Beemaster's International Beekeeping Forum

BEEKEEPING LEARNING CENTER => NATURAL & ORGANIC BEEKEEPING METHODS => Topic started by: doak on October 19, 2007, 01:34:39 am

Title: testing
Post by: doak on October 19, 2007, 01:34:39 am
testing ing ing ing  ing
doak
Title: Re: testing
Post by: doak on October 19, 2007, 01:52:34 am
The line between pure natural and organic honey is so broad we will never be able to cross it.
If the honey gets as much  red tape and scrutiny  in the testing of it for organic as the rules do, there is no organic honey on earth. JMO
Natural honey is a different story.
doak
Title: Re: testing
Post by: Brian D. Bray on October 20, 2007, 12:46:14 am
The line between pure natural and organic honey is so broad we will never be able to cross it.
If the honey gets as much  red tape and scrutiny  in the testing of it for organic as the rules do, there is no organic honey on earth. JMO
Natural honey is a different story.
doak

True, at least until the USA sets a honey standard(s).
Title: Re: testing
Post by: Kirk-o on October 20, 2007, 06:18:05 pm
I tell my Customers tha My honey comes from hives that have not been treated for mites faul brood nothing.I also say that I use starter strips from wax that has come frome a hive that hasn't been treated or medicated in any way.Clean Wax and Honey that has got no Mitesides pesticides oils or acids.I also say this honey is like the honey you grand pa used to eat.Sold American
people like that.I don't even mention Organic or Natural I let them Dub that In
kirko
Title: Re: testing
Post by: Old Timer on October 20, 2007, 06:24:29 pm
I also say this honey is like the honey you grand pa used to eat.

maybe so, but chemicals have been used to combat disease for 100 years. they used to use formaldehyde to try to kill out afb spores in the early 1900's .
Title: Re: testing
Post by: Kirk-o on October 20, 2007, 11:41:01 pm
Thats right they did use Fermaldahyde also to stuff dead people and to make glue for particle board there is alot of people and other creatures that can attest to the benefits of chemicals.In fact the grave yard is full of them.What honey would you like to eat?Chemical infused honey or honey from a hive that hasn't had any put in.All that polluted honey is also in bread and the cherrios people eat.I know which one I prefer.Which one do you prefer?
kirko
Title: Re: testing
Post by: Old Timer on October 21, 2007, 12:54:34 am
i prefer my honey ;). i don't use chemicals either. i was pointing out that when some of these people's grandpa was around they were using chemicals in bee hives. chemicals have been used for a hundred years. terramycin was patented in 1950, how many grandpas do you think used it? and ate the honey from the hive? i'm sure a lot of us has. i am trying to let you know that there was a use of chemicals in hives before mites.
Title: Re: testing
Post by: buzzbee on October 21, 2007, 07:46:35 am
Thats right they did use Fermaldahyde also to stuff dead people and to make glue for particle board there is alot of people and other creatures that can attest to the benefits of chemicals.In fact the grave yard is full of them.What honey would you like to eat?Chemical infused honey or honey from a hive that hasn't had any put in.All that polluted honey is also in bread and the cherrios people eat.I know which one I prefer.Which one do you prefer?
kirko
To be truthful, a lot of people that ate pure,wholesome ,unadultered honey are also dead.
I wonder if any sickness could be attributed to hives
that contained spores of untreated foul brood with proper research?
Just a question for thought. Sick bees could probably produce less than great honey even though"organic"
I do agree that not imposing man made chemicals any more than needed should be done but there is a time when intervention is needed.
Title: Re: testing
Post by: Jerrymac on October 21, 2007, 10:47:59 am
Of all the insects in the world..... How many are medicated?
Title: Re: testing
Post by: buzzbee on October 21, 2007, 10:51:10 am
How many insects do we harvest a crop from?
We"medicate " mosquitos ;)
Title: Re: testing
Post by: Jerrymac on October 21, 2007, 11:36:50 am
How many insects do we harvest a crop from?
We"medicate " mosquitos ;)

Hummmm. Seems the harder we try to wipe out a species the more it thrives and the more we try to fix something the more it is broken. Perhaps we should try to get rid of bees.

I do not know the full history of the honey bee but I do imagine that once upon a time they lived in the wild all on their own and managed just fine. The process of natural selection probably took place and the survivors moved on to become stronger and better. Then at some point man came along and decided to put the bees into containers to make it easier to get to the honey.

Now some where since then for some reason man bees got sick. So man being man decided he needed to fix the problem. But this so called sickness was probably something the bees had lived with for years. (many many years) And either the bees coped with it or they died. The weak die in nature you know. But now that man was fixing the problem, the bees thrived. Yea! But it is the weak bees, and they get weaker, and new diseases come along. So man fix those also. Then more and more and more. Soon a super bug comes out of the woods and attacks the weak bees and man runs around screaming "OH NO what do we do?" Now all of man's weak bees are being slaughtered. But there are a few strong ones left and if we just give them a chance to out propagate the weak ones by doing nothing, we can beat this.

