From MAILER-DAEMON Sat Feb 28 10:53:30 2009 Return-Path: <> X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.8 (2007-02-13) on industrial X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-86.9 required=2.4 tests=ADVANCE_FEE_1,ALL_NATURAL, AWL,MAILTO_TO_SPAM_ADDR,SPF_HELO_PASS,USER_IN_WHITELIST autolearn=disabled version=3.1.8 X-Original-To: adamf@IBIBLIO.ORG Delivered-To: adamf@IBIBLIO.ORG Received: from listserv.albany.edu (unknown [169.226.1.24]) by metalab.unc.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37B874894F for ; Sat, 28 Feb 2009 10:52:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from listserv.albany.edu (listserv.albany.edu [169.226.1.24]) by listserv.albany.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n1SFhrpe016524 for ; Sat, 28 Feb 2009 10:52:19 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2009 10:52:17 -0500 From: "University at Albany LISTSERV Server (14.5)" Subject: File: "BEE-L LOG0709E" To: adamf@IBIBLIO.ORG Message-ID: Content-Length: 62168 Lines: 1436 ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2007 00:57:27 -0400 Reply-To: bee-quick@bee-quick.com Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: James Fischer Subject: Re: CCD Circus MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > statistical certainty? I would think the U.S. would get > pests off containers before Australia! Yeah, you'd think that from the gross numbers, but you'd be, ummm... wrong. You'd change your mind if you looked at the types of cargoes and types of ships. The US just doesn't get a whole lot of agricultural imports from Indo-Asia. Australia does. They process and add value to these imports, and re-export them. Remember the honey up in Canada that was contaminated with trace levels of nitrofurans? It came from Australia. But not quite. It came from South America, where the drugs were used in beehives, and was imported by the Australian honey packer (Capilano Honey) and blended with Australian honey, and then exported to Canada. And when you want a container that has a good chance of containing stowaway bees, you want agriculture, as bees just don't have as much chance of getting into a container full of cheap electronic consumer goods or anything else in the way of "manufactured goods" as they do getting into a container that was loaded "in the field" with things like fresh produce. That's the cool thing about multi-mode containers - they can be slapped down anywhere, filled, picked up, trucked to the docks, loaded on a ship and whisked to their destination without anyone ever needing to glance at the container. (If not for containers, "World Trade" would have never gotten so frantic.) Also, one has to consider distance. The shorter run between Indonesia/Asia and Australia means that older, less well-run, less well-maintained ships can make the run. It takes better ships, better crews, and more profitable cargoes to make the longer runs around to the other side of the planet. The incidence of sloppy oversight over cargo, and even the ship holds themselves containing swarms tends to be higher with the barely-seaworthy "coastal freighters" that tend to be making these shorter runs. > Australia only gets a *tiny* percent ( population big difference) > of the containers we get in the U.S. from areas of T. clareae. Population really does not enter into the equation as much as you might think off the top of your head. What matters is the importation of raw materials, the adding of value, and the re-exporting of finished goods. Australians do this a lot. One has to count all the customers of Australia's export trade in with the population of Australia. > All of our current pests could have come off swarms on containers! Sure, but funny how we have gotten AHB from Central and South America rather than African bees direct from Africa, isn't it? Isn't it also funny that Australia has discovered several incursions of Apis cerana, while we've had zero? No, its not funny, unusual, or strange at all. The same exact phenomena is at work here. In the case of the Western Hemisphere, the short-run, rundown, "coastal freighters" work between Central America and Florida. The same problem works the same way here as it does around Australia. So, while your scenario does not fit the actual experience of the US in regard to what we've gotten, and the likely sources, my scenario does fit the historical record. So I'll see your scenario, and raise you a practical mechanism. My point here is that the US needs to START screening for invasives, just like the Aussies have tired their best to do for years. http://www.ucsusa.org/news/press_release/screening-for-invasive.html While the odds of something making it into Australia are lowered by their inspections of imports and complete ban on imports of bees, the odds of invasive exotics making it into the USA via Australian bees would be orders of magnitude better, as it would be very hard for something to get by BOTH import inspection programs unnoticed. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2007 09:06:26 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "=?UTF-8?Q?Peter_L._Borst?=" Subject: Re: Invasion of Varroa mites into mite-free colonies Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit J. Waggle wrote: >Also, as mentioned earlier by a poster, a brood break after swarming, >potentially 3 to 4 weeks can perhaps contribute to mite reduction. >But in my observations, most varroa invasion of cells during swarming >season is concentrated very heavily in drone cells which take about 24 >days to hatch, basically carrying most mites through most of the broodless >period. * In Europe, "artificial swarming" is considered an effective method of controlling mites without chemicals: From: www.defra.gov.uk * Biotechnical Methods – The use of methods based on bee husbandry to reduce the mite population through physical means alone. * Artificial swarm 1. Move parent colony to one side of the original site, at least 4 metres away. 2. Place a second hive containing newly drawn combs and the queen (alone) on the original site to house the artificial swarm. Foragers will return to this hive creating the artificial swarm. 