From MAILER-DAEMON Sat Feb 28 10:52:27 2009 Return-Path: <> X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.8 (2007-02-13) on industrial X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-81.7 required=2.4 tests=ADVANCE_FEE_1,ADVANCE_FEE_2, ADVANCE_FEE_3,AWL,KAM_STOCKOTC,MAILTO_TO_SPAM_ADDR,SARE_FRAUD_X3, SPF_HELO_PASS,USER_IN_WHITELIST autolearn=disabled version=3.1.8 X-Original-To: adamf@IBIBLIO.ORG Delivered-To: adamf@IBIBLIO.ORG Received: from listserv.albany.edu (unknown [169.226.1.24]) by metalab.unc.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D989480F9 for ; Sat, 28 Feb 2009 10:52:18 -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 n1SFhrpK016524 for ; Sat, 28 Feb 2009 10:52:17 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2009 10:52:17 -0500 From: "University at Albany LISTSERV Server (14.5)" Subject: File: "BEE-L LOG0704C" To: adamf@IBIBLIO.ORG Message-ID: Content-Length: 214007 Lines: 5095 ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 01:07:57 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Brian Fredericksen Subject: CDD Frenzy goes big time!! Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit http://www.drudgereport.com/ The Matt Drudge Report, one of the busiest web sites in the world carries the headline tonight ARE CELL PHONES WIPING OUT OUR BEES? with this story below linked. http://news.independent.co.uk/environment/wildlife/article2449968.ece "Now a limited study at Landau University has found that bees refuse to return to their hives when mobile phones are placed nearby. Dr Jochen Kuhn, who carried it out, said this could provide a "hint" to a possible cause." Simultaneously several european outlets are carrying bee loss stories trying their best to make this seem world wide. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/04/01/nbees01.xml http://www.voanews.com/english/2007-04-11-voa65.cfm and some people now outright predicting the end of the earth http://www.thetrumpet.com/index.php?page=article&id=3103 "It could yet become a much greater curse, contributing to the famines prophesied in the Bible to occur on an epidemic scale at the time of the end, shortly before the return of Jesus Christ to Earth." What next Oprah ? ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 08:02:15 -0400 Reply-To: james.fischer@gmail.com Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: James Fischer Subject: Re: What do Tree Huggers & Honeybees have in common? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit > the issues related to Imidacloprid though continue to be of concern. How so? A key point to recall is that identical symptoms and identical "widespread losses" have shown up before, long before the introduction of GMO crops, Imidacloprid, or even the varroa infestation of North America (the best known way to spread viruses to the bulk of the bees in a colony). The last such event was in 1976 or so, and prior to that, in the 1960s. > http://www.sierraclub.org/biotech/whatsnew/whatsnew_2007-03-21.asp > some very interesting links in this article on the Sierra Club, GMO's > and an attempt to relate to CCD losses. Not surprising in the least. A number of groups with agendas having nothing to do with beekeeping or pollination have attempted to hitch their fund raising and PR wagons to CCD, pointing to CCD as "proof" of their favorite preconceived notions. "Look, the bees are dying, see, we were right all along!" has been the recent cry of everyone except the gun-control advocates, as they have been forced to admit that it is extremely difficult to take down a flying bee with a bullet. > http://reason.com/news/show/119622.html > > the links appears to make a solid argument that GMO crops are not > a risk to bees. Also not surprising. The magazine "Reason" has an agenda that also has nothing to do with beekeeping, but has everything to do with opposing the work of groups like the Sierra Club, as "Reason" presents an interesting mix of "Libertarian", "Conservative", and "Anarchist" views to a very confused readership who apparently re-read Ayn Rand's books endlessly, but have also resigned from the John Birch Society after finding them to be "too liberal". While I agree that GMO crops are not a good "suspect" to blame for even contributing to CCD, the "Reason" article is not at all convincing as a basis for any such conclusion. The argument presented is much less than "solid", as it simply illustrates (yet again) that a wide range of studies can be critiqued as "silly" by someone willing to be very selective about how they summarize results. For example, lets take just one line from the "Reason" piece: "I looked at the 2006 review cited in the Sierra Club letter. In that review I discovered that all of the data cited find no observational differences between bees that fed from biotech crops and those that didn't." The paper cited by this line with a link imbedded in the text "no observational differences": http://www.gmo-guidelines.info/public/publications/download/HilbeckSchmidt06 .pdf contains fairly compelling statements like: "Discussing our findings in the context of current molecular studies, we argue firstly that the evidence for adverse effects in non-target organisms is compelling enough that it would merit more research." Further, the paper cited (a review of prior studies) listed a number of "observational differences" in Table 1, showing increased mortality for bees fed sugar solutions containing BT spores. What this means is that the SUB-LETHAL EFFECTS of BT are still unknown, but one can get lethal effects without too much trouble. The "Reason" piece was thereby misrepresenting the cited paper, and likely misrepresented other research trotted out as "evidence" of thing or another. (I could not check out every citation versus the [mis]representations made in the "Reason" article, as my intestines kept leaping out of my throat in a desperate last-ditch instinctive attempt to cover my eyes, and thereby protect my brain.) Regardless, studies done on caged bees fed specific toxins are not going to find any sublethal effect like a "CCD" problem, as the bees have no brood to raise, no combs to fill, and no opportunity to fly around and return to the hive (or not return to the hive). They are bees in a small box, so they either survive or they don't. Many bees likely die from boredom in such tests. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 10:03:40 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Dick_Rogers?= Subject: Re: Imidacloprid Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Correction to Allen Dick's posting First some background: I am a consulting entomologist and my firm, Wildwood Labs Inc, works on bioscience projects to "support efforts to balance nature and technology". Honey bee research is an area of interest and we have been trying very hard to contribute to the body of knowledge on bee health for the benefit of all. See partial list of projects below. • PEI clover study • Maritime Canada Bee Health survey • Development of virus diagnosis capability in Maritime Canada and a trial survey (AAFC) • Canola residue study • Hive residues survey • Brood effects method development study: Phase 1 • Brood effects method development study: Phase 2 • Colony condition assessment & survival prediction analysis (CCA/SPA): Research, development, and implementation • International Apis Health Assessment Committee (member and active participant) -> Report published in the Italian journal APOidea 3:3-6, 2006; Report in English finished, publication pending • PhD thesis in progress (Wageningen University, The Netherlands) -> Title: Investigations of the multiple factors affecting bee health (English) / Onderzoeken van de multi-Factoren die de Gezondheid van de Bij van de Honing be๏nvloeden (Dutch) • Evaluation of Fumagilin-Bฎ for fall control of the microsporidian Nosema spp. in honey bee (Apis mellifera) colonies in Nova Scotia, Canada. (A 2007 collaboration between Acadia University & Wildwood Labs Inc) • Development of practical ways to estimate levels of deformed wing virus in honey bee colonies based on visible wing deformities and the parasitic mite Varroa destructor. (Another 2007 collaboration between Acadia University & Wildwood Labs Inc) -> We will test for relationships among molecularly quantified deformed wing virus (DWV), degree (determined using an ocular micrometer) and prevalence (determined using underbasket dead-bee traps) of wing deformity, and levels of Varroa destructor, to determine if beekeepers can use these explanatory variables to quantify DWV. Now the correction: Unfortunately, Allen Dick appears to be trying to discredit some of our work and has provided a one-word "quote" that he feels is "enough said". I provide the following facts to correct his misrepresentation. The PEI clover study did include spiked samples, however, they were lab-spiked, not field-spiked. Spiking samples in the lab is a normal, accepted procedure that proved the validity of the analytical method. Also, all analyses were performed under strict GLP guidelines. All samples collected in the field were immediately placed on dry-ice. Back in the lab, the samples from the field were stored in a locked lab freezer and when it came time to ship the samples to the analytical lab, the samples were packaged with dry-ice and shipped by overnight courier. All samples arrived still frozen. There is ample evidence showing the stability of the samples under these conditions of storage and length of time from collection to date of analysis. Therefore, there is no reason to suspect the analytical findings are invalid, and every reason to accept them as valid. Want to hear more: I do many presentations every year on bee health related topics. If there are beekeepers who would like to hear more about any of the projects I have mentioned above, please contact me to discuss speaking engagement arrangements for your next meeting. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 08:12:24 -0600 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: allen dick Subject: Re: What do Tree Huggers & Honeybees have in common? In-Reply-To: <000101c77f55$e94a3210$0d01000a@j> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline > > the issues related to Imidacloprid though continue to be of concern. > How so? A key point to recall is that identical symptoms and > identical "widespread losses" have shown up before, long before > the introduction of GMO crops, Imidacloprid, or even the varroa > infestation of North America... The last such > event was in 1976 or so, and prior to that, in the 1960s. Very true, however, we don't know what caused the "widespread losses" for sure and the detection methods in those days were less sensitive, so continued vigilance, along with improved surveillance methods and communication might break the code. There were some really nasty pesticides in use in the 1970s and they were killing fish and birds, and wiping out bee operations around here wholesale. One year we found a lot of dead birds around, and noticed reduced numbers. Beekeepers were affected, just by cleaning out the dead hives. Don't know about the sixties. One thing is for sure, pesticides inside the beehive or out are bad for bees, and have to be watched closely. Moreover, this one attacks by stealth and leaves Little evidence behind.. Although I personally believe that there are multiple phenomena, including normal statistical extremes in ordinary losses included in the current loss reports and, thus superimposed on the real CCD data (if there is really a CCD), I am fairly confident that the brains working on this are IMO capable of dealing with the matrix of data accumulated. If one of the two unique observations associated with CCD is a lingering unfriendliness of the deadout equipment to bees, moths, and SHB, then this is a very characteristic of chemical contamination, assuming that it is not caused by an alien force field, or a test of such by Jerry's friends at DARPA. One can ask where chemicals might have come from. Beekeepers are more than happy to point fingers at outside pesticide applications, but fall almost entirely silent when it comes to some of the amazing things some beekeepers do inside the hives to deal with mites, diseases, SHB, and moths. Since some beekeepers are highly creative, is it inconceivable that some may have used imidacloprid in their hives, say, to control beetles? They have tried everything else. Some of the reports -- bees flying away never to return -- sure looks like the work of imidacloprid, or its near relatives. Of course there are other things that can cause this, but synthetic nicotinics cannot be ruled out and should be high on the watch list. > > some very interesting links in this article on the Sierra Club, GMO's > > and an attempt to relate to CCD losses. > > Not surprising in the least. A number of groups with agendas having > nothing to do with beekeeping or pollination have attempted to hitch > their fund raising and PR wagons to CCD, pointing to CCD as "proof" > of their favorite preconceived notions. Everyone wants to cash in. Maybe these losses are caused by the seal hunt or clear-cutting? I DON'T want to start something here, since soy has been fed to bees for many years, and the soy products used by responsible beekeepers and bee feed manufacturers have been carefully selected and test in the field for safety and efficacy, however, there are some who make a case against soy for human and animal food. Recently, because I host a page advocating feeding protein patties and giving instructions that include soy as an ingredient, a few wrote me recently. One said, "... soy is poisoning bees ... . ... Soy is proven to be and is classified as a "Topoisomerase II-poison". see pages 32, 42, 44, 71-2, 81 ... in my 144 page Soy Research Paper ... . ... Soy killed my wife - Soy industry murdered my wife". Another wrote "...We help the www.soyonlineservice.co.nz webmaster Soy protein is the most poisonous human food on the planet. Adding it to bee food will lead to an agricultural disaster. No worner there is already concern abourt declining US bee populations." Bees are very different fro humans and mammals, generally, and I mention this only because it is interesting, and there has been a constant murmur in the background about the ubiquity of soy in our (human) foods and possible ill effects. Inasmuch as all common foods seem to affect at least a small part of the human population adversely (think milk, eggs, wheat...) it is another thing to be aware of, for human health. I also mention this because maybe it is not widely known and easy to forget that _the wrong choice_ of soy flour can definitely harm bees. *Untoasted* soy flour is not good for bees. When buying soy to make one's own patties, beekeepers must make sure that the soy is tested for bees. Best way is to buy it from a bee supply house (but make sure it has not been sitting around for more than a month or two). ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 10:53:57 EDT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Walter Zimmermann Subject: Are mobile phones wiping out our bees? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit http://news.independent.co.uk/environment/wildlife/article2449968.ece Are mobile phones wiping out our bees? Scientists claim radiation from handsets are to blame for mysterious 'colony collapse' of bees By Geoffrey Lean and Harriet Shawcross Published: 15 April 2007 It seems like the plot of a particularly far-fetched horror film. But some scientists suggest that our love of the mobile phone could cause massive food shortages, as the world's harvests fail. They are putting forward the theory that radiation given off by mobile phones and other hi-tech gadgets is a possible answer to one of the more bizarre mysteries ever to happen in the natural world - the abrupt disappearance of the bees that pollinate crops. Late last week, some bee-keepers claimed that the phenomenon - which started in the US, then spread to continental Europe - was beginning to hit Britain as well. The theory is that radiation from mobile phones interferes with bees' navigation systems, preventing the famously homeloving species from finding their way back to their hives. Improbable as it may seem, there is now evidence to back this up. Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD) occurs when a hive's inhabitants suddenly disappear, leaving only queens, eggs and a few immature workers, like so many apian Mary Celestes. The vanished bees are never found, but thought to die singly far from home. The parasites, wildlife and other bees that normally raid the honey and pollen left behind when a colony dies, refuse to go anywhere near the abandoned hives. The alarm was first sounded last autumn, but has now hit half of all American states. The West Coast is thought to have lost 60 per cent of its commercial bee population, with 70 per cent missing on the East Coast. CCD has since spread to Germany, Switzerland, Spain, Portugal, Italy and Greece. And last week John Chapple, one of London's biggest bee-keepers, announced that 23 of his 40 hives have been abruptly abandoned. Other apiarists have recorded losses in Scotland, Wales and north-west England, but the Department of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs insisted: "There is absolutely no evidence of CCD in the UK." The implications of the spread are alarming. Most of the world's crops depend on pollination by bees. Albert Einstein once said that if the bees disappeared, "man would have only four years of life left". No one knows why it is happening. Theories involving mites, pesticides, global warming and GM crops have been proposed, but all have drawbacks. German research has long shown that bees' behaviour changes near power lines. Now a limited study at Landau University has found that bees refuse to return to their hives when mobile phones are placed nearby. Dr Jochen Kuhn, who carried it out, said this could provide a "hint" to a possible cause. Dr George Carlo, who headed a massive study by the US government and mobile phone industry of hazards from mobiles in the Nineties, said: "I am convinced the possibility is real." The case against handsets Evidence of dangers to people from mobile phones is increasing. But proof is still lacking, largely because many of the biggest perils, such as cancer, take decades to show up. Most research on cancer has so far proved inconclusive. But an official Finnish study found that people who used the phones for more than 10 years were 40 per cent more likely to get a brain tumour on the same side as they held the handset. Equally alarming, blue-chip Swedish research revealed that radiation from mobile phones killed off brain cells, suggesting that today's teenagers could go senile in the prime of their lives. Studies in India and the US have raised the possibility that men who use mobile phones heavily have reduced sperm counts. And, more prosaically, doctors have identified the condition of "text thumb", a form of RSI from constant texting. Professor Sir William Stewart, who has headed two official inquiries, warned that children under eight should not use mobiles and made a series of safety recommendations, largely ignored by ministers. I received the above from the UK Walter Ontario ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 11:02:20 EDT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Jerry Bromenshenk Subject: Cell Phones - Not MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I haven't been able to locate the study indicating that honey bees avoided=20 cell phones, but I did find this on-line publication by the same author and= a =20 colleague.