Hi Folks,
We all test for varroa,... in our own ways,
I don't have screen bottom boards. I don't count dots from my own hives. I am a mentor in my club. I teach about sbb, the theory and steps to using them. I try to TEACH newbees how to actually use these things on their own hives. Most people are not that technical. It goes undone. You know,... math and everything.
When visiting mentee hives, I pick drone brood in front of them, because it's easily seen by the mentee and can be an important, quick indication of a varroa load.
We talk about the futility of Sugar Shakes. We talk about Treatment Free. We teach and provide documentation as well as *screen top Ball Jars*, for alcohol shake. I, and others in my club, demonstrate their use. We get back: *But I don't want to kill my bees*! People don't alcohol wash as regularly as they should.
However I test, if one of my colonies' *numbers* are bad, I stop testing and just treat them all.
I'm to the point now, as I talk with *colleagues*, that most people will never *TEST regularly and effectively*. They will slowly lose their bees. It may not be until a following Spring or Summer, but the colony will likely not thrive year over year.
I'm now thinking that I should just *regularly* TELL people in the club to treat when I treat. Bypass all that *TEST TEST TEST* spiel. Most are not going to test. Would you suggest I should just start to coordinate club-wide treatments? This WAS our goal in my early days, 2011-2016. It fizzled because people sometimes need a bomb up their colony to get 'er done. Our big deal is that: So what happens if I treat yet my neighbor doesn't? I live next door to a mite bomb.
We show and demo lots of stuff, MAQS/FP. We demo OA Vap, talk about dribble. I don't dribble. Some around here do dribble or include it in the rotation in December.
Do you *test then treat* or do you usually just treat when you think you should?
Sal
Salvo I appreciate your well thought out well worded post. I usually treat in August, December, and the Spring. I am learning and nothing is written in stone in my program. It is understandable that some may shy away from alcohol at first. But when a few total losses of a hive or hives become a reality attitudes sometimes change. It?s all part of the learning process.
.
Phillip
Obviously everything I'm about to say is just my opinion, and as far as teaching others, while I have experience in some areas of teaching, I'm not a member of a bee club and I don't mentor, so I'm coming at this from a rather idealistic perspective. Just my disclaimer.
What I personally do is sugar rolls. I am one of those people who can't stomach killing 100-300 bees once a month in an alcohol wash, and I have zero confidence in passive bottom board drop as a method of determining whether to treat or not. I regularly do deep inspections because I have 10 hives or less and I enjoy inspecting, so whenever I see my queens, which is frequent, I do a sugar roll. I don't test more than once a month, and if it's been two or three months since I've seen a queen or I'm concerned for some reason, I'll take some extra time to look for the queen next inspection and do a sugar roll. Due to the less accurate nature of the sugar rolls, I multiply my mite count from the roll by 1.3 to compensate (a trick that HoneyPump taught me).
As I am foundationless, my bees also make a lot of drones, so once swarming season is over, I cut out my drone brood, check it for mites, and then feed it to the chickens. I do this as an ongoing passive treatment of sorts, another way to get a mite count, and a way to keep the drone numbers low during my big summer flows, since they are just a drain on resources.
My treatment threshold is somewhere around 3% and depending on the season, the size of the hive, whether I'm expecting a flow, etc. I either use FormicPro, OAV, or I do a German trapping treatment, which also gives the colony a brood break. One hive with high counts does not cause me to treat the whole apiary, although it does cause me to keep a closer eye on counts and sugar roll more frequently.
I personally am of the belief that treating without knowing counts and on a schedule is foolhardy. Without knowing numbers before and after treating, I wouldn't know how well my treatment was working. I think that treating when not necessary and on a schedule contribute to mites developing resistance to treatments. As someone who is science-minded, I would be hesitant to take any step without data, and knowing my mite counts over the course of the season enables me not only to know when I need to treat, but which colonies are more naturally resistant, which are the queens I would prefer to breed from (among other characteristics). The only time of year that I treat all the colonies without a prior mite check is if I had several colonies with high counts going into winter. Then I will treat the whole apiary with OAV over the winter.
I am also of the belief that teaching new beekeepers proper parasite management is extremely important. It's a part of beekeeping, whether we like it or not, and learning to navigate treating and doing your own testing and evaluation of treatments is a vital skill to being a good beekeeper. Having someone do something for you is never a good way to learn. I would hope that through instruction and training, new beekeepers would learn to be responsible with their own bees, and ultimately with all the bees in the neighborhood as a result. I'm sure that's far more difficult in practice than theory, but what will happen to the next generation of beekeepers when their mentors aren't around anymore if they haven't learned how to handle this by themselves?
QuoteI am one of those people who can't stomach killing 100-300 bees once a month in an alcohol wash
Woo wee I wouldn't do that either Reagn with the very accurate resulting alcohol wash test method
(kill 100-300 bees once a month). On the other hand if I was using the sugar shake method I would for 'certain' test my bees 'no less' than once a month.
I test mine in the Spring, Mid Summer, and Fall.. Three times a year basically unless I find a problem.. I am 'basically' in agreement with the Bob Binnie layout since he is a Commercial Beekeeper with no telling how many hives, and his livelihood depends on being successful, which starts with keeping his honey bees healthy.
As far as build up to immunity by treatment , The Organic Oxalic Acid, and Organic Formic Acid treatments are no worry since Varroa Destructor has a soft exoskeleton,
(unlike our honey bee), which offers outright exposure to the vaporized Oxalic. As well or the other type Formic Acid methods... Thankfully our Honey Bees with the hard outer exoskeleton give us a real advantage when we choose those methods.
Other pesticide 'type' treatments,
(and that term might not be the proper term, but if not, I hope all will know what I mean), may indeed build up resistance as has been reveled with some of those products.
I would like to commend you for you diligence in your program in the care of your bees which sounds to be fine tuned for the amount of hives you have, making your hobby beekeeping regiment feasible for a 10 hive beekeeper who has the luxury of the time for such a regiment. When using the sugar shake method diligence is 'a must' in my opinion or we know what is destine to happen... As we were taught by HoneyPump when you lost one of your hives when you had less than five hives if I remember correctly or was it three? I miss TheHoneyPump. I hope his health is holding up and I would hope each of our fellow members would read his paper which he wrote especially dedicated to you.. He is a fine person.
Some larger beekeepers, like Bob Binnie, would most likely find the sugar shake method and program unfeasible with many hundreds of hives.. Keep up the good work my friend.
Phillip
Quote from: Ben Framed on May 21, 2023, 04:36:09 PM
I would like to commend you for you diligence in your program in the care of your bees which sounds to be fine tuned for the amount of hives you have, making your hobby beekeeping regiment feasible for a 10 hive beekeeper who has the luxury of the time for such a regiment. When using the sugar shake method diligence is 'a must' in my opinion or we know what is destine to happen...
Some larger beekeepers, like Bob Binnie, would most likely find the sugar shake method and program unfeasible with many hundreds of hives.. Keep up the good work my friend.
Phillip
Thanks, Phillip. I think that's part of the point I was trying to make. Obviously what I do wouldn't be practical for big commercial guys, and it probably wouldn't be practical for more than 10 hives. What works for some people and some bees won't work for others. So learning about mites and treatments with the ability to be flexible and try different things is something important for beekeepers to learn, because what works well for your mentor may not necessarily work best for you.
