Beemaster's International Beekeeping Forum
BEEKEEPING LEARNING CENTER => NATURAL & ORGANIC BEEKEEPING METHODS => Topic started by: TwoHoneys on August 08, 2010, 08:47:55 am
-
I have three hives (and one small, 4-frame split). One of the three hives overwintered last season, but the other two began as new packages this spring.
I’m concerned about stores. Yesterday’s inspection shows tons of bees and frames of brood about to explode. However, at this point, there are few frames of capped honey in any of the hives.
They’re working (slowly) to build comb on the foundationless frames I inserted to keep them from swarming.
I’ve never fed them. I’ve been at this only two years and don’t have any honey stored to feed them if they need it. I guess I could buy some honey to use as feed, but I don't know of any treatment-free honey sources anywhere near me. I don’t want to coddle, but I don’t want to be negligent, either. I keep telling myself that there are many bees and several months of honey-making to go before winter, and I should just let them take care of themselves without my intervening.
What’s the word about feeding?
Liz
P.S. The Northeast Treatment-Free Beekeeping conference in Leominster, MA was soooo helpful and worth the trip from Cincinnati! Many thanks to Dean and Ramona and company.
-
if they are light you only have to choices. feed so that they have enough to make it, or don't and let them starve. not much in between. even if they don't completely die off, they will be so weakened by the lower numbers and nothing to start with in spring, they will be ripe for disease, etc.
it is true that if you want them to go completely natural, you would not feed. you also would never take honey, never look inside, never manipulate frames, etc.
-
In Dean and Ramona's book they state that you should always feed package bees as they have alot of work to do before they can become self sufficient.
While they advocate chemical free beekeeping and not regularly artifically feeding as a routine, they don't have anything against feeding a colony who is going to starve over the winter.
At the conference Sam Comfort said the same thing, I believe his words were " I don't think there are any speakers here tonight that wouldn't condone feeding some sugar syrup if a hive were facing starvation.
Don't confuse chemical free beekeeping with not helping your bees make it through the winter.
I don't know anyone who has started a package and not fed.
It may be several months until winter but its not several months of honey making. Its not long before all nectar source dry up everywhere so they only have a short time left to put away stores.
How much comb do they have built? You say you put in new frames to keep them from swarming but they aren't going to build much comb from here on out so even if you start feeding you still may need to give them some combs from another hive so they can store some food.
If you don't have combs from another hive you should ask around at your local club to see if anyone has some extras they could help you out with.
-
Got it. I'll feed.
Though there are a fair number of foundationless frames in each hive, most of the frames contain already-drawn comb. But this leads me to ask: Is it okay if they go into winter with several empty frames in the hive, or is it better to pull those out now?
-
if you pull them, what would you replace them with?
rotate them in and they may get draw by winter if you are feeding.
-
If there are a lot of empty frames,I would possibly consolidate them into one less box and let them pack that full. Then add another if necessary and they can fill and cap.Empty space is wasted heat come winter time.
-
If you feed them during a flow, you're coddling them. If you feed them in the fall to keep them from starving, you're doing you job...
-
All kinds of advice to hang my hat on.
I'm still figuring out our flows around here. I think we're between flows right now...which means I should feed now, or wait a month or so to see what they do with whatever fall flow we have? I'm tempted to wait, but I feel as if I'm always chasing these matters. And then cursing myself.
Such elementary questions, I know.
-
i would not wait. it's almost mid august and you need to get many pounds of food in and capped before winter.
-
This is very helpful, I seem to be facing a similar dilemma with one of my two hives. This is my first year and I am about to start feeding the one hive because I believe they won't make it without. Thanks.
-
2 to 1 mix for storage of sugar water. How many frames of capped honey are in each hive and how many supers tall? I thought it was 2 to 4 frames of capped honey per deep super to survive a winter on average, depending if we get a really cold spell then the 4. Good luck, Country :)
-
Do the sugar and water need to be heated and cooled before putting in feeder, or can it be mixed and dissolved without the heating?
-
i just use very hot tap water and mix. it dissolves if i let it sit and stir it from time to time. you can boil the water and then pour it into the sugar, but don't boil the mix.
-
Thank you :)
-
There seems to be some kind of movement in regards to not doing anything with bees. That feeding is a bad thing. That HFCS, sugar and anything else is bad for bees. That bees left to their own devices is the best approach. That this simulates "nature" and should be the path taken.
Ok, well lets go with that.
Want to guess in nature how many swarms make it through winter the first year? About 10-20%
Nature is very hard on bees. Colonies swarm every year, and yet we are not inundated with bees are we? Although in nature almost all colonies swarm, nature kills off most swarms, except a few that replace the loss from the established colonies that fail in requeening attempts or from natural distruction.
So ask yourself, are you happy with that kind of survival rate?
We as beekeepers have much better survival rates with swarms and splits because we give them comb, transfer over brood, and among other things, feed. We keep bees to achieve a desired result. We, or at least many do, want better survival rates than what nature dictates, and we want excess honey production.
I've seen some promoting this "hands-off' idea that feeding and anything else is bad for bees. And if someone wants to go down that road, then also understand that mimicking nature may not really be a rosy path of the results you desire.
-
I don't know of anyone that makes it seem "rosy"
Nothing about "survival of the fittest" sounds like a day at the park to me.
As usual, most of the attention seems to go to those operating at the extremes.
at one end there are those who feel the need to micro manage bees and do everything for and to the bees they want and at the other end are those who want to be completely hands off let alone providing a hive and maybe collecting some honey later.
most of us end up somewhere in the middle. perhaps closer to one end or the other, but in general, not many are trying to do what they think is a "bad" thing with the bees, only what they have come to think as what the best thing for the bees they can do.
on the outside of this are the people who don't give a rats patoot about the bees at all. Their whole thing is "show me the money" and it's all about dollars when it comes to bees.
