Nature, Legislation and Angels

As I just explained in a post, I would like to continue in this new one the deviation that was caused in the main post.
The title refers to nature, law and angels. The reason is to answer about.
Wild swarms and their status within beekeeping legislation.
and the angels?

 

[Erichalfbee]

We are very quick to blame varroa and certainly a colony CAN be overwhelmed by the mite load but .... even parasites must be reluctant to take their host to the point where there is no chance ofe survival ?

Varroa seem to though. I'm sure I've read that varroa are adept at jumping ship as the colony collapses, hitching a ride on foraging, robbing bees as the number of nurse bees crashes

 

[pargyle]

Varroa seem to though. I'm sure I've read that varroa are adept at jumping ship as the colony collapses, hitching a ride on foraging, robbing bees as the number of nurse bees crashes

I've also read rhat somewhere ... but I can't find any real evidence that varroa have the sense to do it ? But the study of varroa is nearly all eithe amateur observation or it's done by those with a vested interest in peddling expensive treatments ... so the research tend to be how to best kill them rather than observing any natural behaviour.

 

[Erichalfbee]

I don't think they need any sense. Varroa spend all their time on nurse bees when they are not parasitising brood cells? So where do they go when they start running out of these? The only other bees are foragers and robber bees

 

[Beesnaturally]

Varroa seem to though. I'm sure I've read that varroa are adept at jumping ship as the colony collapses, hitching a ride on foraging, robbing bees as the number of nurse bees crashes

The problem is you are speaking here as if there were no bee adaptation, and no bee/varroa co-evolution.

And where bees are mostly treated there isn't. Treating stops it dead in its tracks.

These sorts of things do happen when non-resistant bees are faced with varroa.

But away from treated hives evolution rapidly goes to work within a population. The least resistant die; the most resistant do well and reproduce, and so...

.... the next generation is built from genes that do well. That, repeated for a few generations is all it takes. There is no explosive build-up, no large varroa population at any time. The mite population is simply kept at manageable levels.

Stop treating beekeeper strains and around 9/10 will die. The same simply isn't true for bees that have had the chance to adapt.

We know a great deal about how this happens - not just the mechanism of evolution through natural selection, but also the specific mechanisms that resistant bees are using to fight varroa. We even know some of the specific molecular locations in which the critical specific resistance genes are located.

It is, in the nicest possible way, at this stage, frankly untenable, to think this can't, or isn't happening, here in the UK, and very likely within a few miles of you.

 

[Erichalfbee]

The problem is you are speaking here as if there were no bee adaptation, and no bee/varroa co-evolution.

I'm not I'm simply describing what I have read

 

[Beesnaturally]

I'm not I'm simply describing what I have read

You must be very skilfully avoiding reading the scientific literature relating to honeybee adaptation

 

[Erichalfbee]

You must be very skilfully avoiding reading the scientific literature relating to honeybee adaptation

No. I just didn't include it in my reply, now stop trying to pick a fight. I have a blue pencil and you do not

 

[pargyle]

@Beesnaturally

I think it's a forlorn hope ,,, tbe reality is that the vast majority of colonies in the vast majority of locations are incapable of surviving heavy
infestations of varroa and actually NEED to be treated, You cannot expect everyone to suddenly stop treatment for varroa and see what happens ... it's unrealisric. Bees are expensive commodities ... if you only have a few hives you cannot afford to lose them and ... if we did all agree and we end up with a majority of dead outs ... where do the replacements come from.

I'm TF but I advocate treatment if a colony shows (from proper testing) that they are not managing a varroa load. Perhaps your initial stance should be to encourage people to test and not treat those colonies that do seem to cope in those locations where they can cope. You cannot expect bee farmers to perform this way - time and commercial constraints prevent it. The easy and practical course of action is to treat for varroa and you have to accept that, for the vast majority of beekeepers this WILL be their chosen path.

