Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 35 of 35

Thread: IPM

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    1,262

    Wink

    MB, thanks for the links...

    I will say that I don't ascribe to anything listed on quackwatch... Follow the money trail.....

    I could go off on dentistry industry but I'll let that one slide for now......


  2. #22
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Nehawka, Nebraska USA
    Posts
    46,729

    Post

    The honey council saying that essential oils work? What's next? Meditation? (Just kidding).

    You will notice a lot of them list AFB as one of the things that essential oils are working against. Keep in mind this is because of the antimicrobial properties of these oils, but only on the active bacteria in the brood. The AFB spores are pretty much indestructable under any circumstances that bees can survive.

    It seems resonable, but no one seems to have researched it that some of these animicrobial properties could be useful against nosema and chalkbrood and other things cause by various microbes. When they are in the feed the bees are ingesting them and the brood is being fed them. Some oils keep the syrup from getting mold in it and may help prevent the fungus that causes chalkbrood. I've had fairly thin syrup with wintergreen oil in it for a year and it never molded or fermented.

  3. #23
    jfischer Guest

    Post


    > rather than address what I say, you keep addressing what you think I am implying.

    I'm sorry that you feel that way. The questions are rephrased below.
    Answer if you please.

    > I said:
    >>> "The Terramycin is a preventative for AFB.
    >>> AFB is everywhere and is a stress disease.

    > You said:
    >> "This is a highly unusual claim. I know of no published work supporting the conclusion
    >> that bees subjected to stress will develop AFB without already having been exposed to
    >> the spores that cause AFB. Where do the Bacillus larvae come from, if AFB is caused by
    >> "stress"? Is this a case of spontaneous generation?"

    > Where did I imply or say anything about a lack of AFB spores?

    My question was very very simple. I'll ask it again.

    If "AFB is everywhere", as you claim, then where did it come from?
    How did it get there?

    If bees started in new equipment and foundation in areas known to lack bees
    (used in research for "isolation testing" of newly-imported stock) can get
    AFB, then I might agree with your claim that "AFB is everywhere". In fact,
    I am led to understand that the consensus view is that AFB is most often
    spread by much more simple mechanisms:

    a) A weak colony fails to be "hygienic", and AFB gets out of hand.
    (The spores are assumed to present in this hive due to sloppy
    practices, most often the re-use of brood chambers and combs
    from prior deadouts, without any attempt sterilization of some
    sort, such as scorching, paraffin dipping, whatever).

    b) The weak colony gets robbed out, spreading the AFB to other hives.

    c) The cycle repeats, weak hives being robbed, spreading AFB.

    That's the most plausible explanation possible, now that the impact
    of the beekeeper has been studied, and it has been realized that
    spreading AFB is very difficult to do with a hive tool. (Regardless,
    one is well-served by keeping a very clean hive tool, and cleaning it
    between opening each hive.)

    > Where did I imply or say that AFB was caused by spontaneous generation?

    It was a joke. It was a refutation of your flat statement that
    "AFB is everywhere and is a stress disease." It was an attempt
    to gently point out that if beekeepers become convinced that merely
    "preventing stress" (a highly subjective metric, one nearly impossible
    to measure) will prevent AFB, this will result in more cases of AFB
    that get out of control.

    > I basically stated that the bees WILL be exposed to AFB because it is in
    > the environment,

    I also question this specific claim.

    >...an irrational belief in spontaneous generation.

    And when/where did I claim that belief in spontaneous generation
    was "irrational"? Isn't this the crime I am accused of committing?

    I simply asked if this was the explanation for AFB spores being "everywhere",
    as I could think of no other way for such spores to be "everywhere", or
    even "in the environment" in sufficient quantity and universal distribution
    to be able to be encountered by a bee.

    > I said:
    > "The Fumidil is for Nosema. Again, if you try to prevent stress and leave
    > them honey for the winter they will be less likely to get an outbreak."

    > Where did I say anything more than what Tom Webster said in his presentation?

    I don't know what Tom said to your group, or what you think Tom said. I only
    know what I heard Tom say at a different meeting, and what is on the tape I
    made of his talk. (Yeah, I got it all on tape. That's why I'm so sure of what
    he did and did not say at the TN meeting.)

