives and then just setting back and allowing them to die is very poor beekeeping.

Apistan it's self did not kill the hives.
Then what did? Mites?
If so, the implication is that the treatment was ineffective. A good beekeeper would have known this within 24 hours through verification testing and would have taken appropriate steps further.

If not mites, then what?
Another pest or disease that a blind eye ignored?
Don' t blame Apistan for P-poor beekeeping.

For more information on verification check out:

www.mitegone.com

Michael Bush

10-26-2008, 04:52 PM

<>"I treated all of my hives with Apistan and they all died."
>What comes to mind when you read that statement?
>Here's my answer: Someone does not know what they are doing.

I just did what was recommended to me by the "I do treat choir" at the time, who were mostly treating "just in case". I wasn't falling for that and monitored to decide that I NEEDED to treat, but I was not aware that one needed to monitor not only before (which was why I resorted to treating) but during and after. I have certainly learned that lesson. Unfortunately, most have not. However I much prefer the position I'm in now, not treating at all.

>Apistan it's self did not kill the hives.
>Then what did? Mites?

Exactly. But the Apistan did nothing to help and only caused more harm. Although I do not think it was the cause of these losses, Apistan is a poison and it can kill bees and it will contaminate the wax. You can pretend otherwise if you wish.

>If so, the implication is that the treatment was ineffective. A good beekeeper would have known this within 24 hours through verification testing and would have taken appropriate steps further.

That was not being recommended anywhere that I had read at the time. The implications by all the articles I had read were that if you had mites, treating was a sure way to get rid of them and anything else was risky. They did not imply that treating could be just as risky and fail in exactly the same way. If putting poisons in my hives won't solve my problems, then why would I even do it? I didn't want to in the first place and resorted to it out of desperation. I know better now.

"A man should never be ashamed to own he has been in the wrong, which is but saying, in other words, that he is wiser today than he was yesterday."--Alexander Pope

tecumseh

10-28-2008, 05:58 AM

thanks for the link adamf.

Bizzybee

10-28-2008, 10:36 AM

Robert Brenchley

10-28-2008, 10:49 AM

Please leave the D- and R- words out of it; I know you did it innocently, but it leads to my being inundated with complaints! Bees know nothing of US politics, and it has nothing to do with this discussion either.

As for not treating, or treating ineffectively, it can cause problems. A couple of years ago my hives were inundated with mites from collapsing hives belonging to someone who was treating resistant mites with Apistan. That's bad beekeeping. But if some can maintain selected bees without treatment - I'm on the wrong continenent to check for myself, but I see no reason to disbelieve them - then bully for them. What we all need is strains which will do this reliably, and if we never get to the point of trying to cut down or eliminate treatment, then we'll never have resistant bees.

NasalSponge

10-28-2008, 12:51 PM

"the organic list" Can someone post a link?? I am very interested in the no treat style of beekeeping and exactly how successful folks are pulling this off!:thumbsup:

Are there any folks in here that sell small cell packages and queens??

Michael Bush

10-28-2008, 07:14 PM

Organic group:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Organicbeekeepers

Organic conference in November:
http://www.bushfarms.com/organic_beekeeping_meeting.htm

Much info on beekeeping in general and natural and small cell beekeeping:
www.bushfarms.com/bees

Natural cell size:
http://www.bushfarms.com/beesnaturalcell.htm

tlozo

10-28-2008, 07:17 PM

Doesn't Dee Lusby have AHB which are more mite resistant because of their aggressiveness.:scratch:

Michael Bush

10-28-2008, 07:59 PM

>Doesn't Dee Lusby have AHB which are more mite resistant because of their aggressiveness.

In my experience, aggressiveness has nothing to do with mite resistance.

NasalSponge

10-28-2008, 09:35 PM

Thx....Michael
Mike Forbes

tecumseh

10-29-2008, 05:33 AM

tlozo writes:
Doesn't Dee Lusby have AHB which are more mite resistant because of their aggressiveness.

tecumseh:
it is my understanding that the difference would be the length of time of the capped pupae state of the bee. they may or may not be some correlation with aggressive/defensive behavior.

TwT

10-29-2008, 07:22 PM

Doesn't Dee Lusby have AHB which are more mite resistant because of their aggressiveness.:scratch:

does dee have AHB, well they get swarms from all over their area so if they are in a AHB area I would say yes (but thats me),

does aggressiveness help with Resistance to mites, I would say no to that one, I have bee's that seem to be resistant because they are still alive after 5 years on regular cell, a few longer and they are on regular cell size. its the bee's themselves and not aggressiveness.

do I think cell capping time is a reason for this, no not even close, the test that was run on small cell bee's showed no difference from the results from UGA and they said they had more mites with SC so that would be out if SC hatches earlier.