=20 =20 =20 _www.bienenarchiv.de/forschung/2004_lernprozesse/Electromagnetic%20Exposure_= Le arning%20Processes.doc.pdf_=20 (http://www.bienenarchiv.de/forschung/2004_lernprozesse/Electromagnetic%20Ex= posure_Learning%20Processes.doc.pdf)=20 =20 =20 tion at the bottom of a beehive, right under the honeycombs. So the=20 station was placed with After a long theoretical rationale for why one might expect electromagnetic= =20 effects in insects, they placed a cell phone base station inside a beehive= ,=20 and report: =20 "We have observed that the honey bees have touched the sending aerial since= =20 the beginning, they did not avoid it. We haven't also been able to recogni= ze=20 a changing behaviour of the bees." =20 They placed the cell phone base unit on the bottom board under the combs. =20 ________________________________________________________________ =20 Like some others, I browsed the professor's list of publicaitons=20 _http://www.uni-landau.de/physik/pubkuhn.htm_=20 (http://www.uni-landau.de/physik/pubkuhn.htm) , don't see anything new. =20 Also, didn't find any news releases by him or his university, so its a=20 mystery, like CCD, as to where the Independent got its alleged story. =20 _________________________________________________________________ =20 We've seen long-term apiaries sitting under cell phone towers with no=20 apparent effect. Many of the CCD locations that I've visited didn't have a= ny cell=20 phone service, couldn't get a signal if you tried. =20 __________________________________________________________________ =20 When we were placing tracking chips on the backs of bees a few years ago at= =20 Pacific NW Labs in Richland, WA - we placed a signal generator near a hive=20 equipped with a bi-directional bee counter. We scanned a wide range of=20 frequencies up into the GHz range, saw NO effect as indicated by flow of be= es=20 thought the counter. =20 __________________________________________________________________ =20 I don't know about other beekeepers, but I wear my cell phone on my belt =20 while in bee yards, often park it on a lid, have yet to notice any chance i= n=20 behavior of the bees, except when it goes off in vibrate mode. =20 __________________________________________________________________ =20 This is an easy one to debunk, anyone can do the supposed experiment of=20 placing a cell phone near, in front of, on top of, into, underneath a hive.= I'd=20 even make some calls. For a control, take the battery out. =20 Do be sure to stand well away and to the side of the colony. If you place=20 yourself in front of the hive entrance, you will see an change in bee fligh= t. =20 And, if you smoke in the beeyard, you will see an affect on the nearest=20 hives -- we've documented this with our bi-directional bee counters. =20 __________________________________________________________________ =20 Since there's no other mention of this study, I'm guessing that the=20 professor didn't do it, that someone googled EM and bees, saw a ref to the= on-line=20 paper, and never read it. =20 =20 The author is a physicist, so all the theoretical computations in his paper= =20 make sense. And I agree with him, bees MIGHT be able to discern some of=20 this, but if a phone base station in the hive didn't invoke a response, I d= oubt=20 that cell phone signals are causing bees to get lost =20 -- and how do you explain a field with three stockpile yards of bees -- on= e=20 in good shape, one showing signs of failing, and the other one almost=20 totally lost -- which I saw in CA -- surely all the bees were exposed to th= e same=20 EM fields in their foraging range -- colonies were less than 400 yds apart. =20 I'd be careful about blaming the professor, he may not have published=20 anything new. The press, on the other hand, needs to cite its source. =20 Cheers =20 Jerry =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 Refe =20 [1] Faber,& Menzel, R. (2001); Visualizing mushroom body response to a= =20 conditioned odor =20 in honeybees; Naturwissenschaften, Vol. 88 (pp. 472 =20 [2] Giurfa, M. (2003); The amazing mini-brain: lessons from a honey=20 bee; Bee World, Vol. =20 No. 1 (pp. =20 =20 logical System =C5=93 The Effect of High-Frequency Electromagnetic Fi= elds=20 on Honey=20 =20 ACTA Systemica =C5=93 IIAS International Journal, Vol. III, No. 1 (pp= . 3 =20 =20 ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com= . ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 09:43:41 -0600 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: allen dick Subject: Re: Imidacloprid In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline > Unfortunately, Allen Dick appears to be trying to discredit some of our work > and has provided a one-word "quote" that he feels is "enough said". I > provide the following facts to correct his misrepresentation. I don't think that I am trying to misrepresent your otherwise excellent work. I am simply pointing out that the response at the time of the presentation by you or your partner was that the samples were not field spiked, and therefore most of us concluded there and then that there is no evidence that the lab did not simply throw them away and send out the desired result. Of course I am not suggesting that, but merely that it appeared *possible* and throws doubt on the results. That would be extreme, however lab inaccuracies, miscalibration, loss, spoilage or confusion of samples, sloppiness, and fudging cannot be ruled out. Again, I am not saying any of the above were involved -- I am inclined to doubt it -- merely that they could have occurred either in a few or all cases, and, lacking spiking done in advance outside the lab, no one would ever know. Going back the the presentation to the Honey Council: after Jerry asked that simple question, the response by the presenter appeared to us in the audience to be one conveying chagrin, and nothing much more was said, leaving the strong impression that far too much trust was placed in the lab, and that there was now no way now to check their work. Are you now saying that 1.) you spiked some samples before sending them in, blind, and unknown to the lab people, or that 2.) the lab spiked some themselves to check their own work? There is a huge difference IMO. If you are saying the former, then I apologise. If the latter, then there is nothing more to say. > The PEI clover study did include spiked samples, however, they were > lab-spiked, not field-spiked. Spiking samples in the lab is a normal, > accepted procedure that proved the validity of the analytical method. Granted. However field-spiking, (with details not revealed to the lab) is an accepted procedure to verify that the lab is doing the work, doing it right, and is properly calibrated against the real world. > all analyses were performed under strict GLP guidelines. All samples > collected in the field were immediately placed on dry-ice. Back in the lab, > the samples from the field were stored in a locked lab freezer and when it > came time to ship the samples to the analytical lab, the samples were > packaged with dry-ice and shipped by overnight courier. All samples arrived > still frozen. There is ample evidence showing the stability of the samples > under these conditions of storage and length of time from collection to date > of analysis. I am sure everyone was very impressed by that scrupulous attention to detail. I know I was and still am. You did a lot of good work. Thus I was stunned that this -- to me -- essential verification technique was omitted. > Therefore, there is no reason to suspect the analytical > findings are invalid, and every reason to accept them as valid. Without a lab-independent spiking, in spite of all that hard work, to me they will never be fully credible, especially in light of the fact that the findings were all -- if I recall and please correct me if I am wrong -- essentially "not detectable". If the matter were not so controversial, I could give much more latitude, but this topic is far too important to let one study, flawed in this detail, be used to draw conclusions. Moreover there are huge sums of money riding on the conclusionsof any such study, so I think we all know that "not only must Caesar's wife be virtuous, but she must also be seen to be virtuous". We must see that there is no weak link in the chain of proof where the results could have been compromised. If there had been at least some positives of some magnitude, or some field-spiked samples for comparison, I would be much more inclined to accept the conclusions less critically. However, science is science, and we need to know if this omission -- if indeed there was one -- has an effect on the credibility of the credibility of the study. In closing, I do not like to have to draw the conclusions I have about the study, and if I am wrong in my information, my analysis, or my conclusions, please let me know exactly where and I will immediately apologise most humbly. I appreciate any scientific work done on bees and pesticides and do not wish to undermine anyone doing so and submit my criticisms with great respect for you and your attempts to learn more about bees and pesticides. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 11:43:46 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bill Truesdell Subject: Re: Imidacloprid In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dick Rogers wrote: > Correction to Allen Dick's posting > We all do that :) For others, you may want to google Wildwood Labs and you will find a very respected organization which, in my opinion, has no ax to grind. In fact, they produce many very good articles on bees as Dick noted in his post and as I found on the google search results. Bill Truesdell Bath, Maine ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 12:40:50 EDT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Jerry Bromenshenk Subject: Re: Cell Phones - Not MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Folks I'm not sure where the html mess came from in my memo on cell phones. Just skip down to the clean text. Sorry, Jerry ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 13:41:37 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Dick_Rogers?= Subject: Some facts related to honey bee colony losses Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Introduction I have been monitoring honey bee health in Maritime Canada and internationally since 2001 for various contracts and for my PhD thesis. Also, I have been using colony assessment data and provisional thresholds to make survival predictions since 2003. Therefore, I offer the following facts, experiences and opinions as a contribution to understanding honey bee losses. Maritime Canada winter loss reports as of April 12/07 New Brunswick • At least two cases of 70-80% losses over winter • One beekeeper claimed sudden loss of adult bee population in some hives in fall of 2006. He feels it is similar to CCD, but this has yet to be determined. • In the above case, it was reported that VM was not as abundant as in some previous years, but no quantitative data available because no monitoring was done. Prince Edward Island • An early report from one beekeeper who suffered a 60-70% loss; actual overall average losses for the province will not be known for a few weeks yet. • Based on the results of monitoring, the survival prediction for 05/06 was 25-55% mortality over winter (officially reported loss in spring '06 was 38%), and for 06/07 it is 55-75% mortality (official report pending). • AFB epidemic and some samples confirmed resistant • VM susceptibility to fluvalinate decreased over previous year Nova Scotia • At least three reports of 70-80% losses; other reports variable, preliminary and unconfirmed. • I visited an apiary of 70 hives and estimated a minimum of 70% losses • AFB resistance confirmed in some samples. Other facts (general notes with no specific location information for reasons of confidentiality) • Nosema in 2007 spring bee samples (live collected bees) = 0.5 to 12 million spores per bee. • In some summer collected bees in 2006 levels of Nosema over 6 million spores per bee. • Species of Nosema was not determined in any cases. • 100% of colonies in one study with mean tracheal mite infection rate of 10% with rates as high as 20%, all in summer bees. • Overall mean number of VM/100 bees from all studies roughly 9 mites (based on alcohol wash method). Lethal threshold considered to be >8. Counts much higher in many cases. • Deformed-wing virus (DWV) accounted for 20% of bee mortality in one study and DWV recorded from an increasing number of colonies in both the US and Canada. • More black bees, bald-brood, K-wing observed than ever before. • Small hive beetle range expanding. The beetle is nasty by itself, but desperation treatments may be contributing to toxic effects to bees and brood. • Even when no traditional diseases present (AFB, EFB, sacbrood) hives weakened by chalkbrood, mites, Nosema, viruses, nutritional deficiencies. • Effects of beekeeper applied concoctions not clear, however, MOST beekeepers experiment with products and even apply off-label treatments. • Residues of plant protection products (PPP) have only been found in a few cases in Maritime Canada and linked to bee losses in only one case over the three year period of studies. • The symptom of "a queen and a handful of workers" remaining in a colony was observed in the one case linked to a PPP (a.i. phosmet) back in 2002 (pictures available). Therefore, this symptom is not new. Can it have other causes? I have not seen a similar situation caused by other factors other than hives abandoned by absconding VM infested bees. • Survival prediction analysis based on colony assessment data from studies in the US forecast potential colony losses by spring 2007 to be in the range of 70-100% in some apiaries. • The factors responsible for the prediction of substantial colony losses are different combinations of disorders and stressors. Because there is no single agent at work, the cause of losses is referred to as Multiple & Various Causative Agents Syndrome (MVCAS). • I have detected what I believe to be the lengthening of worker brood development time by as much as 2-3 days in colonies heavily infested with VM and DWV. The colonies had also been treated with off-label products for mite control. Could there be some kind of interaction or reaction to stress taking place? How would a lengthened honey bee brood cycle affect VM development? A logical possibility is that it would increase the number of mites that successfully emerge from the worker cells as adults. VM natural drop in these hives increased by an average of 245% over three weeks. These observations are preliminary and need to be verified by further research. Conclusions (or opinions, if you prefer) • To understand bee health requires thorough, comprehensive antemortem colony assessments. • Survival over winter can be predicted when adequate quantitative monitoring data is available to compare to provisional thresholds, and when interactions are considered. • If honey bee health continues to decline annually, the time is near when honey bees will not be able to survive without being managed. • Managed bees will only survive if pest management can be improved (i.e. more efficient and effective). ฉ REL Rogers/Wildwood Labs Inc. All Rights Reserved. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 17:46:06 +0000 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Curtis Crowell Subject: Bees and Cell Phones No one has pointed out what everyone takes for granted, I presume, and that is that bees and cell phones are a bad idea. Clearly of our hives should have an OSHA warning against bees' use of cell phones while in the air, as this will likely cause all manner of missed turns and collisions. I strongly suspect this may be a problem in New Jersey, where we have a penchant for ignoring laws we find to be just inconvenient. For example, our own governor felt that way apparently about the seat belt law. Warn your bees! ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 14:11:45 EDT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Jerry Bromenshenk Subject: Re: Imidacloprid MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Since my name keeps coming up with respect to this issue -- the study presented in Canada was a very detail oriented, intensive set of trials, carefully orchestrated, and expensive set of trials. No one questioned issues such as did the investigators set out to thoroughly investigate the issue, have a good statistically based sampling design, or the reputation of the lab, etc. But, as I remember, this study was done because beekeepers were concerned about bee losses in the area and use of imidacloprid. Many of the soil samples showed detectable residue levels, with only a trace in a few nectar/pollen samples. The conclusion was that imidacloprid was not reaching the bees, or at least not in toxic doses, therefore there was no evidence for bee losses relative to use of imidacloprid. My concerns with this study were: 1) Sample size - the study used many subplots. It was easy to get large soil samples, but even after laborious removal of pollen and nectar from bees, the resultant sample size was very small. Small enough that issues of representativeness and detection limits needed to be addressed/reported, 2) Routes of exposure - the assumption seemed to be, the major route of entry must be from soils through plants to nectar and pollen, then to bees. That's not necessarily true -- dust borne materials such as would occur with contaminated soils tend to re-entrain on windy days, deposit on plant surfaces, bees, etc. And, as we've shown in several publications, particulates are adsorbed onto the bodies of bees, and the amount on the bees varies by particle size and electrostatic charge on the bee. This route of entry was not considered, yet our data says that in cases like this, it may be the principal route of exposure, 3) Bees were collected, but at the time of the presentation, no bees had been analyzed and there did not seem to be any intention to do so. Until body burdens of the target insect are examined, the question of exposure remains unanswered. 4) GLP extends to the field, its not just an internal lab issue. The responsibility for this rests with the primary investigators, not necessarily the lab. Field blanks and field spikes should be part of a well designed study to determine whether anything is lost or gained during handling, transport, storage, and processing. There are too many places along this path where materials of interest could be lost (tissue degradation, chemical breakdown, sublimation) or gained (contamination). Everyone involved was trying to do a good job. Elaborate steps were taken to get uncontaminated samples - plastic gloves, etc. Someone sat in a cooler to remove the pollen pellets, obtain nectar from bees. Samples were sent to a GLP lab. All well and good. But, the aforementioned issues were not addressed, at least not at the time of the presentation Allen references. Jerry ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 17:27:49 +0300 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: =?iso-8859-1?B?QXJpIFNlcHDkbOQ=?= Subject: Re: Imidacloprid MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Imidaclprid has beed blamed for bee losses for a long time. We have heard how it affects termites and can be used as a peticede against them. But has any other heard about a study where imidacloprid was fed to the bees ? If it makes bees disappear like what we hear about CCD it should be quite easy to show. Also shoud be quite easy to see what concentration is needed. In Eurbee congress I talked to a french sciestist who had made a study like this and she said that they could not see effects. If I remember they tried with concentrations which were much abowe the ones found in plants growing in treated fields. ( If remember right they treated around tens of ppm:s in sugar feed) The scintist did not get paid by chemical comapanies. This kind of study should be made. Or does anyone have data already ? I do know about the french study about affects to bee memory. But I would like to know the concentrations when bees start to disappear. Ari Seppไlไ ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 15:12:29 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bob Harrison Subject: Re: Some facts related to honey bee colony losses MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello Dick & All, I have always read your research with interest! Thanks for U.S. beekeepers. You are on the front lines in Canada and myself in the U.S.. > Nosema in 2007 spring bee samples (live collected bees) = 0.5 to 12 million spores per bee. . In some summer collected bees in 2006 levels of Nosema over 6 million spores per bee. If you look at the U.S. CCD survey one common point which jumps out is none of the reporting beekeepers used fumidil. Nosema in research for decades has shown nosema kills bees in the last two weeks of adult life and most die in the field. I found low infection of nosema in bees which arrived from California Friday night in down & dirty field test. > 100% of colonies in one study with mean tracheal mite infection rate of 10% with rates as high as 20%, all in summer bees. When tracheal mites first marched through my yards when first arrived I sent samples off to get an idea of TM infestation. 