3. After 9 days remove all but one queen cell from the parent colony. The cell can be protected in a queen cell nursery cage which prevents the virgin queen from leaving the hive to mate, but allows worker bees access to care for her. 4. After 3 weeks all brood in the parent colony will have hatched. Transfer two bait combs of unsealed brood from the artificial swarm to the parent colony, and when they are capped, remove and destroy them. At this stage, cull the virgin and introduce a new queen to the parent colony. 5. The old queen in the swarm can later be removed and the two colonies reunited. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2007 10:40:52 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: =?windows-1252?Q?Steve_Noble?= Subject: Re: CCD Circus Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit “Huh? Is it too much to ask that our "nature" not be polluted with invasive, exotic pests, diseases, and pathogens from other ecosystems on the other side of the planet?” James Fischer Huh? I wouldn’t think so. But who would you ask? And by the way, how long have you been asking? How much control do you really think you are going to get? Maybe we should ask nature. Try it, Jim. Go out and hug a tree and ask nature what too much is. It could produce an epiphany or a catharsis. Maybe moving bees around the world or from state to state IS bucking nature too much. I don’t know. I never said what bucking nature too much was. Too much is too much. I certainly wouldn’t think trying to minimize “invasive, exotic pests, diseases, and pathogens from other ecosystems on the other side of the planet” would necessarily be bucking nature too much. But at some point it might be asking too much in this day and age when “nature just ain’t nature anymore.” Maybe we could figure out a way to inspect for every possible bee disease and then only let the absolutely pure ones in or out of arbitrarily designated geographical subdivisions. Then moving bees around might not be bucking nature too much. Then once all the diseases in a given area had run their course, that area would be free of diseases. Of course you might have to import some bees into an area at first until you got a stable, clean population going in that area. Then as all the areas got sanitized, you could combine areas and feel safe from diseases within larger and larger areas until the whole world became safe and there could be as many bees in the world as anybody wants, and you would just have to make sure there were enough almond trees for all those bees. Am I missing anything? Oh, AHB. Oops! Jeez it gets complicated. It is with great hesitation that I submit this post. I know I’m going to get fried. It’s so easy for Jim to come up with really great acerbic remarks, but I have to work really hard it. It’s probably not worth it. Steve Noble ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2007 17:53:24 +0000 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Gavin Ramsay Subject: Re: sustainability; from CCD circus MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi Steve > It’s probably not worth it. I'd like to thank you for it! Jim is certainly acerbic, pretty perceptive, highly entertaining, an awesome debater and a helluva fast typist, but also sometimes wrong. One thing though - you made the mistake of using the phrase 'bucking nature' which gave Jim the chance to shift the debate from 'sustainability' to 'nature'. The first is absolutely crucial in so many ways; the second is just a convenient term to force folk into a modern, logical camp and a spiritual, gut instinct one. People return to their comfort zones, and the real issues get obscured: is large-scale migratory beekeeping really sustainable? Will it be liable to suffer epidemics of disease that would not affect less intensive beekeeping, or are such epidemics neutral on the question of the intensiveness of the operation? You wanted facts and rational argument on this question Steve, and so do I. We shouldn't be diverted from that. all the best Gavin ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2007 17:33:18 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bob Harrison Subject: Re: CCD Circus MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jim said: >So I'll see your scenario, and raise you a practical mechanism. Most our recent pests have first been found around southeast ports so many believe they arrived from swarms of ships. Certainly Jerry Hayes & L. Cutts (Florida) have always told me they thought so. Almost all traps are around ports and swarms are got all the time off ships. ALL THE TIME! My sources in Australia say both the a.cerana find and SHB were believed to enter through ports. Still no tracheal, AHB or varroa mites in Australia. Keeping score on pests believed to have entered through ports: U.S. 1. tracheal mites( Florida or Galveston) 2. varroa mites(Florida) 3. small hive beetle( Charleston) 4. AHB (Florida) Australia 1. Small hive beetle (Sidney area) 2. two small swarms of A. cerana (caught and destroyed). I actually pushed for an A. cerana import and really do not see A. cerana as a problem. They will not cross with mellifera and are not bothered by varroa . Over a million hives are used for commercial honey production in China. So as I see it the U.S. is as likely to get T. clareae off a container/ship as Australia an in my opinion more likely despite the points you made. Actually most swarms I am told are not IN containers but on the boat itself. bob -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2007 18:52:38 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "=?windows-1252?Q?J._Waggle?