 

[pargyle]

You must be very skilfully avoiding reading the scientific literature relating to honeybee adaptation

We are all aware that species can adapt ... you are pushing against an open door. If you look elsewhere there are many documented cases of VSH bees ...indeed, even today, a bee breeder in Cyprus (Norton) has posted a thread that indcates he has encouraging progress breeding VSH bees. But .... until such strains are widely available and proven - we are all stuck with what we have ... and if we wish to be beekeepers and produce honey then we have to live with whatever bees and whatever beekeeping processes meet our personal beekeeping needs.

Constantly trying to force others to agree with a course of action that may work for you but may not work for them is pointless and provocative. I'm pleased that what you are doing works for you and you feel you have proof that it could work on a wider scale but .... there are risks and not everyone can afford to take those risks. Your belief that to do so would be for the common good is admirable but you could say that an equally admirable aspiration would be to remove or reduce the varroa population in an area by insisting that EVERYONE treats EVERY colony at several given points in the year. How much agreement would you get for that ?

Since we have been treating for varroa the incidence of Acarine (which may have been the cause of the UK bee population being decimated in the early 20th Century) has almost been eradicated ... and we didn't treat feral bee populations. So there is an equally implausible argument for the exact opposite of what you are suggesting (indeed at times it appears to be demanding) we should do.

 

[Beesnaturally]

@Beesnaturally

I think it's a forlorn hope ,,, tbe reality is that the vast majority of colonies in the vast majority of locations are incapable of surviving heavy
infestations of varroa and actually NEED to be treated, You cannot expect everyone to suddenly stop treatment for varroa and see what happens ... it's unrealisric. Bees are expensive commodities ... if you only have a few hives you cannot afford to lose them and ... if we did all agree and we end up with a majority of dead outs ... where do the replacements come from.

I'm TF but I advocate treatment if a colony shows (from proper testing) that they are not managing a varroa load. Perhaps your initial stance should be to encourage people to test and not treat those colonies that do seem to cope in those locations where they can cope. You cannot expect bee farmers to perform this way - time and commercial constraints prevent it. The easy and practical course of action is to treat for varroa and you have to accept that, for the vast majority of beekeepers this WILL be their chosen path.

I think I do accept that. That doesn't mean I like it, or that I'll stop trying to change it.

What I don't accept is denial and ignorance of the realities dominating the beewaves. People - beekeepers and would-be beekeepers and honey buyers have a right to know the facts - and I do mean facts:

Bees ARE being prevented from adapting by treatment;

It IS a case of 'treatment-addiction';

This DOES affect the health of whole ecologies;

There ARE ways of escaping from it - almost anywhere.

And these facts ARE shouted down on the bee forums.

 

[Erichalfbee]

" I hope it doesn't end in a dog-faced bipolar post (treat/don't treat), (yes/no small cell), (amm black/buckfast) etc."

This is beyond tiresome
Two of the mods, at least, are stepping back from this, leaving you all to it and if that is indeed what happens I'll be back to delete the whole thread and a forum member or two while I'm at it so be warned.

 

[Beesnaturally]

We are all aware that species can adapt ... you are pushing against an open door.

Clearly we are not all aware that bees can, given the chance, adapt. A poll would be a useful thing.

If you look elsewhere there are many documented cases of VSH bees ...indeed, even today, a bee breeder in Cyprus (Norton) has posted a thread that indcates he has encouraging progress breeding VSH bees. But .... until such strains are widely available and proven - we are all stuck with what we have ... and if we wish to be beekeepers and produce honey then we have to live with whatever bees and whatever beekeeping processes meet our personal beekeeping needs.

We are not stuck. As many people have shown (and Marla Spivak has been showing for a decade) local beekeeper groups can in all but the most difficult circumstances raise resistance. Again, as many people have found; in some areas wild bees can be found and captured and kept. The only thing needed is for education about how to go about it.

Similarly any commercial operation can at little cost raise resistance. How many know that?

Constantly trying to force others to agree with a course of action that may work for you but may not work for them is pointless and provocative.

I'm not trying to do that. I am trying to defend the truth, thus helping make it available.