Quote from: Ben Framed on May 21, 2023, 04:36:09 PM
As we were taught by HoneyPump when you lost one of your hives when you had less than five hives if I remember correctly or was it three? I miss TheHoneyPump. I hope his health is holding up and I would hope each of our fellow members would read his paper which he wrote especially dedicated to you.. He is a fine person.
I had only two hives when I lost one to varroa. I have missed HP lately too. Hopefully he will post again soon. This is his busiest time of year, I imagine, so perhaps he just doesn't have time for the forum at the moment.
I am glad you posted this topic Salvo. I have been watching the Varroa Destructor situation in Australia closely. I am sure our fellow members from that Country will appreciate reading what we have learned if things do not turn around for the good there.
Phillip
.
QuoteThe15thMember
What works for some people and some bees won't work for others. So learning about mites and treatments with the ability to be flexible and try different things is something important for beekeepers to learn, because what works well for your mentor may not necessarily work best for you.
True words Reagan. As you and I have learned throughout our Honey Bee Journey, there is more than one way to achieve good results and goals.
(Kind of like the old cat skinning phrase lol). :grin: :wink:
Quote from: salvo on May 21, 2023, 09:26:12 AM
We all test for varroa,... in our own ways,
Do you *test then treat* or do you usually just treat when you think you should?
Well not all of us do. Have had bees 10 years now and can't say that I have even looked for mites. Just went through bees at home yard, 43+ queenrite hives with 10+ splits waiting for queens. Still need to go through my outyard. Another 30+/- hives there. Thats up from about 40 that made it through the winter.
Just another perspective. :wink:
Quote from: cao on May 23, 2023, 12:09:54 PM
Quote from: salvo on May 21, 2023, 09:26:12 AM
We all test for varroa,... in our own ways,
Do you *test then treat* or do you usually just treat when you think you should?
Well not all of us do. Have had bees 10 years now and can't say that I have even looked for mites. Just went through bees at home yard, 43+ queenrite hives with 10+ splits waiting for queens. Still need to go through my outyard. Another 30+/- hives there. Thats up from about 40 that made it through the winter.
Just another perspective. :wink:
Love to hear of the success Cao, it's inspiring to see.
This is a truly informative and thoughtfully answered thread. I?m grateful to all who posted.
For me, I can only say one thing about testing for varna. I never never test and never will, unless I see the logic of doing so clearly. Varoa is here to stay for now. I treat with MAQs every August and once more in October. That?s it.
I am posting this for the benefit of those who may not have seen it. Robo wisely has it highlighted in the sticky section of the Disease and Pest Control Forum.
https://beemaster.com/forum/index.php?topic=54623.msg497375#msg497375
Phillip
I have to respectfully disagree with the other posts. If want to experience what a disease free / almost mite free colony can do you have to test with a wash using alcohol or dish detergent. Sugar rolls are not accurate and kill the bees anyway. I try and test at least monthly during the flying season and treat as necessary. I was unable to split all my hives this spring so I left out bait hives. I watched one bait hive fill up yesterday afternoon and I moved it after dark. Today I opened it to add frames and in less than 24 hours they easily built over one deep frame of comb. Its not fair to the bees to let them limp along when sacrificing 300 bees allows them to thrive and not just survive. If the very few mentees I take on dont test then thats on them. The ones that visit my yard, the light bulb flicks on. The best thing for mites is backyard beekeepers have tons of other excuses for low honey production and failing colonies. To cold, to hot, pesticides, fungicides, herbicides, to dry, to wet, on and on.
So just my 2 cents. I saw nothing here about CO2. I did them side by side with alcohol. wash for 3 years and it was almost a wash. I check twice a year, after treatments. Before spring flow, and before winter bee build up or fall flow. I try to run 30 to 40 hives in a yard and
NEVER found 1 hive in a yard that didnt have a huge mite load. That may be 1 out of 30 but when that one crashes in the middle of summer all the rest carry mites back home. Ask me how I know?
As for beesnweeds comment
QuoteThe best thing for mites is backyard beekeepers have tons of other excuses for low honey production and failing colonies. To cold, to hot, pesticides, fungicides, herbicides, to dry, to wet, on and on.
These things happen every year and if you dont know whats going on in your apiary or managing correctly for where you live how do you know why your not making honey
"All the boring and soul-destroying work of counting mites on sticky boards, killing brood with liquid nitrogen, watching bees groom each other, and measuring brood hormone levels?all done in thousands of replications?will someday be seen as a colossal waste of time when we finally learn to let the Varroa mites do these things for us...
"I have never yet counted even a single sample of mites from any of my bees. I consider counting mites as a way of evaluating Varroa resistance to be fraught with all sorts of shortcomings and difficulties. It's very time consuming and hence the size of the apiary, the number of colonies tested, the gene pool, and the income available all start to shrink. It's also very easy for the results to be skewed by mites migrating from other colonies or bee yards. "?Kirk Webster
"You don't grok the desert by counting the grains of sand."--Robert Heinlein, A Stranger in a Strange Land
"Bees that combine genuine hardiness, mite-resistance and productivity can only be maintained in the long run by having many hundreds of colonies constantly exposed to mites?and all the other known and unknown stresses in the real world, commercial beekeeping environment. This is the only way the bees can be tested for all the characteristics they need in order to thrive. And this testing and selection must continue year after year?to keep building up their resilience, and help the bees adapt to a changing world."?Kirk Webster
"I?ve thought a lot about how in the world to describe what?s really happening in an apiary that hasn?t used treatments of any kind for more than five years; where mites are now considered to be indispensable allies and friends, and where the productivity, resilience, profitability and enjoyment of the apiary are just as good as at any time in the past. I wouldn?t dream of killing any mites now, even if I had an easy and safe way of doing so."--Kirk Webster, A New Paradigm for American Beekeeping
https://kirkwebster.com/index.php/a-new-paradigm-for-american-beekeepers
https://kirkwebster.com/index.php/whats-missing-from-the-current-discussion-and-work-related-to-bees-thats-preventing-us-from-making-good-progress
https://bushfarms.com/beessctheories.htm
https://bushfarms.com/beesfoursimplesteps.htm
https://bushfarms.com/beeshardestthing.htm
https://bushfarms.com/beesnaturalcell.htm
And here is why your treatments are not very effective:
https://bushfarms.com/beesvarroatreatments.htm
https://bushfarms.com/beesnotreatments.htm
There 'might be' those who 'may' know more about it than Kirk Webster? Dr Samuel Ramsey comes to mind. No harm or offence intended...
You obviously never met Kirk Webster.
Quote from: Ben Framed on June 21, 2023, 07:11:36 AM
There 'might be' those who 'may' know more about it than Kirk Webster? Dr Samuel Ramsey comes to mind. No harm or offence intended...
Quote from: Michael Bush on June 21, 2023, 08:10:30 AM
You obviously never met Kirk Webster.
What would be you point as compared to my comment?
