Bees going crazy today

[BeeJayBee]

Not out here either, but the florets are lengthening so it won't be long.

 

[user 6228]

Not out here either, but the florets are lengthening so it won't be long.

we have some sunny hedges that have ivy in them... the wasps and bees have declared a truce while they both go for ivy nectar. By no means all of it is open.

 

[itma]

The bigger question which all the 'treat whether they need it or not' brigade seem to have omitted is 'Have you checked how much of a varroa infestation you have.'

If there is ever a case for "treating by rote" it is the first season beekeeper, with just one colony.
By all means finesse things later, but, seemingly not having treated for varroa ever (and not mentioning any checks for their prevalence), I think its a case of best getting on with it.

 

[TryingToLetThemBee]

If there is ever a case for "treating by rote" it is the first season beekeeper, with just one colony.
By all means finesse things later, but, seemingly not having treated for varroa ever (and not mentioning any checks for their prevalence), I think its a case of best getting on with it.

As one of those, I finessed "later"; after the first week. On my own head be it, but treatment affects the bees as well, when they are at a critical stage of the year. Granted the default option is to treat, but it is not the only option for us one-hivers. Our whole problem is we have all our eggs in one basket. One queen knocked out by very strong chemicals and we become ex-beekeepers, when? About March?

 

[itma]

As one of those, I finessed "later"; after the first week. On my own head be it, but treatment affects the bees as well, when they are at a critical stage of the year. Granted the default option is to treat, but it is not the only option for us one-hivers. Our whole problem is we have all our eggs in one basket. One queen knocked out by very strong chemicals and we become ex-beekeepers, when? About March?

Usually after Christmas, but not necessarily discovered until March.

The "very strong chemicals" are very very very much more likely to save than to harm the colony. MAQS might be the exception to that, but mainly because we are all still gathering experience with it. As of now, I wouldn't recommend that a beginning one hive owner should blindly follow the MAQS pack instructions (particularly with a poly hive, and especially with a poly single-brood (only) National.

 

[pargyle]

If there is ever a case for "treating by rote" it is the first season beekeeper, with just one colony.
By all means finesse things later, but, seemingly not having treated for varroa ever (and not mentioning any checks for their prevalence), I think its a case of best getting on with it.

Rubbish ... read some of my earlier posts ... I have tested for varroa, using the above three methods throughout the summer. Result ... not a sign of varroa.

I've said frequently that I am not averse to treatment but see no point in treating if the level of infestation is either none or at such a low level it is not measurable by any means except counting varroa on individual bees.

If I'm wrong then we will all know in Spring and I'm man enough to admit it ... but the way forward is bees able to cope - not chemicals and some of us just have to be brave enough to try (one hive or a hundred).

 

[REDWOOD]

Mm, I have had no mite drop on one colony all year until 10 days ago when I found 1 mite, did I treat.. yes, did I need to probably not but I don't like probabilities I like to know for sure

 

[itma]

Rubbish ... read some of my earlier posts ... I have tested for varroa, using the above three methods throughout the summer. Result ... not a sign of varroa.
...

I don't think you understood what I thought I wrote!

If a new beekeeper has not been looking (and looking hard) for varroa, and has not performed any varroa control operations or treatments before late September - then the working hypothesis has to be that treatment is called for.
To assume that there is no need, or that a novice would always spot that there was a need, is the dangerous assumption.

 

[pargyle]

Mm, I have had no mite drop on one colony all year until 10 days ago when I found 1 mite, did I treat.. yes, did I need to probably not but I don't like probabilities I like to know for sure

It's a philosophy ... I can understand the desire to be certain - the question is - what was the drop when you treated and do you feel it was worth it ?

Not knocking it ... If I had found ANY varroa I think I would be the same as you - the one's I question are those who insist that it is not worth trying to establish whether there is a problem and just treat regardless.

