Evidence-based beekeeping

[Into the lions den]

we have the archly "conventional" commercial beekeepers reporting hefty varroa problems

Perhaps you could explain where you take that twisted little bit of selective observation? This thread please. Hijacking again?

Actually, don't bother. I have no stomach for reading another load of stuff from you which is so selectively off beam and laden with emotive and exaggerating terms that it is rendered worthless.

Hefty varroa problems are a sign of neglect. Dealing with varroa is not. Its a sign of avoiding such issues. If you are saying I neglect my bees say it up front. Your level of authority and being the font of knowledge about the ways of beekeepers you have never met, and whose bees you have never seen, based on the scantiest of experience is quite remarkable.

 

[Brosville]

You admit you have varroa problems that you "deal with", Chris (and many others) don't, so who's getting it wrong?
As for "laden with emotive and exaggerating terms", I suggest you go back and read your earlier posts in this and other threads, bitterly attacking (more) natural beekeeping, I notice lots of emoting, when perhaps removal of motes (or planks) from eyes would be more appropriate......

 

[oliver90owner]

A couple of comments.

perhaps learning from them where they're getting it wrong.......

And go bust in the meantime. Commercial beeks want maximum yield. It costs (just like on that superb vid you put up yesterday).

None of that wimpy sitting on the fence there then!

Err, were not all decent beekeepers aware of those facts for many a year previously! Telling us pretty basic stuff? And costing a lot.

And an observation.

And still we have beeks with OMFs and chimney draughts on their colonies, small colonies dumped in large draughty caverns and left to get on with it. Beekeeeping is about minimising the risks from controllable/avoidable factors and (for the commercial beeks) maximising the harvest, often whatever the cost. All of it convenience for the beekeeper.

 

[Tdf]

the best thing surely is to breed resistant bees to varroa, saw this in the paper a few months ago
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/sciencetoday/2012/0419/1224314919925.html
dont know how easy it is but think treating and breeding at the same time untill resistance is gained is the best option

 

[Sadders]

From reading this thread and relating the posts to the thread title it seems that many do not understand what the term 'evidence based' means in the true scientific context.

 

[Brosville]

"And go bust in the meantime. Commercial beeks want maximum yield" - taking those as the parameters, and applying "what would I do in their shoes", I'd be on the next ferry out to see Chris to learn his methods, and to try them out on my return to the UK with a "test batch" - I see no problem with having the humility to learn better ways of doing anything - at the end of the day it could perhaps make colonies healthier and more profitable

 

[Into the lions den]

Some just wilfully dont get it...............high yield and high performance ARE measures of good husbandry and well looked after bees..............maximum bee health and maximum yield can be entirely compatible.

Asa for Chris, well I have no reason to disbelieve him, but as soon as you have adequate bees to provide the pollination required in agricultural areas you ARE going to have a lot of near neighbours. Isolation is actually a factor responsible for many 'no varroa' tales. Varroa spread from nearby bees hits all types of beekeepers...................natural or not.

 

[user 6228]

TBH are measurably further removed from a bee's natural habitat than a conventional polyhive, in a way that causes per colony kg or per kg of honey extra bee deaths.

This is because their increased thermal losses over polyhives require more energy to maintain the nest, this requires more nectar, requires more flights, requires more bees to die per day to maintain the colony temperature.

simple thermodynamics

 

[flemage]

This doesn’t have to be them and us type thread, its about evidence base.

There are two (worth while) methods of learning, experience and scientific methodology. Both have their place but both have fallibility’s.

For example the beek who has 25 year experience knows what works for his bees but this same operations may not work for his mate 3 miles away because his mate lives on top of a hill and the micro climate and forage are very different.

As for neonicotinoids, yes if you make bees drink the stuff from sugar syrup then 25% cant find there way home. But what percentage actually comes from the nectar source of the flower out in the open field? But you have to read into the paper before you find any issues.

These are just examples I am sure the studies on this subject are better than that.

However I was interviewed few weeks back by a magazine and it soon became clear that his interest was in pesticides etc. I was asked if I thought my bees were suffering as a result of neonectiods my answer 'I have no idea' He was surprised that I didn’t automatically have a go at them but it is a fact I don’t have an idea, its my second year, give me a break! Any one from Bayer…… as stated before I am totally open to bungs every one else seems to be on the payroll why not me? Just PM me.