Kirk started beekeeping when he was in his early teens. He has been doing treatment free beekeeping for more than half a century. He learned from Charles Mraz among others. He went to England and hung out with Brother Adam and modeled a lot of his beekeeping and queen breeding off of Brother Adam's. He has made his entire living doing nothing but beekeeping from his early teens until now. All of the information on overwintering nucs that you hear now from Michael Palmer originated with Kirk who taught it to Michael. Kirk popularized overwintering nucs rather than buying packages. The main reason most people don't know Kirk is he is a Luddite. He has no email address. Not even an answering machine. He lives completely off the grid with solar panels for his electricity. His writings are only on the internet because of the work of his friends who re-posted articles he had published in the bee magazines. Kirk is humble, brilliant, meticulous, philosophical, spiritual, gentle, kind, generous, well read, hard working... and the list goes on and on. Dr Samuel Ramsey is an up and comer who I respect as a person who thinks outside the box, but Ramsey is just a child and has never made a living at beekeeping.
"It will be readily appreciated that in the course of many years and daily contact with bees, the professional bee-keeper will of necessity gain a knowledge and insight into the mysterious ways of the honeybee, usually denied to the scientist in the laboratory and the amateur in possession of a few colonies. Indeed, a limited practical experience will inevitably lead to views and conclusions, which are often completely at variance to the findings of a wide practical nature. The professional bee-keeper is at all times compelled to assess things realistically and to keep an open mind in regard to every problem he may be confronted with. He is also forced to base his methods of management on concrete results and must sharply differentiate between essentials and inessentials."--Beekeeping at Buckfast Abbey, Brother Adam
https://kirkwebster.com
"Beekeeping now has the dubious honor of becoming the first part of our system of industrial agriculture to actually fall apart. Let?s stop pretending that something else is going on. We no longer have enough bees to pollinate our crops. Each time the bees go through a downturn, we respond by making things more stressful for them, rather than less--we move them around more often, expose them to still more toxic substances, or fill the equipment up again with more untested and poorly adapted stock. We blame the weather, the mites, the markets, new diseases, consumers, the Chinese, the Germans, the (fill in your favorite scapegoat), other beekeepers, the packers, the scientific community, the price of gas, global warming - anything rather than face up to what?s really happening. We are losing the ability to take care of living things." - Kirk Webster
Both have available public access to their writings.. My meeting Mr Webster would not add or take away from 'his' knowledge; As I would not try to 'impose' the research of Dr Ramsey', or anyone else's research upon him (which is again, all public accessible). Nor would I impose Kirk Websters' quotes on Dr Ramsey if I were to meet Dr Ramsey. I have no desire to pit one against the other.
As I 'attempted' to make clear when I ask my question, no harm or offence intended toward Kirk Webster or your quotes. I have no doubt that he is a nice guy. My question was and is an honest question.
Referring to Dr Ramsey as a child in comparison might be taken as offence by Dr Ramsey personally? Especially from what he has uncovered and is still uncovering concerning varroa destructor, not to mention the many destructive viruses which they carry, along with his up-most 'earned' respect from his Scientific Bee Research 'Peers' the world over...
This topic was not meant to be a treatment, or treatment free topic from my understanding of the OP. But of methods of varroa testing. An area where Dr Ramsey should be and expert..
But since it seems to have now 'drifted' that way, (treatment free or varroa resistant bees), you might be interested in the work of Richard Noel and his world wide network of friends and researchers. Richard has also studied under Mike Palmer.
Richard is 'far advanced in knowledge' concerning 'treatment free bees' and very enthusiastic concerning the subject ... In case you missed it, I posted the following 'three years ago'.. Check out that topic. You will also find Richards video at the same address....
https://beemaster.com/forum/index.php?topic=53970.msg488317#msg488317
There is no comparison. It's apples and oranges. Or would be if Webster had not spent a lifetime of being scientific as well... Ramsey is a bright young scientist who thinks outside the box and the world is lucky to have him. Webster is a lifelong philosopher, scientist and professional beekeeper with a lifetime of experience with bees and making a living with bees.
Mr Bush, my angle in comparison of the two is directly in response to the concern and desire of 'this topic' in relation to the original post placed here by Salvo. "Testing for Varroa Prior to Treatment". Therefore I wrote after your off topic post, "There 'might be' those who 'may' know more about it than Kirk Webster? Dr Samuel Ramsey comes to mind. No harm or offence intended..." Dr Ramsey is more qualified when it comes to 'testing for varroa'.. as well as 'many others' than Kirk Webster. I can not, have not, will not, and do not desire nor intend to compare the two men in any other way. Because 'it is' like comparing apples to oranges; Two 'totally different subjects' concerning varroa destructor, with Kirk Webster having a 'completely' different 'philosophy'.
You yourself later wrote Mr Webster does not test nor treat for varroa.. a one hundred and eighty degree turn from the original post by 'taking the opportunity' of adding the philosophy of 'treatment free bees' and 'treatment free beekeeping, as well as the opportunity 'to support those whom you admire who do' in the links you posted..
Even though off topic, I entertained you by 'adding' to 'your' concern of treatment free, by going back as far as three years, showing the enthusiasm by some heavy hitters in the beekeeping world and what they are up to and doing in relation, (including Sue Colby), seeking to find a "TRULY" treatment free 'line of bee', which I share that same desire.
To make it easy for you, I placed a link for 'your' non treatment concerns in my reply#18.... Did you check out that link? If not, but do, you might find it 'very' informative.. 'Especially' the added video by Richard Noel...
Quote from: Bill Murray on June 20, 2023, 09:15:11 PM
So just my 2 cents. I saw nothing here about CO2. I did them side by side with alcohol. wash for 3 years and it was almost a wash. I check twice a year, after treatments. Before spring flow, and before winter bee build up or fall flow. I try to run 30 to 40 hives in a yard and NEVER found 1 hive in a yard that didnt have a huge mite load. That may be 1 out of 30 but when that one crashes in the middle of summer all the rest carry mites back home. Ask me how I know?
As for beesnweeds comment
QuoteThe best thing for mites is backyard beekeepers have tons of other excuses for low honey production and failing colonies. To cold, to hot, pesticides, fungicides, herbicides, to dry, to wet, on and on.
These things happen every year and if you dont know whats going on in your apiary or managing correctly for where you live how do you know why your not making honey
Excellent overview Bill, IMHO.
Phillip
Yes, got to agree here. In ther Uk we have many "non treaters" who tell us how well their bees are doing, but mention honey yields and all goes quiet....EVERY time.
Just had the misfortune to inspect several hives that have not been treated for decades, what a pathetic shower of bees, 3 frames of brood at most, deformed wings and the rest of it. Owner doesn't want to treat, I've left him to it. Fortunatley they are so isolated there is unlikely to be any drift to nearby colonies.
As to the topic question, I treat every hive every year without exception and without bothering to monitor varroa levels before hand. Bit like I worm my cat and treat him for fleas every 6 months or so whether he has worms or fleas or not. I monitor drops whilst treating (to make sure it's working) and find a wide variation between hives.
Funny thing is most of my colonies are producing over 200lbs of surplus honey per year.
There is also scientific evidence that non treated bees are significantly lower honey producers.
https://www.apidologie.org/articles/apido/pdf/2007/06/m6118.pdf
In this paper feral untreated bees where hived and some treated for varroa, the treated produced nearly 2x the amount of honey than untreated, suggesting that living with varroa is energetically expensive to the bees.
