Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 96
  1. #61
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Amador County, Calif
    Posts
    3,175

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Barry View Post
    Will this be round two or three?
    One more Barry.

    This is the pay day for feeding sub on the left coast.

    Making up nucs before we move into the almonds, each nucs get four frames of brood like this one three honey and a new
    queen.http://s148.photobucket.com/albums/s...t=100_2857.jpg

    Yea, she's a little spottie, but that's and avg brood frame for late January.

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Swalwell, AB
    Posts
    579

    Default

    That's the truth. At http://honeybeeworld.com/misc/pollen/default.htm is a picture provided by Andy Nachbauer many years ago. The formula, as I recall was just yeast and sugar and water. Feeding pays, but it has to be done right, and at the right time.

    And, Finally here's what the OLd Drone had to say in a post to BEE-L... http://honeybeeworld.com/misc/images/pollen1.jpg For a picture of a hive on DEC.15, 1977 started with NO brood, NO honey, NO pollen, just a normal hive in October with normal number of bees and a good queen when all the frames were replaced with empty brood combs and it was fed all the sugar syrup it would consume and a protein diet of yeast products, NO flowers at all and very little flight time, go to http://beenet.com/121577.jpg This hive would eat the average beekeeper out of house and home if he had very too many like it.<G>

    Unfortunately, the orginal large copy of that picture (linked last) was on Andy's site, which disappeared after his death, in spite of our efforts (Brandis and mine) to save it.

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    FRASER VALLEY, BRITISH COLUMBIA
    Posts
    1,329

    Default

    I put some Global patties on a few coloniesthe other day. About 50 hours later when I checked them they were eating away at them. The cool part was they went from being clustered to being active. The bee's behaviour was modified thru nutrition. The patties were the kind with 15% real, albeit chinese pollen.

    Jean-Marc

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Swalwell, AB
    Posts
    579

    Default

    Just to clarify, Global is using only irradiated U.S. pollen in the US. Global bought and used some Chinese pollen in the U.S. at one point, due to misrepresentation by one of their suppliers. Since then, Global has had the USDA check out and approve any suppliers to be certain that the pollen is as advertised.

    Transporting pollen for bee feed across borders is a hassle. Although there is lots of U.S. pollen available, Canadian pollen is scarce. So, in Canada, for Canadian purchase only, they employ Chinese pollen.

    However, Global is advertising for and preferentially using Canadian pollen when they can get it.

    (I called to confirm this, since it can be a contentious issue, and learned, for those who know Frank, that he had five heart attacks last night and is in hospital. Apparently he is stable).

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Manitoba Canada
    Posts
    5,951

    Default

    >>Chinese pollen

    surely Chinese pollen would be alright? Do they test it for impurities?
    Ian Steppler >> Canadian Beekeeper's Blog
    www.stepplerfarms.com

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Swalwell, AB
    Posts
    579

    Default

    Well, everyone thought so, but who ever really knows? Tests are expensive and mostly effective when you have a clue what you are looking for. Otherwise the test could be for the wrong things and come up zero when something else is pinning the meter.

    Basically, we all go with whetever the general consensus thinks is safe today.

    Hate to say this, but, if the US really has a CCD problem (which I doubt) would you not rather have Chinese pollen? After all the Chinese seem to take a ticking and keep on ticking.

    allen
    (Ducking and running)

  7. #67
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Farmington, New Mexico
    Posts
    6,574

    Default

    So, can we get a recommendation for purchasing a particular brand of pollen patties? I've never fed them but it doesn't seem like it would hurt, and might help.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    FRASER VALLEY, BRITISH COLUMBIA
    Posts
    1,329

    Default

    Yup, they test the chinese pollen. It gets tested in China and may I assume in a fine chinese laboratory. Remarkably the pollen always tests pure, no impurities detected in their pollen, at least that's what the piece of paper that comes with it says.

    Mind you I've fed more chinese pollen to my bees than anybody else I know of and I don't think it's a problem.

    Jean-Marc

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Swalwell, AB
    Posts
    579

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Barry Digman View Post
    So, can we get a recommendation for purchasing a particular brand of pollen patties? I've never fed them but it doesn't seem like it would hurt, and might help.
    Well, I'm biased, but I think that dollar for dollar, Global is a pretty good supplier. I know they are ethical, and they have no axe to grind.

    They have standard formulas, but will make anything you want. You want BeePro, they'll make BeePro. You want MegaBee? Well, they will make patties out of MegaBee. You want Feedbee? They'll make patties from FeedBee. All assuming that you will buy enough to make it worthwhile sourcing the product and making a run. They try not to keep material on hand, since it can lose feed value fast in storage.