    > I said "leave them honey for the winter they will be LESS LIKELY
    > to get an outbreak."

    Then do you or don't you think that honey (or, as you said elsewhere, "dark honey")
    has any impact on (and, thereby is responsible for a lower incidence of nosema)?

    > You changed what I said,

    If you feel that my questions were "changing" rather than attempts to clarify
    and simplify your statements, then we apparently have very different understandings
    of the pathology of diseases like AFB and nosema. I was trying to take your statements
    and fit them into existing models of bee disease pathology, nothing more.

    > You said I said:
    > "Yet you want to dismiss the consensus view of a very large group of
    > folks in an offhand manner, citing only anecdotal reports over short
    > periods of time?"

    The exact words you used were:

    "In the course of my life I have seen alot of things that
    were considered a "proven scientific fact" later disproved...
    If some of us are skeptical as to the conclusions of "science"
    and to the "real" toxicity and ramifications of chemical
    treatments it is not without basis nor is without precedence."

    > When did I dismiss any view of anyone?

    In the exact lines quoted above.

    > I have merely presented my view (and the view of many others).

    A view that can only be read as dismissing science AS A WHOLE in
    a very offhand manner, as I pointed out.

    This is a highly entertaining posture, moreso given the highly
    indignant reaction to my merely questioning the one specific
    study which you mentioned. (Or, more to the point, my questioning
    your interpretation of a presentation about a study.)

    > But I most assuredly understand and respect all your opinions.
    > I simply don't entirely agree with all of them.

    I respect all views.
    I just couldn't make any sense of yours.
    That's why I took the time to ask you questions, something
    that I am certain to hesitate to do in the future.

    The specific points of apparent disagreement are what interest me.
    I was just trying to see where you were coming from, and narrow
    things down to simple points. This was merely an attempt to find
    out how you came to your stated views on these issues.

    > I would appreciate in the future, if we choose to continue this
    > discussion if you would refrain from putting words in my mouth
    > and implying things I did not say nor did I intend to say or imply.

    OK, so asking any question that attempts to narrow the issues and
    "get down to brass tacks" is not going to result in an answer, but
    instead, objections to the questions as "unfair"? That makes it
    difficult to conduct an adult conversation.

    > If you would instead discuss what I SAID instead of what you THINK
    > I said, it would be much easier and less stressful for both of us.

    Well, when the most basic question I asked was "are you SURE
    that you heard him correctly?", there are multiple layers of
    "he said/I heard" to wade through.

    So, I'll ask again. Are you SURE he said what you said he said?

    I'm sorry if I caused you any stress. Would it have been less stressful
    for me to simply paste specific lines from your message, and ask YOU
    to take the time to respond to "Explain your reasoning here?" after
    each quote? Do you think this would result in your jumping at
    once to the specific point of interest? Sounds like I'd make a
    lot more work for you this way.

    But, if you wish, you may explain the pathology of both nosema and
    AFB, and illustrate how you think the specific practices you mentioned
    would somehow "lower the incidence" of either problem.

    In specific regard to the "honey" issue, could you also explain
    why honey should be considered somehow "superior" to HFCS and/or
    sugar syrup when all honey is well-known to contain natural
    indigestibles ('ash', if you will) which not only can, but
    inevitably will lead to diarrhea or worse in the long periods
    when bees are not able to take regular cleansing flights during winter?

    While I agree that improperly prepared sugar syrup can have even
    an even higher percentage of indigestible content due to over-heating
    resulting in sugar that is "caramelized", I wish you to compare "properly
    prepared" to "properly prepared" versions of each.

    Bottom line, I'm harmless. Relax, laugh a little, and understand
    that my being "hard on the issue" is not being "hard on the person".
    Asking for an explanation of your reasoning is NOT an "attack".

    In a subsquent posting, you said (exact quote, here):

    "I have to say it's the story of my life that people on both
    sides of a fence think always think I'm on the other side."

    Could it be that these sorts of "failures to communicate" arise
    from the sort of defensive and angry response you made to a few
    simple questions from me?

    Sounds to me like a song done by the Animals, later covered
    by both Joe Cocker and Cindy Lauper:

    "I'm just a soul who's intentions are good -
    Oh Lord, please don't let me be misunderstood."