As to the topic question, I treat every hive every year without exception and without bothering to monitor varroa levels before hand. Bit like I worm my cat and treat him for fleas every 6 months or so whether he has worms or fleas or not.
Thats the way I look at it also Nigel. But I still believe treatment free can be accomplished.
Getting back into beekeeping after my time off. My goal was just keeping Marleys bees alive. for three years. I Alc. washed continually and treated twice a year, on top of those treatments I spot treated with OA. if mite loads got high. My goal was to never buy bees again, and if I failed quit again. Catching swarms for me is not an option due to the mite loads they carry. I refuse to integrate that into my apiarys. I was still buying queens and requeening every year. 3 yrs later those original 2 Nucs had made us 14 hives. At that point seeing the high rate of purchased queen failures my goal was to make all our own queens, moved 1 yard onto small cell, did away with screened bottom boards, started checking with co2.Every year I am slowly expanding and growing,while at the same time trying to not let the number of hives outgrow what Marley and I can take care of. There are some things to be said here. I saw no difference in the mite count in the small cell yard. Next year I will be removing all the queens in this yard , turn all these into production hives, and allow them to requeen themselves. There will be no treatment here next year. I am thoroughly convinced the treatment free folks that are successful are that way because of a combination of factors and not just one. Staying on top of this will be time consuming but in my opinion is worth it. Co2 in my opinion is the fastest most efficient method for checking mite loads.Testing 2xs a year after treatment was sufficient for me. Having local queens of good stock, with good traits is a key factor in a successful apiary, and you cant be successful without efficient swarm control.
Hope nobody minded my rambling thoughts.
No doubt about it Bill, many beekeepers are treatment free, but many don't take the time or trouble to see what mite loads they are harbouring. Nor how honey production varies between treated vs untreated in the same apiary, a big question.
Personally I don't like my bees being parasitised so I add miticide strips once a year, leave in for 8 weeks and remove. Couldn't be simpler or less time consuming.
Quote"Bill Murray"
Hope nobody minded my rambling thoughts.
Absolutely not as long as Sal doesn't mind, being he started this topic. This topic has expanded, and in a 'good way' as far as I am concerned... 🤷🏻♂️
"NigelP"
"but many don't take the time or trouble to see what mite loads they are harbouring."
True, and once the load if high, it is not so easy to get the mite numbers back down again, even if we successful in getting those numbers down. Kaman Reynolds did an experiment of such a hive, making a video series of that hives progress a few years ago. I posted of that experiment here at Beemaster. Our own Beeboy01 also posted a well documented, in depth topic describing his struggles in getting mite numbers down once they got out of hand. And as Nigel has found, once this occurs, honey production is in jeopardy as well as the colonies involved.
Dont get me wrong, I truly understand the Bees/honey vrs mite-load issues. If I didnt Id be catching swarms, or buying bees every year to make up for losses. Or have just given up. But my thoughts on this, being someone who lived through the tracheal mite dilemma is to have an open mind. What Im interested in is to see if in a managed yard with a complete brood-break before summer. what the fall miteload will be going into the fall flow, then coming out of our almost nonexistent winter, then after spring build up, repeat brood-break for spring flow. Repeat this till the end of the 3rd year. That was the longest I ever had a hive last when I wasnt treating summer of 3rd year.
Bill I'm for you and have confidence in you and your program... I believe you know 'fully well' what you are doing. My last comment was for the benefit of new beekeepers, giving different perspectives, if the same wishes to go the non-treatment direction, there may be obstacles to consider when doing so..
What Richard Noel, Sue Colby and others in the network mentioned above are doing is seeking an actual, dependable, strain of bee that is truly 'Varroa Destructor Resistant' as well as being good honey producers, while that program with such heavy-weight world wide 'heavy' hitters seeking the same results that respected beekeepers such as kirk Webster and others are seeking. Except the program I keep mentioning is likened to 'seeking' those results on steroids, if your will. I am grateful for anyone who has what it takes to go the non-treatment route, Including Cao and Mr Bush.. I do know, that route is not for me at this time... And I am happy I do not have neighbors who keep bees, go the non-treatment route either.
:shocked: lol
Phillip
QuoteBill I'm for you and have confidence in you and your program.
Dont take that to far. I dont even have confidence in it yet.This has been in my mind quite a few years now and Im just getting to the stage where I can give it a try. Maybe it will work maybe not. The variables in a POA like this are huge. Im hoping it works at least partially, that way I can attempt to keep moving it forward. Because of the kinda guy I am If it fails miserably Ill probably have to wait on someone else. Or maybe because of the kinda guy I am Marley will push me to try again.
European breeders have produced several strains of hygienic queens that are varroa tolerant, calm and give good honey yields. You can purchase these queens if you wish. They include Buckfast and Carniolan strains.
The problem for the hobbyists? is they do not breed true, so any queens produced from this stock are not hygienic. They need isolated mating sites with drones from queens with similar hygienic traits or Instrumental insemination to maintain these traits. Not a viable option for many.
To me it?s just so easy to stick a couple of miticide strips in hives (after honey production is over) and take them out 8 weeks later. Probably 5 minutes per hive max.
I don?t quite understand the argument of wanting treatment free, although I can understand the desirability. To me honey bees are livestock and they need looking after in the artificial conditions we keep them in. You don?t let your cats keep breeding until you find a strain that tolerates tape worms. You treat them every 6 months with a wormer to keep them healthy and fit.
Quote from: NigelP on June 23, 2023, 03:31:18 PM
I don?t quite understand the argument of wanting treatment free, although I can understand the desirability. To me honey bees are livestock and they need looking after in the artificial conditions we keep them in. You don?t let your cats keep breeding until you find a strain that tolerates tape worms. You treat them every 6 months with a wormer to keep them healthy and fit.
For me personally, I actually try to keep all my animals with as minimal "treatments" as possible. I don't deworm my indoor cats (if I had outdoor cats, I might). Our indoor/outdoor dogs get a narrower spectrum of dewormer than our livestock guardian dogs who are outside in all the time. My sister uses only natural dewormers on her goats unless she notices a serious problem.
Quote from: NigelP on June 23, 2023, 01:45:01 PM
No doubt about it Bill, many beekeepers are treatment free, but many don't take the time or trouble to see what mite loads they are harbouring.
This is a big key in my opinion. All our animals (except the cats because there is really very little chance they would get any parasites living only indoors) are regularly checked for worms. Our vet does a fecal on our dogs when they go for their annual exam, and my sister does her own fecals on her goats. Without that information, the animal's health would have to decline severely before a problem was noticed, and in my opinion, that's not good ethical stewardship of the animal.
Nigel, its kinda why I raise my own chickens, used to raise my own pork, and purchase my beef from someone I know, and dont drink milk, We can also throw in there why I raised my own vegetables before my kids moved out.
No matter what Im told the hazards are to all the shots,treatments,antibiotics,fungicides,pesticides,etc,etc,etc. I actually dont buy into it. I believe that none of that is good for us, and the only reason we accept it is because we are told its so.
Im not eating my cat, or dog or horse, but I am eating the honey out of my hives. Thats why I started keeping bees originally cause I ate honey instead of sugar.
