Beesource Beekeeping Forums banner

Primitive beekeeping (bee trees, log hives, etc)

32K views 261 replies 22 participants last post by  Gray Goose 
#1 ·
I am finding some beeks confuse primitive beekeeping with honey hunting.
These are not the same.

Eastern Europe is observing a real Renaissance of legacy, primitive beekeeping ways just as we speak (near TF by the very definition; for sure chemical-free).
Unfortunately, the English resources on the subject are very few if any (pretty much have to resort to Google translate - better than nothing, IF you can even find the original sources).

Here is a brief article about what the Poles have been doing (Google translate version).

https://translate.google.com/transl...larov-v-polshe-vnov-osvaivayut-lesnykh-pchjol

The original is an Belarus paper article published in Russian - the header says "Liter of honey costs over $100".
http://vgr.by/vse-novosti/163-sosed...larov-v-polshe-vnov-osvaivayut-lesnykh-pchjol

I also already suggested someplace to run this google search just to get some general idea of what is going on in the primitive beekeeping world - "пчелы борть".
 
See less See more
#2 ·
Here is a brief article about what the Poles have been doing (Google translate version).

Piotr was one of the speakers in the Austrian Congress of Treatment free beekeeping in April 2018.

Thousands of years ago when the Finns were still living in these areas they learned this type of beekeeping and therefore there are tales of bees and honey in our national epoch Kalevala.
 
#5 ·
Let me just re-use again a video of a well-known keeper from Ukraine.
(he keeps the log hives in his yard purely for swarm generation - ZERO maintenance for multiple years; bees do NOT die while serving the propagation function well)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ssV0sBaB0Zo

So, I have a couple of new log traps I finished last year.
They have been deployed too late for the summer - no hits.
If any hits the next year - I keeping those logs as-is, do nothing, and only watch.
Whatever happens is fine.
There are removable frames inside, technically; hehe.
 
#4 ·
Probably not entirely the spirit or intent of OPs thread, but the youtuber Jeff Horchoff has posted videos of a couple of occupied tree sections he cut and moved into his beeyards. He set them up and allowed the bees to continue doing their thing. In at least one of them, he adapted the tree trunk to mount a super on top, but the main colony remains in the tree cavity.
 
#6 · (Edited)
As I slowly work through log hive publications, I may post something in this thread, as an appropriate place.

Interior parameters of the artificial cavities in pine tree are varying: 80-120 cm in height and 25-40 cm in diameter.
Internal volume is within 30,000-90,000 cm3, area of the cross-section - 350 - 950 cm2.
Diameter of the trunk at the entrance level is usually at least 60 cm, the back wall and the side walls of the cavity have at least 18 cm.
........
The entrance horizontally positioned 15-45 cm below the top level of the cavity and at the same level where the bottom of the wintering bee cluster should be.
........
Pages 93, 94.
Illustration 3.4
https://www.researchgate.net/public..._mellifera_L_of_the_Republic_of_Bashkortostan


Why care of these numbers?

Because, while these are the specs of an artificial, human-carved bee tree cavity as practiced today, these specs are essentially descriptions of the historic knowledge accumulated over many hundreds of years by the bee tree beekeepers. These specs describe what the beekeepers observed in the natural bee tree dwellings and then mimicked those specifications themselves when creating artificial bee dwellings.

So these are the dwelling specifications the honey bee adapted to over very, very long time of survival in cold-temperate forest zone.
As well, these specifications suggest the optimal micro-climate that defines the annual, normal bee life-cycle (of the northern bee populations).

Meanwhile, the so called "natural" Lang bee hive setups, as defined by Tom Seeley, are not even close to what I quote here.
What puzzles me is that while T. Seeley himself authored an excellent description of the natural bee dwellings, he then completely ignores his own findings and prescribes "Darwinian" beekeeping model based on the sub-optimal fruit crate boxes used as bee dwellings. That will produce a significant skew of the observation outcomes if one pretends that keeping bees in small Lang hives somehow represents the natural, wild bee situation.