ITS THE BEE'S THEMSELVES, SOME HANDLE THEM AND OTHERS DONT, its just a chance you take and some dont take the chances, buying bee's from big bee's suppliers is not going to do to good, the way I went was doing removals and getting a few queens from people like Purvis Brothers or Russians from a USDA Queen Breeder that go chemical free, there are a few on this site that sales queens that dont do SC or chemicals, you should get queens from these folks if you want to try chemical free. !!!!!!!

just my 2 pennies worth, cant buy cup of coffee with that.......

Keith Jarrett

10-29-2008, 08:39 PM

Harry,

I take exception to your posturing in that last post. I think you could agree that slandering and belittling another member because you don't agree with their methods or understanding can be handled a little better.

This is the second time I believe in this thread you have chosen to take an adversarial approach. I think everyone would appreciate a less offensive discussion.

Well Harry it's all your fault for getting to the point :).

Unlike the CCD crowd, Harry is clear and to the point, CCD team should have hired him for there spokesman.... but then there would be no smoke to hide behind all there short comings.

tecumseh

10-30-2008, 05:14 AM

twt writes:
do I think cell capping time is a reason for this, no not even close

tecumseh:
ok... first off to get somewhat approximate to something that looks like SCIENCE you need to at least present a mechanism for HOW something works. anything less is magic.. at this point twt you seem to be waving a wand and conjuring up magic to explain what is happening here.

it is still my understanding that the Lusby's bees were somewhat africanized??? if yes, then the literature suggest that when compared to the purely european cousins their pupae stage is a bit shorter.

keith jarrett writes:
Well Harry it's all your fault for getting to the point

tecumseh:
well no he is not keith.. he simply (in this case) agreeing with your own point of view. at this point there apppears to be a difference in OPINION basd somewhat on SCALE of operation... which might also be describe as a line drawn in the sand as to whether bee keeping for that person is a business or a hobby.

me I am just stuck in the middle... which really mean that for my bees that are thriving I will just leave them alone and the one's that are sick I will treat (I will however not go down the road that inevitable means the pest or disease in question grows ever stronger while the bees are slowly but certainly growing weaker). I have seen this before in another context... at that time it did look as if some folks didn't so mind shooting themselves in the foot.

in the short run I can kind of understand you and harry's view (given the money laid on the table at this point in time). I would suggest over a bit long term (if resistance and genetics still works tomorrow as it did yesterday?) that somewhere down the road (if it ain't already happened) you will look down and wonder how that gaping hole got in your foot.

as ray wylie hubburd wisely said:
doin' what's right aint so hard,
it just ain't as much fun.
'conversation with the devil'

TwT

10-30-2008, 04:23 PM

beemandan

10-30-2008, 06:35 PM

tecumseh:
ok... first off to get somewhat approximate to something that looks like SCIENCE you need to at least present a mechanism for HOW something works. anything less is magic.. at this point twt you seem to be waving a wand and conjuring up magic to explain what is happening here.

it is still my understanding that the Lusby's bees were somewhat africanized??? if yes, then the literature suggest that when compared to the purely european cousins their pupae stage is a bit shorter.

This all sounds more like speculation than SCIENCE to me. Whether small cell, Africanized (Lusby inssists hers aren't) or conventional cell as TWT keeps, whatever keeps them from collapsing, at this point, is pure speculation.....in my opinion. Just because no one has yet established the mechanism doesn't mean that its magic......and we all know there are as many opinions out there as there are beekeepers....maybe more.

iddee

10-30-2008, 07:26 PM

It's the same thing that keeps apistan from killing mites.

Natural selection.

tecumseh

10-31-2008, 05:10 AM

beemandan writes:
Just because no one has yet established the mechanism doesn't mean that its magic

tecumseh:
I did not say that you need to prove the mechanism was the 'the one and only' thing that created 'la differance'. You do need to PRESENT a reasonable explanation of mechanism. proof can come later, but don't be surprised when this or is proved that the mechanism was a bit more complex than first suggested.

then beemandan writes:
Lusby inssists hers aren't

tecumseh:
ok.. altough I have read other places that suggested they were. I would also suggest given the lusby's location if some africanization had not taken place that 'this' would be extremely unusual.

twt writes:
when bee's aren't on small cell and aren't africanized and live without treatments of any kind it must be magic since their pupae times should be the same as normal bee's, I have not timed it but if shorter cell times is the reason my bee's live then they must magically shorten their cell times.

tecumseh:
well first off I don't think you (given your screen location) are any more isolated from africanization than are the lusby's or myself.

secondly, although the book might state that 'this stage of a bees development' is X days long... this is actually an average for that particular genetic make up of bees. other species or sub species 'time of development' for any stage (or even their total life span) will have different time frames (mean and standard divation). if it is of your OPINION that each and every time frames in a bees life if set in stone for all bee species or sub species... then I would suggest you hit the books once again. quite evidently there is more variation out there in the natural world than some seem to recognize.

iddee writes:
It's the same thing that keeps apistan from killing mites.