Like taking an aspirin every day in case you get a headache .... you might not get one if you don't, but you won't know until you stop taking aspirins ...

 

[REDWOOD]

If I found no varroa I would not have treated, I don't particularly like medication, It frightened the life out of me when nurses started wearing gloves or putting them in a plastic pot to administer tablets as prolonged handling can cause cancer, now I try alternative ways to to cure headaches, aches and pains

 

[pargyle]

I don't think you understood what I thought I wrote!

If a new beekeeper has not been looking (and looking hard) for varroa, and has not performed any varroa control operations or treatments before late September - then the working hypothesis has to be that treatment is called for.
To assume that there is no need, or that a novice would always spot that there was a need, is the dangerous assumption.

Yes ... I can agree with that ... but checking for Varroa is not difficult and people should be encouraged to make a variety of checks for mites and the vectored diseases, regularly, throughout the season and treat when and if it is appropriate.

It is lazy and deleterious to just take the 'treat them regardless route' and yet it is the one route that is most recommended ... and has been since pyrethroids were introduced .. and over used as a consequence.

If you don't know how to recognise a varroa infestation then really it's time to hit the books or do the course ... if you can't be arsed to do the job properly then the only route is the 'hit them with the treatments' one.

I'm not convinced it's the right way though.

I did, actually, suggest in my original post that treatment is necessary if the various mite checks show an infestation.

 

[Walrus]

If you don't know how to recognise a varroa infestation then really it's time to hit the books or do the course ...

By the time you have a varroa infestation it may be too late. Varroa is the single biggest threat to the survival chances of your colony, and a few varroa today will be a lot tomorrow. Itma gave the simple sound advice IMO.

 

[Dusty Rhodes]

Well, I'd not seen hide nor hair of varroa on my own hives this year.
But that doesn't mean a great deal.

After treatment with MAQS, the week's count was 30 in one, 130 in the other.

And last year, with a new but strong colony, I got over 300 at the end of the first week.

This year I've already made the mistake of trying not to disturb a vulnerable new colony - only to discover DWV.

It's a no-brainer for me: until I get these two, perhaps a third year under my belt, I'll be taking best advice from people with experience, Defra and the like.

Treat.


I rode my luck the first year; I thought it was easy, with my couple of hives.
This second year has been a really difficult eye-opener.
I'm far, far less arrogant as a result.

Finman does have a point.

Dusty.

 

[TryingToLetThemBee]

Well, I'd not seen hide nor hair of varroa on my own hives this year.
But that doesn't mean a great deal.

After treatment with MAQS, the week's count was 30 in one, 130 in the other.

And last year, with a new but strong colony, I got over 300 at the end of the first week.

This year I've already made the mistake of trying not to disturb a vulnerable new colony - only to discover DWV.

It's a no-brainer for me: until I get these two, perhaps a third year under my belt, I'll be taking best advice from people with experience, Defra and the like.

Treat.


I rode my luck the first year; I thought it was easy, with my couple of hives.
This second year has been a really difficult eye-opener.
I'm far, far less arrogant as a result.

Finman does have a point.

Dusty.

I did treat, but I do think. And on 8 days of treatment (with Apiguard) the drops were approximately 1,1,1,0,1,0,0,0, so the girls can breathe free and work the ivy for the remaining 3 weeks (they had pretty well finished clearing the first packet; it's now a strong colony.)


And

If a new beekeeper has not been looking (and looking hard) for varroa, and has not performed any varroa control operations or treatments before late September - then the working hypothesis has to be that treatment is called for.

To assume that there is no need, or that a novice would always spot that there was a need, is the dangerous assumption.

Completely agree and indeed ANY assumption surely is dangerous.

And pargyle, on resistant bees; absolutely, but remember it is EVOLUTION (and so a lot of losses) that is going to bring that.