9% was the level and the USDA-ARS considered over 5% back then needing treatment. 10-20% in summer bees would need a late summer treatment before the brood for winter is raised to even survive in Missouri. High infestation of TM (in late stage) looks exactly like the CCD observation of a queen and a few bees. > Overall mean number of VM/100 bees from all studies roughly 9 mites based on alcohol wash method). Lethal threshold considered to be >8. Counts much higher in many cases. In my opinion we need to lower lethal threshold with the current level of virus problems. >he beetle is nasty by itself, but desperation treatments may be contributing to toxic effects to bees and brood. In the U.S. ( despite what out traveling SHB experts say) most see little problems in the field with SHB as long as they keep strong hives. I can't see SHB ever being an issue in Canada. Checkmite was registered for use against SHB simply because many beekeepers wanting Checkmite to use for varroa control and once registered for bee hives then beekeepers had what they wanted. The FDA had said no to any organophosphate. In my opinion placing half a checkmite strip under a cover in a beehive is only something hobby beekeepers do ( and maybe a few southern researchers). >Therefore, this symptom is not new. We see empty hives in fall all the time. If the hive becomes queenless two things happen. Either the bees all drift to other hives or laying workers. Usually in fall they drift as even the workers are not as desperate to lay eggs with the shorter days. >How would a lengthened honey bee brood cycle affect VM development? I can't even believe you would ask this question. Huge problems! The only proof I have ever seen AHB would possibly handle varroa better than EU bees (other than swarming and absconding) is the shorter brood cycle. A longer brood cycle would be problematic! >A logical possibility is that it would increase the number of mites that successfully emerge from the worker cells as adults. Bingo! No need to research the point! \> Managed bees will only survive if pest management can be improved (i.e.more efficient and effective). That's the answer I am talking about! MANAGED BEES WILL ONLY SURVIVE IF PEST MANAGEMENT CAN BE IMPROVED. Keep up the excellent work Dick! Sincerely, Bob Harrison " Finds the post of Wildwood labs refreshing" -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 17:05:07 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Brian Fredericksen Subject: Re: What do Tree Huggers & Honeybees have in common? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit I'm working on Imidacloprid annual useage numbers since when it was introduced. Inteviewing people in the AG chem industry quickly yeilds comments like usage has sky rocketed in the last 2-3 yrs with seed treatments and proliferation of consumer products for lawn and garden. I do see that the scientific evidence is weak. However the amount of the material in the environment and the method of how the material affects insects makes it very hard to blow off Imidacloprid as harmless or of little concern to beekeepers. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 16:00:34 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: =?UTF-8?Q?Peter_Borst?= Subject: Re: Imidacloprid Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Ari Seppรคlรค wrote: >But has any other heard about a study where imidacloprid was fed to the bees? SEE: Toxicity of imidacloprid feedings on honeybee (Apis mellifera) colonies. Faucon, J-P., et al. ABSRACT: In order to test the hypothesis that imidacloprid is responsible for bee mortality leading to the weakness or loss of honeybee hives reported in France over recent years, colonies were fed with syrup containing imidacloprid at various concentrations over a full year. Groups of eight hives each were fed syrup alone or imidacloprid at 0.5 or 5 ppb; a fourth, negative control group was unfed. The colonies were fed on 13 occasions (July-August, 3x/week, 1 L/hive) and their summer development and winter development followed. Assessments included mortality, colony weight, capped brood area and incidence of diseases. Population development and capped brood area showed a similar development in all colonies with no statistical differences between the colonies even at the higher dose of 5 ppb. Other parameters (e.g. mortality colony weight, diseases) also did not show any significant differences between the treatments. SOURCE: http://www.bulletinofinsectology.org/Contents/Contentsbullinsect.htm http://tinyurl.com/2mjsqb ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 17:38:08 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Dennis Law Subject: Are mobile phones wiping out our bees? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Are mobile phones wiping out our bees? http://news.independent.co.uk/environment/wildlife/article2449968.ece ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 18:07:55 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Dan&jan Subject: Re: What do Tree Huggers & Honeybees have in common? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit you might include specific crops. for example potatoes , small grains, pet flea uses i.e. advantage, and other non nectar pollen producers to deduct from plants that are visited. in order to access the translocation consequences you will have to know the residues in the plant flower parts at flowering plus the LD 50 and LD95 for bees all the info is propriety to the manufacturer ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 20:06:51 -0300 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Stan Sandler Subject: Re: Imidacloprid MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =20 > The study took place during the summer of 2001 in PEI and New > Brunswick. It included sampling and analysis of over 3,800 soil cores, > over 8,000 clover leaves, over 2,000 clover flowers, over 480 grams of > wildflowers and over 6,000 honeybees. One should remember also that the clover was seeded the year following potatoes, and did not flower until the next year, which was the third = year after the treatment with admire (imidacloprid). The following year some samples were taken of honey and pollen in hives in New Brunswick which were being used to pollinate seed canola. This was being grown the year after potatoes. The results of this study = (also by Jim Kemp) which are much less publicized DID show significant amounts=20 of imidacloprid in honey and pollen from the canola (about 3 to 5 ppb = in=20 some samples, I believe). This is the same order of magnitude of = amounts which Cynthia Scott-Dupree found in honey and pollen from canola in the = year of treatment of canola with imidacloprid. This shows how persistent = the insecticide is in the soil. These results were a bit disturbing to Jim Kemp / Bayer, and so the next year they did a study of some of my hives which were on seed canola in = the year following imidacloprid treated potatoes. I had about 1000 hives on = canola that year and about 1000 hives which were not anywhere near it. They = did a lot of testing of honey, pollen, leaves, flowers , nectar, and comb. = I have been trying to get the results of that study for four years now. I = have had no success. I am thinking of petitioning our Pesticide Advisory Committee = again (which was what started all the admire studies in the beginning), to = see if they can have any better success in forcing disclosure of the results. I presently have just finished going through the hives this spring and = feeding pollen supplement patties. I put 2,800 into the winter, and lost about = 20%, so far. There are enough really strong hives to make up any that will = still go down. I believe that the thing that may have mitigated the effects of = imidacloprid here is that when it was first used it was as a foliar spray (it was first = registered in Canada for use on PEI potatoes). Then it was used as a soil injection = in the=20 seed drill, and the amount per hectare was reduced Now many producers are actually soaking the seed sets in an admire solution, and this both = cuts their costs and reduces futher the dose per hectare. Since bees do not = visit potatoes, it is the residual amount (and the 288 day half life) in the = soil which is problematical. When used on sunflowers, canola, apples etc., much = smaller amounts could dangerous. I have no idea whether imidacloprid has any connection with CCD. I will = note that "disappearing disease" is what we always found in hives I felt = were=20 affected. Often this was accompanied by chalkbrood and EFB, but it = always seemed that this was a symptom of hives which had several frames of = brood and only a tiny handful of adults, so the brood was stressed. The = queens were good and often the tiny cluster would abandon all the brood and start = again on clean comb. Regards Stan ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 18:17:52 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Peter Dillon Subject: Re: Imidacloprid In-Reply-To: <012d01c77f6a$3ee144c0$0300000a@ari71aa1cf24c5> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Ari, Is this what you are looking for? > http://www.apiservices.com/abeille-de-france/articles/toxicite_subchronique.htm Pity it is still in the French language - I have not got the time to translate it at present ! Maybe, you will have the possibility of getting it done if need to do so. Regards, Peter ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 19:45:11 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bill Truesdell Subject: Re: Imidacloprid In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Gaucho was outlawed in France in 1999, I believe, and since it was outlawed, the same conditions still exist. However, now other new pesticides are blamed. I do not like it and am a bit suspect of it but so far there is little to link it with bees and CCD or much else. Bill Truesdell ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 19:49:12 EDT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Jerry Bromenshenk Subject: Re: Imidacloprid MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Thanks Stan for a most informative post, and you've awakened lots of questions. I'd like to chat sometime, at your convenience. You information fits what I remember about the presentation in Canada - although I didn't remember that the symptoms looked like CCD, but rather like low level chemical poisoning. However, you would know. One of the things I'd like to talk about. Bill Wilson and Stoner did some work many years ago with other pesticides, long before the introduction of Imidacloprid and other nicotinics (which popped on the scene in the mid-90s) They found that low levels of toxic chemicals caused the bees to dwindle over a period of time. Eventually you got a queen and young bees. Bill says they thought that since the queen was feed a special diet, that maybe the bees feeding her more or less filtered out the toxin or retained it in their own bodies. Did your bees go down fast - days, couple weeks, or slowly - weeks, months? Usually, low level poisoning takes some weeks, sometimes months to decimate a colony -- but I've seen rather quick responses to toxic metals when a plume hit the ground during an inversion. Heavy metals generally dwindle down the population, and the brood looks like it has foulbrood -- but the pathogen doesn't come up in the lab assays. Its not foulbrood, but rather poisoned brood. The brood dies, and the adult population is so decimated, the colony can't clean out the brood as fast as the larvae and early pupae die. So, the brood rots -- smells just like foulbrood, looks like foulbrood. Near the Tacoma smelter in the 80s, a local beekeeper thought he had resistant foulbrood. His bees had enough arsenic, lead, cadmium to kill them several times over. My point, you don't have to pick out a specific category of poisons to get some of these symptoms, many chemicals can produce symptoms that cause loss of adult bees (as the chemical accumulates), and death of brood. Some take out the brood first, if the dose is high enough. I'm not saying Imidacloprid can't induce CCD - especially if CCD is a response to multiple stressors. I'm just not convinced that the pattern of CCD losses across all of the U.S. correlates with areas of Imidacloprid use - since this chemical has been around for almost a decade. I do think, seeing all of the soil samples from the potatoe fields -- that bit about the clover initially through me, since I remembered potatoes-- that the chance for external exposure to the bees in your situation was high - and the study never assayed the critical end point -- the bees themselves. So, you and I and everyone else has to guess as to whether Imidacloprid reached toxic levels in your bees -- and we wouldn't have to invoke lost bees if that were the case. Thanks again for a factual report. That helps understand both your situation, provides some hints. Most informative. Jerry The study may have collected bees, but I did not see/hear of any analysis of bees. I did hear the same as you about levels in pollen and nectar, know it was in the soils. I've seen analytical results from areas in U.S., also showing retention in soils. Glad to hear that growers have gone to seed treatments. Maybe the CCD issue will be the key to getting the reports you want, and that many of us would like to see. ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 19:56:35 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bill Truesdell Subject: Re: What do Tree Huggers & Honeybees have in common? In-Reply-To: <7a790de80704150712q44d82770x885b6e50f4aec76c@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit allen dick wrote: > > If one of the two unique observations associated with CCD is a > lingering unfriendliness of the deadout equipment to bees, moths, and > SHB, then this is a very characteristic of chemical contamination, > assuming that it is not caused by an alien force field, or a test of > such by Jerry's friends at DARPA. From what I have read and heard from experts is that this is not universal. Some are robbed out some are not. It has also been reported that heavy hive beetle infestation keeps bees away. Same with some fungus growth. Those two could be common to the after effects of CCD, but "chemical contamination" does not track with the variety of beekeeping practices of those who reported CCD. There was not one common pesticide or even any pesticide. Does anyone know how many colonies have died from CCD? Obviously 70% of east coast bees since that is what I have read in the papers, but fortunately none in Maine. One reported 2% losses (one of our large operations) which is the best year he has had in a while. And he owns a cell phone. Bill Truesdell Bath, Maine ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 20:18:46 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bill Truesdell Subject: Re: Some facts related to honey bee colony losses In-Reply-To: <001b01c77f9a$665e5da0$04bc59d8@BusyBeeAcres> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bob Harrison wrote: > When tracheal mites first marched through my yards when first arrived I sent > samples off to get an idea of TM infestation. 9% was the level and the > USDA-ARS considered over 5% back then needing treatment. > > 10-20% in summer bees would need a late summer treatment before the brood > for > winter is raised to even survive in Missouri. > > High infestation of TM (in late stage) looks exactly like the CCD > observation of a queen and a few bees. > > One other nasty fact about TM, which I did not know, is after colony collapse the remaining bees will test free of TM even if TM was what did them in. That is because all the infected bees died elsewhere or were disposed of by hive bees. Even my winter dead out will test free of TM even thought that is what did it in. Something else I learned is the mite (either one) does not need to be the virus vector. Once the virus is in the colony, bees can pass it from one to another without any help from the mites.Capped brood have shown virus symptoms with no mites present in the cells. The major problem with TM is it is totally invisible to the beekeeper and even more so with the "fact" that all our bees are TM free since they only die from Varroa. Most beekeepers I know do not worry about TM at all. In my informal survey at the Annual Meeting, those who used Formic Acid pads came through the winter just fine with minimal losses. The Thymol treatments were second best. The idiots like me, who has TM resistant bees and did not treat for TM, lost colonies even if they used oxalic acid drip. It would be interesting to see what happened to bees with the OA vaporizers, but my guess is they did fine since it is a vapor and TM were probably also killed or controlled. I wonder how many CCD colonies there are in the US? Bill Truesdell Bath, Maine ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 20:31:52 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bill Truesdell Subject: Re: Those CCD states In-Reply-To: <001b01c77f9a$665e5da0$04bc59d8@BusyBeeAcres> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I heard that one beekeeper reported CCD in Connecticut, so it has been labeled a CCD state. If that is all it takes to make the grade, then we here in Maine would like to join the group so I now shift my one colony from TM to CCD. We in Maine never want to be left out. As the Union goes, so goes Maine. I wonder how many CCD colonies have been found in the US? Is there just one in each CCD state? The news tells me that there should be 70% on the East Coast so how come we have none in Maine and only one in Connecticut? So does one beekeeper have 70% of the bees in the state? Some states have no reports. So it must be that an even higher percentage were lost in the South. But there does not seem to be a shortage of pollinators for Maine blueberries. But it is the large operations that were hit hardest. But some of the large operations who reported CCD were found to have high mite counts before CCD (by inspectors- the beekeeper did not think so). Very puzzling. Bill Truesdell Bath, Maine ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 21:54:53 -0300 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Stan Sandler Subject: Re: Imidacloprid MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Jerry Bromenshank wrote:=20 >Did your bees go down fast - days, couple weeks, or slowly - weeks, = months? =20 Usually, low level poisoning takes some weeks, sometimes months to = decimate=20 a colony -- but I've seen rather quick responses to toxic metals when a = plume=20 hit the ground during an inversion.It is about three weeks between = visits to a yard. The hives went down fast enough that one one visit we = put a super on, thinking they might need it, andon the next the hive had = collapsed. =20 >Heavy metals generally dwindle down the population, and the brood = looks like=20 it has foulbrood -- but the pathogen doesn't come up in the lab assays. = Its=20 not foulbrood, but rather poisoned brood. We have no heavy industry = whatsoever in Prince Edward Island. We do not getmuch in the way of = airborne pollutants from elsewhere. Agricultural chemicalsare our main = pollutant. In my operation there is very low incidence of AFB, but EFB = has been a problem in hives that dwindled. To be fair, I should note = thatEFB has been noted for many years in hives that pollinate = blueberries in Maineas well as Atlantic Canada. Last year we had very = little incidence of EFB, despite the fact that we used no oxytet in = either fall of 2005, or spring 2006. We also had very little = "disappearing bees". We did not pollinate any seed canola = followingpotatoes. We do see many deadouts with very few bees in them, = but that is not abnormal here, and Iwould not call it CCD.