Mean while, we still kill off the weak mosquitoes and the strong keep coming on stronger.
Title: Re: testing
Post by: buzzbee on October 21, 2007, 06:29:05 pm
where is the data on feral hives? That may be the missing link. I don't know about your part of the country but very few honey bees are seen around here except for in the vicinity of beekeepers.Mostly bumbles,wasps,yellow jackets and the like.If all the wild bees are surviving around here they never came to visit my gardens much
Title: Re: testing
Post by: Jerrymac on October 21, 2007, 06:59:19 pm
There are many many feral hives around here. And I don't know of very many beekeepers. In fact the local apple orchards keep begging for beeks for pollination. I think there are a couple of folks up in PA that go after feral bees. I believe they have a yahoo group called the feral bee project or something.

But if there were a bunch of beeks in this area and they were propping up genetically weak bees then it would stand to reason that those bad genes could/would get into the survivors gene pool and weaken them. Also seems people don't want bees around and will get rid of those survivors further lessoning the strong gene pool.
Title: Re: testing
Post by: Jerrymac on October 21, 2007, 07:26:25 pm
If all the wild bees are surviving around here they never came to visit my gardens much

I've got five acres with a lot of wildflowers and flowers I've put out. I hardly ever see bees around here on my five acres. I don't even know where my bees go to get water. Not from my pool or fish tank or the neighbors horse water tank.
Title: Re: testing
Post by: pdmattox on October 21, 2007, 08:01:25 pm
where is the data on feral hives? That may be the missing link. I don't know about your part of the country but very few honey bees are seen around here except for in the vicinity of beekeepers.Mostly bumbles,wasps,yellow jackets and the like.If all the wild bees are surviving around here they never came to visit my gardens much

Acording to the state of florida most feral hives are not realy feral they are ahb's. I'm sure that texas and californa are the same. How would you know if they are feral and when do they become feral?
Title: Re: testing
Post by: Jerrymac on October 21, 2007, 08:04:31 pm
Feral is when they are not in the care of a person. Bees in your hive are domestic. If they swarm they are feral. If you catch that swam or cut them out later then they are domestic again.


I guess the real question would be if/when do they become wild?
Title: Re: testing
Post by: pdmattox on October 21, 2007, 08:06:39 pm
Feral is when they are not in the care of a person. Bees in your hive are domestic. If they swarm they are feral. If you catch that swam or cut them out later then they are domestic again.


I guess the real question would be if/when do they become wild?

That will never happen due to disease,dearth, or mites.
 Organic beekeeping can be done and organic honey can be obtained if you have the right locations.
Title: Re: testing
Post by: buzzbee on October 21, 2007, 08:24:00 pm
So,am I to think we have no ferals around here except for whatever swarms mine have thrown?
If not what happened to them,mites,nosema afb,efb? no treatment let them build survivor super bees?
Ferals should be organic unless someones treating them or feeding them.
Are ferals surviving or dying from these maladies,thats what I really want to know!
If treatment makes weaker bees,we should be overpopulated with ferals that have figured out how to survive without intervention by man.They should be a dominant species.
Title: Re: testing
Post by: Jerrymac on October 21, 2007, 08:35:13 pm
I don't think anybody read a thing I wrote.
Title: Re: testing
Post by: pdmattox on October 21, 2007, 08:50:13 pm


?

 :evil:
Title: Re: testing
Post by: Jerrymac on October 21, 2007, 09:02:09 pm
That will never happen due to disease,dearth, or mites.

The right genes and the disease and mites are not a problem. No one taking all the honey and they will probably survive the dearth as they will be acclimatized to the area.

So,am I to think we have no ferals around here except for whatever swarms mine have thrown?
If not what happened to them,mites,nosema afb,efb? no treatment let them build survivor super bees?
Ferals should be organic unless someones treating them or feeding them.
Are ferals surviving or dying from these maladies,thats what I really want to know!
If treatment makes weaker bees,we should be overpopulated with ferals that have figured out how to survive without intervention by man.They should be a dominant species.

I will just put what I already have

There are many many feral hives around here. And I don't know of very many beekeepers. In fact the local apple orchards keep begging for beeks for pollination. I think there are a couple of folks up in PA that go after feral bees. I believe they have a yahoo group called the feral bee project or something.