Natural selection.

tecumseh:
I am not certain where you might be going with this 'plausable explanation' iddee, but go ahead brother give it your best shot. at least it is a mechanism that could (or might) explan the difference. are you suggesting that 'small cell' selects for those bees that survive, or are your suggesting someting else?

ps... as a casual well written book 'guns, germs and steel' by jared diamond is quite excellent. given the title you may be surprised to find that a great deal of the book has to do with agriculture crops and the distribution (over time) of these crops. between the covers of this book mr diamond describes agricultureal crops who genetics are simple vs those that are a bit more complex and how this genetics plays out over time in determining what crops are or are not useful (in a historic context).

beemandan

10-31-2008, 06:56 AM

beemandan writes:
Just because no one has yet established the mechanism doesn't mean that its magic

tecumseh:
You do need to PRESENT a reasonable explanation of mechanism.
If you are undertaking a scientific study, then I agree. But, for an individual who has had success without knowing why....well, so be it....in my opinion.
then beemandan writes:
Lusby inssists hers aren't

tecumseh:
ok.. altough I have read other places that suggested they were. I would also suggest given the lusby's location if some africanization had not taken place that 'this' would be extremely unusual.

I agree....but am only pointing out what she says. I can't imagine that hers don't have a boatload of african genes

tecumseh:
well first off I don't think you (given your screen location) are any more isolated from africanization than are the lusby's or myself.
Actually, I think he's still pretty far from the africanized areas....for the moment.

I believe that you said it yourself earlier. When (if) the mechanism(s) are ever established it (they) will be more complicated than we ever imagined. Development time, hygienic behavior and grooming are only three suggested possibilities. There are likely other things we've never considered. So, why is it important that the beekeeper offer a SCIENTIFIC opinion as to why his (her) bees seem to survive varroa without treatment?

TwT

10-31-2008, 07:31 PM

t
twt writes:
when bee's aren't on small cell and aren't africanized and live without treatments of any kind it must be magic since their pupae times should be the same as normal bee's, I have not timed it but if shorter cell times is the reason my bee's live then they must magically shorten their cell times.

tecumseh:
well first off I don't think you (given your screen location) are any more isolated from africanization than are the lusby's or myself.

Just where is it you think my screen location says I am near ahb? I am in north georgia, no AHB here, so how can you compare my location to yours or Dee's? , I mow by my bee's, run a weed eater and work them and no problems, If I have them and they are AHB'S we need to breed from to rid ourselves of the mean one's. but I do know my hive's aren't ahb.

tecumseh

11-01-2008, 07:28 AM

beemandan writes:
Development time, hygienic behavior and grooming are only three suggested possibilities. There are likely other things we've never considered. So, why is it important that the beekeeper offer a SCIENTIFIC opinion as to why his (her) bees seem to survive varroa without treatment?

tecumseh:
I would suggest to you dan that the mixture of the three possibilities (that you list) could get quite complex. multiple allel or additive genetics (anything beyond simple recessive/dominant genetics) would mean that no one would ever be able to even recognize a 'winning' combination from a 'losing' combination (read jarred take on the apple to get some feel for this magnitude of this problem). at one time we though that hygenic behavior was somewhat more complex than simple recessive/dominant genetics and was associated with two allels. now we know (given more modern genetic techniques) that this behavior is associated with at least 7 allels. do the math... hopefully with the aid of a good computer.

as to the last question... it is really about whether you have a desire to approach the problem systemically.... edison for example (who most folks think of as a great inventor) used the style that you seem?? to be promoting. this means that he had to be willing to test and retest everything that ever came to his mind to approach a solution to the problem. the limitation was that it only allowed mr edison to tackle fairly simple problems (and then only with a great investment in time and resources).

the simplist statement of the question is reduced to, 'how' is this working? this effort is undertaken to try and discern cause (as in cause and effect) from simple association (you see this and that, but in reality they only occur together and are not interrelated whatsoever).

twt writes:
you are very wrong my friend, I am in north georgia, no AHB here or do you just not believe the scientist?

tecumseh:
I believe that most scientist when they have funds and are looking for something that is important to them (if they desire to preserve their reputations... which is professionally all they have) tell you not only what they know but what they don't know (statistical tools employed by most all science folks points to these two questons directly).

what are the possibilities that you have an EXACT history of the bees that are in your hives? or are the bees within your hives 'linage' more a matter of faith?

and a point of common human behavior.... most folks will never see something they either don't, or will not, look for. proper science requires something a bit more than simple faith.... which is to say. that even when 'science' is fairly well certain that something does work in a particular way it is still tested (although many times around the edges of the question at this point).

then twt writes:
listening to you would means everyone everywhere would have them just to prove your point

tecumseh:
and exactly what 'point' would that be twt?

ps... at one time I resided for several years in georgia and traveled the state extensively. never kept bees there... but I do have some understanding of the state, it's history, the differences in it's agriuclture and the differences in it's culture from place to place. I expect that georgia has grown some in the years since I left... I also expect that the cultural/agricultural characteristics have not.

over the years beemandan and twt I have seen a lot of snake oil sold to beekeepers commonly employing the same kind of loose association technique you both seem to favor. if you favor snake oil over real results then (I suggest) just keep on doin' what you do.

