Damp rather than cold kills bees

Beekeeping & Apiculture Forum

Help Support Beekeeping & Apiculture Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jun 18, 2011
Messages
6,479
Reaction score
392
I run into this everywhere it really winds me up!!!

Its even on the NBU web site
at best its sloppy use of words, but its really just wrong, fatally wrong

"damp rather than cold air kills bees" becomes the imperative to chill bees and increase ventilation regardless, in all circumstances, because this implies it doesn’t matter how much heat is lost by the air and the hive so long as you stop condensation


So here is my diatribe on the subject

A set of circumstances that reduces a animals key organs below its survival temp kill it.
for an individual honeybee that is around 7 to 9C.

To get a body to reduce its temperature you remove energy from it at rate greater that it can get it from other sources.

lets look at possiblities of the damp killing

If you immerse this bee in water or still air in a box that is at 10C it might drown, but it isnt going to die from the causes implied in the statement " Damp rather than cold kills bees". So it isnt the water killing the bees.

if you spray an object with water and the force air over the object it will evaporate the water lose energy and it can cool the object below the temperature of the air. Are they implying that there is significant air velocity in the hive when cluster is still and quiet..
So it isn’t forced evaporation killing the bees here.

The higher the heat capacity and the greater the effective conduction of heat of fluid, the more efficient it will be at changing the temperature of the object.
So cold water at the same temperature of the cold air will be more efficient at removing heat from the bees.

So we can truly say "cold water kills bees more efficiently than cold air" and it might remove enough heat to overcome a cluster.

But this relies on the water is in contact with the bees and the water is cold.

The statement "Damp rather than cold kills bees" implies the damp isnt cold, but warm water doesnt kill bees.

Do they really mean:

"Cold Damp rather than cold air kills bees"

but where is this damp coming from outside? is it condensation?
if this damp is a water leak then it is likely to be colder than the air inside the hive, but as this phrase is not usually mentioned with admonition to fix the roof. Perhaps they mean

"condensation rather than cold air kills bees"

Condensation with a temperature of 10C or above in still air falling from a roof isnt going to kill the bees. So do they really mean

" condensation below 10C falling on the bees can be more efficient at killing bees compared to air at a considerably lower temperature"

This is actually true... but this is a long way from the original statement. This statement enables different actions e.g.

Make the condensation warmer than 10C
and/or stop the condensation falling on the bees.

And thus prompts beekeepers to use instead of ventilation a slab of insulation instead of the crown board, moves the condensation from above the bees and/or makes the condensation warmer.

All of these actions can be done with out chilling the bees and adding ventilation

So please can beekeepers learn the differences between heat loss and temperature and how it really happens rather than rely on sloppy, wrong, saw cum adages.
And can budding Entomologists sstay awake during their secondary school physics lessons

Rant over
 
I'm convinced and increasingly lots of novice beeks are too. My hives stay dry even with inspection trays in. You'll always get people that blindly follow the advice ....."keep my bees cold and they have always been ok it's damp that kills them"
There's a piece in the bbka news that will have sheep beeks putting syrup on their hives before winter has flown.
 
In our country cold kills but not damp.

Cold kills easy small colonies.

In my country -20C is cold for 2 frames colonies and they do not stand up to Spring. I can over winter them with terrarium heater, but they cannot start brood rearing with such gang..

It is beekeepers fault if damp kills.

Do they really mean:

"Cold Damp rather than cold air kills bees"

Cold air makes water cold. When the hive is enough cold, moisture makes snow into hive corners.
 
Last edited:
Complicated business this beekeeping. there has to be a less complicated occupation!
I wonder for how long the o.p. has actually kept bees? Without wishing to cause offence, may I say beekeeping does not have to be this abstract and theoretical.
 
Complicated business this beekeeping. there has to be a less complicated occupation!
I wonder for how long the o.p. has actually kept bees? Without wishing to cause offence, may I say beekeeping does not have to be this abstract and theoretical.

Longer than I have..
 
Complicated business this beekeeping. there has to be a less complicated occupation!
I wonder for how long the o.p. has actually kept bees? Without wishing to cause offence, may I say beekeeping does not have to be this abstract and theoretical.

Bees are mistresses of energy manipulation try to keep up!

Beekeeping only 6 years .. But i dont know why I have to take my education in science and maths off when I put the beesuit on... or is it like the cinema where you have to suspend the laws of physics and for example forget the velocity of sound and and light are different every time someone fires a gun. (which is strange cos can see/hear the difference in velocities at any big rock concert). Oh this thing about damp isnt so theoretical if you lived from the era when insulation was only to stop pipes freezing through central heating being trendy to now when double glazing is so passe. Now its actually just general knowledge, common sense.