I'd rather have a friendly dis-agreement with anyone in the first group than have anything to do with people in the second group.
speaking only for myself, as a practitioner of "facilitated natural selection" if you want to call it that, I don't believe I am doing anything beneficial for the bees by trying to micro manage them. They have survived who knows what in their millions of years on this planet without humans and experienced any possible number of adversities that we may think this is the first time and is really only the first time humans have seen it.
bees must adapt. With all our "science" all we really have succeeded in doing is polluting forage sources with pesticides, bringing in pests to undermine their health because we want to use them as science experiments and capitalize on every part of their labor, sometimes to the point of completely de-stabilizing the hive so we can take all they have made and give them whatever we think might be a 'good enough' replacement.
What has our science 'fixed' for bees that we didn't mess up for them in the first place?
That's where I come from and while I don't criticize any other beeks methods, I do not apologize for my own.
Big Bear
-
That's where I come from and while I don't criticize any other beeks methods, I do not apologize for my own.
I agree. If the conversation was between you and me.
But the conversations at hand include many others, perhaps in the thousands. Many of which come here and get sucked into the hype about this way or that way. So to debate, expose, and call it out, regardless of which side you are on, lets others know both sides of an issue and maybe even expands their minds a bit.
I'll be critical of others as I expect them to be critical of me. And if they are spreading one way or another of beekeeping, they should be able to back up their position with more than fluff. I hear beekeepers being told that they should not feed their bees, that smoking them is bad, that you should be able to work bees without a veil and you shouldn't even bother buying such things, that this hive or that hive, or this comb or that comb will solve every problem known to exist in the bee industry. And much of it is crap. I'd rather step on a few toes and tell them the truth, then sit back and let them be sold a bill of goods by some seminar promoter, book promoter, or some ego chasing fanatic.
Sorry, questioning the many different types of beekeeping methods is a good thing and so should being criticized or challenged. That is how you become more than just blind sheep, following the next fad or the next bee guru that is placed on the pedestal.
-
>There seems to be some kind of movement in regards to not doing anything with bees.
Interesting, since I don't believe a single person in this thread advocated that. All of them advocated feeding as needed at a minimum. So I'm a bit confused as to who you are disagreeing with...
-
Sorry, questioning the many different types of beekeeping methods is a good thing and so should being criticized or challenged. That is how you become more than just blind sheep, following the next fad or the next bee guru that is placed on the pedestal.
I see it a bit differently. I agree, methods and ideas can be discussed and critiqued if it's done intelligently and appropriately. However, all too often, it is nothing more than a witch hunt in disguise usually based on one or more of the persons involved making an effort to cast judgment over others based on how much others ideas and methods used agree with their own.
It is one thing to criticize an idea, and something else to criticize people.
when I see people "challenge" or criticize using language that is dismissive of the topic you want to 'discuss' usually, your mind is already made up. There is no honest discussion at that point, it's just arguing.
Start a new thread on the idea and I'd be glad to discuss the topic with you. I can play devil's advocate too. :evil:
;)
Big Bear
-
Does anyone know if they make a big cube/block of sugar that you could just put above the inner cover with an empty deep super outside of it with an outer cover on top to keep rain off of it? You know they make small sugar cubes for fancy coffee but imagine a 25 pound one! That would fee a hive right? Wrong? Any ideas? Is it too early? Thanks everyone for your input on this crazy idea but it sounds easier that mixing my sugar water in my glass jars all the time.
-
>There seems to be some kind of movement in regards to not doing anything with bees.
Interesting, since I don't believe a single person in this thread advocated that. All of them advocated feeding as needed at a minimum. So I'm a bit confused as to who you are disagreeing with...
Your confusion may seem warranted since I never said a single person said that.... :roll:
I think you need to look at the sum of the whole. Or the many parts that add up to that.
As new beekeepers, many are bombarded with many concepts that this product, this hive, or this comb allows you to actually do nothing in regards to mite treatments, and your bees will survive. Many times what is lost is the entire process or full understanding of what is needed to make a certain type of beekeeping work. We throw around such terms as "treatment free", going "natural", and other terms to which many indicate unrealistic results by doing near nothing when it comes to managing bees. Throw in discussions that feed beyond honey is bad. That treatments are bad. That sugar, HFCS, and about anything else placed into the hive is bad.....all tends to add up to many beekeepers doing, or better yet, expecting to have success by dumping bees into a hive and thinking that less is more, and nothing is a pathway to success.
I have many beekeepers every year contact me about Russians, or feral survivors, because they want to stop the treatments they have done in years past. They ask me about Warre Hives, TBH's, small cell, and many other topics (many discussed here) all lending some to believe if they only did this or only did that, all their problems would go away. It's because in many ways, they take a comment here, or some advice there, and come to these conclusions. Many times it's because that a small sliver of the actual overall details is provided in some vague snippet of an answer that they are reading for the first time.
We don't need to look far to find terms such as "minimalist approach", "stress free beekeeping", and other thrown about suggestions that if one does nothing, that this is better for bees. You don't need to do many searchers to find information that this type hive will cure mites, or that comb will cure mites, or this treatment will cure all your problems. Many are told to not treat, without clear indications of what that is. They just assume that any process that could be called a "treatment" is better left undone. That even doing or knowing what is happening in the hives in regards to mites is not worth the effort, since they have been sold the idea that "Let nature take it's course" or "Let the bees deal with it".
There are discussions, and it shows how far we have come in this direction... that smoking bees is harmful, that merely opening a hive is seen as undo stress, and the bees are better off without us interfering with notions that bees know best. We have discussions that basically have stated that any food source we provide is contaminated and harmful to bees, suggesting that we are better off not feeding. We use terms such as "treatment free", which I think sends the wrong message, and some take to think you can do nothing with bees and be successful.
