Friends of the Earth Honey guideline

[Calum]

Hi
I read this guide from friends of the earth (http://www.foe.co.uk/living/articles/honey-ethical-guide?ic_number=46102737&m_sourcecode=LM1501233&product=NEWS&utm_source=lyris&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=email&MID=3589254&hq_e=el&hq_m=3589377&hq_l=7&hq_v=8b9410afdb), I have so many issues with it, I dont know where to begin. It is certainly as it stands in my opinion a disservice to the vast majority of beekeepers and to the plight of kept and wild bees. I think letters of complaint may well be in order.
Seriously
Calum

[Calum]

example:
One of the most brutal aspects of industrial-scale bee farming is culling.
This occurs once the honey is collected (usually in autumn).
Some beekeepers use cyanide gas while others will burn the beehives, killing all the bees inside.

[drumgerry]

Where to start really Calum? Clearly written by someone who's read and bought into the whole natural beekeeping pyramid scheme. Inaccurate, naive, simply wrong are some of the terms you could use. The examples are many and various. The lauding of small cell, of letting bees swarm etc - it all smacks of Phil Chandler and Heidi whatshername with the "sun hive" and their claptrap.

And yet again portrays the ordinary beekeeper in a poor light. One of these days we'll actually get some recognition for the good we do. In the meantime all we can do is put people off from putting some clay, wicker monstrosity up in their garden, filling it with an imported nuc and watching the bees die the following winter. That strikes me as far more exploitative and selfish than what we do to keep our bees alive and flourishing year in, year out.

[alclosier]

Anyone know if throne are including bulk cyanide in their next sales day?

[EK.Bee]

I find its better to use both cyanide & burn to be really sure
I find winter losses to be high with this method though, however
the Spring Bees appreciate a clean new hive

[Calum]

Update.:
I complained to friends of the earth, they are looking into it.. My short list of complaints:
Page 4
• Organic standards encourage the feeding of bees with organic honey rather than sugar water; limit the use
of antibiotics; prohibit the clipping of a queen bee’s wings and prohbit artificial insemination.
Use of antibiotics for controlling bee health issues is forbidden in the UK & Europe
Contamination of honey with antibiotics from farming use is controlled (in my area we must give samples yearly for testing)
• But organic beekeeping can still include a number of practices that could be conceived of as ‘unnatural’, and
as violating animal rights, and are argued by ‘natural beekeepers’ to be linked to a higher incidence of pests, disease and stress.5
conversely many regular beekeepers and specialists in bee health (working for the German regional government) view some practices of natural beekeepers as be linked to a higher incidence of pests, disease and stress.
Page 5
• the beekeeper becomes a giver rather than just a taker.
99.9% of beekeepers are givers rather than takers, we give shelter, protection, give health care, ensure plentiful winter stores of the best quality for bee survival – that only Phillip Chandlers “brand” of beekeeper is a giver is disingenuous
• 5. Natural beekeeping: similar to‘balanced beekeeping’, with the emphasis on ‘do-nothing’ approaches. Little or no management is attempted.
6. Conservation beekeeping: bees for their own sake; no honey is taken and no inspections, treatments or feeding.5
Both of these methods are frowned upon as the promote the spread of varroa. Letting bees with varroa swarm off is a death sentence for the swarm, and also through varroa reinvasion to many other surrounding hives – natural beekeepers are very loathe to share their data on their survival rates – I have tended more than 200 colonies through the winter, I have lost 8 colonies, this is an exceptional survival rate even among my peers, but it is not through lack of maintenance of the colonies health
• Winter survival rates are far better in colonies that have swarmed and overwintered on their
own honey as opposed to sugar water or worse...
this is untrue – studies in Germany have shown sugar water is the best energy source for overwintering – the lower “ballast” of sugar water does not put so much pressure on bees digestive tracts, and reduces instances of Nosema- a clear lack of education through a lack of shared best practices internationally – something beekeepers and their bees worldwide could benefit from
• mounting evidence of feral colonies faring better than those kept by beekeepers”.6
No -there is no study that has scientifically proven this – just hearsay
• smaller cell sizes, or ‘natural’ sized cells. A number of studies have linked smaller cells to reduced Varroa mite populations.7
From the same document linked in the article: Fries (2004), in a study not often cited by other investigators, possibly because it was reported in a Swedish
beekeeping journal, prepared large cell (5.45 mm) and small cell (5.05 mm) bees in 2001 and infested them with Varroa in 2002. In 2002 and 2003 he recorded mite drop, mites per 100 bees, and bee weight. Mite drop rose during 2002 and stayed at high levels in 2003. It was higher in the large cell bees in 2003 but by the July, August, and September sample times this difference had disappeared. Mites per 100 bees rose from about eight in October 2002 to 70-80 in October 2003, with no significant differences between large and small cell bees. Some frames in small cell colonies had an uneven cell pattern. Fries acknowledged that this
could have resulted in more drone cells. However, that was not observed. Neither was there a measurementof the amount of drone brood in the experimental groups.
Liebig & Aumeier (2007) reported in a short article to a German beekeeping journal an experiment at Munich with 4.9, 5.1 and 5.5 mm foundation during a single season. The size of the cells had no effect on the pre-treatment natural mite drop and the degree of infestation of cells. They confirmed this with their own work at Bochum and concluded that small cells are inappropriate as a weapon against Varroa mites.
Dahle (2008) reported on a 4-year study with 90 colonies which finished in 2007 and was conducted by the Norwegian Beekeepers Association involving the apiaries of several participating beekeepers. Colonies had 4.9, 5.1 or 5.4 mm foundation in the brood nest, and precautions were taken to remove influences of drifting, climate, and bee genetics. Colonies were given occasional oxalic acid treatment as a moderate control of Varroa infestation. This means that the bees were not exposed to the full selective pressure of Varroa and its
associated pathogens. Multifactorial statistical analysis was applied to the results. Mites per 100 bees were significantly lower in colonies with 5.1 mm cells. A similar tendency was observed with 4.9 cells but the difference was not statistically significant. The author concluded that, on the basis of an experiment of limited scope, reducing the cell size is no alternative to oxalic acid treatment, but may be a possible supplement.
As written in the very same article number of studies could not prove this assertion !