Perhaps beekeeping and entomologists are stuck in the 1940s, well tough luck I'm a space age kid born the same year Sputnik was launched, who got a free university education and isn't afraid to use it.

I like the physics and the maths in honeybees, it's fun and it makes it more fascinating. I dont like my bees dumbed down, and definitely not plain wrong!
 
Last edited:
I prefer to keep bees or perhaps have them keep me, talking about doing so in intangible terms or otherwise is fine, or indeed reading about doing so is fine, if that is what you wish to do. I am sure the o.p. is absolutely correct in what ever he is saying and he is quite right not to be afraid to use his free university education!
 
I for one welcome with open arms anyone prepared to speak with a scientific hat on. Too many arm chair, back seat driver beekeepers around.

Really? These scientist types tell us 'x' is good for us, is bad for us, causes cancer, good, bad etc etc.....
I'd take the advice of years of experience over theory thanks.
 
I for one welcome with open arms anyone prepared to speak with a scientific hat on. Too many arm chair, back seat driver beekeepers around.

Really? These scientist types tell us 'x' is good for us, is bad for us, causes cancer, good, bad etc etc.....
I'd take the advice of years of experience over theory thanks.

Practical experience in a practical occupation is very important for success. Theoretical knowledge far less so, in fact a knowledge of theory is often used to mask a lack of real knowledge or experience.
The acid test is how many members of the BFA are queueing up for a lecture....even non condescending ones?:rolleyes:
 
intervention based on false reasoning makes colonies die
honeybees thrived thousands/millions of years before our neglect was even a possiblity

First line fine...but the second line falls way short of your usual reasoning for the same reason I get into it at times with the native bee lot and the natural beekeepers. For sure they survived, but prior to man being around they must have had similar boom and bust events, mass flourishings and mass die offs....other wise the world would be neck deep in bees. Thriving, prospering, surviving, struggling, collapsing..............all words to slant an argument, often with little in the way of supporting facts. Sadly we have no reports from prior to human beekeeping to go on.
 
intervention based on false reasoning makes colonies die

Yes, all comes under neglect and poor husbandry AFAIC.
Bees surviving without our input is not really relevant because they did so through their natural behaviour. The colonies we keep are not natural.
 
I read it and think well that's fine so I will keep my bees as dry and warm as I can and that leads me to my pollys. :)

PH
 
intervention based on false reasoning makes colonies die
honeybees thrived thousands/millions of years before our neglect was even a possiblity

Most of colonies die in nature every year.

.if the population will be steady, 2/3 will die.
.
 
First line fine...but the second line falls way short of your usual reasoning for the same reason I get into it at times with the native bee lot and the natural beekeepers. For sure they survived, but prior to man being around they must have had similar boom and bust events, mass flourishings and mass die offs....other wise the world would be neck deep in bees. Thriving, prospering, surviving, struggling, collapsing..............all words to slant an argument, often with little in the way of supporting facts. Sadly we have no reports from prior to human beekeeping to go on.
" boom and bust events, mass flourishings and mass die offs." thats my definition of a species thriving. it works for most species. its got them through the eons. Perhaps i should have specified that. But i dont think we have improved things with our intervention especially the destruction of their habitat and our facination of placing colonies about kilometer closer than they would have been. You can make a good argument that the most dangerous disease vector for honeybees is us.
My bone with the natural beekeeping lot is they have no definition of natural or quantification of naturalness, since husbandry is a compromise, you need values to make a value based judgement.
 
Last edited:
You can make a good argument that the most dangerous disease vector for honeybees is us.
.

Biology and ecology are not best virtues of yours.

"Us" has transported honey bees to every continent. Without "us" it would not be in Amerikas.

As I wrote, natural dead rate of colonies is 66% and in human nursing 15-20%.
.
 
Last edited:
Biology and ecology are not best virtues of yours.

"Us" has transported honey bees to every continent. Without "us" it would not be in Amerikas.

As I wrote, natural dead rate of colonies is 66% and in human nursing 15-20%.
.
And we gave A.m varroa and spread A.F. with international exports of honey...
and what percentage of those death rates is disease?

Are you sure you studied experimental biology.

here is atest: is it valid to compare death rates in the U.S. by police by percentage of enthicity in the total population?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top