I'm pleased that what you are doing works for you and you feel you have proof that it could work on a wider scale but .... there are risks and not everyone can afford to take those risks.

Sure, that's fine. But why are there no reasonable and level-headed conversations here about the hows and why?

Your belief that to do so would be for the common good is admirable but you could say that an equally admirable aspiration would be to remove or reduce the varroa population in an area by insisting that EVERYONE treats EVERY colony at several given points in the year. How much agreement would you get for that ?

That is not an equally admirable aspiration - because it wouldn't do a thing to raise resistance. In fact it would hinder it. All it would to is perpetuate the problem even more effectively.

Since we have been treating for varroa the incidence of Acarine (which may have been the cause of the UK bee population being decimated in the early 20th Century) has almost been eradicated ... and we didn't treat feral bee populations. So there is an equally implausible argument for the exact opposite of what you are suggesting (indeed at times it appears to be demanding) we should do.

There wasn't a feral population to treat. I think you'll have trouble defending that argument.

I probably comes across as demanding because I will demand that facts are allowed to be aired, and I will defend the facts for as long as it takes. I won't have facts driven off by people who don't like them, don't understand them, or don't like me. And that generally means I'm under heavy fire and so am on the defensive.

 

[pargyle]

I think I do accept that. That doesn't mean I like it, or that I'll stop trying to change it.

What I don't accept is denial and ignorance of the realities dominating the beewaves. People - beekeepers and would-be beekeepers and honey buyers have a right to know the facts - and I do mean facts:

Bees ARE being prevented from adapting by treatment;

It IS a case of 'treatment-addiction';

This DOES affect the health of whole ecologies;

There ARE ways of escaping from it - almost anywhere.

And these facts ARE shouted down on the bee forums.

What I don't accept is denial and ignorance of the realities dominating the beewaves. People - beekeepers and would-be beekeepers and honey buyers have a right to know the facts - and I do mean facts:

Honey buyers are generally not that discerning. Beekeepers in the UK have the right to make up their own minds whateever course they choose, we cannot force the issue and education is rarely achieved by trying to force it.

Bees ARE being prevented from adapting by treatment;

SOME bees MAY be prevented from adapting but the reality is that those that can't adapt may succumb.

It IS a case of 'treatment-addiction';

No, in most cases it is a case of practical reality - I'd beat the drum for chemical free and the use of OA in it's various forms thar ONLY affect the varroa mites - it does not weaken the bees or make them less capable of adaptation.

This DOES affect the health of whole ecologies;

And a reduced honey bee population in the medium term - if stopping treatment DOES work .. is not a risk to the wider ecology ?

There ARE ways of escaping from it - almost anywhere.

Not without risk.

And these facts ARE shouted down on the bee forums.

As you said, it's a public forum - everyone is entitled to their opinion and even FACTS can be interpreted differently.

I'm rather hoping this will be the last word in this thread - it's descended into the debacle that was originally predicted. I would advise that everyone stops trying to convince you that you are wrong and accepts that your way is your way and works for you.

 

[pargyle]

Thar's an end to it as far as I'm concerned ... Dani and I have had enough ,... get on and argue to your hearts content. If if descends into mud slinging and open warfare ... then it's a dead bunny.

 

[madasafish]

I think I do accept that. That doesn't mean I like it, or that I'll stop trying to change it.

What I don't accept is denial and ignorance of the realities dominating the beewaves. People - beekeepers and would-be beekeepers and honey buyers have a right to know the facts - and I do mean facts:

Bees ARE being prevented from adapting by treatment;

It IS a case of 'treatment-addiction';

This DOES affect the health of whole ecologies;

There ARE ways of escaping from it - almost anywhere.

And these facts ARE shouted down on the bee forums.

"Bees ARE being prevented from adapting by treatment;"

SO explain when our Association had bees from Colonsay - with no prior exposure to varroa and hence no adaptation possible - they had after 4 months a huge varroa infestation, whilst other established treated colonies in the same apiary had "normal" varroa levels.