TwT

11-01-2008, 10:33 AM

beemandan writes:

over the years beemandan and twt I have seen a lot of snake oil sold to beekeepers commonly employing the same kind of loose association technique you both seem to favor. if you favor snake oil over real results then (I suggest) just keep on doin' what you do.

fair enough, but like I said in this or another post, I have not studied my bee's but something keeps them going, what it could be I just think its the bee's themselves and nothing to do with hatching times, most of the drones that I see in bur comb when I open up hives dont even have mites on them, some do but very few and sometimes none at all, something is going on in there and I am not worried to know as long as they live, I might give a few queens to UGA and let them study them since they have the time and know what they are doing.

iddee

11-01-2008, 12:56 PM

>>>>and a point of common human behavior.... most folks will never see something they either don't, or will not, look for. proper science requires something a bit more than simple faith.... which is to say. that even when 'science' is fairly well certain that something does work in a particular way it is still tested (although many times around the edges of the question at this point).<<<<

I seen a headline a few years back. It went something like this:

Scientists find what Grandmas have known for a thousand years. Chicken soup cures colds.

It went on to say how they had segregated the substance in chicken fat that did it.

Does that mean it didn't work before the scientists proved it. I don't think so.

Ted and Dan have found what works, and could care less how it should be written in the science books.

tecumseh

11-01-2008, 05:53 PM

iddee writes:
I seen a headline a few years back. It went something like this:

tecumseh:
a closer reference might be bee sting therapy... which not that long ago some might have considered to be wives tales and wishful thinking.

then iddee writes:
Does that mean it didn't work before the scientists proved it. I don't think so.

tecumseh:
curious sentence iddee. scientist typically don't look (or find) things that don't exist. usually they look at a lot of stuff that doesn't explain before they find something that does.

finally iddee writes:
Ted and Dan have found what works, and could care less how it should be written in the science books.

tecumseh replies:
a pragmatic approach. a lot of science begins as alagory (story telling or some might call it discriptive science) which then directs research as to the how. of course I have no idea of the sample size ted and/or dan might represent... or how reproduceable their approach might when other variable are considered.

I suspect??? just a bit of the varing view in regards to the 'treat or not to treat' question is fairly directly related to firm size (hive numbers) and use (purpose for which the bees are kept).

beemandan

11-02-2008, 08:37 AM

I would suggest to you dan that the mixture of the three possibilities (that you list) could get quite complex.No question about it. I think that many things in our world depend on complex interactions. To isolate one and claim it is the ‘cause’ is often too simplistic.
as to the last question... it is really about whether you have a desire to approach the problem systemically I’m a supporter of well designed scientific studies. On the other hand as an individual beekeeper I find myself more limited. I often find myself taking a more generalistic than a ‘systemic’ approach.

what are the possibilities that you have an EXACT history of the bees that are in your hives? or are the bees within your hives 'linage' more a matter of faith?
and a point of common human behavior.... most folks will never see something they either don't, or will not, look for. I find it especially interesting that you would question twt’s assertion that his bees aren’t ahb. He lives in an area where they haven’t (yet) migrated. On the other hand you have defended Binford Weaver’s claim that his aren’t. And he produces his bees in an area that has a been ahb territory for quite a while. I don’t think you can have it both ways.
over the years beemandan and twt I have seen a lot of snake oil sold to beekeepers commonly employing the same kind of loose association technique you both seem to favor. What makes you think I’m selling anything? I’m only pointing out that, in my opinion, if a beekeeper has developed methods that allow him/her to keep bees without chemicals, I’d be the last person to suggest he/she change those methods. And I don’t demand that they offer a SCIENTIFIC explanation for their success.

HarryVanderpool

11-02-2008, 07:11 PM

iddee writes:

I suspect??? just a bit of the varing view in regards to the 'treat or not to treat' question is fairly directly related to firm size (hive numbers) and use (purpose for which the bees are kept).

Very good point.
I have growers that have come to depend on DEPENDABLE, strong, healthy hives for pollination.
You can see the confidence in their manner not only about our bees, but of the other beekeepers that work with us. I know of many good beekeepers that provide similar quality and service here in Oregon.
On the other hand, we all know a few out there that have a good year here, a bad year there; strong hives here, crashing hives over there....
Growers don't need to be dealing with that. They have their own problems to deal with.
So I do have an area behind my barn for "tinkering" around with a few hives, but as for the rest, they are going to run at full strength, produce nucs and packages, and winter well to do it all over again in the new year.

Also, someone posted earlier on something about treated bees getting "weaker and weaker".
I have seen none of that.
Our bees look really good for almonds. If I see problems, I'll take the blame. I do not blame bees for failure in management.