And what is left many times is new beekeepers being tugged every which way and going with whatever or whoever they speak to first in the industry.
So whether it's ideas that if one collects feral bees, or puts them in a certain hive, the concept and ideas that if one only did this, or keeps them this way, is definitely out there. I know I am approached by many who are totally confused by the many comments out there being billed as the "cure all" of how to keep bees. It may not be one single person, but more of the overall discussion and the misuse of terms being thrown about to promote something.
-
Does anyone know if they make a big cube/block of sugar that you could just put above the inner cover with an empty deep super outside of it with an outer cover on top to keep rain off of it? You know they make small sugar cubes for fancy coffee but imagine a 25 pound one! That would fee a hive right? Wrong? Any ideas? Is it too early? Thanks everyone for your input on this crazy idea but it sounds easier that mixing my sugar water in my glass jars all the time.
That basically is what you are doing with fondant. I buy 50 pound blocks, cut them in half, put them above the inner cover, and then an empty super, then the top. Will feed the bees all winter.
No syrup, no disturbing the bees every few days, no excess moisture concerns, and a happy wife with a big mess left behind by me.... ;)
-
BjornBee, where can I purchase that fondant? Thanks, Country :)
-
BjornBee, where can I purchase that fondant? Thanks, Country :)
Look at the Dawn Foods website, for the nearest distribution point. There are other manufacturers of fondant. You can do a search for it. Just make sure since they make many type of fondant, that you want a fondant with sugar, hfcs, and water. No other additives or ingredients.
-
Mike, those all sound to me like your personal opinion toward or against something and are on a mission to disprove things.
I agree, there are extremists who will go all out and categorically judge all of 'modern' beekeeping with synthetic chemical treatments, et al as 'bad' just as there are the complete opposite who determine that anything not using those methods is 'bad', but again, what is any one's personal approach to bees? do you see them as independent living creatures who do not 'need' our management to survive or do you see them as dependent possessions that require micro-management if they are to live?
Everyone has their own personal ideas and point of view in that regard.
For those who don't see bees as possessions and helpless, how hard is it to accept the truth and reality that shows us bees have lived and survived much longer without out interventions than with them?
You have yet to respond to that.
If 'natural' approaches are so detrimental, nature would have selected bees for extinction along with the dinosaurs.
have you ever noticed that the 'cures' to illness in human medicine almost invariably cause other problems, side effects, that then require further treatment. When you put that synthetic medicine to 'treat' the bees of one 'problem' what 'side effect' is it causing, creating other, new problems that complicate and add increase health stresses instead of leaving the bees to face the initial issue that started the whole process?
It's an endless cycle of 'curing' and treating causing more issues to cure and treat.
in terms of feeding artificial sugar to bees, what is present in granulated sugar besides sugar?
What is preset in nectar and honey besides sugar?
if you take all of the proteins and other nutrients away from bees that they use to live on and reduce them to only one aspect (sugar) remaining, how much 'better' is that substitute than the more nutritious food?
in which case, isn't it better to feed bees what has more nutrition and providing the less nutritious alternative on a limited basis when they have no access to the nectar and honey? it just seems logical to me. not a fad or plot.
the problem is moreso that beekeepers have found a way to make money off of honey. it has financial value to us and when we see honey only as money, we fail to see it as what it really is.
The original and primary source of nutrition and food for the bees.
You are welcome to disagree, we are all friends here, at least I hope so, but you cannot convince me that our finances over rule the bees best food sources.
Big Bear
-
>Your confusion may seem warranted since I never said a single person said that....
You said:
>>There seems to be some kind of movement in regards to not doing anything with bees...
>>I agree. If the conversation was between you and me.
>>But the conversations at hand include many others, perhaps in the thousands. Many of which come here and get sucked into the hype about this way or that way. So to debate, expose, and call it out, regardless of which side you are on, lets others know both sides of an issue and maybe even expands their minds a bit.
Which seems to imply you have concerns about the direction of this particular conversation. I'm having trouble seeing the cause of the concern.
-
I would like to put in my two cents worth that this thread while it might be coming close to people becoming upset has been very very interesting. At least from the point of view of the begining beek like me. It is great to hear debate over methods and styles of beekeeping. Hopefully no one will become offended in the process. I have found advice from all players here to be useful, and it is interesting and enlightening to hear these differences of idea and opinion.
-
Which seems to imply you have concerns about the direction of this particular conversation. I'm having trouble seeing the cause of the concern.
I'm sure you are.... ;)
-
For those who don't see bees as possessions and helpless, how hard is it to accept the truth and reality that shows us bees have lived and survived much longer without out interventions than with them?
You have yet to respond to that.
If 'natural' approaches are so detrimental, nature would have selected bees for extinction along with the dinosaurs.
What? Do you even see or understand what I am saying?
I'm not against natural methods, and have been promoting them for years.
What I am suggesting, and the heart of the conversation, is the overall message placed upon new beekeepers, in regards if they do this or that, that all the so-called problems will go away. I could pinpoint an example of vinegar machines, foundation, hive styles, breeders, and strains of bees...all making the same claim that they have the answer to all the mite and other problems. And based on the many people I talk too, that is the message they come away with. I hear all the time....
I want to keep bees naturally and not use chemicals, so I want to use TBH's.
I want to keep bees and not use treatments, so I want to use Russians.
I want to have comb with no chemicals in the wax, so I want to use foundationless.
I'm tired of losing bees, so I want to start using....... (you fill in the blank, it's all been said before.
My conversation is about the overall message that sugar is bad, HFCS is bad, treatments are bad, opening a hive is bad, and about a dozen other concepts or suggestions that new beekeepers are bombarded with. Many which think after hearing the vague comments, think that they are harming bees if they are not feeding honey, or that they will lose their bees if they keep bees in hives not of a particular style or comb, and so on, and so on.