At the least he should have build thick-walled and tightly enclosed Warre-type hives of ~60 liters in volume with appropriately placed entrance.
 
#7 ·
At the least he should have build thick-walled and tightly enclosed Warre-type hives of ~60 liters in volume with appropriately placed entrance.
GregV:

Neat stuff- given that I still have trouble conceptualizing metric, I was curious how this information compared to standard hive volumes (assuming my math is correct):

80 - 120 cm high = 32 - 47 inches
24 - 40 cm diameter = 9 - 16 inches

Volume min /max: 15 liters (one 5-frame medium) - 155 liters (one 10-frame deep and four 10-frame mediums or six+ 8-frame mediums).
 
#10 ·
#11 ·
With regard to that 'Bait Hive' paper - do bear in mind that was a scientific paper based upon a single-variable tabula-rasa experiment, the results of which were constrained (by convention) to the one single variable being tested.

A more complete account of the experiment can be found in Seeley's 'Honeybee Democracy', in which he reveals that in practice the first swarm being tested chose neither of the bait boxes on offer, but preferred to settle within the only chimney on the island which was being employed for the experiment. It was only after access to that chimney was denied to the bees that the experiment could continued.

Further, although Seeley doesn't specify the size of the boxes used for the raising and transportation of colonies taken to the island, they would almost certainly have been 40L boxes, the same size as the conclusion drawn regarding the optimal size for a bait box. Bees have memory and yet no allowance for this appears to have been made.
LJ
 
#12 ·
Greg - you really do annoy me sometimes (meant in the nicest possible way ...), because I've already trialled Warre boxes and dismissed them. Not because they weren't attractive to bees - quite the opposite - but because their shorter top-bars weren't compatible with those of the rest of my circus.

But - in a recent post you were talking about reducing the number of combs for over-wintering - which reminded me of Doolittle's so-called "6-Frame Hive" (which was actually a 15-frame Long Hive, dummied-down to 6 frames prior to winter), and so I re-read his description of it. And what I've been overlooking with Doolittle's choice of hive was the frame-size he much preferred - that of Gallup, at 11.25" square.

Now Doolittle was no slouch when it came to running his colonies successfully, and yet he rejected the frame sizes which most other people were adopting at that time, and yet was able to successfully over-winter on just six of those small frames and then expand the hive's volume as required to either produce a substantial honey crop, or support his own queen-rearing operations.

So - long story short - I'm now re-examining the Gallup/Warre frame sizes, to see if there are any practical ways in which these may be incorporated here - some ideas around which are beginning to look quite promising.

Re: your figures:
Interior parameters of the artificial cavities in pine tree vary: 80-120 cm in height and 25-40 cm in diameter. Internal volume is within 30,000-90,000 cm3.
If we take the median measurement of 32 cm (or 12.5") for the cavity diameter, and calculate it's cross-sectional area (805 cm2) - this would give us a square box equivalent of 28.5cm x 28.5cm, or 11.25" x 11.25" - which will then hold 8 Gallup frames at 35mm spacing.

If we then take 100cm (40") as being an average cavity height, then this is equivalent to five 8" Warre Boxes - which is not exceptional, by any means, for a full-sized colony.
5 Warre boxes have a volume of some 90L, 4 boxes 72L, 3 boxes 54L and 2 boxes 36L - so the volumes of such stacks correspond (more-or-less) with the range of cavity sizes of which you speak.

So it would appear that with regard to sizes of cavity and the combs within them, there may indeed be some correspondence between Warre hives and these artificial log hives.
LJ
 
#20 ·
Ya, T. Seeleey's work is to be appreciated.
He is still one of a kind and the pioneer in the field.
His report on the feral bee nest is no doubt is a worthy product (I do re-read it).
Have to start somewhere.

We now have Internet resources and this is really exciting time.