  4. #24
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Lenexa, Kansas
    Posts
    445

    Post

    MICHAEL is defensive?

    MMMmmmm....Sounds like the pot calling the kettle black, if you take my meaning.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Raleigh, NC, USA
    Posts
    770

    Post

    jfischer,
    In the below quoted question to MB, please explain or provide an authoritive reference source for the your ridiculous assertion that honey causes diarrhea in bees. Surely you would agree that, since bees work very hard to make honey for the long winter, it must be good for them? Was this a joke too?

    "In specific regard to the "honey" issue, could you also explain why honey should be considered somehow "superior" to HFCS and/or
    sugar syrup when all honey is well-known to contain natural indigestibles ('ash', if you will) which not only can, but inevitably will lead to diarrhea or worse in the long periods when bees are not able to take regular cleansing flights during winter?"

    My guess is that much like humans, bees need some amount of roughage in their diet.

    Danke

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Manitoba Canada
    Posts
    6,572

    Post

    You guys type too much

    Seems to me the only reason there is an arguement here is perhaps, only to argue b/w each other. Just state what your opinions are on the subject, I dont want to hear your opinions on eachother. It just fills the page up with garbage, and doesnt hold any wait in the arguement in my opinion...
    I read all that and got nothing from it!!!

    Ian

    [This message has been edited by Ian (edited March 03, 2004).]

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Nehawka, Nebraska USA
    Posts
    46,729

    Post

    >My question was very very simple. I'll ask it again.

    >If "AFB is everywhere", as you claim, then where did it come from?
    How did it get there?

    >If bees started in new equipment and foundation in areas known to lack bees
    (used in research for "isolation testing" of newly-imported stock) can get
    AFB, then I might agree with your claim that "AFB is everywhere". In fact,
    I am led to understand that the consensus view is that AFB is most often
    spread by much more simple mechanisms:

    And I will answer again quoting from my posts above:

    "You have staphylococcus bacteria in every human abode. Even if it’s new and even if the people came in a very clean ambulance. How did it get there? Life. The environment is full of it. How do AFB spores get in a hive? They live forever. Bees investigate every place that bees in the preceding hundreds of years have been. There are spores there."

    >> Where did I imply or say that AFB was caused by spontaneous generation?

    >It was a joke. It was a refutation of your flat statement that
    "AFB is everywhere and is a stress disease." It was an attempt
    to gently point out that if beekeepers become convinced that merely
    "preventing stress" (a highly subjective metric, one nearly impossible
    to measure) will prevent AFB, this will result in more cases of AFB
    that get out of control.

    Personally I don't think comparing someones view to an irational view is helpful to the discussion.

    >> I basically stated that the bees WILL be exposed to AFB because it is in
    >> the environment,

    >I also question this specific claim.

    You certainly are entitled to question anyone’s claim of anything. But if AFB spores are NOT commonly everywhere then why treat with Terramycin? If the spores are NOT common then what is the point?

    >>...an irrational belief in spontaneous generation.

    >And when/where did I claim that belief in spontaneous generation
    was "irrational"? Isn't this the crime I am accused of committing?

    Are you saying that you believe that spontaneous generation IS rational? If so, I think this conversation is a TOTAL waste of time.

    >I simply asked if this was the explanation for AFB spores being "everywhere",
    as I could think of no other way for such spores to be "everywhere", or
    even "in the environment" in sufficient quantity and universal distribution
    to be able to be encountered by a bee.

    Bees will investigate anywhere that bees have been in the past. AFB spores live virtually forever so they only accumulate in the environment. Any bees anywhere WILL find and investigate places that bees have lived in the past.

    >> I said:
    >> "The Fumidil is for Nosema. Again, if you try to prevent stress and leave
    >> them honey for the winter they will be less likely to get an outbreak."

    >> Where did I say anything more than what Tom Webster said in his presentation?

    >I don't know what Tom said to your group, or what you think Tom said.

    Exactly! So why do you keep questioning it? I have a remarkable memory and can assure you that he said no more or less than that a study had revealed that bees on honey for winter feed had less incidence of Nosema and those on dark honey had even less. He was NOT trying to say that it was a "replacement" for Fumidil, nor am I trying to say he said that. However for those of us NOT using Fumidil it is helpful to know.