Im no tree huger or conspiracy theorist, or even a health nut. But non of this stuff can be good for anyone as they are maturing.
Maybe Reagan said it better.
Quote from: Bill Murray on June 23, 2023, 03:58:41 PM
Nigel, its kinda why I raise my own chickens, used to raise my own pork, and purchase my beef from someone I know, and dont drink milk, We can also throw in there why I raised my own vegetables before my kids moved out.
No matter what Im told the hazards are to all the shots,treatments,antibiotics,fungicides,pesticides,etc,etc,etc. I actually dont buy into it. I believe that none of that is good for us, and the only reason we accept it is because we are told its so.
Im not eating my cat, or dog or horse, but I am eating the honey out of my hives. Thats why I started keeping bees originally cause I ate honey instead of sugar.
Im no tree huger or conspiracy theorist, or even a health nut. But non of this stuff can be good for anyone as they are maturing.
Quote from: Bill Murray on June 23, 2023, 04:03:47 PM
Maybe Reagan said it better.
No, I like what you added, Bill. We feel the same way on our homestead.
Hi Folks,
I'm extremely appreciative of all of the comments on this subject.
Even *treatment free* is a treatment. I read much of MB's writings on TF when I started keeping. I was here and on Beesource. My associates and club members were made up of a spectrum of developing practices.
There is a breaking point, regarding colony count, when testing and then treating and then testing again to see how effective the treatment worked is not practical nor cost effective.
There was always a statement made where *He has 100 colonies. If He looses 10 to varroa, he's lost 10% of his hives. If you have two colonies and loose only one, you've lost 50% of your holdings. If you loose two, you lost 100%.*
I'm concluding, over the years, that a breaking point may be about eight colonies. Nucs are not in this count. I think, at that point, the keeper is serious and regularly involved in the care of the colonies and in the activities necessary to maintain that number by splitting, swarm capture and maintenance, and nuc availability. That level of care, and knowledge, assures that the colony count will always be *about eight, more or less, and those invaluable nucs take up the slack.* You can *treat* however you want.
The hobbyist with only one or two colonies and limited knowledge and involvement is at a disadvantage.
Honey production runs the knife edge also. More colonies should generally yield more honey, even if the poundage from any single colony is sub-optimal.
Please continue the discussion. I'm regularly pointing this thread out to my club.
Sal
Quote from: Bill Murray on June 23, 2023, 03:58:41 PM
N
No matter what Im told the hazards are to all the shots,treatments,antibiotics,fungicides,pesticides,etc,etc,etc. I actually dont buy into it. I believe that none of that is good for us, and the only reason we accept it is because we are told its so.
You are welcome to your beliefs Bill, it would be boring if we all felt the same about every issue.
As a scientist for most of my career I understand that many of these treatment, antibiotics fungicides etc are really beneficial to any creatures that are ill and require them.
My personal creed is that whatever livestock/pets etc of any description that I keep then I am going to provide them with the very best welfare they can get and use whatever treatments are going to be most effective to achieve this.
It perhaps says a lot that our current cat is just over 19 years old and still going strong, although his prolific mouser days are now sadly behind him.
Well since Sal don't mind and pets have been brought up, let me tell you about my uncles Blue Heeler. Several years ago he began giving the anti flea/tick monthly pill to the pooch. The dog is now 20 years old, moving slow but still in the game. I was skeptical when he first began administering this pill to his dog, wondering if the dog would 'make it' very long after the pills were started. Thinking; "I bet he is poisoning his dog to a slow death". Apparently their were/are no side effect to this medication as far as we can tell...
Thanks for the kind words Sal toward all who have posted here concerning your topic. It is inspiring that your Beekeeping Organization is keeping up with the progress 'of' this topic. Thumbs up to you 'and' your 'local' beekeeping friends!
Phillip
Quote from: Michael Bush on June 21, 2023, 06:58:35 AM
"All the boring and soul-destroying work of counting mites on sticky boards, killing brood with liquid nitrogen, watching bees groom each other, and measuring brood hormone levels?all done in thousands of replications?will someday be seen as a colossal waste of time when we finally learn to let the Varroa mites do these things for us...
"I have never yet counted even a single sample of mites from any of my bees. I consider counting mites as a way of evaluating Varroa resistance to be fraught with all sorts of shortcomings and difficulties. It's very time consuming and hence the size of the apiary, the number of colonies tested, the gene pool, and the income available all start to shrink. It's also very easy for the results to be skewed by mites migrating from other colonies or bee yards. "?Kirk Webster
"You don't grok the desert by counting the grains of sand."--Robert Heinlein, A Stranger in a Strange Land
"Bees that combine genuine hardiness, mite-resistance and productivity can only be maintained in the long run by having many hundreds of colonies constantly exposed to mites?and all the other known and unknown stresses in the real world, commercial beekeeping environment. This is the only way the bees can be tested for all the characteristics they need in order to thrive. And this testing and selection must continue year after year?to keep building up their resilience, and help the bees adapt to a changing world."?Kirk Webster
"I?ve thought a lot about how in the world to describe what?s really happening in an apiary that hasn?t used treatments of any kind for more than five years; where mites are now considered to be indispensable allies and friends, and where the productivity, resilience, profitability and enjoyment of the apiary are just as good as at any time in the past. I wouldn?t dream of killing any mites now, even if I had an easy and safe way of doing so."--Kirk Webster, A New Paradigm for American Beekeeping
https://kirkwebster.com/index.php/a-new-paradigm-for-american-beekeepers
https://kirkwebster.com/index.php/whats-missing-from-the-current-discussion-and-work-related-to-bees-thats-preventing-us-from-making-good-progress
https://bushfarms.com/beessctheories.htm
https://bushfarms.com/beesfoursimplesteps.htm
https://bushfarms.com/beeshardestthing.htm
https://bushfarms.com/beesnaturalcell.htm
And here is why your treatments are not very effective:
https://bushfarms.com/beesvarroatreatments.htm
https://bushfarms.com/beesnotreatments.htm
So if I'm understanding aright, "the" test for varroa is in honey production. Good colony, good management, heavy box. Colony is inadequate to the task, light box. Dequeen and requeen with cell from heavy box. Rinse and repeat.
Quote from: NigelP on June 24, 2023, 12:53:20 PM
Quote from: Bill Murray on June 23, 2023, 03:58:41 PM
N
No matter what Im told the hazards are to all the shots,treatments,antibiotics,fungicides,pesticides,etc,etc,etc. I actually dont buy into it. I believe that none of that is good for us, and the only reason we accept it is because we are told its so.
You are welcome to your beliefs Bill, it would be boring if we all felt the same about every issue.
As a scientist for most of my career I understand that many of these treatment, antibiotics fungicides etc are really beneficial to any creatures that are ill and require them.
My personal creed is that whatever livestock/pets etc of any description that I keep then I am going to provide them with the very best welfare they can get and use whatever treatments are going to be most effective to achieve this.
It perhaps says a lot that our current cat is just over 19 years old and still going strong, although his prolific mouser days are now sadly behind him.
"yeah, well" I've got an eighteen year old cat who is ... treatment free. :) grumpy though.
Quote from: salvo on June 24, 2023, 11:32:48 AM
Hi Folks,
I'm extremely appreciative of all of the comments on this subject.