But if there were a bunch of beeks in this area and they were propping up genetically weak bees then it would stand to reason that those bad genes could/would get into the survivors gene pool and weaken them. Also seems people don't want bees around and will get rid of those survivors further lessoning the strong gene pool.
Title: Re: testing
Post by: buzzbee on October 21, 2007, 09:04:19 pm
I've read what you wrote but I'm sure man didn't gather up all the bees. Some should have evolved without our help,but I don't think man caused the varroa  explosion,but maybe we did.I agree we need a term defining how long it takes till bees are considered feral after escaping,One generation two,I
don't know. Maybe we should call a swarm renegades till their caught. ;)
But are the bees in the wild(Good term or not??) surviving any better? We need more research there I think to see if organic beekeeping is worthwhile on a large scale or is organic keeping another avenue that may not prove to be all it's cracked up to be.
I mean it would great if we could just dump the bees in a box,capture a swarm and hive them and just expect all to be well if everyone would just use small cell or let them build all their own comb,but I just don't see this as total reality.
Realistically feeding hives is maintaining bees that may not be the most efficient stock at hoarding and gathering so we should probably let them starve.
Someone else can but I'm not going to go that far because hives with zero bees collect zero honey!
But thats just my two cents worth. I was just throwing these ideas as food for thought as in "what if "and
is there any studies on "Non domestic" colonies?
Title: Re: testing
Post by: Michael Bush on October 21, 2007, 09:14:32 pm
Part of the reason for the term Feral for bees in North America is because it is not believed that there were bees here before the Europeans brought domestic bees over.  So they are all descended from domestic stock.

Bees do survive in the wild for generations.  They always have.
Title: Re: testing
Post by: Brian D. Bray on October 21, 2007, 10:12:26 pm
Only is Florida, so far, is an unmanaged hive considered to be a threat or africianized.  The absurdity of that assumption and the requirement to destroy it will only serve to prolong the problems beekeepers are having adjusting to hive management and the affects of varroa.

Feral or wild hives do exist, they always have and always will.  True the advent of varroa destroyed a vast majority of feral hives just as it did managed hives.  But an uncaptured swarm replaces a feral hive just by its existance.  Those hives can and do survive long enough to develop resistance without chemical assistance, whereas many managed hives fail to develop resistance because of chemical intervention.

What is the most practical approach over time?

I say (soap box please) let's ignore the varroa completely and see what develops.  I will allow the use of sugar shakes to prolong hive life as resistance develops and the use of SBB's to help reduce the numbers of mites in the hive.  Use foundationless frames so that the chemical contamination is interrupted.  Lets get back to beekeeping as it was done prior to the varroa invasion and let the bees survive.
Title: Re: testing
Post by: buzzbee on October 21, 2007, 10:57:05 pm
But wouldn't the ferals have had naturally  small cell?
If that would be the case,the varroa should not have had the same effect on them with the shorter time to emergence of the bees. I thought this is how you broke the cycle of the mite.Or am I misunderstanding the reasoning behind small cell? Is small cell smaller than natural cell? If so we are intervening in the bees natural process here.
Title: Re: testing
Post by: Jerrymac on October 21, 2007, 11:18:20 pm
But wouldn't the ferals have had naturally  small cell?
If that would be the case,the varroa should not have had the same effect on them with the shorter time to emergence of the bees. I thought this is how you broke the cycle of the mite.Or am I misunderstanding the reasoning behind small cell? Is small cell smaller than natural cell? If so we are intervening in the bees natural process here.

This has already been said many times on these pages. But here we go again. As you have just stated, there is not much on feral hives. Therefore how do they know the mites had any affect on the ferals? But let us imagine some feral colonies around some apiary. The domestic bees failed because they got over loaded with mites. The ferals went and robbed out those hives bring massive amounts of mites back with them. Instant over kill small cell or not. But also remember a big majority of ferals are escaped domestics and many probably had not regress all the way back to natural. (Small cell is 4.9. Natural can go smaller)

But now what about all the pesticide poisoning, fires, people killing off bees for what ever reason. The reduction of places for bees to live without people getting mad. Predators. Extremely bad years. There are so many ways the ferals could have died, why does everyone blame it on the mites?
Title: Re: testing
Post by: Understudy on October 21, 2007, 11:19:07 pm
But wouldn't the ferals have had naturally  small cell?
If that would be the case,the varroa should not have had the same effect on them with the shorter time to emergence of the bees. I thought this is how you broke the cycle of the mite.Or am I misunderstanding the reasoning behind small cell? Is small cell smaller than natural cell? If so we are intervening in the bees natural process here.

The research on this is perplexing. Jerry Hayes said varroa wipred out 99% of ferals in Florida.
I called BS. I have read two reports neither stated anything on Florida. One report said Varroa wiped out about 75% of feral hives in Northern California. Another in New York said it was about 20% for their area.

Here are my non scientific thoughts on this. An established hive with a few years behind it. Most likey regressed to small cell which was one of many factors that helped it against varroa. Most swarms that were new or throw offs from domestic hives that hadn't been established for very long probably didn't do so well.

AHB are a smaller bee and draw a cell on 4.62 on average. They also abscond rather quickly if the hive is assaulted for any reason. So a varroa infested hive is going to be abandon rather quickly. Bees with Varroa are weakened and probaly would not survive as well and there would be less of them when the hive reestablished a location.

The problem for Florida is the difference in the timeline on when Varroa entered Florida and when AHB entered Florida. And I am having a tought time getting straight answers on what seem like simple questions. But maybe they aren't that simple.