Anyways, here are few youtube refs to view the primitive beekeeping as it is practiced today.
In the spirit of this forum, of course this is 100% TF beekeeping and it is a good demo of the TF possibilities.
All in Russian, but there is plenty to observe anyway.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xj6ZbKl4PJ4&t=130s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=svE2P4wpouU&t=1360s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8cSZyyZ73Vg
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC7cRfy1Ga-CAKpTYy9lBEOA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YwkVNXUkWtU&t=52s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUuqPTwg7mU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hwfEuUj1lKY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qrldi7JwbPQ&t=318s
 
#22 ·
... here are few youtube refs to view the primitive beekeeping as it is practiced today.
GregV:

I finally had the opportunity to make my way through all the videos you posted. While they were all interesting, the first one was the most engaging due to the fact that it had the English captions and also a lot of the historical context mixed-in, which I enjoyed because I am a history buff.

It was really fascinating to observe that there is a definite practical science to the "primitive" beekeeping (and also a fair bit of government support?)- be it harvesting honey from natural cavities, making cavities in trees or purpose-building log hives- some of which appeared to have removable frames of a type. There were a lot of things I found interesting, but a few notes I jotted down while watching the videos:

1. They mentioned that the best wild habitats were found in linden tree stands but that they tended to have "bee trees" in pines and oaks. I wonder how the lindens there compare to the "tulip poplars" here which used to be the kings of the Eastern hardwood forest landscape.

2. I picked-up that some of these linden stands could produce 10 kg of honey a day on a good flow but that the average harvested surplus was only 5 kg. So it makes me wonder whether the beekeepers tend to leave a significant amount of the stores for the bees and/or that the flow is intense but very short?

3. They talked about cultivating a local bacteria in the voids- I understood to keep the wood about the hive void soft?

4. I can't be sure, but it looked like there were a lot of leaves on the ground when they were harvesting- do they tend to harvest surplus in the early Fall?

As always, you find and share some interesting and thought-provoking stuff- keep up the good work!

Russ
 
#25 ·
GregV:

This all may be old-hat to you, but I came across an article about a recent field day in Washington state featuring Matt Somerville (https://beekindhives.uk/).

This in turn led me to a 2016 article in the UK Telegraph which talks about the renaissance of tree beekeeping in both the UK and it Europe:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/gardeni...eviving-the-ancient-craft-of-tree-beekeeping/

A few of the interesting tidbits to me included:

“Historical evidence includes a Russian tomb from the fifth century that was found to contain a complete set of tree beekeeping tools,” says Jonathan Powell of the Natural Beekeeping Trust (https://www.naturalbeekeepingtrust.org/) and a founder member of Tree Beekeeping International (https://www.nsbka.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=383&Itemid=1264).

“These hives [southern Ural Mountain tree hives] are left to manage themselves. Their honey stores are left intact for winter feeding, and they are not treated for mites and diseases and yet remain healthy. The bees set the density of hives, and there is no intervention to stimulate the hive or save it from failure. Evolution is determined by the bees and nature.”

“In a wild, unmanaged situation, bee colonies are subject to the adverse pressures of natural selection, and over 20 years they have learnt how to cope with the destructive varroa mite,” says [John] Haverson (http://hampshire.naturalbees.net/). “These wild colonies will provide the genetics of varroa-resistant honeybees, which could be transferred to managed bees.”

They also referred to Piotr Piłasiewicz’s website (traditional Polish tree beekeeping methods): http://bartnictwo.com/en/

Again, this may all be old news- just thought I’d share if there was anything of value here relative to your efforts.

Have a great week.

Russ
 
#26 ·
GregV:

This all may be old-hat to you,....

Have a great week.

Russ
Some of this is new - will read; thanks.

I gotta say, they in Russia are really behind on the treatment-free ways.
They are, in fact, moving in the other direction - treat, treat, treat.
They are also concerned a lot about the Bashkir bees - well, somehow I am not concerned too much about the Bashkir bees as long as they do what they have been doing.
 
#27 · (Edited)
Below is the record of seasonal events specific to the said population of the Bashkortostan bees for 2006-2012.
From Ilyason, 2015; page 109.