Even *treatment free* is a treatment. I read much of MB's writings on TF when I started keeping. I was here and on Beesource. My associates and club members were made up of a spectrum of developing practices.
There is a breaking point, regarding colony count, when testing and then treating and then testing again to see how effective the treatment worked is not practical nor cost effective.
There was always a statement made where *He has 100 colonies. If He looses 10 to varroa, he's lost 10% of his hives. If you have two colonies and loose only one, you've lost 50% of your holdings. If you loose two, you lost 100%.*
I'm concluding, over the years, that a breaking point may be about eight colonies. Nucs are not in this count. I think, at that point, the keeper is serious and regularly involved in the care of the colonies and in the activities necessary to maintain that number by splitting, swarm capture and maintenance, and nuc availability. That level of care, and knowledge, assures that the colony count will always be *about eight, more or less, and those invaluable nucs take up the slack.* You can *treat* however you want.
The hobbyist with only one or two colonies and limited knowledge and involvement is at a disadvantage.
Honey production runs the knife edge also. More colonies should generally yield more honey, even if the poundage from any single colony is sub-optimal.
Please continue the discussion. I'm regularly pointing this thread out to my club.
Sal
Sal it seems to me that testing for mites/300 bees is part of a holistic "programme" called Integrated Pest Management. And IPM has a whole philosophy behind it, and a process flow/logic to it, and a definite work load associated with the various tasks in the process. And I'm not at all anti-academic, but you have to realize that the human culture of the academy where most of the IPM stuff is coming from is characterised by cheap/free labor with open schedules. "Kids these days" but I used to be there at 19 too.
And so an idealized philosophy/process that is originated in cheap labor with unconstrained time is going to have some characteristics which may/not mesh with your mentees. For reasons which are human. Working folks have constrained schedules, and time is dear. We don't always have three helpers with us in the yard to break up a task like measuring bees, washing them, counting mites, logging it, working the hive. For a dude working solo, that's a LOT OF WORK.
And add that to the process flow of doing a LOT OF WORK to get information that can easily be deduced by pattern recognition. It's late June, I just pulled honey. I ALREADY KNOW which of my colonies is struggling with either mites or virii or whatever. I can see it. I see it in the behavior, I see it in the broodnest, I see it in the delayed comb drawing. I see it in the honey super that should have been finished and another put on, but instead it's not finished yet.
In the club, the beeks that treat do so on a schedule, or if they're using temperature sensitive treatments, they combine their schedule of honey production, queen production, and weather forecast. They don't do a count because THEY ALREADY KNOW their bees have mites over "threshold", they're not intending to breed resistant/therapeutic bees, and they have a production schedule to keep and personal human constraints.
So I think you should show your mentees the IPM ideal. Maybe they'll want to join that party. And you should show them the way you do it, holistically.
"It's late June, I just pulled honey. I ALREADY KNOW which of my colonies is struggling with either mites or virii or whatever. I can see it. I see it in the behavior, I see it in the broodnest, I see it in the delayed comb drawing. I see it in the honey super that should have been finished and another put on, but instead it's not finished yet."
"They don't do a count because THEY ALREADY KNOW their bees have mites over "threshold", they're not intending to breed resistant/therapeutic bees, and they have a production schedule to keep and personal human constraints."
Good points Matt in my opinion...
Even so, doing random mite counts in a yard is not a bad idea. Remembering; even successful pros 'who recognize the symptoms' you describe, do so in order to 'help insure' their bees do not 'reach' that threshold. For an example; Bob Binnie, and "TheHoneyPump" whom I have great respect, be it they or their family, who 'also' make their living 'with' bees.
I'd be interested to hear how THP, Sal, others who actually regularly test for mite load are using the information. It is too expensive (labor and time) to gather data points that aren't part of a decision tree somehow. How are you using this expensive information to make decisions?
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Quote from: yes2matt on June 26, 2023, 10:24:48 PM
I'd be interested to hear how THP, Sal, others who actually regularly test for mite load are using the information. It is too expensive (labor and time) to gather data points that aren't part of a decision tree somehow. How are you using this expensive information to make decisions?
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Part of my curiosity as well. If one has a scheduled treatment plan in place regardless of the finding (unless I'm misunderstanding something here) then what's the point?
Quote from: Occam on June 26, 2023, 10:58:33 PM
Quote from: yes2matt on June 26, 2023, 10:24:48 PM
I'd be interested to hear how THP, Sal, others who actually regularly test for mite load are using the information. It is too expensive (labor and time) to gather data points that aren't part of a decision tree somehow. How are you using this expensive information to make decisions?
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Part of my curiosity as well. If one has a scheduled treatment plan in place regardless of the finding (unless I'm misunderstanding something here) then what's the point?
I personally don't have a scheduled treatment plan, which I why I like to have the data, because the data is my trigger to treat. I also test post-treatment (unless it's a mid-winter OAV) to be sure the treatment had the desired effect.
That makes more sense to me then what I've understood many to do. It seems like may treat regardless of the count to keep it under control I guess. Not treating until you reach a certain threshold makes more sense, whatever threshold you pick.
Quote"yes2matt"
"It's late June, I just pulled honey. I ALREADY KNOW which of my colonies is struggling with either mites or virii or whatever. I can see it. I see it in the behavior, I see it in the broodnest, I see it in the delayed comb drawing. I see it in the honey super that should have been finished and another put on, but instead it's not finished yet."
"They don't do a count because THEY ALREADY KNOW their bees have mites over "threshold", they're not intending to breed resistant/therapeutic bees, and they have a production schedule to keep and personal human constraints."
Ben Framed
Good points Matt in my opinion...
Even so, doing random mite counts in a yard is not a bad idea. Remembering; even successful pros 'who recognize the symptoms' you describe, do so in order to 'help insure' their bees do not 'reach' that threshold. For an example; Bob Binnie, and "TheHoneyPump" whom I have great respect, be it they or their family, who 'also' make their living 'with' bees.
Quote"yes2matt "
"I'd be interested to hear how THP, Sal, others who actually regularly test for mite load are using the information. It is too expensive (labor and time) to gather data points that aren't part of a decision tree somehow. How are you using this expensive information to make decisions? "
To be clear, I did not say TheHoneyPump regularly test, I said
randomly. Neither did I suggest Bob Binnie test regularly either just in case that might have been assumed as well. It is my understanding from watching Bob Binne videos, he checks hives
"randomly" in each yard during his 'time' or 'season if you will' of treatment... It would be nearly 'impossible' to test so many hives.
In case anyone might have missed it:
Back to TheHoneyPump; He 'clearly' states the times throughout the year when he treats in his area, and the time of year he recommends checking or testing, in the provided link above in reply 10 .. He wrote that article with The15thMember in mind. Since she is reluctant to test her bees with the wash method, but chooses the sugar shake instead, he made exception to add the sugar shake method for her benefit and others who may choose that route. Even so he uses the wash method.
Bob Binnie has a similar schedule, and also uses the wash method. I am thinking he treats with OAV in December to boot.
If memory serves me correctly.Edit:
I can not answer for them but I do 'realize' Mr Binnie is a professional beekeeper as is TheHoneyPumps family, you can add Ian Steppler to that number if you wish, of what I consider 'mega beekeepers'.
