> I seem to recall postings from Tony in Norway that indicated a very high
> amount of comb replacement as a nosema control, and think that Norway
> could not be considered "southern" beekeeping. Juanse's bees are so
> southern that they could almost be considered "northern" and because he
> has a market for old comb (for raising wax moth!) they are largely on new
> comb, and seem to be healthier I thought as a result.
I admit to being puzzled by these reports, along with others. These reports
and others of the sort plus the comments of some researchers were the reason
behind our experiments linked in my previous post.
Although not definitive, our tests did prove to us what we had been
observing less formally over the years and what we had been told (and did
not want to believe). We measured the cost. Did you take a look? See
http://honeybeeworld.com/diary/articles/fdnvsdrawn.htm and
http://honeybeeworld.com/diary/2000/diary040100.htm#ResearchDetails
There is a high cost to more than a small amount of annual comb replacement
in our situation -- our country, our bees, our management -- but apparently
this is not universal -- or else the beekeepers in question find that cost
acceptable. Either that, or perhaps they are not aware of the difference.
I suppose that there is also the possibility that their disease or chemical
problems are so serious that the advantages that come from extreme comb
replacement outweigh the costs, or that their management is much better than
mine.
I have to say, though, that disease and mites have seldom been more than a
slight nuisance to me, and that when they have, like the time we had 30%
chalkbrood measured in some Australian packages, it was from genetic
problems and the cure was obvious -- change the bees, not the comb. Nosema
has never been a problem for me that I could detect (an example at
http://www.honeybeeworld.com/beescience/default.htm ), and I have looked
hard, although I suspect it would be if I put pressure on my bees to draw
more than 10% new comb a year and tried to winter on it
In beekeeping, I find that the problems of one year follow into the next and
the success of one year also follows and builds over time. If you get a
disease, it takes several years to clean it up; if you have an episode of
malnutrition, it takes more than a year to fully recover. This is perhaps
due to our locale and short season. I see the southerners seem to recover
much more quickly (Or do they really? Is their superior climate a mask and
able to compensate for the multitude of problems many cause by their
management style?).
I should mention that I do not scrape frames or boxes any more than I have
to in order to prevent crushing bees when I work, and everything is waxed up
and propolized. I keep several sheets of foundation in every brood chamber,
at the outside in case the bees get crowded enough to need to mass there,
and sometimes insert a frame in the centre at the right moment (a risky
maneuver for the inexperienced), and often insert foundation into supers,
but I make sure, other than the one case, that the bees are not forced to
draw foundation. I ran the world's largest Ross Rounds operation at one
time, so it is not that I don't know how to get bees to draw comb.
One thing that confounds the issue is that some years are so good that a
beekeeper can do everything wrong and still get a crop and winter well.
This sets the beekeeper up for future years of losses and puzzlement.
Successive failures accumulate problems in combs.
It is not the great years, but those other, challenging years that tell the
tale as to whether a technique is wise or not for an given beekeeper.
***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html
|