Page 8

• These include artificial feeding regimes, artificial insemination, treatment with antibiotics and pesticides, inhumane transportation conditions and culling.
artificial feeding regimes- in the main removing high ballast honey and replacing it with low ballast honey is healthier for the bees
treatment with antibiotics – stated already, not legal in EU – so you raise consumers concerns that EU honey can be “doped”?
pesticides – I can only assume this is the naturally occurring organic acids used to treat varroa? To preserve the bees health. Or is the crop spraying meant (as seen in more than honey) if so this needs differentiating – beekeepers do not spray their bees with pesticides
culling – we will get to this ludicrous point
• Some beekeepers use cyanide gas while others will burn the beehives, killing all the bees inside.
Incorrect, cyanide would render the hive, wax, frames and so on poisonous and unusable
The only case where whole hives must be burnt is in case of American foul brood infection – this is highly infectious, and by law all hive equipment must be burnt, after the colony has been put to sleep using sulphur dioxide. This is is tragic for the beekeeper involve, but protects the wider population.
• In many cases it is cheaper to kill off entire hives rather than feed the bees through the winter.
@ Non commercial prices for feed it costs 7pounds to overwinter a colony. A overwintered colony is worth varying amounts – 100-240 pounds depending on the method of calculation / market price. In these days of “bee scarcity” to assert beekeepers take part in mass culls is just silly.
• In cases where bees are not culled they are sometimes fed sugar water as a replacement for the honey taken
for human consumption.
Addressed above already
• One tactic used by beekeepers (in both large- and smaller-scale farming) to keep
production high is clipping the queen’s wings. This helps to prevent swarming.
Because the queen is not able to fly, the swarm simply masses next to the hive.
They are then collected by the beekeeper and returned to the hive.
A second tactic used by beekeepers is to periodically kill and replace the queen.
Clipping is really going out of fashion; it does not really help, as the prime swarm usually absconds with a young queen some days later. If anything the beekeeper puts the swarmed – clipped queen in a new hive with her swarm – so it is successful. Returning the bees to the same hive does not work as the pressure to swarm is not reduced by this method.
The queen is often superseded – only after 2 years – this imitates the supersedure that bees do naturally by swarming, and ensures the long term survival of the colony – as the queen very often dies in the winter at a time of year when the colony cannot replace her.
• In wild colonies the queen is selected by the worker bees and specially fed to become sexually mature. In factoryfarmed hives the beekeeper selects the queen and often replaces her every two years
In managed colonies the process of queen rearing is the same as in wild colonies. The difference is the beekeeper promotes the selection of the best stock through selective breeding. This is I allow less random than natural selection, but it the basis of all food production since the agricultural revolution (in England)
• A key natural defence for honey bees against Varroa is for the bees to groom one another and become ‘hygienic’ and able to remove the mites from larvae and their bodies.3
This is again hersay, Studies have proven that improved hygienic attributes help, but cannot replace supplemental treatments. – You need to understand the Varroa is specialised for asian bees. European breeds have a longer pupation especially drones. Varroa is like measles in South America (or Disneyland lately) a. it is an alien infection that the native population has no defence against. b. you can get away without treatment, but have to accept a much higher mortality rate .

