Beesource Beekeeping Forums banner

How long do you have to be TF before its a success?

19K views 69 replies 26 participants last post by  Hans 
#1 ·
How long would an operation have to be treatment free before one could call it a success?

What's your opinion?

Adam
 
#32 ·
Honey Householder on this board is treatment free because he sells off his bees in fall and starts over in spring. He is constantly markets product on this board. Is his TF method successful?
I lose a lot of my bees every winter and start over from bait catches, also mite treatment free since 2007. I also run at a suitable profit to keep going year after year. I did treat for some EFB, and fed a bit to new swarms.

We both are profitable being treatment free. Are our TF methods a success?

We both restock with bees that probably have been treated. So if everybody went treatment free, probably our methods would not be sustainable.
 
#35 · (Edited)
My survival rates went up when i quit treating. I also did a complete stock change, which im sure affected the numbers. I was using your average commercial queens, and was displeased with the results. I started researching more, collecting more feral, and raising my own queens from II'd breeders. I consider my venture thus far a success. But as any beekeeping operation, I could take a complete beating next year. Apiculture is Agriculture. We take on a lot of variables and associated risk.
 
#37 ·
I agree Oldtimer. I've utilized USDA VSH breeders for years. Those open mated with an array of "survivor" lines make a pretty solid bee. I only offer them nutrition. I do micromanage them at times. If a hive or queen is failing or not up to spec (shows signs of brood disease or PMS) they get requeened with select stock. Seems to be working.......
 
#39 ·
Don't think for a minute that treating doesn't also carry a "pricetag." I'm sure a majority of beeswax products are contaminated with coumaphos and or fluvalinate. Both chemicals are proven to have an array of sublethal effects, most I'm sure we haven't figured out yet. Even soft treatments have sublethal effects on bees. Treating also has some, and or exclusive responsibility in the breeding of chemical resistant mite strains. There is a reason Universities and high level breeders are breeding stock that can survive without running on the pharmaceutical treadmill. Sustainability and logical long term solutions are the ultimate goal.

The gentleman mentioned previously could have had bees with meager stores going into winter. There are a vast array of variables leading to their demise. It's not always because they were not treated.
 
#40 ·
I'd say how long it takes is as variable as the climate, management practices and strains of bees involved.

The fact that it can be done is well established b/c many (among them Kirk Webster, deknow, and myself) are doing it.
I don't think the "if" is the subject of this thread though.

As soon as a guy is accomplishing what he wants to with his bees with a mortality rate from all causes that is acceptable to him, he'll know how long it takes.


Since what he wants to accomplish and what is an acceptable mortality rate varies from beekeeper to beekeeper, and the conditions in which he keeps his bees vary from location to location, the only real answer is:

Just until he succeeds.
 
#42 ·
It seems to me that by this thread that most agree that success is defined by the beekeeper. If the beekeeper says they are successful, they are successful. I also notice that this applies only it situations that do not effect any other beekeeper.

To change that factor I offer this.
Do you think it is acceptable for a bee breeder or queen rearer to market their bees as the best based upon the same requirements to determine what is the best? He says they are the best so they are? Or does the idea that it effects other people change your view?

If no definition of successful exists. Can you dispute their claim? They can simply counter your claim by saying your expectations are unreasonable. And that beekeepers with adequate skill find exceptional results with their bees.

Overall I am trying to describe a situation that can be created that no matter what the quality of the product is. it cannot be disputed. because the only measurement of quality is the beekeepers opinion of their product.

And does the free for all definition of success still hold up under those conditions for you?
 
#43 ·
A good point Daniel. In the non beekeeping world, a general definition of success would be at a minimum, as good as average. But usually, some degree better than average. And that would be against everybody elses standards, not just ones own.
 
#45 ·
According to that, An overall standard of successful could be set by determining at least what is average.


So the next question is. Who is qualified to set that standard?
 
#51 ·
Then, according to Kim Flottum's statement in December's issue of Bee Culture, beekeeping itself is not "successful", since, according to Kim, beekeeping is not sustainable. I guess we will have to see where wer are 20 years from now.
 
#54 ·
I'm not a businessperson and this is oversimplified but in general in business don't you consider your business a success if you meet that year's business goals and objectives (which generally include some growth and expansion).

In a beekeeping business wouldn't that mean that you have met or exceeded the goals you set and commitments you made while staying treatment free (and staying in business)?
 
#55 ·
Yes, I stopped treating around '03. Successful for myself, but I don't make a living from bees. I have been able to keep a handful (up to 15) of hives that produce all the honey I care to deal with. I had to consolidate my hives several years ago due to personal reasons, but am now increasing my numbers. I'll give it another two years, and if the numbers hold, I'll see no reason to change.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top