Thanks Buzzbee now I need a drink. I find my bloodpressure is getting worked up again. I had almost calmed down from reading all the crap I have been pouring over lately. :)

Sincerely,
Brendhan

Title: Re: testing
Post by: buzzbee on October 21, 2007, 11:27:53 pm
But wouldn't the ferals have had naturally  small cell?
If that would be the case,the varroa should not have had the same effect on them with the shorter time to emergence of the bees. I thought this is how you broke the cycle of the mite.Or am I misunderstanding the reasoning behind small cell? Is small cell smaller than natural cell? If so we are intervening in the bees natural process here.

This has already been said many times on these pages. But here we go again. As you have just stated, there is not much on feral hives. Therefore how do they know the mites had any affect on the ferals? But let us imagine some feral colonies around some apiary. The domestic bees failed because they got over loaded with mites. The ferals went and robbed out those hives bring massive amounts of mites back with them. Instant over kill small cell or not. But also remember a big majority of ferals are escaped domestics and many probably had not regress all the way back to natural. (Small cell is 4.9. Natural can go smaller)

But now what about all the pesticide poisoning, fires, people killing off bees for what ever reason. The reduction of places for bees to live without people getting mad. Predators. Extremely bad years. There are so many ways the ferals could have died, why does everyone blame it on the mites?
Now you're kinda getting around to my point. I'm not blaming it all on mites but a lot of people think the mites and everything else is mans fault. Nature has eliminated species on her own before and will again with or without man!



Sorry Understudy for getting up the blood pressure,just felt a little chatty tonight! :)
Have one on me,You too,Jerry! :)
Title: Re: testing
Post by: Jerrymac on October 21, 2007, 11:45:59 pm
OH no you don't. You can't just up and quit like that.

Nature does do alot of things. Even extinctions. But a lot of times when things are left alone it all balances out. But man comes along and tries to fix everything, and usually makes a mess out of it.

I still say that if man never figured out how to medicate himself, while there might be fewer people in the world, the ones here would be super men/women. Instead we have propped up all our pathetic genes. One day it will snap and there will be another massive plague like ain't never been seen before. Then besides people dying from disease they will be riots. Governments will fall because they didn't protect their people. (They did. That's what caused the mess.) Wars will break out. Ect. Ect.

Sweet dreams
Title: Re: testing
Post by: Understudy on October 21, 2007, 11:56:51 pm
But wouldn't the ferals have had naturally  small cell?
If that would be the case,the varroa should not have had the same effect on them with the shorter time to emergence of the bees. I thought this is how you broke the cycle of the mite.Or am I misunderstanding the reasoning behind small cell? Is small cell smaller than natural cell? If so we are intervening in the bees natural process here.

This has already been said many times on these pages. But here we go again. As you have just stated, there is not much on feral hives. Therefore how do they know the mites had any affect on the ferals? But let us imagine some feral colonies around some apiary. The domestic bees failed because they got over loaded with mites. The ferals went and robbed out those hives bring massive amounts of mites back with them. Instant over kill small cell or not. But also remember a big majority of ferals are escaped domestics and many probably had not regress all the way back to natural. (Small cell is 4.9. Natural can go smaller)

But now what about all the pesticide poisoning, fires, people killing off bees for what ever reason. The reduction of places for bees to live without people getting mad. Predators. Extremely bad years. There are so many ways the ferals could have died, why does everyone blame it on the mites?
Now you're kinda getting around to my point. I'm not blaming it all on mites but a lot of people think the mites and everything else is mans fault. Nature has eliminated species on her own before and will again with or without man!



Sorry Understudy for getting up the blood pressure,just felt a little chatty tonight! :)
Have one on me,You too,Jerry! :)

Where is my vodka? Ah here we go. Glug glug glug.

Okay. The mites like AHB were brought over from their natural enviroment by someone doing something that seemed like a good idea at the time. AHB were intentionaly brought in by a scientific team in S. America. Someone thought those pesky excluders needed to be removed.  The mites there is a little debate on. Some say they came in via the ports on some bees in a boat. Others believe someone bringing in queens illegally, like in a shirt pocket or similar. From a varroa positive area helped with this. Here is also another possiblity. the species of Varroa in the US is destructor and for a while it was confused and miscalled Jacobsoni. DNA tests reveiled it to be a seperate species. Possibly a descendant or sister type of mite to Jacobsoni. May have existed hear for a while and finally had a huge growth spurt.

The problem as I am reading it right now is there is no solid answers on how the varroa infestation began. The simple fact is that Varroa until the 80's did not exist in the US. Let me rephrase that V. Destructors presence wasn't confirmed until the 80's it may have gone by unconfirmed for a while before that.

Australlia currently has no Varroa. But sooner or later someone is going to screw up and they will join the rest of us.

Title: Re: testing
Post by: Michael Bush on October 22, 2007, 08:50:59 am
>But wouldn't the ferals have had naturally  small cell?

