From MAILER-DAEMON Sat Jun 17 06:53:27 2000 Received: from listserv.albany.edu (listserv.albany.edu [169.226.1.24]) by luna.oit.unc.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id GAA29389 for ; Sat, 17 Jun 2000 06:53:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from listserv.albany.edu (listserv.albany.edu [169.226.1.24]) by listserv.albany.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id GAA10461 for ; Sat, 17 Jun 2000 06:53:09 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200006171053.GAA10461@listserv.albany.edu> Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2000 06:53:09 -0400 From: "L-Soft list server at University at Albany (1.8d)" Subject: File: "BEE-L LOG0004A" To: adamf@METALAB.UNC.EDU Content-Length: 102776 Lines: 2110 ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2000 15:52:10 +0200 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Rimantas Zujus Subject: Spring in Lithuania Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-4" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dear BeeFriends The first reports of cleansing flights were seen in Bee List from the beginning of February. At last our bees also got a few suitable days. My distant Lithuanian bee fiend reported his bees had a first cleansing flight on the 20 of March (only 5 C or 41 F) and later many bees returned with bright yellow pollen. Our bees decided to announce the spring season in Kaunas region (center of our country) on March, 25 after getting a warm air gap from the southeast. My ladies had a cleansing flight last Saturday also. There was sunny with 7 C (45 F ). Lithuania is a small country (about 300x200 km) but has great temperature differences in the area. Recently I listened to weather forecast announcement for last night. The difference was 11 C degrees in the opposite sides of the country. The Baltic Sea has a great influence to nearer areas. The sunny days are not often here especially in winter. Thus the bee cleansing flights wave may continue a few weeks in different regions. This winter was warmer than usually with temperature jumping between minus 14 and plus 6 (7F-43F). Especially dangerous was November and first half of December. We were warned by our Beekeepers Society of the danger to bees starving this winter. If the bee hives are wrapped too much the bees raise brood, use honey reserves and die. I followed the recommendations, didn't use inner side foam boards but, regardless of it, worried about my bees much. I missed the sunny "cleansing" day. Next day I visited my ladies the sky was cloudy with air 4 C (39F). The side combs were filled 75% with food and there were seen many bees under top cover. I gave them only some salty water in the top feeders. In a 20-30 meter distance there is a quite shallow streamlet flowing between grass. Now I'm calm, they should survive. Soon my happy peace was broken by my bee friend, a new beekeeper having bees not far from mine. He was excited and declared his one stock is starving. Really, after checking the hive we found 2 side combs with many bees sitting on and no food in. We decided to put in a last year reserve comb and to shake the "starving" bees from the mentioned 2 combs on the new one. Well, done. As I said the midday was whole cloudy, cool. The glasses were left at home. We are both longsighted. My inner voice forced me to look to the second (from the side) already empty comb. After a careful studding we had to recognize that the comb was at least 30% filled with eggs. We returned it to the former place. But we have pricks of conscience on account of the Queen. We could drop her on the hive bottom together with the rest bees. Now the logic action had to follow - to check the opposite side combs of the nest. The opposite combs where untouched from the last autumn i.e. full of food! Well, fear takes mole-hills for mountains. We didn't realize that bees could winter not in the center of the nest. Or, maybe, it was a result of the warm winter. We did not dare to check food amount in the center of the nest because of a not suitable weather conditions. By the way, I realized later that, probably, all his bees were not touched enough by sun and had no cleansing flights. The opened hive bees started flying around, land on us and made our white caps brown spotted. We couldn't get rid of them though they were quite peaceful. It could be on account of the north side slope the hives were situated. Lithuanian beekeepers like to communicate with their counterparts in foreign countries. Every year there are arranged visits to advanced beekeepers. Recently we are invited to visit the apiaries in Poland and Check Republic on the 1-5 th of May. The travel as usually is arranged by Gediminas Olsevicius wilara@prienai.omnitel.net . 500 Litas (125USD) per person for a bus, hotel, excursions and breakfast / supper meals. Everyone wishing to take a part is welcome. Sincerely Rimantas Zujus http://rizujus.lei.lt/ ICQ# : 4201422 55 N, 24 E ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2000 08:03:56 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: "Craig M. Spencer" Organization: The Feed Store Subject: bee on pallets MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi All, New bee keeper here. We started last year with 4 hives ,in June-2000, we have 50 nuc coming ,woodware is about complete. If all is well, we would like to split our hives next year and start some small scale local pollination . I would like to palletize (4x4) our hives for ez transporting . Is there any info available on how to set up the hives on pallets ? 2 or 4 to a pallet ? How would you face the hives? Where to purchase equipment needed to palletize? (already have fork truck and pallets) Thanks Craig M Spencer ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2000 08:17:26 -0800 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: "Ted J. Hancock" Subject: cell size MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Back in the early '80's I attended the University of Guelph and = remember Dr. Maurice Smith talking about cell size and its affect on bee = development. Someone had manufactured a lot of drone foundation = believing it would make better comb for honey supers. This proved not = to be true but the university used the opportunity to place a queen on = straight drone comb just to see what she'd do. After laying drones for = a period of days (weeks?) the queen adapted and started laying = fertilized eggs in drone cells. However only 50% of these workers = emerged and inspection showed that the other 50% could not emerge = because they had oriented their heads towards the midrib. Further = research determined that bee larvae pupate they compare the rought = capping of the cell to the smooth bottom and orient their heads toward = the rough surface. In a deeper drone cell the worker larva could not = reach the capping so had to guess which way to orient. I don't know if = this work was ever published. I think Dr. Smith said the workers that = did hatch from drone cells were slightly larger than normal, but this = gave them no advantage. Ted Hancock ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2000 17:29:08 +0100 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Murray McGregor Subject: Re: Formic: Organic or synthetic In-Reply-To: <200004010051.TAA04200@listserv.albany.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 In article <200004010051.TAA04200@listserv.albany.edu>, GImasterBK@AOL.COM writes >If you ...........snip......... you have forgotten the chemistry you should >have learned in high school chemistry. I have read all the posts on this subject that I still currently have on my computer and nowhere can I see anyone having written anything which suggests that there is an actual chemical difference between naturally occurring and synthetically produced formic acid. What was being discussed was the likelihood of it being an acceptable organic treatment, and, despite the apparent lack of logic behind it, it is quite possible that naturally occurring formic would be acceptable and synthetically produced not. I am not a follower of the organic movement, and will not pay extra for these goods, but I have had a prolonged brush with a certification body appointed by a retailer seeking to establish whether we could become an organic producer. Some of their needs are a bit odd and self contradictory, including the distinction between natural and synthetic origin inputs (be they nutrients or treatments or whatever) regardless of whether they happen to be chemically identical. Whilst on the subject of chemistry, it is quite possible for natural and synthetic versions of many molecules to be chemically identical and yet operate differently. It is left and right handedness that is behind this (I think the word is chirene or kyrene, not sure how to spell it). Natural versions are normally created in one version only, as that is the way that the biological systems work, but synthetic versions can be a random mix. This is getting way off topic and way way off my area of knowledge (there will be far better informed folks reading this), but this problem can occur. Whether it can happen in Formic acid, and whether it would make any difference to its action, I do not know. (I suspect not on both counts) -- Murray McGregor ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2000 17:41:52 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Allen Dick Subject: Worker Cell Measurement MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I have spent days literally examining the question of determining the size of worker cells, in response to some email we received some time back suggesting that virtually all the ills of beekeeping at the beginning of this new millennium are due to the decision to produce foundation with larger cells than the bees would build on their own. I can't say that I have reached a conclusion on this and I look forward to much stimulating discussion on the matter. What I have discovered, though is that there is a huge comprehension gap between the measurements that scientists and technicians use and what we use as laypeople. My current belief is that the people advocating return to 'natural' cell size are making a mathematical error that causes them to force the bees onto unduly small cells. Whether or not the use of constrictive cells has benefits in terms of health, I do not know. At any rate, rather than write at length here, I invite you to examine the conversion chart and articles at http://www.internode.net/HoneyBee/. Choose the "Measuring Worker Comb" link from the menu. allen ---- "If I make a living off it, that's great--but I come from a culture where you're valued not so much by what you acquire but by what you give away," -- Larry Wall (the inventor of Perl) ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2000 21:48:17 -0800 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: "Daniel D. Dempsey" Subject: Re: bee on pallets In-Reply-To: <200004011547.KAA28332@listserv.albany.