    >I only know what I heard Tom say at a different meeting, and what is on the tape I
    made of his talk. (Yeah, I got it all on tape. That's why I'm so sure of what
    he did and did not say at the TN meeting.)

    And are you going to share what he said about honey for winter feed, at that meeting, with us?

    >> I said "leave them honey for the winter they will be LESS LIKELY
    >> to get an outbreak."

    >Then do you or don't you think that honey (or, as you said elsewhere, "dark honey")
    has any impact on (and, thereby is responsible for a lower incidence of nosema)?

    Yes. According to at least one study, bees overwinterd on honey had less incidence of Nosema. There does not appear to be a likely hood that the Nosema caused the bees to eat honey as winter feed, so the causality seems obvious. However, it would be much more obvious if a mechanism could be isolated. As someone who has kept bees for 30 years, with a lot of success and has NEVER used Fumidil I think I can say unequivocally that you CAN raise bees without it.

    >> You changed what I said,

    >If you feel that my questions were "changing" rather than attempts to clarify
    and simplify your statements, then we apparently have very different understandings
    of the pathology of diseases like AFB and nosema. I was trying to take your statements
    and fit them into existing models of bee disease pathology, nothing more.

    Then let's clarify. The "germ" theory of disease, which started with Pasteur and has continued until today is that microorganisms are the cause of most, if not all, diseases. And that the cure is to avoid or kill the microorganisms. That theory is still around but is gradually being replaced by the theory that the microorganisms are always there and the microorganisms are opportunists that take advantage of weakened immune systems, or stress. My experience and a lot of recent science in general would support the later theory. I would much prefer to remove the stress than to try to overpower the microorganisms.

    >> You said I said:
    >> "Yet you want to dismiss the consensus view of a very large group of
    >> folks in an offhand manner, citing only anecdotal reports over short
    >> periods of time?"

    >The exact words you used were:

    >"In the course of my life I have seen alot of things that
    >were considered a "proven scientific fact" later disproved...
    >If some of us are skeptical as to the conclusions of "science"
    >and to the "real" toxicity and ramifications of chemical
    >treatments it is not without basis nor is without precedence."

    I have stated the reason I do not trust the basic pharmecutical/chemical/pesticide kind of solutions. I don't see where I was "dismissive" or "offhand". Characterizing what people say and discussing what they say are two different things. How do you suggest I express my distrust of the system that gave us Thalidimide, Phen-Fen, DDT and many others without you characterizing me as being dismissive and offhand? You and others certainly have a right to trust that system if you like. I certainly have the right not to if I like.

    >> When did I dismiss any view of anyone?

    >In the exact lines quoted above.

    Then tell me how do I state my reasons for NOT trusting a "scientific" system that I have seen fail so many times in the past without being dismissive to your view? I certainly did not intend to be dismissive to anyone’s view.

    >> I have merely presented my view (and the view of many others).

    >A view that can only be read as dismissing science AS A WHOLE in
    a very offhand manner, as I pointed out.

    I still don't know what is "offhand" about it. Stating the reasons for my beliefs seems straightforward to me. And I certainly would not say that my view of science is to “dismiss it as a whole” by any means. I have learned to take “science” with a grain of salt and learned to look further into the details of studies and side effects of chemicals and have come to some of my own conclusions based on those studies and my own experiences. If I come across as dismissive, it was not my intention and I hope you will forgive me.

    >This is a highly entertaining posture, moreso given the highly
    indignant reaction to my merely questioning the one specific
    study which you mentioned. (Or, more to the point, my questioning
    your interpretation of a presentation about a study.)

    You have a habit of characterizing my responses in ways I do not intend them. I’m not sure what you think qualifies you to determine my indignance or my posture. My only indignance is what you seem to read into what I have said. Have you ever tried just having a rational discussion of the subject at hand without characterizing the emotions and intent of the person you are discussing it with? My guess is you would get more information with less misunderstanding.

    >> But I most assuredly understand and respect all your opinions.
    >> I simply don't entirely agree with all of them.

    >I respect all views. I just couldn't make any sense of yours. That's why I took the time to ask you questions, something
    that I am certain to hesitate to do in the future.

