From MAILER-DAEMON Sat Feb 28 07:40:52 2009 Return-Path: <> X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.8 (2007-02-13) on industrial X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-86.4 required=2.4 tests=ADVANCE_FEE_1,AWL, MAILTO_TO_SPAM_ADDR,SPF_HELO_PASS,USER_IN_WHITELIST autolearn=disabled version=3.1.8 X-Original-To: adamf@METALAB.UNC.EDU Delivered-To: adamf@METALAB.UNC.EDU Received: from listserv.albany.edu (unknown [169.226.1.24]) by metalab.unc.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D4A44907A for ; Sat, 28 Feb 2009 07:28:41 -0500 (EST) Received: from listserv.albany.edu (listserv.albany.edu [169.226.1.24]) by listserv.albany.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n1SCLoXX010061 for ; Sat, 28 Feb 2009 07:28:41 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2009 07:28:39 -0500 From: "University at Albany LISTSERV Server (14.5)" Subject: File: "BEE-L LOG0210B" To: adamf@METALAB.UNC.EDU Message-ID: Content-Length: 165561 Lines: 3782 ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2002 09:53:57 +0100 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Dave Cushman Subject: Re: Rates of supercedure MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi All Allen said... > People often talk about supercedure as if it somehow reduces > production, but in my understanding, it should not. In fact, I > should think that supercedure might often increase populations > if the two queens co-exist for some time, and should in the > long term assure continuity of the colony. My 'take' on this is that supercedure protects the genes of the colony from dying out due to adverse weather, a faulty queen or a failing queen, but it can be just a 'spare queen on the hoof.'. The bees that I have had over the last 20 years may go 5 or 6 generations in succession without swarming and it is common for mother and daughter to co-exist for months or even one or two seasons. This repeated supercedure does not result in any 'deterioration' of quality. Allen also said... > To me it seems that what *could* reduce production is not the > supercedure, but the conditions that bring supercedure about in > the first place -- like a failing queen -- not the supercedure itself. I do not think it is automatic that supercedure is caused by faults... Certainly supercedure can rectify faults and disasters, but I do not think they are the 'only' cause. In the area where I live, supercedure is much more common than in regions with more favourable weather, but as Jerry said, Beekeepers do not recognise the full extent and frequency that it occurs, even though it is more noticed. Best Regards & 73s... Dave Cushman, G8MZY Beekeeping & Bee Breeding Website... http://website.lineone.net/~dave.cushman ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2002 16:20:14 +0100 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Tom Barrett Subject: Resistance Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Hello All These questions are for my American beekeeping colleagues. In what year was varroa first found in the USA? In what year was resistance to Apistan/Bayvarol first reported? In what year was resistance to Coumaphos first reported? I shall be most grateful for this information, as I am updating one of my lectures and need to have the update in place in the next 10 days or so. Thanks indeed for help Sincerely Tom Barrett Dublin Ireland ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2002 09:02:58 -0600 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Jerry J Bromenshenk Subject: Re: Rates of supercedure In-Reply-To: <004501c26eaa$a51afc20$3514e150@orac> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Peter said that he never heard of queen supercedure following supering for honey. Neither had we, but we've documented it. Why??? Haven't done formal tests, so don't know the cause. I speculate (and that means, its just my guess), adding empty supers significantly and rapidly increases the internal space or volume of the hive. That may DILUTE queen pheromone. In fact, on one occassion, we observed the bees "balling" the original queen. So, maybe the bees think the queen is failing?? If you've got a better hypothesis, let's hear it. Dee has her theories about cell size and orientation with respect to mites. My own personal convictions == and this is just a judgement based on years of working in commercial and research apiaries --- we've got a problem with queens. Too many are just not putting out much pheromone. Loose clusters; queens sitting on the back of a truck in a stockpile yard with hundreds of hives, and no bees on about 1/2 of the queen cages; queens and bees that roll out of the hive and onto the side of the box after just a puff or two of smoke; jack rabbit queens that run from the light and jump from frame to frame and into the box; and laying queens that "FLY" out of the box and over the horizon, never to be seen again. Obviously, some of these traits have been with us all along -- but I've seen some very odd responses, starting in the 80s. Overall, I agree with the observations of Jim Bach from Washington, and add a couple of undesirable traits to his list. My guess, and again, it MY GUESS, I don't think selecting queens based on color, size, and laying pattern gets at fundamental traits that are important to bees. Unless your nose is better than mine, how do we know that the selected queen is producing adequate amounts of pheromone to hold a colony together? Are there queens that produce bees that work better in inclement weather? If bees vary in their ability to detect odors (which we have documented), then how do we select for lines that have a more acute sense of smell? Or, is there an advantage to selecting for odor sensitivity? Finally, all of the above is speculation. Just because I've observed some things and have put some thought into these issues, that simply allows me to start to generate testable hypotheses. If lucky, I'll find a way to fund the tests. Jerry ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2002 07:08:35 -0600 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Allen Dick Subject: Re: Rates of supercedure MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > However, in acute or sudden events, the original queen may be suddenly lost > (e.g., chemicals used to drive out bees, agri- or industrial chemicals, > sudden expansion of space by adding honey supers). In this case, the > colony may: 1) not successfully supercede the queen, That makes me wonder about terminology. When I think of 'supercedure', I think of a situation where replacement measures are begun by the bees while the original queen is still present, and a case where the cells are started after queen disappearance as being denoted as 'emergency replacement'. I made a quick scan of my literature and all (4) references to supercedure that I found assumed that the original queen was still present at the beginning of the replacement process. However, my time and reference material is limited, and I'm still wondering about the word 'supercedure' and its exact meaning. I realise that many beekeepers consider any case where the queen is replaced by the bees without human intervention as being a case of supercedure, but is that correct? Does supercedure include both cases, or, in normal use, is it specific to the first case? Is there an authoritative glossary somewhere? allen http://www.internode.net/honeybee/diary/ ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2002 11:33:03 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Mark Coldiron Organization: The Little ~ Coldiron Farm Subject: Re: FGMO MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Don wrote: > ...I'll admit I've not been doing the cords he describes at that frequency- I've > been refreshing them at only once a month. Reply: Don, I've been using FGMO for two years now. I'm like you, fogging every two weeks. The emulsion soaked cords were put on earlier in the year just to see if there was any noticeable difference. Yes, the colonies did seem noticeably stronger. When I pull the supers in a few weeks, I'll probably put the cords on for the Winter and again in the Spring. But, to maintain the cords during the rest of the year with all the supers on is a bit too labor intensive for me. I'm beginning to experiment with 4.9 cell size too. Between the two, it looks like the mites can be managed pretty well. Of course Dee will say the 4.9 will do it all. Guess I'll just have to see. For me, the 4.9 conversion will only happen in earnest after 4.9 plastic foundation is available and affordable. West Texas Mark ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2002 11:51:31 -0600 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Jerry J Bromenshenk Subject: Re: Rates of supercedure In-Reply-To: <000d01c26ecb$cfd2a460$54ae73d1@allen> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/enriched; charset="us-ascii" Allen comments: >That makes me wonder about terminology. He's probably correct - but it is hard at times to draw a clear line between supercedure (where the original queen is still present) versus an emergency replacement (original queen is lost). Its not simply the timing or the location of the new queen cells. If the old queen is failing, emergency cells may be drawn rather than producing new queen cups. If the bees ball the queen, then pull out emergency cells, is this supercedure? So, to clarify -- I tend to think in terms of colony reproduction, where new queen cells are produced, the old queen stops laying, and the old queen leaves with the first swarm versus queen replacement. By replacement, I mean that the original queen leaves or is lost, but the bee population remains in the hive. And yes, I've seen queens leave hives without attendents, never to return. Fly, walk, crawl out. So, Allen's right -- don't know if there's a proper term to convey what I mean. Sorry about the confusion - its my short hand way of viewing things. Do you make it through the season with the original queen, or do you have a new queen in colonies that have not swarmed? The extremes are easy, old queen still present, new queen in the box (supercedure). Old queen lost, new queen still in the cup (emergency replacement - usually). But its often not that clear cut. Comments? Jerry Jerry ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2002 21:46:59 +0200 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: P-O Gustafsson Subject: Rates of supersedure MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > From: Jerry J Bromenshenk 15-20% of the queens > superceding within any year in any apiary, during the pre-mite years, were > common. And this was in operations that re-queen yearly or at least every > two years. Small research hives, post-mite years, with mite treatment and > aggressive inspection - supercedure drops to 5-10% (new queens) - after we've > culled for the initial queen rejections, etc. > Some data on the subject from northern Europe: This year I had 6,5% of the hives having a F2 queen. Previous years around 8% of the hives had supersedure queens. But it's difficult to compare with other places with another climate and longer brood rearing periods. My queens produce a lot of eggs in a short time, on lower latitudes queens will lay for a longer time at a lower rate per day. Those of my queens that supersede are almost all 2 years old and about to be changed anyway. Exception is a few that get damaged by the workers during introduction, and thus changed same year if I don't see it. > From: T & M Weatherhead Studies here in Australia > have found that up to 30% are not there after that time also. I would think that is due to the continuos egg laying all around the year the Oz queens will have to perform, comparing with the up to 8 months they just "hang around" here. A few words about my experience with supersedure/swarming. Some years ago when I didn't have so many hives I didn't use excluders. There were several reasons, like more honey, less investment in material. At the time I wasn't into breeding/selecting deep enough to be able to avoid swarm control. We have a too short time window here to be able to split hives and have them build up again before the honey flow, so we got to keep them together somehow through the swarming period and into the flow. Usually this means checking for swarm cells every 10 days. When doing this you learn a lot about how bees behave and what to look for. As I said we have a short and intense season. Bees build up very fast and the queen is laying where there is space. In the build up phase the queen strive to move upwards and usually lay in the third box before swarm strength. Early in the spring bees start to make cell cups, you can see them easily on the bottom bars. Those cell cups between the second and third box was the place to look for swarming. The first eggs would be found there, then the queen move down the hive as she lays eggs in the cell cups present on her way to the bottom box. There she will reduce her egg laying (workers stop feeding her?) so she will be able to fly in the swarm. (Another way of swarm checking is to look for eggs in the second brood box.) It's possible to judge the swarm risk even before there is eggs in the cell cups. The cell cups have quite a large opening when they are first made. When the workers think it's swarm time they start to reduce the opening of the cell cup to worker size (queen measure the cell entrance to decide if it's a worker or drone cell) and it's possible to see the new white wax they use to make them worker size. Once you learn to look for those details it's easier to judge what hives are probable to swarm. Nowadays I use excluders, breed queens that don't swarm, and don't go around disturbing bees all summer:-) Regarding supersedure; I usually find a few cells in the centre of brood nest. Swarm cells are found in the periphery of the brood nest, and often a larger number. Guess bees want swarm queens not to be to close as they often keep them alive in the cells during bad weather waiting for a sunny day. Several times when I opened a hive that prepared to swarm I would find a number of virgins hatching out and running around. They couldn't signal to each other anymore when I took frames out so they thought it was time to emerge. But it was supersedure I was talking about. I found two different scenarios. One when the old queen is present until the new young queen starts to lay and prove she is able to head the colony. The other when the virgin kills the old queen after hatching out. The first is often happening with bees that are bred for gentleness, the second with mongrels. Aggressiveness seem to influence this too, or it could be other traits. A few times I had both mother and daughter winter over and lay together in the same cluster in spring, but this is very rare. Some weeks or months the workers seem to tolerate this until they throw the old lady out, first they make sure the new one is doing OK. Too many things we don't know about bees. Some of the posts lately have been more anecdotal than informed, and caused a lot of noise that's not going to lead anywhere. We don't need to challenge every new idea down to the last detail. In due time there will be answers. A little restrictively there might keep this list more "informed" than the other lists dealing with a wider spectra of beekeeping. -- Regards P-O Gustafsson, Sweden beeman@algonet.se http://www.algonet.se/~beeman/ ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2002 22:52:59 +0100 Reply-To: pdillon@club-internet.fr Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Peter Dillon Organization: Home Subject: Re: Rates of supercedure MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Allen's question relating to terminology to describe the replacement of a Queen bee - commonly passing under the term of SUPERSEDURE, or Supercedure(?). Defined as (amongst others) , "to set as side in favour of another". (Chambers 20th C. dictionary) I have used the term supersedure to describe conditions present in a bee colony where either of the following two situations occurs. a. Perfect supersedure - where a new queen becomes mated and starts laying in the colony together with the old queen - before the bees remove the old queen. b. Imperfect supersedure - where the bees rid them selves of the old queen before the new queen is laying. These terms are from Beekeeping Study notes by J.D. & B.D. Yates. Note that causes are not quoted for the supersedure occurring. As posted in previous mails, reasons for "replacement" of a queen varies from the very obvious to the un-explained. Just as a quick point: if as Jerry suggests -" If bees vary in their ability to detect odors (which we have documented),......." - would this not be a possible cause for increased Supersedure. A slight decline in Queen substance would be quickly noted by the colony, which would in turn then proceed to prepare for swarming or replacement!! Regards Peter ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2002 13:52:23 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Shane Woodruff Subject: Rates of supercedure MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii I agree with Dick that when the word supercedure is usedd it is generally depicting a queen being replaced while on "active duty". However, the term is used as a verb where the queen is being replaced other than by man. Shane from NJ __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More http://faith.yahoo.com ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2002 15:38:22 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Blane White Subject: Re: Evicting Entire apiary Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Aaron asked about Dr Furgala's Two Queen Horizontal Management System. I will try to provide a little information even though it has been several years since I too the class from Basil. First yes the system did involve "depopulating" old colonies in the fall and overwintering only strong healthy colonies headed by young queens. Lets start in the spring of the year. You have strong colonies that have come through winter and may have been fed pollen substitute in late winter and early spring ( late February and March ). Colonies were wintered in three deep broodboxes and are managed that way during the early buildup period. Regular ( 7 - 10 day) reversals are done first just the top two boxes but starting in mid to late April full reversals are done. Heavy box on bottomboard lightest box on top. Often it is a "reverse around the middle" with the top box going to the bottom and the bottom to the top. This greatly stimulates expansion of the broodnest. In mid May here in St Paul ( note about 6 weeks before the target date for the main honey flow ) these colonies are divided to prevent swarming. Only colonies with a minium of 10 frames of brood are considered strong enough to divide and you usually have 12+ frames of brood. About half the brood goes with each part of the split. The new split is given a mated queen and kept in the same yard as the parent on a different stand. This greatly helps with queen acceptance but making a unit with only young house bees to requeen. If no nectar flow is on they should be fed 1:1 sugar syrup to simulate a nectar flow and again improve queen acceptance. Usually 95%+ of the queens are accepted this way. The parent colony is now in two deeps and is usually supered at this time just to give them some space. The reversals continue on the parent for a few more weeks but are done when the nectar flow hits usually late June or July 1. The split is given a second deep box a week after queen introduction and they quickly move into this box and fill it. A third box is added once the second story is filled and reversals are also done if needed to keep the broodnest expanding. Late June or early July the split is given a final reversal and supered. The parent colony is your main honey producing unit and they usually need two or three supers at the time of making the divide and by late June will need a couple more. Continue to add supers as needed but by mid to late July the flow is usually slowing and supering is cut back or stopped. Splits will usually produce a couple of medium supers or more depending on the flow and the parents will usually produce at least 4 often more. The split is harvested and then treated for mites and prepared for wintering in three deeps. The parent is harvested down to the second deep and in the late fall killed. The split is overwintered to start the cycle again in the spring. I know it sounds complicated at first but you are keeping young queens in all your colonies, wintering only strong healthy colonies with young queens, prevent swarming, and maintaining strong healthy colonies of bees at all times of the year with population peak at the start of the main nectar flow. You kill the parent colonies in the fall to keep from continually increasing your colony count. It does give you the winter months with broodboxes that can be scraped, you can cull bad combs, get boxes repainted etc. You do need more broodboxes and additional bottomboards and covers. It also works very well for honey production here in the upper Midwest USA. Now what about combining parents with splits for overwintering? You would want to find and remove ( ok kill ) the old queen so as to winter with the young queen. The other observation is that mite levels usually are higher in the parents than the splits so you would be increasing the mite load on the combined colonies relative to the splits. Before mites combining looked better to me than it does now. Of course there are endless variations of this system that may work well in different areas but the basic things are keeping young queens and strong disease free colonies and only overwintering these strong healthy colonies. The old beekeeper saying "Take you winter losses in the fall." comes to mind here. The most consistent methods of swarm control all involving splitting the colonies in some way which leads to the problem of increasing colony numbers to deal with somehow. Yes this management system was developed well before mites but has been very successfully used since and continues to be taught by the U of MN now by Dr Spivak. The hardest part is the "depopulating" or evicting of the parent hives in the fall no question about it. Before mites I usually combined as Aaron suggested so as to boost any "weaker" colonies to go into winter with nice large clusters and lots of stores. This is just a short summary but hopefully it will be helpful for those who have not heard about it. blane ****************************************** Blane White MN Dept of Agriculture blane.white@state.mn.us ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2002 11:46:02 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "adrian m. wenner" Subject: Re: Resistance In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Tom Barrett asked (in part): >In what year was varroa first found in the USA? For a history of varroa spread in the USA, check out the following: http://www.beesource.com/pov/wenner/bcjun1996.htm Adrian -- Adrian M. Wenner (805) 963-8508 (home office phone) 967 Garcia Road wenner@lifesci.ucsb.edu Santa Barbara, CA 93103 www.beesource.com/pov/wenner/index.htm **************************************************************************** * * "T'is the majority [...that] prevails. Assent, and you are sane * Demur, you're straightway dangerous, and handled with a chain." * * Emily Dickinson, 1862 * **************************************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2002 09:16:20 +0100 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Dave Cushman Subject: Re: Rates of supercedure MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Allen & all > That makes me wonder about terminology Often a problem on either side of the pond, Allen's statement... > When I think of 'supercedure', I think of a situation where replacement > measures are begun by the bees while the original queen is still present, > and a case where the cells are started after queen disappearance as being > denoted as 'emergency replacement'. Is exactly what I mean when I use the term 'supercedure', but reading between the lines... I feel that many in the US do not make the distinction between 'supercedure' and 'emergency'. > there an authoritative glossary somewhere? I do not know about a glossary, but you cannot lump emergency and supercedure together... The pressures on the bees are totally different. Best Regards & 73s... Dave Cushman, G8MZY Beekeeping & Bee Breeding Website... http://website.lineone.net/~dave.cushman ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2002 09:22:28 +0200 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Oliver & Jelena Subject: bee photos MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1250" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I'm inviting you to take a look at my bee photos on = http://www.geocities.com/stanisavka/ Be free to send me any commentary Oliver=20 Serbia ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2002 08:43:11 -0600 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Jerry J Bromenshenk Subject: Change of Discussion from Semantics to Bee Statistics Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Hi: Ok, I've admitted to lumping terms, and I think we all agree that queen supercedure and emergency replacement involve somewhat different processes. >From the perspective of colony reproduction, they both represent a change and either may cause a break in the brood cycle. Supercedure does not ensure that the old queen is still laying when the her replacement takes over. So, having agreed with Allen Dick, I'd like to start a new topic. I'm trying to find sources of information (hopefully with a citation) regarding beekeeping statistics for countries other than the U.S. I'm looking for records of the numbers of beekeepers, numbers of colonies, honey produced, numbers of queens produced and sold, etc. I'd also like to be able to identify numbers of beekeepers who have more than 100 colonies, move colonies for pollination, or cover large areas (100s - 1000s of KMs or Miles). In the U.S., I can find much of this from the state Agricultural Statistics, and fill in the gaps by contacting queen producers, etc. I have difficulty finding the sources of this information for European countries. I've contacts in New Zealand and can probably run one to ground for Australia. I'm trying to get a better profile of beekeeping worldwide. With your help, I can pull this together in a report that can be published both here and in a bee journal. Kim, I assume you'd be willing to publish it in Bee Culture and either have it published here or on your web page? Online data sources would be great. If in a language other than English, I'm going to need a translater. Where possible, I want to find data for which there is a citation. Some data points may have to be estimates -- but if so, I need to get the estimate from someone who have in depth knowledge of the subject. For example, U.S. stats don't cover queen production in all states, but the major queen producers know how many queens are produced and sold each year -- at least they can provide a reasonable estimate. Thanks for your help. Jerry ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2002 12:16:15 -0400 Reply-To: jbc@buffalo.edu Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "J.Beth Ciesielski" Subject: unsubscribe In-Reply-To: <001801c26f64$ba282100$45253ed4@jojo> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII unsubscribe ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mrs J.Beth Ciesielski Please check our webpage Founder and Executive Director www.bridges4edu.org Bridges for Education, Inc. 94 Lamarck Drive, The purpose of BFE is Buffalo, New York 14226 to promote tolerance and understanding USA Tel 716-839-0180 using English as a bridge USA Fax 716-839-9493 Europe cellular in Romania (roaming service) 40-(0) 744-67-67-94 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2002 19:24:19 +0300 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Roger White Subject: supersedure MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-7" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable There was a mention recently that the addition of too may supers would = cause supersedure -rather I think that the problem would be caused by an = outbreak of Nosema within the hive by the sudden increase in space and = therefore the bees became stressed or that the supers contained high = levels of Nosema spores and the queen became infected from these and the = bees tried to supersede her. I often notice this problem when we put = supers on in the spring if we haven't treated the supers to kill Nosema = spores. Roger White Superbee Cyprus ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2002 14:05:14 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Todd Subject: Help? Supers with crystallized honey MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I've got several mediums full of honey that's about 50% crystallized in = the comb. I can't extract it properly centrifigully (extractor shakes = like hell!), and it's dark and excellent tasting (kind of malty), so I = don't really want to give it back to the bees. The foundation is = crimped wire. Any suggestions? Thanks, Todd ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2002 15:30:41 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Mark Walker Subject: Earwigs... Yick! All year I've been lifting the inner covers of my hives and finding earwigs scurrying to and fro! Is this something that I should be worrying about? Is this common and do i need to get rid of the buggers somehow? Also, I use screened bottom Boards (SBB) on all of my hives and I've been finding that the earwigs seem to love infesting these as well. No doubt thriving on the hive detritus that falls through the screen and accumalates in the drawer below. On a side note, has anyone that uses SBB's found wax moth larvae in the wax scales that have fallen to the bottom. I was wondering how they would've got there. Then I thought that perhaps the bees dropped the eggs while cleaning them out of the hive and they fell through the screen. Does anybody have any thoughts and/or facts on these musings. Cheers, Mark Walker Delta, BC ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2002 20:36:24 +0100 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Mike Rowbottom Subject: Re: Help? Supers with crystallized honey In-Reply-To: <001001c26fbe$6b542060$bab472d8@sign1> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; x-avg-checked=avg-ok-15573C2; boundary="=======70901584=======" --=======70901584======= Content-Type: text/plain; x-avg-checked=avg-ok-15573C2; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit At 14:05 09/10/2002 -0400, you wrote: >I've got several mediums full of honey that's about 50% crystallized in >the comb. I can't extract it properly centrifigully (extractor shakes >like hell!), and it's dark and excellent tasting (kind of malty), so I >don't really want to give it back to the bees. The foundation is crimped >wire. Any suggestions? Earlier this year we successfully retrieved some fully crystallized honey from oilseed rape. We cut the comb out of the supers and chopped it into about six-eight pieces per frame. It went into a polythene bucket that was then placed inside a larger polythene bucket fitted with an electric immersion heater. The space between the two buckets was filled with water maintained at about 100 degrees F ( 38 degrees C) using a thermostatic switch. The smaller bucket sat on a wooden platform inside the larger bucket to keep it off the heater element. After about four hours the previously crystallised honey was liquid enough to pour off the wax through a double plastic filter to catch any debris and small pieces of wax. The honey so obtained appears OK, and has regranulated in storage containers. regards Mike Rowbottom Harrogate North Yorkshire UK --=======70901584======= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-avg=cert; x-avg-checked=avg-ok-15573C2 Content-Disposition: inline --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.394 / Virus Database: 224 - Release Date: 03/10/2002 --=======70901584=======-- ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2002 22:57:15 +0200 Reply-To: jtemp@xs4all.nl Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Jan Tempelman Subject: Re: Earwigs... Yick! MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit freinds tell my: put there a little bit copper (metal) [coin (if you have one in copper)] will help Mark Walker wrote: > All year I've been lifting the inner covers of my hives and finding earwigs > scurrying to and fro! the home of the dronemethode the only way to fight the varroa without chemicals (but a lot of work!!!!) http://www.xs4all.nl/~jtemp/DarreOverz.html Jan Tempelman Annie Romein-Verschoorpad 2-4 NL 4103 VE Culemborg tel.:0345-524433 mobile: 06 10719917 -- http://www.xs4all.nl/~jtemp/index3.html mailto:jtemp@xs4all.nl -- ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2002 16:52:58 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Peter Borst Subject: Re: Rates of supercedure Comments: To: jjbmail@SELWAY.UMT.EDU Jerry wrote: he never heard of queen supercedure following supering for honey. Neither had we, but we've documented it. Haven't done formal tests, so don't know the cause. Dee has her theories about cell size and orientation with respect to mites. Discussion: In all fairness, you really haven't backed up your statements any better than Dee. You said you have tons of data, but was it published somewhere? Where? I'd like to look at some numbers and methodology. Also, studying supersedure may be one of those things that is affected by the very study of it. In other words, frequent opening the hive may actually contribute to early supersedure, as well. Certainly, people have the sense that bees may "blame" the queen for various problems, most of which are "not her fault." I wonder if any one has studied the affect of not opening the hives too often... pb ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2002 20:58:26 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: DONALD M CAMPBELL Subject: Re: Help? Supers with crystallized honey Todd wrote: >I've got several mediums full of honey that's about 50% crystallized in the comb. I can't extract >it properly centrifigully (extractor shakes like hell!), and it's dark and excellent tasting (kind of >malty), so I don't really want to give it back to the bees. The foundation is crimped wire. Any >suggestions? I've had some good results liquefying crystallized honey by warming them up. Place the combs in an insulated box, big enough for them. (I use an old 'broken' refrigerator.) Use a 100 watt bulb and a small fan inside the box. Check it after several hours to see how its progressing, it could take 12 to 24 hours to work. I have a digital thermometer in my 'refrigerator heater' and the temperature never goes above 110F. I've done 5 gallon pails and comb with this contraption. Bee happy, Don ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2002 17:37:45 -0600 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Jerry J Bromenshenk Subject: Re: Rates of supercedure In-Reply-To: <200210092055.g99GwoiT004577@listserv.albany.