Wild/Feral Survivor-Thrivers: Naturally Selected Resistant Bees.

.
.
This is for discussion of bees that have acquired the ability to cope with varroa without any help. The core assumption is that in the UK and Ireland this has occurred through natural selection for the fittest strain, and any subsequent selection has built on that. The idea is to learn from each-other, what works, and why, in the realm of no-treatment beekeeping. Testimonies, questions, explanations and links to relevant scientific studies are all welcome.

I'd like the thread to be a place where the mechanisms that wild populations employ to locate and maintain resistance can be explored, in the belief that that topic holds the key to understanding why no-treatment beekeeping works in some circumstances and not in others.

 

[Beesnaturally]

Natural selection is not a unidirectional path, and the fact that the parameters under which resistance to varroa develops in wild and managed hives are different does not mean that an equilibrium point cannot be reached in both cases.

That is kind of blinding us with unnecessary complexity. Village idiots have been selecting for strength and vitality for thousands of years. We don't need to make this hard. K.I.S.S.

But yes, there is great complexity underlying the actualities. The trick - of science and good analysis - is to find the underlying patterns,

In our case that can be stated: 'Put best to best'. Its a medieval expression that summarises the core principle of husbandry - all husbandry. It remains in all breeding practice.

Discovering what 'best' is is something we have to do. Understanding that we can largely work only putting the odds in our favour is another. 'The fastest does not always win: but that's the way to bet'.

Yes, resistance to varroa can be raised in-apiary. Its a skill to be learned.

Yes, resistance does arise naturally in free-living populations

Yes, treating bees does keep alive the unresistant genes, and lets them undermine the free-living bees.

These are simple statements of fact. We can generaise them to evolutionary understanding, and to breeding practice.

What exactly is your problem with any of this?

Tip: when you write 'he' make sure its clear who (or what) is intended.

 

[Beesnaturally]

If that's true and if it matters to you, should you be keeping bees at all? And if you do keep bees, shouldn't you purposely house them in very poor accommodation or give them nothing at all?

yeah, I do!

 

[madasafish]

I'm not sure what you consider proven, but we can be sure that if polyhives aid colonies significantly, then they will a priori be detrimental to the nearby free living population.

Oh dear...
Oh dear
Oh dear

Nothing like a closed mind .
Not sure whether to laugh , cry or say something very rude which will get me banned. So I will say no more.

 

[user 20297]

yeah, I do!

That does seem purist.

 

[rolande]

That does seem purist

But maybe not the best admission for someone running a business in this day and age. The headline 'bee farmer keeps bees in very poor accommodation' is just screaming out for a local Kent journalist to pick it up and start the ball rolling.

But full marks for honesty!

 

[Erichalfbee]

That does seem purist to the point of self-flagellation.

Self?

 

[user 20297]

Self?

Well I take it as read that the bees are going to have a hard time!

 

[Mint Bee]

As an extension to your crusade to live and let die animal husbandry BN, I assume that you also include this as a guiding approach to other aspects of your life. It would, for instance, be very disappointed to find that you, your children and grand children were partaking of any modern medicines or procedures that may impact Darwinistic determination of individual survival.

One might almost consider that personal choice hypercritical

 

[Erichalfbee]

As an extension to your crusade to live and let die animal husbandry BN, I assume that you also include this as a guiding approach to other aspects of your life. It would, for instance, be very disappointed to find that you, your children and grand children were partaking of any modern medicines or procedures that may impact Darwinistic determination of individual survival.

One might almost consider that personal choice hypercritical

Nobody applies the same set of rules to everything they do.

 

[pargyle]

As an extension to your crusade to live and let die animal husbandry BN, I assume that you also include this as a guiding approach to other aspects of your life. It would, for instance, be very disappointed to find that you, your children and grand children were partaking of any modern medicines or procedures that may impact Darwinistic determination of individual survival.

One might almost consider that personal choice hypercritical

That's a pretty obtuse and irrelevant argument. I don't treat my bees for varroa but I take a tablet for my blood pressure.... are you saying that people should only have one set of principles ?

 

[madasafish]

That's a pretty obtuse and irrelevant argument. I don't treat my bees for varroa but I take a tablet for my blood pressure.... are you saying that people should only have one set of principles ?

If you don't like my principles, I have others.

 

[pargyle]

If you don't like my principles, I have others.

You'd make a good politician Mike !

 

[Beesnaturally]

But maybe not the best admission for someone running a business in this day and age. The headline 'bee farmer keeps bees in very poor accommodation' is just screaming out for a local Kent journalist to pick it up and start the ball rolling.

But full marks for honesty!

Mollycoddling bees makes for a weakened population. Period. They don't need pretty houses.

