Beesource Beekeeping Forums banner

Do I really need to medicate?

28K views 323 replies 36 participants last post by  Riverderwent 
#1 ·
This is my first year bee keeping. So far I would say pretty successful. Bought two packages in late May. One hive has filled both deeps and working on two supers. Other hive has finally filled the first deep. Pretty good for a late start and no comb to start with.

I try not to bother them too much. Every time I open the hive I feel like I kill so many from the busy hive I feel bad about it. How do you set a 100 pound deep box down on a flood of bees pouring out everywhere.

My question is probably a dumb one, but is treating for diseases and pests something that must be done every year? I haven’t done anything for them but give them a good home to grow. Probably one good month left before it gets cold. I’ll take my supers off the busy hive the end of this month.

Thanks!
 
#135 · (Edited)
article in november 2018 bees magazine:

How much we have bred in the last decades in the direction of strong mites is shown, among other things, by the ever-increasing damage threshold:
In 1980, when it was still at 6,000 and more mites, most colonies today already crash at an infestation of less than 2,500 mites , In 1980, winter treatment ( OA) was enough to save the colonie´s survival.

Later, this was replaced by a treatment in late summer by formic acid. The treatment in winter was then an additional option for a long time. But by the end of the nineties, it could not be avoided. Until the turn of the millennium, many hives died before treatment in late summer. In order to lower the mite infestation early, the removal of drone brood became the most important method before or during the spring flow.

Since 2015, it is said, especially with late flow, not without a kind of intermediate treatment in the summer to get along.
Therefore, the management of total brood frame culling was started during the swarming period.
author:
Dr. Wolfgang Ritter


GregV
It is all about "young queens" and more "young queens" and more.... of the same.
Well, the old, desirable queens are very much part of the local sustainability program and are to be kept around for as long as possible - yes, for drone generation.
:thumbsup:
The constant shifting of queens kills a good hive´s genetics which would stay much longer to throw drones.

crofter.
There are some quite creative ways of measuring losses, one being the neglect to account for multiple splits and combining just before collapse. Some of the testimonial style reporting leaves room for plenty of skepticism.
Treaters count their losses like that!
 
#139 ·
In 1980, when it was still at 6,000 and more mites, most colonies today already crash at an infestation of less than 2,500 mites , In 1980, winter treatment ( OA) was enough to save the colonie´s survival.
How does he know that then ? MOST colonies ? So who's keeping a world-wide register of mite crashes and counting the number of mites in 'em ?

Personally, I don't have mite crashes anymore - thanks (until this year) to a single winter dose of Oxalic Acid. I'm only currently engaging in multiple-doses with a view to a complete elimination, as opposed to ongoing mite population control.

Also - check this out:
In this study, we found an ideal biological framework to test the hypothesis of Milani (2001). This author postulated that the risk of emergence of resistance for the oxalic acid is high if its use is prolonged in time.
[...]
These results indicate that the Varroa population from the Federal apiary remained susceptible to the OA despite its prolonged use in time. It was also interesting that this 'focal' population resulted more susceptible to the acid than the 'naïve' population with mites never exposed to it.

The susceptibility of Varroa destructor against oxalic acid: a study case. Maggi et al., Bulletin of Insectology 70(1), 2017
LJ

Link:
https://www.researchgate.net/profil...structor-against-oxalic-acid-A-study-case.pdf
 
#136 ·
I suppose everyone is guilty of some degree of confirmation bias and lack of objectivity, but this is classic!

"How much we have bred in the last decades in the direction of strong mites is shown, among other things, by the ever-increasing damage threshold:"

The mites immediate damage to the adult bee and to the developing pupae is nothing compared to the vectored viral and other disease. New viruses have been introduced that the mites easily spread around without any need for adaptation on their part. I think this is a quite likely a more plausible cause behind any apparent need to keep mite levels lower than has been recommended in the past.
 