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" At 04:52 PM 10/9/02 -0400, you wrote: Peter's comments appear below mine. Fair enough, Peter. Kim Flottum's after me to write this up. Will try to do so after Christmas. Also, I agree about the possible disturbance of opening hives. In some of our studies, we were in them a lot. In others, only 1 or 2 times during the growing season. However, this is one of the reasons we've been working on systems to monitor what's going on inside the hive without opening it. Jerry >In all fairness, you really haven't backed up your statements any better >than Dee. You said you have tons of data, but was it published somewhere? >Where? I'd like to look at some numbers and methodology. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2002 22:55:20 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Thomas Werner Subject: Term. subscription MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Please terminate my subscription to BEE-L. I got stung last saturday = and went into anaphylactic shock. Hate to do it but I've got give up = the little buggers. Great reading! Keep it up everybody and thankx! Tom thwerner@portup.com=20 ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 07:38:44 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Todd Subject: Re: Earwigs... Yick! MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > All year I've been lifting the inner covers of my hives and finding earwigs > scurrying to and fro! Is this something that I should be worrying about? I believe that earwigs are predators, and likely feed on little critters in the hive. I'd guess that they're neutral, at worst, and perhaps even beneficial to the hive. I noticed a lot of earwigs this year, too. I think it may be related to the very hot/dry summer we had. Earwigs like moisture, and the evaporation of nectar produces a fair amount at the top of the hive - which is exactly where I've been finding them most. Todd. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 07:47:20 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Todd Subject: Re: Help? Supers with crystallized honey MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Thanks for the input. I wound up placing the supers in the oven at around 100 deg. F for an hour or so, and then extracting. I had to pay close attention to the condition of the wax with this method, however - it's very easy to let them sit too long in the heat. I guess it's time to build a warming box. I did manage to extract about 80% of it. The rest should make an excellent base for mead (something I've been planning to do for some time anyway). I think I'll soak the frames in warm water to extract the granulated honey, and use that as the basis for some cyser (apple cider/mead). Thanks, Todd (Who's been looking for an excuse to make some mead) ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 08:55:42 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Peter Borst Subject: Supersedure Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed "Some negative attributes have been found in the Russian stock. The traits needing improvement include high supersedure rates." from "Varroa Resistance and Economic Traits of Russian Honey Bees in Canada" http://www.honeycouncil.ca/nasr02.html * * * "Of major concern to VDACS and Virginia beekeepers is the advertising of illegal mite treatments through direct mailings and the internet. In Virginia, all formulations of formic acid and, so called, "natural and safe herbal or mint products" are illegal. In fact, current research at Virginia Tech is showing that treatment levels of these products sufficient to control mite populations are also causing decreased egg laying by the queen, increased egg and brood mortality, and decrease in adult bee life span. Attempted queen supersedure results in an increase in queenlessness and laying workers. Field observations by our Virginia bee inspectors support these research findings." ERIC MUSSEN ENTOMOLOGY DEPARTMENT UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 08:01:10 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Aaron Morris Subject: Re: Earwigs... Yick! MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" I have one site that always has a lot of earwigs. It's a good location, morning sun, afternoon shade. But the earwigs bother me. Earwig traps can be made with a hollow tube (the tubes on the pants hangers from the dry cleaners are ideal). Simply place the hollow tube (about 6 inches long with one end closed) in the vicinity where the earwigs congregate and they will hide out inside the tube. To "evict" them, simply take the tube and quickly shake the inhabitants into a bucket of soapy water. Aaron Morris - thinking earwig eviction/depopulation! ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 07:34:07 -0600 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Allen Dick Subject: Re: Supersedure MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > "Some negative attributes have been found in the Russian stock. The traits > needing improvement include high supersedure rates." > from "Varroa Resistance and Economic Traits of Russian Honey Bees in Canada" > http://www.honeycouncil.ca/nasr02.html Readers should be aware that this was one very limited trial under less than ideal conditions. In the same tests, the acceptance of the Ontario queens was very poor, although their later performance was better. The Russians were accepted better, but many failed later. In both strains -- the only bees involved -- performance would be considered unsatisfactory by any commercial operator. The influence of factors other than the bees used should be strongly suspected. We must be very careful in believing the results of any one study. allen ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 10:39:11 -0300 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Eunice Wonnacott Subject: Re: Term. subscription MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Tom: I have also been allergic for many years. By being very careful of my choice of clothes, and deliberate in motions, I managed to carry on as a hobby beekeeper, and was able to contribute in other ways to our CoOperative. The fellowship of beekeepers,(not to mention the taste of the fresh honey !) and the real interest have kept me still reading. I am afraid physical constraints re lifting, etc were what really had me give up active beekeeping three years ago. I am sure your doctor will inform you about the epipen and other measures. Please do not be too hasty about giving up this most interesting conversation. All the best Eunice ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 10:56:45 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Peter Borst Subject: Re: Supersedure Allen writes: We must be very careful in believing the results of any one study. Right. I submitted the information to stimulate discussion on the causes and the merits/demerits of supersedure, not to bad-mouth the Russian stock. If you are doing stock replacement, supersedure is not helpful. Many claims are made; little is backed up with real data. We must be careful in believing the results of *any study*. pb ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 10:40:48 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Lois George Subject: Re: Help? Supers with crystallized honey MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Todd wrote > The rest should make an excellent > base for mead (something I've been planning to do for some time anyway). I > think I'll soak the frames in warm water to extract the granulated honey, > and use that as the basis for some cyser (apple cider/mead). Could you share your recipes and methods for making the mead Todd? Lois ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 11:57:13 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bob Hack Subject: Fall Propolis Sources Does anyone have any information on fall sources of propolis in the Pacific Northwest. In spring here, it is mostly poplar, but is this true for fall as well? I tried the archives on this but was unable to come up with anything. Also tried "Plants for Beekeeping in Canada" by Jane Ramsay with no luck (only covers honey and pollen). Thanks in advance for any and all help Bob Hack (Shuswap area in BC, Canada) ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 09:58:21 -0600 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Allen Dick Subject: Bee Escapes Again MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I recall some discussion about bee escapes a while back and have recently visited Dave's excellent Bee Escape page at http://website.lineone.net/~dave.cushman/clearerboards.html I've concluded that the most practical escape boards for my purposes are the Quebec board, or a variation of that design. However, I seem to recall discussion of the need -- to get the best performance -- of making a rim on either the top or the bottom of the board that is larger than the 3/8" rims that are typically sold. Dave says on his site: "A tip I received from Matthew Allan... Is to make the top rim 22 mm x 22 mm as this allows the bees to 'run around' without bumping into bits of brace comb and climbing upwards instead of heading in the stampede direction", but I seem to recall Aaron saying that a space under the board is useful. I can't find that latter conversation. It has been some time since we covered this and a season has passed. I'm sure that many have been experimenting. What are current thoughts on where to put the space and how high it should be? Anyone? allen http://www.internode.net/HoneyBee/Diary/ ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 11:58:35 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Dick Allen Subject: Re: Evicting Entire Apiary Every Year MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Beekeepers: Carl J. Wenning did a feature article in the November 2000 issue of American Bee Journal titled ‘Beekeeping in Alaska’. He emailed several of us up here for information on beekeeping practices in Alaska several months before writing the article. After the article appeared he emailed that he found it interesting that mites are generally not considered to be a huge problem in Alaska since most people here who have bees don’t attempt to overwinter. (Mites are a genuine problem for those of us who do overwinter, incidentally). He wrote in his email that he thought the idea of not overwintering might be worth looking at as a beekeeping practice. In his article ‘The Economics of Overwintering Honey Bees’ that appeared in the February 2001 issue, he used the euphemistic phrase ‘hive depopulating’. Quite a few letters to the editor about the practice of killing off bees appeared in subsequent issues. Regards, Dick ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 12:23:22 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Aaron Morris Subject: Re: Bee Escapes Again MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > but I seem to recall Aaron saying that a space > under the board is useful. I can't find that latter conversation. That was not my tip, but I did pick it up here on BEE-L. Escape boards are the only way I use to clear supers (well, abandonment at the height of a flow, but never when the bees show even the slightest inclination to rob). But based on the recommendation on BEE-L that the bees exit more rapidly when there is more room than provided by the "standard" escape board, I've come to always put an empty super over the brood boxes, then the escape board over which I stack the supers I want vacated. Unequivocally, the bees vacate faster when the extra space is provided. Of course, users are cautioned to make ABSOLUTELY sure there are no cracks of spaces ANYWHERE in the boxes above the escape board. Duct tape (the beekeepers friend) is a MUST if there are ANY spaces WHATSOEVER! When in doubt, duct tape. If you miss a gap, YOUR BEES WON'T! A robbing frenzy will ensue! Aaron Morris - thinking there's no escape like a roomy escape! ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 11:12:25 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Mark Coldiron Organization: The Little ~ Coldiron Farm Subject: Re: Help? Supers with crystallized honey MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit This happened to me. Last year, I didn't have my honey house finished and the equipment wasn't all here, so I just left the supers on the hives through the Winter. In early March of this year I pulled the supers off and tried to extract the honey. It was about half crystallized, so I didn't get a lot of the honey out of the comb even though I went through the whole process of uncapping every frame. I even tried heating the honey house, but just couldn't get it to reliquefy. Later this year, around July, I pulled the supers off again and found that the crystallization was gone and the extraction went very well. The bees, and the temperature, had reliquefied the remaining honey and added more to finish out the cells. Hope this helps. West Texas Mark ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 15:13:54 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Karen Oland Subject: Re: Bee Escapes Again In-Reply-To: <000f01c27075$dc6cd640$f27dfea9@allen> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Allen, I put an empty shallow super (or smaller piece, like used for baggie feeders) under the escape. I've had good luck with the supers clearing, so long as there is no brood above and no holes for robbers to discover. ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 13:20:31 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Janet Montgomery Subject: Re: Help? Supers with crystallized honey MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=Windows-1252 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT the old refrigerator or ant insulated box works well. I use an indoor/outdoor thermometer and place the bulb into the honey and this allows monitoring without opening the box and at a glance. If one uses a small box you may want to decrease the light bulb size Dan in Vilas NC ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 11:39:57 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "adrian m. wenner" Subject: Earwigs... Yick! In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Aaron Morris gave a good suggestion about how to control earwigs (hollow tubes with one end closed). One can find that and many other suggestions to control pests in the following publication by Hilary Dole-Klein and myself: Klein, H.D. and A.M. Wenner. 2001. Tiny Game Hunting: Environmentally Healthy Ways to Trap and Kill the Pests in Your House and Garden (new edition). Univ. of California Press: Berkeley. Adrian -- Adrian M. Wenner (805) 963-8508 (home office phone) 967 Garcia Road wenner@lifesci.ucsb.edu Santa Barbara, CA 93103 www.beesource.com/pov/wenner/index.htm **************************************************************************** * * "T'is the majority [...that] prevails. Assent, and you are sane * Demur, you're straightway dangerous, and handled with a chain." * * Emily Dickinson, 1862 * **************************************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 21:29:18 +0100 Reply-To: pdillon@club-internet.fr Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Peter Dillon Organization: Home Subject: Re: Earwigs... Glug,Glug. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Must comment on Aaron's method of removing Earwigs! - Fine on the trapping method. Disposal? Why kill, when there is no real need to do so - especially when it is considered that these insects are usually beneficial. I suggest that the trapping container is shook out several metres away from the area of the hive(s). Seeing as the top surface of the inner hive cover is an ideal habitat, removal will only leave the location free for other earwigs to move in. Let nature be!! P.S.. Anybody got data on earwigs placed in lit smoker causing V.d. to fall from adult bees? Peter ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 11:43:39 +1200 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Robt Mann Subject: CumminsGram: Honey Bees and the toxicity of genetically modified crops Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit The following note is by a biochemically-oriented professor emeritus of genetics who is also one of the more experienced critics of GM. R October 10, 2002 Prof. Joe Cummins e-mail: jcummins@uwo.ca Honey Bees and the toxicity of genetically modified crops Genetically modified (GM) crops incorporate novel changes in the genetics of crops. Bees have an essential but subtle relationship to the crops and to the environment. It is essential that GM crops should not damage the bees and if commercial GM crops are found to injure bees that those crops be removed from production. GM crops can affect bees directly or indirectly through affecting flowering or pollen production or biochemical composition. A good deal of effort has been directed to evaluating the impact of GM crops, particularly those crops genetically engineered to contain insect toxins or toxins of fungi which have components such as chitin which are common to fungi and arthropods. The results of such studies have uncovered important threats to bees but the evidence of injury to bees did not seem to influence the release of crops capable of injuring bees for commercial production. Studies on the impact of GM crops on bees included both behavior and toxicity studies of the GM crops and studies of the purified toxins produced in GM crops. A number of excellent reviews of studies of the impact of GM crops or their toxins have been published (1,2,3). The effect of insect toxins called protease inhibitors has been studied in bee larvae (4) and the effect of a protease inhibitor (trypsin inhibitor) on bee flight and longevity (5). The results of the studies suggest that GM crops modified with _Bacillus thuringiensis_ (Bt) toxins have little or no effect on bees, as does the enzyme chitinase while protease inhibitors consistently have detrimental impacts and the glucanase enzyme modification to resist fungi also was found to affect bees detrimentally. The Bt toxin gene modifications are designated Cry ; there are numerous alleles and these have distinct characteristics. Cry 1 alleles were studied extesively along with Cry 9C and Cry 3B; Cry II and CryV alleles have not yet been reported but probably should. Heretofore the Cry genes have not proven detrimental to bees. In contrast the protease inhibitors proved to be detrimental to the longevity and behavior of bees. Chitinase (protection from insects and fungi) did not prove detrimental to bees while glucanase (protection from fungi) effected conditioned responses in bees. Of the GM toxins genes in crops released for commercial production in the United States only the Bt Cry genes and the protease inhibitors seen widespread release. The GM crops with protease inhibitors released for commercial production included potato, canola (rapeseed) and creeping bentgrass (6). The sound and logical approach would be to totally ban commercial production of GM crops modified with protease inhibitor genes to protect bees and to prevent long term damage to the entire environment. Those crops released for commercial production containing the protease inhibitor gene should be withdrawn. The impact of all GM releases on bees should be carefull studied prior to release and crops injuring bees should not be released for production. References 1. Malone,L and Pham-Delegue,M ěEffect of transgene products on honey bees and bumblebeesî 2001 Apidologie 32,287-304 2. Malone,L,Burgess,E,Philip,B,Tregida,E and Todd,J ěDo GM crops and their products have side effects on bees and bumblebees?î 2001 Apimondia ISBN:0-620-27768-8 Proc 37th Int Apic,28Oct-1Nov 2001 Durban,South Africa 3. Picard-Nizou,A,Grison,R,Olsen,L,Pioche,C,Arnold,G and Pham-Delegue,M ěImpact of proteins used in plant genetic engineering: toxicity and behavioral study in the honeybeeî1997 J Econ Entomology 90,1710-16 4. Brodsgaard,H,Brodsgaard,C,Hansen,H and Lovei,G ěEnvironmental risk assessement of transgenic plants using honey bee larvaeî 2001 Apimondia ISBN:0-620-27768-8 Proc 37th Int Apic,28Oct-1Nov 2001 Durban,South Africa 5. Malone,E,Burgess,E, Gatehouse,H,Voisy,C,Tregida,E and Philip,B ěEffect of ingestion of a Bacillus thuringiernsis toxin and a trypsin inhibitor on honey bee flight activity and longevityî 2001 Apidologie 32,57-68 6. Crops No Longer Regulated By USDA http://www.nbiap.vt.edu/cfdocs/biopetitions1.cfm ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2002 17:54:14 EDT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: CSlade777@AOL.COM Subject: Re: BEE-L Digest - 8 Oct 2002 to 9 Oct 2002 (#2002-275) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 10/10/02 05:06:47 GMT Daylight Time, LISTSERV@LISTSERV.ALBANY.EDU writes: << Help? Supers with crystallized honey >> I have to deal with these sometimes, particularly this year when there has been a lot of over wintered ivy as well as OSR. If the comb is on thin foundation or starter strips I use it for cut comb if it is pretty enough. OK I know I wouldn't win any prizes in a show for solid cut comb, but the customers haven't read the show schedules. If it bothers you then raise the temperature briefly to 50C. It won't improve the honey at all but it will make it runny without melting the wax. With standard weight, old or wired foundation I am happy to use a spoon to scrape the comb down to the mid rib and then melt it as Mike describes. Chris ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 00:15:14 EDT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Scott Jeffreys Subject: NOSEMA IN SUPERS MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I think nosema is the great undetected scourge. Who out there is testing and how? Nosema causes workers lives to be cut in 1/2 and most queens to give out prematurely. What I want to know is how to rid supers of nosema before putting them on in the spring? I am testing with the Basil Furgala test. Scottco6789@aol.com ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 09:30:50 +0100 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Dave Cushman Subject: Re: Bee Escapes Again MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Allen & all There are dozens of types of escape board and they all work (some better than others, but none perfect). Over the last few years... I have come to believe that it is not the precise design of an escape board that makes it effective, but the principles of putting in a separator with some sort of channels and some means (small holes or mesh) whereby the bees in one group can be aware of bees in the other group. The idea of a 22 mm rim space on top was mentioned in Allen's previous post. I am unsure of the source of the idea of using the deep skirt... I was making 8 way escape boards way back in the days when we measured in inches (late 1970s)... The sides were originally 2 1/2" deep. The objective was to provide clustering space for the bees that were 'disoriented' by the manipulation. The deep skirts were a nuisance as they took up much storage space when not in use. Since those early days I trimmed the rims back to 9 mm top and bottom and used an eke to provide the clustering space. http://website.lineone.net/~dave.cushman/nateke.html Shows how I make these ekes, but they can be just four planks. (I will track down the missing cross section drawing later today.) If I were making them today I would certainly incorporate 22 mm top rims. I may also be tempted to fit thin square strips to the top surface of the board as per the experiment detailed in the page http://website.lineone.net/~dave.cushman/edgefollow.html Best Regards & 73s... Dave Cushman, G8MZY Beekeeping & Bee Breeding Website... http://website.lineone.net/~dave.cushman ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 13:37:28 +0200 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: P-O Gustafsson Subject: Bee Escapes Again MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > From: Aaron Morris > But based on the recommendation on BEE-L that the bees > exit more rapidly when there is more room than provided by the "standard" > escape board, I've come to always put an empty super over the brood boxes, > then the escape board over which I stack the supers I want vacated. > Unequivocally, the bees vacate faster when the extra space is provided. What is it that draws bees down from the supers? I would think it's the lack of queen feromones. Thus the greater distance between brood nest where queen is and the honey supers, the more eager the bees will be to go down when less feromones are present. The timing is also important. If escapes are put in the hives before noon, the bees will leave the supers faster than if they are put there in the afternoon. And if left too long bees will learn to go through them and start carry honey down. And Aaron, why kill earvigs, they eat wax moths among other things.... -- Regards P-O Gustafsson, Sweden beeman@algonet.se http://www.algonet.se/~beeman/ ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 13:03:27 +0100 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: James Kilty Subject: Re: Bee Escapes Again In-Reply-To: <000f01c27075$dc6cd640$f27dfea9@allen> MIME-Version: 1.0 In message <000f01c27075$dc6cd640$f27dfea9@allen>, Allen Dick writes >I've concluded that the most practical escape boards for my purposes are >the Quebec board, or a variation of that design. However, I seem to recall >discussion of the need -- to get the best performance -- of making a rim on >either the top or the bottom of the board that is larger than the 3/8" rims >that are typically sold. I recall discussion in one of the Canadian Newsletters (Red River) some years ago showing that space immediately under the clearer board was essential to allow the bees getting through if there was a mad rush to have space to gather. I have purchased and made myself clearer boards of the Canadian, New Zealand and other designs with a good 25mm (1") rim under them. I had not come across the idea of enlarged space above the boards and will add this to mine. Otherwise, using bottom bee space, as many of us seem to do in the UK, the standard design actually adds another bee space under the frames above the clearer board. I came across a design of escape using a line of flaps on the lines of spray entrances. This seems to give a wide space for the bees to get through and definitely keeps them from finding their way back - so long as a flap is not propolised!! -- James Kilty ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 15:04:07 +0200 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: P-O Gustafsson Subject: Supersedure MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > From: Peter Borst > > "Some negative attributes have been found in the Russian stock. The traits > needing improvement include high supersedure rates." > There is study made in Germany, presented at the IBRA conference in Cardiff July 2002 by Stefan Berg. I have a reference written by Dr Ingemar Fries and published in the commercial bee mag. in Sweden. Original article was published in Allgemaine Deutsche Imkerzeitung. Short translation: Primorsky bees were imported from USA 2000 and distributed to research institutes. 64 colonies were used, two lines of Primorsky bees and two different Carnica lines. They were all started as shook swarms and infected with varroa mites. The colonies were checked every third week (during active season) and amount of bees and brood noted. Mite drop registered every week, and total mite number counted 308 days after start when all bees were killed and mites on bees and brood counted. During the first weeks the varroa population increased slower on Primorsky bees compared to Carnica. After 10 months there were no difference in varroa population between the lines. Primorsky bees has showed to be considerably more swarmy, aggressive, and produce substantially less honey than german Carnica bees. The article ends with a recommendation from the German Bee Institutes Cooperation Council for the present to avoid using Primorsky bees. -- Regards P-O Gustafsson, Sweden beeman@algonet.se http://www.algonet.se/~beeman/ ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 09:04:30 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "Frank I. Reiter" Subject: Re: Bee Escapes Again In-Reply-To: <000f01c27075$dc6cd640$f27dfea9@allen> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Allen Dick writes > > I've concluded that the most practical escape boards for my purposes are > the Quebec board, or a variation of that design. However, I seem > to recall discussion of the need -- to get the best performance -- of > making a rim on > either the top or the bottom of the board that is larger than the > 3/8" rims that are typically sold. I use these boards. The rims on mine are probably about 1/2" and they clear practically all of the bees out of the supers in a day. I have not checked to see how effective they are over shorter periods of time. Frank. ----- The very act of seeking sets something in motion to meet us; something in the universe, or in the unconscious responds as if to an invitation. - Jean Shinoda Bolen http://WWW.BlessedBee.ca ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 08:35:34 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Aaron Morris Subject: Re: NOSEMA IN SUPERS MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > What I want to know is how to rid supers of nosema before > putting them on in the spring? Acedic Acid fumigation (not vinegar, concentrated acedic acid, don't recall the concentration, but it's way up there 80%, 90%, not the vinegar you can buy at the grocery store). Unfortunately I have not my text books at hand to reference concentration and duration, but it's covered in _The_Hive_and_the_Honey_Bee_. I thought it would be covered at MAAREC's site, but a quick glance did not turn up anything. > I am testing with the Basil Furgala test. What is the Furgala test? ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 15:28:04 +0200 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Mats Andersson Subject: Re: Bee Escapes Again In-Reply-To: <3DA6B7F8.50100@algonet.se> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" P-O wrote >"What is it that draws bees down from the supers?" I don't use escape boards myself, so maybe this is a stupid question: Wouldn't it be better instead of the traditional escape boards on top of the hive to have an "escape bottom board" that is placed beside the hive(s) so the bees can walk or fly back to their hive. This would be even further from the queen (definitely out of feremone range), supers from more than one colony can be placed on one escape and you can pick up the supers without disturbing the colony. Now, those of you using escape boards, tell me what i'm missing. /Mats Andersson, Stockholm Sweden ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 10:23:32 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: LLOYDSPEAR Subject: Bee Escapes Aaron and others are entirely right about how to use the escape boards described, and how well they work. But I have a word of caution. I produce a great deal of comb honey and formerly used the escape boards with an empty super underneath. I no longer do so as one day several years ago I returned to the yard about 24 hours after installing the escape board and the empty super and found the full super of cut comb frames an absolute mess from melting (but with no bees). Obviously, one of the function of the bees was to keep the temperature down through ventilation, and I interfered with that. That said, I never had a similar difficulty with Ross Round supers or with extracting supers. In those cases I think the additional support of the frames prevented the collapse. I no longer use escape boards. Lloyd Lloyd Spear, Owner of Ross Rounds, manufacturer of comb honey equipment for beekeepers and Sundance pollen traps. http://www.rossrounds.com Lloyd@rossrounds.com ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 20:02:18 +0300 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Roger White Subject: Nosema spores MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-7" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I agree with Scott, Nosema is the silent killer and does a lot more = damage to colonies than people realize. I didn't think that we had much = of a problem, as we live in a hot climate, but I guess Nosema caused = around $30,000 in lost production before I found out what was going on. = Nosema does not cause dysentery, but dysentery causes nosema. Frequent = culling of old combs, changing bottom boards in early spring, treating = stored supers with acetic acid and giving the bees fumidil b will help = to keep the problem at bay. Probably every colony in the world is = infected and usually it's not a big problem, but when conditions are = favourable it can do a lot of damage. =20 When we export queens, we have to supply our vet with a bee sample from = the attendant bees, he will not issue a health certificate if the bees = show ANY spores. The test is easy to do and we have started doing our = own testing to monitor the situation as fumidil b is an expensive item. Roger White Superbee Cyprus. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 14:05:03 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "Smart, Billy Y" Subject: Re: Bee Escapes Again MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Wouldn't the younger house bees, too young to have yet made thier orientation flights, not be able to find thier parent hive? Billy Smart Rock, KS P-O wrote Now, those of you using escape boards, tell me what i'm missing. /Mats Andersson, Stockholm Sweden ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 15:11:52 -0600 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Allen Dick Subject: Re: Bee Escapes Again MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Wouldn't the younger house bees, too young to have yet made thier > orientation flights, not be able to find thier parent hive? That's true, however the bees in the supers during strong flows all seem to be able to find their home. Later in the season, when the bees have not had good flight for three days or so, and when there is no strong flow, some or all the bees -- not just the young ones -- will not know where to go. Under those conditions, they just stay in the boxes. allen ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 18:32:34 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Karen Oland Subject: Re: Bee Escapes Again In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit When I tried this, I got LOTS of robbing - the supers were regarded as abandoned, while those on a full hive apparently were not. I even tried multiple escapes to stop the robbing, but nightfall was required to get the supers back away from the bees. > -----Original Message----- > From: Mats Andersson > Wouldn't it be better instead of the traditional escape boards on > top of the > hive to have an "escape bottom board" that is placed beside the hive(s) so > the bees can walk or fly back to their hive. This would be even > further from > the queen (definitely out of feremone range), supers from more than one > colony can be placed on one escape and you can pick up the supers without > disturbing the colony. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 18:56:24 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Milt Lathan Subject: Too late to add space?? I have a couple of hives started from packages this spring - they were slow coming on so I didn't take any honey from them. They have been medicated and treated. One hive is a deep & a medium - the other is 3 mediums. I went in to remove strips and the hives are stuffed top to bottom with bees on capped honey & syrup. The queens barely have room to lay and as far as I can tell there isn't much stored pollen. The outside top frames are still mostly unworked foundation. Is a late swarm a valid concern? Can I add a super for space now and take it away in a month or so? I don't have drawn comb to give them and the temps are beginning to go below freezing here at night - just east of Seattle. I welcome advice (& opinions). Thanks. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 12 Oct 2002 07:29:12 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Todd Subject: Re: Bee Escapes Again MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I've been using homemade escapes for a couple of years. They're cheap, and very easy to make and use. I have found that they work much better in the late summer/early fall than in warmer months. The cooler temps at night drive the bees from the supers down into cluster. Less concern about overheating, too. I've found that the best system for me is to wait for a couple of cool nights, put the escape on mid-day, wait two days, and then pull the supers. I rarely have more than 30 or so bees in a super this way. I have had robbing occur if I put the escape on and can't get to it within two days - mostly uncapped honey, though. Apparently the bees can figure out how to beat it if it's left on long enough. Todd. ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 12 Oct 2002 07:20:04 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Todd Subject: Re: Crystallized honey & Mead MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > Could you share your recipes and methods for making the mead Todd? > Lois > Hi Lois, Although I used to brew a fair amount of beer, this would be my first attempt at mead. There are many variations on mead, and a zillion recipes. Basically, though, there are two forms - straight mead, which is just fermented honey & water, and melomels, which are a fermented combination of honey and fruit (just about any kind), and sometimes spices, such as cinnamon or ginger. Pure mead is difficult to brew properly, because honey is not an ideal food for yeast. It can take a long time to ferment, and also takes a long time to mature - I have read recommendations of 6 months to a year or more before consumption. Melomels (fruit and honey) are easier and take less time to mature, and allow the intrepid to really explore different recipes. The easiest recipe is simply 5 gals. apple cider and 7-10 lbs of honey. Pasteurize, add champagne yeast, and a 5 gallon carboy, and you'll wind up with a beverage around 15-18% alcohol that tastes pretty damned good (almost brandy-like), and makes for pleasant Saturday afternoon naps. A local crew here in town (which includes a commercial beekeeper) were legendary for their ability to make and consume this stuff. I had the opportunity to drink a fair amount of it at a town dance once. I don't remember a lot of details, but I remember having a hell of a good time... Another simple method (which I'm going to use) is: 10 lbs honey, 5 lbs of crushed fruit, and water to fill 5 gals. Again, pasteurize the mix. I plan to use some wild grapes from our property - they're perfect; sweet and tart at the same time, with plenty of tannins to balance the honey. Any fruit will work, even black currants, which are supposed to be excellent in wine or mead. Favorites are grape, apple, and raspberry. Try to avoid fruit that's overly sweet, however, since the honey will need some acid balance. This basic recipe should yield a slightly lower alcohol content - around 10-15%. A recipe which I'll try later is one which is renowned - Barkshack Gingermead. It's reputed to be one of the finest beverages you'll ever try. Recipes for this abound - you can find them on the internet, or Charlie Papazian's "The New Complete Joy Of Home Brewing" (a very good book on homebrewing). DO NOT boil any mixture containing fruit. It will "set" the pectin (like jelly), which will make the mead forever cloudy. The two options to sterilize fruit-based mead are either pasteurization or sulfites (Campden tablets). Apparently, copper tubing contributes important nutrients for fermentation, especially honey based. A small piece of tubing on a string, hung into the wort (the pre-mead/wine or beer) will help the yeast along. You can also buy yeast nutrient, which is spent yeast hulls. This is especially important for mead making. * An interesting footnote here - according to Papazian, the term "Honeymoon" is from an ancient tradition. It was believed that consumption of mead for one moon (one month) after a wedding would produce a son, making the couple and the meadmaker happy. Todd. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 22:25:23 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Peter Borst Subject: Re: Too late to add space?? Greetings! I would not add space in October. I am quite sure they will not swarm. They will be fine on full combs of honey. In late winter they will have emptied some of these out and will begin to raise brood. There is probably pollen underneath the stored honey. I doubt they are lacking in stored pollen; bees know how to prepare for winter. pb ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 12 Oct 2002 01:23:11 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Dick Allen Subject: Re: Honey & Tooth Decay? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit "Honey–Health and Therapeutic Qualities" from the National Honey Board is available as a download. It has about a page of discussion on dental health. A couple of quotes: 'Little is known about the effect of honey on oral health' 'To date, studies on the carciogenicity of honey have yielded contradictory results.' http://www.nhb.org/download/factsht/compendium.pdf Regards, Dick ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 12 Oct 2002 14:43:36 EDT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: CSlade777@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Nosema in supers MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 80% Acetic acid. Wear gloves. Chris ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 12 Oct 2002 16:02:29 +1000 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: T & M Weatherhead Subject: Re: Bee escapes again MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > If escapes are put in the hives before noon, the bees will leave the supers faster than if they are put there in the afternoon. I have found the same here in Australia. The theory as to why this happens is that by afternoon, a lot of young bees are moving up in the supers and these do not seem to be able to find their way out the exits of the clearer board the same way as older bees If you look at these the bees remaining, a lot seem young. There are two factors that I find that affect the clearing rate of the bees. Firstly temperature. If it is hot, then bees do not clear out of the super as well as if it is cooler. Secondly space. If there is not enough room under the clearer board, then the bees will not go down. Of course, if there is brood in the super, a lot of the bees will not go down. I find that no matter what you do, there is always one hive in the yard that will not clear out properly. You can look all you like to try to find our why but there seems no reason. Just one of those things. We use a different type of clearer board exit. I am getting on of my friends who has a digital camera to take some photos as I had promised I would get some for another beekeeper. Maybe Allen might be interested in them. Trevor Weatherhead AUSTRALIA ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 12 Oct 2002 20:34:19 EDT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: George Fielder Subject: Re: Bee Escapes Again MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 10/11/02 8:29:09 AM Eastern Daylight Time, beeman@ALGONET.SE writes: > What is it that draws bees down from the supers? I find that a cold night works wonders!! ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 12 Oct 2002 20:31:07 EDT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: George Fielder Subject: Re: Bee Escapes Again MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 10/10/02 12:00:57 PM Eastern Daylight Time, allend@INTERNODE.NET writes: > What are current thoughts on where > to put the space and how high it should be? > Hi Allen and all I have been making and using the Quebec type escapes (two triangles one inside the other) for almost 20 years. I have never set out to run experiments but pretty well use what scraps of wood are at hand. I notice no difference with 3/8" , 1/2" or 3/4" rims on the top side (from which I want the bees to go). Perhaps that is because I do not like burr comb to build up so would remove it from time to time. But, I have just checked and found only one of my 9 escape boards at hand have any trace of burr comb on the top side. I think that without bees, nectar, etc. going in and out, comb building quickly stops in the super being emptied of bees. On the other hand I find that my escapes with 5/8" to 7/8" rims on the bottom side empty the super faster. I think that this is because of congestion in the receiving super. Especially with booming colonies on 3 brood chambers I have noticed a lot of milling around and non progress in the escape routes, as well as many bees left in the super, if I want to retrieve the honey in only one or 2 days. Thus I always prefer to have a deep rim on the under side to give the 'escaping' bees lots of room to clear the exits quickly rather than stopping to discuss the new anomaly with all and sundry. With these deep rims on the lower side, I can retrieve the honey the next day without carrying home too many bees. george ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 12 Oct 2002 18:03:28 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Shane Woodruff Subject: Apistan/Cumaphous resides in beeswax. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii I have a friend who aked me if there were any resides from apistan or cumaphous strips in my cappings beeswax. I am not sure how to answer his question. I only use these miticides in the fall after I have removed my honey supers. Even so, I am not sure if the possibility exists. Does anyone know the answer to this question? Shane from NJ __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More http://faith.yahoo.com ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 12 Oct 2002 21:32:48 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Dee Lusby Subject: Re: Apistan/Cumaphous resides in beeswax. In-Reply-To: <20021013010328.78879.qmail@web21411.mail.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Shane wrote: I have a friend who aked me if there were any resides from apistan or cumaphous strips in my cappings beeswax. I am not sure how to answer his question. I only use these miticides in the fall after I have removed my honey supers. Even so, I am not sure if the possibility exists. Does anyone know the answer to this question? reply: Yes there is limited residue and this has been noted in articles published in ABJ.. Sincerely, Dee A. Lusby __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More http://faith.yahoo.com ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 12 Oct 2002 21:59:13 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Dee Lusby Subject: Re: Apistan/Cumaphous resides in beeswax. In-Reply-To: <20021013010328.78879.qmail@web21411.mail.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Hi all Since many use Apistan and coumaphos, having topped out on one or the other or both, and may use TM paddies, figured I make a post about information written about coumaphos in W.T. Thomson's 1992 edtion, Agricultural Chemicals, Book 1 Insecticides. I am adding a few comments also here by the way. Figure it a good way of seeing how beekeeper view the situtation. >From page 220: Precautions: Do not spray animals in a confined(note: not that bees are confined in a box/super), unventilated area (note: not that some are now reducing entrances to PVC openings due to SHB). Do not apply to sick or stressed animals or animals less then 3 months old. (Note: Of course our bees treated are healthy and not stressed and our bee larva,eggs would not be equivalent to less then 3 months old). Do not dip overheated animals.(Note: not that bees get hot in summer after working or on trucks in movement). Do not treat within 10 days of shipping, weaning, vaccination, etc.(Note: again movement, vaccination as pertains to drugging? do we drug bees?). Do not use before or after the application of natural or synthetic pyrethrins or compounds used to synergize them. (note: apistan is a pyretrin and maybe wax absorbing both apistan and coumaphos could/probably act to synergize them together). Cattle on a fattening ration may be more subject to organic phophate poisoning then animals on pature or maintenance feed. (Bees feed to fatten? to go into winter having more fat bodies?) Do not mix with other insecticides (any migratory with various spraying) nor use in conjunction with oral drenches or other internal medicines (Note: TM in paddies to add to the synergistic mixture of apistan/coumaphos). Toxic to birds and fish (Note: but not the bees all of a sudden?). Comments? Odd to note approved Apistan, coumaphos, and TM medication might and probably do come together here in a precaution statement. But maybe I am reading wrong. Sincerely, Dee A. Lusby __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More http://faith.yahoo.com ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2002 10:16:01 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Peter Borst Subject: Re: Apistan/Cumaphous resides in beeswax. Comments: To: Dee Lusby Does anyone know the answer to this question? reply: Yes there is limited residue and this has been noted in articles published in ABJ.. I honesty don't think you need to worry about chemical residues in new wax produced prior to the application of the pesticide. This is the *whole point* of not applying during the honey flow. How would it get there? Furthermore, if there is evidence of pesticide residues in capping wax, then you owe it to us to cite specific studies and their conclusions. It is simply not good enough to say: "this has been noted in articles published in ABJ" Peter Borst Ithaca, NY USA ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2002 08:05:35 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Dee Lusby Subject: Re: Apistan/Cumaphous resides in beeswax. Comments: To: Peter Borst In-Reply-To: <200210131416.g9DEAeQ5013094@listserv.albany.