>
> >beekeepers who must attempt to overcome the losses and stay profitable


There are several issues at hand.  Biology, landscape and pesticide change,
and profitability of business practices.  In order to make any sense of the
Big Picture, one must include all of them.

Firstly, the invasion of varroa, and likely to a lesser extent *Nosema
ceranae*, have been devastating to honey bee populations (a biological
issue), and have made beekeeping much more difficult (a business issue).

In some areas, landscape changes due to agricultural practices,
urbanization, and climate change have altered the amount of forage
available to bees and other pollinators.

Re pesticides, overall, the situation appears to have improved greatly
since the 1960's and '70's, but the incredible overuse of neonics
definitely needs to be questioned.  Commercial agriculture's dependence
upon pesticides rather than IPM is deplorable.  But these are business
decisions, and it is up to the consumer and voter to pay growers to adopt
more eco-friendly pest management approaches.  So far, the consumer has not
demonstrated that she is willing to do so.

I must take issue with Dr. Otis' contention that neonics continue to build
up in the soil though.  Actual measurements indicate that they quickly
reach an asymptote.  That aside, the issue of neonics and native bees, and
the suggestion that they may be involved in reduced queen longevity
definitely needs to be addressed.

Re the business of beekeeping.  In any industry, any industry-wide problem
causes both business failures and opportunities.  In beekeeping today, many
progressive beekeepers are finding beekeeping to be more profitable than
ever.  Others, however, whose income depended upon landscapes rich in
clover and long-flowering alfalfa are hurting.

And any who don't effectively manage varroa will definitely experience
continuing colony collapse (I watched three colonies collapse from
varroa/virus last week in my Bond Yard).

But losses do not need to be great.  I often run long-term trials involving
over a hundred hives.  So long as I manage varroa, losses from summer 'til
late spring (when I typically end my trials) are in the single digits.

So the first question that I ask when someone claims a high loss rate is,
what were your varroa counts during the time period leading up to those
losses?  It typically costs in the ballpark of $10/year to manage varroa,
even with the relatively expensive "natural" treatments.  This is a
business decision, yet many do not make the decision to do so.

Unfortunately, the self-reported surveys of colony loss rate rarely include
metrics on how effectively the beekeepers actually managed varroa, or the
amount of hive weight going into winter (to avoid starvation).  Without
such metrics on basic beekeeping BMPs, I find such surveys to be of little
value.

My concern in this debate is about the expected backlash that is currently
occurring.  Many have been busy propagating the myth that honey bees are on
the verge of extinction.  Such alarmism will of course eventually result in
backlash, with the alarmists being accussed of crying wolf.

So although the great increase in funding for bee research has been of huge
benefit to us involved in the science of bees and beekeeping, I suggest
that we tread carefully.  Beekeeping is an important part of agriculture,
and deserves appropriate funding.  But such funding should be on its
merits, not from alarmism.

The largest demand for bees in agriculture is for the pollination of the
California almond crop.  The free market has solved the problem of
beekeeping being more difficult and costly these days by better
compensating beekeepers.  The law of supply and demand is working just
fine.

Similarly, the market for honey is offering opportunity for those not
involved in pollination.  And the market for bee sales is ravenous.

IMHO, we are watching beekeeping evolve just as with any other industry.
Painful at times, but full of opportunity.  I'm currently proudly in the
process of passing on my business to my sons, with full expectation that
beekeeping will remain profitable for the foreseeable future.  And also
that a number of operations will go out of business if they are unwilling
to adapt.

-- 
Randy Oliver
Grass Valley, CA
www.ScientificBeekeeping.com

             ***********************************************
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