I think this is a very good example of a phenological record that should exist for any more or less distinct beekeeping locale.
Maybe BS folk could start keeping such records specific for the local communities.
In my case it would be South Central WI, for example and the phenological events will be adjusted to that.

I spent some time googling for such local record - zilch so far.
Just some gardening records, pretty useless as they do not keep track of blooming weeds.
I hope someone will correct me, otherwise this is a shame.

Phenological Events.2006 (day.month)200720082009201020112012Average
Tentative cleansing bee flights start.10.0316.0314.0301.0329.0322.0302.0416.03
Mass cleansing bee flights start.12.0420.0428.0329.0315.0414.0408.0409.04
Start of nest rebuilding.22.0427.0422.0430.0420.0428.0418.0423.04
Start of mass flight onto willow.29.0402.0503.0528.0426.0430.0420.0428.04
Norway Maple (Acer platanoides) bloom start.10.0508.0505.0503.0507.0513.0524.0406.05
Norway Maple (Acer platanoides) bloom stop.16.0519.0514.0518.0520.0523.0509.0517.05
Swarming start.11.0615.0602.0630.0528.0530.0528.0502.06
Swarming stop.10.0708.0710.0709.0728.0620.0726.0607.07
Small-leaved linden (Tilia cordata) bloom start.28.0606.0707.0703.0725.0608.0716.0602.07
Small-leaved linden (Tilia cordata) bloom stop.16.0721.0724.0716.0714.0724.0730.0618.07
Drone expulsion start.01.0923.0822.0819.0814.0810.0817.0819.08
Last round of brood (start?).18.0912.0914.0909.0902.0906.0904.0909.09
 
#33 ·
I think this is a very good example of a phenological record that should exist for any more or less distinct beekeeping locale.
Maybe BS folk could start keeping such records specific for the local communities. In my case it would be South Central WI, for example and the phenological events will be adjusted to that.
GregV:

I don’t know if this will help you, but I asked a similar question on a recent thread (https://www.beesource.com/forums/showthread.php?351987-Swarm-Date-versus-Overwintering-Success), and I got some very helpful feedback from Eikel. Specifically, he forwarded me a link to greencastonline.com, where one can look up the growing degree-days for your specific locale and then cross-reference this to a GDD versus phenological cue benchmarks from a resource by The Ohio State:

http://www.greencastonline.com/growing-degree-days/home
https://www.oardc.ohio-state.edu/gdd...w.asp?fill=all

I do not want to send swarms out - I find it ineffective in my area (they will just likely perish and be wasted).
But, I do find it reasonable to actually set out several pseudo-feral units in the vicinity, in protected areas...
I think this is a neat idea, and I am looking forward to seeing how this project develops for you.
 
#28 ·
Primitive beekeeping gives zero control of bee genetics. This has obvious consequences for honey production potential. It is perhaps an ideal way to preserve genetics since the beekeeper does not exercise any selection.

The consequences of too small a cavity for the bees include potential to starve in a colder than normal winter and much increased propensity to swarm. I'm sure you have seen and calculated the relative capacity of a square Dadant hive and know that it gives 2.3 cubic feet (65 cubic liters) as compared to a Langstroth deep with 1.5 cubic feet (42 cubic liters). It is interesting that I get as much brood space with 14 frames in my Dadant hives as in a double deep Langstroth hive with 20 frames. This suggests a question should be asked about the way bees move within a cavity as the colony goes through a normal year. Would it be better for the bees to move up and down as in a hollow tree? or is there a benefit in working from front to rear as in a modern moveable frame hive?
 
#29 · (Edited)
Primitive beekeeping gives zero control of bee genetics.
I will try to find appropriate answers from the two books I am reading - Petrov, 1983 and Ilyasov, 2015.
I don't want to toss out the answers to your questions without quotable facts as I do not keep bees in the logs myself (yet).
Pretty sure I know the answers already, but need to find the actual pages.