After awhile, it just makes you want to puke. So broadening the conversation, and questioning, challenging, and being critical is something worth merit. To sit back as you say and simply have 100 beekeepers all suggest 100 ways of keeping bees, all making the same claim, without discussion due to being afraid on not being PC or afraid of steppin on a few toes, benefits nobody. And for most if not all of the claims, some are half-truths at best, and downright wrong for many.
If I say something you don't think is correct, then challenge it. If you say something that to me needs clarification or challenged, I will also. Why that is seen as "bad" is beyond me. I'm not just here to promote my own agenda or my way of keeping bees. It is to pass on my experience of both good and bad, what worked and what did not work. And to state what never came close to what the claims may of been.
But somehow, if I mention my own experience in something that did not work, and due to the fact that there happens to be a group standing on another corner suggesting conflicting views, then why is that seen as "attacking" or something incorrect?
I'm just glad I am not a new beekeeper needing to experience each and every wild claim out there chasing some illusive success, due to nobody stating perhaps the other side and bringing some sense into some rather wild claims and suggestions.
When you start hearing people lose bees because they were told not to treat, or you hear people not feed bees when they are starving because white sugar was suggested as a no-no, or they start questioning themselves because they were told if they bought these bees or use this hive and they lost the colony, you start wondering.
I'm not blind. One of the things you will not see on most forums, is the brutal truth of many of the same beekeepers who make wild claims. You won't hear them state how many hives they lost. And if they did lose hives, it was due to some obscure reason, and certainly not due to anything associated with their beekeeping style. SUCCESS....always due what they are promoting. FAILURE...always for some other reason.
Me, I lost my Warre Hive last year. Did everything by the protocol out there being promoted. But they died. I wonder how ofter you hear that claim among those promoting the wild claims while promoting this type of beekeeping. And that example can be used across the board.
It's like the breeder never suggesting how many hives they actually lost. Most breeders never mention problems. They are promoting their business and have "interests" to protect. And groupies promoting one style of beekeeping or another are just the same.
That....is how I see it. ;)
-
BjornBee, thanks for the tip on fondant! Amazing stuff! Can't wait to get some and see how it does, thanks again, Country :)
-
for criminey sakes, guys.
if you want to go to the extreme of keeping bees totally naturally, buy a piece of property with a bee tree. if you want to keep bees for honey or pollination, manage them in a way that makes sense for your situation. that takes time to figure out. avoid extremes and don't be afraid to experiment some.
pretty simple.
-
What? Do you even see or understand what I am saying?
I'm not against natural methods, and have been promoting them for years.
I have seen plenty of your posts and your website and I know what you have posted. apparently you missed my "devils advocate" comment.
The point of my earlier comments though is that for every anti sugar, etc.. post, there is a pro sugar post. For every anti treatment post, there is a pro treatment one.
I just did searches of three bee forums on anti sugar and pro sugar and the threads go back for years.
There is nothing new that you are seeing. perhaps a more recent spike in one side of the discussion.
also, I don't assume that newbees are idiots. I am pretty sure most folks have learned how to take other peoples comments in perspective and to seek out as much information as they can before coming to a decision. as least I hope so.. maybe that's what makes me an optimist.
anyway, enjoy the bees.
Big Bear
-
for criminey sakes, guys.
if you want to go to the extreme of keeping bees totally naturally, buy a piece of property with a bee tree. if you want to keep bees for honey or pollination, manage them in a way that makes sense for your situation. that takes time to figure out. avoid extremes and don't be afraid to experiment some.
pretty simple.
Now Kathy...be reasonable. ;) a little "criminey" here, and a "criminey" there, and some will take this thread to be some cut throat peein' contest, full of anger and fightin', and threatening to move on to better pastures. :lau:
Just a conversation the way I see it. ;)
-
I have seen plenty of your posts and your website and I know what you have posted. apparently you missed my "devils advocate" comment.
I was being "devils advocate" to your devils advocate. Ok....your turn...... :roll:
-
awwww
did i let my cranky show? :evil:
you all remind me of my boys sometimes. only difference is that i can't send you out to clean the barn and weed the garden :-D
-
you all remind me of my boys sometimes. only difference is that i can't send you out to clean the barn and weed the garden :-D
[/quote]
Good thing too. Cuz then we'd be discussing roundup vs. a hoe :lau:
-
awwww
did i let my cranky show? :evil:
you all remind me of my boys sometimes. only difference is that i can't send you out to clean the barn and weed the garden :-D
Hmmm. Just thinking out loud Kathy. Do you ever "spank" your boys........ :roll: Just wondering. ;)
:devilbanana:
-
roundup is a tool. a hoe is an attitude adjustment device.
spank....? i have been known to hold one of them up against the barn wall with his feet dangling off the ground, but i had to be pushed some to get to that point...
all right now...enough of that. behave and get back to bees. and BE NICE.
-
>for every anti sugar, etc.. post, there is a pro sugar post.
Going back to all the literature I have from the 1800s... it is definitely not new...
-
>for every anti sugar, etc.. post, there is a pro sugar post.
Going back to all the literature I have from the 1800s... it is definitely not new...
Yeah, that's right. Even I believe it was CC Post that had a crusade against sugar, and went on to found oatmeal or toastems, or something.
I bet I can find or suggest MILLIONS of hives saved from starvation through the feeding of sugar. Compare that to the scare tactics being passed on to new beekeepers being told not to feed their bees, because some small chemical amounts in white sugar, and the argument is about senseless as it comes. Show me the damage to the hives over the past 100 years, the amount of time you now suggest this fearmongering has been taking place.
