Man made v natural breeding and selection

[Curly green finger's]

No data? I have had sixty plus hives for ten years. I have all the data I need.

I can't pass it to you because you won't believe me. So you keep asking for something I can't give you.

But I can pass you the literature, which explains how to do it, why it works, and evidence of it working that I don't suppose you will think invented.

I'm not saying you could go it - I don't know your circumstances. But you could stop blindly claiming it's impossible. Even a cursory glance at the literature will demonstrate that is unsustainable.

 

[mbc]

Fwiw my efforts at soft bond went out of the window when I couldn't bring myself to feed untreated colonies, it just seemed like I was pouring syrup into hives to feed varroa. Also I hate to see colonies fail to thrive when I can easily do something about it, there's not much worse than observing creatures under your care struggling with welfare.
Now I choose breeder queens which respond well to a light touch treatment regime of extended release OA in the autumn and a winter vape.
I guess I might reassess once the mortgage is payed.

 

[Fusion_power]

When BWeaver decided to develop varroa resistant bees, they set aside 1000 colonies that were not treated. IIRC, about 50 survived. They rebuilt raising queens from those 50 and had heavy losses again. They rebuilt again and raised queens from the best of the remaining hives. Today their bees have significant varroa resistance. They are also about 30% africanized (my estimate based on behavior, not tested to my knowledge).

When varroa first hit this area in the early 1990's, almost all honeybees were wiped out. Best guess about 1 in 10,000 survived. By 2004, a few feral colonies showed back up in areas where there were no beekeepers within several miles. Those colonies showed enough tolerance that they could be kept treatment free.

I do NOT advocate that every beekeeper should just stop treating their bees. This would be a disaster of epic proportions. I do however advocate queen breeders developing varroa tolerant lines and selling queens that are then used to replace susceptible commercial bees. There is already a very good start on this in Europe, especially with Carniolan lines.

 

[rolande]

I do wonder how this is working for you you only have 60 colonys and you live in Kent!? But say you have 10% losses?

Don't waste time wondering, he's been at this for a good length of time and isn't claiming anything that others with far fewer colonies are getting away with claiming while no one gives them the stick he receives.

 

[Beesnaturally]

I do wonder how this is working for you you only have 60 colonys and you live in Kent!? But say you have 10% losses?
Do you open mate your queens?
Do you know your local folk with hives?
If you were more isolated I would say keep going, apologies if this sounds abit ruff.
I've spent the last three years trying to get purer Amm queen's and will probably spend the next decade or two doing just that.

What leads and what antedotel science?

First, science isn't anecdotal. It's the exact opposite. You need to be clear about that.

In this thread I have linked to several papers, and all of them contain both clues to sources of information and scientific references.

Start with them.

As to your own chances: the more clear of treated bees you are, the better the stocks you start with, and the more hives you have... the better your chances are.

In my opinion running unlimited brood nests makes a big difference, and importing queens is of limited value - because you want the mite strains that have co-evolved with feral bees. Look for feral swarms and cut-outs, especially long lived ones. Or find a local longstanding non-treater.

But read up and learn about how evolution keeps populations strong and healthy. You need to work with the grain of life. The best suited to the environment make a greater contribution to each new generation. That's the law of population health.

Take that away and expect to medicate on a permanent basis.

PS yes, my bees mate openly.

 

[Mint Bee]

That's daft. I have 60 odd hives full of untreated bees that I do monitor, in exactly the same ways all beekeepers do. My losses year on year are around 10%, and that's without any requeening.



In some cases winter deaths are replaced by early swarms, but there is usually an interval of very low activity once the honey has been cleared out.

But what is it that happens to the bees you imagine will die within a year a two when I home them, that allows them to live on in some cases for 7 or 8 years now? Obviously it's not the change of locality. So it has to be that they arrived with inbuilt resistance.

Let me be clear, in the early days many did die. But something like a third didn't. As time went by, and I trapped their swarms, and made splits from the best losses gradually reduced.

I'll say the same to you that I said to finman: read the literature - I've supplied you with leads. The science is in place, the mechanisms largely understood, and many beekeepers are getting the same results. But to get them, you have to know how this works. It won't work everywhere, it won't work simply by importing resistant queens (at least not everywhere, but, if you choose the right spot and get the right colony, it's very simple. Open your eyes.

You are not reading, understanding and answering my questions. I've read the literature references you have supplied and they don't answer my concerns with the position you put forward. my eyes are open - you seem to be blind to any queries raised with your posts. My issue is that people who don't know any better will think you are putting forward a proven system and loose bees as a result.

I'm not going to try to engage with you anymore. It is pointless and a waste of my time.

 

[Beesnaturally]

You are not reading, understanding and answering my questions. I've read the literature references you have supplied and they don't answer my concerns with the position you put forward. my eyes are open - you seem to be blind to any queries raised with your posts.

You keep saying this. Tell me what questions I haven't answered? If it is scientific data from my operation, as I've told you several times, I can't supply it. It hasn't been a scientific experiment.

You seem to be one of the famous naysayers - all no no no, and no substance to back it up.

My issue is that people who don't know any better will think you are putting forward a proven system and loose bees as a result.

Anyone who reads through my posts to this thread has clear guidance, should they wish to try the same. They just have to read what I've said - carefully - and read what I've posted. Nobody who has done that will have any doubt as to whether trying to go medication-free is a good plan _for them_.

I'm not going to try to engage with you anymore. It is pointless and a waste of my time.

It certainly is if you insist on an unreality and blind yourself to the information needed to come to terms with reality.