I was asked if I thought that the hive I lost over winter was due to pesticide. Answer, No it was beekeeper error, I treated with Apistain, I think they could have been resistant, I (on advise from book) put super with stores under brood box which left it open to attack from wasps, I drowned a load of them due to ill fitting feeder and they finally died out in feb due to isolation starvation. This was MY fault, I could blame varroa, the book, wasps, thorn*s, but it was me in charge at the time so it comes down to me.

This was not what was wanted to be heard, but it was the truth. I was asked at the end what I believed the biggest threat to bee's was my answer Varroa.... might be boring and old hat but that’s my belief.

If I had been asked do I like pesticides or neociods then I would have said no. to be honest the framers don’t want them either. No one wants to spend thousands of pounds on chemicals but the fact is until us as consumers get a grip and vote with our pounds for organic they have to keep doing this.

I personally would love some science to be completed on Chris’s bees I think its amazing and wonderful that Chris can report this really good news. I would also love more science on all be bits of other forms of beekeeping so we could all really see what works.

I am a frame beekeeper but this does not mean that I automatically disregard other forms of beekeeping (I like them all) but I do want to see the studies to back things up before I change or start using new methods…..

 

[Chris Luck]

Chris do you use foundation in your hives.

Not any more but I used to, but I'm not at all sure it makes any difference...

....correction, it must make a difference to the colony but not necessarily regarding varroa tolerance. It does take longer for a new colony to construct comb without foundation but they make the type of comb they want - that's more interesting to me and of course it reduces any residues to be found in foundation. I do use foundation in supers but many of those are used year on year once drawn.

ITLD. I think it's more complex and is clearly to do with tolerance. My apiaries are surrounded by other peoples hives, many of which are also untreated. As I've posted before the INRA study clearly showed no substantial difference between colony lifespan between treated and untreated hives if they are allowed to swarm and not manipulated. Of course we have had the mite for 30 years since 1982, so perhaps longer to shake out the weak colonies in local stock and leave bees that are to some extent adapted to living with the mite. Clearly these methods, (allowed to swarm and minimum manipulation), won't suit everyone , in fact I've just supplied some bees to someone that made it clear that pulling the bees out every week is "the fun of it", and I understand that BUT the fact that I can do something doesn't mean I have to, I can resist my impulses.

Another factor may well be climate and geographic location, including whether honey bees would naturally be present or not.

Chris

 

[Brosville]

"TBH are measurably further removed from a bee's natural habitat than a conventional polyhive, in a way that causes per colony kg or per kg of honey extra bee deaths" - is not borne out in practice - I know of Kenyan TBHs that work well in Sweden and really cold parts of North America - if you try to apply that to Warre hives (which are also "top bar" hives), the claim is even more nonsensical, and shows complete ignorance of the construction and use of both*. My guess is that the Warre hive is probably superior to conventional hives on that front, and Kenyan TBH about on a par with Nationals

*If you actually contemplate the design of a Kenyan TBH, the colony is surrounded by good thick wood (the sloping "front and back"), at either side are the follower boards, with an air gap, then the thick wooden "side boards). Above them are the top bars (good thick wood), another air gap, then the roof ( to which some choose to add further insulation)

In the case of the Warre, you have good thick wood for the "walls", and what is actually a very sophisticated design of "quilt" and roof that helps the bees to control the atmosphere in the hive, and is extremely good at avoiding moisture problems endemic in many areas in winter......

Sadly many of the criticisms aimed at top bar hives and (more) natural beekeeping tend to come from an ignorance of the hive design and management techniques

 

[oliver90owner]

Sadly many of the criticisms aimed at top bar hives and (more) natural beekeeping tend to come from an ignorance of the hive design and management techniques

I would have no argument with those points. The commercial boys must have missed a trick or twom or maybe they are not appropriate for operation for most As I said - convenience for the beekeeper.

Differnt types of beekeeper look for different evidence to support their own (different) ends.

 

[madasafish]

TBH are measurably further removed from a bee's natural habitat than a conventional polyhive, in a way that causes per colony kg or per kg of honey extra bee deaths.