=20 >The study may have collected bees, but I did not see/hear of any = analysis of=20 bees. Actually, I noted your comments about dust from contaminated = soil before the last year that Jim Kempstudied my hives, and asked him = to sample some bees. I do not know if he did, but it isn't of = muchconsequence if a person can't get access to ANY of the = results.RegardsStan =20 =20 ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 22:07:37 -0300 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Stan Sandler Subject: Re: Imidacloprid MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I just went back and got the actual data of what was found in New = Brunswick in the second year of the study looking at bees in canola = fields following potatoes. Please note that thiamethoxam is another = neonicotinoid that is manufactured by Syngenta. It was put right on the = canola seed as a systemic insecticide. But the imidacloprid was = coming up from the soil from the previous years potatoes. =20 You will note Jerry, that bees were analyzed apparently. Thiamethoxam (ppb) =20 Field Unripe Honey Pollen Wax Bees Flowers =20 T1 6.60 0.57 2.40 <0.50 0.82 =20 T2N 1.60 <0.50 0.59 <0.50 1.40 =20 T2S 4.30 0.93 0.73 <0.50 5.40 =20 BLM* 3.10 1.50 2.40 <0.50 8.30 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 * Flower samples in BLM analyzed three times; results were 2.40, = 7.30, and 8.30 ppb. =20 =20 =20 =20 Imidacloprid (ppb) =20 Field Honey Pollen Wax Bees Flowers =20 T1 2.90 2.50 <0.50 <0.50 1.10 =20 T2N 2.60 2.40 <0.50 <0.50 2.00 =20 T2S 3.30 1.60 <0.50 <0.50 1.70 =20 Blm 1.00 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 0.00 =20 =20 =20 ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 21:51:49 EDT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Jerry Bromenshenk Subject: Re: Those CCD states MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit One beekeeper reporting CCD does not make a state a CCD state. States where one or more beekeeper's have lost several thousand lost colonies make the grade, as do states with multiple reports from hobby and sideline beekeepers. Jerry ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 22:27:39 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bob Harrison Subject: Re: Some facts related to honey bee colony losses MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello All, Those on the list which subscribe to "The Speedy Bee " will find an article on page 5 of vol. 36 No. 2 ( mailed 04-04-07) by Phil Craft (Kentucky State Apiarist). Possibly one of the best articles I have read in a long time. I actually cut the article out and stuck on the wall of my office! I think the list could find the article in the March issue of "The Buzz" at the Kentucky State web site. http://www.kyagr.com/statevetbees/index.htm The article is: "Why Do We lose Colonies in Winter" I believe Troy Fore thought the same as I did when he first read the article that Phil's article is a must read for those with today's high winter losses and a reminder for those not seeing high losses that winter bee loss and poor management go hand in hand! When my bees winter good I think *all my hard work paid off!* If they do not winter good then I look in the mirror for the problem. I am not saying CCD is not real. I know some very smart CCD people are looking at bees closer than they maybe ever have been looked at in the U.S. for which I am grateful! Perhaps a better understanding of our bees will come out of the research! I hope a new problem is not found but if one is then we need to know as soon as possible. I do know I am not seeing *unexplained* loss in my bees. Bob I subscribe to the Speedy Bee because at times Troy has articles and industry information the other sources do not. -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2007 00:37:51 -0400 Reply-To: bee-quick@bee-quick.com Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: James Fischer Subject: Re: What do Tree Huggers & Honeybees have in common? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit > we don't know what caused the "widespread losses" > [in the 60s and 70s] for sure The overt symptoms were the same as those we now call "CCD". Not just "similar", but precisely the same. These symptoms are unique from everything else we have seen in the way of pesticide effects, diseases, pests, you name it, and we have seen these exact same symptoms before, long before things like Imidacloprid. As luck would have it, we have eyewitnesses to the 1960s and 1970s incidents who can verify the details with firsthand accounts, and those contacted have verified such details. (If anyone has a copy of "The Encyclopedia Of Beekeeping" by Roger Morse, and Hooper, this book may provide details about the circa 1915 rash of "disappearing disease" cases sufficient to say if similar symptoms were seen back then. I dunno, I can't seem to find a copy anywhere. Anyone got a copy?) > There were some really nasty pesticides in use in the 1970s... But what are the odds of the very different pesticides used in the 70s versus today resulting in the same exact symptoms? Yes, the pesticides were "nasty" in the 1970s and also in the 1960s, but the key point is that the entire set of pesticides used then are no longer in use now and were based on different chemical families, elegantly illustrating to us that the problem at hand is hard to pin on "pesticides" both then and now. Another point is that all these outbreaks have been short-lived. If any one of the outbreaks had been caused by any pesticide, why would we only see sporadic, yet widespread outbreaks, decades apart? Why wouldn't we see it every year, or at least 5 years in a row? > Don't know about the sixties. See above. You don't need details, all you need to know is that agricultural technology has advanced since then, and that the set of pesticides available now is very different from those available then. Also, what are the odds now that we would have THREE well-documented "outbreaks", all of them short-lived? Could it be "pesticides" every time, and maintain consistent symptoms? > One thing is for sure, pesticides inside the beehive or out > are bad for bees, and have to be watched closely. Moreover, > this one attacks by stealth and leaves Little evidence behind. What sort of reasoning is employed above? We have zero evidence of any pesticide(s) being behind "CCD" despite extensive analysis using modern technology. How can we be expected to conclude from this that a pesticide "leaves no evidence"? It seems that the sole reason would be to allow us to continue to "blame" pesticides, despite a lack of ANY actual residues that would support such a claim. If you are speaking of Imidacloprid (and I suspect you are), have you any idea what an actual pesticide kill from sprayed Imidacloprid even looks like to a beekeeper? It is easy to see, as one sees the bees get "the shakes". The other important difference is that hives can and do recover from even "heavy" Imidacloprid spray kills. If an overt "pesticide kill" from Imidacloprid being sprayed on a crop near hives results in symptoms very different from what we have seen with "CCD", how have all the hives been "lucky" enough to avoid a dose that is acutely toxic or fatal to at least SOME of the bees, yet all hives are consistently unlucky enough to get just enough of a dose to cause symptoms very different from an Imidacloprid spray kill? Also, how would it be possible for all to have consistent symptoms? Where is the bell curve of different levels of exposure? Where are the bees that would fit into that bell curve at a point where they show something akin to pesticide kill symptoms? To me, pesticides seem to be the "Dog that did NOT bark in the night" ("Silver Blaze", Sherlock Holmes). > If one of the two unique observations associated with CCD is a > lingering unfriendliness of the deadout equipment to bees, moths, > and SHB, then this is a very characteristic of chemical contamination, > assuming that it is not caused by an alien force field, or a test of > such by Jerry's friends at DARPA. Let's look at these "observations". How come we don't have any sort of volatile compounds doing all of this repelling? I know more than a bit about repelling bees, and one needs a highly active volatile compound to get bees to merely move a few inches down within a hive. Something that somehow repels bees from an entire hive, and keeps repelling them for days should be easy for even an untrained human nose to smell, and would have a peak that looks like Mt. Everest on a GC or Mass-Spec of some comb. You simply can't have an odorless, undetectable long-lasting volatile compound, and it MUST be volatile for bees to detect it from a distance and "stay away" from combs and hives. So where is that peak? There has been more than enough time to grab some comb from a recently-collapsed "CCD" hive and get it analyzed. Why has nothing been found? Are we to believe that there is a substance that bees can detect that we can't? Or are we to think that no one has done this basic forensic work? I just don't "buy" this "symptom", as it is such an obvious starting point, one that would provide a "smoking gun" in short order with even cursory examination. We haven't heard squat about this, and we know that multiple teams started out their work on CCD by looking for some sort of contamination, as even they naturally thought "pesticide kill" off the top of their heads. > Beekeepers are more than happy to point fingers at outside > pesticide applications, but fall almost entirely silent when > it comes to some of the amazing things some beekeepers do > inside the hives to deal with mites, diseases, SHB, and moths. This is yet even more fuzzy thinking. How could a large number of beekeepers all stumble upon the exact same "unfortunate cocktail" of pesticides, all in the same season, spread hither and yon across the landscape, and all somehow avoid leaving any detectable residues in the hives so (mis)treated? How could these same symptoms pop up so briefly in the 1960s, 1970s, and again today, given that there was no need for any sort of "desperate measures" in the 60s and 70s? > Since some beekeepers are highly creative, is it inconceivable > that some may have used Imidacloprid in their hives, say, to > control beetles? They have tried everything else. If this were the case, they would have found Imidacloprid on the combs, in the bees, and so on. They haven't. > Some of the reports -- bees flying away never to return -- sure looks > like the work of Imidacloprid, or its near relatives. It is understandable that the French blamed Imidacloprid for their woes, as they had a specific bloom period (Sunflower), a specific crop (again, Sunflower), they had hives "on" or "near" Sunflower dying and hives far away from them NOT DYING. They also had Imidacloprid residues of "0.09 mg/kg in the hives and 0.35 mg/kg in the bees". http://www.bbka.org.uk/freefiles/imidacloprid/Imidacloprid-inked-to-french-b ee-deaths.pdf They had a consistent and clear set of evidence. Their evidence "made sense". Their overt symptoms does not match what we are calling "CCD", except for the loss of adult bees. By comparison, we seem to still have "no evidence". If we had anything like "0.09 mg/kg in the hives and 0.35 mg/kg in the bees", do you think that the multiple teams involved in looking at CCD would miss it? ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2007 04:53:53 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: C Hooper Subject: NC Apitherapy Conference to Explore Healing with Honey Bee Hive Products MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII NC Apitherapy Conference to Explore Healing with Honey Bee Hive Products SEE: www.apitherapynews.com Research Triangle Park, North Carolina to host April 26–29 apitherapy training and conference of the American Apitherapy Society (April 16, 2007) - Medical doctors, researchers, beekeepers and a spectrum of holistic practitioners will gather April 26-29, 2007, at the Radisson Hotel/Research Triangle Park in the Raleigh-Durham area of North Carolina for the 12th annual Charles Mraz Apitherapy Course & Conference (CMACC) sponsored by the American Apitherapy Society (AAS). The Thursday evening through Saturday morning course provides a basic understanding of the therapeutic use of products of the beehive -- including honey, pollen, propolis, royal jelly and bee venom therapy using live honeybees. The Saturday and Sunday conference will look at more advanced techniques, protocols and international advances in the field of apitherapy. Members of the media are invited, with prior arrangements, to attend course and conference sessions and AAS faculty are available for interviews. One of the most ancient of all healing modalities, apitherapy is gaining increased attention worldwide as the efficacy of the hive products and treatments becomes better known. The AAS, www.apitherapy.org, is a nonprofit membership organization established for the purpose of advancing apitherapy. The CMACC has been named in memory of Charles Mraz, an American pioneer in the use of bee venom to treat diseases. The fee for the course and conference is $275, and includes a one-year AAS membership. To register, contact the AAS at 4835 Van Nuys Blvd., Suite 100, Sherman Oaks, CA 91403; Phone: (818) 501-0446; FAX: (818) 995-9334; Email: info@apitherapy.org Media Contact: Frederique Keller, Vice President, American Apitherapy Society Phone: (631) 351-3521; E-Mail: Kellerf@optonline.net - Charles Mraz Apitherapy Course & Conference Schedule - SEE: http://apitherapy.blogspot.com/2007/04/nc-apitherapy-conference-to-explore.html ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2007 08:20:45 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Peter Borst Subject: Wild honeybees declared public nuisance in Arizona MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Bill adds bees to list of public nuisances By: Djamila Grossman PHOENIX, AZ Last week, Gov. Janet Napolitano signed into law a bill that adds wild honeybees to the list of public nuisances because they endanger public health. This means county officials can order a property owner to have a bee swarm removed at the owner's cost. If the bee swarm is located on public lands, the county will pay for the exterminator. No county currently has the authority to enforce wild bee removal. All wild bees are considered Africanized, which means they are more defensive and therefore more likely to attack than European bees. "This is a threat to human safety, and if there are hives and no one has the authority to remove them, someone walking down the street could be attacked," said sponsor Rep. Jennifer Burns, R-Tucson. "We have been infiltrated with Africanized bees." "Once they start attacking, they all will attack," Krueger said. "They're one of the only venomous animals in the state of Arizona that are aggressive." Burns said that while she seeks to protect the public with her bill, she also wants to make sure the measure would not harm any of the roughly 300 beekeepers in the state. That's why it only applies to colonies that are not maintained by a beekeeper. The Arizona Department of Agriculture worked with several beekeepers to make sure they don't have concerns about the bill, said Ed Hermes, spokesman for the Arizona Department of Agriculture. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2007 08:36:02 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: =?UTF-8?Q?Peter_Borst?= Subject: Re: Wild honeybees declared public nuisance in Arizona Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Meanwhile, while the exterminators take aim at the wild bees: A mysterious disorder killing honeybees across the nation has spread to Arizona. And it's delivering another blow to the state's $11.8 million beekeeping industry, which was racked by Africanized bees and other pests in the mid-1980s and 1990s. No one in the state is tracking the problem, and beekeepers say they feel helpless against the threat to their livelihoods. Dennis Arp, 55, had planned to rent 1,000 colonies to California almond growers at $135 per colony. Practically overnight, he had fewer than 700 available - a loss of roughly $40,000. "If it keeps at the pace that it's going, in terms of how many bees are dying off, it could be huge," said Julie Murphree, a spokeswoman for the Arizona Farm Bureau. "You just could not endure this level of die-off in the colonies and then expect that we could have the same level of pollination." There are about 50 commercial beekeepers in Arizona, according to the state Department of Agriculture. A number of crops grown here depend on bees for pollination, including melons, squash, cucumbers and vegetable seed crops. Many beekeepers also raise bees for honey production. The Arizona Legislature deregulated the bee industry in the mid-1990s. As a result, the Arizona Department of Agriculture does not have the resources or authority to investigate colony collapse disorder, spokesman Ed Hermes said. No central agency is tracking reports of colony collapse disorder in Arizona. "Our researchers don't seem to be on top of (this) at all," said Kenneth Orletsky, beekeeper and former president of the Arizona Beekeepers Association. "I'm a very, very strong conservative. I don't want government in my business. (But) there are times when we the people choose to have help." [should have thought of that before they sent them packing] ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2007 09:21:08 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Peter John Keating Subject: Some facts related to honey bee colony losses MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dick Rogers mentioned.... "Maritime Canada winter loss reports as of April 12/07........ Small hive beetle range expanding. The beetle is nasty by itself, but desperation treatments may be contributing to toxic effects to bees and brood" Could Dick tell us in which provinces they are finding the small hive beetle? Peter (still shovelling snow) ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2007 13:19:10 GMT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "waldig@netzero.com" Subject: Re: Wild honeybees declared public nuisance in Arizona Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit >>All wild bees are considered Africanized, which means they are more defensive and therefore more likely to attack than European bees. It's going to be interesting to see to what extent, if any, African honey bees spread this season. After a couple of years of relatively little movement, they were expanding again last year. Waldemar Long Island, NY ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2007 13:18:23 GMT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "waldig@netzero.com" Subject: Re: Some facts related to honey bee colony losses Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit >>I am not saying CCD is not real. I know some very smart CCD people are looking at bees closer than they maybe ever have been looked at in the U.S. for which I am grateful! I read in a recent issue of ABJ - an article by Dick Marron I believe - that small hive beetles and wax moths stay away from CCD- deadouts! There is very little, if any, robbing of the CCD-deadouts by other bees. In CCD-affected colonies, a dead bee pulled out of a cell and placed in the midst of the live bees caused the live bees to disperse. This makes CCD unique and real for me! The various insects are 'smelling' something in CCD-affected hives and stay away. This is different from everything else that I know can cause colony losses. Waldemar Long Island, NY ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2007 17:09:52 +0300 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Roger White Subject: bees poisoned in Crete MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-7" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable GREECE: 50 MILLION BEES POISONED IN CRETE =20 HERAKLION (GREECE), APRIL 13 - Fifty million bees have been = deliberately poisoned in a village in Crete and local authorities = investigate upon request of bee growers who suspect an action of some = islanders opposing their activity, the prefect's office of Heraklion, = the main city of Crete, has announced. Following a report by the = Association of bee growers of eastern Crete - Ms Vangelio Sxinaraki, = Heraklion's police chief, told the France Presse - experts went in the = Selakano hamlet near Heraklion where they established there had been a = premeditated massacre of insects. According to the first results of the = inquiry, the bees, found around the beehives had died after absorbing = huge quantities of insecticides. A total 930 beehives were targeted, = according to the representative of the bee growers, Zacharias Gemistas, = who attributed that 'monstrosity' to the will of some Crete residents to = eliminate bee growing in the area. A similar massacre happened in 1993, = but with less victims, Gemistas told the Net public television. Bee = growers demand immediate compensation of 300,000 euro, the police chief = said. (ANSAmed). RED-KUZ=20 =20 ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2007 15:27:20 GMT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "deknow@netzero.net" Subject: Re: Wild honeybees declared public nuisance in Arizona Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit well, apparantly they have suddenly spread to every unmanaged hive in az by "mandate"....next, all "unmanaged" cats will be mandated to have rabies, any abandoned car will be mandated to have a body in the trunk, and all unmanaged weeds will be mandated to be marijuana. i wonder if all unmanged trees will be mandated to fall on someone's head. what a big &*&^%^& mess of ignorance! when nz decided to poisen all of the feral bees last year (to keep varroa out), i wrote to the nz minister of biosecurity...and even got a response (first from underlings that said "your message has been passed up the chain, and then from the minister himself)....of course it didn't do any good...the good news is that the manufacturer of the poisen they were going to use refused to allow it to be used for this purpose....i'm sure they will come up with one that will allow it eventually. deknow >>All wild bees are considered Africanized It's going to be interesting to see to what extent, if any, African honey bees spread this season. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2007 11:29:41 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "James W. Hock" Subject: Re: Wild honeybees declared public nuisance in Arizona In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The amended Act has some impact on Arizona Beekeepers. To be safe from local officials, hives need to be posted or labeled with the Beekeepers name and ten digit phone number. Unlabeled hives may be deemed abandoned or not maintained and dealt with. Beekeepers may be ordered to deal with or remove suspect hives. Wal-mart should be selling a whole lot of Krylon right about now. http://www.azleg.gov/DocumentsForBill.asp?Bill_Number=HB2306 Jim Hock Wethersfield, CT ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2007 11:31:08 EDT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Chris Slade Subject: Re: Cell Phones - Not MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 15/04/2007 17:36:31 GMT Standard Time, BeeResearch@aol.com writes: I haven't been able to locate the study indicating that honey bees avoided cell phones, but I did find this on-line publication by the same author and a colleague. On the odd ocasion I have used a pocket dictaphone for taking notes while beekeeping, usually placing it on the roof of the adjoining hive. It always seems to get lots of 'angry' sounding buzzes. Chris ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2007 22:25:38 +0100 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Peter Edwards Subject: Re: Cell Phones - Not MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I want to know who puts all these cell phones at the entrances of hives - and, of course, why! I suspect all this started with radiation from phone masts and other microwave links. Some time ago we saw much debate about bees and the electrical fields under high voltage power lines. Peter ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2007 18:10:53 EDT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Chris Slade Subject: Re: Wild honeybees declared public nuisance in Arizona MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 16/04/2007 16:34:27 GMT Standard Time, deknow@NETZERO.NET writes: >>All wild bees are considered Africanized Have any AHB colonies been affected by CCD? Chris ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2007 18:43:24 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Dee Lusby Subject: Re: Wild honeybees declared public nuisance in Arizona In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Chris: How many AHB have been effected by CCD? Well, well, since most of the beekeepers do swarms like me, but I am considered AHB because I work self contained and don't buy outside stock and the others do and are considered to have European stock while doing migratory work like to the almonds, and I do SC foundation and combs and the others are on LC or intermediate sizing and I am having no problems and others are, that sure makes it hard in a way to give an answer. Latest paper article with me in on on front page said organic beekeeper having no problem with CCD but then I was alluded to being the Killer Bee Person for type of bees I keep, though others in area are said to keep european bees but we all do swarms and split/divide own bees. Well, since the SC so-called AHB IMPOV are healthy I keep, then if I don't see any being effected then I quess answer to you is zilch/zero! So what does it mean? YOu have any idea? Sincerely, Dee __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2007 07:30:26 +0000 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Gavin Ramsay Subject: Re: Cell Phones - Not MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ascii Hi Peter and All > I suspect all this started with radiation from phone masts > and other microwave links. This brings to mind an experiment where bees being bombarded with radiation from a radar dish still managed to fly to where the dance led them ..... ! G. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2007 06:36:08 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: MRH Subject: Beekeepers! Beware of cell phones! MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Are cell phones killing our bees? I never let my bees use cell phones. They are social insects and I have found once I let them have cell phones it is impossible to control their use. The charges from time overruns can bankrupt even the most efficient apiary operation. Once they learn to use them they become dependent: They stop returning to the hive to dance and just phone in the location of their forage discoveries. Furthermore, the increased peer-to-peer communication plays havoc with traditional bee values. "To heck with phremones!" they say. "Chemical communication is passe compared with digital." As in many societies, the young are the early adopters, spending their time text messaging instead of doing their jobs. In the end we observe a breakdown in heirarchy and, fatally, anti-royalist sentiment. This, then, is the cause of CCD--foolish notions of independence among the immature, loss of authority of the elders, breakdown of group cohesion, and collapse of the aristocracy. Marc Hoffman ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2007 05:26:12 -0600 Reply-To: allen dick Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: allen dick Organization: Deep Thought Subject: Re: What do Tree Huggers & Honeybees have in common? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > The overt symptoms were the same as those we now call "CCD". > Not just "similar", but precisely the same. > > These symptoms are unique from everything else we have seen > in the way of pesticide effects, diseases, pests, you name > it, and we have seen these exact same symptoms before, long > before things like Imidacloprid. Thanks for writing, Jim. Seemingly, more writing leads to more confusion, so I'll try not to add to it by trying to reply, other than suggesting a careful review of posts on the topic up to this date, and add that the point of the previous article was that we should not rule out any potential suspect just because we haven't been able, thus far, to prove a connection -- especially if the MO looks like a fit. In recent times, with improved methods, things like industrial and consumer chemicals are being found to have previously unimagined delayed effects, or effects only in the presence of several other influences which may not always, or even often be present, making prediction and detection very difficult. If even everyday, formerly benign things like fire retardants and Teflon-coated frying pans are proving suspect, then we must always keep a close eye on products that are designed specifically to kill or confuse insects and mites -- and if they are *known* to be near the scene of a crime, they should always be in the line-up, even if they walk free immediately afterwards time and time again. Does this all have anything to do with CCD? Is there really an unique, newly discovered CCD? Or is this just another pitch for sympathy? I don't know. All I know is that there have always been clusters of bee die-offs, and each time the claim is made that it is something new. Sometimes it is and the cause is obvious. Some times it is and the truth behind it is covered up or ignored. Sometimes it isn't. We're waiting for the jury on this one. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2007 05:08:08 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: =?windows-1252?Q?Hugo_Thon=E9?= Subject: what to do with winter stores Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi, To all CDD-specialists in the world - if there are any (grin). Due to CDD I lost 5 of my 8 colonies (3 before december, 1 in december and 1 that is collapsing rihgt now - the rest of my beehives are fine, thank you). As it were my bees the inheritance was due to me, and so I have now loads of perfectly sealed sugar combs. Can I reuse these frames to winter my bees a the end of this season ? Or do I throw everything away .... cheers, Hugo (half a bee) ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2007 09:02:16 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bill Truesdell Subject: Re: Simple question In-Reply-To: <001b01c77f9a$665e5da0$04bc59d8@BusyBeeAcres> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Is CCD at all related to winter kills? From what I have seen so far, they are two different things. They seem to be merging on this list. Mea also culpa. Bill Truesdell Bath, Maine ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2007 10:52:29 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Dan&jan Subject: Re: what to do with winter stores MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="Windows-1252"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit put them back on the colonies for spring buildup. consolidate the full combs in full suppers over the brood chambers so you can keep them separate from the new honeyflow. if they are still full at the end of the season use them as overwintering food i have one arm in a sling, hence the poor typing Dan Veilleux in the mountains of NC zone 6a ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2007 11:32:29 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Brian Fredericksen Subject: Re: Simple question Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit I totally agree with Bill on this. The NE region of USA and Ontario had some really warm weather in late Dec/early Jan and from various reports seems to have created havoc with hives in that region when harsh below zero weather moved in during late Jan. This seems to be a possible additional major loss on top of CCD losses reported in fall. I spoke with a board member of the MN Honey Producers Association today and he had no reports of CCD in Mn to relate. He did indicate some members had mite related die offs last fall as colonies were moved to CA or other winter holding areas. As I have mentioned before these keepers have been elsewhere other then MN since last November FWIW. I have yet to hear of one credible report that wintered over hives in northern regions had bees exiting the hives in mid winter, and what was a healthy hive in fall is now empty in spring, this would imply an expanded definition of CCD if it turns out that is the case. Instead we hear of apperent winter losses attributued to CCD. I have not seen in the media any interviews of keepers in the northern 1/3 of the USA claiming they had a hive of bees in spring and then weeks later had dwindled to nothing and displayed CCD symptoms. Makes you wonder if the "real" CCD losses have occurred and no new losses are happening. Like all of the news reports that are credible are all in the past tense fall/early winter and in warm climates. I can't help but draw an analogy to Orson Wells 1938 radio broadcast and the power of suggestion. From a social standpoint we have a mania on our hands. If the bee loss survery results indicate a small number of beekeepers nationwide affected but collectively a huge number of hives decimated. I would be wondering how real the prospect is that we have a disorder that is randomly and equally affecting any beehive. From a statistics standpoint data like that would be pointing toward the individual beekeeper practices (pollination, migratory roation, treatments etc). This would be welcome news to the rest of the beekeepers if it plays out this way. I think we have some information to support that hypothesis already. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2007 12:15:28 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: =?UTF-8?Q?Peter_Borst?= Subject: Re: what to do with winter stores Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Is it safe to reuse the equipment from colonies that have been lost during the winter? > If it can be determined that bees starved or died due to other reasons associated with typical winter loss, it does appear safe to reuse equipment, including honey stores and pollen, but caution is advised and equipment probably needs to be aired thoroughly. Also you should seriously consider replacing old comb with new foundation on a regular basis. > However if your colonies died from what appears to be CCD, reusing equipment is not advised since we do not yet know the cause of this condition. Members of the CCD working group have initiated experiments that will look at various comb sterilization techniques for suggestions in the future. from CCD Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) (3/2007) http://maarec.cas.psu.edu/ColonyCollapseDisorder.html ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2007 10:07:08 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: a e Subject: Toronto Star Article MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi Aaron, There is an article in the Toronto Star today. I also heard that CBC News in Toronto will have an item on bees at Six tonight, Tuesday April 17, 2007. Sincerely, Abbas http://www.thestar.com/Business/article/203818 __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2007 04:21:48 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: C Hooper Subject: Propolis Compounds May Boost Growth of Neural Stem Cells MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII Propolis Compounds May Boost Growth of Neural Stem Cells (Taiwan) Research Showing Increasing Neural Stem Cell Activity With Ppls Brings Hope for Alzheimer's Cure, Implications for Memory Enhancement BiotechEast, 4/16/2007 http://apitherapy.blogspot.com/2007/04/propolis-compounds-may-boost-growth-of.html Early-stage study in Taipei, Taiwan, on PPLs--a group of prenylflavanone compounds--extracted from bee propolis specific to the island, has shown the compounds provide a boosting effect on the growth of neural stem cells. This research has exciting implications for neurological diseases such as Alzheimer's, Parkinson's and Lou Gehrig's diseases, as well as in the study of memory enhancement... ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2007 13:31:47 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Randy_Oliver?= Subject: betterway cyclone vinegar vaporizer Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Has anyone on the list had experience with this machine? You may reply off list. Thanks, Randy Oliver ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2007 13:03:52 -0600 Reply-To: allen dick Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: allen dick Organization: Deep Thought Subject: Re: Simple question MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=response Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Is CCD at all related to winter kills? From what I have seen so far, they > are two different things. I really recommend a careful reading of all the articles at http://maarec.cas.psu.edu/ColonyCollapseDisorder.html (Each line is a link, although that may not be apparent on all browsers). That site is pretty close to the horse's mouth, and contains everything we might like to know -- except the answer, and I expect that eventually that will be there too, even if it amounts to "no conclusion possible at this time". Science is good at studying, evaluating and manipulating events which are repeatable, but less so for events which are anecdotal, random or irreproducible. > They seem to be merging on this list. Most of what we are getting here is second-hand and speculation, mixed in with some misunderstanding and confusion, but we do get some good pointers, such as the one above. Thanks to Peter for reminding us to keep looking there. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2007 15:37:18 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Peter Borst Subject: it will add a few cents MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Despite the effort of the News Media to scare everybody, the real importance of honey bees seems still to be lost on some: > While the long-term impact on food prices will depend on the extent of the problem, agricultural economists say that consumers will most likely see small increases in prices of crops that are dependent on honeybees this year. Almonds, for example, require honeybee pollination. Walter Thurman, an agricultural economist at North Carolina State University, estimates that the price of almonds at the supermarket will rise 1 percent this year based on the increased cost of renting honeybees for pollination because they are in short supply. In other words, it will add a few cents to a $3 package of almonds. from: U.S.News & World Report Bee Crisis May Drive Up Food Costs Monday April 16 ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2007 16:44:38 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bill Truesdell Subject: Re: Simple question In-Reply-To: <00f901c78123$24380cc0$0201a8c0@Pericles> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit allen dick wrote: > > I really recommend a careful reading of all the articles at > > http://maarec.cas.psu.edu/ColonyCollapseDisorder.html Which is why I asked the question, since it appears that many are linking "normal" winter kills with CCD, as noted by several recent posts. The best and most comprehensive article is the Fall Dwindle disease talk which lists the observations. There does not appear to be a link, but maybe there is something new that says there is. I hate to say it, but many who are saying their colonies died this winter from CCD are probably wrong. Two entirely different critters. As I noted before, too many beekeepers do not know what they are looking at when it comes to dead-outs and disease. There are just too many things that cause winter kills. Bill Truesdell Bath, Maine ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2007 20:48:27 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bob Harrison Subject: Re: Where do they get these numbers? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello Mark & All, >But isn't there some idea of what the actual number is amongst those who got this ball rolling in the first place? If you want to go back to the start I would read the excellent article by Dick Marron "Die Off". Page 299 of the April American Bee journal. I have spoke with David Hackenburg ( first to report CCD)several times about his situation and Dick's article goes right along with the things David told me he saw in his bees. I spoke with Lance Sundberg at the ABF convention about his losses. Lance reported at the convention that a whole load of 450 hives went from super strong to dead in two weeks. Not that I am a bee expert ( like the handle a few like to use when speaking to the media) but both Lance and David came to me to ask my thoughts on their situation. I have been friends with both these guys for many many years. Both are beekeepers I respect. If they say they had unexplained losses ( symptoms) then I am inclined to side with those guys. These guys have been keeping bees for years and I am sure are well aware of what regular deadouts look like. While researchers try to sort things out the industry is moving on. Left turn, right turn or straight ahead. What happened last year is history now. However next fall will be the moment of truth about CCD. Right now bees are out running CCD from what I can tell. A question which has not been raised is "does requeening help the CCD hive recover quicker?" Reports from Florida is that the CCD survival hives still are not thriving. It *appears* some races of bees are involved more than others but too early to put a finger which ones for sure. I personally are looking at my bees closer than normal this year hoping to see a CCD problem starting in time to try and correct the problem. I am watching varroa loads closely and even treated my package bees with sucracide when installed. Did a spring miteaway 2 treatment on over wintered hives. We all need to be the best beekeepers we can and be watchful for the signs of CCD. Those commercial beekeepers in my area which think they see CCD starting in August please contact me and I will come and take a look. I would like to see if moving hives to a different area would reverse the effects. Also shaking the hive on to foundation. An interesting fact common to both David Hackenburg & Lance Sundberg was that both their bees looked great but crashed on arrival in another state in a couple weeks. Maybe coincidence or not? Mark asked about the CCD start so I revisited the start. Sincerely, Bob Harrison -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2007 23:46:11 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Paul Law Subject: Bee Crisis May Drive Up Food Costs MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline U.S.News & World Report Bee Crisis May Drive Up Food Costs http://biz.yahoo.com/usnews/070416/070413_13honeybees.html?.v=1&.pf=personal-finance -- Dennis Law ( aka Paul D. Law ) Brooklyn South Community Emergency Response Team Logistics Section ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2007 11:32:42 +1000 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: queenbee Subject: Registration for Apimondia 2007 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Just thought I should remind all Bee-Ler's that the early bird = registration ( where you get a discount for registering early) closes on = 15 May. It is less than a month away. So make sure you take advantage = of this discount and register for Apimondia 2007 in Melbourne Australia = now. All the details are on www.apimondia2007.com It should be a great = program and ApiExpo is certainly bigger than expectations. If anyone has any queries, they can contact me offline. Trevor Weatherhead AUSTRALIA ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2007 03:45:22 EDT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Chris Slade Subject: Re: Wild honeybees declared public nuisance in Arizona MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 17/04/2007 04:10:42 GMT Standard Time, deelusbybeekeeper@YAHOO.COM writes: How many AHB have been effected by CCD? ...........You have any idea? None of my own but I'm just drawing together a few threads of other people's work. Tom Seeley in Honeybee Ecology describes how, left alone and given availability of suitable nest sites bees tend to distance their colonies about half a mile from each other (although we can all think of examples where they have not). I was wondering whether AHB are any different in this respect from the bees in the forests of New York State where Seeley conducted his studies (I hope to see him tonight and if I get a chance may ask him). Leslie Bailey in lectures delivered in 1984 (The Effect on the Number of Honey Bee Colonies on their Honey Yields and Diseases) and 1986 (Bee-keeping by Numbers) ie before varroa, explored through statistical analysis what happens when honeybees are out of equilibrium with their natural food supply. In summary there are greater periods when there are a lot of unemployed foragers rubbing shoulders and this was the condition under which certain diseases were best spread, notably Chronic Paralysis Virus. Norman Carreck would be able to tell us a lot more and I think he controls the copyright of Bailey's lectures! Chris ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2007 04:05:40 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: C Hooper Subject: U.S. Conferences to Feature Lectures on Wound Healing with Honey MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII U.S. Conferences to Feature Lectures on Wound Healing with Honey Leading Wound Care Experts to Discuss Benefits of Manuka Honey in Wound Treatment PRINCETON, N.J.-- Derma Sciences, Inc. (OTCBB: DSCI), a manufacturer and supplier of wound and skin care products, announced that several sessions on the use of Active Manuka Honey in chronic wounds will be incorporated into the agenda at the upcoming American Professional Wound Care Association’s (APWCA) 2007 National Clinical Conference in Philadelphia, April 19-22… SEE: http://apitherapy.blogspot.com/2007/04/us-conferences-to-feature-lectures-on.html ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2007 07:11:52 -0400 Reply-To: bee-quick@bee-quick.com Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: James Fischer Subject: Cell Phones and Bees - Hysterical Speculation, Based Upon Defective "Research" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit When e-mailed, Prof Hermann Stever, one of the researchers involved in the studies cited by the press articles about "cell phones and bees", such as: http://news.independent.co.uk/environment/wildlife/article2449968.ece replied as follows: > "First of all I have to clear up that our research is > specifically not related on the massive losses of bees > around the world lately (often called "CCD"). We study > the influence of electromagnetic fields (especially of > DECT-mobile phone) on the learning ability of bees. > So we can not explain the CCD-phenomenon itself. > Attached to this email you find a contribution concerning > our pilot-study in 2005 published in the paper "ACTA SYSTEMICA > - IIAS International Journal" (Vol. VI, No. 1, pp. 1-6). > Because of many inquiries, a contribution concerning our > follow up-study in 2006 today is published in English on > our website http://agbi.uni-landau.de/materialien.htm. I've glanced at the preprints of the papers they have produced, and I was thoroughly unimpressed, both with the basic techniques employed, and with startling lack of understanding of "basic bee behavior and biology" evinced by the methodology and the interpretation of the "data". I'd submit that no actual "data" was gathered at all, due to basic and massive mistakes in experiment design, as follows: In one paper: http://agbi.uni-landau.de/material_download/preprint_IAAS_2007.pdf they compared return times for bees that had been trapped exiting the hive, gassed with CO2, marked, and then released 500 meters away from the hive. Problem is, they may have been trapping experienced foragers in some cases, and bees on their first orientation flight in others. They also apparently had no idea that a forager, trapped upon exiting the hive and then released, has no interest in returning directly to the hive, but instead, will still go out and forage, even after being trapped, detained, gassed, marked, and released. In this context, measuring "return time" is so utterly meaningless that it can be considered a random number. I lead workshops on bee-lining here and there, and if weather is poor or time available is short, we will capture bees exiting a hive's entrance reducer to "pre-load" bee-lining boxes for the workshop participants to save them the trouble of capturing bees from flower patches. Even though the bees are left in the feeding chamber long enough for them all to "tank up" with nectar, some bees, upon release, will do the sort of hovering flight one sees at a hive entrance, orienting to the bee-lining box, rather than a hive entrance. These are clearly bees that were captured "in error", bees with perhaps no flight experience at all, certainly bees without a firm handle on the hive's location or the local terrain. These bees are certain to have slim chances of returning to their hive in any reasonable time period, if they return at all. If I were to capture and then release bees without providing them with "nectar" and time to "tank up", bees with less than a "full tank" are certain to continue foraging, rather than return directly to the hive, which would makes the "winners" of the contest the bees that are foraging on the closest patch of blooms currently providing some groceries. In the other paper: http://agbi.uni-landau.de/material_download/IAAS_2006.pdf We find the statement (confession!): "In the course of the experiment three exposed colonies and one non-exposed colony broke down. To compute the average weight of the honeycombs over all analyzed colonies their weight was used at the time of the breakdown. While the weight of the frames for the honeycombs was similar at the beginning, the average total weights of the honeycombs, which were built by non-exposed bees, came to 1326 g while the average honeycomb weight of the exposed bees amount 1045 g. The difference of 281 g corresponds to 21.1%." So, the results were skewed by using data from colonies that were on the verge of "break down" (from varroa infestation, one assumes), and of 16 total colonies, only one of the eight "non-exposed" hives "broke down", while three of the eight "exposed" hives "broke down". It should be no wonder at all that when 3 of 8 colonies in one group of hives is suffering from something that causes them to "break down", that group of colonies will have a lower colony weight gain. When the other group has only one hive "break down", it is highly likely to have a much better set of "weight gain" numbers. Apparently, the peer review group selected for the "International Institute for Advanced Studies in Systems Research and Cybernetics" (where these papers have been either submitted or published) does not include beekeepers, entomologists, or even intelligent 12-year olds who have read a few books about bees. To summarize, the press reporting was pure speculation by reporters who neglected to ask even basic questions of the authors of the cited papers, and was based upon "science" that would not even get past the editor of one's local beekeeper association newsletter. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2007 07:50:28 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: =?UTF-8?Q?Peter_Borst?= Subject: Re: Simple question Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Bill Truesdell >I hate to say it, but many who are saying their colonies died this >winter from CCD are probably wrong. Two entirely different critters. As >I noted before, too many beekeepers do not know what they are looking at >when it comes to dead-outs and disease. What do you think CCD would look like in a cold climate as compared to "normal" winter kill? How would *you* tell the difference? pb ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2007 11:30:44 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Brian Fredericksen Subject: Re: Cell Phones and Bees - Hysterical Speculation, Based Upon Defective "Research" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit What an excellent review of the so called data and study. IMO your scientific and beekeeping knowledge and experience is invaluable to the List and makes you one of the "must read" posters here. Have you considered submitting that post as a letter to the editor at NYT's or elsewhere? considering the other outlets which also picked up that story it would be refreshing to see someone debunk that story. With global warming as a backdrop it appears the media and public are ripe for associating honey bee losses with impending doom and gloom. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2007 16:49:51 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bill Truesdell Subject: Re: Simple question In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > What do you think CCD would look like in a cold climate as compared to > "normal" winter kill? How would *you* tell the difference? > The characteristics of CCD have been documented. Which means there would be a rapid loss of bees before they ever went into winter so end of issue. So far the team has not coupled winter loss with CCD. Which is my point. When and if they do, I am sure they will document the symptoms and characteristics and let all of us know. Bill Truesdell Bath, Maine ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2007 13:52:42 EDT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Jerry Bromenshenk Subject: Einstein Quote Comments: To: hayesg@doacs.state.fl.us Comments: cc: ccdworkinggroup@lists.cas.psu.edui, adisperser@hotmail.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit It remains to be seen if Einstein said what he reportedly said, or not -- but here is what Scott Debnam, my associate got in return to a question about authenticity: This will clear up the questions about the Dr. Einstein quote that has been widely posted: >From: "Roni Grosz" >To: "Scott Debnam" >Subject: RE: Dr. Einstein and The Honey Bee >Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2007 13:37:24 +0300 > >Dear Mr. Debnam, > >I found the following as a widely reported but unconfirmed quote. I am >sorry to have to inform you that the quote you refer to is not authentic. > >If the bee becomes extinct, mankind will have only four >years to live: no bees, no pollination, no plants, no animals, >no humans. > >I agree with you that Albert Einstein would probably have held your work in >high esteem but I cannot offer you authentic words from him regarding the >bee. > >With best regards > >Dr. Roni Grosz >Bern Dibner Curator >Albert Einstein Archives >Jewish National & University Library >Hebrew University of Jerusalem >POB 39105 Jerusalem 91390 ISRAEL >TEL: +972-2-658-5781 >FAX: +972-2-658-6910 >e-mail: ronigr@savion.huji.ac.il >www.albert-einstein.org >www.alberteinstein.info ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2007 16:22:38 -0600 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Medhat Nasr Subject: Re: Simple question In-Reply-To: <4626846F.8050709@suscom-maine.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Bill Said: The characteristics of CCD have been documented. Which means there would be a rapid loss of bees before they ever went into winter so end of issue. So far the team has not coupled winter loss with CCD. Which is my point. When and if they do, I am sure they will document the symptoms and characteristics and let all of us know. I will be interested to know the difference. I am looking at dead hives in Alberta. They are considered winter mortality. I am not sure if they can be classified as CCD or high classical winter mortality. Bees even if they suffer from the CCD they would not have the proper temperature to leave their hives and die somewhere else. In our case bees did not leave the hives, a lots of food, good mite control with legal chemicals, and combs very much new, but they died inside the hives. Any help would be very much appreciated, eh! Jerry might have some answers. Thanks in advance. Medhat Medhat Nasr, Ph. D. Provincial Apiculturist Crop Diversification Centre North 17507 Fort Road Edmonton, AB, Canada T5Y 6H3 ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2007 19:02:15 -0400 Reply-To: james.fischer@gmail.com Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: James Fischer Subject: Re: Cell Phones and Bees - Hysterical Speculation, Based Upon Defective "Research" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Have you considered submitting that post as a letter > to the editor at NYT's or elsewhere? considering > the other outlets which also picked up that story it > would be refreshing to see someone debunk that story. No, I'd rather not waste my time trying to extract a retraction from news outlets that merely echoed the article in the "Independent". I did send a copy to the "Independent", as they appeared to be the original source, but I don't expect that anything will result. Most importantly, I sent a copy to the Chairman of the last several IIAS conferences, as the journal of these conferences is where this highly questionable work has been "published". Others may also way to drop this fellow a line. The more, the merrier. :) Prof. George E. Lasker International Institute for Advanced Studies (I.I.A.S) P.O. Box 3010 Tecumseh, ON N8N 2M3 Canada lasker@uwindsor.ca Also, my list of criticisms only touched on the "big mistakes" that would be obvious to most any random beekeeper. Kevin Hackett, Senior National Program Leader, USDA/ARS (the designated liable party for all the USDA Bee Labs) had a few things to add, but is far too shy to post anything on the Internet, understandable given the nature of his day job. He added the following, slightly more technical critiques, with (2) and (3) being, in my view, the "kiss of death". One can calculate the minimum sample size required for different statistical approaches, and he is correct - 25 bees is simply far too small a sample for any common statistical method. 1) Most honey bee colonies are kept in rural areas away from urban areas with a high concentration of cell phone towers or cell phones. This past year while sampling CCD colonies in various parts of the U.S., USDA-ARS researchers were unable to remain in cell phone contact, emphasizing the lack of cell phone-associated EMR on bee colonies in rural areas. 2) In the very small study in question, base stations of mobile phones (these stations send out electromagnetic signals to mobile phones) were placed in a few hives, which would expose the bees to unnaturally high levels of EMR; yet, researchers were only able to demonstrate marginal and not statistically significant effects. 