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:
Thu, 23 Jun 2005 17:54:11 -0600
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (95 lines)
I have to say that I agree pretty much 100% with *both* Bob and Scot, But,
however, Scot's reasoning appeals to me more, especially now that I am
retired.

When I was a commercial, I was well aware of my 'sins' against the bees, but
had (I think) valid excuses, as, probably do all who try to make a living
from or with them, except for a fortunate few who find themselves in the
perfect place at the perfect time, with the perfect bee, and a potful of
money.

Frankly, however, on the whole, I am still not as convinced as some that the
bees are not at least a bit better off for the meddling of Man, after all,
we did bring them to the New World, unless Dee is correct and they were
already here.

I've heard it claimed that bees have been around a lot longer than Man and
actually influenced the development of a promising-looking primate to create
a critter which would delight in hauling bees from place to place, feed
them, and generally serve them (as do most of us on this list).  A human
would say, "no way', that we abuse them, but then their ways and their laws
are much different from ours.  Then again, I've heard that humans were
created by water as another way of getting around.

So, as I say, I have no problem agreeing with both.

> Perhaps the loss of season's productivity seems a waste to you.
> There are those of us conderned with being successful beekeepers in the
> long term, and not just maximizing profit in the short term.

And there are many of us who keep bees just for fun, have lots of equipment,
and consider more than  a little honey to be a nuisance, especially at these
prices :(

> Then again, this thread was about the mechanics of doing
> walk-away splits and not about eugenics.

Yup, and we got to pointing out the good features of walk-aways -- of which
there as many as there are questionable features -- when viewed from the
viewpoint of a non-commercial or non-perfectionist beekeeper, the boxkeeper,
the kind of guy/gal that GEORGE loves to denegrate as a beeHAVER, or from
the viewpoint of someone who values the bees as more than just a possession
to be exploited.  Personally, I have been all of those at one time or
another, plus some kinds not listed (Wouldn't that make a great thread?).
For us, the walk-away is a dream come true.

Moreover, if commercial beekeepers were to tell the total truth, I'm betting
that *every one* of them would admit that when leaving a yard with queenless
hives or some that appear queenless -- and knowing that there are no queens
handy, and that he/she cannot/will not return for weeks or for a month --
that he/she always slips a frame of eggs into each.  Not to do so would be
negligence.

>>the walk away split will have shrunk to nuc size.

In my experience, within about six weeks, the walk-away half which made its
own queen pulls ahead of the other half, due to the vigour of the young
queen, and the pent-up brood rearing potential of the well-fed waiting nurse
bees and the food stores accumulated during queenlessness.

> I don't know about the rest, but Miller? If you read his books as much
> as I have then you will understand that he has pretty much written about
> trying all sorts of things only to discover and finally come to the
> conclusion in the end that the bees know what they are doing better than
> we do.

When we eliminate the economic necessity of manipulating the bees to our own
purposes from our deliberations, I think we all reach that conclusion,
although we can accomplish some neat things with bees, in the short term at
least.

> Funny though that you chose the 100 year time period. Its within the
> last 100 years that beekeeping changed from traditional to modern and
> modern beekeepers are having all the problems that the old time
> beekeeper did not have. Large cell foundation development, inhive
> pesticides, antibiotics, chemical treatments, etc, etc.

Gee, Scott, you saved me a lot of typing.  Did you mean to mention also
economic slavery to government, suppliers and bankers?

> In conclusion also I find it funny that while most beekeepers are afraid
> of loosing their bees and watching them dwindle without refreshing
> stocks ... My walk-away splits from april are already ready to
> be split again AND I got my crop from them.

> Keeping bees successfully for us isn't producing the largest crop this
> year, its ensuring that we will always have a crop to harvest.

And enjoying the bees, while minimizing cost and effort if we can.

allen

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

ATOM RSS1 RSS2