Otherwise, primitive beekeeping does control bee genetics just as well.
It just does not do it in a way commonly understood and desired as in - more honey, less stings, fewer swarm...
Primitive beekeeping is very close to the basic Darwinian survival of the fittest for the given environment.

The only conditions where there is NO control of the genetics - where 100% of the specimens survive due to ideal external conditions.
Indeed, if there is no selection of the fittest, then there is no genetics control (an impossible situation).
Nature always does the genetics control by default - there is the default selection that is always going with or without humans around.

So, I disagree with too general of a statement - "Primitive beekeeping gives zero control of bee genetics. This has obvious consequences for honey production potential. It is perhaps an ideal way to preserve genetics since the beekeeper does not exercise any selection."

This needs qualification.
It is not just about "honey production potential" and "genetics preservation".
Indeed, I believe we need to review the modern beekeeping practices and do much needed adjustment.

As you wrote you deliberately released many swarms into your own vicinity.
What was the design and goal of that move?

IF I do a similar move (which I probably should do as well), my main motivation will be to establish a pseudo-feral population of the bees in my vicinity (since it does not exist).
I want to have some default selection going near me in parallel and independently, so that I can take advantage of that via the reverse feedback into my managed bees.
I have no idea what the default selection process would be in my vicinity - the only way to find out - establish some feral bees nearby and subject them to the default selection.
 
#31 ·
Keep bees long enough and there is probably no need to deliberately get swarms to populate the local area. I had one spring where the flow was so heavy, my newly started nucs filled everything up then took off. Keeping bees treatment free probably is supportive (or not interfere too much) of feral populations so long as we don't bring in new problems for them to deal with. Perhaps the health of local bee populations can be evaluated by the health and persistence of feral populations of bees.
 
#32 · (Edited)
Keep bees long enough and there is probably no need to deliberately get swarms to populate the local area. Keeping bees treatment free probably is supportive (or not interfere too much) of feral populations so long as we don't bring in new problems for them to deal with.
The "long enough" part is the unknown.
I might croak and do not get to see it before anything comes around (and IF it comes around - remember my "almond bee" annual loads).
That would be a real shame.

You know, time is the most limited and valuable resource we get.
No IFs; no BUTs.
You get no extra shots.

The "wait and see" approach in certain areas is not the best way, I feel.
Undertaking some deliberate steps is a better way.

I do not want to send swarms out - I find it ineffective in my area (they will just likely perish and be wasted).
But, I do find it reasonable to actually set out several pseudo-feral units in the vicinity, in protected areas, and rather keep them low profile (or face prosecution, literally).
(be it actual log hives for the fun of it - posing as "swarm traps").
Hint, hint...
 
#35 · (Edited)
Checked on the latest status of the wild/feral bees of the Bashkortostan.

Here is my source:
http://ylejbees.com/index.php/porod.../1143-burzyanskie-bortevye-pchely-i-varroatoz

I pulled out few significant facts (apparently some of these facts are coming back from the 80s yet - hence the 10 year window referenced):

Varroatos in Bashkortostan was first documented in 1973.
The existence of the boorzyan tree bees under the conditions of varroa invasion for 10 years without any prophylactic measures whatsoever and consistent increase in the bee colony numbers in 1980-1986 demonstrate that the these bees were able to adapt to the new parasite. In 1981-1982, there were many documented cases of absconding from the bee trees and non-viable swarms, but later such cases became less visible.

At present, .............the very conditions of the primitive beekeeping in combination with the continuing improving bee survival create conditions of the boorzyan tree bees to be in equilibrium with the new parasite.

Similar favorable condition could develop in other honey bee populations where the human impact on the natural complexes is not significant.
In short, the Bashkortostan wild/feral bees pretty much adapted to Varroa on their own and they are not going to die off.
These bees are doing fine and not going anywhere.
If anything, this is just another story of the "Russian" bees that has been developing right in front of us.
I am surprised no one is talking about it - maybe because the story is inconvenient in many ways to many invested parties.