Isn't it only good stewardship on their part to know what is going on in their bee yards? I would suppose keeping notes for comparison 'for and from' all aspects of beekeeping,
and not only mite counts, have proven to be 'very valuable' assets when ones livelihood 'is' "the bee business" and on the line.
For instance, if the tested hives are past the threshold or on the verge of passing that threshold at the allotted time of treatment, adjustments can be made or considered in their program,
(now or in the future as needed), to address the problems accordingly.
(a bee care takers road map if you will 😊). No doubt their desire is to 'never' have their bees 'reach' the obvious levels of distress which you described and look for, in your earlier post? 😊 Which is my desire as well..
I hope that helps.
Phillip
"Thresholds"......who determines what that threshold level of varroa is and what is it's value?
My aim is keep varro levels so low they never reach the "threshold" value, whatever it is.
Just means I treat all hives annually.
Saves me a lot of time this way.
Quote from: NigelP on June 27, 2023, 01:00:53 PM
"Thresholds"......who determines what that threshold level of varroa is and what is it's value?
My aim is keep varro levels so low they never reach the "threshold" value, whatever it is.
Just means I treat all hives annually.
Saves me a lot of time this way.
Nigel I am thinking it was Dr Samuel Ramseys'
'enthusiast', in depth, lecture in Ireland was the first time I heard of it. But my memory is not exactly clear.
I might have heard of it earlier.. https://youtu.be/z2plL5NIRcw
From your post above, may I assume you do not test for mite counts anytime?
Quote from: Ben Framed on June 27, 2023, 01:19:41 PM
From your post above, may I assume you do not test for mite counts anytime?
I used to put drop trays in when treating to make sure the treatment was working. These days I just treat, as I know what I use is efficatious.
Takes seconds to add strips to hives and seconds to remove them 8 weeks later.
Job done.
Thanks Nigel, for such a small creature they sure are a thorn in the side!!
Phillip
>These days I just treat, as I know what I use is efficatious.
Actually you only know it was last time you checked. I may work one year and not the next. Resistance is not futile, but it is frustrating. Neither Apistan nor Checkmite have worked here in Nebraska since the early 2000s.
Which is why it is wise to not use the same treamtent for more than three consecutive years before using a different one.
Although some treamtents, like oxalic acid, affect mites along so many different pathways it is unlikely that resistance to it will ever form.
Quote from: NigelP on June 28, 2023, 08:49:14 AM
Which is why it is wise to not use the same treamtent for more than three consecutive years before using a different one.
Although some treamtents, like oxalic acid, affect mites along so many different pathways it is unlikely that resistance to it will ever form.
Just because 'we'
the individual beekeeper might not use the same treatment three years in a row,
(if that is the time limit for resistance build up?) What cycle does our neighbor, our fellow countrymen practice in treatment? Plus; "even if rotated", doesn't the resistance not still persist and build with each years use? By using this commendable practice, are we guaranteed that mites will not prevail?
If not, just more the reason for testing or checking for mites and doing mite counts? Especially for those who make their living with our friend and gift, the Honeybee...
As far as the organic Oxalic; my go to 'topper offer'; has its "shortcomings". We have discussed oxalic in depth here at beemaster
as well as various organic Formic treatment methods. Phillip
>"These days I just treat, as I know what I use is efficatious."
"Michael Bush"
"Actually you only know it was last time you checked. I may work one year and not the next. Resistance is not futile, but it is frustrating." "Neither Apistan nor Checkmite have worked here in Nebraska since the early 2000s."
I agree Mr Bush...
Phillip
The article laid out by TheHoneyPump and re-posted on this topic as a reminder, was excellent in my opinion. As he wrote, 'varroa carriers numerous viruses' and teaches how and what to look for, not only 'on' our bees but within our colonies frames.
The article placed with-in this topic featuring Dr Ramsey, also point out the many weapons varroa brings against our bee.
I am posting a link featuring a picture of the results of one of those viruses, which was posted by ROBO some time ago. "Deformed Wing Virus"
https://beemaster.com/forum/index.php?topic=23879.msg184861#msg184861
Quote from: Ben Framed on June 28, 2023, 10:53:17 AM
, doesn't the resistance not still persist and build with each years use?
Phillip
Resistance will only be maintained if the same miticide is constantly used that it has become resistant to. Resistance is quickly lost if the "resistant" agent is not present as it's energetically and genetically expensive for any organism to maintain resistance to something that is not present in it's environment and ergo there is no requirement to do so. Which is why changes are important. Three years is the mantra, but it could easily be 4 or 5. But changing every three years seems to work okay.
Still not had anyone clarify what the threshhold level for mites is before treatment is needed?
I only used Apistan (Fluvalinate) once. The mites were totally resistant already and apparently (I found after some research) had been in this area for several years. I'm pretty sure they still are. Checkmite quit working shortly after and as far as I can find out still doesn't work. Maybe if you could coordinate with all the beekeepers in the area to rotate the same ones that might work. If I was going to treat (which I have not done at all for more than two decades) I would put a sticky board on and count mites before, during and after.
Quote from: NigelP on June 28, 2023, 12:53:58 PM
Quote from: Ben Framed on June 28, 2023, 10:53:17 AM
, doesn't the resistance not still persist and build with each years use?
Phillip
Resistance will only be maintained if the same miticide is constantly used that it has become resistant to. Resistance is quickly lost if the "resistant" agent is not present as it's energetically and genetically expensive for any organism to maintain resistance to something that is not present in it's environment and ergo there is no requirement to do so. Which is why changes are important. Three years is the mantra, but it could easily be 4 or 5. But changing every three years seems to work okay.
Still not had anyone clarify what the threshhold level for mites is before treatment is needed?
You may be right but If that's the case I have a question; If that is the case, and resistance is build against products as Mr Bush described in this entire State, couldn't we simply wait a year, or two, or three, bringing thing back to square one and normal? In other words if the good folks of Nebraska simply stopped using the miticide products Mr Bush described, then soon the same products would once again be just as effective as in the beginning?
"I don't know about that." I really don't know enough about miticide buildup to say much more lol... I have not studied it enough...
The threshold which is pretty much accepted among the scientific community is 2 to 5 mites per 100 adult bees. This number was reached and concluded by many Universities and research centers. Some say less. One University; Pennsylvania State University says 2 mites per 100 adult bees.
Nigel have you had a chance to take in the documentary placed in
reply#48? If not, I highly recommend it.
Phillip
Quote from: Michael Bush on June 28, 2023, 01:03:54 PM
I only used Apistan (Fluvalinate) once. The mites were totally resistant already and apparently (I found after some research) had been in this area for several years. I'm pretty sure they still are. Checkmite quit working shortly after and as far as I can find out still doesn't work. Maybe if you could coordinate with all the beekeepers in the area to rotate the same ones that might work. If I was going to treat (which I have not done at all for more than two decades) I would put a sticky board on and count mites before, during and after.
That has been my concern as well. The resistance is already there or soon will be, thus testing...
But as you say;
"Maybe if you could coordinate with all the beekeepers in the area to rotate the same ones that might work." I would like to know the answer to that as well, I do not wish to sound like a doubting Thomas but one resistance has been built...