    I still do not see your response as an attempt to clarify anything. I think I stated quite clearly what I meant in the first place. Mostly I find myself quoting myself from previous posts.

    >The specific points of apparent disagreement are what interest me.
    I was just trying to see where you were coming from, and narrow
    things down to simple points. This was merely an attempt to find
    out how you came to your stated views on these issues.

    I think you will find a lot of people of that same view on this board if you listen.

    >> I would appreciate in the future, if we choose to continue this
    >> discussion if you would refrain from putting words in my mouth
    >> and implying things I did not say nor did I intend to say or imply.

    >OK, so asking any question that attempts to narrow the issues and
    "get down to brass tacks" is not going to result in an answer, but
    instead, objections to the questions as "unfair"? That makes it
    difficult to conduct an adult conversation.

    No. If you have a specific statement I have made, let's say "AFB spores are everywhere" then quote my statement and ask me for clarification. What I didn't want was to be accused of saying I believe in spontaneous generation when I said nothing of the sort. The others were similar complaints.

    >> If you would instead discuss what I SAID instead of what you THINK
    >> I said, it would be much easier and less stressful for both of us.

    >Well, when the most basic question I asked was "are you SURE
    that you heard him correctly?", there are multiple layers of
    "he said/I heard" to wade through.

    What he said was that bees overwintered on honey had less incidence of Nosema than bees overwinterd on sugar syrup and dark honey had less incidence than light honey. When asked about the cause he said that no one knows. I don’t see any “layers” here. It’s what I said the first time, the second time, the third time…

    >So, I'll ask again. Are you SURE he said what you said he said?

    I am quite certain that is no more or less than what was said. I have said it several times now. I’m not sure if you are questioning my memory or my veracity.

    >I'm sorry if I caused you any stress. Would it have been less stressful
    for me to simply paste specific lines from your message, and ask YOU
    to take the time to respond to "Explain your reasoning here?" after
    each quote?

    Certainly.

    >Do you think this would result in your jumping at
    once to the specific point of interest? Sounds like I'd make a
    lot more work for you this way.

    I don't understand why you perceive that would make more work? I'm also not sure what "jumping at once to the specific point of interst?" means? My first impression was that you mean I would skip some points and address the ones I'm interested in, but that wouldn't make MORE work, so I must not be understanding what you are saying.

    >But, if you wish, you may explain the pathology of both nosema and
    AFB, and illustrate how you think the specific practices you mentioned
    would somehow "lower the incidence" of either problem.

    Maybe someday I'll have some personal experience with AFB. I hope not. But I have had bees for 30 years, have not used any antibiotics for 29 of those years and have never had any. I’m sure some of it is luck. But probably not all of it. I think we both understand the pathology of AFB quite well and it is documented in every bee book I’ve ever seen. I don’t see the use of rehashing it

    I think we’ve both read plenty over the years on the protozoa Nosema apis. I can't say that my bees have or have not ever had Nosema. Especially since I am lacking a microscope. I have had bees with dysentery after long cold spells in the winter. I have had very productive hives with crops as large as 200 pounds a hive in good years and I've never used Fumidil. Until a few years ago when the mites showed up I had never lost a hive.

    The original question was concerning raising bees without chemicals. My point is, if you don't want to use “hard” chemicals to raise bees you don't have to. As far as the practices I mentioned, keeping strong hives is recommended by virtually every bee book I have, as the best preventative to most everything, including AFB. Certainly they all also stress using all of the antibiotics, but I certainly did not invent the concept that weak stressed hives are susceptible to diseases and that keeping strong hives, by combining weak ones or requeening weak ones, is the best way to avoid most diseases.

    The honey for winter feed will help reduce Nosema. It certainly does not have the dramatic affect of an antibiotic such as Fumidil, but some of us don't want that in our hives.

    >In specific regard to the "honey" issue, could you also explain
    why honey should be considered somehow "superior" to HFCS and/or
    sugar syrup when all honey is well-known to contain natural
    indigestibles ('ash', if you will) which not only can, but
    inevitably will lead to diarrhea or worse in the long periods
    when bees are not able to take regular cleansing flights during winter?

