Hello from Cwmafan

[mbc]

There seems to be some belief that it is in sub clinical levels in all colonies, so we would need to destroy every honey bee colony in the country, or even the world.

Dis-proven by the Random Apiary Survey.
https://secure.fera.defra.gov.uk/beebase/downloadDocument.cfm?id=886‎

 

[jenkinsbrynmair]

Ahh, but I thought that now we have turned another turn of the wheel and destruction is being considered as the best way of dealing with EFB.

Nope - policy hasn't changed, that was just the usual confused message from the WBKA - confirmed by our RBI a few months ago that it's just advice to the beekeeper. In some cases it is destroy if the infection is bad enough, otherwise it's shook swarm and yes, the NBU were thinking of taking it off the reportable list.

 

[pargyle]

Nope - policy hasn't changed, that was just the usual confused message from the WBKA - confirmed by our RBI a few months ago that it's just advice to the beekeeper. In some cases it is destroy if the infection is bad enough, otherwise it's shook swarm and yes, the NBU were thinking of taking it off the reportable list.

+1 ... At our bee disease day the RBI stated that he would only recommend destruction of a colony with EFB if it hadn't responded to shook swarm into new/clean boxes and possibly requeened and was repeatedly becoming infected.

 

[bontbee]

Best practice, based on:

rolande, just cos I haven't had the disease in my own colonies doesn't mean I don't have an opinion on how I would choose to deal with it...

With regard to current NBU advice, I stand corrected. I was passing on information given to me by our RBI late in the latter part of last year. Thank you all for putting me right.

 

[rolande]

rolande, just cos I haven't had the disease in my own colonies doesn't mean I don't have an opinion on how I would choose to deal with it...

Hi, of course not, which is why I didn't quote you with regards to the fact that you'd kill a positive colony in your own apiary; that's your personal choice and none of my business, however I do question the notion that all infected colonies should be destroyed -just as much as I question the idea of allowing all infected colonies 'a chance'.

Years ago I worked for a guy who had an outbreak over several apiaries memory isn't perfect but it was only a handful short of 100 colonies. Some were killed upfront (necessary as I still think it was, I reckon that most beekeepers would find the sight of hive roofs with 'petrol' crayoned on them to be an unhappy experience even when they belong to someone else) while the others were blanket treated with OTC, the following year there was a high recurrence which resulted in shook swarming the lot. I went my own way just after the shaking but I heard later that there had been hardly any recurrence afterwards. The main point here is that other than the colonies which were killed to begin with all of the others were strong powerful units that had no problem filling dadant supers; a condition which we don't necessarily hear about regarding efb infections -and good reason not to drop vigilence just because we have powerful colonies.

To each their own but I personally wouldn't want to see a blanket rule that all infected colonies should be killed outright, it's just not necessary.

 

[VEG]

I thought this was a hello thread

 

[mbc]

I thought this was a hello thread

Since when have threads on here not strayed off topic ?

With regards to efb, in areas where there is no efb historically, if someone was to bring in an infected colony, what would you conscientious forumers advocate then, shook swarm or destruction ?

 

[pargyle]

Since when have threads on here not strayed off topic ?

With regards to efb, in areas where there is no efb historically, if someone was to bring in an infected colony, what would you conscientious forumers advocate then, shook swarm or destruction ?

You are quite right and destruction in that scenario would be a very sensible option. I live in an area where we get one or two outbreaks every year - one last year only a mile or so as the bees fly from my home and hive. It usually stems, we believe, from a beek that keeps himself isolated totally from the local beekeeping community and has, we understand, refused to do anything about his hives .... but it is inevitably other beekeepers in the area that suffer the consequences.

 

[rolande]

With regards to efb, in areas where there is no efb historically, if someone was to bring in an infected colony, what would you conscientious forumers advocate then, shook swarm or destruction ?

Myself, as I've just said, I don't actually have an issue with individual colonies being put down if the inspectorate deem the odds to be stacked against them. In fact, I'd actually prefer that to a situation where a colony failed to respond to multiple 'chances'.