Speaking of management:
One problem that I see plaguing some beekeepers is that they change to many aspects of their program, every year.
How do you EVER know what works or doesn't if you change everything you do, every year?!!!

We hold very tight procedures and feed and medication regimins.
Rotation is required in some chemical applications, yes. But strict and careful testing is part of that.
For most everything else, if it is working and has worked well for years, be careful with changing anything without thorough testing and documentation.

tecumseh

11-03-2008, 05:24 AM

beemandan writes:
I find it especially interesting that you would question twt’s assertion that his bees aren’t ahb. He lives in an area where they haven’t (yet) migrated. On the other hand you have defended Binford Weaver’s claim that his aren’t. And he produces his bees in an area that has a been ahb territory for quite a while. I don’t think you can have it both ways.

tecumseh:
perhaps you might wish to reread my 5500 post and point to me where I said Binford Weaver's bees were not africanized (hybridized) or even where I might have suggested that Binford said they there was absolutely no possibility that his bees were not hybridized. I would suggest that where ever twt got his bees there is a definite POSSIBILITY that the initial stock was africanized even if he did get them from B Weaver. ps.... I do believe via experience and more than a bit of chatter with KNOWLEDGEABLE commercial beekeepers that the africanized problem was around a bit longer than some folks might think (taber wrote a bit on his experience which reinforces this view). so even the ploy of... I got them bee 30 years ago and have kept them up 'a holler ever since' might not insure you againist africanized bees.

and really I was not insisting that twt's bee may or may not be hybridized. I was asking what mechanism(s) those that think small cell works (which I take is what both of you utilize?) operates upon. I guess the impression I hold at this time is that small cell is based upon BLIND FAITH and a bit of smoke and mirrows (excellent salemanship by someone else).

then beemandan writes:
What makes you think I’m selling anything? I’m only pointing out that, in my opinion, if a beekeeper has developed methods that allow him/her to keep bees without chemicals, I’d be the last person to suggest he/she change those methods. And I don’t demand that they offer a SCIENTIFIC explanation for their success.

tecumseh:
you seem to have internalized my snake oil salesman comment.... humm. so quite evidently BLIND FAITH works for you.

a couple of Harry snips..
I have growers that have come to depend on DEPENDABLE, strong, healthy hives for pollination.

One problem that I see plaguing some beekeepers is that they change to many aspects of their program, every year.

Rotation is required in some chemical applications, yes. But strict and careful testing is part of that.

tecumseh:
at your size of operation harry I would suspect (experience suggest) that getting past the state scales with a valid health certificate is a primary concern. of course for those of us that need not ship bees across a state line this is a concern that is easily tossed out the window. I would also suspect??? being able to relaible fill contractual agreements with folks that are going to use your services next year and the year that follows would be a fairly high level of concern for anyone that pollinates.

you second and third snipped sentence is what much of my quite obviously fruitless dialogue points toward. folks that for no better reason than they have been sold the one and true way are now True Believers themselves. well actually they have just BOUGHT into the newest fashion de jour... which will change tomorrow.

and a final Harry snip:
Also, someone posted earlier on something about treated bees getting "weaker and weaker".

tecumseh:
could happen of course. some time (I suspect) the 'weaker and weaker' could be reason and sometime excuse. with the multitude of things that can happen with bees yes this is always a possibility. I cannot image some person who experienced this would not have composed a list of things that might have contributed to the problem. testing of course might toss a thing or so off the list or it might add other possible concerns.

for myself (and likely somewhat a product of my economic background) I pretty much know that what I do today only shows up six months to a year down the road (lagged time effect). so for anything I might attempt any results or success is a "let's wait and see thingee". it is also why I don't (and likely will not) change how I do things in some radical way just to look fashionable or trendy. when I do alter something, I will likely insist on having some idea of HOW it works before I set upon a path of changing anything.

beemandan

11-03-2008, 06:00 AM

and really I was not insisting that twt's bee may or may not be hybridized. I was asking what mechanism(s) those that think small cell works (which I take is what both of you utilize?) operates upon.No. I don't use small cell and twt has clearly indicated that he doesn't either. I treat some of my hives for varroa. I used Apiguard this season.

I guess the impression I hold at this time is that small cell is based upon BLIND FAITH and a bit of smoke and mirrows (excellent salemanship by someone else).We're closer to agreement here.

If I understand your general complaint its that if a beekeeper keeps bees without chemical treatments successfully, then they are under some obligation to determine a specific cause for that success? That is my main disagreement in this particular discussion. I don't believe that they have that obligation. Most of us would have some curiousity but no obligation exists...in my opinion. Twt, if my memory serves only pointed out that he doesn't treat his bees. He, like I was not selling....or buying anything...snake oil or otherwise.