#141 ·
One needs to look at where all this learned rhetoric from comes' mostly from a group of beekeepers who do not produce much from their hives other than the hot air that keeps telling folks that are making a living or income from their bees that they are doing it all wrong. For most of these folks just the survival of a colony is an indication of success. I wonder how many of these folks are leasing out colonies for pollination, shucks I wish I could but nobody is growing almonds in my neck of the woods and if they were I would probably have about a thousand colonies by now. Which reminds me of a commercial guy who visited one of the major treatment free guys who commented that this guys hives were just like his dinks that never made the cut for almond pollination. I often wonder what it is that they get out of beekeeping and it seems to me that it is the illusion of being one of the environmentalists or green tree huggers that are going to save our planet for the ungrateful greedy people like us who steal the honey out of the mouths of starving brood, Sorry about the rant but I flunked out in diplomacy. I wonder about the guys who do this for a living, dont you get tired of preaching to the intellectual giants who know it all.
Johno
 
#146 ·
Greg, It was more of in incomplete thought. I was going some were aboutsome people feeling every swarm they catch was feral survivor stock, when the truth is they were likly perpetuation the lines they are against by allowing them to throw drones for another year.
 
#148 ·
I have looked forward to your posts and was looking forward to hearing more about your hives that had high mite loads but still appeared to be doing okay/well.
i wish you all the best but wish you werent leaving.
Not everybody here is against you......maybe that holiday I spoke of.....a couple of weeks maybe instead of just a few days
 
#150 ·
Threads that wander off into the Treatment/Treatment Free arena never seem to end well. I think it's one of the most divisive topics in beekeeping discussions. If one is going to actively participate and defend their position ( from either perspective ) they need to have very thick skin.

I try to steer clear of TF discussions. It's a lot like politics. Other than brand new beekeepers, most have already made up their mind what they believe, and it seems that no amount of talking or heated discussion really changes anyone's mind about the topic. It creates hard feelings and really goes nowhere, just around in circles.
 
#155 ·
I am chiming in really late. As a beekeeper my goal is to raise the healthiest hives of bees I can. However, raising bees treatment free is not raising healthy bees. Parasites have been a part of the human existence since we came into being. Being alive and capable of reproduction and being healthy are two very different things. Humans have lived with tapeworms, flukes, fleas, lice, various round worms, bed bugs and thousands of other bacteria, mold and other parasites. But living with these parasites is not living with good health. How many millions of years and generations have humans lived with these parasites and not become immune or resistant to them? Why are you expecting bees to become resistant/immune in a couple of decades? If your children were plagued with fleas or tapeworms or varroa mites you would NOT even consider the motto "Let the strong survive", you would be taking them to the doctor for treatment. Letting hive after hive suffer and die is inhumane and cruel in my opinion. At best, it is only irresponsible.
 
#167 ·
Why are you expecting bees to become resistant/immune in a couple of decades?
Because they have done it with other exotic and novel pests and ailments, they have shown various observable techniques or reactions that repress mites, the likelihood that other, unobserved techniques or methods exist in random population pockets or vestigial genomes, the speed with which random genes are quickly and widely dispersed geographically with modern transportation and migratory practices, their remarkable ability to amalgamate novel genomic combinations quickly resulting in new and varied phenotypes, the fact that my bees achieve my goals of production and reward to my psyche, because it might work and I enjoy keeping bees this way and likely wouldn’t keep them if I needed to put miticides, fungicides, or antibiotics in the hive on a regular basis, and because I’m an optimist and “the whole of [my] essential and unconscious being [is] spirited and confident.” There are other reasons I’m sure.

I don’t want to control how you keep bees, and I don’t want prevent you from judging how I keep bees if you want to do so.