3) There were experimental flaws in the study: E.g., the number of bees sampled (25) was very small, leaving the chance that some bees were quite different physiologically and behaviorally (trained vs. untrained); 200 bees is a more traditional sampling size for colony studies. 4) It was also not clear whether there was an experimental (non-electromagnetic) object to control for the physical intrusion of the base stations in the hive. Any object placed in the hive may cause some bee distress. 5) The paper also states that the bees were exposed to the tip of the station's antenna, which might give off very high levels of radiation; if the tip was not insulated, contact with it might cause physiological effects on the bees, even shocking or burning them. Importantly, since radiation exposure falls off very precipitously from the tip of the station's antenna, it is almost impossible to extrapolate what might happen to bees in the field near mobile phone nodes/towers (which are another form of base station). There are numerous factors that are or may be impacting honey bee health; electromagnetic radiation is not high on this list. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2007 17:47:02 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Dee Lusby Subject: Re: Wild honeybees declared public nuisance in Arizona In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Chris Slade: I am not seeing any difference in habitat for setting up colonies. In those areas where permanent water available the bees will spread out more as more. Where water is confined to specific areas they will pull in more also. Depending upon nesting sites available for setting up colonies, this too changes the scenario, so it is not uncommon to see several colonies in rocky areas together where natural cavaties are with water nearby, while the flats with just grasses and few trees have few bees as few nesting areas available, and of course yearly burning by range management adds to this developing scenario, along with fewer cactus. Chris with your Bailey thread with unemployed foragers and rubbing shoulders more for spread of disease, what comes to mind here is: Cannot the bees groom themselves and clean anymore in today's modern world? What has changed their grooming habits, along with tolerance for contact with such in everyday life? It's sounds almost like needing to put them into contact again with proper avenues to rebuild immunities, like having children play in dirt again in sandboxes, etc. REgards, Dee A. Lusby __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2007 21:28:00 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: =?UTF-8?Q?Peter_Borst?= Subject: Re: Simple question Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Medhat Nasr wrote: >I will be interested to know the difference. I am looking at dead hives in >Alberta. They are considered winter mortality. I am not sure if they can >be classified as CCD or high classical winter mortality. Bees even if they >suffer from the CCD they would not have the proper temperature to leave >their hives and die somewhere else. In our case bees did not leave the >hives, a lots of food, good mite control with legal chemicals, and combs >very much new, but they died inside the hives. This is almost to the letter what I was going to write. Just goes to show, if yo wait a while someone else will say what you thought. Obviously, when the bees were flying off and dying in the almonds in California, bees were dying in the north but couldn't fly off to do it. pb ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2007 20:56:17 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bob Harrison Subject: Re: Einstein Quote MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >It remains to be seen if Einstein said what he reportedly said, or not -- I mistakenly posted the quote was from "Al" Einstein a beekeeper at a farmers market but a beekeeper from the Ozarks told me he believes the quote was said by a Mr. Frank Einstein ( no relation to Albert but the beekeeper is still checking) while doing a presentation for research funds! Bob -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2007 22:53:46 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Peter Dillon Subject: Re: Simple question In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Medhat et all, Symptoms have been linked / associated CCD by individuals investigating colony losses. One being that foraging bees fly out of the hive, but do not return. Bill Truesdell wishes to try and separate CCD losses from Winter losses by some symptomatic difference. Medhat indicates possible high numbers of colony losses, presumably in Alberta but hesitates between classic winter loss and CCD as the culprit. So, is "....They are considered winter mortality. I am not sure if they can be classified as CCD or high classical winter mortality." an indication of where we are in the investigation of this CCD problem ? Back to Bill's point. But in Medhat's "case", the bees are still there (and would be in most over wintered colonies in Canada). If this is a case of CCD in Canada then we have bodies that in typical CCD cases are not present to investigate. Therefore returning to Bill's point, it is essential to differentiate between losses due to wintering conditions and CCD. If CCD was present in Canadian stocks would it be expected to see the following: 1. Where losses occurred over winter that the dead bees would still be present in the hives. 2. The number of colonies that die being a high % of a total present. 3. That colonies remaining alive and coming out of winter (as at present) dying off without showing spring expansion. Until there is something to differentiate winter loss from CCD it would seem logical to try and prove that colonies did not die from CCD rather than they did die from CCD. Regards, Peter ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 11:23:32 GMT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "waldig@netzero.com" Subject: Re: Wild honeybees declared public nuisance in Arizona Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit >>...so it is not uncommon to see several colonies in rocky areas together where natural cavaties are with water nearby, while the flats with just grasses and few trees have few bees as few nesting areas available... Do you find any colonies nesting in abondoned ground burrows in the flat areas? I assume there is some forage/water in the flats. Waldemar ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 08:59:23 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bill Truesdell Subject: Re: Simple question In-Reply-To: <4626E7CA.8080007@mts.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Peter Dillon wrote: a great post Add to the problem that we in the US NE did have a "warm" early winter when bees could have flown from the hives, so there might not be any large number of bees in the colony. That is the same thing you would see from TM. However, Medhat's reported bees are still in the hive, then, as Peter notes, you have just what you are looking for if they did die from CCD. You have a classic "smoking gun" (if it is CCD) and one of the best bee scientists in North America on scene. Will be interesting to see how this unfolds. Bill Truesdell Bath, Maine ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 13:05:02 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Wayne Young Subject: bees MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Hi All, Are there any bee keepers near Norman O.K.? I spoke with some one this morning that has bees up under the side of a roof at his house.It might be a little hard to get them out,but they have to go.They have been there since last summer,and have wintered there. If anyone is interested please let me know. Wayne in Maine ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 19:35:31 EDT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Chris Slade Subject: Re: Wild honeybees declared public nuisance in Arizona MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 19/04/2007 01:51:55 GMT Standard Time, deelusbybeekeeper@YAHOO.COM writes: Chris with your Bailey thread with unemployed foragers and rubbing shoulders more for spread of disease, what comes to mind here is: Cannot the bees groom themselves and clean anymore in today's modern world? Dee, Viruses are a mite smaller than mites and I doubt if grooming will make the slightest difference. What Bailey says is: "....the incidence of severe cases of paralysis is positively and significantly associated with the population density of colonies. Paralysis is transmitted by bodily contact between a live infected individual and healthy individuals, mostly during the foraging season. The more bees are crowded together within their colonies the more efficiantly is the virus transmitted. This is because the hairs on the cuticle of the bees are broken by close bodily contact, and the virus is carried in and transmitted to the temporarily exposed cytoplasm of the underlying tissue. Crowding in the winter cluster does not spread paralysis because bees are then torpid and unlikely to damage one another." Chris ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 19:55:44 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Dee Lusby Subject: Re: Wild honeybees declared public nuisance in Arizona In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Chris: Some how I am not seeing this as written about in the bees I keep that are smaller. But then they have more access to varied propolis/resins from more varied floral sources,also that is critical to broodnest sterilization and injested by the bees themsleves. So am I wrong in assuming that the bees looked at by Bailey were on enlarged combs FWIW being maintained? What were the parameters of the bees looked at for living/maintenance? Ferals, or domesticated and then what type? Dee A. Lusby __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 22:56:42 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bob Harrison Subject: Virus research (was Wild honeybees declared MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello Chris & All, I remember reading the below when I was deep into the Bailey virus research several years ago. What Bailey says is: "....the incidence of severe cases of paralysis is positively and significantly associated with the population density of colonies. This is why when colonies peak in late summer in the Midwest problems manifest. Another reason is because of adverse weather (drought) most queens shut down which in my opinion makes the number of virus effected individuals rise. Up until that point the bees are raising a couple thousand new brood a day and are kind of out running virus issues. I would like to use a researchers name right now but all posts using her name are rejected so I will simply say the researchers work shows that despite virus spreading through the hive certain bees do not become infected ( reason unknown but one hypothesis is those bees do not have a weakened immune system). However she says the bees which are not infected can still transmit the virus. I think the same could be said for flu virus in people. > The more bees are crowded together within their colonies the more efficiently is the virus transmitted. >This is because the hairs on the cuticle of the bees are broken by close bodily contact, and the virus is carried in and transmitted to the temporarily exposed cytoplasm of the underlying tissue. This is a known method ( dated 60's) of virus transmission confirmed by later U.K. research since Bailey but several other methods are likely including the varroa mite today. The above is taken out of context and is only one method. I remember reading the above and believe the above is from the period of around 1963 which is BEFORE varroa. Maybe Chris will provide the date Bailey said the above? >Crowding in the winter cluster does not spread paralysis because bees are then torpid and unlikely to damage one another." This only applies to virus spread by hair breakage. Even though the above is (in my opinion) dated material it is important (thanks to Chris for posting) because it might shed some light as to why when very populous colonies are trucked a long way virus issues could manifest quicker *on arrival* due to the breaking of hairs in the cluster during transit. I do not know of a migratory beekeeper today which uses the invention to keep the bottoms of comb from swinging in transit. However many used those in the early days of migratory beekeeping including myself. Perhaps migratory beekeepers might take another look at those again? I can't remember now who sold those but they acted like a spacer and were made of a heavy wire into which the frame bottoms fit. They were common when we moved hives by hand with bottom boards. Sincerely, Bob Harrison ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2007 08:06:54 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "Peter L. Borst" Subject: Ohio beekeepers found 72% loss MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit > A recent survey (March 14—19, 2007) of Ohio beekeepers found that on average there is a 72% loss of live colonies from September 2006 until March 2007. A closer breakout indicates that beekeepers with fewer than 100 colonies had an average 55% loss, those with 100 to 500 colonies averaged 67%, and those with over 500 colonies averaged 75% loss. There did not appear to be any difference in area of the state. Why the difference in loss as the size of operation increases? The thought that comes to mind the quickest is time spent per colony. Is an average of 72% loss unusual? Yes, at one time a 10% or less loss was considered normal then with mites that number rose to nearly 30%. The 72% is an unheard of amount. > It is hard to say if something is or is not CCD as there is no clear definition of CCD. John C Grafton OHIO INFO BEE Ohio State University Extension Service Ohio Department of Agriculture ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2007 08:49:34 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Brian Fredericksen Subject: Re: CDD Frenzy goes big time!! Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit As attention is focusing lately on bee losses in the NE region of US, presidential candidiate Hillary Clinton calls on USDA to do something fast. http://www.allamericanpatriots.com/ 48721472_congress_senator_clinton_calls_usda_respond_widespread_concerns_over_nationwide_ho neybee_de ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2007 07:34:16 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bob Harrison Subject: Re: Virus research (was Wild honeybees declared MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello All, I believe I got my lower frame holders from A.H. Meyer Winfred,.South Dakota along with my first truck net and pallet clips. I might give Meyer a call and ask why they dropped the lower frame spacers but sure it was because of sales. Bob -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2007 11:34:09 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Adony_Melathopoulos?= Subject: congressional hearing transcripts Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Does anyone know if the official hearing transcripts have been published? The press release they put out said the transcripts would follow in 4-6 weeks. Thank you in advance, Adony ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2007 12:11:12 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bill Truesdell Subject: Re: Ohio beekeepers found 72% loss In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >> The 72% is an unheard of amount. When Tracheal first hit in the 80s those numbers were not unusual across the nation. I did a quick google search and numbers like 90% kills were being thrown around by environmental groups. Back in the late 90s, numbers like 80% were being reported for some states, including Maine. I have no idea where those numbers come from, other than you seldom hear from those who winter well. In Maine this winter we have reports of 80% losses by some beekeepers but in every case so far it is either VM or TM. Lots of TM. We have had reports of a 2% loss from a large beekeeping operation. Most seem to be faring well, but a 70% loss made the news and CCD was blamed. It was not CCD. >> It is hard to say if something is or is not CCD as there is no clear >> definition of CCD. I am sure there will be an investigation by Ohio bee inspectors to see just what may be going on. Truth is, I doubt if the CCD team can identity CCD winter kill in the North. It would probably look like a TM kill- few bees, disoriented, lots of honey. CCD in flying weather can be identified and has been. It looks like Fall dwindle disease or Disappearing Disease among others. Bill Truesdell Bath, Maine ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2007 17:57:57 +0100 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Peter Edwards Subject: Re: Virus research (was Wild honeybees declared MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bob Harrison wrote: > I believe I got my lower frame holders from A.H. Meyer Winfred,.South > Dakota I am curious as to why you do not use Hoffman frames - no problems with swinging. Best wishes Peter Edwards beekeepers@stratford-upon-avon.freeserve.co.uk www.stratford-upon-avon.freeserve.co.uk/ ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2007 14:16:22 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bob Harrison Subject: Re: Virus research (was Wild honeybees declared MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello Peter & All, I am curious as to why you do not use Hoffman frames - no problems with swinging. We use nine frames once drawn out. or eight frames and a feeder. The reason is speed of frame removal. Bob -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2007 14:31:38 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: David Vander Dussen Subject: Re: Ohio beekeepers found 72% loss In-Reply-To: <4628E620.8040701@suscom-maine.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Tracheal mite can be a real killer, especially in the North. A study done at the University of Guelph, Ontario, by a grad student found that once the temperature in the hive around the cluter dropped below 4C the bees with tracheal mites couldn't get enough oxygen. Good winter packing makes a difference and a proper formic acid treatment (Mite-AwayII)once a year really cleans it up. David VanderDussen Stirling, ON --- Bill Truesdell wrote: > >> The 72% is an unheard of amount. > When Tracheal first hit in the 80s those numbers > were not unusual across > the nation. > In Maine this winter we have reports of 80% losses > by some beekeepers > but in every case so far it is either VM or TM. Lots > of TM. ****************************************************** > * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: > * > * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm > * > ****************************************************** > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2007 21:28:54 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Brian Fredericksen Subject: Re: Cell Phones and Bees - Hysterical Speculation, Based Upon Defective "Research" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Now even Der Spiegel thinks the cellphone story is a bit questionable. Not that they have a great track record in dispensing speculative reasons for a dead bee hive (ie bacteria from GMO's) . http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,477804,00.html ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2007 21:33:50 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Peter Dillon Subject: Re: Virus research (was Wild honeybees declared In-Reply-To: <003701c7836d$0c4d1280$9df96a58@office> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Peter, Hoffmann frames most definitely do swing in Langstroth boxes when the frames and body is clean. As the box/frames progressively plugs up with propolis/wax damping takes place until it becomes rather difficult to remove the frames at an adequate speed. Whilst working with bees in France, I placed large fencing staples at the required distance between the frames - just above the lower bar - That stopped swinging. (In half Dadant boxes) Just to many supers to do that now. Peter ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2007 23:21:25 -0400 Reply-To: bee-quick@bee-quick.com Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: James Fischer Subject: Re: congressional hearing transcripts MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Does anyone know if the official hearing transcripts have been published? Full gavel-to-gavel audio of both statements and Q&A: http://bee-quick.com/ccd/ Text of statements only for now, and where the full text transcripts will appear someday: http://agriculture.house.gov/hearings/statements.html (Scroll down to March 29th) ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2007 22:48:40 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bob Harrison Subject: Re: Ohio beekeepers found 72% loss MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello David & All, >proper formic acid treatment (Mite-AwayII)once a year really cleans it up. I pulled my Mite-away two pads on April 7th and have done some testing. So far i have not turned up any tracheal mites in samples or varroa in drone brood. I think I got a decent kill! Sincerely, Bob Harrison __________________________________________________ -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2007 20:32:29 -0800 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Tom Elliott Subject: Midnight Bees In-Reply-To: <179712.87035.qm@web50407.mail.re2.yahoo.