    Their business model is to be the low cost supplier. They buy cheap due to volume and sell cheap. Because of their throughput, their ingredients are always fresh. They do a good job. I ask around for complaints and hear none.

    Their formulas are public knowledge and their ingredients are all USDA approved in the U.S.

    That said, there are others who sell supplements and are trying to promote their proprietary products. Some may reveal the ingredients. Some not. Some may be quite effective, and some may outperform the standard yeast/soy/sugar/pollen formula. Hard to say.

    What counts is consistent performance and return on the dollar. Global delivers that. Others may too, but my experience has been with Global. I have been watching the others, though.

    Competition is good.

    I'm sure others will comment.

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    SOUTH TEXAS
    Posts
    49

    Default

    Allend , I have a good friend from North Dakota that purchased 40000 lbs of global this past fall and said the bees wouldnt take it for the most part and the ones that did take it didnt do anything as far as brooding with it. He said that was the biggest mess he ever got into and would NEVER buy that again..

  11. #71
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Amador County, Calif
    Posts
    3,175

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by allend View Post
    Well, I'm biased, but I think that dollar for dollar, Global is a pretty good supplier.
    Well here are some stats.


    Keith's ( no pollen) "fat" 9.04% protein 16.19% PH 5.97% $ 1.05 lb

    global (15% pollen) "fat" 2.37% protein 14.84% PH 5.51% $ ?


    You guys draw your own conclusion.
    Last edited by Keith Jarrett; 02-01-2009 at 07:34 AM. Reason: adding info

  12. #72
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Farmington, New Mexico
    Posts
    6,574

    Default

    Here's a link to Globals price list. Looks like their protein patties are $0.95/lb. They also offer pollen patties.

    http://globalpatties.com/orders/order_us.htm

  13. #73
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Devils Lake, North Dakota
    Posts
    9,123

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Reed Honey View Post
    Allend , I have a good friend from North Dakota that purchased 40000 lbs of global this past fall and said the bees wouldnt take it for the most part and the ones that did take it didnt do anything as far as brooding with it. He said that was the biggest mess he ever got into and would NEVER buy that again..
    I'll second that........... I bought 2 cases a couple
    years ago and still have a case and 1/2.

    Messy, bees not wild about it, and did I mention
    messy?

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    VENTURA, California, USA
    Posts
    3,604

    Default Its the fat?

    Keith's ( no pollen) "fat" 9.04% protein 16.19% PH 5.97% $ 1.05 lb

    global (15% pollen) "fat" 2.37% protein 14.84% PH 5.51% $ ?

    Humm.
    There is a difference in fat %
    There could be a difference in the lipid sources too.

    Ernie
    Ernie
    My websitehttp://bees4u.com/

  15. #75
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Swalwell, AB
    Posts
    579

    Default

    Allend , I have a good friend from North Dakota that purchased 40000 lbs of global this past fall and said the bees wouldnt take it for the most part and the ones that did take it didnt do anything as far as brooding with it. He said that was the biggest mess he ever got into and would NEVER buy that again..
    Thanks for the report. That does not sound at all typical. In fact it sounds like baloney. Not saying it is, but if that is the case, the reasons need to be known.

    Did he mention it to Global? AFAIK, they are unaware of any such problems, and they do stand behind their product.

    Nobody benefits if a buyer is unhappy and does not inform the supplier, and arrange to set the situation right.

    If there is a problem, the supplier needs to know, and know immediately. Conditions in transport and in the field are variable and sometimes unpredictable. and if not reported, no corrections can be made.

    I know also that there was pressure from some buyers some time back to make the patties softer, because those beekeepers wanted to squish them, and that there were some changes made in response to that request, but the idea was not good. Patties have to be firm, and not squish.

    Global is not some monolithic giant faceless manufacturer. Global is a small family operation that does what customers want and makes products to customer specs. Not everyone wants the same thing, and any formula that is legal can be made to order. In truckload lots, like that, the formula and consistency is something that should be agreed between buyer and seller. If the customer orders a standard product, hopefully he or she knows what he or she is ordering, and if it does not arrive as expected, then it is the customer's responsibility to notify the supplier and work something out.

    Dunno. At any rate the answer is to report problems immediately rather than grouse.

    Global has been asking people if they are happy. They attend conventions across the US and Canada and talk to people to make sure that their products are what people want. Everyone seems happy when asked.

    If a buyers are not happy, then they should write mike@globalpatties.com immediately and explain the problem, or phone 866-948-6084 and talk about it. That way everyone benefits.

    Of course competitors are not likely to ever be happy, because Global has driven the price down and raised the bar for everyone and reduced the profit margins.