Letting hive after hive suffer and die is inhumane and cruel in my opinion.
I think that my treatment free approach is best for bees and man in the long run in my location. I respect your opinion, and if I became convinced that the way that I keep bees was causing material harm in the long run, I should hope I would change the way I keep bees or stop keeping them. I will say that there are a lot of feral bees where I am, and a large ecological niche that they fill. Unless the area were saturated with managed, non-mite resistant, treated bees, then the niche will be filled by un-managed relatively resistant bees. So in a sense, anyone who does not keep bees might as well be keeping untreated managed bees. Which would be cruel and inhumane in your opinion if what you say were to be taken literally and applied to the area where I live. Since here (not all places I’m sure) the untreated feral bees are likely a Petrie dish for “culturing” resistant bees, I’m not sure that displacing them with managed treated bees would be so good either.
 
#156 ·
I agree that it would be irresponsible to keep bees in such a fashion where they just die from disease or parasites....yet there are many out there who are TF and their bees are doing as well as, if not better, than treated bees......if you believe that they are being honest when they tell us this and I do.

If my kids ever had tapeworms then something would be terribly wrong and yes I would most definitely take them an myself to the doctor, get it fixed and we would live happily every after with no more worms, but thats not how it is with our bees and something is most definitely wrong here!!! No quick fix from the Doc. Its more a life support scenario.
Fleas?, nah probably not, but then I have the old fashioned remedies from my Nana for those.

As you say, letting a hive suffer and die is inhumane and cruel.......
Cruelty appears to be a relative thing especially when you see what sharks do to each other in the name of reproduction.

I happen to think that it is a cruelty to pour toxic chemicals into a hive just to keep it alive.
No life form is healthy if it needs to be medicated just to continue to live, not even our own.
So your bees are not healthy, just alive.
 
#157 ·
I happen to think that it is a cruelty to pour toxic chemicals into a hive just to keep it alive.
No life form is healthy if it needs to be medicated just to continue to live, not even our own.
So your bees are not healthy, just alive.
Emotive rhetoric ...

For Varroa mites try using Vapourised Oxalic Acid - which is non-toxic to bees in the amounts used. The bees are just as healthy after the treatment as they were before it. Not so the mites - as they are the organisms being treated.

With regard to health, a clear distinction needs to be made between parasitism and disease - they are NOT the same thing, although one can certainly lead to the other.

We humans are responsible for the situation bees currently find themselves in, and yet many are placing the onus for a solution to the Varroa problem upon the bees themselves. But this problem is of OUR making, and so it ought to be up to US to rectify the situation - and hopefully learn something about our own stupidity and greed in the process.
LJ
 
#159 ·
You are right.... emotive rhetoric..... and I agree that we are responsible for the situation bees find themselves.

Having said that, the earlier question posed as a comparison, was in regards to tapeworms in our kids.
The answer is, Yes!,you take your kids to the doctor, get a med and voila la! no more tapeworms.
That is not the situation bees face with varroa, except for those who somehow have managed to get their bees to the point where they dont need to treat them with anything.

That fact that this parasite has persisted for so long for most beeks is worrying to me. That fact that so many have said they tried to go treatment free and failed is too.
I think there is something wrong with this scenario but, as I am just a newbie I am looking for answers not touting them.
I am not willing to accept that in order to have healthy bees, I must continuously treat them.
In order to save my hive this spring, I had to put in Apivar. Just as I would treat my kids with meds if absolutely necessary, I did to my hive. I dont want to have to keep doing that though.

I understand about the OAV and actually have the kit for this now, but followed the advice of a more experienced beek= live hive so far.
OAV is also treating. So far, there are no documented adverse side effects, but you are talking about something that you cannot breathe and can cause serious damage to your eyes....yet it is okay to put in with the bees who also have eyes and also have delicate antennae. I find this really odd.


Gee, I sound like a real hypocrite!!:D

What I am trying to do is keep them alive by what ever means possible, using the softest approaches first, while I regress them down to small cell in an attempt to follow examples that have been set by others.
So far, two years with zero loses. Probably causes alot of eye rolling and sniggers but, you know what? Zero losses is pretty good even if it is only one hive.
If others can have treatment free bees, then I know if I can get everything right, then so can I.....gotta keep your eye on the mountain(goal) and keep walking towards it.
Sometimes there are gullies. Sometimes, you have to take a slight detour or go off over a cliff.... But if you never try, you will never even have a chance to get there.
 