=" Subject: Bee and Honey Crop Losses - Historical Record Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hello All, I’m gathering information about severe bee colony OR honey crop losses the beekeeping industry has encountered in the past, either by weather, disease or other undetermined cause. I am focusing search efforts ‘not only at numbers‘, but what beekeepers were ‘saying about the conditions’, news press articles, magazines and agriculture reports published at the time of the events. E.F. Phillips, In BEEKEEPING (1915) makes mention of 1884-85, 1903-04, 1909-10, 1911-12 as years of devastating losses to the bee industry. I obviously need to include 1995-96 and 2006-07, and have gathered some historical accounts from these years. But are there any more years of bee losses between the years 1912 and 2007 that I should look into? I’m looking at 1917-1918 as a potential candidate due to volcanic events affecting weather occurring around that time and some reports of bee losses. On November 07, 1918 Richwood, Ohio the local news paper writes,, “…The death rate of colonies last winter was so high that even a loss of 10 per cent which is the normal winter loss will seriously injure the honey industry.” Also very interested in historical bee loss events occurring in Europe; e.g. the foulbrood epidemic and especially weather related losses. Please send information related to historical bee or honey crop losses to naturebee@yahoo.com Thanks! Joe Waggle ~ Derry, PA ‘Bees Gone Wild Apiaries' http://pets.groups.yahoo.com/group/HistoricalHoneybeeArticles ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2007 16:42:13 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Mike Stoops Subject: Re: Fw: Re: [BEE-L] CCD Circus In-Reply-To: <20070927.175833.22196.0@webmail17.dca.untd.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit "waldig@netzero.com" wrote:The small farmer in the US and Europe who has been making a living from farming ........... Most small farmers in Europe are subsidized by their governments. Most would not survive as farmers unless subsidized. Mike in LA --------------------------------- Tonight's top picks. What will you watch tonight? Preview the hottest shows on Yahoo! TV. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2007 17:42:35 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Mike Stoops Subject: Re: parasitic mite syndrome (PMS) & CCD In-Reply-To: <001a01c80238$5d2ccb60$18bc59d8@BusyBeeAcres> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Bob Harrison wrote:I have long kept quiet on the CCD issue as I felt all research on honey bees would benefit the industry but I so far have not spoke with a beekeeper which had a large number of hives which fits the CCD description of 7-8 frames of brood and missing bees. Bob, One of the listed symptoms of CCD was the lack of any invasive insects (wax moth and/or small hive beetle) invading the now defenseless hives for at least one week if not two. Have you heard any references to that condition? Secondly, from what I have heard, any new bee colonies placed into these affected hives have also seemed to have perished. Have you come across that situation? Mike in LA --------------------------------- Fussy? Opinionated? Impossible to please? Perfect. Join Yahoo!'s user panel and lay it on us. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2007 22:33:35 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Brian Fredericksen Subject: Re: CCD Circus Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit to me we've made a big science project out of a what some common sense could help solve. ponder having an operation of 500 hives that is on clean comb never contaminated with any harsh mite treatments, using russian or resistant genetics and a combination of other soft treatments. consider that these hives are not moved but rather placed permanently where no heavy farming pressure exsits. assume that they are located in the north where a 2-3 month no brood cycle exists. now consider another 500 hive operation which is moved repeatedly for pollination and is on some level of contaminated comb and portions of the season sits on heavy ag use land. assume this operation moves to warm climes during the off season and amps up their bees for almonds with lots of gmo based feed and gmo soy based pollen subsitutues. assume they have heavy mite pressure every spring from no down time for the brood cycle and bees that are mite happy mass produced conveyor belt italians with no breeding selection criteria other then laying eggs whenever some HFCS comes down the pipe. assume they mingle with other feedlot bees why would anyone spend any money or time studying the problems associated with the second operation? i'm not sure that federal or other research money is well spent looking into the practices employed by the second kind of operation. its the same stupidity as subsidizing industiral farming practices that are corporate profit based and short on benefits to the community and environment. our government should have a sustainable farming standard and only fund activities that meet some kind of standard of common sense and sustainable practices. if we fund the feedlot practices side of the equation then we risk pushing those problems onto the other side of the fence also. As I started this thread i'll repeat my beleif that CCD has turned into an over blown media circus of epic proportions while common sense sits by the sidelines. IMO the losses were never that big as compared to other historical losses and the likely sources of the problems are inherently flawed practices doomed to never ending problems. its a big sham! CCD = The Y2K Bee story of 2007! ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2007 23:46:54 -0400 Reply-To: bee-quick@bee-quick.com Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: James Fischer Subject: Re: CCD Circus MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >> "Huh? Is it too much to ask that our "nature" not be polluted with >> invasive, exotic pests, diseases, and pathogens from other ecosystems >> on the other side of the planet?" [James Fischer] > But who would you ask? [Steve Nobel] Those who are paid excellent salaries to protect the biosecurity of the US, the folks at USDA-APHIS. I've never asked them for much, I've only asked that the "Animal Health Inspection Service" (which is what "APHIS" stands for) take their name seriously, and start doing some actual gosh-darned INSPECTIONS of the health of animals. In short, I expect them to START doing their freakin' jobs, nothing more. > And by the way, how long have you been asking? Since childhood, if you must ask - the tree in which I had build my tree house and the surrounding woods were being devastated by Gypsy Moths. As applied, to bees, since 2002 when the push to allow uninspected imports of live bees became "serious", due to the creation of the World Trade Organization. This resulted in a number of postings here on Bee-L, and a series of articles, mostly in "Bee Culture, many picked up and syndicated by other periodicals, like these: http://bee-quick.com/reprints/apis_bc.pdf http://bee-quick.com/reprints/bioterrorism.pdf http://bee-quick.com/reprints/dragnet.pdf http://bee-quick.com/reprints/no_name.pdf http://bee-quick.com/reprints/regs.pdf http://bee-quick.com/reprints/serial_killer.pdf http://bee-quick.com/reprints/bee_trade.pdf And most recently, these: http://bee-quick.com/reprints/fourth.pdf http://bee-quick.com/reprints/practical.pdf http://bee-quick.com/reprints/world.pdf http://bee-quick.com/reprints/reads.pdf http://bee-quick.com/reprints/happens.pdf http://bee-quick.com/reprints/udunno.pdf I could go on, but I think you get the idea. I think I've made myself pretty clear. :) > How much control do you really think you are > going to get? Well, I'm encouraged, as there appears to even be some over-reaction to the point of being over-cautious, for example, this: http://www.newsday.com/news/local/state/ny-libees185379658sep18,0,758269 3.story and this: http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2007/09/11/ap4107018.html Just a tad over-the-top, given the weak nature of the evidence at hand, but what the heck - anything to get the discussion started. > Maybe we should ask nature. You don't really need to ask - all you need do is to stand next to a beekeeper who HAD a 3000 hive operation, but now has less than 1000 hives. You can stand next to him and watch the hives slowly die. Nature speaks loudly. > Try it, Jim. Go out and hug a tree and ask nature > what too much is. Funny, I already did that back when I was a kid. I loved my tree and my treehouse. I even took the care to learn how to "lash" ropes, so I could avoid sinking any nails into my tree. It died anyway. Apparently, the "Gypsy Moth" alone was too much for my favorite tree. Again, I did not need to "ask", all I had to do was watch all my efforts to save my tree fail. > Jeez it gets complicated. Yeah, it is a "rear guard defensive action". It is an opportunity to do nothing but eventually fail, no matter how hard you try. Not a task for the weak of stomach, or weak of will. A thankless task, one with a statistical certainty of eventual and relentless loss of ground. But we (the USA) haven't even tried. If we beekeepers were somehow able to "sell" the idea that live animals like bees are not "goods", but are ummm, live creatures that need extensive inspection, the rest of "trade" would be pretty easy to subject to fumigation, irradiation, and other mass-production sterilization techniques that eliminate exotic invasives without harming the goods. Its not rocket science at all, and other countries have done it for years. Australia itself is one of the "best" examples of how due diligence can be performed on imports. New Zealand is another. > I know I'm going to get fried. Sorry to disappoint, but you flinched over nothing. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2007 00:43:36 -0400 Reply-To: bee-quick@bee-quick.com Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: James Fischer Subject: Re: CCD Circus MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Brian offered a choice: > an operation of 500 hives that is on clean comb > never contaminated with any harsh mite treatments... > now consider another 500 hive operation which is > moved repeatedly for pollination and is on some > level of contaminated comb... > why would anyone spend any money or time studying the > problems associated with the second operation? Maybe the money and time is being spent because BOTH TYPES of operations have been affected by CCD, and all the negative factors you listed have been (at least, initially) ruled out as contributory factors in CCD due to the wide range of actual conditions among operations that were hit by CCD? Even if you want to dismiss the analysis above as "it must be somehow wrong", maybe the reason that the problem is being studied is that the migratory operations are exactly the ones doing the bulk of the pollination that justifies the research effort and dollars in the first place. (You don't really think for a moment that anyone gives a hoot about honey as a crop, do you? Or haven't you noticed that there are no "honey futures" traded on any exchange planet-wide?) > IMO the [hive] losses were never that big as compared > to other historical losses and the likely sources of > the problems are inherently flawed practices doomed > to never ending problems. its a big sham! Hmmm... an interesting choice. I can either believe: 1) Hundreds of beekeepers, 30 or so researchers, video and still photos, data from sophisticated lab gear, and the first-hand accounts of the large number of people who looked at scores of hives, and took samples from the hives that met the criteria of "CCD collapse". 