[EK.Bee]

Well said that man :)

[drumgerry]

Eloquently put Calum. Shame FoE didn't employ someone who actually knows something about beekeeping to write their report. I almost feel embarrassed on their behalf....almost.

[Castor]

Applause.

[Calum]

anyone actually bothered to complain to them can email paul.dezylva(a)foe.co.uk

[prakel]

Just looked through it -not bothered to read all of it. Seems the usual mix of misinformation that we're all getting weary of.

Did get one idea though, reading of the poor overworked honey bees; may start advertising the fact that the bees which produce our honey get at least six months off each year.

Just wearing real thin with me now. Too many do-gooders in and outside of beekeeping all trying to get the last slice from the pie.

[Jon]

Just wearing real thin with me now. Too many do-gooders in and outside of beekeeping all trying to get the last slice from the pie.

Dig deep to save the bees has become a key fundraising plank of many organisations who have hitherto shown little or no interest in bees. Starts to grate after a while. FoE has made itself look ridiculous with this statement. I presume they swallowed hook line and sinker some press release from a fringe beekeeping lobby. Well done Calum for correcting the bull but I doubt if they really care.

[HJBee]

It will be interesting to see a) if they reply to you Calum and b) how they do to counter any of your points or c) print a retraction of some sorts (unlikely)

[Calum]

They have replied, are preparing their rebuttal. Please also complain to the email address paul.dezylva(a)foe.co.uk - silence = acceptance. I feel like they are dragging us through mud here!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Black Comb]

Dig deep to save the bees has become a key fundraising plank of many organisations who have hitherto shown little or no interest in bees. Starts to grate after a while. FoE has made itself look ridiculous with this statement. I presume they swallowed hook line and sinker some press release from a fringe beekeeping lobby. Well done Calum for correcting the bull but I doubt if they really care.

Agree. Well done Calum.
Some of it I recognise as expounded by a certain "natural" beekeeper.

[Neils]

FOE Have record on this front. They regularly have a stand at the Bristol festival of nature with an anti phone mast group and are enthusiastic peddlers of garbage on bees generally, not just honeybees/Beekeepers which in recent years has started to make me question their worth as a campaign group rather than a money siphon willing to jump on any fashionable bandwagon.

Uncle Phil peddles the sort of half truth, tin foil hat "woo" that FOE just love. Moustache twirling Beekeepers killing bees with cyanide!!!!!11one!!!

[Adam]

This is a good one:-

"Ethical Consumer suggests that regular honey consumption can contribute to declining honey bee populations". So this means that.... Eat less honey to save the bees? Mental.

[Adam]

I also like the caption under the wild comb on page 5 labelled Natural Beekeeping. Err, leave the bees on the tree to die?.