#160 ·
Gee, I sound like a real hypocrite!!:D
Yes you do.


But it's not really that.


What's happening is that like probably the majority of us, you started out with high ideals, but little knowledge. You are now transitioning to more knowledge, and working in the real world not the ideal one.

Most of us been through it, me included.
 
#166 ·
My my all these theories being thrown around. Lets face it I keep bees to make honey and dead or sick bees do not make much of that. Now that Radon story is another good one, maybe Radon kills mites and thats how you TF guys manage to keep bees. Now for the long term damage to bees most bees in the summer will live 6 weeks, winter bees maybe 5 months so how long is this long term stuff supposed to be. Ah queens you might say but then again I had a 3 year old queen in an observation hive that had near 36 OAV treatments. She was just superceded a couple of months ago so maybe I should now blame the OAV for her demise. And for the record I had all my children vaccinated, would de worm them if they had worms of any kind and I also get an influenza shot every year so as you can see I am definitely not a treatment free person. another story that comes up all the time is that OAV will not work when bees are clustered, who has observed this. My own observations of when OAV is introduced minto my observation hive is that the bees drop every thing they are busy with and run around in a complete panic until the vap[or is no longer visible mand after about 5 minutes return to normal.
Johno
 
#173 ·
C'mon OT you told me yourself that you didnt shave down the shoulders when you tried to go SC, so you didnt do all the recommended steps and didnt get the desired result. Try again and see if it goes differently.

There are too many people out there who are or say they are TF with the same or less losses as those who are treating to discount.
That is the real world too.
I want to know what they did, what they are doing differently to others, do they have different locale, less hive density, are they all very experienced beeks, is it really just a matter of good genetics, why are they different, why are they....going to get a thrashing for this one.....why are their hives normal?
 
#174 ·
True, after the 2 year trial i did try again with shaved down end bars, so yes, I took your advice already. Here's the rub though, my original trial used 33 mm end bars, as per Solomon Parker. Of the people claiming sucess with sc there's a bunch of them using 33 or bigger.

Are they all experienced beeks? Many not, and many if not most, do not know what they are doing different. Don't all use sc either.
 
#179 ·
Good info GregV. Over the years of reading the experiences of others in different places, it seems to me that there is no "formula" for keeping TF bees that works for everyone. It's a psychological human condition, when we do something a certain way and it works for us, we assume we have hit the right formula, it's a human condition to look for a concrete set of rules we can follow. And think that if everybody else does that it will work for them also. In beekeeping this does not always apply due to different locations, and bee types.

As examples of this is a certain management technique that has been touted as the be all and end all of swarm control. It worked well for the originator but not always for people in other locations. But the originator could never accept it didn't work for everybody, he would always insist they must not be doing it correctly.
 
#180 ·
This is where narrow frame spacing comes in.
odd....
I thought is was because small cell comb is.... smaller, both in with and length
what is the rationale of changing the beespace impacting hive survival? I haven't hurd of this

I want to know what they did, what they are doing differently to others, do they have different locale, less hive density, are they all very experienced beeks, is it really just a matter of good genetics, why are they different, why are they
It likly a little of every thing... but how and were you keep bees seams to trump genetics
One common thread for most of them (long term sussefull/ self sustainable) is they graft from select stock not just split up what ever over winters.

Tarpys work is showing that grafted or swam queens are on advrage 50% better then E cells, but if left on to there devices the bees will often thin out the poorer ones, fine for the bees if left alone with a bunch of cells to chose from, not so good when the cells are distributed in to mateing nucs and the bees are forced to raize what ever hand they got delt
Sam Comfort stopped doing the above when he found he was getting poor queens from it, even inter cast ones.