    Competitors are likely to continue to be unhappy, and do what they can to discredit Global, because that process of lowering cost and inproving performance will continue at Global, especially with the help of customer feedback.

    ---
    One other thing I should mention. I test Global patties for them myself from time to time and do not see what is described. I did see some pretty soft ones one time when I went to visit Jean-Marc. Those were from the softer patty experiment, and they were sticky. AFAIK, that was a one-time thing.
    Last edited by Allen Dick; 02-01-2009 at 11:54 AM. Reason: Clarification and further explanation/Phone number correction

  16. #76
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Owen, WI, USA
    Posts
    2,551

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by allend View Post
    ....That does not sound at all typical. In fact it sounds like baloney. Not saying it is, but if that is the case, the reasons need to known.
    I agree with Allen on this one. We have used Globals several times and while they ARE a big mess, our bees love them. In our experience, if the patties are put between the boxes of healthy hives, they eat them right up and turn them into brood. Sick bees, small queenless colonies or bees tightly clustered in the deep freeze aren't interested in eating much of anything.
    Sheri

  17. #77
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Manitoba Canada
    Posts
    5,951

    Default

    >>Yup, they test the chinese pollen. It gets tested in China and may I assume in a fine chinese laboratory. Remarkably the pollen always tests pure, no impurities detected in their pollen, at least that's what the piece of paper that comes with it says.
    Mind you I've fed more chinese pollen to my bees than anybody else I know of and I don't think it's a problem.

    Thats what I needed to know, thanks!


    >>global this past fall and said the bees wouldnt take

    When I do use patties, I tend to use global. I have never had problems with them not eating the patties. Infact, most of my hives take them in about a week,
    My smaller hives didnt take them as fast, some not at all. But what would a beekeeper expect?
    Ian Steppler >> Canadian Beekeeper's Blog
    www.stepplerfarms.com

  18. #78
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Swalwell, AB
    Posts
    579

    Default

    Keith's ( no pollen) "fat" 9.04% protein 16.19% PH 5.97% $ 1.05 lb
    global (15% pollen) "fat" 2.37% protein 14.84% PH 5.51% $ ?
    Well, I wonder how anyone could claim to know the constituents to the second decimal place. I know I would have trouble pinning it to the nearest percent. The simple reason is that the suppliers of the ingredients only publish a typical analysis, and there are some variations in the mixing.

    I'm assuming you are generating the numbers for your best guess for Global, since Global does not AFAIK publish any claims. If that is true, then even one decimal place would be a stretch.

    Not only that, small differences in specifications mean little, since there are so many complexities in the combination of the various amino acids and lipids. Age of the components also has a huge effect on some essential components. Moreover, there may be some interaction between components, and the bioavailability of the nutrients is unknown.

    Consumption rates and many other factors determine the end result.

    You guys draw your own conclusion.
    My conclusion is that numbers like that cannot anything much to anyone who knows much about feeds, in the absence of other data.

    Although I understand the use of theory to choose ingredients and proportions while designing a new diet attempt, I would never base any conclusions on theory.

    I would base my conclusions on the results of independant field tests anf factors like cost to me (not list), format, convenience, freshness, guarantees, availability, and such.

    We have lots of good choices out there. There are only a few bad ones.

  19. #79
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Paul, ID
    Posts
    13

    Default Keiths numbers

    I have a copy of the analytical result from a sample of Keiths pollen sub and the numbers Keith gave for his are the same thats how he gets to the second decimal place for his.

  20. #80
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Swalwell, AB
    Posts
    579

    Default

    Thanks. That's interesting.

    I wonder how many tests they did and how accurate the results are claimed to be -- and the standard error. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_error_(statistics)

    I'll bet they never get the same result twice. No matter. Total protein and lipids is not what counts, but rather the matching of the amino acid profile to the needs of the bees in question, digestibility, etc. http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/MEETING/00...E/M2836E00.HTM. With lipids, it is a matter of having the right ones and not reaching toxic deleterious levels of any one lipid more than trying for high levels.

    Theory and numbers mean only so much. I know of one diet that was designed at a university with input by an insect diet specialist. I assume that the number were perfect. The bees did eat it, however that product, in spite of the hype, proved to be the worst in the group when field tested.

    These topics are complex and what counts is results for the dollar and the bother.

    Talking numbers like this is like talking torque and horsepower in cars. These numbers may make a difference on the road, or they may not, but as long as they are adequate, most people don't care and are more interested in comfort, looks, mileage, durability, etc.

    As I say, most of the products out there fall pretty close together in results, with only a few that are bad value.

    For thise really intent on down and dirty details, there is an ongoing discussion on the honeybeeworld list. All I know for sure is that nobody knows much.

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast

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