Interesting discussion. On a similar note, I lost 2 of my 3 hives a couple weeks ago (I think due to mites) and have been cleaning up the old frames. I want to make sure there is no remnant disease on my equipment, so I’ve removed all the old foundation and scraped as much wax off as I can. I was wondering if anyone has done further precautions to kill any disease like heat treatment (It’s about 30+ frames, and I thought I could heat them up in batches in my oven), or with a bleach solution. They’ve been sitting in the sun, but I just want to make sure that I get rid of whatever harmed them.
Thanks so much, Elizabeth Pratson
I think we all agree that until something better comes along beekeepers have several controls that can be used to mitigate the effects of varroa. But I offer the following distinction between Randall's definition of natural and my definition of natural which I think is more consistent with the permaculture view that Phil endorses.
Randall argues correctly that we already have "natural treatments." But those treatments require active intervention by a beekeeper to introduce the natural substance into the colony. The intervention of the beekeeper is the unnatural element here. Bees don't gather formic acid, oxalic acid or thymol in quantities or delivery modalities sufficient to self-treat for varroa. The beekeeper is the delivery mechanism.
What Phil and others hope for is that further research may someday offer a natural treatment that the bees can and will harvest without the intervention of the beekeeper. A treatment that will be sufficient in both quantity and delivery modality to be an effective self-treatment. To paraphrase "Apis mellifera heal thyself." A passive fungal supplement - at least with respect to the beekeeper's role - would be an improvement. The bee is the delivery mechanism. I see that as a truly natural solution if it results in reduced mite/viral loads.
The ultimate outcome of this fungal research is unknowable and, at best, many years away. But the optimists among us continue to keep our fingers crossed that a solution might be found (fungal or even botanical) that passively benefits bees and beekeepers alike by reducing the mite/viral load in the colony.
Of course, those of the 'glass half empty' persuasion can argue that there is still likely to be a bit of active beekeeper intervention in that the beekeeper will have to introduce spores of the correct fungal strain to a suitable growth media in a location acceptable to the colony so that the bees have ready access to this new source of healing and/or mite killing fungus.
And, for the record, I am not offended by Randall's comments or Phil's comments because the discussion has been civil and informative. I see this listserv as an open forum for the respectful exchange of information and ideas about beekeeping best practices. Participants should feel free to bring new ideas, new approaches, questions and comments to this listserv w/o fear of ridicule or condescension. I think this fungi discussion is an example of how this listserv best serves the beekeeping community. Like Randall I believe that controlling varroa is critical colony health. Without control our bees will die. But there is room for differing perspectives on our individual hopes and aspirations for new approaches to accomplish that varroa control. Like Phil I encourage research into natural alternatives (as I define natural) to supplement the natural tools (as Randal defines natural) that we already have in our arsenal.
Final word from me - send a check to your favorite university bee research facility. Better yet, write your elected representatives to encourage their support of basic bee research. We need all of the evidence-based research we can get.
Phil,
A thousand apologies, I must have missed the mark. You certainly
didn't offend me. If you'll notice, the remark I responded to was
John's, not yours. And John didn't offend me either. I agree that
the fungus article is interesting, although I am highly skeptical
that it will come to fruition. Many hurdles exist with new
treatments; a mite-killing substance is just a small part of it. A
practical delivery mechanism is critical, and is what stumps many
great ideas in this arena.
I agree 100% with your overall sentiment, and I agree 100% that
good IPM principles imply that we need a variety of EFFECTIVE
treatments. Rotating treatments is good practice. My comment was
that we don't need to hope that one day we will have a "natural"
treatment, as the tenor of the article implied, because we already
have "natural" treatments. I certainly welcome new treatments if
they are better than existing treatments. I hope you agree that
not treating with existing, effective treatments today because we
are waiting for even better treatments tomorrow (with no guarantee
that they are better, just different) would be an odd thing to do.
I seriously doubt that the thymol treatment, if properly applied,
was the proximate cause of your losses. I would suggest from your
description of your colony management that perhaps you were
applying treatment in a reactionary, "hail Mary" mode rather than
getting ahead of varroa and controlling it. If that was the case,
I would expect colony failure after 3 or 4 years (actually a lot
sooner) whether you had applied thymol or not. Thymol doesn't get
rid of the viruses that kill colonies, just the bugs that vector
the viruses. Giving folks in the cancer ward a flu shot is too
little, too late. And hopefully I don't offend with that comment;
I'm just trying to educate folks on the list about the realities
of varroa infestation. Ignoring them doesn't make them go away.
Randall
On 3/21/2016 2:06 PM, Phil DeGuzman wrote:
Thanks Randall. I get where you are coming from. There are
established products that when applied appropriately are
essentially nontoxic. Basically I am reading your point as if
it ain't broke, don't fix it.
But let me offer that from a permaculture perspective, we
try to minimize bringing in recurring inputs to our farming
ventures. Permaculture attempts to create bio-diverse systems
that are regenerative and somewhat self sustaining. We all
have our own agendas and battles we choose to join, and I
strive to incorporate permaculture principles wherever
possible. For me, after four successful years of non-chemical
beekeeping (the two hives I started with grew to four), I lost
all of my hives last year after my first attempt at applying a
thymol treatment.
It was news to me that there might be a way a beekeeper
could cultivate an additional arrow in the quiver against
Varroa (just like one might plant flowers or trees to give the
bees more resources) I thought it sounded interesting and
thought I'd share. Perhaps my sentiment about remaining
chemical free strike you as rhetoric.
I for one am very interested in any techniques that protect
the value of my property, invite me to connect with nature,
appeal to my systems way of thinking, and especially minimize
my labor and/or input costs. That is why I raise cattle using
rotational grazing instead of chemical fertilizer, I raised
chickens on pasture rotation behind the cattle, and build
whatever I can from salvage materials like barnwood and
site-sourced lumber. If I can reduce buying inputs, and I can
achieve 80% success with the solutions, I will.
I'm not trying to persuade anyone, just gathering and
sharing information. Sorry if I offended you.
Phil
_________________________________________ ocba mailing list | North Carolina Beekeeping| http://www.theocba.org/Manage Your Subscription: http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/ocba/
|