    I'm not saying it "should be considered" superior or not. There are a lot of factors that could be interpreted in different ways. The reduced incidence of Nosema is the only scientific evidence I know of but again, there is not a lot a "natural" beekeeper can do to reduce Nosema except this so it is significant to us. It has been speculated that some of that difference may be due to those very solids that may contain micro nutrients the bees need to handle the stress. It may also be the difference in pH between the honey and the sugar syrup. All of this is speculation, of course. We don't know the mechanism. I do know that bees have overwintered for millennia on honey. Whether you believe that God made them in balance with their natural habitat and natural food or evolution has, the end result is, honey is what they are made to eat. IMO I see no reason to believe anything else is an improvement without a very significant, measurable difference.

    >Bottom line, I'm harmless. Relax, laugh a little, and understand
    that my being "hard on the issue" is not being "hard on the person".
    Asking for an explanation of your reasoning is NOT an "attack".

    You have in the course of just this current post characterized me as indignant, entertaining, posturing, defensive, dismissive, and later in this post as angry. These are all your words. I could add a lot more characterizations that you didn’t say in one word but in whole phrases, but I won’t. I don’t see any of that having anything to do with being “hard on the issue”. I have no problem with being ask for an explanation of my reasoning. I am complaining about you characterizing both me and the things I have said in a totally different way than I intended and saying that I'm saying things that I am not. Of course at this point I don’t get the feeling you have any real interest in my POV.

    >In a subsquent posting, you said (exact quote, here):

    >"I have to say it's the story of my life that people on both
    sides of a fence think always think I'm on the other side."

    >Could it be that these sorts of "failures to communicate" arise from the sort of defensive and angry response you made to a few simple questions from me?

    And now you are characterizing me as angry. And you don't understand why things like this rub people the wrong way? I am not angry. I AM defensive of being misquoted. Most of the reason I get classified on opposite sides is that I often listen to both sides of an argument and find some truth on both sides. In the end both sides think I'm on the other side and I'm just trying to see the truth in the other side. There are seldom two polarized views of things unless there is some truth on both sides.

    >"I'm just a soul who's intentions are good -
    Oh Lord, please don't let me be misunderstood."

    Questioning other’s reasons by direct quotes or simple direct questions in order to understand them and matter-of-factly stating your opinion on the matter when you disagree, without characterization or judgment, will probably clear up most of the misunderstanding.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Danbury,Ct. USA
    Posts
    1,966

    Post

    Gentlemen, Gentlemen.
    The psychologist in me is fascinated by the above. Two great minds in beekeeping and you get hooked into such an elegant tug-of-war. And I thought that wars for dominance were for the animal kingdom.
    Jim,
    You took a small sojourn from Bee-l to visit with us. I hope you hang around because you know stuff and I could learn from you. A lot of us here are risking all to raise bees without drugs of any kind. One day you commercial guys will be coming to us when we are ahead of the curve on resistant AFB. This is where you could possibly take away something.

    Mike,
    Jim is hard to get the last word with but now that you've jousted I hope we stop trying to do that. He's been around awhile and is well respected. You are as solid as a rock on this board and that's not going to change. Let's keep Jim too.
    NOw, can we start over? Let me hear both your inputs on something neutral. Is there a relationship between the defensiveness of a colony and the honey crop it produces?

    Dickm

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    mountain home, ar, usa
    Posts
    378

    Post

    Dickm

    Great question! I think that defensiveness certainly improves honey crop- and the AHB has proven that.

    But I also think that defensiveness is an important part of IPM as well. You'll hear lots of talk about cell size, SBB's, Russian bees, etc., but I think that defensiveness is completely overlooked as part of IPM. I've switched over to the Russian bee, and I think the reason it can handle varroa better than other races is that it is slightly more defensive. For over a century we have been breeding gentleness into our bees- while mother nature was breeding survival into russian bees. When I make queens, I use the more agressive hives that I have (out of the hives I've had untreated for 4 years now). These agressive hives have proven to survive mites untreated and tend to produce more honey IMO. I use a full (nylon) bee suit, which I know many beekeepers won't- but I think it's worth having one more IPM strategy to employ.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Nehawka, Nebraska USA
    Posts
    46,729

    Post

    On the issue of a really HOT hive. I don't think it is beneficial to the bees or the beekeeper. A lot of bees get killed over-defending a hive. Crops are often good because of robbing your other hives.

