From MAILER-DAEMON Sat Feb 28 11:08:21 2009 Return-Path: <> X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.8 (2007-02-13) on industrial X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-87.1 required=2.4 tests=ADVANCE_FEE_1,AWL, MAILTO_TO_SPAM_ADDR,SPF_HELO_PASS,USER_IN_WHITELIST autolearn=disabled version=3.1.8 X-Original-To: adamf@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 B378549081 for ; Sat, 28 Feb 2009 11:03:38 -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 n1SG3Y6w017265 for ; Sat, 28 Feb 2009 11:03:38 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2009 11:03:35 -0500 From: "University at Albany LISTSERV Server (14.5)" Subject: File: "BEE-L LOG0806E" To: adamf@IBIBLIO.ORG Message-ID: Content-Length: 91263 Lines: 2006 ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2008 23:52:06 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bob Harrison Subject: Re: Germany and France Ban Pesticides- apistan In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello All, >if you listen closely to the Maryann Frazier video, if I recall, she said >the levels of self contamination have approached the LD 50 levels. also we often hear about synergistic potential of miticides and other external contaminants. And if you look at the number of samples tested versus the 2 and a half million hives in the U.S. (most with a couple boxes of 9-10 frames each) what very very small segment of the total are we looking at . Not even a statistic worth discussing. Maybe the researchers will find the "needle in the hay stack" but saying they have found the needle does not ring a bell with many. Those which pour over dated releases (and draw their own conclusions) only muddy the water further. The bee hive works as a unit. You take a bee and place by itself in a jar with everything the bee needs to survive and the bee dies ( personal experiments). The commercial beekeeper understands the unit. The living bee hive unit (which commercial beeks work with daily) is the place to find answers to problems. Not the dead hives which tell little. Turning around a hive with problems is the answer commercial beeks seek not documenting what killed the hive. Many of us believe researchers for the most part do not understand what the beekeeping industry needs! A handful of us are working very hard to take hives dwindling and turn those hives around and doing so with success many times. Researchers are coming for the most part and saying. Bees gone must be CCD. If their area is virus then they say the problem is virus related. If your their is pesticides then the problem is pesticides. Then they all chime in and say send money and we will solve the problem in our air-conditioned labs. I spent over 12 hours the last two days each day in the bee yards. My eyes are burning from the sweat ( I wear a sweat band). I understand with the internet you can read all the published works on the subject but the material is dated and comes from limited actual contact with the problem. The recent article in the Elks magazine on CCD speaks of migratory beekeeping but shows around 7-8 hives on cement blocks. Although today I run a small operation (with hired help) I advise many of the the big guys. The few large beekeepers left live in a fast pace world. example: A friend with over 10,000 migratory hives can load over 500 hives in forty five minutes. Using two loaders he can cut the time in half. Multiply the CCD team by 100 and place in commercial operations with lab backup and I think the bee industry will get better in a hurry. The present method is in my opinion doomed to failure. Bill Wilson spent years trying to solve disappearing disease without success. The ABC-XYZ book devotes a half page to the subject.. Rothenbuler came to Bill's rescue and looked into the issue and concluded that disappearing disease was caused by honey bee genetics. Rothenbuler bee knowledge is legendary but none of the current team talks of genetics being an issue. Many say stop the Australian bees coming in but the guys with the best bees I have looked at are now running Australian bees and raising queens from the stock. The beeks running the Russians are not seeing the problems the rest of the industry is. Genetics? Did Rothenbuler figure out disappearing disease but his revelation fell on deaf ears? Has the import of Australian & Russian genetics confirmed what many have said for years we have got a genetic problem in U.S. bees? Many in Texas might argue even the AHB genetics has helped their stock. Quote from pg. 203 of the new ABC XYZ : "The name "disappearing disease" has been used to describe one such condition. In all of the cases bees died or disappeared in great numbers, and beekeepers sought to understand why this took place. it is important to recognize there are good beekeepers, careless beekeepers, nutritional deficiencies, toxic pollens and nectars, poor locations, genetic abnormalities, combinations of diseases and a host of things that can go wrong in honey bee colonies" I don't know for sure the person which wrote the above for the book but I suspect Dr. Shiminuki. Everyday the public asks: "have they found the cause of the bees dying yet" ( meaning a single cause to explain the die-off) They still ask about the cell phones. Off to bed now as another busy day tomorrow. Yes I would like to sit home and barbecue or maybe go fishing but the bees need tending and the rains have stopped for hopefully a few days. bob **************************************************** * General Information About BEE-L is available at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm * **************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2008 11:41:27 GMT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "waldig@netzero.com" Subject: Re: Beyond the Honeybee Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit >>And the sucky part ,half of the honey I produce is bakery,which sucks in price... The so-called bakery (I hate labels) honey may go mainstream, if the light stuff will be in short supply, at good prices. Waldemar **************************************************** * General Information About BEE-L is available at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm * **************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2008 11:46:10 GMT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "waldig@netzero.com" Subject: Re: Germany and France Ban Pesticides Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit >>"Pesticides can't be an explanation for why organic beekeepers are losing their colonies" It should be *easy* then to determine why organics have problems. Do they know why? Waldemar **************************************************** * General Information About BEE-L is available at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm * **************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2008 12:41:39 GMT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "deknow@netzero.net" Subject: Re: Germany and France Ban Pesticides Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit -- James Fischer wrote: >"Pesticides can't be an explanation for why organic beekeepers are losing their colonies" - Dr. May Berenbaum hi jim, i have no idea who joe is...but this claim that since organic beekeepers have lost colonies, than pesticides (or beekeeper applied treatments) can't be the cause keeps getting repeated. i can't speak for all organic operations, but i did spend 2 weeks going through virtually all of dee lusby's hives with her, and with my wife in april. a few of her yards were affected, and samples were taken. it would be interesting to see the results from testing these samples (for chemical contamination, and for disease organisms)...but as far as i know, testing has not yet been performed. imho, the industry should make sure that jerry b. has funding to do this testing, as the samples were taken last fall, and dee is in a rather unique situation...the results could be very telling. what i can say about what we saw in this particular case is this: 1. only yards that are in flying distance of other beekeepers hives (migratory, treated, and non-organic) were affected. 2. dee observed the bees cleaning everything out of the hives before they disapeared...spitting pollen out the front entrance, and cleaning out the cells. ...we can't make any conclusions from these observations, but it does bring up some questions. 1. is it possible that weaker bees being treated in the vicinity were being robbed out by these organic bees? 2. could they have picked up hive treatments and/or pathogens via this route? 