2) One guy from Minnesota who has never seen a single case of CCD with his own eyes, and therefore calls everyone involved in (1) either a liar or a fool. I'm afraid I'll have to get back to you about this, as I'm going to have to think about it for a while. I don't have to think about my answer much. I just have to figure out how to best phrase my answer. > CCD = The Y2K Bee story of 2007! IAPV from Australia - The "Cold Fusion" of Beekeeping! ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2007 01:00:05 -0400 Reply-To: bee-quick@bee-quick.com Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: James Fischer Subject: Re: parasitic mite syndrome (PMS) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bob said: > Thymol needs three correctly timed treatments (my research) Funny, I heard about this a long time ago, and I was told that it was Max's work at Vita-Europe, who will soon be getting a new label approved by the EPA for Apiguard with lower doses and 3 treatments rather than two. Just about everyone has known about this for months and months and months, ever since the first few people to follow the label "as is" found way too many dead bees after treatment. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2007 07:27:27 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bob Harrison Subject: Re: parasitic mite syndrome (PMS) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >Funny, I heard about this a long time ago, and I was told that it was Max's work at Vita-Europe, who will soon be getting a new label approved by the EPA for Apiguard with lower doses and 3 treatments rather than two. To be honest the first i have heard of a new label coming is now from you! News travels slowly during the busy season! ( of course while you were sitting in the EAS, HAS or WAS summer meetings I was in the bee yard with a sweatband trying to keep the sweat from burning my eyes! Hopefully one of these days the work load will drop to a level I can attend!) > Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Mike Stoops Subject: Re: CCD Circus and media exposure In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Brian Fredericksen wrote:As I started this thread I'll repeat my belief that CCD has turned into an over blown media circus of epic proportions while common sense sits by the sidelines. IMO the losses were never that big as compared to other historical losses ...................... Brian, You may be right that this recent loss of colonies is not a big a previous losses, but....... The previous losses never received the publicity this past loss has received. The public's attention has been caught up in all the hoopla as never before. It has paved the way for U.S. beekeepers to bring other concerns and problems to the public forum like never before. Is CCD a concern? Yes. Is it of a nature to receive the level of concern it has as compared to previous problems experienced? Don't know. Let's use the exposure, the publicity to our best advantage as an industry as a whole, not as factions of an industry. And, if migratory beekeeping gets the brunt of the benefits of all this investigation, know that there is a trickle down effect and that all of beekeeping benefits. After all, if passing semi loads of migratory bees aren't throwing off clusters of small hive beetles around a nearby hobbyist's yard, doesn't he/she benefit? Mike in LA --------------------------------- Tonight's top picks. What will you watch tonight? Preview the hottest shows on Yahoo! TV. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2007 10:04:48 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Brian Fredericksen Subject: Re: CCD Circus Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On Sun, 30 Sep 2007 00:43:36 -0400, James Fischer wrote: Maybe the money and time is being spent because >BOTH TYPES of operations have been affected by CCD, >and all the negative factors you listed have been >(at least, initially) ruled out as contributory >factors in CCD due to the wide range of actual stress has never been ruled out !!! and was fingered from the very start by many many researchers. I'm not saying that non commercial operations that are stationary never have problems I'm saying that those operation have reduced the risks by running an operation that is inherently more sustainable. the non sustainable operation is so screwed up that all the CCD studies in the world will only be a band aid even if they do find something definitive to hang a hat on. > >2) One guy from Minnesota who has never seen a single > case of CCD with his own eyes, and therefore calls > everyone involved in (1) either a liar or a fool. > I have never said I don't beleive that CCD is real. I am saying its been overblown. You know darm well how over blown it is. We had a massive winter kill in northern US last winter and those dead bees, not lost, laying on the bottom boards were conveniently counted as empty hives. The almonds were polliinated and