Robin Dartington said:
> many beekeeping practices (for example sugar feeding), that have
> recently been recommended to beginners in this list, are quite
> simply incompatible with producing pure honey.
It was not "recommended" - it was one option available that would
achieve his goal under the specific conditions and limitations he
described. The actual "recommendation" was to go beg, buy, or
borrow some drawn comb!
But does Robin's claim contain a Seed of Truth, or just fertilizer?
Let's walk through a typical year here at Farmageddon, and see
what happens to "feed":
a) The bees draw comb (by feeding syrup) in the hottest days of
late summer, after last harvest. Fall nectar in VA is really
only good for winter stores most years, so any fall blooms
are also "stores".
b) I then remove the drawn comb before the bees have any chance
to completely finish it, let alone fill it with any syrup.
Any combs that might contain syrup are placed in supers above
the inner cover, where the bees will soon clean them out so
the new (dry) comb can be stored for winter.
c) Once drawn comb is off, I then continue feeding any
light colonies until they are "ready" for winter, meaning
that they have enough stores to make it to early spring.
d) In very early spring (in the snows of February), I feed a
little more, to get brood rearing going. Sometimes, I must
feed colonies that have eaten nearly all their stores longer
than those who simply need "motivation".
e) The progression of blooms is very predictable if one counts
"degree-days" from last frost as any gardener would do, so
there is zero chance of any overlap between feeding and
a harvestable bloom. In fact, there are months between the
two. Last frost here in VA is April 15th. The first blooms
of interest are in May. All feeders were off by March 2nd
this year.
f) Since spring is cold or cool, the bees simply do not have the
temperature conditions to "make honey" from syrup fed. The
growing population of brood and bees can cause some hives to
loose several pounds a week after feeders are removed. Since
they are limited to the brood nest, there is a limit to how much
feed they can store, and they clearly do not have sufficient comb
surface area to even think about evaporating off tiny amounts of
syrup in many cells. They are forced to (and they do) nearly fill
cells with syrup.
g) Since the spring feeding is brief for colonies not at risk of
starvation, the amount of syrup fed is small.
So what happens to the syrup? Anyone with an observation hive can
watch and see the bees consume the syrup before they go back to
ripping open cells of honey, simply because "syrup" is "ready to eat".
Honey takes some work to "prepare". It is cold in spring.
Bees are not stupid.
> There is absolutely no way you can plump a colony up on sugar before
> (or even it seems, during) a flow and keep supers clear of 'cured' syrup.
Well, you certainly don't feed DURING a flow! :)
You also do not "pump up" a colony, you feed briefly to convince the queen
to start laying, most often when snow is still on the ground. Yes, it takes
skill, timing, and planning. If one doesn't know when to do this relative
to their first useful blooms, one is flying blind, and risks exactly the
problem posed by Robin.
And just when might this syrup be "cured"? When might it be warm enough to
evaporate syrup or nectar? May? June? By then it will have been consumed.
Because you did not feed too much!
> It's in the biology of the bee. They build a brood nest and pack
> stores around it.
> As the nest expands, they move the stores up and around.
If a beekeeper is foolish enough to put supers on that early, this might be
a problem, but one adds supers JUST before the bloom, not months or weeks
before.
> They simply do not consume sugar to draw out a super of foundation and
> leave it dry for use later.
They do if you take away the almost completely drawn comb just before they
are done! Of course, one needs to be able to dance through one's apiaries
every other day with all the elegance of Fred Astaire, peeking in supers
to see which ones need to be pulled to do this. It is hard work.
But it is worth it.
> George Imirie said it - 'bees do not build comb unless there is an
> immediate need'.
Or unless you convince them that there is a "need" by removing all
harvestable honey supers, and replacing them with foundation and a
feeder. Bees can be fooled. They are insects. We are humans. No contest.
For most of us, at least. :)
> UK beekeepers in WW2 who fed only small amounts of green-dyed sugar
> (when sugar was rationed) found they got green honey.
We have learned much since the 1940s. I had no idea how much. If they
fed close to the bloom, and/or with supers on, and/or feeding too much,
this was sure to happen. They could have also made any number of other
massive mistakes. It sounds to me like a tale about a group of people
without a plan, without a calendar, with no knowledge of the massive and
highly predictable impact of the weather on spring blooms.
...but Green honey?
Sounds like a great St. Patrick's Day promotion.
Gee, thanks for the idea! Food coloring, eh?
> Any large-scale honey producers who use sugar feeding to draw supers
> before
> a flow will contaminate their honey, but if the honey crop is large, the
> degree of contamination may be small.
But detectable. There are a number of highly sophisticated tests
with a good track record in exposing adulterated honey, including
the adulteration that would result from force-feeding bees.
The lot would be rejected.
Robin's points might be valid concerns in regard to an uniformed
beekeeper who feeds just before a bloom, feeds when supers are on,
or has no idea of the amount of stores a colony might require for
his area and weather, but basic ignorance or errors are no excuse
to condemn "feeding" as "incompatible with producing pure honey".
Feeding is sometimes required to keep bees alive so that they can
produce any honey at all. Feeding is suggested to get the queen
laying and create a large enough population to obtain a larger crop.
To rail against "feeding" by wielding such unfaltering might in an
unflattering light will do nothing but doom new beekeeper's colonies
that are starving in spring.
jim (Who would like to point out that
the Law of "Conservation of Mass" states that
Matter can be neither created nor destroyed.
Therefore, "weapons of mass destruction"
are incompatible with physics itself.)
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
-- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/BEE-L for rules, FAQ and other info ---
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
|