Not all of them.  Recent escapees will not:
http://www.bushfarms.com/beesnaturalcell.htm#feralbees
http://www.bushfarms.com/beesferal.htm


>Is small cell smaller than natural cell?

No.  Small cell is in the middle of the range of sizes of worker brood in natural cell:
http://www.bushfarms.com/beesnaturalcell.htm


>Jerry Hayes said Varroa wipred out 99% of ferals in Florida.

Obviously at least into the first part of the current century (2000) they were having not troubles finding them.  If Varroa wiped them out they would have been gone long before that:
http://www.beesource.com/news/article/floridaferal.htm
http://www.beesource.com/news/article/floridaferalsurvivor.htm
http://www.beesource.com/pov/wenner/varroaabstract.htm
Title: Re: testing
Post by: Understudy on October 22, 2007, 09:27:54 am

>Jerry Hayes said Varroa wipred out 99% of ferals in Florida.

Obviously at least into the first part of the current century (2000) they were having not troubles finding them.  If Varroa wiped them out they would have been gone long before that:
http://www.beesource.com/news/article/floridaferal.htm
http://www.beesource.com/news/article/floridaferalsurvivor.htm
http://www.beesource.com/pov/wenner/varroaabstract.htm


Oh No Michael, didn't you hear all feral bees in Florida are AHB and those don't count because they have a natural resistance to the varroa mite.

My question is what happened between 1987 (when varroa were confirmed) and when AHB were confirmed.
http://news.ufl.edu/2005/06/20/africanbees/ (http://news.ufl.edu/2005/06/20/africanbees/)
The timeline seems a little bit like a coincedence.
Although the USDA map says 1998 for AHB spread.
http://www.ars.usda.gov/Research/docs.htm?docid=11059&page=6 (http://www.ars.usda.gov/Research/docs.htm?docid=11059&page=6)

Michael,
Thanks for those articles by the way. Nice stuff. I am going through them and their references later tonight.

Sincerely,
Brendhan

Title: Re: testing
Post by: TwT on October 23, 2007, 06:40:40 pm
But wouldn't the ferals have had naturally  small cell?
If that would be the case,the varroa should not have had the same effect on them with the shorter time to emergence of the bees. I thought this is how you broke the cycle of the mite.Or am I misunderstanding the reasoning behind small cell? Is small cell smaller than natural cell? If so we are intervening in the bees natural process here.

This has already been said many times on these pages. But here we go again. As you have just stated, there is not much on feral hives. Therefore how do they know the mites had any affect on the ferals? But let us imagine some feral colonies around some apiary. The domestic bees failed because they got over loaded with mites. The ferals went and robbed out those hives bring massive amounts of mites back with them. Instant over kill small cell or not. But also remember a big majority of ferals are escaped domestics and many probably had not regress all the way back to natural. (Small cell is 4.9. Natural can go smaller)

But now what about all the pesticide poisoning, fires, people killing off bees for what ever reason. The reduction of places for bees to live without people getting mad. Predators. Extremely bad years. There are so many ways the ferals could have died, why does everyone blame it on the mites?

people blame it on mites because they disappeared the same time all domestic hive's were all dieing from mites and not pesticides at the time all ferals were coming up missing so that make it easy to see it was mites, back before mites showed up there was more feral hives than domestic, I remember not being able to play in parts of the yard because clover was blooming and you would get stung stepping on honeybee's and no beekeepers anywhere in my area because I knew everyone ( I believe that 90% or more were killed), they were everywhere, now if bee's naturally build small cell on their own were did they all go? my conclusion is if bee's really build small cell on there own then small cell didn't work for them, people would sound stupid to say that all feral (over 90%) were killed because they were just escapees from domestic hives and not regressed yet(some feral were loose from back in the 50's and 60's and they swarmed and their swarms swarmed and so on), now you could say T-mites could have got the feral that varroa didn't, who nose? I have always wondered about small cell and if it was the reason bee's lived or was it the bee's? could you really buy a package from anywhere put them on small cell and they live or take a small cell hive that has lived for years and put them back on regular cell and see if they would make it, mine make it and they on regular cell. I think pesticides are out of the question unless they some how treated the entire USA because percentage of farm land is small and was then and domestic bee's wasn't effected, fires and people can't do it, just look at AHB's, if this was true they would be controllable, its the question of ages but mites are more likely the cause of the demise because of the timing... now when I moved to GA. I went for 13 years without seeing a honey bee, apple tree's never had a apple until I became a beekeeper then they were loaded.... jerrymac, robbing is the main reasons mites get spread, and saying a small cell hive will die also must mean small cell isn't what its cracked up to be, if a hive dies from robbing another hive that tells me they was dieing anyway, small cells hives aren't suppose to die to mites is the story,  all hives rob dead or dieing hives and I am sure my bee probably have robbed a hive that was dieing from mites and mine are still here....... its a lot of questions to be answered but some of the answers are probably right in our face we are just looking to hard......... Just some of my thoughts!!!!
Title: Re: testing
Post by: Michael Bush on October 23, 2007, 06:54:15 pm
I still say the first mistake is assuming they died.  I've never stopped finding them.