When beekeepers are having to choose between starvation and not feeding, due to the fearmongering out there over obscure information or "purists" who spread this crap, and this is what they are being told, it is not the same as it's been for the past 100 years. It certainly has been elevated to new levels of scare tactics, many of whom also are out to promote this or that, with little proof or scientific fact when it comes to the claims of the damage that emergency feedings provides, and compared to the hives saved. I have heard more questions in the past year or two like "I thought feeding sugar was bad for my bees" and "I want to keep sugar out of my hives so I am hoping not to feed. Do you think they have enough to make it?" and "I read on one of the forums that HFCS was bad for bees" I ask them, "so your hives are light,...what are your options?" "Are you going to let them starve?" "Do you have 80 pounds of honey laying around to feed as some ignorant beekeeper has suggested is what you should be feeding to bees?" Anyone reading enough or talking to enough beekeepers, has certainly come across this type conversation. And the information and ideas about this are certainly coming from somewhere.
Beyond someone finding small amounts of chemicals in sugar, as they find in almost everything YOU eat, show me a study that justifies the conversation that one should not feed sugar to hives. And compare that to the hives saved by feeding sugar.
At the end of the day, I find the mentioning of the dangers of feeding, about as senseless as it comes. Makes you wonder what agendas, what motivations, what egos, or anything else is at play.
-
Instead of fondant can I make a box inside to hold 25 pounds of dry sugar and will the bees use it? It is cheaper over here than fondant for me. Thanks :)
-
Instead of fondant can I make a box inside to hold 25 pounds of dry sugar and will the bees use it? It is cheaper over here than fondant for me. Thanks :)
If they are starving in winter they will.
Don't leave any dead air space or empty boxes on top of the hives. If bees are starving, they will be up against the inner cover anyways conserving heat and energy.
I know one guy who makes sugar blocks by filling a box with sugar and pouring some syrup on top and letting it soak in. That way he has a solid block instead of loose sugar. But I have found that the sugar after a day or two sucks up enough moisture that it hardens anyways.
I like to take the inner cover off, and place a paper towel in the middle of the frames. Then put back the inner cover. Then place a 2 or 3 inch spacer. Pour the sugar in the inner cover hole. It will not pour into the frames due to the paper towel. Then continue to pour the amount you want filling in the space above the inner cover. The bees will eat through the paper towel, but after the sugar has hardened. Then they will continue eating up through the inner cover into the empty space as needed. This area is warmer and above the cluster so they have good warmth to feed there.
I hope that makes sense.
-
At the end of the day, I find the mentioning of the dangers of feeding, about as senseless as it comes. Makes you wonder what agendas, what motivations, what egos, or anything else is at play.
hrmmm...what i see in "traditional beekeeping" is the concept that feeding of sugar is a fallback (or "emergency") measure to be used _if_ the bees don't have enough to get them through the winter (or spring...or mid summer dearth). somehow, this seems to go hand and hand with practices that ensure that the bees need to be fed virtually every year (if not every year). if an emergency measure is necessary _most of the time_ (and can we agree that most "traditional beekeepers" feed most of their bees at sometime during most years?) it is not an emergency measure...it's a management practice.
philosophically and practically, i think bees should be managed in such a way that they do not require feeding. it is not always possible to do so (as the weather may not cooperate)...but what i see advocated in bee schools and in most of the standard books is a management style that almost always assures the need for feeding.
in another thread you discussed your own feeding of HFCS (which is a synthetically produced monosaccharide)...yet on your website you claim:
Our hives are maintained by natural management practices and we do not use chemicals in our hives. Healthier chemical free hives means chemical free honey.
...so, you seem to be aware that consumers buying honey are looking for a "natural product produced naturally". even if you are going to distinguish between "naturally occurring substances" and "chemicals", HFCS would end up on the chemical side by any measure (being produced in a lab and not occurring in nature).
by no reasonable definition is a hive that is fed HFCS a "chemical free hive"...but this is what you sell your customers? this is promoting natural beekeeping?
you've generated a laundry list of complaints about what other beekeepers promote...but once again have attempted to lump them all together by generalizations. it would be more helpful to new beekeepers to be more specific about who is claiming what. it would make for a more productive discussion if you were specific about who and what you don't agree with. what you are doing is the equivialent of me lumping all beekeepers who treat into one camp, and then charging them all with being the worst offender (shop towel treatments, hfcs in the honey just below detection levels, diluting the honey with rice syrup, etc)...not a productive discussion given that there are many excellent and conscientious beekeepers who use some treatments (and feeds) responsibly.
since the only thing that you have pinpointed here is sugar feeding, i'll point out the following (that has been posted here and on other forums several times...i'd be surprised if you have not read these facts before):
1. sugar and/or hfcs have a very different pH than honey and/or nectar. many disease organisms (including afb) are more active at the pH of sugar than they are at the pH of honey (ie, if you were going to culture these things in a lab you would be using sugar not honey).
2. the novel microbial culture in the honey stomach (which is a fairly new discovery with the advent of dna sequencing) has been observed to completely die off over the winter when fed sucrose.
3. the routine feeding of colonies prevents us from selecting those colonies that can collect/store more honey and/or are more frugal with their stores.
The over-feeding of bees resembles, in its result, the noxious influences under wich too many children of the rich are reared. Pampered and fed to the full, how often does their wealth prove only a legacy of withering curses, as, bankrupt in purse and character, they prematurely sink to dishonorable graves.
L.L. Langstroth
deknow
-
:lau:
Good one deknow.
My marketing off my website that you refer too is targeted on keeping treatments and beekeeper applied chemicals out of the hive. Yes, if you want, HFCS is a chemical. not one that I use while supers are on the hive.
As for your point, lets broaden it to include your hives also. NO hive is chemical free. No bees go out and collect nectar without chemicals being brought back to the hive. I know, I have tested my own hives. If you want to harp of HFCS, then I hope you are also open and honest with your clients as to YOUR chemicals in YOUR hive.