[brothermoo]

Problem with 'uncle phil' and his crystal toting pals is that there are some really good things that beekeepers could be doing more naturally ...and unfortunately the level headed beekeepers tend to throw the baby out with the bath water when it comes to 'natural' beekeeping (most of the biobees regulars turn me off the nuggets good info there)

[Calum]

My latest email to the Ethical Consumer Magazine which is selling the FOE honey guide in their Nov/Dec 2014 issue:

Hi,
regarding your Nov/Dec 2014 issue. There a large number of inaccuracies in the ethical honey guide, which are frankly defamation of most beekeepers practices.
I think in fairness to the reputation of the majority of beekeepers this guide should be taken down from your website untill rectified. I have also already taken up this issue with friends of the earth. They are looking into this

With best regards,

Calum Grigor 凯乐,

T: +49 (0)8382-xxxxxx M: +49 (0)174 30xxxxxx

I think we should also urge FOE to take down this guide until the inaccuracies are corrected.
We do not use cyanide!!!

also to Paul De Z.



Hi Paul,

since I have not heard back from you for a bit, I guess it will take longer to get through my points.

Talking too other beekeepers that have read the guide, they have pointed out other problems that I either missed, or had not yet reviewed.

Due to the large number of inaccuracies in the ethical honey guide, which are frankly defamation of the most of (at least) UK and EU beekeepers practices. I think in fairness to the reputation of the majority of beekeepers this guide should be taken down from your website untill rectified.

Calum Grigor 凯乐,

[Calum]

Replies so far indicate no intention of pulling their shite of the internet. Did anyone else complain?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[greengumbo]

yup. No response so far. That caption of the bees building comb on a branch just sums up the lack of knowledge in the entire leaflet. Its laughable....if it was not so serious.

[Nige.Coll]

He replied to my e mail.
Had quite a good chat with him over a few mails.
Told him the national pollinator strategy was a good thing which he spearheaded but the ethical honey article was a joke and as accurate as the drivel released by the pesticide companies. Hit a nerve with that.
He wrote the forward only on that article. I suggested he reads what he puts his name in front of in the future and asked him to pass my comments to tim hunt and anna clayton who wrote it.

[Castor]

He replied to my e mail.
Had quite a good chat with him over a few mails.

Well done that man - so long as they are aware that they have been had by the hippies.....

[Jon]

Unfortunately FoE has a recent history of being careless with the accuracy of their info.

[Castor]

Unfortunately FoE has a recent history of being careless with the accuracy of their info.

I told them they were damaging our mutual interests and diluting their credibility by inaccuracy.
I got an unsigned "thank you for your feedback".

[madasafish]

I told them they were damaging our mutual interests and diluting their credibility by inaccuracy.
I got an unsigned "thank you for your feedback".


In other words "we think you are wrong and will ignore you"

[Castor]

In other words "we think you are wrong and will ignore you"

....however it seems that Nige.Coll ate message #23 has established duplex communications with the bloke since then, so maybe the cumulative effect has led to a review......all good.
Whether they actually *do* anything about it is another matter altogether.
I find it really frustrating when the loonies take over worthy organisations like FoE - they have a ready made platform built over years of campaigning and then they blow it all with some tinfoil hat thinking.

[madasafish]

....however it seems that Nige.Coll ate message #23 has established duplex communications with the bloke since then, so maybe the cumulative effect has led to a review......all good.
Whether they actually *do* anything about it is another matter altogether.
I find it really frustrating when the loonies take over worthy organisations like FoE - they have a ready made platform built over years of campaigning and then they blow it all with some tinfoil hat thinking.


Ah but if you believe your cause is just, then everything - and I mean EVERYTHING - you do to advance it is just and right ..The single minded zealot in action is a dangerous being ... See the Middle East as an extreme example.

I suggest all should read the manifesto of the Green Party. A party which wants to make the UK green - good thing - by making everyone MUCH poorer...

[drumgerry]

Not to get into politics etc but just to say the Scottish Greens are a separate party from the E and W Green Party and as we're on a Scottish forum.....

[mbc]

To add a little international flavour, especially with the Scotland vs Wales 6 nations match coming up, I'd like to tell you all that my first ever vote was for the UK's first green mp, Cynog Dafis, who got in under a green/ plaid Cymru aliance. I had no trouble whatsoever choosing who to vote for that time round, but since plaid and the Welsh green party have chosen not to put forward joint candidates it's been much tougher to decide.