Mr Bush since you don't treat, do you still like to know where your hardy bees 'are', concerning mites?
Phillip
Most years I pay to have them inspected to get a health certificate from the state to sell queens. Mite counts are pretty typical. Some low. Some high. APHIS sends the same people out (from the University) to do all kinds of tests including Varroa. Same results. Never really high.
Thanks...
Phillip
Quote from: NigelP on June 28, 2023, 12:53:58 PM
Quote from: Ben Framed on June 28, 2023, 10:53:17 AM
, doesn't the resistance not still persist and build with each years use?
Phillip
Resistance will only be maintained if the same miticide is constantly used that it has become resistant to. Resistance is quickly lost if the "resistant" agent is not present as it's energetically and genetically expensive for any organism to maintain resistance to something that is not present in it's environment and ergo there is no requirement to do so. Which is why changes are important. Three years is the mantra, but it could easily be 4 or 5. But changing every three years seems to work okay.
Still not had anyone clarify what the threshhold level for mites is before treatment is needed?
Threshold: it's changed over the years. And by "it" I mean the consensus among American academic voices (because that's what I have access too). When I took bee school, consensus was 10/300. A few years later it went down to 6/300. Now, when I hear this conversation, folks are saying 2 or 3/300 is time to medicate.
It was explained to me as "economic threshold" : when the mite load on the bees is significant enough to be deleterious to honey production equivalent (economically) to the expense (supplies and labor) of treatment. This was back before "we" understood the second order effects of mite infestation, namely vectored disease.
So that explains why the threshold (which is a consensus figure among practitioners/ academics) has gone down, because "we" account the second order effects of disease to mite infestation, and so economic threshold is lower because infestation is accounted more expensive. Also because OA specifically is cheap, and so lower costs of treatment also bring the threshold down.
Man I hope that made sense to you, it makes sense to me but I have ... issues. ;)
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Quote from: yes2matt on June 28, 2023, 05:31:42 PM
Quote from: NigelP on June 28, 2023, 12:53:58 PM
Still not had anyone clarify what the threshhold level for mites is before treatment is needed?
Threshold: it's changed over the years. And by "it" I mean the consensus among American academic voices (because that's what I have access too). When I took bee school, consensus was 10/300. A few years later it went down to 6/300. Now, when I hear this conversation, folks are saying 2 or 3/300 is time to medicate.
It was explained to me as "economic threshold" : when the mite load on the bees is significant enough to be deleterious to honey production equivalent (economically) to the expense (supplies and labor) of treatment. This was back before "we" understood the second order effects of mite infestation, namely vectored disease.
So that explains why the threshold (which is a consensus figure among practitioners/ academics) has gone down, because "we" account the second order effects of disease to mite infestation, and so economic threshold is lower because infestation is accounted more expensive. Also because OA specifically is cheap, and so lower costs of treatment also bring the threshold down.
Man I hope that made sense to you, it makes sense to me but I have ... issues. ;)
Personally, my treatment threshold is ~5%, just to throw my 2 cents in.
"Yes2Matt"
"Now, when I hear this conversation, folks are saying 2 or 3/300 is time to medicate."
Matt 2 to 300 is a 0.67% mite threshold. I've not heard of that low recommendation before, 'anywhere'.... I am not disputing you, but I would think that is a bit extreme (for a threshold)??
Phillip
Quote from: Ben Framed on June 29, 2023, 01:41:55 AM
"Yes2Matt"
"Now, when I hear this conversation, folks are saying 2 or 3/300 is time to medicate."
Matt 2 to 300 is a 0.67% mite threshold. I've not heard of that low recommendation before, 'anywhere'.... I am not disputing you, but I would think that is a bit extreme (for a threshold)??
Phillip
I've heard extremely low numbers like that from several sources too. I listen to a very interesting podcast interview on
The Well-Managed Hive with Dr. Gloria DeGrandi-Hoffman where she talked about mite counts and treatments and why the recommended thresholds are so low these days. I came away with a similar impression to Matt; we now understand that one of the real dangers from varroa is virus transmission, and it obviously doesn't take many varroa to spread a virus (or several) to a colony, nor does it take many mites to re-infest a treated colony.
Quote from: The15thMember on June 29, 2023, 11:10:56 AM
Quote from: Ben Framed on June 29, 2023, 01:41:55 AM
"Yes2Matt"
"Now, when I hear this conversation, folks are saying 2 or 3/300 is time to medicate."
Matt 2 to 300 is a 0.67% mite threshold. I've not heard of that low recommendation before, 'anywhere'.... I am not disputing you, but I would think that is a bit extreme (for a threshold)??
Phillip
I've heard extremely low numbers like that from several sources too. I listen to a very interesting podcast interview on The Well-Managed Hive with Dr. Gloria DeGrandi-Hoffman where she talked about mite counts and treatments and why the recommended thresholds are so low these days. I came away with a similar impression to Matt; we now understand that one of the real dangers from varroa is virus transmission, and it obviously doesn't take many varroa to spread a virus (or several) to a colony, nor does it take many mites to re-infest a treated colony.
As I stated a 0.67% mite threshold is less than one mite per 100 bees.. The low number quote which I found and posted in an earlier post was from Pennsylvania State University and based on a '2' mite per '100' bee wash average.. Not 300 in case that might have been misunderstood?.. Which would be 6 mites per 300 bees.. I personally do not like those numbers either. Can you or Matt provide the source or sources 'address which suggest the newly 0.67% mite threshold'?
Thanks,
Phillip
Quote from: Ben Framed on June 29, 2023, 12:33:37 PM
As I stated a 0.67% mite threshold is less than one mite per 100 bees.. The low number quote which I found and posted in an earlier post was from Pennsylvania State University and based on a '2' mite per '100' bee wash average.. Not 300 in case that might have been misunderstood?.. Which would be 6 mites per 300 bees.. I personally do not like those numbers either. Can you or Matt provide the source or sources 'address which suggest the newly 0.67% mite threshold'?
Thanks,
Phillip
I wasn't suggesting that .67% exactly is a new recommended treatment threshold, and I doubt Matt was either. What I have heard though, mostly on podcasts, is people essentially saying they treat if they see any mites or more than one (something I think is unrealistic personally). Here is a link to the podcast episode I mentioned. It's been a while since I listened to it, so I'm not sure exactly when in the hour they discuss the treatment threshold conversation, but it's a good listen if you have the time. https://thewellmanagedhive.podbean.com/e/dr-gloria-degrandi-hoffman/
Thanks I understood that Matt was not suggesting that number is the new accepted threshold standard. I think he said something like he has been hearing or reading where this is being talked about (somewhere), 2 Mites to 300 bees. Thanks for the link I look forward to hearing that discussion.
Phillip
Mr Binnie came out with a video on this matter since our discussion, (actually yesterday). He explains things he is finding. I am placing that video here for you consideration.
The bee world seems to be constantly changing and beekeepers need to be prepared to change with those circumstances is my opinion.
Phillip
https://youtu.be/TDzlQkzO1Io
QuoteMaybe if you could coordinate with all the beekeepers in the area to rotate the same ones that might work.
[/b]
I posted on this a while back. WAS called Draconian I think.