3. could these organic bees have gone down nearby mine shafts and picked up contaminated water (it's my understanding that these old silver mines have reasonable levels of arsenic in the water)? it seems to me that there is more than one route to hive contamination...directly applied chemicals from the beekeeper is only one possibility. it seems to me that no matter who you cite, that it is a rather large leap to assume that if the beekeeper isn't putting chemicals in the hive that there cannot be chemicals in the hive. it seems to me that dee's operation is an important resource in the hunt for a cause...as her hives have never been treated, and some of her yards were affected, and most were not. especially given that the ccd team did take samples from these yards, it seems imperative to have these samples tested, and the results made available (at least to the beekeeper). without testing samples, at least in this particular case (which is the only one i know about in detail), one cannot claim that chemical contamination (from beekeeper applied chemicals or from agricultural/environmental chemicals ) cannot be ruled out...there are plenty of possibilities that do include chemical contamination, and ruling this out based on what amounts to a "thought experement" (that if the beekeeper is organic, than there is no chemical contamination) is premature. deknow **************************************************** * General Information About BEE-L is available at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm * **************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2008 09:42:01 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "Peter L. Borst" Subject: Super Weeds MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit There are countless definitions of weeds, ranging from the hardheaded one necessarily observed by farmers, that a weed is any plant that interferes with profit, to the aesthetic (a popular gardener's definition of a weed is "a plant out of place"), to Ralph Waldo Emerson's sanctimonious assertion that a weed is "a plant whose virtues have not yet been discovered." Lewis Ziska, a lanky, sandy-haired weed ecologist with the Agriculture Research Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, speaks of weeds with admiration as well as apprehension, and even with hope. Ziska explores what global climate change could do to mankind's relationship with weeds. He took soil from an organic farm, which already contained seeds of 35 common weeds, and with it created uniform beds at each of the sites, urban, suburban and rural, so that the growing medium and weed population would be the same throughout. What happened over the next five growing seasons surprised even him. Not only did the weeds grow much larger in hotter, CO2-enriched plots — a weed called lambs-quarters, or Chenopodium album, grew to an impressive 6 to 8 feet on the farm but to a frightening 10 to 12 feet in the city — but the urban, futuristic weeds also produced more pollen. Five years after the creation of the plots, the biggest ailanthus in the rural test site measured about five feet tall. The city site boasted a 20-footer. He traces his interest in weeds to an epiphany during his undergraduate years at the University of California at Riverside: noticing a weed springing up through a crack in the Southern California pavement, he was suddenly struck with wonder at any organism that could flourish in such a hot, dry, hostile environment. That may become an essential talent, it occurred to Ziska, given the way our planet is going. When he grew ragweed plants in an atmosphere with 600 p.p.m. of CO2 (the level projected for the end of this century in that same climate-change panel "B2 scenario"), they produced twice as much pollen as plants grown in an atmosphere with 370 p.p.m. (the ambient level in the year 1998). This is bad news for allergy sufferers, especially since the pollen harvested from the CO2-enriched chamber proved far richer in the protein that causes the allergic reaction. In this new world that we have made, weeds, our old adversaries, could be not only tools but mentors. At which point, if Ralph Waldo Emerson is to be believed, weeds by definition will cease to exist. -- Can Weeds Help Solve the Climate Crisis? http://tinyurl.com/5sj4hj **************************************************** * General Information About BEE-L is available at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm * **************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2008 03:53:36 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: C Hooper Subject: Video: Demonstration of the Use of Active Manuka Honey for Wound Care Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Video: Demonstration of the Use of Active Manuka Honey for Wound Care http://apitherapy.blogspot.com/2008/06/video-use-of-active-manuka-honey-for.html **************************************************** * General Information About BEE-L is available at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm * **************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2008 14:12:00 GMT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "deknow@netzero.net" Subject: Re: Germany and France Ban Pesticides- apistan Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit bob, i think this was a great post, and i agree with most of it....but the passage below: -- Bob Harrison wrote: >And if you look at the number of samples tested versus the 2 and a half million hives in the U.S. (most with a couple boxes of 9-10 frames each) what very very small segment of the total are we looking at . Not even a statistic worth discussing. ...i do agree that this is an embarrassingly small sample (as are most bee studies as far as i can tell), but if i tested ground beef from only 5 suppliers nationwide, and they _all_ came up with "significant" e.coli contamination, i would consider that cause for concern...same with this foundation data....but of course, who (with deep enough pockets to fund such a study) would benefit from doing a comprehensive study on foundation contamination? who would fund such a study? deknow **************************************************** * General Information About BEE-L is available at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm * **************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2008 10:50:38 -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: Germany and France Ban Pesticides- apistan Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Bob Harrison wrote: >And if you look at the number of samples tested versus the 2 and a half >million hives in the U.S. (most with a couple boxes of 9-10 frames each) >what very very small segment of the total are we looking at . Not even a >statistic worth discussing. Nobody knows how many colonies there are in the US. The 2.4 million figure you hear over and over again is the pre-CCD count. Most beekeepers have lost bees, most have repopulated hives, but nobody really knows. How many here have the same number of colonies they did three years ago? Or rather, how many good colonies do you have? A hundred good ones is not the same as a hundred duds or even a hundred nucs. Statistics. I know next to nothing about this, but I would be very reluctant to say that the sample size was too small to be significant, without studying the topic a bit. The hives studied "were mainly from migratory operations, but also included smaller, non-migratory operations and the PSU research apiaries, with operations represented from across the country". THEY felt they had a pretty representative sample. How many hives would you need to check from a given operation to get a basic picture of the health of the outfit? Suppose someone has 1000 hives. Couldn't I get a pretty good sense of how he is doing by going to several of his yards, and look at a few good ones and a few bad ones at each? When you check your yards to see if they need supering, do you need to open up every single one? Or just a few? pb **************************************************** * General Information About BEE-L is available at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm * **************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2008 09:55:01 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bob Harrison Subject: Re: Germany and France Ban Pesticides- apistan In-Reply-To: <20080629.101200.27651.2@webmail13.dca.untd.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > (with deep enough pockets to fund such a study) would benefit from doing a > comprehensive study on foundation contamination? who would fund such a > study? The U.S. taxpayers are concerned about the loss of honey bees. Yet only a small amount of funds are being applied to the problem and the Sec. of Ag. seems to think the problem is not a big deal. Yet: Tax payers were hoodwinked into a 160 million dollar ear mark tagged on the farm bill for salmon fisherman by Nancy P. ( congress). Those fishermen may need funding but their problem lies in over fishing and brought on themselves and the hand writing has been on the wall for years. They still have got their boats and can move to other fish to fish for. Getting pay of the amount of their best year of the last five while trying to figure out what their next move is is a bit out of the ordinary in my opinion. Beeks can't even get the price of a package with CCD like the received in the 70's when the USDA-ARS documented a dead hive killed from pesticides. Beeks are as Dave Hackenberg said "the red haired step Childs of agriculture". When the bee industry is gone then its gone. I am late going to the bee yards because partly of two beeks losing hives to CCD type symptoms. Both in areas of teaseling imadicloprid treated seed corn. Coincidence? I surely do not know. The people of the U.S. can spend the money to save the bees or simply ignore the issue until the commercial industry is gone. Maybe we can get China to send bees to pollinate along with honey. Four million is not enough money to make a serious attempt at fixing the bee industry. If half what the salmon fishermen received was earmarked to save the bees than an appropriate response by congress would have been made. I have nothing against the salmon fisherman and glad they are receiving help but think congress has got its priorities mixed up. bob **************************************************** * General Information About BEE-L is available at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm * **************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2008 18:28:41 +0200 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Juanse Barros Subject: Re: Germany and France Ban Pesticides- apistan In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Peter It depends on what you are looking for. In Chile we have our