untreated bee's (poll)

[TwT]

It has come to my attention that there are a few member that don't think bee's can survive in large cell hives without some kind of treatment, so I want to show that I myself isn't the only one on this site that has untreated hives on large cell that live fine.

so this poll I want based on at least 3 year old hive's to make it even harder to fine LC survivors with no treatments, I will try to make it multiple picks because I know some have some that will fall in a couple selections....... I am not against using small cell or people doing some kind of treatment, people do what they think is best, guest being fairly new to beekeeping (4 years) when I started doing removals I figured if the bee's lived without treatment then why treat and I have been lucky (from what I hear) , I guest because my hives do fine on regular foundation.

in this post treating means anything from chemicals to sugar shakes and fogging......

[Ross]

I'm on natural cell size. I haven't measured it, but the bees built it. That and SBB for the last 5 years. I've gone from 6 to 32 in that time.

[Barry]

For this to have any real meaning, I think there needs to be qualifiers attached. Spell out what "do not treat" means. Some think it only means hard treatments and soft ones are "not treating." What management style are you using? Replacing queens every year? Replacing any comb? Introducing swarms or cutouts into the picture? Give us the details so we know what the full picture is. I hope it's being done on LC! What a great bit of news. Then at least some have another option.

- Barry

[JohnK and Sheri]

I agree with Barry, some qualifiers are needed here.
While I think it is a worthwhile thing to try to develop resistant, less human dependent bees, some folks are deluding themselves. (present company excepted, of course )
I had a guy come by here the other day bragging about how he hasn't treated his 4 colonies in 4 years. Reason for his visit? To order 4 nucs as "boosters",
Sheri

[BjornBee]

I agree with barry on qualifiers.

For those on smallcell, I would imagine that there are many in this group who are perhaps those who are trying smallcell due to not wanting to treat. I would imagine that most on smallcell are not using treatments, but are also the type that are very much in tune with whats going on in the hive.

What will be said, is "Look at all those who are on LC, and treat!". For the most part, this group is a large faction of people who have continued to do the same thing for year after year. Perhaps because they have a livelihood to protect, or they simply have not trusted anything beyond the standard "treat your hives!" that is promoted everywhere you turn, to include club meetings to mags.

I wonder how many treat for no other reason than its whats been done for years. I wonder how many people treat without no idea of what their mite counts are, and have no basis for needing to treat.

I'm not interested in how many treat, I'd be interested in how many don't treat.

[iddee]

I didn't vote because I have two sets of hives. One set I soft treat, "fog", and the other I don't treat in any way.

The one I treat has no history. I try to sell them the first year. The other is 5 years with no treatment. It is on LC from Kelleys.

[BjornBee]

I agree with Barry, some qualifiers are needed here.
While I think it is a worthwhile thing to try to develop resistant, less human dependent bees, some folks are deluding themselves. (present company excepted, of course )
I had a guy come by here the other day bragging about how he hasn't treated his 4 colonies in 4 years. Reason for his visit? To order 4 nucs as "boosters",
Sheri

Are you saying that the ONLY reason for boosting a hive is due to mite related reasons? Did he say he had mite issues? Maybe they were for late swarms, late splits, or for a host of reasons that could include him being a bad beekeeper and not doing a whole host of things.

You don't say why he needed the booster colonies. So in the middle of this conversation dealing with mites and treatments, it will be assumed by some that his bees were weak due to mites. And that's not clear.

[BjornBee]

I didn't vote because I have two sets of hives. One set I soft treat, "fog", and the other I don't treat in any way.

The one I treat has no history. I try to sell them the first year. The other is 5 years with no treatment. It is on LC from Kelleys.

I'm kinda like iddee. I did select LC - no treatment. But I have natural cell, smallcell, and LC. I don't treat any of them. I selected my choice based on LC being the most hives out of the three.

[JohnK and Sheri]

I have no idea why he is boosting them and I don't know what kind of beekeeper this gent is. Your point is well taken, perhaps they are totally mite-free but he knows they will starve because they are too light to make it through winter.
My point stands, and is, some folks like to imply they are self sustainable but are not. Back in the days before mites it was common practice to be able to split your colonies in the spring; you didn't have to boost them. In my opinion, someone who adds a new mite-free nuc to an existing colony in the spring can not call that colony a "survivor". Yes, the 'colony' made it through winter. No, it wasn't treated....but, but, but. The devil is in the details.