In the late 30's and early 40's the USDA Bee Culture Lab in Madison, Wisconsin started a program to determine which stocks available from queen breeders were best. Two-pound packages with queens were placed on combs on or about April 15. Brood production, population, and total honey production were monitored carefully. Some of these package colonies barely made winter stores, but a few did pretty well, producing 150 to 250 pounds above winter requirements. But one breeder consistently produced queens that developed colonies producing 250 to 450 pounds of honey over winter requirements.

Madison's Farrar, and other government beemen then spent time visiting and making observations of that particular queen breeder, and methodology developed in his queen-rearing operation. The conclusion was the stock was no better than available anywhere else. That's right! When we reared queens from that stock or from stock obtained from the poorly performing groups, we turned out very high-performance queens. So it wasn't the stock that was good -- it was the queen breeder. What stood out more than anything was his care and selection of each queen cell and queen every step of the way.

The basic information we got from that queen breeder was something we already knew -- to raise superior queens was mostly a matter of creating a superior environment. After all, there is no genetic difference between the workers and the larvae from which you graft your queens. Improve the environment. Improve the environment -- get that imprinted in your queen-rearing method every step of the way. Be sure there are always enough young bees and more than enough pollen and honey available. Always graft more cells than you will use or need so you can select only the best. Also, have more laying queens than you will use, and again -- select only the best.
Steve Tabor Breeding Super Bees

both suggest that how you rear your queens impact the future colony. If it can dubble honey production, can it dubble mite resistance or outher thing we think of as a "trait"?

there is quite a bit on the table to suggest serial spliting of dequeened hives after they drawn cells may lead to poorer performing queens, yet its a common subjected practice for TF to do so to get there numbers up.

further more you don't tend to change your stock unless you get selective about what reproduces, alive doesn't mean breeding stock... you will get queens better and worse then the one you rear from. (given a large enuff sample size) If you rear form your best queen, her worst offspring will be better then the best ofspring of your worst over wintered queens. make you increase form her off spring and requeen the bottom 2/3s of you hives...
thats how you shift a trait in your stock, Kefuss layed it out well in soft bond
splitting whats left alive permotes the advrage.

my take on it is (aside from being a hard thing to do depending on your location), TF fails many do to poor beekeeping practices
 
#181 ·
odd....
I thought is was because small cell comb is.... smaller, both in with and length
what is the rationale of changing the beespace impacting hive survival? I haven't hurd of this
Now you have.
:)

I find they winter better on narrow frames (1 1/4" on center instead....
http://www.bushfarms.com/beeswinter.htm

Google for more if wish.

I do foundationless natural cell and whatever they build - goes.
5.1-5.2 for me is the staple so far.
I have a feeling this is where it will stay.
Don't care to pursue the "small cell" in particular (not spending money of foundation for sure).
 
#182 · (Edited)
not sure were your going....
you wrote
The point of 1.25 inch spacing is - to provide better survival setup for small colonies during the cold season.
Why is this important?

This is important because a part of medication-free management is running a sustainable nucleus operation.
the link you posted said
I have tried overwintering nucs every winter since 2004. I can't claim to be good at it
The famous Nebraskan beekeeper with a few dozen hives is a small sample size, and he is saying his nucs don't over winter well (on 1.25")..

as a counter point(I was looking more for a link to a per reviewed study, but sence we are siting internet famous beekeeprs, not data) Mike Palmers 100' of nucs seem to do very well with standard frame spacing... despite being 2 full plant hardness zones colder.

BTW... In lite of resent events I should say this
you and I butt heads, have for a bit...
Please take my sparing as a sine of respect. I chose to to endgade you for the sake of stimulating debate... not because I think I will some how be the winner of internet beekeeping... thats a loosing fight.
you are well researched beyond your years of experience, and respond intelligently, that makes changeling your positions much more insteringing...

So.... no bull, no insult meant with this next question

What has your experience been on survival rates with 1.25"? how many hives did you over winter on 1.25 in 2017?
 
#183 · (Edited)
....
What has your experience been on survival rates with 1.25"? how many hives did you over winter on 1.25 in 2017?
I am about 90% of 1.25 now.