My marketing, is directed at the fact that consumers want the best chemical free product they can get. Knowing that I use NO beekeeper applied chemicals, and have the testing to back that up, and feed only in winter when sugar or HFCS is use only for emergency conditions, and does not end up in the honey produced later in the season...I see this as nitpicking at best.
I walk the walk and talk the talk. I wonder if you do. Have you had your hives and honey tested? Do you openly and honestly state to your customers that NO honey is pure? Cause unless you do, then you have no right to point fingers. I'd like to see your honey label, your website, and hear what you suggest to people. This conversation was about scare tactics and advice given to beekeepers in regards to having them worry about minuscule amount of some chemical in feed, possible necessary to keep hives alive.
As for the detrimental facts you state about HFCS or sugar, I never said you should feed it all year long. I am referencing, and have done so a couple times now, the idea that beekeepers are questioning feeding bees sugar or hfcs in attempts to keep their hives alive. a fact that you youself said is a necessity sometimes. Of course honey is best and contains beneficial microbs, etc. But that is all lost is you have no honey to feed, and then also get bombarded with the idea that feeding is a no-no, resulting in dead hives.
Are you going to suggest that the millions of hives saved by feeding HFCS and sugar would of been better of served by not feeding, because the very food that saved the hives, lack what honey has? Sounds like nonsense to me.
I think that ranks right up there with the idea that it is better to euthanize animals rather than have them be enslaved by pet owners who provide the basics for survival, such as a warm house and enough food to exist, but lack giving animals the freedom to roam as some suggest they should do as in the wild.
Sorry guys. I'm telling new beekeepers to feed, feed, feed. And if that means HFCS and sugar, then so be it. Even if that means the food source has less of the nutrients than honey. HFCS and sugar is safe and has been used for years to stop starvation. It's better than dead hives.
And please don't quote over egotistical old dead guys who seem to be idolized by the mere fact they were envious of others, and was judgemental in his views of others. I find that appalling and sickening. Having the nomenclature or title of "Rev." while making statements like that is why many are sickened of religion. Just another self-rightious denigrating person in my book.
-
My marketing off my website that you refer too is targeted on keeping treatments and beekeeper applied chemicals out of the hive. Yes, if you want, HFCS is a chemical. not one that I use while supers are on the hive.
ok, so we agree that HFCS is a chemical...even if one is going to call refined sugar "natural" or "not a chemical".
so your claim that "...we do not use chemicals in our hives" is an outright misstatement of fact directed at your honey customers.
As for your point, lets broaden it to include your hives also. NO hive is chemical free. No bees go out and collect nectar without chemicals being brought back to the hive. I know, I have tested my own hives. If you want to harp of HFCS, then I hope you are also open and honest with your clients as to YOUR chemicals in YOUR hive.
i'm very open and honest to customers, curious non-customers, new beekeepers, health food store owners, market managers, and anyone else that will listen.
this is precisely why we chose the term "treatment free" not "chemical free". our environment is polluted with chemicals...some of them are very bad to be around. the highest levels of pesticides found in beehives are beekeeper applied. we don't use treatments at all, and we barely use foundation (and yes, even foundationless comb has chemicals in it).
from talking to the labs, it seems that HFCS isn't detectable under 5%.
remember, 5% is 50,000ppm?
My marketing, is directed at the fact that consumers want the best chemical free product they can get. Knowing that I use NO beekeeper applied chemicals, and have the testing to back that up, and feed only in winter when sugar or HFCS is use only for emergency conditions, and does not end up in the honey produced later in the season...I see this as nitpicking at best.
testing for contamination (especially if undetectable if under 5%) says nothing about what chemicals you use. saying that you feed HFCS says that you do use chemicals...and stating on your website that "we do not use chemicals in our hives" is clearly untrure.
I walk the walk and talk the talk.
yes, you walk the walk of putting HFCS in your hives (which you agree is a chemical), and talk the talk that you do not use chemcials in your hives......it takes reading a beekeeping forum (and pointing out the contradictions of your claims) to drag out of you that you do not use chemicals on your hives while there are honey supers on.
sorry, that is not walking the walk and talking the talk.
I wonder if you do. Have you had your hives and honey tested?
i have not...but i'm also not worried about the things i put in the hive getting into the honey...because nothing (but bees, wood glue, the occasional piece of string to tie in a comb, and occassional honey) gets put in our hives. we are planning on some tests, but are saving the requisite $$$ to test a number of our own wax and honey along with some that are treated so that we have more than one data point to look at....as we agree that things will be found in any hive (treated or not), we need to look at the levels found in treated vs untreated hives.
Do you openly and honestly state to your customers that NO honey is pure?
yes, i do.
Cause unless you do, then you have no right to point fingers.
the finger pointing has been coming from your end of cyberspace....as i said before, it would be more helpful for all this discussion to be more specific as to who has been claiming what that you don't agree with.
I'd like to see your honey label, your website, and hear what you suggest to people.
are you implying that i'm not upfront enough with my thoughts and recommendations? i'm pretty vocal here, on beesource, on bee-l, and on the organic list....and i took the time to write a book on the very subject you are asking about (it's probably the least expensive beekeeping book available). if you want to know what i suggest to people, you can find out for free online (on any of the forums), or you can pay Amazon the $10 to buy our book. i'm not sure how i could do more to express my opinions and to make my suggestions more available.
This conversation was about scare tactics and advice given to beekeepers in regards to having them worry about minuscule amount of some chemical in feed, possible necessary to keep hives alive.
...and again, you have lumped all negative comments about artifical feeds together as "scare tactics" without citing a single one.
