How long does a bee colony last?

[user 20297]

Is there any point in this thread?

No point at all; does there have to be?

 

[Boston Bees]

No; I don't believe that untreated, kept bees must die off after three or five years and I've read evidence of that on this forum.. But obviously, some untreated and some treated colonies will die off within that timeframe. The conclusion usually jumped to, often without necessarily having evidence, is to say that when bees do die off without being treated it is always because of varroa or because of diseases or issues related to varroa.
I've not been beekeeping long enough to get my fingers burned yet with my lax attitude to mites. When I do I'll be sure to join my voice with everyone elses'...."Treat, treat, treat." But where does the certainty about the outcomes come from when few people will admit to having had the experience of not treating their bees?

I have had experience of not treating my bees, for the first 4 or so years of my beekeeping career. My motivation was probably the same as yours is - I didn't want to use chemicals - wanted to build natural resistance - etc etc.

The outcome, over a slow three-or-so year deterioration, was a set of mostly miserable, crippled hives. So I started treating. Last winter I took 16 hives into winter and 15 came out (well, 16 came out, but one had turned drone-layer).

A hive with proper varroosis is a truly distressing thing to behold.

 

[user 20297]

So kill it off now - pleeeeease.

When I'm not interested in a thread I just don't read or contribute to it.

 

[Gilberdyke John]

Is there any point in this thread?

Maybe it's time to open a discussion about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?

 

[user 20297]

I have had experience of not treating my bees, for the first 4 or so years of my beekeeping career. The outcome, over a slow three-or-so year deterioration, was a set of mostly miserable, crippled hives. So I started treating. Last winter I took 16 hives into winter and 15 came out (well, 16 came out, but one had turned drone-layer).

That's the type of experienced and evidence-based information I was looking for; thank-you.

 

[user 20297]

I know: that's the point I was kiddingly trying to make.... (Never joke in text...)

And let's coin TTLTB's Law, as a direct offshoot of Godwin's Law (that any internet debate on politics inevitably eventually involves the use of the term "Nazi"). Any thread long enough on this forum evolves to be about treatment or non-treatment. There are exceptions but this is not one.

...only thing is, this thread started off being about the options of treating or not treating. Typically, it will probably evolve into either a bitching session about who first called who a liar, a gentle discussion about English grammar or a debate about the best place to buy brass cup-hooks without having to take a pack of ten.

 

[Erichalfbee]

When I'm not interested in a thread I just don't read ………… it.

I wish……

 

[Markthebuilder]

So because I have taken advice on this forum and used a mated queen from external genetics to replace a lost queen due to time of year… I can no longer claim I have had the same bees since I started…… no one told me that….. obviously you are all just a bunch of bee farmers trying to make a quick buck by selling queens

 

[Markthebuilder]

No; I don't believe that untreated, kept bees must die off after three or five years and I've read evidence of that on this forum.. But obviously, some untreated and some treated colonies will die off within that timeframe. The conclusion usually jumped to, often without necessarily having evidence, is to say that when bees do die off without being treated it is always because of varroa or because of diseases or issues related to varroa.
I've not been beekeeping long enough to get my fingers burned yet with my lax attitude to mites. When I do I'll be sure to join my voice with everyone elses'...."Treat, treat, treat." But where does the certainty about the outcomes come from when few people will admit to having had the experience of not treating their bees?

I believe the evidence comes from those old enough to have been keeping bees before varroa and there experience of colony’s apiaries and so forth being wiped out As varroa swept across countries, befor we learnt to treat . A bit like cov19 you may survive without treatment / vaccination but why take the risk?

 

[Finman]

I believe the evidence comes from those old enough to have been keeping bees before varroa and there experience

A bit like cov19 you may survive without treatment / vaccination but why take the risk?

When varroa came to Finland 40 years ago, and there were no treatment methods, varroa killed often all ten hives in one winter from hobby beekeepers.

My very good friend had 60 hives and 1987 winter he lost 30 hives. Second winter he lost the rest 30. He was so tired that he finished the whole beekeeping. He was going to be a professional. He lost a huge amount of money.