If on the other hand someone is promoting a specific method to others then, I'd agree that they need to understand why that particular technique works.

deknow

11-03-2008, 08:04 AM

.... edison for example (who most folks think of as a great inventor) used the style that you seem?? to be promoting. this means that he had to be willing to test and retest everything that ever came to his mind to approach a solution to the problem. the limitation was that it only allowed mr edison to tackle fairly simple problems (and then only with a great investment in time and resources).

yes, edison is one example of this kind of approach....another might be john chapman (johnny appleseed). breeding for a good apple is as difficult (if not more difficult) than finding the best filament for a light bulb...or even breeding a better bee. apples don't breed true....and you have to wait for a tree to mature to fruiting before even getting preliminary "data".

(i'm leaning heavily on michael pollan here...the first section of 'botany of desire').

john didn't care about 'eating apples' (there were variety of 'old world' varieties available...and grafting was done in those days), but for making hard cider (the only available source of 'sweet' in many areas...and sometimes the only safe thing to drink). because of this, he was happy to use as his seed bank, the piles of seeds outside of cider mills. he traveled ahead of the westward expansion, planting seedlings, and making partnerships with locals who would sell the small trees to settlers moving westward with which to start their own cider orchard...and give him his cut when he came back around.

of the many thousands (millions?) of trees he (and i assume others) planted in this way, a very, very few trees in the resulting orchards produced good eating fruit. it's essentially grafts from these few trees that make up the 'new world apples'. this didn't come from complex computer models, it came from letting this kind of complex genetics do it's work, and be evaluted by humans.

perhaps we need, in addition to people breeding from untreated survivor stock (regardless of cell size), the equivalent of the apple competitions that used to exist....a better way to identify the best this kind of vast breeding program has to offer. an equivalent might be larger breeding operations offering cash prizes for extraordinary hives.

i do agree that the genetics (especially when working with multiple drone fathers) of bees is complicated...perhaps too complicated for us to think that we know enough (or can learn enough in the short term) to manipulate these factors positively.

as i've said before (and will say again), the research we have been doing on the microbial environment inside the hive is fascinating....perhaps more complex and important than the genetics of the bees themselves. the 'soft treatments' like formic acid might be more harmful than some of the 'hard treatments' in this regard. there also seems to be some research that shows that bees fed sugar syrup lack some of the necessary gut bacteria over the winter, whereas those feeding on honey maintain these populations.

wrt africanization, it is well known that the usda supplied breeders in this country with the same genetics used in brazil. wrt africanization in the lusby operation, it is my understanding that 3 labs analyzed the samples...and one of the 3 returned positive for africanization. i don't know the answer about her bees (although i have worked with them), but i do know that if you have a 'lab test' that can't be repeated from one lab to another, it is useless. this seems irrelevant anyways.....who cares. defensive ehb colonies should be culled. defensive ahb colonies should be culled. what do we get from testing for ahb to decide the fate of a hive? it is uncomfortably close to deciding what punishment one should receive for robbing a liquor store based on their skin color....or their degree of 'africanization'.

deknow

deknow

11-03-2008, 08:50 AM

also, wrt 'science' and 'proving the mechanism'....

we don't have a proven mechanism for how gravity works....it is not magic, it is repeatable and something we can rely on.

wrt small cell...the studies that have been done on this by the 'researchers' have been sorely lacking. given (as others have suggested) that there are likely many interrelated factors involved in bees surviving, it makes no sense to take one isolated aspect and test it in isolation...at least not as a first step.

there is no doubt that the lusby's operation is worth looking at....and sc is just one aspect. why not replicate it as closely as possible to see if as a whole it is reproducible? this operation does seem to work as a whole, so why expect one aspect of it to 'work'...in less than one season no less.

if i were to say that eating earthworms cures cancer (and had some demonstrable examples to demonstrate success), isolating one protein, feeding it to cancer patients, and seeing no positive results proves nothing except that that particular protein in isolation doesn't cure cancer...perhaps the active compound is a different protein...perhaps it's a combination...or perhaps it never works from laboratory raised worms because it's the microbes in from the soil in the gut of fresh dug earthworm that are responsible.

as far as the 'mechanism(s)' by which sc might operate...there are a number of candidates. higher density of bees in the hive/on the comb, shorter capping time (as measured by michael bush), less body weight is easier to fly with equivelent flight muscles, less jgh and/or food placed in the smaller cell. it's worth noting that one would have a hard time naming a human disease who's effects aren't worsened via being overweight...that an overweight human population is not likely to be as healthy as one that is not. in this sense, to an overweight human from an overweight population, losing a few pounds is indeed a 'magic bullet' for many of their health problems.

another note (since probiotics were mentioned earlier in this thread) is that jeff pettis in a recent talk to our county bee club noted that there was some work going on wrt probiotics...the preliminary results showed that they did have a positive effect on caged bees...but no effect on actual colonies of bees.

deknow

pasted here is a recent post from dee on the organic list:

Since Dr Loper sampled my honeybees last fall for analysis for Dr Bromenshenk
I decided to give him a phone call and invite him out with 4 more yards to
work thru so he could see how bees were doing and timing would be similar to
last fall in a way, as last saw the yards in August and was setting them up to
continue coming on and try to get fall honey/stores for wintering successfully.