This is because their increased thermal losses over polyhives require more energy to maintain the nest, this requires more nectar, requires more flights, requires more bees to die per day to maintain the colony temperature.

simple thermodynamics

Comparing a wood made TBH to a polyhive in terms of thermal efficiency and then drawing a conclusion is the act of someone who compares apples and grapefruit.

And of course it does not make a simpleton to work out that insulating the hive walls makes a difference...

If you had compared a Wooden national to a polyhive or an insulated TBH to a polyhive, your conclusions might have meaning.


(I insulate my TBH walls and roof)

Edit
But anyone who claims a TBH is easier to manage than a National is my view wrong. I speak as one who handles both weekly.
If I wanted to buy conventional hives, I would buy poly and get twice the honey yield - and still the same enjoyment.

 

[user 6228]

Comparing a wood made TBH to a polyhive in terms of thermal efficiency and then drawing a conclusion is the act of someone who compares apples and grapefruit.

And of course it does not make a simpleton to work out that insulating the hive walls makes a difference...

If you had compared a Wooden national to a polyhive or an insulated TBH to a polyhive, your conclusions might have meaning.


(I insulate my TBH walls and roof)

Edit
But anyone who claims a TBH is easier to manage than a National is my view wrong. I speak as one who handles both weekly.
If I wanted to buy conventional hives, I would buy poly and get twice the honey yield - and still the same enjoyment.

The choice between going wooden TBH or convenetial poly is a valid choice.

I will make it clearer, the geometry of a TBH compared to conventional hives loses more heat if the two are made out of the same material. (greater upper surfaces area)
TBH as shown the OP link are not insulated.

 

[user 6228]

"TBH are measurably further removed from a bee's natural habitat than a conventional polyhive, in a way that causes per colony kg or per kg of honey extra bee deaths" - is not borne out in practice - I know of Kenyan TBHs that work well in Sweden and really cold parts of North America - if you try to apply that to Warre hives (which are also "top bar" hives), the claim is even more nonsensical, and shows complete ignorance of the construction and use of both*. My guess is that the Warre hive is probably superior to conventional hives on that front, and Kenyan TBH about on a par with Nationals

*If you actually contemplate the design of a Kenyan TBH, the colony is surrounded by good thick wood (the sloping "front and back"), at either side are the follower boards, with an air gap, then the thick wooden "side boards). Above them are the top bars (good thick wood), another air gap, then the roof ( to which some choose to add further insulation)

In the case of the Warre, you have good thick wood for the "walls", and what is actually a very sophisticated design of "quilt" and roof that helps the bees to control the atmosphere in the hive, and is extremely good at avoiding moisture problems endemic in many areas in winter......

Sadly many of the criticisms aimed at top bar hives and (more) natural beekeeping tend to come from an ignorance of the hive design and management techniques

i'm referring to the TBH in the OP. a long low thing made out of wood with a large amount of surface area for the top 25% of the volume and not the infinity of possible designs where someone omits to use a frame

if you cite the Watts per degree C for your hives and particularly the top 25% of the volume, then I might be convinced.

If you have a TBH or Warre Hive thats not in commision I could bring my Thermal measurement equipment and find it out for you.

If I make a tall box hive out of 25mm kingspan but without frames, would that get me admitted to TBH club?

if so I have one already, why dont we compare the real thermal performance of my TBH with yours ?

 

[Brosville]

It may be a "valid choice", but they are at diametrically opposite ends - many beekeepers wouldn't touch a poly hive because of the materials from which they are made, and the basic design - and honey yield is not the highest priority for all beekeepers!

"But anyone who claims a TBH is easier to manage than a National is my view wrong" is utter nonsense - (Kenyan) TBHs are ludicrously easy to use, and the only serious choice for many with back problems or are confined to a wheelchair (no box lifting at all!)

In theory the point about greater upper surface area may be true, but in practice makes clutter all difference, and most definitely doesn't apply to Warres which have a smaller upper surface area, and to my mind a far superior "quilt and roof" design. It has often been postulated that an ideal mix would be a Kenyan with a Warre style top end......