first outbreak of american foulbrood two years ago. If you went for a 10% sampling of yards you easily couldn`t find any cells with simptoms, so we have to increase the sampling to 20% to be 95% confident that a yard was free of AFB. I guess Bob is rigth in the case of CCD, since you do not know what you are looking at, one would have to increase the size of the sample. -- Juanse Barros J. APIZUR S.A. Carrera 695 Gorbea - CHILE +56-45-271693 08-3613310 http://apiaraucania.blogspot.com/ juanseapi@gmail.com **************************************************** * General Information About BEE-L is available at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm * **************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2008 18:34:30 +0200 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Juanse Barros Subject: Re: Germany and France Ban Pesticides- apistan In-Reply-To: <7D9F1D5A0515431ABBCBE5CB8513F99D@bobPC> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Four million is not enough money to make a serious attempt at fixing the bee industry. Indeed is not. Australian being a smaller economy than USA is booking $50 millions A YEAR for their beeindustry http://www.aph.gov.au/house/news/news_stories/news_bees_report08.htm -- Juanse Barros J. APIZUR S.A. Carrera 695 Gorbea - CHILE +56-45-271693 08-3613310 http://apiaraucania.blogspot.com/ juanseapi@gmail.com **************************************************** * General Information About BEE-L is available at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm * **************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2008 13:29:58 -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: Germany and France Ban Pesticides- apistan Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Bob Harrison wrote: >Those fishermen may >need funding but their problem lies in over fishing and brought on >themselves and the hand writing has been on the wall for years. Hmm. Sounds like what a lot of people are saying about the bee industry. pb **************************************************** * General Information About BEE-L is available at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm * **************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2008 13:59:13 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bob Harrison Subject: Re: Germany and France Ban Pesticides- apistan In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="UTF-8"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >Nobody knows how many colonies there are in the US. The 2.4 million figure you hear over and over again is the pre-CCD count. Actually most commercial beeks consider the number higher because large operators usually claim less hives than they actually run especially in areas where bee hives are taxed or charged a pre hive fee. You may be surprised to know there are commercial beeks which have never filled out a survey or even attended a bee meeting. I have watched as commercial beeks with thousands of hives have tossed USDA surveys in the trash. Also numbers are changing constantly so many large beeks simply put the same number down on surveys year after year. >Statistics. I know next to nothing about this, but I would be very >reluctant to say that the sample size was too small to be significant, without studying the topic a bit. How could the number of hives sampled be even a percent of the total? Even a percent of a percent. >THEY felt they had a pretty representative sample. Despite what THEY think many of us feel THEY barely scratched the surface and are trying to somehow make those which did not get sampled believe that what they found in the small amount of the CCD samples taken and tested provides information on what is going on in our yards. Peter asks my methods: >How many hives would you need to check from a given operation to get a >basic picture of the health of the outfit? As many as is needed. As often as needed. >Suppose someone has 1000 hives. Couldn't I get a pretty good sense of how he is doing by going to several of his yards, and look at a few good ones and a few bad ones at each? No! A commercial beek with a 1000 hives in Missouri (24 hives on 6 plts in a yard) would run around 40 yards. Would 3 yards tell the story with today's problems? I agree most bee inspectors only visit a couple yards and look at a few hives. In order to check a hive you need to at the very least pop the lid. The trained eye can tell quite a bit after a light smoke across the top. Looking at the entrance is better than nothing but popping the lid tells the most about a hive. After all these years I can pick a "dink" out quickly with the lid off. I can smell AFB. See the brood most times and the honey/pollen ring from the top. When our bees return from almonds our inspector looks through every hive. He takes as much time as needed and reports hives without queens and and disease problems he sees. Random testing is less work for the bee inspector but has a margin of error. When problems I arise I pull the lids on the whole yard. Go into the ones needed looked at . >When you check your yards to see if they need supering, do you need to open up every single one? Or just a few? I pull a frame of brood from each hive to make sure queen right and no problems before placing a super. I then super as needed until the flow is over. If the hive is not filling supers I dig into the brood nest to see what is going on. Picked up a couple drone layer boxes about an hour ago. My brood comb is excellent and replacement cost on a couple boxes of wax moth trashed comb is worth the effort. Much easier to spend the time to pick up the comb and place in a safe place. A couple brood boxes without bees will become trash this time of year by wax moth so I take the time to pull brood comb boxes which has no bees to protect it. bob **************************************************** * General Information About BEE-L is available at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm * **************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2008 16:26:53 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Brian Fredericksen Subject: Re: Germany and France Ban Pesticides- apistan Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit So we can believe a very experienced beekeeper that says the sample size is inadequate or assume that some of the best bee researchers in the world know a thing or two about sampling theory. I worked in an R&D lab for a large Fortune 500 company and we routinely consulted with our statistics staff who did nothing but help scientists design experiments. the whole idea of sampling is understanding the population, in this case not the whole hive population in the USA but rather get a cross sampling of combs from CCD operations was my recollection of Maryanns data. Since we do not have the final scientific paper in front of us we really cannot comment on what hypothesis Maryann was working from when she designed her sample size. In the end a very explicit set of conclusions can be made from a sample. I very very much doubt that Maryann was trying to make a statement about how contaminated the roughly 2.4 million hives are in the USA, so I feel Bob's comment completely misses the mark. A recent rough sampling of beekeepers was done in Bee Culture back in the April issue, I think. I posted info on that a while back. Basically 65% of respondents said they use products like Apistan and Checkmite. How accurate was that sample? Probably not too representive as it only polled a limited number of people who they contact for the honey reports. But its a piece of data that one can draw conclusions about miticide use in the USA. In the upper midwest the enforcement actions documented in Nodak and Mn speak for the reality that shop rags and heavy use of miticides that contaminate comb is rampant. Talk to beekeepers and researchers at regional meetings etc and you'd have to be out of touch to think that comb contamination is not reality folks. The denial is kind of like this: today I went strawberry picking across the road here. The berry farmer said this it the last year as his knees are bad. He's 75 pounds overweight and 60 years old. He is planning to get his knees replaced but no mention of taking some poundage off. So are his bad knees a result of the berry farming or hauling around 75 pounds of extra baggage? Likewise regardless of what virus or version of nosema is causing CCD, is CCD caused by the virus or are the bees more susceptible to the virus and nosema etc (CCD) because they are shuttled around to feed on monocrops, over medicated and living in a contaminated hive? now we will have someone say oh but we have organic keepers with CCD. Whatever. it does not take a Phd to figure out that the vast number of CCD affected hives are coming from a rather small number of beekeepers - NOT the other way around - with most of the CCD hives coming from many many beekeepers. the widespread use of fluvalinate and coumaphos that we now know damages the reproductive health of honeybees and have a long residual life span in combs is inexcuseable. while some segment of the industry awaits the Silver CCD bullet and the Bayer Tooth Fairy to bring home the bacon, the rest of us can see through the denial and get a clear idea of what needs to change. the sooner the industry take some responsibility for the mess we are in the sooner we can move forward. **************************************************** * General Information About BEE-L is available at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm * **************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2008 17:00:54 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: =?windows-1252?Q?Steve_Noble?