Figured this would be the polite thing to do, not knowing how many beekeepers
after sampling invite same people doing work back next year for updates and
comparisons to see if situation improved or worsened.

Also I had informed you all here that I had worked first two yards and gotten
a barrel of honey apiece.....................

Anyway we worked the bees and he liked what he saw,............and seemed to
agree with me I have NO reason to give in on what I do as my bees seemed
healthy......saw no foul, chalk, sickness etc, I had reused same equipment, and
yes....he helped me take another barrel of honey or should I say Dr Loper helped
me get in 23 deeps of honey for the day. Still have to extract over weekend.

Also two of these yards were were I had reported here 5 frames of brood and
bees had been taken from 3rd deep back in May thereabouts which made them
harder to work back up.................and got me buying that 38 special
smith/wesson I talked about getting mad for awhile.

So what is CCD for getting over???..... for organicbeekeepers with zero
treatments, and not doing artificial feeds (which I don't)........etc.??? Why
are
other beekeepers hurting?

beemandan

11-03-2008, 12:57 PM

tecumseh:
you seem to have internalized my snake oil salesman comment.... humm. so quite evidently BLIND FAITH works for you.

I love it when you use these meaningless, semi-coherent phrases. It sounds cool but just doesn't have any substance.
Absolutely ridiculous.

NasalSponge

11-03-2008, 05:27 PM

Apart form the personal attacks, this has been a fascinating read.:)

beemandan

11-03-2008, 07:07 PM

Apart form the personal attacks,
How did I miss those? Sheesh!! Now I've got to go back and read all of the posts again.

TwT

11-03-2008, 07:25 PM

for the record I got most of my bee's from removals, I did about 3 years ago buy some PBA queens from Dann Purvis to cross into my removal hives.

tecumseh

11-03-2008, 08:25 PM

deknow writes:
yes, edison is one example of this kind of approach....another might be john chapman (johnny appleseed). breeding for a good apple is as difficult (if not more difficult) than finding the best filament for a light bulb...or even breeding a better bee. apples don't breed true....and you have to wait for a tree to mature to fruiting before even getting preliminary "data".

tecumseh:
jared diamond 'guns, germs and steel' talks about apples directly and the problems of determing productive offspring when the genetic are not of the simplist form (dominant/recessive). I think it was apples where grafting (sound familar) became the preferred mechanism for replicating productive individuals.

beemandan writes:
I love it when you use these meaningless, semi-coherent phrases.

tecumseh:
I find it curious that I can make a general statement about things that have (frequently) occurred in the long distant past (likely before some here were born) and a few souls alway seem to think I am in some way talking about them? seems a bit me, me, me.. to me.

I find it curious that some folks don't mind stating that I said something that I absolutely did not say and then seem unremorseful about their embellishments. then a few pages later, the pattern is repeated again. how absolutely unclever.

deknow

11-03-2008, 10:04 PM

deknow writes:
I think it was apples where grafting (sound familar) became the preferred mechanism for replicating productive individuals.

this was entirely my point. in john chapman's time, grafting of apples was known and practiced...if one wanted eating apples, this is what one did. by planting seeds instead, there were enough individual combinations that some stood out as good eating apples...despite not really trying to produce eating apples. "rolling the genetic dice" as pollan puts it.

this is where we got the 'new world apples'....not from grafting...grafting is how these new apples were propagated.

deknow

Michael Bush

11-04-2008, 05:46 AM

I can never figure out why AHB always comes up in a discussion of small cell. Maybe Dee's are, maybe they are not. Mine are not. No other small cell beekeepers I know of are.

If more of you would set up an observation hive, put some bees on Honey Super Cell or small cell foundation, measure some cell size, measure some capping and post-capping times we could use some actual observations in this discussion instead of speculation. A few people on Beesource have and the only results I've seen posted by anyone, correspond with my observations (and Huber's). Shorter on both counts by a day. Did anyone ever do this on small cell with different results?

Also, just because you don't know a mechanism doesn't mean something doesn't work. They are still working out the mechanism of how aspirin works and weren't even in the ballpark of explaining it in the 1970's and yet humans all over the planet have been using it (in the form of willow bark) for as far back as we can find records in every culture. If we insisted that no one could actually be getting help and no one could use it until we could explain it there were literally Trillions of headaches that would have gone untreated and the people would have had to just suffer because we couldn't explain it. Just because people didn't know the mechanism did not mean it did not work nor did it mean it was "magic".