we never had a queen or package shortage. We have had shortages of bees for pollination and shortages of queens and packages since 2000 and we never called in the Army with their diagnostic equipment. My point is simply why waste time and money diagnosing a sick bunch of bees kept in a way that makes no sense if you want healthy bees. Its all backward in your mind Jim. You have attached too much importance to the economics of the problem and forgot that keeping bees healthy and alive should be the first priority of commercial beekeeping. Its not and that the crux of the problem here. The system is flawed and the sham is that we act like we can fix it with what, inspections ( we don't need those bees if we have our act together) ? some fancy genetic testing? None of that will fix the inherent flaw that money,profits and industrial Ag have helped paint commercial beekeping into a corner with no way back to a healthy industry free of crisis and shortages. Things are tough in the Heartland this summer. We've had plenty more fines and citatons in this region for shop rag treatments. Some heavy hitters from leading bee organizations caught up this time. A large regional packer has raised their in house specs for off label chems. All symptoms of a sick, sick puppy IMO. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2007 11:39:39 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Dave Thompson Subject: ccd anonymous Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Maybe we need an anonymous login here (heavily moderated) so my fellow ccd suffers can gather their courage firmly in both hands (sorry for the extra work Aaron) Yes I am in Canada, mid Ontario, 1&2 hrs NE Toronto Last winter I had > 2/3 winterkill, over 1/2 of that was clearly ccd. I am not 'commercial', they never moved, the mites were reasonably well controlled. and except for the bear attack 4+ months earlier they were not stressed I hate repeating myself, read archives for the (considerable) information already said. (except to correct errors) As to new info: l-lysine and powdered Sulfur are not effective. Vinegar gives a reasonable ROI, nearly as effective as formic With all my efforts this yr I hope to have reasonable winter survival, the ccd is NOT gone only suppressed dave ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2007 11:43:53 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "=?UTF-8?Q?Peter_L._Borst?=" Subject: Keeping bees healthy and alive Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Brian Fredericksen wrote: >You have attached too much importance to the economics of the problem and forgot that keeping bees healthy and alive should be the first priority of commercial beekeeping. Its not and that the crux of the problem here. Keeping bees healthy and alive has always been the most important thing to beekeepers. You can't be a beekeeper with dead bees. The issue is: how best to do it. You claim that large scale operators are their own worst enemy, but you offer no evidence nor any proof of this claim. These people are responsible for pollinating the nations food supply because they will go where they are needed. The queen and package industry meets the phenomenal demand for new bees every spring. All of these folks have just as much right to make a living as you and as they are essential to the modern food supply, they have a perfect right to ask for help in solving some of their most pressing problems. The world's problems are created by all of us and will only be solved by all of us working together. While you are dodging the question of what beekeepers (large and small) are doing wrong, many of us are trying to get to the bottom of this. I talked to a large scale beekeeper who does NOT have the problems that others do to try find out what he does differently. He doesn't have CCD, nosema, or hives crashing due to high mite loads. Several key practices: he doesn't buy bees or queens, has done his own queen rearing for 50 years. Doesn't rent bees for pollination. Moves bees in a refrigerated truck to avoid the stress of long hauls. Takes his bees South for the winter. pb ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2007 18:02:35 GMT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "waldig@netzero.com" Subject: Cameras for apiaries. Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Can anyone recommend any night time cameras for capturing the vicinity of hives with a camera? The camera should come with a recorder and only run when triggered by a motion detector. The range should be up to 50 ft. Thank you! Waldemar ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2007 14:13:09 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bob Harrison Subject: Re: ccd anonymous MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >Last winter I had > 2/3 winterkill, over 1/2 of that was clearly ccd. Dave you are saying winterkill which is different than CCD although could still be linked. With winterkill your dead bees would still be in the hive. I think your hives needed to crash last fall before winter to be considered as CCD. In spring after a Canada winter determining CCD would be difficult. I am looking for a beekeeper which last fall had 8-9 frames of brood and only a handful of bees left. Also hives which were checked 2 weeks before and strong and normal. Also the brood showed no signs of PMS and healthy ( How could the brood be considered healthy by the CCD team definition when almost all the CCD hives had nosema and many EFB ). The above description given by the CCD research group is the description of CCD. How close is the above to what you observed Dave? bob -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2007 14:59:11 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: =?windows-1252?Q?Ted_Hancock?