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Anyone know who sells Midnights these days? If anyone. Tom Elliott Chugiak, AK ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2007 23:04:30 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bob Harrison Subject: Re: Virus research (was Wild honeybees declared MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello Peter & All, Peter said: Subject: Re: Cell Phones and Bees - Hysterical Speculation, Based Upon Defective "Research" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Now even Der Spiegel thinks the cellphone story is a bit questionable. Sure, one newspaper will debunk another, but why have they not fact-checked their own story blaming "pesticides" and "GMO Crops" for CCD? http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,473166,00.html To my knowledge, both these potential contributing factors have been ruled out as not supported by the movement of affected colonies, some never moved near any GMO crops or systemic pesticides. Further, the lack of detectable residues in the surviving bees, honey, pollen, or wax comb is significant. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2007 09:20:36 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bill Truesdell Subject: Re: Ohio beekeepers found 72% loss In-Reply-To: <179712.87035.qm@web50407.mail.re2.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit David Vander Dussen wrote: > > Good winter packing makes a difference and a proper > formic acid treatment (Mite-AwayII)once a year really > cleans it up. > > > I asked many at our Annual Meting who had success last winter what they use to treat mites. The successful one used formic or thymol. In every case they came through the winter with healthy colonies "boiling with bees". Both of those treatments also control TM. Those like me who only used OA drip lost colonies. OA drip does not seem to control TM. Nor do strips. When I would treat with Apistan, years ago, I would always treat for TM with Crisco patties. Since I started using OA drip, I did not treat for TM. Plus, other things were going on that directed my attention away from bees. Mine colony loss was definitely TM. I checked them with a magnifying glass yesterday. The dead bees were large, not stubby, all against the warm side of the hive and a small cluster. There were plenty of stores and no brood. I found no Varroa on the bees with only one or two on the bottom board. I grant that this is not much of a data point, but it will be interesting to see just what the treatments were for those who suffered large winter losses. The key word in David's post is "proper". For Formic to work in the North, you have to have the correct conditions. Bill Truesdell Bath, Maine ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2007 10:13:50 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bill Truesdell Subject: Re: Some thoughts about Tracheal Mites In-Reply-To: <179712.87035.qm@web50407.mail.re2.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Tracheal Mites are the forgotten mite. Why? We have "tracheal mite resistant bees". We cannot see it unless we do some scope work. If a colony fails, since Varroa is so common now, VM gets the blame even though it might have been TM (or a combination of the two). After the failure, only Varroa will be present, so there is no problem blaming it. TM disappears with the bees. When we talk about VM or TM killing a colony, as all on this list know, we are really talking about the disease they spread that does the killing. TM causes disoriented bees that do not act like bees should. They vacate a hive in the dead of winter with temperatures well below freezing. TM spread when bees are crowded, such as in colonies on a truck being moved from place to place. As Bob noted, TM "vectored" disease can spread under those conditions. Winter also causes crowding as does bad weather or a lack of nectar. Those conditions also allow disease and TM to spread. In the past many years, we have taken TM resistance for granted. The problem is, we have also imported bees from TM free places like Australia or Hawaii or have bred from TM resistant bees which could easily have lost that resistance over time and open breeding. We, in all probability, do not have TM resistant bees in most of the US. TM seems to operate in cycles. You have large winter kills one year then it disappears for as many as five years or more. It seems intuitive that the kills are related to the mites dying with the bees and they build back up, but it is also related to the weather in the area. As noted, bees can be confined in good weather with a lack of nectar, or bad weather in the normal growing seasons. TM can build up not just in winter. You can also have the normal cycle of resistance, in this case, bees. You have the massive die off of TM susceptible bees, the remainder are TM resistant. Over time, TM resistance fades since there is no pressure, and the bees are again TM susceptible. Another interesting fact is that Varroa have their greatest growth during maximum brood rearing while TM is just the opposite, when bees are confined and no nectar is available. TM and VM can be in a colony at the same time. The virus or combination of diseases that cause TM symptoms could be started by the TM and helped along by VM. As I hypothesized (guessed) before, there may be a much lower threshold for Varroa to spread disease if TM is also present. You could have acceptable VM thresholds but the additional TM may allow a rapid spread of disease especially in confined environments found in commercial operations. The result is TM behavior- disoriented bees flying off to die and rapid colony collapse (helped along by Varroa). The only thing missing is the lack of robbing. I can add another unscientific observation. My TM colony which was loaded with honey was not robbed by the adjacent (four feet away), active colony. There was not even one bee on the hive. That means nothing but it is interesting. Bill Truesdell Bath, Maine ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2007 09:22:30 -0600 Reply-To: allen dick Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: allen dick Organization: Deep Thought Subject: Name Dropping (again) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > I would like to use a researchers name right now but all posts using her > name are rejected. I'm not a current moderator, but I was -- and in the interest of truth and fairness -- can say right here that the reason any of your posts have been rejected, when a researcher's name was mentioned, was that the researcher in question was actually contacted by the moderation team for confirmation since the matter was controversial, and the researcher did not agree that you were quoting or interpreting his/her words correctly or in context. Some of us have a long memory, and can recall several occasions where you named names, then were proven very wrong and had to back down, or fell silent, but not until after you had drawn this list into disrepute among the research community. A researcher's reputation is his or her capital, and most of us are very careful when naming names, not to draw them into controversy, speculation, or quote any candid comments they might have made to hypothetical or confidential discussions in private conversation. FWIW, since you brought this up, you have been asked here on the list to have the researcher in question verify your paraphrasing and oversimplification of a very sensitive topic, some time back and have not yet done so. We are all still waiting. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2007 12:57:57 -0400 Reply-To: Stacy L Brockett Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Stacy L Brockett Subject: Can someone help rehive? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=response Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I've never done it before, and I have a feral hive in a tree than needs to be moved to a hive. I have 20 sheets of waxed Rite Cell foundation (new) I can trade, goat milk soaps, you can have any of the wax and such from the feral hive as well (though I'd like to tie a few brood combs into the new hive). I have the new hive here, but I don't have a smoker (don't know how THAT happened). New to beekeeping! Stacy L. Brockett SM3Pines Farm - Canandaigua, NY http://www.smthreepines.com ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2007 12:06:04 -0600 Reply-To: allen dick Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: allen dick Organization: Deep Thought Subject: Re: Some thoughts about Tracheal Mites MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=response Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Tracheal Mites are the forgotten mite. Why? We have "tracheal mite > resistant bees". Do we? I wrote recently that we do *not* have any assurance that we have TM resistant bees, at least ones that the supplier will certify as non-susceptible. Dr. Fischer wrote to say I was wrong. >> ...if your queen supplier sells you queens that are still susceptible to >> tracheal mites, find a new queen supplier. This is the 21st Century, and >> anyone selling tracheal-mite susceptible stock is either lazy or >> incompetent. I then said, >> tried that approach {asking queen suppliers about Tracheal Mite >> resistance] and, found that it is easier to accomplish at the keyboard >> than in the real world. And Dr. Fischer said, > Maybe it was that you had no intention of actually buying any queens. > Another problem may have been that you were not well-known to them. I replied, Hmmm. Why would you think that? At the time I was buying queens and also influencing quite a few purchases, and I have been on a first name basis with these people for many years. That's why I asked them. Maybe you can share the results of your queries in this regard that make you think differently? Maybe list some suppliers who have given you such assurances? You'll note that I asked Dr. Fischer to name a few suppliers who have given him reason to believe that they supply queens which are reliably TM resistant. I am still waiting for a reply. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2007 15:02:12 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "=?windows-1252?Q?J._Waggle?=" Subject: Re: Wild honeybees declared public nuisance - NOT Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit >Last week, Gov. Janet Napolitano signed into law a bill that adds wild >honeybees to the list of public nuisances... I thought we settled this. There are NO wild honeybee in America. Joe ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2007 13:25:32 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bob Harrison Subject: Re: Name Dropping (again) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello Allen & All, Allen said: >, was that the researcher in question was actually contacted by the moderation team for confirmation since the matter was controversial, and the researcher did not agree that you were quoting or interpreting his/her words correctly or in context. Maybe you are willing to let researchers off the hook but I am not. When they do a presentation in front of a group of beekeepers ( most I record ) then they are fair game to the beekeeping community. The problem is old friend is that NONE of the researchers like to see their name on BEE-L. Researchers are VERY careful what they publish but in presentations things are different. My hearing is fine. I would love to discuss what those researchers *meant*to say instead of what they did say on BEE_L but not going to happen. They might send a one-liner comment to defuse the situation but that's it! Years ago I made a statement about a researcher based on what several people told me was fact. When the researcher denied what was said I apologized (in archives). Not because what I posted was not true but because the people involved lost their nerve and would not stand up. My mistake was listening to others back then. Will never happen again. I report now only what I hear and tape. I am done discussing the issue with you on BEE-L. Have you ever wondered why those researchers you contacted NEVER have contacted me? I would love to hear from researchers anytime. Happy to discuss what they meant to say instead of what they said. I understand completely ( maybe better than you) why researchers do not for the most part want to do internet discussion. Bob -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2007 22:18:47 +0100 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Peter Edwards Subject: Re: Virus research (was Wild honeybees declared MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=response Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Peter Dillon wrote: > Hoffmann frames most definitely do swing in Langstroth boxes when the > frames and body is clean. I have no experience of Langstroth, but using Hoffman frames and a dummy board the fill most of the remaining space, I find that there is little room left for any significant movement, certainly not enough to cause any problems. I agree that a little propolis helps to hold things together. I was surprised that you find Hoffmans slower to work - I find them much quicker and better for the bees, as it is easy to move them just that small amount that makes it easy to get the first frame out without rolling bees. Best wishes Peter Edwards ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2007 19:37:12 -0600 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: allen dick Subject: Re: Name Dropping (again) In-Reply-To: <001c01c78442$8b21bae0$14bc59d8@BusyBeeAcres> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline > Maybe you are willing to let researchers off the hook but I am not. When they do a presentation in front of a group of beekeepers ( most I record ) then they are fair game to the beekeeping community. What does "fair game"mean to you? What most of us understand it to mean? > The problem is old friend is that NONE of the researchers like to see their > name on BEE-L. Au contraire, Jose Villa was delighted when his TM study when came up here, and came on BEE-L to add comments. Jerry B is here all the time, as is Medhat. There are quite a few orthers, too, but they keep their silence, because, sadly, some people consider them "fair game" and lack the manners to show them the respect and consideration they deserve. > Researchers are VERY careful what they publish but in presentations things > are different. My hearing is fine. I would love to discuss what those researchers *meant*to say instead of what they did say on BEE_L but not going to happen. Interesting that you know what they meant to say better than they do. > Years ago I made a statement about a researcher based on what several people told me was fact. When the researcher denied what was said I apologized (in archives). Not because what I posted was not true but because the people involved lost their nerve and would not stand up. That's your story. We all know better. You just got part of the story and jumped to conclusions. Most of us are careful not to report gossip and repeat hearsay, especially when it is damaging. > My mistake was listening to others back then. Gossip is dangerous. > Will never happen again. We have noticed that, but maybe you should listen a bit more carefully, and ponder what you hear, instead of believing you understand. > I report now only what I hear and tape. But cannot provide the proof when asked. You are too busy, it seems, but not too busy to drop more names and enlarge on what you think you heard. > I am done discussing the issue with you on BEE-L. Could it be because you have nothing backing you? Your bluff has been called, and we asked to se your hand, but you apparently folded. > Have you ever wondered why those researchers you contacted NEVER have contacted me? It is obvious to most of us. > I would love to hear from researchers anytime. Happy to discuss what they meant to say instead of what they said. You are now admitting to making things up (what they meant to say) and using their names? I'm not surprised. > I understand completely ( maybe better than you) why researchers do not for the most part want to do internet discussion. Researchers have their own private Internet discussion lists where everyone knows the rules. They do and have come here when they are confident that they will not be attacked or misinterpreted. Unfortunately, that is seldom. ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ****************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2007 20:58:12 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Peter Dillon Subject: Re: Virus research (was Wild honeybees declared In-Reply-To: <008e01c7845a$a6bbb130$cb9f6a58@office> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Peter Edwards wrote "I was surprised that you find Hoffmans slower to work...". I should make matters clearer: Hoffmann or for that matter any of the other type of frames that I have used all become slow to work with once they are gummed up with wax and propolis. Keeping frames and boxes clean is a luxury. One that takes many weeks to achieve. In the central regions of France, it was propolis that built up rapidly, essentially gluing the frames. The heat made it quite a problem to work with as most areas that were used to hold the frames were covered with well warmed "chewing gum". Here in the Manitoba Prairie, the canola flows result in frames becoming covered in wax (burr comb) with propolis helping out to slow things down - and after two harvests the frames require a total scrape down. So do the super boxes. Dummy boards: I do not use them. I understand why they are used in climates where flows are relatively slow and bee colonies are comparatively small compared to here. Such a board takes up valuable space, is a dead cost and another piece of material to deal with. Trying to keep up with several thousand supers and their frames is enough to deal with. As ever - beekeeping is local ! Regards, Peter ****************************************************** * Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm * ******************************************************