All through time you could eat food that is less processed and stay healthier than eating food that was more processed. What is the mechanism? There are probably many including removing things that contain nutrition (wheat germ etc.) and removing things that don't contain any nutrition but that change how you digestion works (fiber). The "scientific" view would hold that since fiber has no nutritive value it can't be important. ;) I hear statements like this all the time. But reality is it works and always has regardless of whether or not we understand it.

beemandan

11-04-2008, 05:55 AM

tecumseh:
you seem to have internalized my snake oil salesman comment.... humm. so quite evidently BLIND FAITH works for you.

beemandan writes:
I love it when you use these meaningless, semi-coherent phrases.

tecumseh:
I find it curious that I can make a general statement about things that have (frequently) occurred in the long distant past (likely before some here were born) and a few souls alway seem to think I am in some way talking about them? seems a bit me, me, me.. to me.

That was a general statement about things that have occurred in the distant past? You weren’t referring to me? How could I have gotten so confused? (or at least one of us is confused)

No remorse on my part for making untrue statements? I’ll tell you what. I don’t plan to reread your 5500 posts looking for clues but if you will simply state that you believe that Binford Weaver is selling Africanized bees and queens, then I’ll happily apologize. Just a simple yes or no will do.

beemandan

11-04-2008, 06:39 AM

I can never figure out why AHB always comes up in a discussion of small cell.

You're kidding, right? Lets see. Dee Lusby started the small cell movement. She is located in an area that is well established with AHB. The natural sized cell for AHB is likely around 4.9mm. Its pretty hard to separate small cell from AHB given those points...wouldn't you say?

iddee

11-04-2008, 08:03 AM

Hey, Guys, look what I found. I bet you didn't know it was closed, did you?

http://www.beesource.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=244

beemandan

11-04-2008, 08:32 AM

Hey Dr Tec....I'm thinkin' that we've had a couple of posts deleted.....I reckon that we're gettin' too frisky for the neighborhood.

deknow

11-04-2008, 08:45 AM

You're kidding, right? Lets see. Dee Lusby started the small cell movement. She is located in an area that is well established with AHB. The natural sized cell for AHB is likely around 4.9mm. Its pretty hard to separate small cell from AHB given those points...wouldn't you say?

....yet, look at the timing. the lusby's started their look at cell sizes and regression in 88/89, and were already seeing improvements _before_ the arrival of ahb in their area. most of the 'testing' for ahb in that time was by size...so it's interesting that the 'ahb' was first seen in the vicinity of these hives that were already (before ahb) on smaller cell sizes.

also, my understanding is that when tested by 3 labs worldwide, only the one in the u.s. returned positive for africanization. what good is a lab test that can't be repeated from one lab to another?

deknow

beemandan

11-04-2008, 08:59 AM

....yet, look at the timing. the lusby's started their look at cell sizes and regression in 88/89, and were already seeing improvements _before_ the arrival of ahb in their area. most of the 'testing' for ahb in that time was by size...so it's interesting that the 'ahb' was first seen in the vicinity of these hives that were already (before ahb) on smaller cell sizes.

also, my understanding is that when tested by 3 labs worldwide, only the one in the u.s. returned positive for africanization. what good is a lab test that can't be repeated from one lab to another?

deknow

I will suggest that ahb were probably in the Lusby's area before they were confirmed there. I would also suggest that it'd be very difficult, if not impossible to have pure european bees from open mated queens in an area with a large feral ahb population.
It was my understanding that the other labs were unable to unequivocably state that her bees weren't ahb. Am I mistaken?

Having said all of that, my reply to MB was only to challenge his statement that he couldn't understand the association people made between small cell and ahb. He really does understand, I'm sure......

beemandan

11-04-2008, 01:43 PM

'Don't promote what you don't intend'. Maybe I can't explain it but, 'It work's for me'. ;) I hope it helps you.
Not to put too fine a point on it but I'm thinkin' its more like 'Do not pretend what you do not intend'

deknow

11-04-2008, 06:36 PM

I will suggest that ahb were probably in the Lusby's area before they were confirmed there.
...if it were anywhere but tucson...a place where there was (and is) an active bee lab that stood to get funding to deal with the ahb "problem". also, at that time, the lab (dr erickson specifically) was looking at the "lus bee" wrt to thelytoky...published in '91. it would be hard to imagine that if these were in fact ahb that no one at the lab noticed.
http://www.beesource.com/pov/lusby/bsmay1991.htm

I would also suggest that it'd be very difficult, if not impossible to have pure european bees from open mated queens in an area with a large feral ahb population.
It was my understanding that the other labs were unable to unequivocably state that her bees weren't ahb. Am I mistaken?

i haven't seen the primary data (lab reports), so i can't really say....but if you (or your child) were diagnosed with plague from 1 lab, and 2 other labs couldn't confirm or deny, would you assume you had plague? what would you think of the lab tests that couldn't be replicated from one lab to another?

Having said all of that, my reply to MB was only to challenge his statement that he couldn't understand the association people made between small cell and ahb. He really does understand, I'm sure......

understood...but remember, there are far more beekeepers that have read michael bush's website than have read dee's writings on small cell....and michael is not in an ahb area, and uses/has used all kinds of stock on sc with similar results...

deknow