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed At 08:03 AM 04/01/2000 -0500, you wrote: >Hi All, >New bee keeper here. > > We started last year with 4 hives ,in June-2000, we have 50 nuc >coming ,woodware is about complete. >If all is well, we would like to split our hives next year and start >some small scale local pollination . > >I would like to palletize (4x4) our hives for ez transporting . > >snip< >Craig: Some people put 6 hives to a pallet entrance facing out. You use a bottom board with 1 1//2" square runners at the back and front. The bottom boards are nailed to the first brood super. On the pallet you put 2 1 1/2" Square strips about 6" apart running the length of the pallet. The back runner on the bottom board sets behind the strip on the pallet. they band the hives to the pallet with plastic banding and metal fasteners. You loop the banding on one side if the fastener so that you can pull the tail to release and can re- use the banding. (Hard to explain)4 ft. x 4 ft. four way pallets work best for this. Other people use bottom boards made in the pallet with pallet clips from a bee supply Hope this helps. Dan Daniel D. Dempsey P O Box 5 Red Bluff,CA 96080 N40.09 W122.18 ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2000 01:17:56 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Allen Dick Subject: Attention - Non-North American Beekeepers MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit A group of us are very interested in what types of foundation are available around the world. You can help us by simply measuring across 10 cells and reporting the distance accurately in inches or in centimetres. Please let me know personally at allend@internode.net what sizes you get. For more information, you may visit http://www.internode.net/HoneyBee/Misc/CellCount.htm. TIA allen ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2000 08:24:05 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: reno Subject: Queen Excluder MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On March 1, I purchased a nuc hive and placed it in a standard hive body. Since I use screen bottoms, I can observe the hive from beneath. On the 29th it was boiling with bee and all the frame bottoms were covered with bees. At that time I was advised to add a honey super without a queen excluder by one veteran beekeeper. He said that the bee would be reluctant to go up through the excluder, and that I should wait about three or four days, then add the plastic excluder under the super. This technique is not discussed anywhere in the books that I have. Most say to just add the excluder at the time the honey super is placed on the hive. What is the course of action I should follow? I have three other hives that were started from three pound packages on the 29th, so I need this information for them as well. I am in a flow here in North Florida..Thanks in advance for your input. Will Lewis...NOVICE FIRST CLASS.. ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2000 09:18:22 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Peter Borst Subject: organic honey Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Greetings The whole is of "Organic Honey" seems to hinge on the question of where the bees forage, not the practices of the beekeeper. If there were standard accepted practices, any beekeeper could try to follow them (whether his or her bees would survive is a different matter). However, one has less control of the forage. For example, I know that the primary sources of honey in this area are wild plants (basswood trees, goldenrod, etc.) but I was told that since this is an agricultural area, the honey "could not" be certified organic. If the bees got honey mostly from sprayed crops (like alfalfa), that would be another matter, though I don't see how, if the crop was being sprayed, the bees would manage to get back to produce any honey from that source. But if the bees collect nectar mostly from wild sources (sage, wild buckwheat, tupelo, to name a few) that would seem to be exactly what a consumer of "Organic Products" would want. I think the line is being drawn to strictly here. I don't know of any beekeeper that has been able to meet these requirements, hence - there is no "Organic Honey" available. If the rules were a little more reasonable perhaps it would be possible to market such a product. -- - - - - - - - - Peter Borst plb6@cornell.edu http://www.people.cornell.edu/pages/plb6/ - - - - - - - - ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2000 11:05:20 EDT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: GImasterBK@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Queen Excluder MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Your "veteran" beekeeper gave you good advice. Put super in place. Wait until "something" is put into the cells that have been drawn on 3-5 frames. This may be BROOD as well as nectar. Which ever will be an attractant (bait) to attract bees to cover it. Make sure the queen is DOWN BELOW and put an excluder under the super. George Imirie ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2000 11:22:18 EDT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: John Mitchell Subject: Organic Terramycin, Formic MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Terramycin is listed in a chart titled "Pesticides Often Accepted for Use On or Around Some Types of Organically Grown Produce" in a book called "Pests of the Garden and Small Farm" (2nd edition) by Mary Louise Flint, director of IPM Education and Publications for the California IPM Project, and an extension entomologist at UC Davis. Terramycin is derived from a naturally occuring substance. It's manufactured from fungi. The book was published in 1998, so until the new U.S. federal regs. kicked in recently, this was probably the most current thinking on organic pesticide use in the state of California, and maybe nationally. California regulations are significant nationwide because so much of its produce is sold elsewhere. I've purchased organics in Massachusetts marked "Certified Organic in the State of California." As reported in the media, no antibiotics are allowed under the new federal regulations. Bob Roach wrote: <> The USDA should be lobbied first to follow the precedent of California in allowing Terramycin as an organic treatment, and then as a certified organic treatment in beehives. Bob, is there a way to submit comments to the USDA via email or through a Web site? Murray Mcgregor wrote: <<...it is quite possible that naturally occurring formic would be acceptable and synthetically produced not.>> Flint goes on to explain the logic behind this organic vs. synthetic conundrum, after acknowleding that many find it confusing. "Generally there are less environmental and health hazards with pesticides allowed for organically certified produce than for synthetic pesticides. However, "organic" pesticides are not without hazard for users—acute toxicities of some of them are higher than for synthetic alternatives. What makes organic pesticides safer environmentally is their tendency to break down more rapidly into nontoxic substances than synthetic materials; as a result they are much less likely to leave toxic residues in soil, groundwater or marketed produce." So the key, it seems, to the health and environmental concerns that organic certification is meant to address, is how quickly an antibiotic or pesticide degrades and becomes inert. As we all know, TM breaks down pretty quickly, so much so it's not even recommended that we apply it in sugar syrup. Our formic acid will be derived from a synthetic source probably, but this is also a substance, as I understand it, that breaks down rapidly. I feel much better knowing (at least until I get more information) that these substances, while not currently "certified" organic, are comparable in effect to the organics. ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2000 12:10:06 EDT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: John Mitchell Subject: Apistan: Contamination Confusion MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The active ingedient in Apistan strips is fluvalinate, a synthetic pyrethroid. It's naturally occuring cousin is pyrethrum, a plant derivative. I am confused about how rapidly fluvalinate degrades. It seems that assertions about the potency of fluvalinate depend somewhat on whether we're talking about it's use as a varroa treatment vs. its potential as a food contaminant. There are many posts in the archives about fluvalinate's potential as a food contaminant. One report in the B-eel archives shows a researcher concluding, "that a return to fluvalinate-free wax, would take an estimated fifty years, provided there was no chemical usage for that time period." Yet we're admonished on the U.S. label for Apistan strips: "Wastes resulting from use of this product may be disposed of on site or at an approved waste disposal facility." If fluvalinate hung around for 50 years, it would be a threat to soil and groundwater, and we wouldn't be allowed to dispose of it on-site. Furthermore, it seems to be generally accepted knowledge that Apistan strips deteriorate quickly when the package is opened or exposed to light. So why is it that when we're talking about fluvalinate and food, it's as potent as radioactive waste or AFB spores, but as a pesticide, it's life can be measured in days and months? I don't get it. How rapidly does fluvalinate break down and become inert? ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2000 18:49:59 +0200 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Jorn Johanesson Subject: SV: Organic Terramycin, Formic In-Reply-To: <20000402153609.IAAA2292.fepE.post.tele.dk@SEGATE.SUNET.SE> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit -----Oprindelig meddelelse----- Fra: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology [mailto:BEE-L@LISTSERV.ALBANY.EDU]På vegne af John Mitchell Sendt: 2. april 2000 17:22 Til: BEE-L@LISTSERV.ALBANY.EDU Emne: Organic Terramycin, Formic When I first started my addult life farming, we have used Formic acid for preserving grass for winther food to the cows. I recal its smell that was able to take all air out of the lungs :-) In Denmark formic acid is also called ANT acid, because it chemical is equal to the Acid the ants are using. Try to sit down in a red forrest ant nest and you will get that smell in your nose. I doubt that you can get people to collect 100 litres of this acid natural from the ants. But it is factory produced, but is the same as the ant acid. best regards Jorn Johanesson EDBi = multilingual Beekeeping software since 1987 http://apimo.dk (USA) http://home4.inet.tele.dk/apimo (Denmark) apimo@post4.tele.dk Jorn_Johanesson@apimo.dk ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2000 09:27:44 -0800 Reply-To: cherubini@mindspring.com Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Paul Cherubini Subject: Re: Apistan: Contamination Confusion MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit John Mitchell wrote: > > The active ingedient in Apistan strips is fluvalinate, a synthetic > pyrethroid. It's naturally occuring cousin is pyrethrum, a plant derivative. > I am confused about how rapidly fluvalinate degrades. It seems that > assertions about the potency of fluvalinate depend somewhat on whether we're > talking about it's use as a varroa treatment vs. its potential as a food > contaminant. Fluvalinate is a 3rd generation or so synthetic pyrethroid - a chlorinated hydrocarbon that is only distantly related to natural pyrethrum. In private tests* sponsored by the chemical company I work for, these newer synthetic pyrethroids took months to degrade to undetectable levels. Worse, when foreign countries like Japan and western Europe conduct routine pesticide residue screening on imported foods, synthetic pyrethoids are easily detected in trace amounts and these countries have set their tolerances very low. By contrast, natural pyrethrum degrades faster (but still lingers in contaminated food for a month or more) and is not easily detected in routine pesticide screening unless the amount is 1 part per million or more. Fluvalinate can be detected at concentrations about 100 times lower than this. *Tests conducted by the Dried Fruit Association of California to evaluate synthetic pyrethroids as a pesticide to use in warehouses storing dried fruit and nuts. Paul Cherubini, Placerville, Calif. ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2000 23:06:36 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Robert Roach Subject: Re: Organic Terramycin, Formic MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit John Mitchell Wrote: >Bob, is there a way to submit comments to the USDA via email or through a >Web site? Yes, you may submit comments through the National Organic Program (NOP) web site at: http://www.ams.usda.gov/nop/ I cannot find the word "honey" anywhere in the proposed rule. When the federal rule is adopted, California will have to fall in line with it. The California Organic Foods Act also seems to be mute on the subject. You can find this at: http://www.cdfa.ca.gov/inspection/fve/organic_act/index.html. I will try to find out what the major certifying agency is doing. A quick web search found one private agency in Oregon that apparently certifies organic honey. Organic certification is currently done by 49 state and private organizations. They can all have different rules because there is no national standard. If the NOP does not address organic standards for honey, I am not quite sure what that means. It may mean that the local certifying agencies can write their own standards, as long as they are not inconsistent with the NOP. BTW, antibiotics are not going to be allowed in livestock production under the proposed rule. I think this has to do with E. coli and resistant bacteria concerns. Beekeepers could certainly argue that treating for AFB is different. Bob Roach ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2000 16:46:20 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: glbarbor@JUNO.COM Subject: Re: Queen Excluder MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dear Will, I agree that you should wait until there is some brood in the upper box before you place the excluder. My experience is that some colonies will go through an excluder no matter what. Most, however, need some inticement to go through, and brood is the best. Just make sure the queen is below when you add the excluder. Once they have started going through the excluder there seems to be no problem. Jerry in PA. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2000 12:27:45 EDT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Adony Melathopoulos Subject: organic vs. reduced residue- a logical choice MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit There is a very interesting paper in the 'New York's Food and Life Science Bulletin' (1992, 132: 1-8); 'A method to measure the environmental impact of pesticides'. The paper outlines a Environmental Impact Quotient, which is a method of assessing the overall impact of various pest management practices. The quotient takes into account: - Mode of pesticide action. - Toxicity of pesticide to fish, birds, bees and other beneficial insects. - Short-term and long term health effects of the pesticide to mammals. - Potential for ground water runoff of the pesticide. - Peristence of the pesticide in soil. They used the quotient to evaluate three different ways of mananging pests on Red Delicious apples in NY state; organic, traditional pest management (reliant on pesticides), and integrated pest management (monitor and spray only when pest is causing economic damage, use least toxic pesticides, rely on biological control). Which do you think was most environmentally benign? Environmental Impact Quotient (Red Delicious Apples in NY State) [the larger the number the more damaging to the environment] Traditional pest management= 938 Integrated pest managment= 182 Organic= 1799 Why so high for organic pest management? Organic growers were bound to use natural compounds like sulphur for the control of apple scab, which were way more deliterious than the synthetic products (Sulphur EIQ= 1720 vs. Nova or Captan < 300). As most people on this thread have commented, natural is not necessarily safer. There are a number of regional programs sprouting throughout North America that market residue-free or integrated pest management grown crops. Just like organic, these groups certify farmers for the way they grow their crops, but differ in that they certify and market crops that have been grown as safely and sustainable as possible. In British Columbia Canada their is the Greenprint crop labeling program. In Massachusetts their is the Partners with Nature program. The Wegmans supermarket chain has their own IPM label. Growers involved in these programs are able to use this marketing tool to keep their market share in face of cheap imports, and in some cases, fetch 5% higher prices in the market, enabliing them to justify higher costs of production. I suggest that beekeepers do two things: 1) Spend research dollars to develop production guidelines that focus on integrated colony management, with the aim of reducing pesticide use and residues in hive products- not eliminating pesticides, just reducing their use. The outcome of this research will be something like an ISO designation that would assure packers and consumers that you have taken all the steps towards producing the purest and sustainable product on the market. 2) Do heavy duty marketing. Find what customers want and make your product fit that mold. Get premium prices for making a premium product. With smart planning and judicious use of marketing dollars beekeepers could get organic prices and protect their domestic markets without having to even deal with all the issues that go with organic certification (the ironies and the headaches). Regards Adony Melathopoulos Calgary, Alberta, CANADA ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2000 14:09:23 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Elizabeth Petofi Subject: Request Recommendations for Bee Plants MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit My bees are in a wooded area of which seven and a half acres has been logged. I want to plant a good nectar source for them such as clover AND I have a deer and turkey population which decimated the planting I made last year. Please could I have recommendation of plants the deer do not like which will provide good nectar and pollen sources for my bees? In Virginia. Thanks in advance. Elizabeth Petofi ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2000 18:53:51 +0200 Reply-To: jtemp@xs4all.nl Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Jan Tempelman Organization: Home sweet home Subject: Re: Organic Terramycin, Formic MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Robert Roach wrote: >......... antibiotics are not going to be allowed in livestock production under > the proposed rule. I think this has to do with E. coli and resistant > bacteria concerns. > Beekeepers could certainly argue that treating for AFB > is different. Why???? aren't you not using antibiotics for AFB treatment???? regards, jant -- Jan Tempelman Kerkstraat 53 NL 7471 AG Goor xx.31.(0)547.275788 http://www.xs4all.nl/~jtemp/index3.html mailto:jtemp@xs4all.nl -- ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2000 00:22:52 +0200 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: peter dillon Subject: Regulations concerned with Pesticide testing MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit It appears to me that there is a serious lack in testing procedures - I say this because pesticides are put on to the market not having been tested regarding their toxicity when bees come into contact with the active molecule (or the resulting metabolites). Often an active ingredient in allowed and passes by so called controlling commissions due to the fact that it method of application does not bring it into direct contact with the bees. When this is the case, there are few, limited or no tests applied to the substance relating to effects on bees- a handy way of getting around a problem. E.g.. Systemic pesticides may be applied to a plant before flowering periods, therefore allowed, its target being aphids-nothing is mentioned about bees- NO NEED - WHY LOOK FOR PROBLEMS. Companies wait until there is a problem, fight all the way, hoping that legal argument slows down the procedures until the material in question looses its efficiency and it needs to be replaced anyway Looking up legal requirements (and I do understand why) tests are required for human health, "animal health"- but bees- very little!! Are Beekeepers so easy to roll over? If a kind soul could indicate to me where I might find the regulations stipulating the basic steps-taken by the "authorities" when a company wishes to place a substance on to the market. i.e. what criteria decides which tests are to be applied and why; Peter ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 3 Apr 1999 16:03:22 PST Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: GREGOIRE@ENDOR.COM Subject: Re: Request Recommendations for Bee Plants MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Eat the deer and turkey. Ernie Gregoire "Beekeeper," definition= partially brave, partially excentric Grist Mill Apiary Canaan, New Hampshire, USA ------------------------------------- 04/03/99 16:03:22 ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2000 17:33:19 -0600 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Jerry J Bromenshenk Subject: Re: Regulations concerned with Pesticide testing In-Reply-To: <200004032239.SAA03837@listserv.albany.