    On the other hand, I think SOME defensiveness MAY be part of the reason some bees do better agains Varroa and especially against SHB. I agree the Russians seem defensive, but in a different way than most hot bees. Instead of all trying to sting me at once, they just do more head butting and dive bombing, but not a lot of stinging.

    I think it would make a wonderful study to find out if there is a relationship.

  11. #31
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Nehawka, Nebraska USA
    Posts
    46,729

    Post

    Note to Jim and anyone else interested in my opinions (or anyone else's opinions) on anything. There is a search feature here in the forums and another from the menu on the main page (slightly different searches from the main page search). The one from the forum has a space for user name. Mine is "Michael Bush". If you also fill in the Search words with something like "AFB" you will find all of the entries where "AFB was somewhere in those posts and I responded. Using AFB as an example there are 42 entries for that and in there you will probably find everything you ever wanted to know about my opinion on that. You will need to put in search words because it will only list 200 results and I have more than 5400 posts.

    I have, over the last few years, changed my opinions on many things, so if an earlier post says one thing and later post says another please don't accuse me of inconsistency, it's because the good people of this forum have convinced me to reasess my original thoughts on the subject.

    With over 5400 posts of mine out there, you should be able to clarify anything you want to know about what I think on any aspect of beekeeping.

    Using this search feature without anyone's name is a very good way to find information on whatever subject you are interested in and give you the opportunity to hear a variety of opinions from many experienced people.

    Again, using AFB as an example, a search on just AFB will return 112 results.

  12. #32
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Near Ocean City, MD
    Posts
    14

    Question

    On the question of whether a more defensive hive has better honey production; has the AHB--of those who have had dealings/research or use/have to use some hives of that stock (from wherever in the world, I know that there are beekeepers from all over that read this forum)-- been able to keep varroa in check, i.e., is this a reason for the increase in honey production as well?
    If defensiveness is a factor in increased honey production, does that mean that AHB's traits may be a blessing in disguise (as much as many seem to loath it) for those in the areas of the U.S. that it is infiltrating? (A side question would be as the AHB continues to move northward, will it be able to adapt enough to survive winters eventually in the northern U.S./Canada, providing another varroa resistant stock (feral, at that!) to draw from, if this is the case?)
    I am just wondering if someone might turn the 'bad' effect of hyper-aggressiveness of AHB, as it is commonly talked of having, into an advantage, if this is the case--and has anyone from South America said that lower incidences of varroa are occuring to AHB stock (feral or otherwise) compared to 'domesticated' (european) stock commonly used by most in the western hemisphere for honey production. I hope what I am asking makes sense...
    Robert

  13. #33
    jfischer Guest

    Post


    On "Hot" hives... ignoring AHB for a moment,
    I most often find that a "hot" hive is one
    that has been bothered by skunks or other
    small mammals over a period of days.

    This happens often enough in my yards that
    part of one of the talks I am giving in PA
    at the end of the month will address "IDing
    tracks of animals". See, Boy Scout training
    DOES have a practical application! (But I
    must admit that my current definition of
    "camping out" is staying in a town without
    and Embassy Suites.)

    If "hotter" non-AHB hives are considered
    generally "more productive", could it be
    that they are more defensive merely because
    they have "more to protect"? Which causes
    which? I dunno, I simply requeen consistently
    nasty hives. I have yet to buy a "bee suit",
    and its been years and years.

    On the prior AFB/Nosema discussion, I must
    apologize. I had no idea I was discussing
    AFB with someone who had never even seen it.

    You have to see it yourself (or know someone
    who has fought it) to hate it enough. Either
    you hate it as something that can wipe you out,
    or it is merely an abstract issue.
    There's no in-between.



  14. #34
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Danbury,Ct. USA
    Posts
    1,966

    Post

    I wrote a short essay on the day I had to go out and kill some hives with AFB. Is there a way to post it on this site? MB?

    Thanks

  15. #35
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Nehawka, Nebraska USA
    Posts
    46,729

    Post

    I don't know how to post anything other than put it in new post if it's not too long. The other choice is to email it to Barry and see if he will post it somewhere. I'd just cut and paste it into a post here.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Ads