To clarify: I try to keep the hives mostly dry. And I confess that I've started using celotext on top of nucs to help to get them up to weight before winter.

What I'm doing is trying to give them, and me, a fair chance, to keep bees and earn a living without weakening the local population - because that would be stupid. My good hives make as much honey as most and more than many.

To my mind that's good policy in both ethical and commercial terms. I think I could explain that to anyone bright enough to write a newspaper article.

Only the honest can tell themselves the truth.

 

[fian]

For you, any action that contributes to maintaining an apiary leads to a reaction that negatively affects wild bees and that means that we beekeepers must give up our work.
It is curious that those who ask for scientific essays that endorse the arguments with which they do not agree remain so relaxed with the sentence "I am not sure what he considers proven, but we can be sure that polyhives do help the colonies in a significant way , a priori they will be harmful to the nearby free-living population" And where is the proof that the use of polyhives is harmful to wild bees that surely do not exist in the vicinity of ordinary management apiaries?

 

[rolande]

Mollycoddling bees makes for a weakened population. Period. They don't need pretty houses.

To clarify: I try to keep the hives mostly dry. And I confess that I've started using celotext on top of nucs to help to get them up to weight before winter.

What I'm doing is trying to give them, and me, a fair chance, to keep bees and earn a living without weakening the local population - because that would be stupid. My good hives make as much honey as most and more than many.

To my mind that's good policy in both ethical and commercial terms. I think I could explain that to anyone bright enough to write a newspaper article.

Only the honest can tell themselves the truth.

Well, my experience of local paper journalists clearly hasn't been as good as yours, maybe you're just super confident that your explanation will sound better than the already stated fact that you keep your bees in "poor" housing!

I knew what you meant from the start; I also still don't believe that you keep your bees in poor accommodation despite your odd urge to claim that you do.

Sometimes, it's better to concede a point than to defend what, in black and white, is indefensible.

 

[madasafish]

You'd make a good politician Mike !

Better than Boris?

 

[fian]

Better than Boris?

Not that much , but better than the Liss Trust for sure .

 

[pargyle]

Better than Boris?

That's a very low bar ... but best we stop here as it could end up in the cupboard under the stairs ...

 

[Beesnaturally]

For you, any action that contributes to maintaining an apiary leads to a reaction that negatively affects wild bees and that means that we beekeepers must give up our work.

That is not my opinion.

My entire objective is to help beekeepers understand the effect of their actions so that they can make properly informed decisions.

It is curious that those who ask for scientific essays that endorse the arguments with which they do not agree ...

Its not clear what you are trying to say. But is worth saying: scientific papers are not 'essays', they are careful formal reports of the data obtained from a study. If, like me, you have a strong faith in science, they are your primary source of information. If a scientific study disagrees with something I believe, then I alter my beliefs. Its that simple.

...remain so relaxed with the sentence "I am not sure what he considers proven, but we can be sure that polyhives do help the colonies in a significant way , a priori they will be harmful to the nearby free-living population" And where is the proof that the use of polyhives is harmful to wild bees that surely do not exist in the vicinity of ordinary management apiaries?

Wild bees often exist in the vicinity of managed apiaries. How many free-living bees, and how healthy they are, depends completely on how many managed colonies are nearby, how close they are, and in what ways they are managed.

I think it is very helpful to visualize this relationship with diagrams showing frequency and proximity of colonies, both managed and unmanaged.

To put it it an accurate form: The more non-resistant drones are mating with free-living queen bees, the more the health of the free-living population will be dragged down.

Once you have this relationship clear, things are as clear as subtracting oranges from fruit bowls. You don't need to be able to see the fruit bowl to predict the processes that will unfold.

The fact that numerous scientific papers (carefully reporting studies...), including a good number linked here, supply evidence of such relations, and explain it by reference to standard simple evolutionary understanding, strongly indicates that there is nothing at all wrong with what I am trying to put across to you.

If you think there is something wrong with it, I strongly suggest you spend a period of time studying the matter carefully.

 

[Beesnaturally]

Well, my experience of local paper journalists clearly hasn't been as good as yours, maybe you're just super confident that your explanation will sound better than the already stated fact that you keep your bees in "poor" housing!

I knew what you meant from the start; I also still don't believe that you keep your bees in poor accommodation despite your odd urge to claim that you do.

Sometimes, it's better to concede a point than to defend what, in black and white, is indefensible.

I can only disagree. We've had some very wet weather and a cold snap recently. I've lost several colonies to dampness. I'm not so precious about my bees that I think that's indefensible. If it were not for me none of those colonies would have existed at all. Its the practical outcome of trying to bootstrap a livelihood. There are too many balls in the air: some get dropped. That's not to say its not regrettable.