As neither had been treated in this period , the ONLY explanation - and remember the Colonsay colonies started with the same levels of infestation as the others ( as they started with queens added to local bees) - is that local bees treated but with over 20 years exposure to varroa had actually developed some immunity. The Colonsay Qs had none.


So I suggest treatment does NOT mean no immunity but possibly some.


After all, when varroa came to the UK, many thousand of colonies died but some did not.. And the remaining bees were treated and survived/

SO history says many UK stocks have some natural immunity by surviving the initial varrroa shock.




"

 

[fian]

"Bees ARE being prevented from adapting by treatment;"

SO explain when our Association had bees from Colonsay - with no prior exposure to varroa and hence no adaptation possible - they had after 4 months a huge varroa infestation, whilst other established treated colonies in the same apiary had "normal" varroa levels.

As neither had been treated in this period , the ONLY explanation - and remember the Colonsay colonies started with the same levels of infestation as the others ( as they started with queens added to local bees) - is that local bees treated but with over 20 years exposure to varroa had actually developed some immunity. The Colonsay Qs had none.


So I suggest treatment does NOT mean no immunity but possibly some.


After all, when varroa came to the UK, many thousand of colonies died but some did not.. And the remaining bees were treated and survived/

SO history says many UK stocks have some natural immunity by surviving the initial varrroa shock.




"

One questions:
How big are the bees in your association?
Natural comb?
Agricultural treatments in monoculture areas close to their apiaries?

 

[buffon]

Returning to the opening post about the law of swarms. This is covered a little bit in this judgement Borwick Development Solutions Ltd v Clear Water Fisheries Ltd [2020] EWCA Civ 578 (01 May 2020)

In the USA there is often the suggestion to go into the back of beyond, nail a bait box to a tree and collect your "mite resistant" bees in a few weeks time. I have two problems with this: 1 on our crowded island almost all land/trees belongs to somebody and 2 is it ethical to be taking bees from the wild since I wouldn't do this with any other animal/plant. There is also the risk of spreading disease in both directions (particularly if using some dubious old comb as bait).

There is a patch of Woodland Trust owned woodland near me and I am a little bit tempted to hang a bait box there since there are some big old trees that must have bees in them, but I figure they must be virtually identical to the ones I pickup in my garden anyway.

 

[Erichalfbee]

(particularly if using some dubious old comb as bait).

You use your own

 

[buffon]

You use your own

It's totally unnecessary. I catch swarms every year without any old comb. I started beekeeping with an empty box and some lemongrass oil (and I don't think that is necessary either).

 

[fian]

Returning to the opening post about the law of swarms. This is covered a little bit in this judgement Borwick Development Solutions Ltd v Clear Water Fisheries Ltd [2020] EWCA Civ 578 (01 May 2020)

In the USA there is often the suggestion to go into the back of beyond, nail a bait box to a tree and collect your "mite resistant" bees in a few weeks time. I have two problems with this: 1 on our crowded island almost all land/trees belongs to somebody and 2 is it ethical to be taking bees from the wild since I wouldn't do this with any other animal/plant. There is also the risk of spreading disease in both directions (particularly if using some dubious old comb as bait).

There is a patch of Woodland Trust owned woodland near me and I am a little bit tempted to hang a bait box there since there are some big old trees that must have bees in them, but I figure they must be virtually identical to the ones I pickup in my garden anyway.

Regardless of the ownership of the property (permit), you must take into account the proximity of the forest and your apiary as well as other apiaries.
At any distance less than 4/5 km with more than 20 hives apart from their own, a DCA is likely to be established, their queens will have ancestry from forest swarms (if any).
Checking trials, 1.Take a queen buckfast colony and place it in its own apiary, remove it to a nucleus and wait for a generation. The bees darken?.
2. Have you collected any swarms that are not from your apiary?
3. Do you have bait hives in your apiary, are the scouts from your apiary?
4. Have you noticed sudden oscillations in the varroa count after the treatments?
5. Do you have a water source in your apiary, do you receive visits from foreign bees?