= Subject: Government support: Who needs it? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Bob Harrison writes in Re: Germany and France Ban Pesticides- apistan : “Those fishermen may need funding but their problem lies in over fishing and brought on themselves and the hand writing has been on the wall for years.” Bob, with regard to the west coast salmon fishery, if you look carefully I think you will find that environmental factors have had the biggest negative impact. In the absence of these factors, such as dams, development and poor logging practices, you have to wonder how much of a problem the current level of fishing would have caused. Well maybe not the current level because in Oregon and California that is currently zero. Perhaps the reason the federal government feels obliged to support commercial fishermen is because of the devastating impact on fish runs federal dams have had. See 60 Minutes report on Salmon recovery efforts here: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/06/20/60minutes/main4198581.shtml. “They still have got their boats and can move to other fish to fish for.” Not exactly true, Bob. Some of them do, some of them don’t. Some of them can, some of them can’t. I agree with you that honeybee research is under funded. I don’t think pointing the finger at the commercial fishing industry is going to help though. What’s going to help is beekeepers getting it together like the commercial fishermen have gotten it together and lobbying congress from a much more powerful position. You would know more about the politics of the beekeeping industry than most of us, Bob, certainly me, but my impression is that the industry is not as organized as it needs to be to get things done. The squeaky wheel gets the grease, right? If commercial beeks were really organized they would have been able to take better advantage of all this publicity and public sympathy that CCD has generated. But they are not that organized and in fact they seem to tend more toward the loner category, and from what I can tell they tend to hide their problems from one another, which seems really counter productive to me. I may be wrong about this, and I welcome correction if I am. Steve Noble **************************************************** * General Information About BEE-L is available at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm * **************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2008 17:40:28 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Peter_de_Bruyn_Kops?= Subject: Re: Super Weeds Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Regarding Peter Borst's post that some 'weeds' will grow more and produce more pollen at higher levels of atmospheric CO2. The let us all dream about the these weeds being more productive: dandelion autumn olive crab apple wild rose black locust brambles/wild berries honeysuckle milkweed clovers and vetches sumac purple loosestrife goldenrod Japanese knotweed **************************************************** * General Information About BEE-L is available at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm * **************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2008 18:17:07 -0400 Reply-To: bee-quick@bee-quick.com Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: James Fischer Subject: Re: Germany and France Ban Pesticides- apistan MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Peter said: >> Most conscientious beekeepers already abandoned the use of >> fluvalinate and coumaphos, even before they were implicated >> by Penn State. MaryAnn Fraiser's findings clearly conflict with any claim that fluvalinate and coumaphos have been "abandoned". Both are being found at levels that indicate ongoing use. And while I agree that coumaphos was a very desperate measure, a bad idea from the get-go, the actual conscientious beekeepers have been able to use Apistan without problems all along, and still can. The "resistant" mites were created by overdoses and misuse of off-label close equivalents of Apistan, not by proper use of the Apistan strips themselves. It remains to be proven if resistance to both Apistan and coumaphos can be caused by "per-label" use of CheckMite, but anecdotal reports are consistent in condemning the CheckMite. Peter also said: >> You will note that they did NOT detect formic acid, >> oxalic acid or thymol products. and Brian responded: > thats one of the reasons why they are called soft treatments > because they don't contaminate the comb. Sorry, Brian - that's wishful thinking. The reason that MaryAnn did not find any of the "soft treatment" residues is that there has been only very limited uptake among the commercial beekeepers that were sampled. Anyone with a Gas Chromatograph or HPLC/MS can look at "before" and "after" samples of honey, comb, and pollen and show the residue left by any or all of Formic, Oxalic, and/or Thymol. Yes, "formic acid is a natural component of honey", but the levels found after treatment are waaay off the scale. Yes, it may volatilize out of at least honey after some period of time, and certainly will volatilize out of honey that is even warmed by the ambient temperature of a warm day, but wax is not going to give up as easily, and pollen will tell the tale for a long time, moreso if mixed with honey and stuffed into a cell. Oxalic? Easy to find. Yes, it is nice that it is not a pesticide, but don't fool yourself - these days a high-school student can look at honey samples and make a very accurate guess as to whether the beekeeper drives a diesel or a gasoline vehicle. And thymol? THYMOL? That is perhaps the most persistent residue of all possible treatments. Some folks can smell it days after the treatment has been removed from the hives. Lord only knows if it ever outgases from anything. Again, overdoses are the main culprit here, but people tried hard to make thymol work as well as Apistan worked, and kept cranking up the dosage. Big mistake. Peter also said: >> Short answer: Residues of chemicals exist in all food, including >> so-called organic food. Yeah, but the general public (naive, as usual) don't want to hear this, and there is a very unethical (or under-educated) group of self-proclaimed experts who want to claim that one can be "organic" simply by not treating diseased hives, by treating with the equivalent of crystals and happy thoughts, or by treating the "soft" treatment options. Those of us who teach novice courses are running into a new breed of novice, one that monopolizes the classroom portion of the courses by arguing with the instructor, the course materials, and the basic premise of animal husbandry as applied to bees. These instant know-it-alls are finding lots of fodder on the internet on web pages and in discussion groups created by a group of (George Imrie Memorial) "Bee-Havers" but these folks are not mere "Havers of Bees", they are overt "Miss-Bee-Havers", as they openly misbehave. Part of the allure of these wacky beekeeping practices is the siren song of "natural", "organic", and (for the true cultists) even "biodynamic". These willfully ignorant approaches to bee behavior and biology are the Dianetics of beekeeping, and those who are drawn into these "alternative" approaches are setting up and mismanaging swarm factories in the form of top-bar hives. Aaron recently forwarded me a newsletter from one of these self=proclaimed "teachers", which was headlined: "A Celebration of Swarm Season Swarm Season is a good indication of honeybee health in our communities... The original Queen will leave in a primary swarm once the new Queens begin to pipe in their cells, announcing their emergence and the beginning of a new phase in the colonys' life. This good swarm season celebrates the vibrancy of honeybee colonies in our area..." So, not only do we have hives with problems that go undetected due to a lack of proper training in disease and pest diagnosis and treatment, but we also have those same colonies throwing off tiny swarm after tiny swarm, with their bee-haver owners being told to "Celebrate" the swarms. I have no idea how to de-program these misinformed people and get them away from the ignorant dogma of the cults they have been sucked into, but I welcome input from others who have run into these willfully incorrigible so-called "beekeepers" and their so-called "teachers". Their numbers are growing. Just as anyone who would want to learn gardening would of course want to learn "organic" gardening, it seems a common impulse to embrace the idea of "organic" beekeeping without understanding what the word might actually mean in regard to honey, pollen, wax, and bees in this world of parts-per-trillion and complete transparency. **************************************************** * General Information About BEE-L is available at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm * **************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2008 18:27:08 -0400 Reply-To: bee-quick@bee-quick.com Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: James Fischer Subject: Re: the life span of the honey bee MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit There is a much more simple equation. In physics, the simplest equations tend to turn out to be the most powerful, so perhaps beauty is truth and truth beauty. My contention is that the lifespan of the honey bee is not counted out in days, but in miles flown. With the rule of thumb above, one suddenly needs no complex explanations for the longer lifespans of "winter bees". As I recall, there is a certain chemical that honey bees cannot make more of, and when this chemical is exhausted, they are unable to use their flight muscles. I read this somewhere, and can't recall the name of the chemical