 

[madasafish]

Randy Oliver - Scientific Beekeeping- has an update on his breeding or varroa tolerant bees. He is open with his results - I cannot recall the details but several hundreds of colonies.
https://scientificbeekeeping.com/varroa-management/breeding-resistant-bees/
Worth reading for some factual results...

(this thread is hardly worth reading: all noise and no signal except BS)

 

[Beesnaturally]

And what that has to do with bee husbandry?

You should trust that natural selection takes its job on British Isles by itself. Over 90% out of their beekeepers are 2 hive owners and they cannot fight against natural selection. They do not need any theories, what will happen in the future. The whole England is full of pure Blenheim bees.

Ok, I've understood you now, apologies. Most UK bees are kept by small beekeepers. And for them a measure of genetic control is hard to impossible.

First: its not natural selection they have to fight against! Natural selection for the FITTEST strains is what they need. And they do that best if left alone.

Second: I disagree - what UK beekeepers do need is an understanding of plain genetic husbandry.

I thought you denied the possibility of 'Blenheim bees'?

To your main point: yes, being small is a problem - for some. However:

1) there are a surprising number of areas where feral bees have re-established, having developed resistance through natural selection. If you are lucky enough to be able to keep bees near them you will likely have no problem, no matter how few hives you have. Just don't go buying packages or bringing duff queens in!

2) try to form a non-medicating club with nearby beekeepers.

3) locate as far as you can from large numbers of medicating beekeepers

4) try to mate your queens in promising feral areas

5) keep more than 2 hives!

6) when you get a promising colony, give the queen plenty of room. She'll raise more drones likely carrying good genes. And use her to requeen other hives.

7) imo its worth bearing in mind that having the right mite strains is also part of the solution. Given time the bees will probably raise them

So: yes, being in the wrong place makes it impossible to go treatment free. And being in a non-ideal place and having too few colonies makes it an uphill struggle. But most people will be able to evaluate their chances and form a plan.

 

[jenkinsbrynmair]

No data? I have had sixty plus hives for ten years. I have all the data I need.

I can't pass it to you because you won't believe me. So you keep asking for something I can't give you.

I've dredged back through this thread and yes, you are right on one point - you cannot supply any credible peer reviewed data to support your claim - or any data at all to be honest.
All we've been fed thus far is bullsh!t and bluster garnished with a bit of irrelevant babble about Darwin.

 

[Swarm]

We already established in another thread that a discussion is quite possible without links to peer reviewed papers.

 

[jenkinsbrynmair]

what about the alternative facts bullshine and bluster though?

 

[Mint Bee]

We already established in another thread that a discussion is quite possible without links to peer reviewed papers.

discussion is fine, but this is being put forward as gospel truth. BN has admitted his thoughts are based on anecdotal evidence. if it works for him fine. Despite BN's protests, he has not provided the information required for others to replicate the work. basic principle of scientific research and development of new knowledge is that others can achieve the same results independently. earlier in the thread he stated that he was too busy with others things and couldn't be bothered to publish anything, even in BeeCraft. based on this, if it smells like it and looks like it, it probably is

 

[user 20297]

discussion is fine, but this is being put forward as gospel truth. BN has admitted his thoughts are based on anecdotal evidence. if it works for him fine. Despite BN's protests, he has not provided the information required for others to replicate the work. basic principle of scientific research and development of new knowledge is that others can achieve the same results independently. earlier in the thread he stated that he was too busy with others things and couldn't be bothered to publish anything, even in BeeCraft. based on this, if it smells like it and looks like it, it probably is

It sound like @Beesnaturally is being asked to prove that natural selection along Darwinian principles is an actual thing.
Any population of bees which have been exposed to Varroa for the last few decades can't not have made a response to tolerating them a little better.

In any population which has had positive human guidance, that response must be better.

Science tells me that.

 

[madasafish]

It sound like @Beesnaturally is being asked to prove that natural selection along Darwinian principles is an actual thing.
Any population of bees which have been exposed to Varroa for the last few decades can't not have made a response to tolerating them a little better.

In any populations which has had positive human guidance, that response must be better.

Science tells me that.

Most semi competent thinking beekeepers tend to NOT breed from colonies prone to varroa. So a degree of simple selection for resistance is going on in the UK.

 

[jenkinsbrynmair]

Most semi competent thinking beekeepers tend to NOT breed from colonies prone to varroa. So a degree of simple selection for resistance is going on in the UK.

and it has got bugger all to do with Darwinian theory

 

[user 20297]

Most semi competent thinking beekeepers tend to NOT breed from colonies prone to varroa. So a degree of simple selection for resistance is going on in the UK.

All beekeepers think. Aren't all bees prone to Varroa? Your last line is what I said.

 

[user 20297]

and it has got bugger all to do with Darwinian theory

Why hasn't it?

 

[rolande]

I've actually lost track of what this thread is about and simply can't bear the thought of going back and starting from the beginning. Finding myself agreeing with bits from lots of different posts from both sides of what appears to me to be an unnecessary divide.

----------------

The business about isolation in Kent (was that this thread or another?) seems ludicrous to me, better to embrace the fact that these survivor colonies are surrounded by loads of managed ones than to dumb things down by implying they're surviving as a result of isolation because that's little use to any of us.

------------------
What I really want to know even though its none of my business is how much profit they're enabling the beekeeper to make as a percentage against the capital in the business. Is it a fully viable business or not. I appreciate there are only 60 colonies But there's been plenty of time to get numbers up unless of course there's some as yet undescribed roadblock stopping expansion.

 

[Finman]

When you have plenty of those mite resistant beekeepers in the UK, does somebody sell resistant hives in the UK.