Large cell too - 5.4mm-5.5mm naturally.
 
#37 ·
Thanks; did not see this one.

Jump to 7:30 and watch how an old lady buys 7 queens.
What?
They just handed her over $70,000 worth of queens as if these were some cucumbers???? :)
I did not think so.
As often gets noticed, movie producers are either lying or uninitiated to make much sense.

PS: they did say $10,000 apiece;
yet they don't have any armed guards standing around while handling hundreds of thousands bucks worth of queens?
gimme a break... I'd raid the **** place as soon as I watch his video with a plastic gun and snatch a box full those bees (a joke but see what I mean?).
PSS: I did observe nice and old, long Dadant hives that they run; good, classic pieces
 
#41 ·
The original bee race distributions.
The case of the USSR - they were planning where any particular bee will be a good fit per the local factors (climate, ecology) - that is the planning map for bee introductions, only partially factual.
Map Ecoregion Atlas World Geology

Map World Ecoregion Atlas
 
#42 ·
E.P. Petrov draws attention to the peculiarity of the structure of the bee's nest in the conditions of the natural existence of the family. The entire upper part of the dwelling forms a food storage, and below them is a compact nest with brood woven by numerous bridges between cells. Such a structure creates unity, increases the internal compactness of the nest, located in a vertical space, which contributes to the economical use of food and good family development. When bees are hibernating in the hollow, the relative position of the food, brood and letka stocks is of great importance. Between them there is a constant interaction. In the autumn-winter period, when the development of the family is completely stopped and the feed consumption of bees is limited to a minimum, the bee club moves only upwards following the diminishing feed reserves, but at the same time it is “tied” to one of the entrances. As the cluster moves away from the entrance the its shape changes, and in the second half of the wintering season it has a slightly elongated shape, so that the edge of the cluster is always next to an entrance. Since the bees in the winter cluster are constantly changing places, each of them periodically falls into the zone of fresh air coming from the entrance.
So this particular quote only applies only to the northern-style bee living in a vertical bee-tree (and its artificial emulations).
And also, this particular context is well studied and documented.
One issue - somehow this particular context is assigned to ALL bees.
Unsure why so - the context disagreements are so very obvious once you start looking at the places where the bees are coming from originally.

To compare, for Gray Caucasion normal habitat is caves and cracks in mountain sides - with totally different dimensional dynamics and seasonal moves (horizontal seasonal moves maybe indeed common).
I am yet to find any good study on this exact subject.
There is just none to be found it feels like.
 
#45 · (Edited)
Latest interesting find.
I extracted and translated a section of interest.

Epizootology of infectious and invasive diseases of Burzyan wild/feral bees.

Varroatosis was first registered in the reserve “Shulgan-Tash” in 1977-1979. Until 1986, the situation of the bee colonies with respect to the Varroa distructor within the range of Burzyan wild bees was considered relatively satisfactory. Levels of mites in the bee trees (Table 5) in most cases (8 out of 10) was lower than in the standard frame hives maintained in the same areas and same environmental conditions.

More often than not these differences were statistically significant, including for medium multi-year data - at the level of p <0.001.
In one case, when the mite level parameter was lower in apiary-kept bees, the mite levels for the year as a whole were low.

In addition, in the bee apiaries on the reserve therapeutic and preventive measures were routinely carried out over the study period (as opposed to the treatment-free wild/feral bees).

Without regular the use of veterinary drugs the differences of the compared groups would be even more pronounced.
The reasons for the greater stability of wild/feral bees can be several …

(GV: bee dwelling differences mentioned as possibly significant - I omit details)…

But the main reason why wild bees suffer less from invasions and adapt to them faster, is their more pronounced immunity due to the fact that hard natural selection without human intervention takes place.

(GV: feral bees’ swarming and absconding as other favorable factor to their survival are mentioned - I omit details ....)