or the name of the book or paper. **************************************************** * General Information About BEE-L is available at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm * **************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2008 19:32:37 -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: Germany and France Ban Pesticides- apistan Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Brian wrote: >Basically 65% of respondents said they use products like Apistan and Checkmite. How accurate was that sample? Probably not too representative as it only polled a limited number of people who they contact for the honey reports. And yet, if you were to ask me, from what I see daily I'd say about 2/3 use the strips and about 1/3 use other stuff. By the way, in case it is not clear, I am in full agreement with Brian here, that the time for Apistan or Checkmite has passed. Oh, and I see a small percentage of hives where they have Apistan AND Checkmite AND they aren't ever taken out. pb **************************************************** * General Information About BEE-L is available at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm * **************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2008 15:52:59 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: randy oliver Subject: Suck-a-Bee Plans MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Hi All, I have received numerous requests for plans for a portable bee vacuum for nosema sampling. I have completed pictorial plans, which will be published next month in the American Bee Journal. Thanks to the generosity of Editor Joe Graham, I have also posted to www.scientificbeekeeping.com in the Nosema section. Randy Oliver **************************************************** * General Information About BEE-L is available at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm * **************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2008 19:49:09 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: randy oliver Subject: Re: the life span of the honey bee In-Reply-To: <200806292227.m5TMRB6p011828@smtp3.albany.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline > My contention is that the lifespan of the honey bee > is not counted out in days, but in miles flown. I agree with Jim, or more accurately, perhaps, number of wingbeats. This subject is covered in depth in two articles that I wrote at http://www.scientificbeekeeping.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=59 Randy Oliver **************************************************** * General Information About BEE-L is available at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm * **************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2008 23:16:21 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bob Harrison Subject: Re: Government support: Who needs it? In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="Windows-1252"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello Steve & All, I have not got a problem with the Salmon fishermen and only use the situation to show a problem with congress and its priorities. 160 million ear marked on a tough farm bill in which we fought hard to get 4 million dollars. All articles done on CCD point out what our world would be like without pollination. What is the amount of salmon a person can safely consume in a week? One pound due to mercury? I think living without salmon to eat would not hurt a lot. I prefer a KC strip when given a choice! Maybe Hackenberg should get paid his revenue for his best year out of five years before CCD? Many of those watching the farm bill had no idea Nancy P. was planning on doing the ear mark. its a done deal now but the salmon fishermen received everything they wanted and the beekeepers got zero. Researchers are happy with the farm bill as they received most of what they asked for except for the 20 million dollar building devoted for the study of CCD ( with statues of the CCD major players out front) the senator from Florida proposed in his bill. i guess the almond growers will pick up the slack as I hear Joe Traynor is setting almond fees for 2009 at $200 for the best hives. Hackenberg is charging growers double for certain crops. My advice to commercial beeks is to pass the costs of CCD on to consumers of honey and growers. Again I say I am glad the salmon fishermen got the help they need. usually government help is not so generous. We used to be able to forfeit honey on CCC loan and the loan was interest free. Not now. In many cases you can get cheaper interest rates from a bank than the CCC. despite public opinion on our side and most people wanting to "save the bees" commercial beeks have little clout in Washington. A popular slogan from the past was " save the whales" yet whales are still being killed for dog food! Man has made a big deal of the most intelligent species has the largest brain. If so then the whale should be a higher intelligence than man. Hmm. bob **************************************************** * General Information About BEE-L is available at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm * **************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 08:46:05 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Aaron Morris Subject: Study Identifies 52 Royal Jelly Proteins MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit This message was originally submitted by editor@MEDIBEE.COM to the BEE-L list at LISTSERV.ALBANY.EDU. Monday, June 30, 2008 Study Identifies 52 Royal Jelly Proteins Comprehensive Royal Jelly (RJ) Proteomics Using One- and Two-Dimensional Proteomics Platforms Reveals Novel RJ Proteins and Potential Phospho/Glycoproteins J. Proteome Res, June 26, 2008 Abstract: Royal jelly (RJ) is an exclusive food for queen honey bee (Apis mellifera L.) that is synthesized and secreted by young worker bees. RJ is also widely used in medical products, cosmetics, and as health foods. However, little is known about RJ functionality and the total protein components, although recent research is attempting to unravel the RJ proteome. We have embarked on a detailed investigation of the RJ proteome, using a modified protein extraction protocol and two complementary proteomics approaches, one- and two-dimensional gel electrophoresis (1-DGE and 2-DGE) in conjunction with tandem mass spectrometry... As the RJ from 48 (or sometimes 72) is commercially used, we selected the RJ sample at 48 h for detailed analysis with the first collection. 1-DGE identified 90 and 15 proteins from the first and second selection, respectively; in total, 47 nonredundant proteins were identified. 2-DGE identified 105 proteins comprising 14 nonredundant proteins. In total, 52 nonredundant proteins were identified in this study, and other than the major royal jelly protein family and some other previously identified proteins, 42 novel proteins were identified... **************************************************** * General Information About BEE-L is available at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm * **************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2008 20:47:24 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: randy oliver Subject: Re: Government support: Who needs it? In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline >but my > impression is that the industry is not as organized as it needs to be to > get things done. The squeaky wheel gets the grease, right? If commercial > beeks were really organized they would have been able to take better > advantage of all this publicity and public sympathy that CCD has > generated. You hit the nail on the head, Steve. My correspondent in DC confirms that beekeepers have not presented a good face to Congress. If we were able to organize and present a united face, Congress is ripe to help us. Randy Oliver **************************************************** * General Information About BEE-L is available at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm * **************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 07:56:53 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "Peter L. Borst" Subject: Re: A Complex Buzz MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Jim: > Rather than Israeli Acute Paralysis Virus, "IAPV", we can call it: "Ian Lipkin's Pet Virus", "ILPV" And where did Ian go, anyway? He certainly found the exit quickly once the Evans/Chen data hit the fan. Excerpts from "Pathogen Discovery" (April 2008, by W. Ian Lipkin): ''What has become clear to you since we last met?'' -- Benjamin Franklin The rate of discovery of new microbes, and of new associations of microbes with health and disease, has accelerated over the past two decades. Many factors are implicated. New pathogens have truly emerged with the globalization of travel and trade, changes in demographics and land use, susceptibility to opportunistic organisms associated with immunosuppression, and climate change. Proof of Causation Finding an organism is only one step in establishing a causal relationship or understanding how it causes disease. Many have wrestled with the challenge of codifying the process of proving causation. Based on the germ theory of disease of Pasteur, Koch and Loeffler proposed criteria that define a causative relationship between agent and disease: the agent is present in every case of a disease; it is specific for that disease; and it can be propagated in culture and inoculated into a naive host to cause the same disease. Pathways to Pathogenesis Implication of an agent is easiest if it is present in high concentration at the site of disease when the disease is manifest. Examples include poliomyelitis, where death of infected