 

[Luminos]

By the time you have a varroa infestation it may be too late. Varroa is the single biggest threat to the survival chances of your colony, and a few varroa today will be a lot tomorrow. Itma gave the simple sound advice IMO.

from bitter experience

 

[jenkinsbrynmair]

This second year has been a really difficult eye-opener.
I'm far, far less arrogant as a result.

Finman does have a point.

Dusty.

Take it from me, it is hard to be humble but with my superior skills and intellect I think I can honestly say I HAVE PERFECTED THE ART!

 

[madasafish]

I always remember a hive at our Association apiary in 2011. It was on double brood, with three supers in July and full of bees. A moderate varroa drop - about 20/week. By September when we treated it had been reduced to under one brood box of bees. The varroa drop on treatment was uncountable: certainly over 500 and probably nearer 1,000.
The hive survived - but only just.

 

[pargyle]

There's no arrogance or laissez faire in my decision not to treat ..it's a measured situation - I cannot find any evidence of varroa from a number of multi facetted tests (in accordance with FERA and others). I took another sample of bees yesterday and did an alcohol wash ... killed over 60 bees in the process ... result not a single varroa.

Those who choose to treat, regardless, are not 'wrong' ... it's a way of being certain - but I really don't feel that, with my colony, there is, currently, a need to cause them the stress of any sort of treatment at a time when they are clearly fit and well, with a negligible varroa load and getting ready, nicely, for winter.

Just because I'm a one hiver in a first year is not sufficient reason not to think about my beekeeping and abdicate from difficult decisions... believe me, I've thought long and hard about it ... I have bought the Thymol crystals in readiness for any signs of varroa. It's not a decision taken lightly but I think it's worth it .... as I said earlier, we will know in Spring.

It's not as though I actually started from scratch this year ... there's nearly three years of research behind me now and whilst there is much, much, more still to learn and experience I've concentrated my studies on bee husbandry, not breeding or honey production. I appreciate the good advice and wisdom of many on here and understand that you all have my success as a beekeeper at the heart of the advice offered but, perhaps, a little encouragement and optimism would not go amiss.

I am not in the least dismissive of the threat of varroa but nursing hives that are, clearly, unable to meet the threat and survive (and when you hear about drops of 5000 mites on treatment you have to question why that colony got to that state) may not be the answer.

If you have brood diseases it is often the hereditary factors in the queen that are the problem and re-queening the colony is the answer - so perhaps those people seeking 'hygienic bees' are on the right track and bee breeding from seemingly resistant colonies is the long term solution.

Perhaps we should all be looking at our colonies and assessing them for the ability to maintain low varroa levels. It makes little sense when two hives, sited next to each other, have widely differing levels of varroa.

Everyone tells me that varroa spread insidiously and multiply at a phenomenal rate once established in a colony ... so, why do two colonies, treated the same, almost next to each other have such widely differing varroa loads ? Is it the type of bee, learned behaviour, a slightly different set of circumstances, treatment chemicals retained in the comb ? We really don't know and until some of us are prepared to risk not treating those colonies that appear resistant we never will know. This year and my bees may be a flash in the pan ... but, if I did treat and got a nil or low drop, I would never know.

I have a unique opportunity, I have a new hive, new frames, no wax in there that the bees have not produced themselves, there was a low varroa level when they arrived and it has only got less since then and I have no preconceived notions.

I think it's worth the effort. One hive or not ...

 

[mbc]

I would never know.

I think it's worth the effort. One hive or not ...

A good post IMHO
There is a world of difference between making an informed decision based on observation and monitoring, and neglecting your duty of care without a clue whats going on with your bees.

 

[Roola]

As a first year beekeeper and only 2 hives, I was in a quandry having read numerous posts of different views on whether to treat or not... my apparent drop was low but then i wondered about earwigs and ants and the rest of it and in the end i thought to myself, The treatment will not kill the colony, the varroa could well do, I can't afford to lose my bees so this year I will treat and when I am more experienced or can afford to make up losses or strengthen hives in the future I can go back to this debate then.