Granted I am a really heartless beehaver (as you know), the last year my survival was 2 out of 11 (less than 20%).
Those only two survivors made it in tiny 4-5 frame clusters on 1.25 frames (my own tall frames, to clarify); and in temp plywood hives too (this is South WI). These survivors originated from a trusted TF beekeeper and have feral sources.

And so, sending 13 units into the winter (as of two weeks ago, to be sure; donno how many now, could be fewer).
I got at least 8 units originating from feral sources now (the others are various random swarms, very likely commercial/package puppies).

My point is this - I very much anticipate that the survivors in 2018/2019 will be those smaller clusters again (these are originating from feral sources that I could acquire).
And so - I want to make my setup such that to make small cluster wintering a bit more successful (narrow comb spacing is one such parameter). Notice, I am not talking of a small cell - I don't care of any special cell. Up to my bees to regulate the cell size.

Speaking of tossing data around - I don't care much for the data anymore.
I can Google very well if have to (part of my job).

So here is just one (totally independent of MB) observation of the natural comb spacing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ENodvhG0hdg&t=5s
Jump to 2:16 and observe - 33.2 mm natural spacing by totally commercial bees run on a foundation.
(32mm ~ 1.25inch).
Sorry, non-English again.
But it is all in front of you if willing to observe.

PS: sorry for repeating myself - if you question my experience, you are free to do so (my little resume is in my signature);
I am simply re-learning this entire beekeeping thing from scratch again.
Call me a newbee if wish since I am in very many ways.
 
#185 ·
Sorry can't read Russian, what is the 8 mm space? Comb face to comb face?

Interesting the comment about swarming. I use 33 mm end bars in all my hives, years ago used to use 35. I definately have more swarming issues nowadays.
 
#186 ·
OK, let me share more.
now your playing the game right, we can debate a study with out it being personal

sooo
Overall, if you do small clusters (which I do), 1.25 inch should benefit you.
only if you do small cell/ maby foundation less... not over all in the least
from the study
By the end of the experiment (June 4), families of the experimental group with a street of 8.5–9 mm grew brood on average by 43% more families of the control group.
I gather by "street" they mean bee space. "standard" spacing/foundation gives us a 3/8 bee space that's 9.52mm
while you keep saying 8mm... the link says
In the experimental group of 20 families, the street was reduced to 8.5–9 mm

The point of 1.25 inch spacing is - to provide better survival setup for small colonies during the cold season.
the study dosn't back up your hypothesizes that smaler spacing was better for overwintering, The study came to the consultion that 15mm was better
and that over all "standard" 12mm spaceing was best
According to our experiments and the observations of many practicing beekeepers, a small street, reduced to 8.5–9 mm, is effective for families that are lagging behind in development, and for medium-sized and strong families, besides the short period after the bees from the winterizer, it should be left 12 mm.
yess the tighter spacing helped with spring build up, but that wan't the statment you made
I would argue if anything, its suggesting the standard 3/8" is too small and we should be looking at 15/32"


I appreciate you being strait forward on your losses, that is what I had remembered, but couldn't find the thread.

You have been giving a lot of overwintering advice lately. Maby a newer beekeeper taking 80% loses should not be giveing that advice to other new beekeepers.

that being said I am very interested in hearing about your losses come spring and what efect shifting your spacing had. Did those 2 hives live do the gentnics, the spaceing, the fact that they were small and had a lower mite load, etc.... the results should be instering .

don't care much for the data anymore
that seams to be a trend with TF failure... It not a value stament, just an observation, Pilots crash planes bleaving they are right and there instruments must be wrong...
As my sig says the easiest person to fool is your self.... and boy did I fool my self in my early days....still do I am sure.
 
#187 ·
You have been giving a lot of overwintering advice lately. Maby a newer beekeeper taking 80% loses should not be giveing that advice to other new beekeepers.
Thing about that though, he is straight up honest. Which makes his data reliable, because if whatever he does fails he will say so. To me anyway, that makes him someone I can learn from.
 
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