Please don't get my intent wrong and/or get overly defensive here. I think working towards sustainable bees is a worthy goal, but the proponents would be doing us all a service if they would define their management techniques. There are no easy fixes to the mite problem. If folks are NOT treating and their bees are thriving, the non-treatment is not the determining factor. What ARE they doing? That is the million dollar question.
Sheri

[Dave W]

>define their management techniques . . .

Respectfully . . . I don’t think the "average" beekeeper "knows" what he “is doing”.
If they knew, they would be telling

However, if a few do know but don’t tell . . . shame on them.


Another aspect that’s hard to determine is genetics.
While some bees are "tolerant", some are not.
Mites are not the same, some transfer viruses, some don’t.

With the right combination (bees and good mites) beekeeping "without treatments" becomes easy.


Now, how do we explain why NeeBees are the “only” ones that seem to get the wrong combination?
How do they get over the “hump”?

Hmmmmm . . .

[Yuleluder]

I use no treatments whatsoever. I do use SBB, and raise queens from overwintered stock which builds up the best in the Spring. I also purchase queens from breeders using similar philosphies. I haven't really done the yearly requeening thing, as 75% of my hives are 1st year hives. However I do have (1) hive that has a queen from 2005, and (3) hives with an 2006 queens. My queens are all marked, and genetics are recorded for each hive.

[MountainCamp]

We had a thread / discussion last year, I think along these lines.

I think that this is a very complicated topic.

What is the definition of a treatment? Soft Treatment? Hard Treatment?

Screen bottom boards are used by many for increased ventilation.
Screen Bottom Boards are used by many for the reduction of mites.
Are they a soft treatment if your intention is mite reduction and NOT if your intention is ventilation?

Smoking is used by many when they work their colonies. Smoking is also an irritant that promotes grooming and dislodging of mites. So when you smoke, are you doing a soft treatment?

Brood interruption reduces mite levels as they can not reproduce. So by doing yearly splits or allowing your colony to rear their own queens, you are performing a soft treatment. Even if it is not the intended purpose, it is a benefit.

Drone trapping is a soft treatment, but if one works their hive and removes all of the drone comb found between the frames / boxes is that not a soft treatment?

My point is that does anyone really tend their colonies without any intervention that assists the colony to survive?

I do a number of things with my beekeeping that may or may not be considered treatments. I feed, I smoke, I add Oils to my feed in spring and fall (usually 1 or 2 times), I have some SBB, I do splits, I allow my hives to rear their own queens, etc.

Are my bees kept without treatments? - No

[BjornBee]

Mountain,
I agree.

The problem with discussions like this, is that something along these lines usually happen....

I'll pick one of my management strategies. Say, re queening.

After much research with feral bees, the cavity size, the frequency of supersede and swarming, understanding the importance of brood cycle breaks that re queening affords, and other factors that all play out in nature, I have taken a much stronger stance on re queening.

Among other things, studies have shown that first year queens on average will swarm less, produce more honey, and overwinter substantially better than older queens. I would say that re queening is probably the single largest factor that a beekeeper could do in improving overwintering colony percentages.

I have stated this several times.

And a chorus of replies echo back in...
*I have a queen 5, 6 or more years older. (like NOT upgrading your stock over this time frame is a positive)
*I have smallcell and I don't need to requeen to see positive results.
*Your just saying that because you breed bees.
*Or some other reply that centers on a bad experience with requeening, and finishes with comments of "just let them do what they want". Thus one never actually selecting for anything positive, just taking what one is given by chance.

And that is what normally happens.

But I have stated that I split many yards in the summer. My older hives with the original queen has higher winter kill, and the new splits with first year queens will range in the 10% range. (I guess I should now include a "standard" clause I see smallcell people use) Please note...that none of the 10% hives that die were as a result of mites. An occasional failed queen, perhaps a starved hive. But nothing that I could blame on mites.