More resistant wild bees, apparently, increase the stability of the managed bees when they are relocated <GV: to the apiaries> for breeding purposes.
The table 5 as mentioned on the text (with my comments).
Text Font Line Document Parallel


Source - Umaguzhin, 2011, p. 20-21 (non-English):
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...lifera-l.pdf&usg=AOvVaw2tZ7klhNCpUqjCWdKvFE-H

So - IF the wild/feral bees are left alone to their devices - they can survive and self-manage the mites (after the initial brief shock period passes over - in this case in late 1970s).
This paper appears a totally a "black box" data collection effort without significant attempts to explain much of anything (in Varroa area to be clear).
But the details of "how" are less important to the practical bee keeping anyway, and best left to the academics to ponder about.

Just one more professionally researched and documented confirmation of the same.
I can only wonder how many more relevant non-English sources are available completely under the radar.
Anyone can read Korean or Chinese?
 
#47 ·
Here is a really good video about current bee-tree beekeeping.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8cSZyyZ73Vg
Too bad - non-English and no subtitles (I enjoyed watching it).
7:00 - 9:45 - ground-level log hive apiary
9:45 - 24:00 - modern way to carve a bee-tree ("bort'") - chain saw is a big help.
24:00 - 33:00 - bee-tree maintenance - setting up an old, used tree-hive to attract a new swarm
33:00 - 34:00 - modern bee-tree operator with equipment
34:00 - 34:20 - fresh tracks of a brown bear trying to climb the bee tree (unsuccessfully)
34:20 - 48:00 - process of honey harvest (September, it looks like)
.... more stuff, but I need to sleep... :)
 
#49 ·
Sure.
Am still hoping a swarm will move into my one of my log traps this season, but getting late.
Idea is to let them stay there and not touch.
Just observe them and let them throw the swarms and do whatever they wanna do.
 
#72 ·
Just was gonna say, some of the passages here sound old and annoying to me (getting tired to hear these).
Such as:
Honey bees are critical to the planet’s ecosystem
The healthy and diverse insect population is critical to the planet's ecosystem.
NOT the honey bees.
The honey bee cultivation is not any different from any other mono-crop cultivation.
Saving the mono-crop of the "dying honey bees" is non-sense.
Really tired to read this media propaganda (hate to say this - but it is "fake news").

And so on.....(no smoke; no protection; etc).
Whatever. (go and do my bees without smoke and protection - and I will watch from a distance; hehehe....)

At this rate, the guy better be creating some general insect preserves then - much more admirable project, actually, I feel.
So yes - I am torn.
Suppose if the tiresome "save-the-bees" propaganda is removed from the context - it is an OK project; an interesting project on honey bee introduction into the CA native ecosystems - for what it is.

Where the honey bees must be preserved - the original habitats in the Old World.
Once the original, old populations are lost - they will not come back.
Lots of people have been doing exactly that already.
 
#71 · (Edited)
Not familiar, Russ.
A good read.
Will not get into the many details, except his honey harvest - "only take from the absconds and the dead - leave the rest alone".

On this same note, this year I spent the time and effort extracting the honey in conventional way.
Goota say - this spinned summer honey is "meh".
It is a pedestrian, generic, bland honey.
Donno - what is the fuss.
I don't care for it.
Everyone has it.
Why bother with it.

Mason jar Fruit preserve Canning Lekvar Food

Right here, on my table they are side by side.
The dark honey with some bee bread mixed in from the C&S - the last season harvest, half-eaten - the real deal.
The lighter honey - pedestrian honey everyone here sells (even the grocery stores).
Why spend the time and effort to get what everyone already sells.
Cheaply too.
I am done with that silly approach.
The pressed honey from the brood nest is my favorite and will be.
So - I better stick to that business model.

I better save the last of my C&S batch so I can do some blind tasting trials with it.
No more of the real honey left until something comes along.

With that, lots and lots of hives (smaller hives is fine) - let them load up with the stores then let some of them self-kill - then harvest from the dead and the absconds - actually is a fine operating mode as for me.
Double-bang, actually (self-weeding out the poor bee and trivial harvest from the empty hives).
Stupid simple.
 