If you choose to use poly hives, and go all out for maximum honey yield, that's fine - "horses for courses" - I could also point out that you can knock up a Kenyan TBH for a very few quid with clutter all woodworking skills...........

 

[Brosville]

DM -I'm getting the feeling you've never "played" with a Kenyan hive, or even seen one in the flesh - to explain again - at the top of the colony are the "top bars" - effectively a thick wooden "top", then there's an air space, and over the top of that, the "roof"- some people interpose some form of insulation between the two - you're trying to suggest that the heat loss is greater through that than in a "conventional" hive - look at what happens in winter, and the size of the "central core" of the colony - it extends for a few top bars either side of the centre of the hive, if you take the area of that, its probably the same or less than in a National in area, we're not talking heat loss from the entire width of the hive in winter when it matters

As for "can I join the club?", there is no "club" that I know of - I'm all in favour of experimentation, and there may be merit in your "Kingspan" hive - why not give it a try?
It's not the route I'd go (I worry about plastics), but it may be a perfectly valid choice for you

 

[user 6228]

It may be a "valid choice", but they are at diametrically opposite ends - many beekeepers wouldn't touch a poly hive because of the materials from which they are made, and the basic design - and honey yield is not the highest priority for all beekeepers!

"But anyone who claims a TBH is easier to manage than a National is my view wrong" is utter nonsense - (Kenyan) TBHs are ludicrously easy to use, and the only serious choice for many with back problems or are confined to a wheelchair (no box lifting at all!)

In theory the point about greater upper surface area may be true, but in practice makes clutter all difference, and most definitely doesn't apply to Warres which have a smaller upper surface area, and to my mind a far superior "quilt and roof" design. It has often been postulated that an ideal mix would be a Kenyan with a Warre style top end......

If you choose to use poly hives, and go all out for maximum honey yield, that's fine - "horses for courses" - I could also point out that you can knock up a Kenyan TBH for a very few quid with clutter all woodworking skills...........

My reasons for going poly are ethical not honey production. And heat loss in this universe does make a difference, the heat lost has to come from somewhere.

Lets make some real measurements then if you think its all theory and then we could see just how good or not these warre hive really are.

How many temperature measurement points would you like? 8 is straight forward can do that right away, a little preparation and with could do 64+

btw my TBH cost around £8

 

[Brosville]

I think you're confusing the value of temperature measurements in this case, and I fear you're over-simplifying the whole matter - as I've already mentioned, moisture control is every bit (if not more important) than pure "heat loss per square inch of roof" (which I think you wrongly estimated the effective area of anyway) - if it makes you happy, go ahead and measure for all you're worth, then try to work out it's true value in the context of keeping bees happy and healthy for the winter - my personal experience of Kenyans and Warres suggest that there is no problem with either, even through really harsh winters - I'd worry about plastics' lack of porosity rather than just (perceived) higher temperatures - even a tiny late cast survived in a standard Warre against all the odds through a really bad recent winter - by all means make yourself a Warre too, and do these measurements - as I said, experimentation is good and healthy - I think you're over-simplifying, but if it's what floats your boat.......(if you're going in for measurements, try moisture levels at the same time)

 

[user 6228]

I think you're confusing the value of temperature measurements in this case, and I fear you're over-simplifying the whole matter - as I've already mentioned, moisture control is every bit (if not more important) than pure "heat loss per square inch of roof" (which I think you wrongly estimated the effective area of anyway) - if it makes you happy, go ahead and measure for all you're worth, then try to work out it's true value in the context of keeping bees happy and healthy for the winter - my personal experience of Kenyans and Warres suggest that there is no problem with either, even through really harsh winters - I'd worry about plastics' lack of porosity rather than just (perceived) higher temperatures - even a tiny late cast survived in a standard Warre against all the odds through a really bad recent winter - by all means make yourself a Warre too, and do these measurements - as I said, experimentation is good and healthy - I think you're over-simplifying, but if it's what floats your boat.......(if you're going in for measurements, try moisture levels at the same time)

You are confusing temperature measurements and thermal conductance measurement.
Thermal conductance is real and measurable and not "perceived".

On Warre hives:
a inch or two of wood shavings in the roof is not going to any have real impact on the overall losses ( from a thermal point of view) a very conventional hive