The thing with your situation is that there can't be different rules for different areas, totally unmanageable. As an example, Dorset has an efb history but as far as I'm aware my own little corner where I have my home apiary has no history of efb at all so should I and the other locals here-about have our own little enclave where different rules apply than to the rest of Dorset?

I'm going to remain reluctant to see a change in policy to one of 100% compulsory destruction. That said, if the rules did change, then like all other laws we'd just have to make the best of it.

 

[mbc]

Myself, as I've just said, I don't actually have an issue with individual colonies being put down if the inspectorate deem the odds to be stacked against them. In fact, I'd actually prefer that to a situation where a colony failed to respond to multiple 'chances'.

What about good strong, otherwise healthy, vigorous colonies which show minimal clinical symptoms(but still a few positively identified cells) that have been parachuted into an area where there has been no recorded efb previously for dozens of miles around ?

The thing with your situation is that there can't be different rules for different areas, totally unmanageable.

Why not ? and why should it be unmanageable ? There used to be such a thing as discretion.

 

[rolande]

Why not ? and why should it be unmanageable ? There used to be such a thing as discretion.

Discretion is something which I'm all in favour of, as regards my comments about putting colonies down if they're deemed to be likely not to bounce back after shaking (for whatever reason). Ultimately all decisions to treat are in some part discretionary.

Arbitrary boundaries ring fencing areas with no history to date seem pointless to me in the sense that once the first infected colony is moved into the protected area (or a natural outbreak is found) that region would no longer be able to claim protected status anyway, at least I don't see how it could.

mbc What about good strong, otherwise healthy, vigorous colonies which show minimal clinical symptoms(but still a few positively identified cells) that have been parachuted into an area where there has been no recorded efb previously for dozens of miles around ?

I almost missed this question until double checking prior to posting my answer to the question above. My opinion remains unchanged as ultimately efb respects no legislative boundary.

 

[bontbee]

.
Years ago I worked for a guy who had an outbreak over several apiaries memory isn't perfect but it was only a handful short of 100 colonies. Some were killed upfront (necessary as I still think it was, I reckon that most beekeepers would find the sight of hive roofs with 'petrol' crayoned on them to be an unhappy experience even when they belong to someone else) while the others were blanket treated with OTC, the following year there was a high recurrence which resulted in shook swarming the lot. I went my own way just after the shaking but I heard later that there had been hardly any recurrence afterwards. The main point here is that other than the colonies which were killed to begin with all of the others were strong powerful units that had no problem filling dadant supers; a condition which we don't necessarily hear about regarding efb infections -and good reason not to drop vigilence just because we have powerful colonies.

Hi rolande,

Thanks for your comments. As I said, it is the best way "IMO", (unless I've misused that acronym), and I should, perhaps, emphasise that I wouldn't expect anyone to do it the way I would, as long at they weren't contravening regs... Just don't get me started on the pig-headed, arrogant g*t* who keep bees and who don't give a stuff for any other bees than their own - and whether they have much regard for their own is very debateable. I'm talking about the ones who will move colonies to avoid inspectors, even when they know they have diseased bees)

Anyway, sorry for that little digressive rant. Back to the subject. I would appreciate it if you could clarify what the situation you referred to was, when the shaken colonies "had no problem filling dadant supers". My reading was that this was a reference to one summer season only. Is the cleansing effect immediate, and lasting? If the colonies carried on thriving, year after year, I would be more reassured than I currently am, with repeated breakdowns in an apiary in my locality. I just can't see that efb would be eliminated by shaking, hence my own personal concerns that a reservoir of infection would remain and rear its head when/if colonies got stressed again.

I perhaps should have refreshed my understanding of efb before pontificating on this forum, so, please, shoot me down in flames. I 'd really appreciate it. When I'm wrong, (yeah, most of the time ) I can only learn and get it right - or at least better!