motor neurons results in paralysis, or infectious diarrheas where the causative agent (bacterium, virus, or parasite) is found in the gastrointestinal tract. More complex examples of intoxication occur in botulism or tetanus, where replication in the subcutaneous tissues or the gastrointestinal tract results in release of toxins that have remote effects on the nervous system. Strategies for Pathogen Discovery Over the past two decades, subtractive cloning, expression cloning, consensus PCR, and high throughput pyrosequencing resulted in identification of novel agents associated with both acute and chronic diseases, including Borna disease virus, hepatitis C virus, Sin Nombre virus, HHV-6, HHV-8, Bartonella henselae, Tropheryma whippelii, Nipah virus, SARS coronavirus, and Israel Acute Paralysis virus. * * * Comments: Science has not gotten simpler with more knowledge and understanding. Combined with the effects of globalization, greater knowledge has often led to lesser understanding. Or, perhaps what we thought we knew and understood has simply been overturned. Cause and effect are almost never as clear as in the movies. If you watch the gunman shoot the bad guy, you see the gun in his hand and then the bullet hit the bad guy. You forget it's all staged and the two images could have been filmed in different locations on different days. So, what looks at first glance to be linked, with a little further knowledge may turn out not to be. And vice versa. As Lipkin says, "replication in gastrointestinal tract results in release of toxins that have remote effects on the nervous system." Many of us still remember the first Shuttle disaster in 1986. Although they were able to pinpoint the exact moment when the mission went bad, it was found that there were dozens or hundreds of mission critical flaws in the system, which had been passed over in the effort to get the ship into the air. "The unrelenting pressure to meet the demands of an accelerating flight schedule might have been adequately handled by NASA if it had insisted upon the exactingly thorough procedures that were its hallmark during the Apollo program. Arnold Aldrich, the Space Shuttle program manager, described five different communication or organization failures that affected the launch decision on January 28, 1986. Four of those failures relate directly to faults within the safety program." The point is, cause and effect are often unclear and in fact there may be multiple, interlinked factors that simply cannot be addressed individually. One problem with the human mind is it tends to proceed in a trouble shooting mode. Fix this or that and get back up and running. Like my first car, it could get me there most of the time -- but I had to pump the brakes, finesse the gas pedal and clutch, and fuss with the point gap all the time. It was never what I would now call "a good car". Health is not the absence of disease, or something that can be assembled from parts. It is the ideal state of the organism, and a honey bee colony has an optimal condition too. * * * Ian writes: "The most advanced technology will fail if samples are degraded, and data will be uninterpretable without accurate information on clinical course and sample provenance; thus, emphasis should be placed on engaging clinicians as equal partners." This means that the field work is every bit as important as the lab work, and the results can be made completely useless the moment a sample is taken. Oh, and the equal partners thing goes both ways. pb **************************************************** * General Information About BEE-L is available at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm * **************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 08:52:05 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Aaron Morris Subject: NYTimes.com opinion piece from today: Bee by Bee MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/30/opinion/30farley.html?ex=1215489600&en =075186b8fc2cc0d3&ei=5070&emc=eta1 **************************************************** * General Information About BEE-L is available at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm * **************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 09:01:03 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bill Truesdell Subject: Re: Super Weeds In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Peter L. Borst wrote: > Not only did the weeds grow much larger in hotter, CO2-enriched plots > — a weed called lambs-quarters, or Chenopodium album, grew to an > impressive 6 to 8 feet on the farm but to a frightening 10 to 12 feet > in the city — Interesting that the name "Lambs Quarters" was given to Pig Weed (by Ewell Gibbons) to enhance its desirability as an edible weed. Our new church has a parking area with several plantable islands that recently had to be torn up and re-sodded. Pig Weed has grown in abundance. I showed some how to harvest it. Also ate some my self to show it is actually quite good. Now they are wondering how to make money from it to pay off the mortgage :) I am with Emerson. Bill Truesdell Bath, Maine **************************************************** * General Information About BEE-L is available at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm * **************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 09:37:36 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bill Truesdell Subject: Re: Germany and France Ban Pesticides- apistan In-Reply-To: <200806292217.m5TMHAVo009622@smtp3.albany.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit James Fischer wrote: > I have no idea how to de-program these misinformed people > and get them away from the ignorant dogma of the cults > they have been sucked into, but I welcome input from > others who have run into these willfully incorrigible > so-called "beekeepers" and their so-called "teachers". Often. I taught many in our chapter's bee school. The unfortunate result is they drop out of beekeeping since they continually lose colonies. Most are well informed organic farmers who want to pollinate their crops with organic bees. They attend classes but reject any non-organic mite controls. They champion many of the "proven" organic methods. Those that do survive as "organic" beekeepers, the less pure, go with thymol, oxalic and formic since they are "organic". The dirty little secret of most organic farming is that there are loopholes that allow shifting back to conventional practices since there are no organic solutions to many diseases and other pathogens found in nature. Enter the antibiotics or other normal treatments found in non-organic farms. For reasons that have been enumerated on this list, organic beekeeping in the US has drifted over the edge. It is not sustainable unless you bend the rules. It is interesting that had you invested in the, recommended by motley fool, "whole foods" stock (organic) compared to the evil Monsanto GMO purveyors of evil seeds, you would have lost money compared to a 35% increase for Monsanto just this year (check the WSJ for Wednesday of last week- good article). The current food crisis has shifted away from organic to GMO as the real savior of the third world. Most organic farming that is heralded by those in the developed countries keep them on the farm in a labor intensive subsistence world. I loved an article on ethanol production in Brazil which touted the use of peasants to harvest the cane, which saved on diesel and tractors. It was all about how Brazil has become energy sufficient because of ethanol production. Dirty little secrete is that Brazil pumps more oil and that is the actual reason. Ethanol production has remained the same, while oil production has dramatically increased. But who cares about facts. Bill Truesdell Bath, Maine **************************************************** * General Information About BEE-L is available at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm * **************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 14:00:01 GMT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "deknow@netzero.net" Subject: Re: Government support: Who needs it? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit one of the issues here (at least in my mind) is that whatever the industry, the bulk of the industry will want to maintain the status quo, regardless of whether it is wise in the long term or not. if your town is the widget capital of the world...but foreign competition threatens the local industry, the action that follows is likely to ask for government subsidies (or tarrifs, or import restrictions) to "maintain this way of life" rather than to find something competitive to do (premium widgets marketed as "made in the usa", use the widget infrastructure to make something else, improve manufacturing efficiency, etc). from the outside, it seems futile and perhaps even silly (not to mention expensive)....but to those living a particular lifestyle based upon a particular way of life/making a living, it seems imperative. i have strong opinions on what is right and wrong with our current way of doing things beekeeping-wise, and they often conflict with what the "mainstream" of the industry thinks is important. i don't see this as a problem, per se...it's really just things working their way out. lists such as this are an important part of this dialog, and an important part of solving problems. i personally feel that the problems we are seeing today are a result of both the practices of most beekeepers, and how most food is grown in this country. i don't feel that getting help from the govt. to keep things on the track they are on (treatments in the hive, monoculture agriculture, so many bees in california at once for the almonds, etc) is