What is everyone's thoughts on this? For a hobbyist or side liner
classification in the US, I believe it may make sense but you would have to be
ready to lose 90-95% of your hives initially. For a commercial operation this
would be devastating. In the long run even with treatments I believe this
is true. Without treatments the bees would get to a survival state
quicker but at a large cost initially. With treatments the bees would get to the
survival state but it would take longer w.r.t mites for example becoming
resistant to treatments. I wonder if this isn't what some of CCD is all
about. I agree that controlling Varroa is a key to sustaining current
domestic colonies. I suspect this is partly why we have had 30% or so losses in
the US over the past years.
Dave M.
From: [log in to unmask]
Reply-to: [log in to unmask]
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: 4/8/2011 3:47:33 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time
Subj: [FeralBeeProject] Re: Sugar Treatments
Hi Shiryle
Without for a moment wishing to pour cold water on your interest in
sustainable beekeeping, it must be said that, contrary to the beliefs of
many,
use of powdered sugar as a varroa management system is as destructive of
local
population health as any chemical. For this reason: husbandry of a
population involves controlled reproduction, allowing the strongest
individuals
to make each new generation, in imitation of natural selection. Preserving
the weaker (with powdered sugar, or any other kind of treatment) allows
their (weaker) genes to go forward. This breaks the foundational rule of
husbandry. It perpetuates the problem - at best.
Bees cannot be 'taught' to groom. Grooming is a genetically-controlled
behaviour, that is inherited, or not, from the parents. There are also
other
behaviours that also help the bees manage the mites. The trick is to find
bees equipped with these behaviours (which you are doing), and to aim to
promote them in your population. (And that is where the feral bees come in
- they too have these behaviours - which are of course necessary for
survival without beekeeper help)
This is the only path that can be regarded as 'sustainable'. 'Sustaining'
inadequate bees, and thus preventing adaptation to the parasite, is
against nature, and against health in the middle and long term. Far from
helping
bees, treatments hinder them in their effort to make the simple switch to
mite-managers.
The same things are just as true of other bee diseases and their
treatments.
With that in mind, Mike's advice:
"And..... there is some debate as to how effective the powder sugar
method is. If you do use it, you need to do three to four applications
anywhere
from five to seven days apart. It is not a one time application
treatment."
...needs to be read with the following in mind: the more effective the
treatment is at making the individual colony appear healthier, the more
damaging it will be to the local breeding pool.
Well meaning and caring people promote sugar treatments without realising
quite what they are doing. Understanding the principles of natural
selection for the fittest strains allows us to see how things actually work
in
nature, and to imitate her - as husbandrymen have done for thousands of
years.
That alone can fairly be called sustainable.
Good luck with your beekeeping!
Best wishes,
Mike (UK)
***********************************************
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
Guidelines for posting to BEE-L can be found at:
http://honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm
|