 

[mbc]

I would appreciate it if you could clarify what the situation you referred to was, when the shaken colonies "had no problem filling dadant supers". My reading was that this was a reference to one summer season only. Is the cleansing effect immediate, and lasting? If the colonies carried on thriving, year after year, I would be more reassured than I currently am, with repeated breakdowns in an apiary in my locality. I just can't see that efb would be eliminated by shaking, hence my own personal concerns that a reservoir of infection would remain and rear its head when/if colonies got stressed again.

Great post.
At what percentage of repeated breakdowns do shook swarms lose cost effectiveness ?

 

[jenkinsbrynmair]

I just can't see that efb would be eliminated by shaking, hence my own personal concerns that a reservoir of infection would remain and rear its head when/if colonies got stressed again.

Most times colonies can and will handle EFB - the nurse bees will remove any infected larvae they find and keep it in check and their 'personal hygiene' takes care of any bacteria they have on their mouths. The 'stress' seems to happen at the height of build up - more bees out foraging more brood to look after thus less care taken to look out for infection and maybe cells not properly cleaned out before the next egg laid more foul brood infected larvae means more nurse bees carying the bactera on their mouths.
A shook swarm means you leave all the cr*p in the old comb which you destroy, all bees are busy making wax for a while and also no brood to look after means that the adult bees clean themselves of the bacteria, a lot being 'locked in' to the new wax: all brood cells are free of bacteria thus they get off to a fresh start.
That, I believe is basically the theory anyway.

One issue with 'shaking out' is if only one hive at the location is shaken out in close proximity to the others bees get strewn everywhere nurse bees especially get disoriented and will try and beg their way into any hive. As nurse bees, they are welcomed relatively easily and get tasked to brood rearing immediately with their mandibles crawling with EFB bacteria Ergo, you have helped spread the disease not contained it.
The solution would be to close up the hive and move it three miles before shook swarming or shook swarm every hive at the apiary.

 

[mbc]

If a colony is "handling" efb and shows no clinical signs, but its brood frames are then split up for making nucs, then those nucs will carry the causative agent and help perpetuate the myth that melissococcus plutonius is endemic.

 

[VEG]

Only problem with moving it would be it may well be introducing it to another area

 

[jenkinsbrynmair]

Only problem with moving it would be it may well be introducing it to another area

It would have to go to a 'quarantine' apiary the nurse bees aren't going to go far. It has been done I know with the agreement of FERA

 

[VEG]

I had this arguement with the welsh RBI on monday (he gave a talk at our association) There are always flying bees though.

 

[jenkinsbrynmair]

But they aren't the biggest problem. When you shook swarm, unless there are hives in close proximity the bees will all stay together.
How is Frank by the way - did he tell you of his bumper honey crop this year?

 

[rolande]

Anyway, sorry for that little digressive rant. Back to the subject. I would appreciate it if you could clarify what the situation you referred to was, when the shaken colonies "had no problem filling dadant supers". My reading was that this was a reference to one summer season only. Is the cleansing effect immediate, and lasting? If the colonies carried on thriving, year after year, I would be more reassured than I currently am, with repeated breakdowns in an apiary in my locality. I just can't see that efb would be eliminated by shaking, hence my own personal concerns that a reservoir of infection would remain and rear its head when/if colonies got stressed again.

Hi bontbee, maybe I wasn't overly clear in my post, the reference to the colonies being able to (support powerful broodnests and) fill supers was a general reference to their status upto the point where diagnosis was made as well as after treatment with OTC until the recurrence *showed up* the following year; just a bit of a reminder to no one in particular that all may not always be what it at first seems.

I believe that the majority of the shaken colonies were fine afterwards (they were actually shaken into brand new 16X10's).

With regard to colonies such as those you mention that fail to respond to shaking or succumb again (not necessarily the same thing of course) then in my opinion tough decisions do need to be made but that can only really be done by the people dealing with the individual case; for the record, if I had such a colony I'd bite the bullet and see it off because I also doubt that repeated shaking is going to do them any good either.