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 12:22 AM 4/4/00 +0200, you wrote: Peter, the guidelines are clearly spelled out in the Federal Register and on EPA web pages. We can argue at length about the appropriateness of the required tests. But what is more fundamental is that EPA has tended to move from bees as the most important species to be protected (the only non-target species named by the FR and EPA) to a generic non-target organism (which they tend to translate as water fowl). In the last year, I have read over 1500 pages of EPA documents concerning test protocols, guidelines, requirements, etc. Two trends are disturbing - much more to me than the issue you bring up: 1. EPA likes simplistic protocols - and ignores the advice of the people who pioneered testing for bees and pesticide hazards. This is confounded by Congressional pressure to privatize testing. Done right, these tests take time, cost $$, and should be available for public and scientific review. When Atkins and Johansen at Universities in CA and WA were doing these tests, they recognized the need for colony replication and publication of results. But private firms have to make a profit and often collapse the tests onto one colony - because of time and costs. They also tend to emerge brood to get bees of an even age - but that's not what the pesticide hits. Atkins and Johansen knew that colonies vary in susceptability and that forager bees are not tenurial adults (just emerged from the pupae). So nowadays- hazard assessments for label registration may be based on a single colony and young bees. 2. Private firms generally do not publish results. You have to go through the freedom of information act to get the results (and to do that you have to know the exact formulation tested). Whether you agree or disagree with their methods of testing, Atkins and Johansen published. The remaining academic doing this type of testing is Dan Mayer in WA, who worked with Carl Johansen. 3. When the beekeeper endemnity program was in place in the U.S. (before Ronald did away with it), EPA and others had labs that could investigate bee kills AND the beekeeping organizations made themselves heard load and clear at the U.S. Congressional level. With mites, africanized bees, etc., and the chemicals used to control hive beetles taking center stage, many in EPA tend to think that by restricting the use of methyl parathion, the pesticide issue and bees has been more or less resolved (or at least is less important than mites and beetles). But EPA remains concerned about birds. Why? Because the bird folks (those who love birds and those who hunt birds are very vocal). My opinion is that when the endemnity program ended, most beekeepers started taking their lumps. Only a very few strident voices told the agency that pesticides continue to be a problem - and the agency tends to ignore one or two vocal critics if they are not hearing from the beekeeping industry (that is, the beekeeping organizations or lots of beekeepers) As such, with the exception of beekeepers telling EPA why they need chemicals (a pesticide) to control beetles, EPA will continue to focus its non-target organism protection on the warm, fuzzy, or feathered critters - rather than bees. I have worked with EPA for over 27 years. The agency is not indifferent, but it does respond to the squeaking wheel - and the beekeepers have been waving the flag for other issues - mites, beetles, africanized bees. If the agency does not get continual input about the critical need to adequately protected pollinators, it is likely to assume that the bee/pesticide problem is under control and that other issues, such as the protection of birds is more important. The good news is that the agency does respond to public pressure. But I can't speak for the beekeeping industry. All of the above is my own personal opinion. Many of you have heard me say at meetings, that if you don't let the agency know your problems/concerns, you have no one to blame but yourselves if the agency de-emphasizes pollinator protection. Cheers, Jerry >It appears to me that there is a serious lack in testing procedures - I >say this because pesticides are put on to the market not having been >tested regarding their toxicity when bees come into contact with the >active molecule (or the resulting metabolites). >Often an active ingredient in allowed and passes by so called >controlling commissions due to the fact that it method of application >does not bring it into direct contact with the bees. >When this is the case, there are few, limited or no tests applied to the >substance relating to effects on bees- a handy way of getting around a >problem. >E.g.. Systemic pesticides may be applied to a plant before flowering >periods, therefore allowed, its target being aphids-nothing is mentioned >about bees- NO NEED - WHY LOOK FOR PROBLEMS. >Companies wait until there is a problem, fight all the way, hoping that >legal argument slows down the procedures until the material in question >looses its efficiency and it needs to be replaced anyway >Looking up legal requirements (and I do understand why) tests are >required for human health, "animal health"- but bees- very little!! >Are Beekeepers so easy to roll over? >If a kind soul could indicate to me where I might find the regulations >stipulating the basic steps-taken by the "authorities" when a company >wishes to place a substance on to the market. i.e. what criteria decides >which tests are to be applied and why; >Peter > > Jerry J. Bromenshenk, Ph.D. Director, DOE/EPSCoR & Montana Organization for Research in Energy The University of Montana-Missoula Missoula, MT 59812-1002 E-Mail: jjbmail@selway.umt.edu Tel: 406-243-5648 Fax: 406-243-4184 http://www.umt.edu/biology/more http://www.umt.edu/biology/bees ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2000 20:36:41 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Becky or Al S Boehm Subject: spring progress in the south just a short report from the stormy north - south carolina border took first swarm yesterday (april 2). when i checked over all the colonies today between thunderstorms I found that the 2 supers i put on each colonie march first to help avoid swarming were being filled with honey . one colonie even had most of the first super capped. apples in full bloom along with basswood and dandelion, and wild cherry starting to bloom today. it appears to be very early season and might be a fruitful one. northerners get ready! Al Boehm Columbus NC ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2000 19:26:01 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Robert Roach Subject: Organic Honey Standard MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit This is from the National Organic Program proposed rule. Apparently, all of the text is not in the HTML links. You have to get the PDF file containing the entire rule. The excerpt below is on page 136 of 508 pages, under the "Livestock" section. If you print that sucker out it is over two inches thick and weighs five pounds. It seems like the apiculture standard in the first proposal has been dropped, along with the proposals to allow GMO's, irradiation and sludge on organic commodities. (4) Apiculture Standard. The first proposal allowed bees to be brought into an organic operation at any stage of life and required that the predominant portion of their forage be organically produced. Several commenters, including producer and industry groups, pointed out that bees differ significantly from other livestock types and that the first proposal lacked sufficient details to guide honey producers. Many consumers stated that the provisions proposed for bee forage, which required only that a predominant portion of the bees' forage be organic, were too vague and lenient. Recognizing that the provisions in the first proposal for certifying beekeeping operations were inadequate, we removed them entirely from this proposal. We will review the detailed production and handling standards for beekeeping operations that several certifying agents have developed and assess the feasibility of developing a practice standard. The NOSB (National Organic Standards Board) has agreed to review and recommend an apiculture practice standard for organic honey production and hive care, including the origin of organic bees. Regarding honey certification in California, CCOF does not certify honey. However, they tell me that Farm Verified Organic, Inc. (FVO) in North Dakota does certify honey. Bob Roach ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2000 14:57:44 EDT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Beekeeperc@AOL.COM Subject: Beekeeping Help MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I am writing this for a novice beekeeper friend who will be moving to Dorset, Vermont this June and would like to have someone in the area help her. Please E-mail her at MaddieFarm@aol.com Thanks: Norm beekeeperc@aol.com ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2000 23:09:57 EDT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Jean-Francois Lariviere Subject: Pollinators Make Headlines MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Honey Bees Contribute Over $14 Billion to the Value of U.S. Crop Production Many of the Country's Crops Would Not Exist Without the Honey Bee at Bloom Time LONGMONT, Colo., April 4 /PRNewswire/ -- As honey bees gather pollen and nectar for their survival, they pollinate crops such as apples, cranberries, melons and broccoli. Some crops, including blueberries and cherries are 90 percent dependent on honey bee pollination; one crop, almonds, depends entirely on the honey bee for pollination at bloom time. For many others, crop yield and quality would be greatly reduced without honey bee pollination. In fact, a 1999 Cornell University study documented that the contribution made by managed honey bees hired by U.S. crop growers to pollinate crops amounted to just over $14.6 billion. (Photo: http://www.newscom.com/cgi-bin/prnh/20000404/SFTU162 ) Cornell entomology professors, Drs. Roger Morse and Nicholas Calderone have reported the results of their study in the March issue of Bee Culture magazine. Morse and Calderone calculated the value of 51 individual fruit, nut, vegetable and field crops that depend to some degree on pollination by managed honey bees in the U.S. Using USDA crop production figures, grower surveys and data from their 1989 study, they estimated the total annual value of increased agricultural production attributable to honey bee