= Subject: Beekeeping on Mars Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit If they had beekeeping on Mars, I expect they'd talk about importing bees from Earth. The conversation mite go something like this: Dip: We're so far from the sun it's hard to raise enough bees. We need to start importing them from Earth. Ip: I don't have trouble raising enough bees. Dip: That's because you're not a real beekeeper. Ip: What makes you say that? Dip: Because real beekeepers want to import bees from Earth. Ip: That's not a rational argument. Dip: I don't have to be rational, I'm a real beekeeper. Ip: But Earthling bees have some nasty pests and diseases that we don't have. If we import them they could kill our bees. Dip: You're just fear mongering. Even if we did import exotic pests they'd never survive in our Martian atmosphere. Ip: How do you know that? Dip: Look at Earth's moon: varroa can't survive there and we're a lot further away from Earth than the moon. Ip: Oh boy. Maybe we could allow the importation of genetic material under strict scientific protocols. Dip: A pox on your scientific protocols. Scientitst have no idea what risks we need to take in order to make a Martian living. If we don't allow legal cross cosmic distribution of bees, someone's just going to smuggle them across anyways. Ip: Now who's fear mongering? Dip: You need to think more like a human. Ip: That's hard to do when I'm an intelligent being. So Mars allows the importation of bees from Earth. Varroa, trachea et. al prove to be much more virulent on Mars and suddenly no one can keep bees alive longer than six months. Ip: Well, this is great. Now we're totally dependent on imported bees from Earth. Dip: That's right. And I hope you appreciate my foresight in pushing for those imports. If we didn't have them our industry would be dead now. Ip; Youch! I think my brain just exploded! Dip: Good, I can steal your beekeeping area. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2007 23:19:14 +0100 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Mike Rowbottom Subject: Prevention of rat damage to beehives MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Hi Two years back my wife and I lost two hives that were trashed by rats (rattus norvegicus) on one apiary site-they were the only two hives there. We stopped using that site, but circumstances beyond our control have driven us to put some hives back there for this Winter. We have also had to put some hives on another site where I saw rats present last Summer. Does anyone have any ideas or (better) experience of controlling rats in Winter in an outdoors rural situation. Both sites are 10-15 miles from my home base so attendance at them will be relatively infrequent. Regards Mike Rowbottom HARROGATE North Yorks UK ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2007 14:48:14 -0800 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: joe carson Subject: Re: Cameras for apiaries. In-Reply-To: <20070930.110235.4450.3@webmail06.dca.untd.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I was just at Cabela's in Nebraska and they have the deer monitoring camera= s that work just as you describe. Motion triggered and come with flash. T= hey have regular 35mm film and digital models. Check out the Cabela's web = site or catalogues. I looked at them Friday and am planning on putting the= m in my yards as well. Dr. Joe Carson Alaska Heavenly Honey Alaska _________________________________________________________________ News, entertainment and everything you care about at Live.com. Get it now! http://www.live.com/getstarted.aspx= ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2007 19:51:34 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Dave Thompson Subject: Re: ccd anonymous Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Bob: you are splitting hairs here In spring there were no/very few bees in all hives The ccd event obviously happened in Oct or Nov (95% feed left) The WHOLE yard (10) went ccd Do you not find that striking? That EVERY hive suffered? Anyway I continue to see symptoms, so no I am not imagining it dave ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2007 19:04:51 -0400 Reply-To: james.fischer@gmail.com Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: James Fischer Subject: Re: CCD Circus MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Brian said: > I'm not saying that non commercial operations > that are stationary never have problems I'm > saying that those operation have reduced the > risks by running an operation that is inherently > more sustainable. You can call it "sustainable" if you'd like, but such an operation is no less likely to be hit by CCD, given who has been verified as "having CCD". Not one iota. No matter what kind of self-congratulatory label you want to put on it, it doesn't seem to help. So your definition of "sustainable" is clearly much less than sustainable in the face of CCD. This is why we employ researchers and lab techs, so that we can find the actual practices that can be proven to reduce or eliminate the risk of losing one's colonies, and avoid managing bees with acts of faith. We'd rather use reason. > the non sustainable operation is so screwed up > that all the CCD studies in the world will only > be a band aid even if they do find something > definitive to hang a hat on. Uh, maybe you ought to realize that even though we don't have any "eureka" moment on CCD, we do have lots of very specific advice as to what we should be doing in the meantime. One of these things is to test and treat for Nosema, as both kinds of Nosema (apis and cerana) are so widespread it appears