30 years ago varroa was much more easy to treat. Apistan was easy. Perizin too before that.

One year I lost 60% out if my hives. Mites had become Apistan resistant. Perhaps it was the year 2004.

There are cases that the beekeeper had nursed 30 years bees and in one winter he lost all 100 hives.

My experience is that best hives are danger to die. They may get 150 kg honey, and in October the hive is dead. A huge amount of mites condense in winter brood in late summer and the hive does not get healty workers. That is called in USA disappearing disease. But it is typical varroa. Most of hives are so, that they have on few frames of bees in spring.

I cannot see any hip hurray in cases that you teach to beginners not to treat the hives. These opinions kill in USA even 75% out of back yard beekeepers' hives, and guys even do not know what happened.

 

[bingevader]

Yes, because they keep buying bees that have little or no resistance.
If you just dump your bees in a box and hope for the best, then yes, there's a significant chance they will succumb to varroa.

 

[Boston Bees]

Yes, because they keep buying bees that have little or no resistance.
If you just dump your bees in a box and hope for the best, then yes, there's a significant chance they will succumb to varroa.

You have mite-resistant bees?

 

[bingevader]

No, would love to go treatment free, but don't have the number of hives to breed resistant colonies.
Added to which, I am surrounded by treaters whose drones will dramatically influence any offspring.
Bees are treated because they have no resistance.
Bees die because they have no resistance.
Until we change the bees we breed there will be no change.
There's no hunger for change in this country whilst we can treat bees that produce high yields.
No difference from the rest of the farming sector.

 

[Moobee]

A colony is like a town. The population is constantly churning but the town remains.
A bit like Trigger's broom.

Darn it, you beat me to it!

 

[Anduril]

No, would love to go treatment free, but don't have the number of hives to breed resistant colonies.
Added to which, I am surrounded by treaters whose drones will dramatically influence any offspring.
Bees are treated because they have no resistance.
Bees die because they have no resistance.
Until we change the bees we breed there will be no change.
There's no hunger for change in this country whilst we can treat bees that produce high yields.
No difference from the rest of the farming sector.

Did you go to the last Welsh Convention? The NBU stayed silent when asked about backing the non treaters, this is understandable as they would not advocate going treatment free because they don't want to be held to account for any colonies dying. That lecture got a bit heated.
There are a number of scientific studies for and against. The against study was to do with the transmission of disease to bumblebees.

 

[TryingToLetThemBee]

Bees are treated because they have no resistance.
Bees die because they have no resistance.
Until we change the bees we breed there will be no change.

Have a quick look at some of the latest research on DWV 'B' and other elements of varoosis. We naturally focus on the bees but the much faster adaptations (and even evolutions) are at virus and at mite level. That can lead to more stable outcomes regardless of what the bees and beeks do. eg the bloke in Slough or wherever it is who has only DWV 'B' (sorry: as I said, Google). I treat but I try to treat varoosis not mites.

<ADD> Swindon. Here is a seed or two.

Figure 8: New honey bee-Varroa mite-DWV equilibrium. Type A DWV is...

Browse Articles | The ISME Journal </ADD>

 

[Boston Bees]

I treat but I try to treat varoosis not mites

What does this difference mean in practice for how, why and when you treat?

 

[jenkinsbrynmair]

What does this difference mean in practice for how, why and when you treat?

when it's too late

 

[Boston Bees]

when it's too late

That was my concern, yes

 

[TryingToLetThemBee]

Stress TRY. I took a run at selecting for DWV-B when this research came out. Documented to some extent here. I'm breeding mites (well, DWV really) .But for reasons clearly illustrated in this thread it is hard unless you make it the centre of your breeding program, which I did not. My bees' common ancestor was in another colony, for example, so I doubt that particular potentially less virulent mite/virus combo is still around. But I try to keep up some selection pressure by treating colonies that appear to be exposed to more virulence and I don't treat all colonies twice a year (in non-association apiaries) . Like all things, there is a lot of judgment involved.