Bob H. and I can agree on one issue:
If a bright side CCD is helping our beekeeping industry by making us take a
long look at the way we keep,medicate and feed our bees!
And, I'd add, the industry (and researchers) need to stop making excuses for
bee losses. Bee losses are telling you something. I'm from a cattle
industry (beef and dairy) background. If we had routinely lost 20% or more of our
cows, we'd have been considered very poor cattle men, and probably would not
have remained in business.
By excuses, I mean taking the easy way out = picking your favorite culprit
of the day. In the 60s, early 70s, pesticides killed the majority of bees.
In the 90s, mites killed bees, or mites and viruses. In recent years, its
new pesticides, and because of some bad batches of HMF in California earlier
this year, its now HMF. If not, the new nosema.
And, when none of these fits, the driver left the truck in the sun or its
toxic honeydew.
All of these can and are causes of bee losses. But, common sense says
pesticide usage hasn't diminished, and some beekeepers in specific regions of the
U.S. have been very vocal about this -- yet most beekeepers that I know have
assumed for the last couple decades that they somehow WERE routinely not
exposed to the same chemicals - until the CCD. Why are pesticide kills occasional
nowadays, with more and I'd contend, riskier chemicals being used in recent
years? Because its mites that kill bees, as everybody knows - or thought
they knew.
The CCD has brought some regional favorites - causal agents- to light.
Toxic honeydew - or just poor nutrition from honeydew - seems to be real in some
areas at some times -- but where's the proof? So far, its always been -- my
dad told me, another beekeeper told me.
In some cases, honeydew was blamed for the CCD when that region produced no
honeydew (at least not that any plant industry or other beekeepers know
about). I'm sure that there are regions with toxic plants -- but just because
bees fail in a region doesn't prove its from a toxic plant source.
Maybe someone ought to sample, find out once and for all - is it real, or is
it a myth? Is something else in the area causing the problem? For example,
MT beekeepers are concerned about death camas - and I'd say its a fair
question. But the patch of death camas next to my 60 colony research yard never
gets any visits. Our beekeepers want to prove me wrong, and I hope they do -
but my bees are at no risk from this plant.
So, I will now continue picking on Bob, who said: "I haven't read the CCD
report "
Bob, why not read the report? I'd have thought you'd be one of the first to
grab a copy.
Bob also said: "I can say when at the American Beekeeping Federation meeting
and we all compared notes one of the things we came to realize was that the
beekeepers using only sucrose had good bees without CCD problems." Did you
ask all of the beekeepers at the ABF whether anyone had fed only sucrose and
yet, still experienced the CCD? The answer we've been getting is Yes.
That said, we at Bee Alert/UM are sampling for HMF residues, just in case -
but I no longer think this is the main issue - maybe it is in a few cases.
Unfortunately, the response that Bob found at ABF may be a perturbation of
the sample size, mixed with some correct information. I don't know that
anyone will argue that HFCS is the best food for bees - but it may be better than
starvation - maybe not.
Our surveys, and remember, we've been in a lot of states and have received
input from a lot of beekeepers indicate that HFCS is NOT, in many cases, a
factor. It may contribute (as another stressor), but we've got beekeepers who
have never fed HFCS with the CCD problem. We have bees that had great stores
of honey and natural pollen, STRONG bee populations, and the bees crashed
with CCD. And feeding with sucrose does not necessarily protect the bees from
CCD.
Note, no one wants a simple fix more than I do, but it just isn't happening.
Good beekeepers and bad have the CCD -- and by bad beekeepers, I mean lack
of mite control, lots of illegal chemicals, etc. By good, I mean new comb,
little or no chemicals. Nothing jumps out of the surveys and hive inspections
- there's no simple solution or smoking gun.
Getting contradictory information is part of this overall problem. I asked
colleagues going to the Canadian National meetings to ask about CCD in
Canada. Several said: We've not seen this, and no one at the meeting said that
they had seen it. But, one of the speakers at the Canadian meeting, talking
about the problem in the U.S. had several Canadian beekeepers come up later and
admit to the syndrome.
So, in the meantime, in my usual stubborn way, we will keep plugging along -
and all of the other members of the CCD are putting forth a concerted effort
to get at the source of this problem.
Jerry
-- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and other info ---
|