But even if you have a stable varroa population within a hive, how many hitchhiking varroa would it take to overwelm a hive?  How many crashing hives getting robbed would it take?  I think this is a problem for any hive where there are a lot of colonies around it crashing from Varroa.

Drones drift shamelessly and workers drift some and robbers will rob anything that is dying from mites.
Title: Re: testing
Post by: TwT on October 23, 2007, 07:27:29 pm
I still say the first mistake is assuming they died.  I've never stopped finding them.

But even if you have a stable varroa population within a hive, how many hitchhiking varroa would it take to overwelm a hive?  How many crashing hives getting robbed would it take?  I think this is a problem for any hive where there are a lot of colonies around it crashing from Varroa.

Drones drift shamelessly and workers drift some and robbers will rob anything that is dying from mites.


were did they go then?, I didnt believe all feral hives died but most did, face it, they just don't up and vanish but most did....

if a hive is crashing and population down for enough to not protect its self then mite population would be down also right, without bee's mites don't last? MB you been around mites longer than me so tell me something, whats a healthy  mite count on a large hive and whats the mite count on a half or less populated crashing hive?  I am sure you counted both...
 now in a small cell hive or a hygienic hive mites shouldn't be successful breeding or reproducing so how do they kill a hive like that that lives or resist mites? just wondering!!!

since hives collapsed in the 90's and mite also of course then when hives come back up in numbers and mites also the small cell want help if you have a number of hive in your area that are crashing from mites, is that what you are saying because your hives will be robbing others that are crashing from mites, if this is true and SC works, sounds like a short term fix, guest we need to work on resistant bee's instead.... we will need a country of resistant bee's to keep robbing and mite transfer from being a crashing thing again like the 90's... I am just thinking and typing as the questions pop up, not condemning know one.....
Title: Re: testing
Post by: Jerrymac on October 23, 2007, 08:04:57 pm
TwT,

The first honey bee I ever remember in my life is the one that stung me on the bottom of the foot when I was five years old. Many years later I remember seeing honey comb built under the eve of a house. Some years later I saw that again. Then in the seventies I had bees move into the walls of a house I lived in. (And at some point in the seventies my dad got some bees from Sears Robuck. Don't know what happened to them) then there were a few that flew into the vehicle I was driving and stung me on the back a couple of times. I really don't know if those were feral or domestic. The point is, I never thought of or looked for bees until I encountered them. So I don't know if they were out on the yard flowers or not as I wouldn't sit and watch for them. I don't know if the dwindled or not. I do know that a few years back a swarm showed up here and eventually moved into my well box. That is when I decided to give beekeeping a try.

I didn't intend to imply that just one of the things I listed caused the loss of a bunch of bees, but that all of them probably had something to do with it. Now if a hive of bees on natural cell is holding their own with mites and does it year after year, and then suddenly the mite load doubles or triples then they will fail. If one feral hive robs from five failing domestic hives, it is possible to over whelm the feral hive with mites.

AND before the mass extinction of bees came about, how much attention was paid to the number of feral hives any where? They could have already dwindled from all the other things I mentioned.
Title: Re: testing
Post by: Michael Bush on October 23, 2007, 08:05:53 pm
>were did they go then?

They are still out there by my observation. I have no trouble finding them.

>if a hive is crashing and population down for enough to not protect its self then mite population would be down also right

The ones I have seen crashing from varroa have tens of thousands of varroa in them.

> without bee's mites don't last?

No, but they get robbed before that.

> MB you been around mites longer than me so tell me something, whats a healthy  mite count on a large hive and whats the mite count on a half or less populated crashing hive?

Crashing hives have tens of thousands of mites all together.  I can't find enough mites to count in my healthy hives.

> now in a small cell hive or a hygienic hive mites shouldn't be successful breeding or reproducing so how do they kill a hive like that that lives or resist mites?

If a strong hive is robbing out a crashing hive and hauls thousands of mites back I can see the possibility of that causing a crash.  I have not seen it happen.  But that is what I would speculate.  The small cell hives don't have enough mites to amount to anything.  I just had a field day at my beeyard last month and tried to find one dead Varroa mite on a tray to show them and after searching several trays I just gave up finding one.