really helpful long term. the way we are doing things has led us to where we are, and it is unlikely (in my opinion) that more of the same will bring us past these problems...i think they will get worse, requiring more chemical controls, more research on the effects of these controls, and more lobbying for help from washington. to me this seems unproductive seems to dig us into a deeper hole. i can't blame anyone for wanting to preserve their business the way they have been doing it for years, or to protect their way of life...but open and honest debate is necessary for any of us to learn anything. when an industry is in trouble, the _best_ thing that we can do is open things up for as many alternative approaches as possible. the more working (or not working) models we have to look at, the more choices we have, and if things do end up needing to change, there are working models (not just theoretical ones) to study, examine, analyze, and choose from. subsidizing the status quo way of doing things only delays this process (much like welfare is likely to delay someone who is unemployed from taking a job). thus far (speaking for myself), i doubt i would want to support what "the industry" would be lobbying for if it were well organized. didn't the nhb spend about 1million co-promoting the jerry seinfeld embarasment of a movie to "help the industry"? please....that money would have been better spent on anti-bee movie publicity, getting the truth of how bees live out there as a contrast rather than helping to sell fast food for mcdonalds. the nhb has also done much of the funding of the penn state work that we have been talking about....testing the brood, comb, foundation, trapped pollen, beebread...but of course since the bulk of the beekeepers the nhb represents produces honey using the chemicals found in every other part of the hive, they did not fund for testing the honey. this is the other shoe, and it is likely to drop sooner rather than later. i'm not sure unity is what we actually need. deknow **************************************************** * General Information About BEE-L is available at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm * **************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 10:39:38 EDT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Jerry Bromenshenk Subject: Nosema, Pesticides MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit All This is VERY preliminary, but we have been looking at N. ceranae in our own ~60 colonies. Most were started from packages this spring to replace severe losses. Most were "free" of Nosema c. when we got the packages, but a few had low spore counts. We treated EVERYTHING with fumadil at the label dose level. We knew that dose level DID not provide protection/control last fall, but we wanted to stay within the label guidelines for dose. Most of the treated colonies are still Nosema free, but a few are showing up with Nosema, and we are re-dosing. Interestingly, we also had three survivor colonies - made it through the winter. These all had Nosema, one at very high levels. One dose did not yield the hoped for results, but a 2nd dose did. We're continuing to check, but it appears that one could/should dose, then re-dose - just like we've done for years with antibiotics. Our doses were about a week apart, and at the legal, label dose. As we read the label, it doesn't say you can't repeat. This may be a better approach than doubling dose, other practices that are inconsistent with the label. One, it follows label guidelines, and more importantly, it may do as well or better for control. We're monitoring Nosema c. in old and young bees from each colony, have done so since we installed the packages on May 5. We test weekly, dose if we see it re-emerge, keeping good records. By end of summer, we should know how well it all worked. Jerry P.S. Don't forget, based on Robb Cramer's lab trials, Nosema c. spores may be heat sensitive - 120 degrees F for 90 minutes killed most of the spores. Easy to do with comb, unless you get heavy handed and melt the wax. **************Gas prices getting you down? Search AOL Autos for fuel-efficient used cars. (http://autos.aol.com/used?ncid=aolaut00050000000007) **************************************************** * General Information About BEE-L is available at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm * **************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 17:02:06 +0200 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Juanse Barros Subject: Re: Government support: Who needs it? In-Reply-To: <20080630.100001.2407.1@webmail12.dca.untd.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline i personally feel that the problems we are seeing today are a result of both the practices of most beekeepers, and how most food is grown in this country. ---------------- You should read the book "The Honey Spinner" of Grace Pundyk, Pier 9, Murdoch Books Pty Ltd. 2008 Chapter 10: The United States .. -- Juanse Barros J. APIZUR S.A. Carrera 695 Gorbea - CHILE +56-45-271693 08-3613310 http://apiaraucania.blogspot.com/ juanseapi@gmail.com **************************************************** * General Information About BEE-L is available at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm * **************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 11:13:51 EDT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Jerry Bromenshenk Subject: Soft Chemicals versus Synthetic Pesticides MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit ---- We've lots of data about soft chemicals in bee hives - we filed a draft report with the NHB, and we are working on final confirmations. Some members of this list make the mistake of thinking that when something is analyzed for chemical residues (e.g. pesticides), one should see ALL of the chemical contaminants in a sample. This is simply not true. Each instrument, and each setup covers a different array of chemicals. There is no one analysis for all. If the test protocol is set up to look for chemical A-G, it won't see H-Z at all. Doesn't mean H-Z are absent, it just means the particular assay won't pick them up. The standard suite of analysis protocols for pesticides is aimed at specific compounds, and it still takes several different analysis protocols, plus at least two different ways of preparing/extracting the samples, in order to do anything even close to broad spectrum pesticide testing. Remember, at this time, most pesticides in use are synthetic organic compounds. Older pesticides were based on inorganic materials like sulfur, arsenic - to look for those, you need both a different sample preparation and a very different instrument. We've been looking at semi-volatile and volatile organic compounds (e.g., thymol, many pollutants such as break down products of gasoline and diesel, things off-gassing from plastics, HMF, etc.). Most of these, probably all, will NOT show up in the typical analysis for organic pesticides. We've also looked at HMF using more conventional approaches - and we can do these routinely - takes a very simple instrument, one that has little or no use for looking at conventional pesticides. We also looked at aflatoxins, things that fungi are likely to produce - yet another sample preparation and instrument - we sent these out to a lab that specializes in these things. So, just because someone did not report something, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Jerry J.J. Bromenshenk **************Gas prices getting you down? Search AOL Autos for fuel-efficient used cars. (http://autos.aol.com/used?ncid=aolaut00050000000007) **************************************************** * General Information About BEE-L is available at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm * **************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 10:57:41 -0500 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Walter Weller Subject: Re: Government support: Who needs it? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit DeKnow seems to feel that "live and let die" refers to beekeepers as well as to bees. He makes a good case. It's hard on those eliminated, but extinction has always been part of evolutionary "progress". Let people alone to do what they can, any way they can. If they're smart and lucky they may survive, and the rest of us may learn from their success; if not, the world didn't need them. Walter Weller **************************************************** * General Information About BEE-L is available at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm * **************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 12:44:05 -0400 Reply-To: bee-quick@bee-quick.com Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: James Fischer Subject: Re: the life span of the honey bee MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > This subject is covered in depth in two articles that I wrote... Then do you have a citation to the original source of the findings? How about the chemical name? I cannot agree with using "wingbeats" rather than "miles flown" as a measure of a bee's lifespan. The energy required to hover is a tiny fraction of the energy required to move through the air, so not all wingbeats are going to use the same amount of "muscle power". Flying with the wind rather than against the wind would be another case where not all wingbeats would be the same. I'd also cite the higher wingbeat frequency and faster airspeed of a bee that "head buts" you as a warning that you are about to be stung, but the wingbeat frequency of a "Kamakaz-bee" is the least of its problems given that it head-butts you at the highest velocity it can attain. That impact has gotta hurt the bee more than it hurts you. :) **************************************************** * General Information About BEE-L is available at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm * **************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 10:27:33 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: randy oliver Subject: Re: the life span of the honey bee In-Reply-To: <200806301644.m5UGiB21014333@smtp3.albany.