As for the detrimental facts you state about HFCS or sugar, I never said you should feed it all year long. I am referencing, and have done so a couple times now, the idea that beekeepers are questioning feeding bees sugar or hfcs in attempts to keep their hives alive.
...and none of the "detrimental facts" that i listed are dependent on feeding year round. most commercial (and smart non-commercial) beekeepers i know are well aware that there is nothing to be gained by trying to keep all colonies alive all winter by feeding...this is why they combine colonies, or even blow the bees out of weak colonies in early winter (before the bees die and mold in the comb). the desire to keep all of one's bees alive is a large part of the bad breeding that has led to poor state of genetics. culling is important, and not being able to feed oneself is a good reason to be culled (in many if not most circumstances).
...a fact that you youself said is a necessity sometimes. Of course honey is best and contains beneficial microbs, etc. But that is all lost is you have no honey to feed, and then also get bombarded with the idea that feeding is a no-no, resulting in dead hives.
traditional beekeeping bombards the new beekeeper with methods that lead to necessary feeding virtually every year. if feeding was stressed as an emergency measure for unusual circumstances we would be having a very different discussion.
Are you going to suggest that the millions of hives saved by feeding HFCS and sugar would of been better of served by not feeding, because the very food that saved the hives, lack what honey has? Sounds like nonsense to me.
those fed HFCS after their sufficent honey stores were removed (or management prevented them from producing these stores in the first place) would have been better off with their honey. as for those that were unable to provide for themselves should not be propped up....their own survival is irrelevant, the population as a whole would be better off without them.
I think that ranks right up there with the idea that it is better to euthanize animals rather than have them by enslaved by pet owners who provide the basics for survival, such as a warm house and enough food to exist, but lack giving animals the freedom to roam as some suggest they should do as in the wild.
this is a false analogy. bees are not puppies, and they need to be able to fend for themselves....feral bees that fend for themselves are the best resource for beekeepers as a resivour of genetics. for most dog owners, the genetics of feral dogs don't offer much that they want...with bees it's different.
Sorry guys. I'm telling new beekeepers to feed, feed, feed. And if that means HFCS and sugar, then so be it. Even if that means the food source has less of the nutrients than honey. HFCS and sugar is safe and has been used for years to stop starvation. It's better than dead hives.
there is much more wrong with sugar/hfcs than lacking some nutrients...but i've already pointed that you, and you don't seem to want to hear it.
And please don't quote over egotistical old dead guys who seem to be idolized by the mere fact they were envious of others, and was judgemental in his views of others. I find that appalling and sickening.
given that the vast majority of your hives are virtually unchanged from langstroths design, he must have had something on the ball!
deknow
-
deknow,
Well goodie for you.
So what's next, a crusade against getting "pure honey" off everyone's label? a mass marketing campaign announcing to the public that no honey out there is pure.
Sorry I don't buy it. I use "Pure Honey" and will continue to do so. I also smoke, yet have not taken the time to test for contaminates.
What you do, is point fingers and call out others, yet have not provided any testing yourself as to what is in your honey. Sorry, go sell a book to another sap down the road.
Your spewing crap in my opinion that new beekeepers should, for the goodness of the overall pool of bees, allow their bees to die, rather than use the hyped up and demonized sugar or HFCS.
I did mention specifics, and actual questions posed to me, but you fail to acknowledge them. But as you say, and blind as I see it, you are deaf to the needs of many beekeepers out there trying to keep bees alive for the sake of promoting an agenda or selling some book. once again conveniently mentioned.
On about every other point you responded, you failed to see the point given. But as I tell all new beekeepers, be cautious of agendas, and self promoting advice, which seems at odds in doing the right thing. I'll help those beekeepers not standing by and as you say suggesting "Let your bees die, because this will help the pool of bees and will better your line down the road. I can not even believe that is the advice you are suggesting.
But at least it is in the clear. And I say thank you. This is the exact stuff I was mentioning in throwing all this out there to begin with. Now I know where it is coming from. Next time a new beekeeper comes to me and asks what to do after hearing it is a no-no to feed bees, and it is better to let hives die, then I can at least suggest who not to speak too again, or whose book to stay away from. :-D
There you go beekeepers. a beekeeper suggesting that for the sake of the gene pool, you should not feed sugar or HFCS (Boogie man gonna get you!) and let your bees die. Then next year, I can only assume you should go rip some more out of a tree and get some of them good genetics. :lau:
I wonder if it ever occurred to you that suggesting bees who could not make it themselves, perhaps had nothing to do with genetics. maybe it was location, something to which I think should not be seen as a negative for any person keeping bees anywhere they want to. Or maybe an odd year comes round, and although ferals may die off in higher numbers, which is the case with every species on the planet occasionally, if not for some feed, why would the beekeeper not do what was needed to fend off this situation. Your whole "If they can't do it themselves, then let them die", is about as bad advice I can think of for new beekeepers. Many factors could play into a situation of a light hive. And to sit back, and even write books about it, suggesting that this is the game plan suggested, is questionable at best.
-
>Your confusion may seem warranted since I never said a single person said that....
You said:
>>There seems to be some kind of movement in regards to not doing anything with bees...
>>I agree. If the conversation was between you and me.
>>But the conversations at hand include many others, perhaps in the thousands. Many of which come here and get sucked into the hype about this way or that way. So to debate, expose, and call it out, regardless of which side you are on, lets others know both sides of an issue and maybe even expands their minds a bit.
Which seems to imply you have concerns about the direction of this particular conversation. I'm having trouble seeing the cause of the concern.
Are you getting this MB.
Do you understand what I'm talking about now? I said there was a movement in not doing anything for your bees, even to the point of having them DIE, and this is going right up that alley. ;)
I applaud you in mentioning feeding on your website for when needed and for a purpose, instead of watching bees die needlessly. ;)
-
Thank you BjornBee for helping me learn how to help my honey bees from dieing this winter because they were totally robbed of all of their honey. Thanks again for everything, Country :)
-
:cheer:
Thank you.