that they are almost universal. Now, maybe you don't want to test or treat for Nosema, as treating for something would violate your definition of "sustainable". That's a shame, as it is hard to cure Nosema with crystals and incense, but easy to cure it with some Fumagillan. > stress has never been ruled out !!! and was > fingered from the very start by many many > researchers. I'm not sure what anyone means by "reduce stress", but if you define a non-migratory, no-chemicals, "all natural" beekeeping operation that wants to call itself "organic" as one with minimal stress, call Jerry Bromenshank and ask him which kind of operation was the FIRST to report CCD when he put up his online survey system. You see, it is easy to sit back and thunder your opinion, but it is another thing to reconcile your opinions with the facts. Objective reality is sometimes much more complicated than one might want. > We have had shortages of bees for pollination and > shortages of queens and packages since 2000 Again, some facts may help you here. Below is the "bearing" acreage devoted to almonds in California, listed by year (USDA figures): 1994 433,000 1995 418,000 1996 428,000 1997 442,000 1998 460,000 1999 485,000 2000 510,000 2001 530,000 2002 545,000 2003 550,000 2004 570,000 2005 580,000 2006 585,000 2007 615,000 So, as you can see, the "need" has been GROWING, while the total number of US hives has been shrinking, so the "shortage" you speak of has been created more by the growers' expansion than by beekeeper's losses. This has been going on for some time. The first "breaking point" was back in the early 2000s, when the Almond Board put their considerable support behind allowing bee imports. It took them a few years to realize it, but now, even the Almond growers realize what should have been obvious - that packages dumped into a box don't do much pollination, and a hive worth paying for is a hive that has been overwintered and built up (i.e. fed) prior to being placed in the almonds. So their little attempt to keep pollination fees low kinda backfired, as the packages still needed expert care to get them built up to proper strength. The second "breaking point" was in the winter of 2004/2005, when so many colonies in California were doing poorly, that Bart Smith was sent to California to collect samples and see if he could figure out what new thing had gone wrong. The most recent "breaking point" was when Dave Hackenberg pointed out the specific symptoms his hives were presenting, and it was found to not be unique to his operation. So, extraordinary measures HAVE been attempted multiple times, long before we had any hint that we had what might be yet another invasive exotic disease or pest, might be the fallout of widespread systemic pesticide use, or might be something else. Or all of the above. > Its all backward in your mind Jim. You have attached > too much importance to the economics of the problem Thank you so much! I don't think I've ever been complimented so well. Yes, it is true that bees would never have been brought to North America if not for "the economics of the problem", and that beekeepers would have nothing more than "ant farms" with flying residents if not for the economic value of bees, so yes, it is simply impossible to attach "too much importance" to the economics of beekeeping. > and forgot that keeping bees healthy and alive should > be the first priority of commercial beekeeping. I haven't forgotten. Those who refuse to even test for diseases like Nosema, let alone treat, and yet have the gall to posture and pose as somehow being superior to other beekeepers are the ones who have forgotten. These types are guilty of negligence bordering on the criminal, as they make little or no attempt to even verify the health of their bees, let alone save the lives of God's creatures who will perish without the beekeepers' help. So, when you gonna send some bees in to Beltsville for a Nosema test? ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2007 20:01:52 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bob Harrison Subject: Re: Prevention of rat damage to beehives MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Don't let the rats get into the hives. Plug all holes and reduce the entrance. Put hardware cloth over the entrance. bob -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2007 21:14:17 -0400 Reply-To: ik Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: ik Subject: Re: Cameras for apiaries. In-Reply-To: <20070930.110235.4450.3@webmail06.dca.untd.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Waldemar, If you go to Cabelas or Bass Pro web site and look for trail cameras you should find something that will suit you. They are used to take pictures of animals day or night. Kent Stienburg Remove NOSPAM in address to reply ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 30 Sep 2007 18:58:06 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Mike Stoops Subject: Re: Prevention of rat damage to beehives In-Reply-To: <47002EF2.10804.214BA48C@localhost> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Mike Rowbottom wrote:Does anyone have any ideas or (better) experience of controlling rats in Winter in an outdoors rural situation. Mike, Use quarter inch hardware cloth to close off your entrances to the rats. If you're finding the rats are chewing through the hives to get inside, wrap all outside surfaces of the hives with the quarter inch hardware cloth. Mike in LA --------------------------------- Moody friends. Drama queens. Your life? Nope! - their life, your story. Play Sims Stories at Yahoo! Games. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ******************************************************