I say all this because "requeening" was a point that Barry included on page one in wanting some guidelines on what treatments are. I feel that was a loaded question or comment. I don't see requeening as a treatment. Its smart beekeeping and pays for itself.

To consider SBB, requeening or other management strategies as a "treatment" only degrades the whole process to begin with.

[Barry Digman]

Large cell, no treatments, and take this with a great big caveat.

I would suggest that this or an ancillary poll should ask why one is keeping bees. To be honest, if I lost all twelve or so of my hives it wouldn't matter much to me. I wouldn't like it, and I'd be curious about what caused it, but it wouldn't change my life. For others, losing their hives would be (or IS) huge, perhaps devastating. The point here is that any poll has to be interpreted very, very carefully if one is going to base a decision on the results. If the poll is just for the sake of curiousity, then we needn't worry too much about who is doing what.

[JohnK and Sheri]

Interesting point Coyote,
It would be interesting if the poll broke out how many livelihoods depend on their bees and correlated that with 'treat or not'.
Dave W, are you suggesting that only newbees have mite losses? Keeping bees is easy? I think you must be that person who knows what they are doin and ain't tellin'.
Oh, and I wanna know where you get those "good mites". Those are the kind I want.
Sheri

[MountainCamp]

>…..(I guess I should now include a "standard" clause I see smallcell people use) Please note...that none of the 10% hives that die were as a result of mites. An occasional failed queen, perhaps a starved hive. But nothing that I could blame on mites...

I may now step on some toes. Nothing personal here!!!
I have been keeping bees for only 12 years.
I live in a rural forested area of the Catskill Mountains in Upstate New York. The area has reverted from a much higher level of agriculture / farming to State Forest Preserve and Park lands, smaller number of farms, as well as homes over the last 100 years or so. This area has been settled since the 1600's and beekeeping was part of many homesteads.
My neighbor who got me in to beekeeping himself had bees on the family farm which dates back to the late 1800's. So there had been bees kept on the land around my yards for over 100 hundred years, as well as this part of NYS.
My view is that over this time the "feral" population would have had to regress to whatever cell size that wanted.
If cell size reduction on it's own was the "holy grail", then the woods and farms around here should be teaming with hives and swarms. They are not, I am not saying that there are no colonies, but this year I saw (1) swarm and got one swarm call from Catskill. My level of swarm activity was directly related to the guy down the road keeping bees. He stopped and so have the swarms.

>To consider SBB, requeening or other management strategies as a "treatment" only degrades the whole process to begin with.

I don't disagree with you that management strategies and techniques being labeled as treatment will have some not use them, but in a "review" of what other beekeepers are doing and finding what works, will require a complete review and examination of what the management strategies and techniques are.

I do not and have not used Checkmite or Aspertan in over 9 or 10 years, I would have to check my notes. But, if you want to know what I do and why my yearly loses are far below the average, then a complete look at my management strategies and techniques is required.

Some will see what I do as treatments and some will not. To be honest I DO NOT REALLY WORRY ABOUT WHAT OTHERS THINK. I do what I have found works for me and my techniques have evolved over the years.

[BjornBee]

Mountain,
You pasted a quote from me, and then mentioned stepping on toes. Not sure if I see the connection. My toes feel fine....

[REDTRACTOR1]

If you ask 12 beekeepers only one question you will get 24 answers so whats the point?
Thanks red

[bluegrass]

I think even keepers who treat have hives they don't treat...... also how do you determin how old a hive is? If the queen is replaced intentionally or naturally to me its a new hive so none of my hives are more than a season old...... I do keep records of the source of the genetic line though.

[TwT]

this is not a science contest, It's simple, just choose the size cells you have and weather you treat or not, its not hard to know if you treat your hives for mites, desease's or not treat them.
And how do you tell if a hive is 3 years old, you have bee's live in it for 3 years, change queen's all you want, I never said if the queen was 3 years old, just has the bee's been steady living in the hive, I mean no insult to anyone but man!!! I just dont see the choices on the poll that hard to understand and pick from.... Sorry if anyone didn't understand what I meant by treating a hive. I thought it would be easy to understand, my fault!!!!