#80 · (Edited)
Lately I have been reviewing old literature (or references to it) regarding the log hive keeping methods of the 19th century (Russia/Ukraine).
Specifically, studying the hive-culling system and its effects.

Here is a good overview:
They lit up not only strong families, but also the weakest, the weakest, not prepared for the winter and unable to survive it.
Poor families gave 2 kilograms of honey, and the best - 12-16 kilograms. According to fairly thorough calculations by N. M. Vitvitsky, about 10 million bee families were killed annually in Russia.
With the swarm-culling system, the only way to support the apiary is swarms. Usually, as many families as the number of new ones were taken out, that is, extra families were destroyed.

The swarm-culling system had serious flaws. The best, strong families that could make up the beekeeper were killed ................

...... However, there was a rational grain in the swarm-culling system. The elimination of weak unproductive “thin” families was advisable both economically and from the point of view of selection.
The apiary got rid of families of obviously bad heredity, which could worsen the genetic basis of other families. For winter, they left "beehives of good and medium-sized seed bees." .........

Strong honey-making families, which were lit, managed to release several swarms per season. With the first swarms left the old queen. The first swarms took part in the main flow and provided themselves with food for the winter. They avoided destruction. Old queen, the genetic basis of strong and productive families, was preserved in them. So contrary to the established opinion, the swarm system, in principle, did not lead to a deterioration in the heredity of bees and their degeneration. Honey bees have retained their excellent qualities to this day.
From Shabarshov, 1990:
http://paseka.su/books/item/f00/s00/z0000049/st005.shtml


Why bother?
Because the dynamics of that time period also included very high hive losses - precisely because of the "swarm-culling" system.
The humans acted in a role of a pest.
In fact 1)a very deadly pest and also 2)a very selective pest - killing the better performing colonies - because that's where the honey was.

Probably, the weaker colonies were also culled, as not worthy of keeping.
But a quote below somewhat contradicts this idea.

Roughly 10M colonies were culled in Russia annually for the purposes of honey harvesting (per Vitvitsky - GV: I assume this is for the 19th century when Vitvitsky lived).
I estimate at about 50% of the overall population was being culled annually (which was, of course, compensated for by the annual expansion at about the same level).

This phenomenon is interesting and worth studying because despite the mass slaughter ongoing for roughly 200-300 years, the bees did not perish - obviously.
Also, during this era, the concentrated bee yards become common with all the associated issues.
Contagious infection cases, such as foul broods, became common - and still the bees did not perish.

Will post few artifacts regarding this.

Here is the first - "Self-studying manual for beekeeping", Bootkevich, 1926, 4th edition.
I translate an excerpt from the book.
Text Font Paper Paper product


...
The swarming is over. There are a lot of young colonies hived, on the top of each other if not more.
The main flow is soon to end, and the beekeeper is now waiting for the honey buyers.
When a long awaited guest shows up; the host takes him to the yard and shows him the hives set aside for culling.
These are inspected and marked. The to-be-culled hives are almost always old colonies, (some that not swarmed, but these are in small numbers in general);
but mostly these are moderately swarmed hives that have the most honey. The swarms with little honey are of no interest to the buyer,
unless the year is so good that that some comb honey can be harvested from the "head". However, the small honey buyers are not interested in honey types' sorting.
The owner himself highly values the young swarms due to the new combs in them also (GV: i.e. - not interested to cull them).

Thus, predominantly the older colonies with young, strong queens are being culled, and the younger colonies with older queens stay.
It is obvious, but the ordinary beekeepers do not understand how important is to retain good young queens in their yards; and by the way,
vast majority of them are sure that swarms are going away with the young queens and the old queen stays behind in the hive.
But let me continue.

The deal is made usually with a bottle (GV: of booze) present and the beekeeper is paid per the hive, not per the pound; and, of course, the buyer is never getting a bad deal.
(GV: I am not getting into the technical details of the culling as described here...)
 
Top