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline > Then do you have a citation to the original source of the findings? > How about the chemical name? Sorry, not that simple. Mostly has to do with lack of maintenance of wing muscle mitochondria. Feel free to read the article--references are at the end. Randy Oliver **************************************************** * General Information About BEE-L is available at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm * **************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 19:49:56 GMT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: "deknow@netzero.net" Subject: Re: Government support: Who needs it? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit -- Walter Weller wrote: >...but extinction has always been part of evolutionary "progress". Let people alone to do what they can, any way they can. please note that one does not have to keep doing things the way they always have...learning, changing, and evolving one's own operation is always an option. deknow **************************************************** * General Information About BEE-L is available at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm * **************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 15:55:30 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bill Truesdell Subject: Re: Government support: Who needs it? In-Reply-To: <001c01c8daca$0fc3fa90$6701a8c0@walter1a7c2923> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Walter Weller wrote: > It's hard on those eliminated, > but extinction has always been part of evolutionary "progress". Process, not necessarily progress. Survival of the fittest is always nice except when it is your children. Bill Truesdell Bath, Maine **************************************************** * General Information About BEE-L is available at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm * **************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 13:13:19 -0700 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Eugene Makovec Subject: Re: Government support: Who needs it? In-Reply-To: <001c01c8daca$0fc3fa90$6701a8c0@walter1a7c2923> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit I think we should always be wary of government "help". What starts as emergency aid develops into a never-ending boondoggle concerned mostly with funneling money to political constituents. Just look at what's happened to dairy and crop programs -- the majority of our "aid" goes not to the poor subsistence farmers we see in the movies, but to large agribusinesses and weathy suburban hobby farmers, many of whom are paid to produce nothing at all. **************************************************** * General Information About BEE-L is available at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm * **************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 16:19:54 EDT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Jerry Bromenshenk Subject: Re: the life span of the honey bee Comments: To: bee-quick@BEE-QUICK.COM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jim and Randy Much of this was covered in work by the Germans - one poor soul marked bees and followed their life span, longevity - using feeders at various distances, etc. The conclusion was that bees more or less had a built in odometer - when they log the set number of kilometers (or miles if you're looking at a U.S. bee), they expire. In good foraging weather, this averaged out to about 10-12 flight days. In spring and fall, if you assume bees don't fly 10-12 days consecutively, you can build a reasonable model of bee longevity. I double checked these estimates against lots of studies of marked bees. Virtually none of the researchers marking bees had bothered to reference the German work. However, the 10-12 days, or flight distance numbers (about 800 kilometer if memory serves - don't quote me on this) held up for most reports. Appears that the German work holds up. Jerry **************Gas prices getting you down? Search AOL Autos for fuel-efficient used cars. (http://autos.aol.com/used?ncid=aolaut00050000000007) **************************************************** * General Information About BEE-L is available at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm * **************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 17:00:14 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Dick Marron Subject: the life span of the honey bee In-Reply-To: <200806301644.m5UGiB21014333@smtp3.albany.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jim wrote: >>>>The energy required to hover is a tiny fraction of the energy required to move through the air, so not all wingbeats are going to use the same amount of "muscle power". <<<< Apparently this is not true. The honeybee beats her wings at the same 200 240 times a second no matter how fast she is flying. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/01/060111082100.htm Dick Marron ----- **************************************************** * General Information About BEE-L is available at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm * **************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 22:43:30 +0100 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Peter Edwards Subject: Re: the life span of the honey bee MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I seem to recall that human life is related to the number of heart beats. I cannot remember the suggested number before you drop dead, but it does seem that there is a good case to be made against working out in the gym! Ever seen an elderly, fit sportsman (or woman)? Best wishes Peter Edwards beekeepers at stratford-upon-avon.freeserve.co.uk www.stratford-upon-avon.freeserve.co.uk/ **************************************************** * General Information About BEE-L is available at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm * **************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 18:17:38 EDT Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Chris Slade Subject: Re: Beyond the Honeybee MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =20 In a message dated 29/06/2008 14:47:10 GMT Standard Time, waldig@NETZERO.CO= M=20 writes: >>And the sucky part ,half of the honey I produce is bakery,which sucks in=20 price... Then try some marketing. I sell it at the same price as table honey (=A33.50= =20 or $7) a lb, but I provide a recipe leaflet to go with it. =20 Chris =20 **************************************************** * General Information About BEE-L is available at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm * **************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 21:43:11 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Peter_de_Bruyn_Kops?= Subject: Re: the life span of the honey bee Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit >Jim wrote: >>>>The energy required to hover is a tiny fraction of the >energy required to move through the air, so not all wingbeats are going to >use the same amount of "muscle power". <<<< > >Dick Marron wrote: Apparently this is not true. The honeybee beats her wings >at the same 200 240 times a second no matter how fast she is flying. Wingbeats per second and effort are not the same thing. For top distance runners, cadence is pretty much independent of speed but effort is highly dependent on speed. To hover a bee fights gravity. To fly at 15 mph, it has to fight wind resistance as well as gravity. **************************************************** * General Information About BEE-L is available at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm * **************************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2008 21:54:39 -0400 Reply-To: Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology Sender: BEE-L@listserv.albany.edu From: Bill Truesdell Subject: Re: the life span of the honey bee In-Reply-To: <000601c8daf4$4e24a940$ea6dfbc0$@net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dick Marron wrote: > > Apparently this is not true. The honeybee beats her wings at the same 200 > 240 times a second no matter how fast she is flying. > > http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/01/060111082100.htm From the article: When bees want to generate more power--for example, when they are carting around a load of nectar or pollen--they increase the arc of their wing strokes, but keep flapping at the same rate. That is also odd, Dickinson says, because "it would be much more aerodynamically efficient if they regulated not how far they flap their wings but how fast " So the article confirms that distance flying expends more energy (think increased power), as would be expected. In fact, the article says that they are much less efficient when working compared to hovering, just what Jim stated. And Jerry. And the Germans. And basic physics. It takes more energy to move than to stay still. Think vectors. I lay awake one night with them careening around my brain before a vector's final. Not pleasant. Bill Truesdell Bath, Maine **************************************************** * General Information About BEE-L is available at: * * http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/default.htm * ****************************************************