Hi all. I've been watching this thread from the bleachers and would like to make a point that has been overlooked in support of benstung's bee management. Good hive management is a regional matter. For instance, studies in Alberta a few years back, suggested that pollen supplements in fall were economically a poor choice, as they did not affect hive overwintering. Beekeepers who heeded this advise in Southern Oregon, however, saw significant hive losses despite timely treatment of mites.
A study by Dr. Eisen of 200 colonies in southern California, comparing pollen supplementation, mite treatment, or both, demonstrated significant benefit from any of these interventions. A rough approximation of results is as follows:
1: control- outcome of most colonies dinks or deadouts.
2: mite treatment- 50-60% of colonies made grade for almond pollination
3: subs and syrup- 50-60% " "
4: mite, subs and syrup- 70-80% " "
You notice a significant difference between study results from Alberta and southern California.
My understanding is that benstung is from Minnisota where fall pollen is assumed to be more on the scale of Alberta. While supplemental subs and syrup will grow massive hives in California, in most years, this is probably unnecessary in his operation. Now, however, we see high temperature and drought conditions in his area, possibly some roundup ready crops with elimination of pollen producing weeds, maybe a little growth modifying or appetite inhibiting pesticides, maybe also some Idiopathic Brood Death Syndrome or new viral pathogen, and suddenly "he's not in Kansas anymore", well Minnisota anyway. This does not mean that his beekeeping is sloppy or that Keith's beekeeping is superior; it's bad luck in a vocation where you don't see the problem until weeks into the injury. With proper and timely intervention, you may be able to pull your bees out, but often there are so many variables that could be causing the dwindle, that it's really best guesses and a crap shoot.
I would reckon that if Keith unknowingly got some contaminated HFCS or heat processed rather than expeller produced soy flour in his subs, he could see dwindling too, and this would not mean that Keith was a poor beekeeper.
Hive losses may not be the beekeepers fault, but repetitive hive losses are. We've got some very successful large scale beekeepers in the Oregon who are also seeing losses and you can be assured that a lot of fine beekeeping practice and cutting edge science is incorporated into their operations.
Now, as for change for next year, do you manage Minnesota bees like they are in California or like they are in Minnesota. Last year was very unusual so normal management practices failed, but this observation is easier through the retrospectoscope. How can we identify an unusual weather pattern which essentially removes us from the regional climate which we have adapted our beekeeping practices to. Or, how can we identify when a harmful event has afflicted our bees...soon enough to modify our management practice. Oh, and once we see a problem, how do we determine the best practice alternative. Don't mention apiary inspectors as I would guess that many of you viewing this post could teach inspectors a few things. Well, lets bring our concerns up in a public forum and be turned to chopped liver by those who are having a luckier year.
To summarize a recent quote from the American Bee Journal, the successful beekeeper will be able to adapt to a changing world. We're all in this together and if we are able to foster alliances to assist each other, we will be better able to cope with what will probably be tougher times ahead.
Andrew