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Peter wrote: I honesty don't think you need to worry about chemical residues in new wax produced prior to the application of the pesticide. This is the *whole point* of not applying during the honey flow. How would it get there? reply: Movement of wax within the colony just like honey stores are moved around. You know Peter, that treated stuff in the broodboxes up to the honeysupers above. Peter also wrote: Furthermore, if there is evidence of pesticide residues in capping wax, then you owe it to us to cite specific studies and their conclusions. It is simply not good enough to say: "this has been noted in articles published in ABJ" reply: Not only the capping wax, but also the honey!But I thought that Peter had access to library and sat there alot and could read an index like me. The stuff I like best is in articles written overseas if it helps you any Peter. Regards, Dee __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More http://faith.yahoo.com ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2002 12:18:09 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Peter Borst Subject: coumaphos contamination Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Dee Lusby writes: But I thought that Peter had access to library and sat there a lot and could read an index like me. Reply: Don't expect me to do your homework for you. If you are going to quote articles, it is your responsibility cite references. Otherwise, your statements amount to nothing but hearsay. Unfortunately, people may say they got the information from BEE-List and let it go at that. * * * Data on coumaphos contamination (residues in parts per million): number of treatments/ brood comb/ honey comb/ honey 1/ 4.3/ .7/ .013 2/ 7.4/ .5/ .010 5/ 5.8/ .5/ .005 explanation: After 5 treatments the residue in the supers was less than 10 percent that of the residue in the brood combs. The residue in the honey was one thousandth of the amount in the brood combs. At 5.8 ppm, the amount in the brood comb was still far below the 100 parts per million allowed for wax. The level in honey was 5 parts per BILLION, much smaller than the .1 ppm (100 parts per billion) allowed. Capping wax was not studied, but it would likely have levels like that of the honey, which were were PARTS PER BILLION. THESE ARE EXTREMELY SMALL NUMBERS! Additional data were collected from commercial beeswax. From 1991 to 1998 the level of coumaphos in beeswax (not cappings) went from slightly over 1 ppm to slightly under 1 ppm (100 ppm allowed). Fluvalinate residues went from 0 to almost 3 parts per million during this time. Info from: Acaricide residues in honey, wax and propolis. Bogdanov, et al. Swiss Bee Research Centre. Dairy Research Station, Bern. * * * Coumaphos residues are not expected to exceed 0.1 part per million (ppm) in honey and 100 ppm in beeswax. The Agency has determined that these residue levels are *adequate to protect the public health*. Time-limited tolerances at these levels have been established and will expire December 31, 2002. These tolerances will be extended to support the 2002 use season. Treatments must be applied at a time when bees are not producing a surplus honey crop. Chemical resistant gloves must be worn when handling strips. Info from: New York Department of Environmental Conservation Division of Solid and Hazardous Materials Bureau of Pesticides Management, 625 Broadway, Albany, New York 12233-7254, January 18, 2002 -- Peter Borst ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2002 13:38:58 -0400 Reply-To: kgbenson@mindspring.com Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "Keith G. Benson" Subject: Re: Apistan/Cumaphous resides in beeswax. > reply: > Not only the capping wax, but also the > honey!But I thought > that Peter had access to library and sat there > alot and > could read an index like me. The stuff I like > best is in > articles written overseas if it helps you any > Peter. That might help Peter, but what of the rest of us? And one could very well argue that since the original assertions were yours, the burden to point to the specific information is yours, not Peters. While you may not feel compelled (though most do) to provide support for your arguments, I would submit that your efforts to educate beekeepers and have folks stop "doping" hives and "get of the treadmill" would better be served by providing references than by cryptic hints. Not everyone can access these materials easily, if you know what they are (and your mentioning them suggests that you do) and they do indeed support your contentions, then logic would suggest that disseminating the information and not making it hard for people to follow your train of thought would better serve your cause. Otherwise you are really only preaching to the already converted. Though I do use a wide variety of medications every day in the pursuit of animal health, I am keenly interested in minimizing chemical use in all aspects of food production. I could use all of the information you allude to, but will likely need a great many hours to find it now. Do I think every utterance on this list need be backed up by an exhaustive bibliography? Nope - but if you say there is scientific information out there, let us know where. Keith ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2002 17:33:45 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: waldig Subject: "Housel Positioning" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Just wondering... does the Housel positioning apply to one-piece plastic frames ? They should be coming out exactly the same from the same cavity tool. Waldemar Long Island, NY ------------------------------------------- Introducing NetZero Long Distance Unlimited Long Distance only $29.95/ month! Sign Up Today! www.netzerolongdistance.com ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2002 18:19:28 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Aaron Morris Subject: Re: "Housel Positioning" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > ... does the Housel positioning apply to one-piece plastic frames? Only if you buy into the idea in the first place. And if you DO buy into the idea, the positioning doesn't start with a single frame, it requires a pair of frames which have the down-Y cells facing each other. If you are standing in front of a 10-frame hive looking at it head-on, frames 1 through 5 (where frame 1 is to your left) will hve up-Y on the left side of the frame, down-Y on the right side of the frames, and frames 6 through 10 will be the mirror opposite(down-Y on the left, up-Y on the right). Aaron Morris - thinking cold fusion! ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2002 19:47:03 -0400 Reply-To: "jfischer@supercollider.com" Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: James Fischer Subject: Re: Apistan/Cumaphous resides in beeswax. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Keith G. Benson said: > That might help Peter, but what of the rest of us? At risk of sounding snide, consider your friendly neighborhood search engine. With a flip of the wrist over to Google, I find more than I care to read on a Sunday night: "+residue +wax +bee" yields 2,560 hits "+residue +beeswax" yields 3,110 hits "+residue +Apistan" yields 429 hits "+residue +Checkmite" yields 45 hits "+residue +coumaphos" yields 877 hits Not all of these will be citations to published papers, but some of them will. ...and if all else fails, your local reference librarian has access to good databases of the usual set of journals. and can not only run searches for you, but also order full-text copies, which are most often delivered 100% free. I have been making Inter-library loan requests for decades, and I have been "charged" only a handful of times, most often for the shipping of a heavy book or set of books. Yes, folks that work at universities have access to much better citation search services than the rest of us, and often have better "science-oriented" journal databases and collections of journals than public libraries, but on the other hand, they must put up with working for a university, which is a very high price to pay. As an alternative, anyone can wander into the library of most university or community colleges, and anyone who does quickly notices that students and staff tend to run searches on the same expensive subscription databases that Peter has at Cornell, print the results out on a printer, and then wander off toward the stacks in search of a few books. I have yet to see a single person "log off" their workstation when they are done. Do I have to draw anyone a picture? jim ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2002 21:49:27 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: DONALD M CAMPBELL Subject: Re: A beekeeping joke A little light humor!! (to relieve all this Housel Positioning.......) Two bees ran into each other. One asked the other how things were going. "Really bad," said the second bee, "the weather has been really wet and damp and there aren't any flowers or pollen, so I can't make any honey." "No problem," said the first bee, "Just fly down five blocks and turn left and keep going until you see all the cars. There's a Bar Mitzvah going on and there are all kinds of fresh flowers and fresh fruit." "Thanks for the tip," said the second bee and flew away. A few hours later the two bees ran into each other again and the first bee asked, "How'd it go?" "Fine," said the second bee, "It was everything you said it would be." "Uh, what's that thing on your head?" asked the first bee. "That's my yarmulke," said the second bee, "I didn't want them to think I was a wasp." ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2002 19:40:49 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Peter Borst Subject: Risk from pesticides in honey, etc. Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Greetings I would be the last person to belittle the public's concern about pesticides in food. I, too, dream of a world where we would be able to eat food free from contaminants. However, some perspective is needed. Not only is the amount of pesticide present in honey and wax minute, it pales before the quantity of toxic material we ingest every day. Furthermore, the health benefits of consumption of fresh food far outweigh the risk of illness from pesticide residue. Too much food and the wrong type of food, is far more worrisome than the residues, which are strictly regulated. Please read these excerpts and ponder their implications. Stay informed!! * * * >The vast proportion of chemicals to which humans are exposed are >naturally-occurring. Yet public perceptions tend to identify >chemicals as being only synthetic and only synthetic chemicals as >being toxic; however, every natural chemical is also toxic at some >dose. We estimate that the daily average American exposure to burnt >material in the diet is about 2000 mg, and to natural pesticides >(the chemicals that plants produce to defend themselves against >fungi, insects, and animal predators) about 1500 mg. In comparison, >the total daily exposure to all synthetic pesticide residues >combined, based on the TDS, is about 0.09 mg. We estimate that >humans ingest roughly 5,000 to 10,000 different natural pesticides >and their breakdown products. We have shown that a diet free of >naturally-occurring chemicals that are rodent carcinogens is >impossible. > >It is probable that almost every fruit and vegetable in the >supermarket contains natural pesticides that are rodent carcinogens. >Even though only a tiny proportion of natural pesticides have been >tested for carcinogenicity, 35 of 64 that have been tested are >rodent carcinogens and occur in common plant foods and spices. Since >99.9% of the chemicals humans ingest are natural, and the 50% >positivity rate for natural chemicals is similar to that for >synthetic chemicals, nearly all rodent carcinogens that humans >ingest are likely to be natural. Therefore, when risk assessments >are published for synthetic pesticide residues, it might help to >educate the public and broaden perspective if they were compared to >this enormous background of naturally-occurring chemicals in the >diet. from Pesticide Residues in Food, by Lois Swirsky et al http://potency.berkeley.edu/text/pesticide.html * * * >The risk of cancer from exposure to agrochemical residues in food >and water is small. The evidence >for an increased content of anti-cancer protective factors >(anti-oxidant vitamins and minerals) is >neither conclusive nor persuasive. A diet of organic food would not >reduce the risk of cancer to any >significant extent. > >There is a general consensus that dietary factors are responsible >for 30 to 60% of cancers in the >developed countries although there is less certainty about the >specific dietary measures which can be >recommended and no guarantee that dietary changes will prevent all >kinds of cancer. Evidence-based >dietary recommendations have been made which, if followed, should >lead to a significant reduction in >cancer risk. The most conclusive evidence is for the protective >effect of fruit and vegetables and for >an increased risk of cancer from salt, pickled food, alcohol and >aflatoxins. The evidence is less >conclusive but good for the effect of fibre, fat, total >calories/obesity and red meat. > >A healthy cancer-preventing diet consists of: >-- at least 5 portions of fruit and vegetables per day, including >raw, unprocessed produce, >-- plenty of foods from plant sources, such as breads, cereals, >grain products, rice, pasta or beans, >several times each day, >-- total fat intake from calories limited to 30% or less, with >saturated fat intake limited to 10% or >less, >-- limited intake of total calories so as to stay within a healthy >weight range, minimal consumption of >red meat, >-- minimal consumption of salt-pickled fish and vegetables, >-- no more than the current UK consumption of salt, smoked, cured, >and pickled food, >-- moderate alcohol consumption, men not more than 21 units/week, >women not more than 14 >units/week. > >The evidence that organic food reduces the risk of cancer is not as >convincing as the evidence for any >of the dietary factors mentioned above. It has to be concluded that >in contrast to the strength of >evidence for a healthy cancer-preventing diet, there is no >compelling reason to recommend the >consumption of organic food in order to reduce the risk of cancer. from AGRICULTURE, FOOD AND CANCER RISK An investigation into the environmental causes of cancer - whether intensive agriculture has an important influence on cancer aetiology in the UK and whether organically grown food reduces the risk of cancer or can play a significant role in the promotion of health of those with cancer. Researched and written by Lisa Saffron -- Peter Borst ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2002 21:10:42 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Dee Lusby Subject: Re: Apistan/Cumaphous resides in beeswax. Comments: To: "jfischer@supercollider.com" In-Reply-To: <01C272F1.4EBEFF20.jfischer@supercollider.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii James wrote: With a flip of the wrist over to Google, I find more than I care to read on a Sunday night: Not all of these will be citations to published papers, but some of them will. Reply: Also Peter you might read more of my thoughts on this subject (though you might not agree here again)at http://www.beesource.com/pov/lusby/ and go into the chapters on decontamination concerning fluvalinate and coumaphos. Sincerely, Dee A. Lusby __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More http://faith.yahoo.com ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2002 22:00:16 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Dee Lusby Subject: Re: "Housel Positioning" In-Reply-To: <002d01c27300$37533770$47d9d23f@ws04> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Waldemar wrote: Just wondering... does the Housel positioning apply to one-piece plastic frames ? They should be coming out exactly the same from the same cavity tool. reply: Yes. And while you are talking on adding, Lee showed up yesterday here from Deming N. Mexico to physically go over the "Housel Positioning" inside of domestic colonies we are doing and trying to understand more. We looked at comb samples all day and just questioned each other and talked. We normally do a lot of cutouts in a year, but this year was different and we due to excessive drought have only averaged about 25 or so this year and not much of that was after July. Normally we do at least 100 if not double that. In doing swarm cutouts, we have always had an attrition of about 50% initially in making the change to 4.9 and in taking to the field to acclimitize better over the years about the same. Talking with Lee and going over combs and positioning now gives we something to further look at this coming year, especially with El Nino due in. Namely, how much of this loss in attrition was due to improper positioning of combs to inhibit initial buildup of swarms or triggered absconding? I am almost afraid to think about it and the loss of bees! I already am upset with all the needless culling and remelting that done properly first with the positioning by the HOusel method we could have avoided over the years. Now I am thinking bees and swarm captures lost, and for no other reason then improper sequencing of combs to allow for proper buildup. My mind is saying bees that are harmoniously kept don't swarm back out and abscond or have trouble building up when hived. Lee and I talked about that all day for hours after the thoughts registered. Now that we are getting time to view the bees more, by not having to worry about mites and accompanying diseases, it sure is frustrating to see how little is known about bees and how to keep them harmonious with a natural system, and yet how much is lost by not doing so. Fine tuning our field management for the betterment of bees is sure needed it seems and not just with us. Sincerely, Dee A. Lusby __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More http://faith.yahoo.com ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 02:39:18 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Mark Walker Subject: Re: Bee Escapes Hello Lloyd... A little off your topic of "Bee Escapes"... however, as the esteemed owner of Ross Rounds I wondering if you could pass along some tips on the use of your Ross Round Supers. I purchased a Ross Round Super and all the accompanying "stuff" this past spring with great expectations of giving this comb honey a try. I picked out my strongest and most productive hive and installed the RR super above a medium super that had already been filled (the Medium super was divided by a queen excluder from the two brood boxes below). In two weeks the bees didn't touch the RR Super. They did mill around and loiter, however, didn't make any attept to draw any comb out. They came in the top entrance and went sraight down. Thinking that perhaps there was not a nectar flow on, I put another empty Med. super with foundation, on top the RR super, and the "girls" immediately started to draw out and fill the foundation. I then rotated the RR Super right down to the bottom (above the Queen excluder, with both full Med. supers above) and the bees still ignored it. All summer they ignored the super, in fact they started eating the thin wax foundation. I was hoping if you could tell me what I was either doing wrong, or provide any tips as to how to properly use this system. Your help is greatly appreciated...! Cheers, Mark Walker Delta, BC ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 02:41:16 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Mark Walker Subject: Re: NOSEMA IN SUPERS Acedic = Acetic Acid ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 11:06:22 +0100 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Harry Goudie Subject: Re: Risk from pesticides in honey, etc. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I have to disagree with what Peter has said here. It is a case of "Size does not matter". We all know that some people die from one bee sting - a very small amount of venom. Would it be more toxic is you drank a whole pint of it? In homeopathic medicine the cures contain very little of the active ingredient (perhaps none!!) and yet they seem to have an effect on the body. I don't think therefore that the amount of toxic material in honey or anything else is not important. It seems also that Lisa Saffron is only concerned with cancer but this is only one diseases which can be traced to contaminated food. I would agree that we do eat a lot of toxic material but over the years we have become accustomed to eating it and it may in fact even do us some good. The GM products and the new weedkillers, insecticides etc which go along with them are the contaminants we have to worry about as we have not seen these in honey before. It looks to me as though honey from rape is going to be contaminated with GM material in future years and I believe this could be a bad thing for British beekeeping. Harry --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.401 / Virus Database: 226 - Release Date: 09-Oct-02 ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 07:25:37 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: William Truesdell Subject: Re: Risk from pesticides in honey, etc. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Peter Borst wrote: >> >> It is probable that almost every fruit and vegetable in the >> supermarket contains natural pesticides that are rodent carcinogens. >> Even though only a tiny proportion of natural pesticides have been >> tested for carcinogenicity, 35 of 64 that have been tested are >> rodent carcinogens and occur in common plant foods and spices. Since >> 99.9% of the chemicals humans ingest are natural, and the 50% >> positivity rate for natural chemicals is similar to that for >> synthetic chemicals, nearly all rodent carcinogens that humans >> ingest are likely to be natural. Therefore, when risk assessments >> are published for synthetic pesticide residues, it might help to >> educate the public and broaden perspective if they were compared to >> this enormous background of naturally-occurring chemicals in the >> diet. > Thank you, Peter. The tests for carcinogens is a bit suspect since the chemical is added to the rat's diet in quantities far in excess of anything the rat or a person might eat, sometimes in a lifetime. Even bread has fallen under the do-not-eat absurdity of cancer testing. Onions and garlic, both touted for their health-giving qualities would be banned under FDA regs because of their chemical mix. Broccoli, also, but I would not fight that. To compare cumophose treatments ( spray or dip for cattle) to strips for bees is a matter of great difference in concentration and method and are not comparable as to risk. (I will never use it no matter what the concentration.) We have beat this horse often, so one more go-around will do little more than increase the entropy of the universe a fraction more. Bill Truesdell Bath, Maine ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 09:21:58 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Timothy Eisele Subject: Re: Bee Escapes In-Reply-To: <200210140639.g9E6dIPr001131@listserv.albany.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Mon, 14 Oct 2002, Mark Walker wrote: I see from your address that you are quite far north (British Columbia), and you might be having the same problem I had. The first two years, the bees wouldn't touch the RR super no matter how much I crowded them or how strong the honey flow was, instead they would build and fill burr comb in every little nook and cranny they could manage in the rest of the hive. It was a mess. They also were quite reluctant to draw out new supers of foundation in general, although not as bad as the rounds, and really didn't like to work the frames on the ends of the super. It occurred to me that most of the advice people give about making comb honey assumes that it will get really hot in the summer (well over 80 F (26 C) for weeks or months at a time). That just doesn't happen here (northern Michigan, right next to Lake Superior), so I wondered whether it might be a problem with the RR supers being too cold for the bees to easily draw comb. This year, I painted most of my supers dark green instead of white, so that the sun would warm them quickly in the morning. This seems to have done the trick, as the one hive with RR supers filled them just as fast as the other two hives filled their regular supers, and I got two supers worth of beautiful rounds from them. The other hives were also a lot more vigorous, and built nicer comb much faster than I had previously seen. This makes sense to me, because it would be hard for the bees to really get into a RR super to warm it up, because of all the plastic in the way that would tend to break up a cluster. They therefore have to be brought to wax-working temperature from outside heating. So, if your summers tend to be on the cool side, try painting a few hives a dark color (if you haven't already) and see if that helps. -- Tim Eisele tceisele@mtu.edu ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 09:19:05 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Peter Borst Subject: Re: Risk from pesticides in honey, etc. quote: I have to disagree with what Peter has said here. It is a case of "Size does not matter". reply: Well, I don't have a problem with disagreement. When I post, I do so in the spirit of inquiry. I do not have the last word on any of this. However, one must have perspective. If you are talking about PARTS PER BILLION, you are talking about amounts that are undetectable by ordinary means. Finding 5 parts per billion is like looking for a particular family in China. Finding a needle in a haystack would be easy compared to that. Of course, some molecules are toxic in smaller amounts than others. You can eat a teaspoonful of salt, but not of dioxin. Still, there is a concentration at which dioxin is not dangerous, just as there is an amount of salt which is poisonous to a human being. There is also a word for inordinate fear of an item: superstition. Perspective is what I am talking about, and to have that, one must be informed. Millions of dollars are spent on determining the lethal doses of these compunds (LD-50). Peter Borst ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 14:51:07 +0200 Reply-To: Jorn_Johanesson@apimo.dk Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Jorn Johanesson Subject: Re: coumaphos contamination In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I don't Know if this is of any interest but for a lot of years we have had wax clubs here in Denmark to assure that wax taken into use in the bee yards were residue free. We don't wish any residue from medicine in either wax or honey! Practical all wax is bought as foundation and the supplier is voluntary bound to deliver separated manufactured foundation to the wax clubs. Best regards Jorn Johanesson Multilingual software for beekeeping since 1997 hive note- queen breeding and handheld computer beekeeping software Updated 13-09-2002 Added grouping and colouring of hives + a lot more. Each breeding queen now has its own timetable. all you need and a little more. being a little beekeeper or a big queen breeder free of charge up to 10 hives. Soon coming up handling more than dreamed out hives. home page = HTTP://apimo.dk e-mail apimo@apimo.dk ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 07:53:05 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Mike Tooley Subject: Re: Bee Escapes(round comb) In-Reply-To: <200210140639.g9E6dIPr001131@listserv.albany.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >I picked > out my strongest and most productive hive and installed the RR super above > a medium super that had already been filled (the Medium super was divided > by a queen excluder from the two brood boxes below I am not an expert comb honey producer by any means ,but I have done it enough to have learned a thing or two about what doesnt work under the conditions here at the 3000' level in N. Cal.(cold snowy springs).Here,I wouldnt expect to get them drawn and filled that far up in the stack.We have our best results shaking the strongest hives down to a single deep,then putting 2 or 3 round comb supers right over this brood box(no excluder,not needed).This should be done right at the start of a reliable flow of a type that is slow to granulate,if you have such a thing.Granulated comb honey is an abomination so pick your flows if possible.With us that means star thistle(not reliable)and Cascara(Sierra Coffeeberry).Our hives and supers are all different colors(no white)but Im not sure that is important.Strong hives and a fairly good flow are. If you shake them down,watch out for swarming.It helps to have a very young queen,and I was never able to avoid going in and cutting cells every 10 days.Take all this with a grain of salt. ----Mike ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 08:38:08 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Dee Lusby Subject: Re: Risk from pesticides in honey, etc. In-Reply-To: <3DAAA9B1.9030205@suscom-maine.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii William wrote: To compare cumophose treatments ( spray or dip for cattle) to strips for bees is a matter of great difference in concentration and method and are not comparable as to risk. (I will never use it no matter what the concentration.) We have beat this horse often, so one more go-around will do little more than increase the entropy of the universe a fraction more. Reply: Maybe you will never use is understood. To compare coumaphos treatments to strips is also a matter of great differnce in concentration to be sure. To have section 18s maybe approved to cover tracks for residues already starting to appear for rag'ems is shakey politics as pertains to various treatments on the market today, so no misuse then technically can be found. Yes, there is a merry-go-round and it seems it gets faster and people keep falling off the horses. When does the game stop? Regards, Dee A. Lusby __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More http://faith.yahoo.com ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 11:20:33 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Todd Subject: Re: coumaphos contamination MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Although I respect Peter's purely rational, science based approach, it seems that there may be several possible oversights in his arguments: 1) Measurements of wax & honey residues are based on *proper* use of pesticides. This does not take into consideration dolts who don't believe the directions apply to them, and leave treatments in place during a honey flow, or leave them there for prolonged periods. 2) There is an underlying assumption that all pesticides have the same relative ability to harm us, whether they're natural (phyto-chemicals) or synthetic. Personally, I'm much more worried about synergistc possibilities resulting from synthetic pesticides than I am from natural sources. 3) We always assume that the EPA somehow magically knows what the actual safe levels are for any particular synthetic compound, even if it's only been around for a few years. Science News has repeatedly reported considerable effect on fish populations from a variety of hormones and medications which are not being captured by water treatment plants. These compounds are in extremely low concentrations, and yet are capable of significantly altering the sex ratio of the populations, with other undesirable effects. Synergy has been suggested as one potential culprit. 4) Time and again, synthetics previously thought to be "absolutely safe" have been found to have very tragic effects. A few notables to come to mind: Thalidamide, DDT, etc. The herbicide Roundup (Glyphosate) has been used in such quantities by farmers that many crops no longer germinate properly in heavily treated soil - thus the need for GMO food crops which are "Roundup Ready". This stuff was heavily marketed as "absolutely safe" to the soil. All I'm suggesting here is that we probably know a hell of a lot less than we think we do about effects of synthetic compounds on the world around us, and the little we do know usually comes from painful realizations after the fact. Cheers, Todd. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 09:55:03 -0600 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Jerry J Bromenshenk Subject: Wax residues Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Peter will object that we haven't published all of this -- but any chemist would also predict this. We have performed 10s of thousands of analyses of bees, pollen, wax, etc. Wax acts as a sink for many organic chemicals -- that's been published in many reports to our sponsors, and obviously, others have found chemicals in wax. Here's the rub, I can spend 30 minutes running down the obvious references, or you can do it. They are available. I have a few minutes to make a quick response, but I don't have time to conduct a search for references that are readily available. Right now I'm pulling together a talk for the MT/Wyoming Beekeepers meeting later this week. Simply stated, some chemicals are attracted to wax and migrate or move through it. Old or new or any mixture of the two, same process. New wax is also moved by bees-- we have reported this in technical reports to EPA. When we digitized the amount of wax drawn on new foundation, then got a nectar flow, on our next inspection, we found that the digitized data sets showed a reduction in the amount of newly drawn comb. Apparently -- and this is speculation, faced with the need to accomodate the flow, the bees removed newly drawn wax from the foundation and used it to repair and cap the drawn combs where the bulk of the flow was being stored. That may be quicker or more economical than producing more wax. Now, we also know that the levels of chemical residues in wax from the same combs varies with time of year. Levels tend to be higher in summer, fall; lowest in the spring. Lots of things are probably going on here -- chemical migration and breakdown, but also we see bees tearing down and repairing comb. Old comb mixed with new wax would dilute the residues to some degree. Jerry ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 08:59:20 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Dee Lusby Subject: Re: Risk from pesticides in honey, etc. In-Reply-To: <200210141319.g9ED3IQV005956@listserv.albany.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Peter wrote: There is also a word for inordinate fear of an item: superstition.Perspective is what I am talking about, and to have that, one must be informed. Millions of dollars are spent on determining the lethal doses of these compunds (LD-50). reply: This is so true Peter concerning millions spent determining the lethal doses and even more spent lobbying to see what part of the cut each commodity gets, to fill the cup pertaining to these dosages or lethal doses, as you say.This we call residue tolerances or limits! To each his cut so all get a piece of the action. Then how do you tell the public how to properly eat and in what proportions, so their cup not runnith over and troubles set in? regards, Dee A. Lusby __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More http://faith.yahoo.com ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 13:18:01 -0400 Reply-To: "jfischer@supercollider.com" Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: James Fischer Subject: Has any USA Beekeeper Bought "New Zealand" or "Austrailian" Queens/Pkgs via Canada? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit If anyone has bought queens or packages from New Zealand "via Canada", or knows of anyone who has done this, I'd like an off-list e-mail. The reason I ask is that the USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) is assuming that this not only has happened, but has been common practice. You can read their assumptions here http://www.aphis.usda.gov/ppq/pra/honeybees/ The fact that they do not cite specific cases, or provide a number of queens/packages imported per year makes me wonder if the actual number has been zero, or very close to zero. While Bee-L represents only a tiny fraction of beekeepers in any country, it is a fairly good "random sample", and hence is a valid forum for a survey. So, let's count, shall we? Please send any e-mail off-list. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 13:42:32 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Peter Borst Subject: Re: Risk from pesticides in honey, etc. Greetings I regard this topic as extremely serious and not one where one can afford to be very wrong. We are selling food and the public wants to know if it's safe. I heard some actually say "Honey? I heard that's full of chemicals" If someone asks you if your honey has chemicals, what can you say? I would say "There may be traces of some pesticides. Certainly far less than the legal limit and far less than some other food products. Most agricultural products are sprayed directly, whereas we do not apply chemicals to hives during the honey gathering period." What is ironic is that many people seem confident in scientists when they talk about parts per million (I mean, how can they *detect* these amounts?) but they think they are being lied to when the same scientists say that .1 part per million or less is safe. You should be thanking them for such stringent rules, and insisting the laws be enforced. Many other countries are much more lax and their populace is routinely poisoned by food and drugs due to lack of regulation. pb ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 19:22:52 +0100 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Harry Goudie Subject: Re: Risk from pesticides in honey, etc. MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Peter, I don't think "superstition" is the correct word here. If the crop was "cursed" then this word would apply but unfortunately it is not cursed but poisoned. I think the best words to describe my reaction to the situation would be "logical instinct" If someone has put poison on a crop to kill insect, weed or whatever then I don't think eating that crop will do me any good. The fact that millions of dollars have been spent determining lethal doses etc only proves to me that the product is dubious. You must also ask yourself who is spending this money and are they to be trusted! It is my experience when so much money is available that corruption is also very prevalent. Harry --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.401 / Virus Database: 226 - Release Date: 09-Oct-02 ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 16:10:59 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Peter Borst Subject: Re: coumaphos contamination Todd writes: All I'm suggesting here is that we probably know a hell of a lot less than we think we do about effects of synthetic compounds on the world around us, and the little we do know usually comes from painful realizations after the fact. Of course. But we still have to eat, have to live. We go on limited information always. I would rather place my bet with scientific inquiry and testing than fear mongering and superstition. We are so much better off now in regard to pure food than 100 years ago. Food then was aldulterated and contaminated. They used to put carbolic acid in fresh milk to "disinfect it"! pb ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 16:00:28 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Peter Borst Subject: Re: Risk from pesticides in honey, etc. >> Peter, I don't think "superstition" is the correct word here. ... You must also ask yourself who is spending this money and are they to be trusted! "Paranoia" also comes to mind. pb ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 16:58:25 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: LLOYDSPEAR Subject: Pollen Trap A beekeeping dealer in the US has been giving customers who ask an old OAC schematic and bill of materials for a bottom mount trap. (It is really out of date.) They have asked me if I am willing to share similar material for the Sundance trap. In principle, I would not mind. However, we have just under 40 parts and six sub-assemblies, and do not even have a schematic and bill of materials for our own use. (Instead, we rely on jigs and tribal knowledge.) I am not willing to spend the time making up the information, and also suspect that there are very few do-it-yourselfers interested in making this kind of a Cadillac product. Does anyone know of an internet source for construction details of a bottom mount trap? I've tried BeeSource, but what they have cannot be reproduced well. Lloyd Lloyd Spear, Owner of Ross Rounds, manufacturer of comb honey equipment for beekeepers and Sundance pollen traps. http://www.rossrounds.com Lloyd@rossrounds.com ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 19:38:46 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Todd Subject: Racial Differences Among Bees MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Another fringe question for the more learned among us: Has anyone noticed observable forage preferences among different races = of bees? For example, when white asters are flowering next to = goldenrod, would one race prefer the goldenrod, and another the asters?=20 Secondly, I noticed that my Russians have stored very little obvious = pollen, unlike my Carniolans, which store prodigious amounts of pollen = in Fall. It has been mentioned on the list that some bees store pollen = underneath capped honey. Has anyone else noticed this? Thanks, Todd. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2002 01:18:23 +0200 Reply-To: jtemp@xs4all.nl Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Jan Tempelman Subject: Re: Pollen Trap MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit http://www.xs4all.nl/~jtemp//ChiliPolVal.html http://www.xs4all.nl/~jtemp//Chili8.html LLOYDSPEAR wrote:also suspect that > there are very few do-it-yourselfers interested in making this kind of a > Cadillac product. -- Met vriendelijke groet, Jan Jan Tempelman Annie Romein-Verschoorpad 2-4 NL 4103 VE Culemborg tel.:0345-524433 mobile: 06 10719917 -- http://www.xs4all.nl/~jtemp/index3.html mailto:jtemp@xs4all.nl -- ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 19:24:40 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Todd Subject: Re: coumaphos contamination MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Todd writes: > All I'm suggesting here is that we probably know a hell of a lot less than > we think we do about effects of synthetic compounds on the world around us, > and the little we do know usually comes from painful realizations after the > fact. > > Of course. But we still have to eat, have to live. We go on limited > information always. I would rather place my bet with scientific inquiry and > testing than fear mongering and superstition. > > We are so much better off now in regard to pure food than 100 years ago. > Food then was aldulterated and contaminated. They used to put carbolic acid > in fresh milk to "disinfect it"! > > pb > I wouldn't personally call a general mistrust of agricultural chemicals "superstition". I suppose there were a few orchardists back a hundred years or so who were laughed at because they thought lead arsenate wasn't the smartest thing to put on apple crops year after year...the ground is still poisoned to this day in many areas. One hallmark of our over-reliance on agri-chemicals is evidenced in a five minute visit to Agway. Most of the customers there seem to be buying stuff to kill something or other, with *NO* regard to collateral damage. Worse, they usually target something that is of no real concern (like weeds or grubs). End of soapbox. I do agree that sometimes it seems that there is little to be done except bite the bullet and use a chemical on a problem like varroa, until a real solution presents itself (like breeding). This, of course, is especially true of pros like yourself, unlike hobbyists like me, who can afford to experiment a bit. The flipside, though, would appear to be that troubling times like these actually create niches and opportunities for the creative. In the end, I'm sure that nature's resolve will present itself either way. Regards, Todd. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2002 13:41:57 +1200 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Robt Mann Subject: Re: coumaphos contamination In-Reply-To: <001801c27395$3dc5f4e0$56ad72d8@sign1> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Todd wrote: > I'm much more worried about synergistic >possibilities resulting from synthetic pesticides than I am from natural >sources. This is only a crude rule of thumb; some natural poisons e.g aflatoxins are much worse than some synthetics. Another rule of thumb is that halogen (chlorine or bromine or fluorine) atoms bonded to carbon should be treated as a warning flag. ... >Time and again, synthetics previously thought to be "absolutely >safe" have been found to have very tragic effects. A few notables to come >to mind: Thalidamide, DDT, etc. I agree fully. > we probably know a hell of a lot less >than we think we do about effects of synthetic compounds on the world around >us, and the little we do know usually comes from painful realizations after >the fact. After 3 decades of teaching, campaigning, & advising NZ govts, I couldn't put it better. Bees are almost certainly more susceptible to infections, parasites etc because they're weakened by sub-lethal dosages of numerous chemicals. I believe synergism is the rule rather than the exception, so toxicity measurements on one chemical will in general be only a v loose guide to what it will do to bees that are taking in a cocktail of other chemicals ( + radiations). If these principles were properly implemented, bee carcasses would be assayed routinely for a suite of chemicals (the list being revised from time to time), in much the way truck oils are analysed for copper, iron, etc as indices of wear. But the threatened bee labs will not, on past trends, get funded to measure potential evidence against the powerful companies of what Goldsmith calls "a criminal industry". R ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 20:51:33 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Peter Borst Subject: Re: coumaphos contamination Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Todd writes: >I do agree that sometimes it seems that there is little to be done >except bite the bullet and use a chemical on a problem like varroa, >until a real solution presents itself (like breeding). This, of >course, is especially true of pros like yourself, unlike hobbyists >like me, who can afford to experiment a bit. The flipside, though, >would appear to be that troubling times like these actually create >niches and opportunities for the creative. In the end, I'm sure that >nature's resolve will present itself either way. I am sorry if I have stirred something up here. I think that it is worth the effort to uncover the truth, no matter how unsavory. The truth is, honey has pesticides in it, even if you are not using them, because of the sad state of our environment. The good news is that the amount is minuscule, only of major concern to people who entertain the notion of absolute purity (which doesn't exist). Our environment is probably a lot safer now than when everybody was burning coal. I am not a professional beekeeper any more (was for many years). Now I am involved in honey bee research and spend all of my time on experiments. We tried to avoid coumaphos just like a lot of other beekeepers. In fact, when we finally used it, it cut back our mite populations so severely that we had to stop because we *need* mites to continue our studies. But returning to Apistan was a disaster. It no longer works for us. As far creativity goes, there are a lot of very creative people working on this one. Some do creative work, others fantasize, but never mind! Yes, nature can solve this! But the solution might not be the one you want. Nature would let the susceptible bees -- my bees -- die out and replace them with more aggressive ones. Breeding better bees is what we are working on but if it was simple, we would already have them. One last word: I have no particular agenda to promote. I don't sell anything, I don't apply for grant money. I just work with bees and I would like to see the next generation be able to keep bees and sell honey. Peter Borst, Ithaca, NY ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 18:14:42 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Shane Woodruff Subject: What is slumgum and how does it get in beeswax cappings? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Today I rendered cappings and got a bunch of slumgum. Can someone tell me what slumgum is and how it gets in cappings. Thanks, Shane in NJ __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos & More http://faith.yahoo.com ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 16:52:46 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: dan hendricks Subject: Too late to add space?? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Milt, any box you add now is going to be the top box when you first inspect in the spring. The queen and all the bees will be there then so it now should be full of honey with any pollen frames you can find. Dan --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos, & more faith.yahoo.com ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2002 14:17:16 +1200 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Robt Mann Subject: Re: Risk from pesticides in honey, etc. In-Reply-To: <200210141319.g9ED3IQV005956@listserv.albany.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > Millions of dollars are spent on determining the lethal doses of >these compunds (LD-50). This is a measure of acute (i.e prompt) toxicity only. Of greater concern generally are delayed effects - cancer, malformations _in utero_, mutations, and some mental effects (where applicable). >there is a >concentration at which dioxin is not dangerous, just as there is an amount >of salt which is poisonous to a human being. With a few if any exceptions, no threshold (safe dose) has been shown for any agent causing those types of delayed harm. The notorious 'dioxin' is soluble in water to the extent of only 0.2 ppb, but at that "less than one person in China" level in a standard plant-cell culture causes severe harm e.g bits of chromosome floating free in the cytoplasm. We have no evidence of a no-effect dose for mutagens such as this. A good book is S S Epstein The Politics of Cancer. >There is also a word for inordinate fear of an item: superstition. >Perspective is what I am talking about, and to have that, one must be >informed. Political misuse of fear evoked by unwarranted alarms has largely replaced in the media any duty to present authority, reliable fact, or informed opinion. I complained about this in a public debate (about GM) last Sat, naming some of NZ's main poseuses who have thus usurped expert status; nobody showed any sign of dispute. R ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 22:56:18 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "Nathan W. Lawrence" Subject: stings-- should I be concerned? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Hello to all on Bee-L-- One of the memorable parts of my first summer of beekeeping is the stings I received. I'm not a masochist, but in a way I almost enjoyed getting stung. I think it was mostly because I know many other people are so afraid of being stung-- I could get stung, knock the stinger out and shrug it off as if it was nothing. I even did a lot of my hive work in a short sleeve shirt and sometimes (I know it is dangerous) without a veil or any other protection. I helped someone take bees out of a barn wall and got nine stings. There was some itching the next day or two, but little or no swelling. No big deal. It seemed like I was becoming less sensitive to the stings as I've read about in practically every beekeeping book. However... since then, the stings I've gotten have had a much greater effect on me. I was stung on my thumb (just below the nail) and the next day, I was swollen all the way up to my elbow. While the swelling is always local, it seems to be covering a very large area. My most recent sting (on my ankle) took almost a week to go down. Even now, two weeks later, the area is still quite tender. Is this something I should be concerned about? Are my reactions likely to diminish or might they continue the current trend of increasing in swelling and duration? I feel like I'm being a bit of a wimp when I put my gloves on... Any wise words on stings? Thanks. --Nathan Lawrence -- ============================================================= * Nathan Lawrence * * * * Violinist * Audio Applications and Recording Technology * * 230 Lawton Road * Howes Cave, NY 12092 * * Phone: 518-296-8403 Fax: 508-632-7945 <>< * * http://www.bigfoot.com/~audioart * * Mobile Phone (with voice mail): 518-461-9622 * * AudioART@mac.com * =============================================================