pollination at $14.6 billion. In comparison, the total value attributable to honey bee pollination in 1989 was $9.3 billion (a 36.3 percent increase). Approximately 20 percent of that increase is due to inflation; the rest is because of increased demand for pollinated foods from an increasing U.S. population. Each year American farmers and growers continue to feed more people using less land. They produce an abundance of food that is nutritious and safe. Honey bees are very much a part of this modern agricultural success story. It's estimated that there are over 2.9 million colonies in the U.S. today, two-thirds of which travel the country each year pollinating crops and producing honey and beeswax. Nearly one million colonies are used each year in California just to pollinate the state's almond crop! The $14.6 billion contribution made by managed honey bees comes in the form of increased yields and superior quality crops for growers and American consumers -- a healthy beekeeping industry is invaluable to a healthy U. S. agricultural economy. The Cornell study was supported by the National Honey Board. Bee Culture article: http://bee.airoot.com/beeculture/pollination2000/pg1.html Honey Color Image: http://www.nhb.org/pressrm/images/photos/tn02.jpg Visit www.nhb.org for honey information. SOURCE National Honey Board CO: National Honey Board ST: Colorado IN: AGR ENV PUB SU: 04/04/2000 19:56 EDT http://www.prnewswire.com ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2000 23:35:18 EDT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: John Mitchell Subject: Re: Organic Honey MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In a message dated 4/3/00 6:01:14 AM, raroach@IX.NETCOM.COM writes: << Yes, you may submit comments through the National Organic Program (NOP) web site at: http://www.ams.usda.gov/nop/ I cannot find the word "honey" anywhere in the proposed rule. >> Thanks Bob. The USDA site allows a search of the comments presented so far. A search under "honey" for submitted comments only turned up the following. I thought it would be a valuable contribution to the discussion of organic honey here. The comments are from a honey packer from California who certifies organic honey under Oregon state programs. "I have just learned that the revised proposed rule concerning the National Organic Program contains no standards for organically gathered honey. My company currently uses certified organic honey as an ingredient and packs certified organic honey for resale. The standards that our third party certifier uses for honey are very strict, and pertinent to concerns about honey gathering. They disallow the use of synthetic strips to treat for mites, killing off the hive at the end of each season, and use of oil base paints. They require a four mile radius free from industry or conventional crops. My husband and I personally visited the bee yards and honey operation of our major source of organic honey. It is so remote, we are thoroughly confident in the certifiability of that honey production. There are few locations that qualify for such strict standards, but they do exist - in Mexico and Hawaii and Canada and Africa. If an organic distiction can be made for honey, then we believe that the AMS should leave room for us to do so in the new rules. Please investigate the honey standards that have been used by Oregon Tilth www.tilth.org, Quality Assurance International 858-792-3531, and OCIA www.ocia.org, and incorporate them into your new NOP rules." Interestingly, the proposed organic regulations here would also codify certain moral behaviors that have nothing to do with health or the environment (killing off the hive at the end of each season). And for the subscribers to "The Forgotten Pollinators" theory of competition, (I'm devil's advocating for a position I don't embrace) consider this: requiring certified apiaries to be located miles from conventional agricultural land would encourage organic honey producers to establish production apiaries in true wilderness areas, which, ironically, could put substantial pressure on native pollinator populations in areas with the least carrying capacity, at least in the U.S, Mexico and Canada. I could not locate any standards for Oregon Tilth on their Web page. Oregon state (OCIA) has moderately detailed regulations, which include this: "Extracting facility should be very clean and inspected annually by federal food inspectors." I am not aware of too many hobbyists—or even sideliners—who have their extracting facilities inspected annually by a federal food inspector. It seems that organic honey certification, under this set of rules, would exclude all but the largest, most well-capitalized, producers who could afford a facility to meet federal standards, to produce "organic honey." Being a hobbiest/sideliner, this dampens my enthusiasm for an organic certification program. Even worse, for customers who are willing to pay 5-10% premium for a superior honey product, they may choose to spend that money on a faraway packer's organic certification at the grocery shelf, rather than a hobbyist's locally produced honey at the roadside stand. Of course, I understand that there is a point of view expressed from time to time that some hobbyists are reckless or ignorant in their use of medicines/pesticides, and that hobbyists are more prone to using unregistered, or even illegal, treatments. From that point of view (devil's advocating again), organic certification—by excluding hobbyists—might allow the consumer to make a truly informed buying decision about the health and safety of a honey product. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 07:28:15 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Bob Cannaday Subject: Henbit\Dead Nettle I searched the list for the subject and found several articles but did not find any info concerning on whether or not Henbit\Dead Nettle provides any nectar or a pollen and if it is considered a minor or major source if any. Any info is appreciated. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 08:32:08 -0500 Reply-To: busybeeacres@discoverynet.com Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: bob harrison Subject: Re: Henbit\Dead Nettle MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bob Cannaday wrote: > > I searched the list for the subject and found several articles but did not > find any info concerning on whether or not Henbit\Dead Nettle provides any > nectar or a pollen and if it is considered a minor or major source if any. > Any info is appreciated. Henbit is a minor source in Missouri and actually blooms before Dandelions in most years. Bob Harrison ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 13:44:52 EDT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: "David L. Green" Subject: Re: Henbit\Dead Nettle MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 4/5/00 5:23:12 AM Pacific Daylight Time, bobcan@CLOVER.NET writes: > I searched the list for the subject and found several articles but did not > find any info concerning on whether or not Henbit\Dead Nettle provides any > nectar or a pollen and if it is considered a minor or major source if any. > Any info is appreciated. I always considered henbit an important source, not so much for quantity as for earliness. It is a rich pollen source, as is most of the mint family. Dave Green The Pollination Home Page http://pollinator.com ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 10:31:09 -0500 Reply-To: busybeeacres@discoverynet.com Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: bob harrison Subject: Re: Pollinators Make Headlines MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Jean-Francois Lariviere, Beekeeping needs all the positive image it can receive. The report does exactly that but because Bee-L is a discussion of beekeeping issues i feel obligated to give my opinion. The study reads in part like a white house cover up. page 4 of Bee Culture Quote: The goal of the honey bee importation from Africa was achieved, and there is now an extensive beekeeping industry in the tropical parts of Brazil. Are we going to say the African bee is a good thing now and our reseachers are going to give themselves a pat on the back. Quote:The introduced African bees mated freely with the european bees, but the Africans dominated,and the bees we call africanized are genetically 90 to 95% African. Am i missing something here? At the ABF convention in Austin, Texas i saw the largest collection of beekeepers FIGHTING to keep AHB out of their hives. Those beekeepers said they would quit beekeeping before they would work those bees. Dr. Orley Taylor had to keep his Africanized bees in nucs as large hives were to aggressive. Even Brother Adam said they were to aggressive. Which is it introduced or escaped? I was surprised to see the part about African bees in the article. Are they suggesting AHB would be a asset to migratory beekeepers. Swarming four or five times a year,absconding,not storing enough honey to survive a cold winter, not being able to improve stock because of the dominate African gene are enough reasons for me not to want any part of AHB without even going into aggressiveness! I don't believe U.S. beekeepers are going to be as thrilled with AHB as the article states. AHB-super bee or super headache? > > Quote from page 5 of Bee Culture article: At the same time, varroa mites pretty much wiped out feral colonies in the mid- 1990s. This is the only reference to Varroa in article. What about a small statement that the commercial beekeeper took a hard hit from Varroa in the same period. At least Kim Flottum had the guts to improve the article in Bee Culture by adding the beekeepers side of things at end of article. Thanks Kim for adding your comments! I believe they were VERY appropriate in this case! I have a lot of respect for the bee knowledge the two writers of the article. I found everything in order with their facts on polination. > a healthy > beekeeping industry is invaluable to a healthy U. S. agricultural economy. Maybe we will return to full health one of these days! > > The Cornell study was supported by the National Honey Board. I would support a edited version! Bob Harrison U.S.A. > > > > SOURCE National Honey Board > > ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 11:48:41 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Musashi Subject: Re: Regulations concerned with Pesticide testing Jerry Bromenshenk wrote of EPA pesticide testing regulations and how they have a tendency to test chemicals mainly on birds. Since no one has given him the obvious response begged by his post, I just had to reply: EPA should not be testing only on birds, but should be testing on "the birds AND the bees." It appears that no one told the EPA about the birds and the bees. Anyone with a lick of sense knows that the very survival of the human race is dependent upon knowing about the birds AND the bees. That should be obvious to anyone, including people who work for the EPA, but I guess maybe not. Sorry...I just couldn't help myself. Layne Westover College Station, Texas ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 22:41:21 EDT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Richard Spiekhout Subject: rush MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Caught my first swarm today. What a rush! 30 zillion bees on and around me. My ladder looked like it was made of bees. They were very calm and all i did was cut branches as they clustered on them and put them ino a deep with 2 frames of comb and 2 frames of honey(badly damaged by wax worms). Should I have waited for them to make a big cluster? None were bigger than a big soft ballwhen I removed them and the air and ground and my ladder and me were covered with bees. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2000 17:20:19 -0600 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Jerry J Bromenshenk Subject: Re: Regulations concerned with Pesticide testing In-Reply-To: <200004052059.QAA12546@listserv.albany.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 11:48 AM 4/5/00 -0500, you wrote: Layne is not the only one to make that connection. A few years ago, one of my graduate students was study raptors on the Hanford reservation and I was also coordinating a project that looked at the potential for conflicts between birds and wind turbines. In a meeting with our Natural Resources groups, who knew of my involvement with birds, it came to light that my personal research area was bees. Which resulted in someone asking if that meant I spent all day thinking about the "birds and the bees" Sorry Layne, you started this. >Jerry Bromenshenk wrote of EPA pesticide testing regulations and how they have >a tendency to test chemicals mainly on birds. > >Since no one has given him the obvious response begged by his post, I just had >to reply: > >EPA should not be testing only on birds, but should be testing on >"the birds AND the bees." It appears that no one told the EPA about the birds >and the bees. Anyone with a lick of sense knows that the very survival of the >human race is dependent upon knowing about the birds AND the bees. That should >be obvious to anyone, including people who work for the EPA, but I guess maybe >not. Sorry...I just couldn't help myself. > >Layne Westover >College Station, Texas > > Jerry J. Bromenshenk, Ph.D. Director, DOE/EPSCoR & Montana Organization for Research in Energy The University of Montana-Missoula Missoula, MT 59812-1002 E-Mail: jjbmail@selway.umt.edu Tel: 406-243-5648 Fax: 406-243-4184 http://www.umt.edu/biology/more http://www.umt.edu/biology/bees ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2000 08:33:25 -0500 Reply-To: busybeeacres@discoverynet.com Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: bob harrison Subject: Re: rush MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Richard, Many beekeepers like myself are in a hurry when they catch swarms. Allways seems to come at the wrong times and is a crisis for the people whos yard they are in. Once you get the queen in the box,hive or whatever the others SHOULD join the queen shortly. The big soft ball know doubt had the queen so job was basicly over. If she wasn't in the big ball the bees would have returned to the tree. Waiting for the swarm to cluster is best but, with the queen in your swarm box ,the bees on the ladder will join her in short order. I have on small swarms found the queen and removed her by herself to the box to the delight of the kids watching and watched the entire swarm go to the box. I handle queens all the time so I would recommend you not catching queen by wings in fingers till you get a few years of beekeeping behind you. happy beekeeping! Bob Harrison Should I have waited for them to make a big cluster? None were bigger than a > big soft ballwhen I removed them and the air and ground and my ladder and me > were covered with bees. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2000 13:21:19 EDT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: John Mitchell Subject: Re: Pollinators Make Headlines MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 4/5/00 4:59:58 PM, busybeeacres@DISCOVERYNET.COM writes: << I don't believe U.S. beekeepers are going to be as thrilled with AHB as the article states. >> Perhaps if we want to make an accurate prediction about Africanized honey bees and U.S. bee culture, we should look to the contemporary history of beekeeping in Mexico, where AHB is now "omnipresent." In the current issue of American Bee Journal, Carl Wenning reports on the Mexican experience of AHBs and mites. "After the arrival of the Africanized honey bee and parasitic mites, the annual honey production trended downward. Honey production in 1996 was off 30% from five years earlier. In recent years honey production within Mexico has been on the rebound because Mexican beekeepers have learned to deal effectively with the africanized honey bee and mites, and have been using more modern production techniques." He writes further that many beekeepers in the southern half of the country cannot afford protective equipment for working with AHBs. American beekeepers will not be prevented by poverty from acquiring such equipment. Predictions that the beekeeping industry will disappear in parts of the U.S., or be significantly damaged, are overblown (though they have probably been effective for loosing the purse strings for more research dollars). The rewards of beekeeping, both real and pyschological, will lead new beekeepers to pick up the tradition and learn new management techniques for the Africanized bee, thereby replacing those who are unwilling or unable to change. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2000 14:22:31 EDT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: John Mitchell Subject: Headline: Killer bees arrive in Fort Worth area MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Quote from an article today by United Press International. This is a continuation of my "pollinators make headlines" post. Killer bees arrive in Fort Worth area "Africanized honeybees, or so-called "killer bees," have been confirmed in the Fort Worth, Texas, area, state agriculture officials said Wednesday. "The bees were found in a tree near the town of Pelican Bay, northwest of Fort Worth, according to the Texas Apiary Inspection Service, a unit of the Texas Agricultural Experiment Station at Texas A&M University. "'A sample was collected and sent to Texas A&M's Honey Bee Identification Lab where it was confirmed as Africanized,' said Paul Jackson, the service's chief inspector. "The hive apparently had been in the tree for several months, he said. "The Africanized bees have now been confirmed in 120 of Texas' 254 counties since they entered the United States at Brownsville, Texas, in October 1990. They inhabit most of the southern portion of the state but only one death from the bees has been confirmed." After a description of the AHBs, and the conditions under which they usually attack, the article focuses on the effect on commercial beekeepers in Texas: "Tarrant County, the site of the latest confirmation, was added to the state quarantine list restricting the movement of commercial bee operations in Texas. The action was taken to prevent the spread of the Africanized bees to unaffected areas of the state. "Commercial beekeepers could be forced out of business if their hives were infested by the Africanized variety. The more gentle, European honey bees, are important to Texas agriculture because they pollinate more than 80 percent of state's crops." ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2000 16:36:04 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Bob Harrison Subject: Queen handling and marking for beginners At various talks i have given the subject of handling the queen has come up. Most beginners are timid about picking up a queen by her wings let alone putting a dot on her. My solution is for beginners to practice on DRONES. We bring a cricket cage(like used for fishing )full of drones to the class. We practice catching the drones by their wings and marking them. The drones will sometimes buzz unlike a queen (maybe a male thing!)but beginners get used to catching and marking. Also a fun activity for a bee club. I could not find drone marking in the archives so thought needed adding. Bob Harrison U.S.A. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2000 15:29:23 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: "Lipscomb, Al" Subject: Re: Pollinators Make Headlines MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain > Predictions that the beekeeping industry will disappear in parts of the >U.S., or be significantly damaged, are overblown (though they have probably >been effective for loosing the purse strings for more research dollars). The >rewards of beekeeping, both real and pyschological, will lead new beekeepers >to pick up the tradition and learn new management techniques for the >Africanized bee, thereby replacing those who are unwilling or unable to >change. Most people who are going to be willing to "pick up" beekeeping would not be willing to do so with the AHB. Having a few hives in my back yard to do a little show-and-tell would not work too well when I had to put on armor to work the bees. I can also imagine the pollination industry when they had to explain to the farmers that nobody would be allowed in the fields while the bees were out there to reduce the chances of stinging. You can of course just forget the migratory industry. Want to try and get insurance on a truck load of "killer" bees? How are you going to explain a stinging incident when a semi-tractor load of "killer" bees overturns? Sure, in the end there may be a few beekeepers out in rural areas producing honey, but I doubt there will be enough to maintain the "traditions" much less the industry. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2000 20:46:31 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: De Witt Subject: Brood for sale? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Does anyone in the Dallas Texas area have any frames of brood for sale? I have two hives that have no brood one is completely dead the other has lots of bees but no brood in any form, capped uncapped, or eggs no queen cells or swarm cells. I'd be glad to trade drawn comb and money for brood. Please I would drive within about 90 miles to get some brood and bees. Please let me know. Cliff ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2000 07:30:09 EDT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Maysoon Shukur Subject: Re: Brood for sale? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The queen must have died recently. I'm a new bee keeper but wouldn't it be a good idea to requeen. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2000 09:04:38 EDT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: John Mitchell Subject: Re: AHB: gear and quarantines MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In a message dated 4/6/00 7:12:27 PM, LipscombA@HSN.NET writes: <> Perhaps I need a better understanding of what protective equipment is needed over and above the usual bee suit, veil, gloves, smoker, and perhaps bootbands to work with AHB. The only recommended change that I am aware of to the aforementioned equipment list for AHB is to get a bigger smoker. This is anecdotal, but I don't know too many hobbyists who start out working their hives in less than what's described above. And you're right—hobbyists who want to paw in and tinker with live hives, passing frames around to all the family members and friends, may have to change their ways. Does that kill the joy? For some, definitely. Not for me. And change will be necessary for experienced beekeepers who saunter around the apiary in flimsy cotton short sleeves and a veil, or mug for the cameras with disassembled colonies and no protective wear. Or when hiving swarms without protective gear. Commercial honey producers with permanent apiary sites may find their operations become even quicker and more efficient as they find themselves and their employees doubly motivated to spend as little time as possible mucking around in or near the hives. Commercial pollination could be hit hard by quarantines, especially cross-country migratory beekeeping. Is there anybody on the list who operates in Texas and has some more information about how this quarantine works? Obviously, it means you can't take colonies out of the quarantine area, but can you move colonies around within the quarantine area? ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2000 09:23:52 EDT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: "David L. Green" Subject: Re: Brood for sale? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 4/7/00 4:44:26 AM Pacific Daylight Time, MaySimmons@AOL.COM writes: > The queen must have died recently. I'm a new bee keeper but wouldn't it be a > good idea to requeen. It's not usually a good idea to requeen broodless colonies. You need young bees to get the new queen accepted. (They may also have an unnoticed virgin queen.) I always add at least one panel (two is better) of sealed brood with adhering bees, when requeening such a colony. Dave Green The Pollination Home Page: http://pollinator.com ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2000 09:14:17 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Musashi Subject: Re: AHB: gear and quarantines John Mitchell asks: "Is there anybody on the list who operates in Texas and has some more information about how this quarantine works? Obviously, it means you can't take colonies out of the quarantine area, but can you move colonies around within the quarantine area?" I'm not a commercial beekeeper, but I know Paul Jackson (State Apiary Inspector) and others who are familiar with the quarantine, and that is what I have heard: you cannot move bees out of the quarantined area into an area that is free of AHB, but you CAN move them anywhere within the quarantined area. If you look at the map, it's interesting that there are many counties south of Dallas/Fort Worth that are not quarantined (at least there are some). I'm not sure what all the factors are that contribute to the distribution of AHB. It's an interesting situation. Andy Nachbaur used to say that normally "gentle" bees behaved agressively in desert areas. I'm guessing the same might apply to AHB. That would be an interesting study. Layne Westover College Station, Texas ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2000 11:24:28 EDT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Maysoon Shukur Subject: Re: Brood for sale? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I see. Thank you. But here's another question. What if no queen exists? Of course the bees will try to make one. Correct? What I don't understand is why you want to add broad. Won't a new mated queen lay eggs. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2000 18:26:47 +0100 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Computer Software Solutions Ltd Subject: Queen Marking Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Hello All I am of the opinion that finding and marking queens is an utter waste of time. OK, call it making a virtue of a necessity but so be it!. I cannot find queens even if the queen is known to be on the frame I am holding. If we really think about it, we do not need to find the queen, we need to know which box she is in or which box she is not in. So all we have to do is to sieve the bees through a pristine queen excluder and the objective is achieved. At least it worked for me last year. All I have to do now is to convince the Senior Certificate examiners that this is a valid answer to finding queens. Sincerely Tom Barrett 49 South Park, Foxrock Dublin 18 Ireland # ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2000 12:13:52 -0600 Reply-To: flightdeck1@earthlink.net Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Matthew Subject: Re: AHB: gear and quarantines MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi all, John, you don't have to work AHB to know the 'punch' bees are capable of. Anyone whom has pulled out a feral hive with storm clouds rolling in can tell you how (in)effective bee suits are against angry bees. For those that haven't put their 'armor' through the test, bees will set their stingers straight through bee suits, vinyl or heavy cloth. I have both the Sherriff suit and Dadant and prefer the Sherriff (MannLake version) when working tough bees because they have less risk of my face mask touching skin - where bees are bound to sting immediately. A good set of hair or a baseball cap is important to keep bees off your scalp with these suits. Two shirts under the suit are a must. On several occasions I've removed my sweatshirt after a days work to find it covered with stingers and the blotch of the venom. With bad weather, angry bees will set down on you like taking a squat - which also hurt more than the fly-by stings received on sunny days because the stinger gets in 3 times farther. Gloves are to the opposite extreme. I use mine skin tight because mistakes can be costly. Vinyl clad or chemical type of gloves come in handy but become really uncomfortable after a few hours on a hot day. Leather protects but draws stingers like an attractant and can (will) be stung through once the leather is softened by water or sweat. Choose your gloves by the type of activity. Sweat seems to be the 'prime directive' to clue bees exactly where to sting. The more you panic, the more you sweat, the more they sting. Keeping your cool can be a trick when you feel a few bees climbing up your leg toward things you would prefer to leave out of beekeeping (happened to me twice last year). Protect the back of your neck and around your wrists. Bees will squeeze through holes you previously thought were bee-tight. My Dadant ventilated helmet gave me a fun experience learning this point a few years ago. There's nothing quite like an entire hive covering your body with a deep 'hum' going on. Knowing you're committed and had better have checked your suit twice over because any free-wheeling bees that gain entrance can sting anywhere they choose without interference from you; Or else their friends at the face mask where you try to press will 'help' with a hundred more stings. It's very unnerving knowing these bees mean business by the thousands. If AHB are predisposed with temper as bees at their worst, can we blame beekeepers dropping the biz once AHB arrives? Angry bees take all the fun out of it. Matthew Westall // Earthling Bees >8(())))- "Take me to your feeder" \\ Castle Rock, CO, USA John Mitchell wrote: > Perhaps I need a better understanding of what protective equipment is > needed over and above the usual bee suit, veil, gloves, smoker, and perhaps > bootbands to work with AHB. The only recommended change that I am aware of to > the aforementioned equipment list for AHB is to get a bigger smoker. > Commercial honey producers with permanent apiary sites may find their > operations become even quicker and more efficient as they find themselves and > their employees doubly motivated to spend as little time as possible mucking > around in or near the hives. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2000 12:28:22 -0500 Reply-To: busybeeacres@discoverynet.com Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: bob harrison Subject: Re: AHB: gear and quarantines MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit John, In my opinion and the opinion of most beekeepers is not that the protective equipment need be different but that when disturbed they sting so fast that the alarm odor is impossible to mask. I had a hobby beekeeper drive in the other day and he said he had been stung 20 odd times thru his bee suit and wondered what the problem was. I asked him if when he got a sting did he smoke the area of the sting to mast the odor. Hello! A fellow beekeeper called last year to see if i would work his college helper while he was gone for a couple days. I said sure! We went out to pull honey supers. The bees were after him right away but not bothering me. I asked him when was the last time he washed the venom out of his bee suit. Had to drive all the way beck to apiary to loan him a bee suit. Couldn't get the smile off his face the rest of the day. Most beginners with a book in one hand and a hive tool in the other need to be protected from AHB. > Commercial honey producers with permanent apiary sites may find their > operations become even quicker and more efficient as they find themselves and > their employees doubly motivated to spend as little time as possible mucking > around in or near the hives. I am afraid the work wouldn't get done on a timely basis as they would be hiding in the truck all day waiting for quiting time! I am having trouble getting help but now maybe would that improve if they knew they were killer bees. I wonder if i would still be able to afford insurance? Many friends of mine have been south to check these mean buggers out first hand. After they got back years ago i decided to stay home,save my money and take their word for their aggressivness. How many stings per minute did the researchers say? I will email you a phone number to call if you want and you can talk to a beekeeper that spent two weeks working AHB. His comments are not for the general publics ears. > Commercial pollination could be hit hard by quarantines, especially > cross-country migratory beekeeping. Is there anybody on the list who operates > in Texas and has some more information about how this quarantine works? Last i heard there is a migratory beekeeper with around 3,000 colonies which has never been able to leave the Rio Grande Valley. The story is old so maybe he has left by now with just his equipment. I heard the story at the Austin ABF convention from Texas beekeepers. Maybe a Texas beekeeper will post. > Obviously, it means you can't take colonies out of the quarantine area, but > can you move colonies around within the quarantine area? Yes!I am sure on this point. Tried to ignore this post but couldn't resist! Bob Harrison U.S.A. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2000 15:24:22 EDT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: John Mitchell Subject: Re: AHB: gear and quarantines MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In a message dated 4/7/00 2:31:49 PM, flightdeck1@EARTHLINK.NET writes: << There's nothing quite like an entire hive covering your body with a deep 'hum' going on. >> From your description, I want nothing to do with them either. Yet, the beekeeping industry (and hobby, I gather) persists—and as Wenning reports, is recovering—in Mexico. Central and South America seem to have robust beekeeping industries too. I have a hard time reconciling the "facts on the ground" in foreign countries with AHB, and the "inevitable" demise of beekeeping within the United States. Perhaps the management practices for AHB will little resemble what is conventional now. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2000 16:08:00 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: "Lipscomb, Al" Subject: Re: Queen Marking MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain >I am of the opinion that finding and marking queens is an utter waste of time. The primary reason I like marked queens is to have an idea which queen I am looking at. I do like to raise my own queens but when I find a colony that is having problems it helps to know if I am looking at last years queen or a virgin fresh out of her cell. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2000 16:47:17 EDT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Todd Webb Subject: Re: AHB: gear and quarantines MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The problem I fear the most from the advance of the AHB is not from the bees themselves but from something the US has in spades compared to Mexico and South America- litigation. Once the AHB gets into several metropolitan areas-particularly east of the Mississippi- I fear we are going to see a flood of lawsuits, and the inevitable local laws just behind them. These will be passed by faux-concerned politicians who want to appear as if they are "doing" something about a "serious public health issue" (can't you just hear them on TV now)? This, of course, will seriously impact hobbyist and sideliners. Will beekeeping die out in the US? Of course not, at least not commercially in rural areas. Suburban and Urban beekeeping may be a different story if the well known "Soccer Mom" hysteria fixes on this issue. I see it all the time- folks find out I keep bees and they look at me as if I must be insane. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what those people will want done when the AHB shows up in their town. Todd Keeping a low profile somewhere in Georgia ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2000 13:13:10 -0800 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: Tom Elliott Subject: Bad tempered bees (AHB: gear and quarantines) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Matthew wrote: > John, you don't have to work AHB to know the 'punch' bees are capable of. Anyone > whom has pulled out a feral hive with storm clouds rolling in can tell you how > (in)effective bee suits are against angry bees. I can only guess that the natural beauty of the surrounding countryside is what makes the difference here in Alaska. The fact that there are no "feral" honeybees could not have any bearing, could it :>) The only time I have ever had to don any protective gear was when working with bees that had been mishandled by their owner (or myself). The horror stories I read would certainly put me off my hobby. I don't like hot "protective gear" and I don't like getting large numbers of stings. Life is a lot tougher down there in the "hot" country. Tom -- "Test everything. Hold on to the good." (1 Thessalonians 5:21) Tom Elliott Chugiak, Alaska U.S.A. beeman@gci.net ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2000 23:08:22 +0100 Reply-To: John Burgess Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: John Burgess Subject: Drone layer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Spring has arrived in the UK after a mild but wet winter. I have one colony which is laying up well, but unfortunately all the brood is drone, laid in a spotty fashion. I obviously concluded that the queen had died over the winter and I have a laying worker. However, there are 3 or 4 fresh queen cells (not present 3 weeks ago) containing food, but as far as I can see no eggs or larvae. Is this usual with laying workers? Is it possible that the bees can steal a fertile egg from another hive and rescue the situation? Should I give up with this colony? All suggestions welcome. John Burgess, Editor Gwenynwyr Cymru/The Welsh Beekeeper ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2000 18:20:00 EDT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: John Mitchell Subject: Re: AHB: gear and quarantines MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 4/7/00 5:05:28 PM, SPCherub@AOL.COM writes: << The problem I fear the most from the advance of the AHB is not from the bees themselves but from something the US has in spades compared to Mexico and South America- litigation. >> Great point. Maybe if we could develop some strategies to deal with this now, the irrational hyper-reactive types could be stymied in some places. How about this for a strategy: One way to influence government is to wield the credibility and authority of even bigger government. What if all beekeepers were required to register with the state apiary inspection system? (This may already be true in some places) Apiary sites would be inspected more than once a season to ensure AHB had not become established. Beekeepers would pay a low flat fee to ensure funding for random testing. It could even be argued out of such a system that only state government has the jurisdiction to shut down an apiary, not localities, which employ no trained staff that could determine if a threat actually exists. Insurance companies would be protected by the state certification. And who says we have to ask insurance companies to insure AHB? Provide documentation of your regular requeening practices with pure European or Russian honey bees (and inspections) so you can get the "good beekeeper" discount. Does all this ensure a 100% AHB-free apiary? No, but it shows you were responsible and made every effort to protect the public and yourself. If beekeepers could enlist the state apiary inspection systems to come out and inspect each season for AHB, and then provide certification that an apiary was AHB-free, local authorities could be placated. Or beekeepers could show documentation (provided by queen breeders) that they requeened regularly with certified queens from European or Russian stock. The practicality of this would hinge on whether the state apiary inspection system has the resources. If people are greatly motivated by fear to do all kinds of things about AHB, then maybe that fear could be turned productively to extract more funding to reinvigorate apiary inspection in the U.S. Here's another idea: What if a representative from the apiary inspection program could come and out and talk at local government committee meetings when these types of laws are being considered? This could be the single most important role an inspector could step into to protect honey bees (and beekeepers) in an area: Use his credibility and authority as a representative of the state to prevent local fearmongers from outlawing honey bees (and beekeepers). Lacking this type of vigorous state support, is there anything a local beekeeper can do if he finds himself in front of a committee trying to defend the continued legality of beekeeping? Sure. Save all your documentation of when and who you buy queens from. And requeen frequently. It's not a total guarantee that AHB won't move in, but you'll know it immediately and correct the situation when it develops, the argument goes. Another argument that has worked for some in the gardening world is that you are somehow involved in important or special work, and outlawing what you are doing would be grossly irresponsible or illegal. When gardeners have been confronted by draconian landscaping laws in some places (putting greens for all), they have sucessfully challenged them by planting native endangered species and arguing that the city law was forcing the homeowners to violate the Endangered Species Act. A beekeeper could talk about the great experiment going on right now with the introduction of Russian honey bees, and point out that by keeping Russian bees you are making a significant contribution to the experiment. Get the focus off the AHB and onto the good things that you are doing with your bees that keep them from being Africanized honey bees. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2000 17:39:06 -0500 Reply-To: busybeeacres@discoverynet.com Sender: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology From: bob harrison Subject: Re: Queen Marking MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lipscomb, Al wrote: > > >I am of the opinion that finding and marking queens is an utter waste of > time. > Hi Al, Every beekeeper should be able to FIND the queen for a number of reasons i won't go into. The only time i mark a queen is one headed for a observation hive. Its so much easier for the kids to find the queen themselves AND EASIER ON THE BEEKEEPER! For beekeepers with poor vision and begining beekeepers i recommend a marked queen. Also beekeepers with dark colored bees as the queens are difficult for beginners to find. Being able to pick up a queen by her wings without harming her is something i believe a beekeeper should be able to do. Then when ready workers with stingers. Even now i get punished by a worker now and then for picking her up by her wings. I never swell because of the amount of stings i get year around but even the last sting i got about a hour ago felt like the first i got as a child. i rather work without gloves but will put them on on a cloudy day or when bees seem in a bad mood. Major stinging hardly occurs because i don't let it get started. Bob Harrison