I haven't treated some of them since 2001 and I haven't treated any of them since 2003.
Title: Re: testing
Post by: Kirk-o on October 23, 2007, 08:31:24 pm
I observed a couple quad-zillon feral bees in the desert in Arizona they are
lousey out there.There all over the Hollywood hills were I work chimneys under the roof tile in walls everywere.I stopped purchaseing bees because there are so many swarms and cut outs.Its like Cyotes man I see more in L A than I ever saw when I lived in Utah
kirko
Title: Re: testing
Post by: buzzbee on October 23, 2007, 11:15:32 pm
Maybe this is all wrong?
http://www.ent.uga.edu/bees/Disorders/Varroa_mites.htm
Copied from the article page:
Varroa destructor is a common mite found on Apis cerana, the Asian honey bee on which it  does not cause serious damage like it does on Apis mellifera. These mites were accidentally introduced into the United States in the mid 1980s. Before this time, honey bees were found coast to coast across the United States. Now only an estimated 2% of the feral honey bee population remains, and even this derives annually from honey bee swarms from beekeeping operations. Practically speaking, the wild honey bees have become extinct in the United States due to infestation of the Varroa mite.

Title: Re: testing
Post by: Understudy on October 23, 2007, 11:23:27 pm
Another document I read. The problem is it doesn't state it sources. What is the basis for this claim. The reports I am reading dispuit those numbers.

Sincerely,
Brendhan
Title: Re: testing
Post by: Kirk-o on October 24, 2007, 06:22:36 pm
All the feral bees in L a and Arizona don't read that stuff by the experts.Your observation is always more valid than any report.I see Feral Bees all over the place.
kirko
Title: Re: testing
Post by: Michael Bush on October 24, 2007, 09:58:05 pm
>Practically speaking, the wild honey bees have become extinct in the United States due to infestation of the Varroa mite.

MOST of the bee scientists keep saying that.  A few don't.  Larry Connor says he keeps finding feral bees.  Tom Seeley has been studying the ones in Arnot forest.  Obviously if feral bees could talk, they would say as Samuel Clemens did: "reports of my death have been greatly exaggerated".
Title: Re: testing
Post by: TwT on October 24, 2007, 11:41:21 pm
maybe at the time when all these hives were dieing it was true, I believe the ferals are making a comeback, but I think they are half of what they use to be..... it makes since that after the main die off the bee's that showed restraints are spreading plus beekeepers are buying bee's for resistance and all these bee's swarm the feral population will grow...
Title: Re: testing
Post by: Understudy on October 24, 2007, 11:59:58 pm
I am not saying that the Varroa didn't have an impact on hives feral and domestic. I just don't think it was as extreme as they are saying. I think saying 99% death of feral hives due to Varroa is just wrong.  I think people throw that number around without sound scientific backing. So right now I want to find a report that says when the Varroa arrived in 1987, That between the years of 1987 and 1993 99% the feral bee hives were destroyed by Varroa.

And that report needs to be specific to Florida. I have read reports on a few other places one says 75% one says 20% but none say 99% and none talk about Florida. Except in some cases where they mention that the Varroa came in through Florida. But I cannot find a report that confirms that either.

Sincerely,
Brendhan

Title: Re: testing
Post by: TwT on October 25, 2007, 07:45:06 am
tell you what understudy, one way would be ask Keith S. Delaplane and see how he or others came up with so many different numbers... go straight to one of the horses mouth's

http://www.ent.uga.edu/bees/contact.htm
Title: Re: testing
Post by: Michael Bush on October 25, 2007, 07:50:52 am
In talking to beekeepers around the country there seem to be pockets where the feral bees did all die.  But there also seem to be pockets where not many died at all.  Since the Varroa are endemic, I'd have to blame other causes as contributing those higher numbers.
Title: Re: testing
Post by: TwT on October 25, 2007, 08:16:00 am
  Since the Varroa are endemic, I'd have to blame other causes as contributing those higher numbers.


but what other cause's that could effect a such a wide area and happen at the same time mites were killing domestic bee's, I dont believe there was anything else that could have killed ( or made disappear) the bee's like they did but mites and timing is the main reason I think this. just look at the mites track record, every country they were newly found in got hit hard just like the USA did so why think there is another smoking gun thats caused the bee's to disappear, nothing else would make since, now dont get me wrong, I am not blaming it all on Varroa, bee's started vanishing when T-mites got started and I think they were still dieing from them when varroa hit, but when I was talking about mites I was referring to both.
Title: Re: testing
Post by: Understudy on October 25, 2007, 08:26:23 am
I have sent him an email.

You wouldn't happen to have contact information on Dr. Larry Connor. Author of The Varroa Handbook: "Biology and Control"

Sincerely,
Brendhan
Title: Re: testing
Post by: TwT on October 25, 2007, 08:33:45 am
this is the only one I know of and seen on the web, might be the same  Dr. Larry Connor

http://www.wicwas.com/page4.html
Title: Re: testing
Post by: reinbeau on October 25, 2007, 08:52:20 am
I';m pretty sure ferals died out around here for a period in the early 90's, I remember being in my garden for probably two years in a row at least and never seeing a single honeybee (I'm observant, nature is one of my loves, I watch and keep track of what I see out there).  I remember exactly the first time I saw a honeybee in two years, it was on a purple crocus next to my stoop, and I cried out "a honeybee!" when I saw her.  They've been back around ever since.
Title: Re: testing
Post by: Kathyp on October 28, 2007, 04:17:53 pm
i read back through this thread.  something to think about.....