-
:cheer:
-
:lau:
y'all crack me up.
standing up there on your soapbox, telling others to get off theirs.
I think I'll just keep on giving the same advice to beekeepers I always have, which is to learn as much as you can about bee biology and bee behavior, read all you can about the different methods, hives and ideas by the soap-boxers out there and decide for yourself, based on your own local experiences what works best for you and the bees in your hives.
None of us are ever going to agree on every detail and no other beekeeper can force you to do things their way.
and remember, you're the one keeping those bees in your hives, not the ones who are trying to talk the loudest.
enjoy the bees.
Big Bear
-
...it's interesting that it's only in your "paraphrasing" of my words that i seem to say the things you seem to claim i'm saying. either i'm doing a terrible job expressing myself and you are simply clarifying (for me and all the readers here) what i'm _actually_ saying.....or you are making a straw man to poke with a stick.
i entered this thread because of your statement:
At the end of the day, I find the mentioning of the dangers of feeding, about as senseless as it comes.
there certainly are "dangers" in feeding (i think "downsides" would be a more accurate word here)...and why one would think that it's not worth mentioning these downsides in a discussion of feeding is beyond me.
somewhere i believe you asked for a study that supports the idea that there are harms that come from feeding sugar or HFCS?
http://ddr.nal.usda.gov/bitstream/10113/17780/1/IND44075806.pdf (http://ddr.nal.usda.gov/bitstream/10113/17780/1/IND44075806.pdf) (diana sammataro is one of the authors of this study).
i can't reiterate my position on emergency feeding any better than natalie does. if emergency feeding is require most of the time, it is not an emergency measure. as for calling honey "pure", i'd see a big difference between environmental contaminants brought into the hive by the bees from the general envrionment and feeding bees hfcs with supers on and mixing the resulting "honey" with actual honey (or rice syrup) until it is only 4.5% HFCS and undetectable....you may well (and probably do) produce honey that is free of HFCS adultration....but using HFCS over the winter and claiming that one does not use chemicals in their hives is lying to your customers (or, as you so poetically put it, "spewing crap").
deknow
In Dean and Ramona's book they state that you should always feed package bees as they have alot of work to do before they can become self sufficient.
While they advocate chemical free beekeeping and not regularly artifically feeding as a routine, they don't have anything against feeding a colony who is going to starve over the winter.
At the conference Sam Comfort said the same thing, I believe his words were " I don't think there are any speakers here tonight that wouldn't condone feeding some sugar syrup if a hive were facing starvation.
Don't confuse chemical free beekeeping with not helping your bees make it through the winter.
I don't know anyone who has started a package and not fed.
-
Hey, Hey, Hey! Don't back up and change course. You said plain and clear, after I mentioned that there is some big confusion out there with new beekeepers in regards to letting bees die, the following.....
"those fed HFCS after their sufficient honey stores were removed (or management prevented them from producing these stores in the first place) would have been better off with their honey. as for those that were unable to provide for themselves should not be propped up....their own survival is irrelevant, the population as a whole would be better off without them.
I started this conversation due to an increase in beekeepers approaching me and emailing about their confusion in being told or suggested that all feeding is bad for bees. That using HFCS or sugar was not to be used....period! They came to this conclusion after reading or listening to someone, somewhere. And that point was the same point you made in the above statement.
As for suggesting my product is not pure, call it what you like. Your ignorance of my operation is your problem. You assume that I put fondant or HFCS on all my hives. Except for my home yard which is nothing but nucs, and the few light pollination units coming out of late field crop pollination, nothing in my operation even gets fed. Last year, I took off 550 pounds of honey. This year I took off 0 pounds. My use of sugar or fondant is limited to very few of my hives that need it and is not used for 95% of my operation. I normally take honey off remote yards that are permanently placed, and too far to to worry about feeding. I take off excess only when warranted. But like I said, I smoke also. And I don't rationalize such as you when it comes to what the bees put in a hive compared to a beekeeper doing it. I sell honey with labels that conveniently come already printed with "pure" on them. I also market my honey, with my own paid for chemical analysis of what is in honey. Although I can not keep my bees from collecting contaminates, I do sell to customers that understand better than you, that my honey has not been adulterated or treated with chemicals such as mite treatments, etc. By calling me a liar, is calling all beekeepers liars. Not too many had their honey analyzed for chemicals. And everyone lets the consumer assume they are getting a pure product when they are not. And I highly doubt you have done your own analysis or stand and market your honey by claims you make in suggesting you tell your customers that you have a product not pure, even though you know it is not.
You ignorantly assume that my commenting (or passing of good solid advice) on feeding some hives in my operation to fend off starvation, can easily be carried over to the honey I sell, and is badly mistaken.
As for your use of quotes from those being labeled "chemical free" I wonder if you stand up and call them hypocrites also. You yourself said sugar was a "chemical" and yet somehow use their comments to back up your now new and convenient position of "Feed when you need too". And yet surprisingly instead of calling them just another beekeeper at best, you apply some title (or reiterate) such as "Advocates of chemical free"....is hypocrisy at best!
Deknow, you seemingly have no problem bringing up conversation of past forums, and now going to my website and copying material to use against me, while making incorrect and broad assumptions of the honey I sell. I once asked for you to state who you were that I must of crossed with on another forum. I also asked for your name and website. You seemingly have me at a disadvantage, you openly knowing me, but me not knowing you. Not that this disadvantage isn't easily overcome. So come on, fess up and let everyone know who you are so you can be scrutinized and picked over like you do to others. Myself.....I'm the same on every forum. I have nothing to hide. And everyone can easily find out who I am, where I live, what's on my website. Heck come on down, your all invited to spend an afternoon.