BEE-L Archives

Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology

BEE-L@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
allen dick <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 7 Jun 2004 22:13:55 -0600
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (64 lines)
> I split from good hives (subjective evaluation) in spring and got poor
> returns.  Plenty of drones around.  The majority of those that did
> survive turned out to be tourist hives i.e in migratory terms hives
> that were taken around the country side for a look see but did not
> produce much honey.  I ended up buying some queens to re-queen
> and then got good results. Tried splits again the next year with
> similar reuslts.  So I gave up and kept to purchasing queens.

You are not alone in that.  Emergency queens work for some and not for
others.  It's a mystery.  I suspect that there are more than a few factors
at play, and that is why I'd like to see some studies.

> Where is the proof?  We know the end result but are we interpreting
> the right cause?  I know beekeepers who now admit that when they
> introduced queens to their hives, they had high nosema counts.
> Reality tells us that we often re-queen poor performing hives.  Why
> were they poor performing?

Good points all, but we were discussing splits from (I assume) good hives,
which levels the playing field.

> We have ceratin species of trees in Australia that when beekeepers are
> working them, the introduction rate for queens is poor.  This includes
> bought queens or queens raised by the beekeeper.  All real but we
> know the results but not the reasons.

True again.  Many factors.

>> Therefore, I am very curious.  Obviously, it is in the interests of
>> those who make their money by raising and selling queens (and
>> advertise in magazines) to study and promote use of those queens,
>> and in the meantime trash the queens that any beekeeper can raise
<snipped>
>
> I hope you are not including me in your above example.

I wasn't meaning you.  I was speaking generally.

> My often expressed quote is that if you have a method that works for
> you why change?  So if the split method works for you, stay with it.
> So don't use a broad brush to tar everyone that rasies questions
> contrary to your opinion.
>
> I am turning away orders for queens so I don't have to malign others
> to get orders.

Let's not take things personally.  They were not meant that way.  When I was
buying Australian queens, you were one of my preferred suppliers.  I have
often mentioned that some of the best bees I ever had were from Aus, over a
decade ago, and although I forget from whom they came, I suspect it may have
been you, since you were one of my suppliers at the time.

> If it was easy, everyone would be a beekeeper and what
> would the price of honey be then?

Good point.  ...And if bees did not sting?

allen
A Beekeeper's Diary: http://www.honeybeeworld.com/diary/

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
-- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/BEE-L for rules, FAQ and  other info ---
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

ATOM RSS1 RSS2