all of the great epidemics and pandemics in history, with one exception, have one thing in common.  mobility.  either the mobility of the vector, or mobility of the carrier.  it does not matter whether you are talking about livestock, people, or, most likely, bees.  the one exception is the flu pandemic of the early 20th century.  the great flu appeared simultaneously in several places and on different continents. some of those places were quite remote.  to this day, no one really knows how that happened.

seems that leaves control of disease to three choices.  1.  allow nature to take it's course and live with what is left.  2.  control mobility, which in this day and age is not practical 3.  control disease.

breeding survivor stock of anything is desirable.  does the survivor stock you breed, survive export?  perhaps not.  when exposed to new contaminates, the stock you have raised may not be immune to the contaminate in the new area.

controlling mobility is not an option with bees if you are going to transport them for pollination.  you also could not import or export your "survivor" stock.  even if your own hives never leave your property, the bees travel a large area and may be exposed to bees that have been imported and may be infected with ?.

treating disease has it's own risks.  we have experienced resistance to mite treatments.  antibiotic treatments can lead to resistance in many species.  this is especially true if it is not done according to direction.  not treating disease puts our own and others bees at risk.  if we are going to treat, we all want to use the least dangerous and most effective medications or methods.

this is just the disgorging of thoughts on the choices we all face.  i don't think there are easy, or one size fits all, answers for us.

i remember that my great aunts oldest daughter died of rheumatic fever after having a sore throat for a couple of weeks.  people don't die from strep throat much anymore.  of course, now they die of antibiotic resistant staph infections.....in fewer numbers....a fair trade?
Title: Re: testing
Post by: Brian D. Bray on October 28, 2007, 11:57:34 pm
I';m pretty sure ferals died out around here for a period in the early 90's, I remember being in my garden for probably two years in a row at least and never seeing a single honeybee (I'm observant, nature is one of my loves, I watch and keep track of what I see out there).  I remember exactly the first time I saw a honeybee in two years, it was on a purple crocus next to my stoop, and I cried out "a honeybee!" when I saw her.  They've been back around ever since.

I have to disagree.  Bee's go where the nectar is.  Where I'm living, at the old family homestead, there was a dearth of bees for years.  this with 2 beekeepers less than a mile away.  the main problem as I saw it was that my parents weren't into growing plants that the bees liked over other nectar sources, the only time of the year honey bees were observed was when the orchard was in blume, otherwise, nada.  After they passed away and My wife & I moved in we changed the types of flowers majorly, added more fruit trees and bushes, and added out own bees.  Now we see bees everywhere.  However, if we hadn't changed the flora to that which bees like my bees would be going elsewhere for their nectar instead of getting it closer to home.
Title: Re: testing
Post by: reinbeau on October 29, 2007, 08:26:30 pm
I';m pretty sure ferals died out around here for a period in the early 90's, I remember being in my garden for probably two years in a row at least and never seeing a single honeybee (I'm observant, nature is one of my loves, I watch and keep track of what I see out there).  I remember exactly the first time I saw a honeybee in two years, it was on a purple crocus next to my stoop, and I cried out "a honeybee!" when I saw her.  They've been back around ever since.

I have to disagree.
Disagree with what?  My observations?
Quote
Bee's go where the nectar is. 
There was never a dearth of nectar here, especially one that lasted two years.
Quote
Where I'm living, at the old family homestead, there was a dearth of bees for years.  this with 2 beekeepers less than a mile away.  the main problem as I saw it was that my parents weren't into growing plants that the bees liked over other nectar sources, the only time of the year honey bees were observed was when the orchard was in blume, otherwise, nada.  After they passed away and My wife & I moved in we changed the types of flowers majorly, added more fruit trees and bushes, and added out own bees.  Now we see bees everywhere.  However, if we hadn't changed the flora to that which bees like my bees would be going elsewhere for their nectar instead of getting it closer to home.
Well, that definitely wasn't the case here, I have been gardening here since 1978 and have always, except for those two years, had bees, yes, honeybees, in the garden, along with all different kinds of flowers for them to enjoy.   There were no beekeepers nearby, the bogs are within range, but they stopped pollinating most of them around here in 1980 or so.  Believe me, there were no bees.
Title: Re: testing
Post by: Brian D. Bray on October 31, 2007, 02:34:42 am
Well, if you had the type of flowers that bees prefer, were a credible distance from any apiary, and didn't see any honeybees for several years, you may have been in one of those pockets where the ferals bees died off.

What I was trying to say is that there is much more than not noticing the bees around than just assuming if you don't see them they must be gone.  I think that is the crux of the 99% feral die off theory go started.  I'm sure that in some areas that was the case, In my area it wasn't.  We need to think about it and explain it a little better.  And I admit I was wanting in the explaining portion.