> By using different treatments I am hoping that the claims made for IPM are
> borne out in practice. A friend of mine has used Ipereat last year and
this
> year, and reported good mite kills. This is an Italian product and there
is
> a supply on its way to me.
This product has not been discussed here, but has on the IBL, and I'll quote
the most cogent parts, since I no longer recommend visiting Yahoogroups due
to serious recent serious privacy and reliabilty concerns (I have to visit
anyhow since I have several lists there and, besides, I have my shields up
and working):
--- begin ibl quotes --
Have translated that info from Italian but to be quite honest
it just gives info on how to administer it and the results of experiments
with it.I'll just condense it for you.Its composition is water,simple
sugars,organic acida,{ph solution 1+-0,5},purified and sterilised propolis
and essential oils.Comes in a liquid form and sold in 1 and 1.5 litres
respectively.Before applying, it should be heated to between 35 and 40
degrees celsius in a bain marie and then administered to the colony using a
syringe or sprayed directly on the bees between the frames at the rate of
3cc per frame and a total of 25cc per hive.This should be done twice over a
period of 16 to 20 days ie 8 to 10 day interval.It is more effective on a
sunnless day with temperatures not less than 10 degrees celsius. It can be
applied at any time of the beekeeping year{provided the temperature is as
above directed}, even over a cluster with the exception that in this case
there is just one dose of 50 to 60 ccs.It has been found effective in cases
of chalk brood and will also knock down braula.I know nothing of its effects
on tracheal mites or any of the other ailments known to affect the bees.This
is one of the questions to be asked.They recommend not using it on freshly
caught swarms until they have established their new home and just before the
new brood have hatched out. Can be used with supers on and experiments have
shown no ill effects on bees,honey or queen.
This is basically it Tom and now I will just give a brief account of my own
experience with it: I used it at the above specifications in late October on
11 double brood hives of the nature of a national and a commercial brood
chamber.That previous spring these same hives were checked using bavoral
strips for 48 and 72 hours and the maximum mite fall was just 2!! in just 3
of the 11.In October this product showed varroa in all hives.They were
checked over a period of 18 days,second treatment after 9 days.The mite drop
showed a steady increase up to the 13 and 14 day and then dropping rapidly
to tens and twenties.I finished counting them on the 19 day but were still
dropping in small numbers.In some hives at the beginning daily numbers of 6
and 7 hundred were to be found culminating in an overall average of 2500 and
a maximum of 4020.There was also one or two with just a few hundred.I was
also finding transparent mites which am told are to found only in the
cells,this is an interesting indication of the strength of this product.On
administering the product the bees did'nt seem unduly disturbed,indeed no
smoke was required,although there was an ivy flow on at the time which would
account for this. Most of the mites were alive but thankfully the floor was
vaselined quite well.There was also a good knock down of the braula and
again seemed quite a large number were alive and kicking.Clearly ipereat
seems impressive and surely deserves a place in IPM.?
--- second person commentson ibl ---
First: The list of ingredients is too vague to know what chemicals we
are dealing with organic acids covers a multitude including the one known to
be used for treatment of varroa ( Formic, lactic and oxalic) but might also
include others. From the description of dosage I think it probably has
oxalic acid as its active ingredient. Similarly for essential oils again
this covers a multitude of chemicals.
Secondly; the personal experience a test using Bayvarrol for 48 / 72
hours produced a drop down of 2 or 3 mites in some colonies in the SPRING.
Spring is when the bees brood nest is expanding rapidly and any self
respecting varroa having spent the winter in phoretic state will be in the
brood cells procreating like mad. Bayvarrol is not effective on mites in the
brood cells ( which is why treatment is for 42 days or two full brood
cycles). This could well ex[lain the low levels of drop with the Bayvarrol
test.
When Varroa was found in the Apiary all the hives should have been TREATED
with Bayvarrol for the full 42 days, this does not seem to have been done!
>From Dr. Martin's paper a colony with 180 mites in March will reach the
critical level of 2,500 mites in September, and this does not include for
the further infestation which arises from feral colonies collapsing, robbing
etc. So the levels found in October are not surprising.
If I am right in the active ingredient being oxalic acid this does not kill
the mites in the cells, the pale immatures which were found are a natural
product of the mite laying eggs which have not matured before the adult bee
emerges from its cell. The male mite and all the immatures perish and will
be found on the Vaselined paper when the cell has been cleansed.
The story is a lesson to us all: when varroa is found treat it to kill the
mites, then monitor the levels by checking the natural drop down of dead
mites, and if necessary treat again before mite levels attain too high a
level and the colony is likely to collapse.
--- end ibl quote --
At any rate, the product is proprietary and the ingredients are not
disclosed, other than in very general terms. It may also be an incomplete
list. Ipereat appears to be persistent and the reasons for the persistence
are not disclosed.
I presume your honey is for your own use only, not sale, and I do not know
anything about Irish law, but for us selling into international commercial
channels -- using such an unapproved product could easily result in
condemnation of the entire shipment of honey and any honey with which it is
blended -- and even honey from a whole country -- resulting in a nightmare
of expense and unnecessary anguish.
> A Fogger is on its way to me to use FGMO and by all accounts this is
showing good results.
FGMO seems to pose some control with little threat of honey contamination.
Its efficacy needs to be examined in any particular environment and local
parameters established, particularly in view of the large number of
applications required in the published work discussed here some time back.
FWIW, Californians used oil fog years ago in the very early days of mite
problems, but seem to have abandoned it entirely early on. Just for
interest sake, for those looking for such a device, I should mention that
around here, a Burgess fogger can be picked up off the shelf at Home Depot
or one of its clones for about $75 CAD (<$50 USD)last time I looked.
> Perhaps others may wish to share their experiences with us using IPM.
That is a good idea. I think most of us are using IPM to some extent or
another, although our understanding of the term seems to vary. I wonder if
the term IPM has different meanings in different parts of the world or in
different groups of people, since many seem to use the term IPM in a context
of unapproved, 'natural' and/or experimental solutions, while my
understanding is much different and includes the idea of using well-studied
and officially sanctioned control methods.
As I understand IPM, the term merely refers to testing for a pest or pests,
comparing results of tests with known benchmarks to determine whether
econonomic damage is occurring, or likely to occur, and then applying
approved treatments in an intelligent and safe manner. A crucial part of
the IPM idea is taking into consideration more factors than just
obliterating the foe ASAP. Safety in its many aspects, then testing to see
if the treatment worked and repeating the cycle are central to the concept.
Rotation of treatment methods and dose optimization are also part of any
intelligent approach, to forestall resistance as much as possible, to
minimize damage to non-target organisms, and to minimize residues in crops
and the environment.
> At this stage I could not have less experience in using IPM but I am going
to do my best with it.
I hope you will consult with your local authorities and follow approved
methods, use only approved chemicals, or obtain advice and consent from
trained professionals, especially if you are planning to market any honey.
The authorities are sometimes annoyingly slow to adopt new methods and
materials, but they have many factors to weigh besides immediate apparent
efficacy against one pest.
> But Danish, Dutch and German beekeepers seem to be handling varroa without
chemicals. So why cannot I?
Many reports are confused, some are not complete, and some are just plain
dishonest or uninformed. Some pretty harsh substances are often not
considered 'chemicals' by some people. I don't know why. If Ipereat is not
an chemical cocktail, I don't know what is.
As for success -- reported here and there -- in living with varroa without
harsh treatments, there are many factors involved, including climate, local
management techniques and bee stock. We are finding that the experience of
beekeepers in other regions with regard varroa does not apply here at all
and that the recommendations of others far away are interesting and give us
insight, but are simply not applicable.
Yes, IPM is what is needed, but what will be observed both before and after
treatment -- if required -- will not be consistent between observers in
different locations. It may not even be consistent from year to year.
Good luck
allen
http://www.internode.net/honeybee/diary/
|