[Calum]

wow got a reply.... interesting read...
Ethical Consumer Honey Report
Response to questions raised, March 2015
Recently, you raised with Friends of the Earth comments and concerns about the honey
report produced by Ethical Consumer (EC) in 2014, which contained one article written by
our senior nature campaigner.
Many points that have been raised about the report are important to debate, and deserve
more study. Friends of the Earth welcome this opportunity to explore the issues and has
contacted the authors and researchers to obtain responses. These are summarised below.
In its work across the different topics it examines, EC advocates transparency in business
practices and strives to present ethical alternatives to standard practice and consumption. In
the case of its Honey Report, this explores a range of bee-keeping practices on the
spectrum between industrial scale bee keeping and bee conservation – from large
commercial brands deriving honey from multiple EU and non EU sources to local
beekeepers producing modest amounts of honey and bee products such as wax for little
commercial gain, for pleasure and for conservation interest.
EC regards that consumers have a right to know the range of practices that could potentially
be involved in the supply chain of products they buy, in this case, honey. The report
encourages consumers to question the businesses supplying honey and to be informed on a
range of issues and practices whether mainstream or fringe. Central to EC’s approach of
encouraging enquiry and consumer action is the encouragement to consumers to ask key
questions to help ensure the product they buy aligns to their personal ethical values.
The report should have been clearer in its references to the EU, UK and practices outside of
the EU. The report is not intended as a criticism of beekeepers or beekeeping and
references to some practices and techniques that may be performed in the production of
some honey brands does not mean that these apply in all cases of beekeeping and honey
production - that would be incompatible with the report’s recommendation of some brands of
honey as ‘best buys’.
Responses to specific comments received
Report section: Page 4 - “Organic standards encourage the feeding of bees with organic
honey rather than sugar water; limit the use of antibiotics; prohibit the clipping of a queen
bee’s wings and prohibit artificial insemination.”
Comments on the report included that:
- The use of antibiotics for controlling bee health issues is forbidden in the UK and
Europe
- Contamination of honey with antibiotics from farming use is controlled.
Response: Agreed. It is illegal to use antibiotics for controlling bee health in the UK and
some European countries. However, a large number of brands covered in the report source
honey from outside these areas where the use of antibiotics is not illegal. For example, as
highlighted later in the report - on page 16 of the report - Chloramphenicol has been found in
honey imported from China.
Recommended limits on antibiotics in honey is stipulated in the UK, but organic certification
is the simplest way for a consumer concerned about this aspect to buy honey with no or low
levels of antibiotics. It is noted that UK honey cannot receive organic certification at present
because of the widespread use of pesticides and herbicides in the UK.
Report section: “But organic beekeeping can still include a number of practices that could
be conceived of as ‘unnatural’, and as violating animal rights, and are argued by ‘natural
beekeepers’ to be linked to a higher incidence of pests, disease and stress.”
Comments on the report included that:
- Some beekeepers and bee specialists link ‘natural beekeeping’ to higher risks of
infection from pests and disease and stress to bees.
Response: This is an important matter for discussion and the ‘natural beekeepers’
association can be contacted directly to discuss and explore comment on any single
practices. We understand that those promoting ‘natural beekeeping’ do so as a whole
integrated system and holistic approach with multiple practices rather than singular
responses to a particular issue.
Report section: Page 5 – “the beekeeper becomes a giver rather than just a taker.”
Comments on the report included that:
- Beekeepers give more than they take, providing shelter, care, food etc.
Response: Beekeepers do give a lot but the point in the report was a specific reference to
those reading from a vegan perspective. This was included in the report given the general
position that honey is not a vegan product, however benignly it may be produced. For people
with a vegan outlook, the view can probably be described as being that if bees are kept, they
should be kept for the bees themselves and not for the honey they produce.
Report section: “5. Natural Report section: beekeeping: similar to ‘balanced beekeeping’,
with the emphasis on ‘do-nothing’ approaches. Little or no management is attempted.
6. Conservation beekeeping: bees for their own sake; no honey is taken and no inspections,
treatments or feeding.”
Comments on the report included that:
- These two methods promote the spread of varroa
- Allowing bees to swarm raises the chance of bees dying
- Deliberate swarming can spread varroa to surrounding hives.
Response: This is another area worth further debate and, probably, extensive scientific study
to compare the range of bee keeping practices. Conventional beekeepers may frown upon
these minimal management espoused by those in the ‘natural beekeeping’ movement. The
report sought to acknowledge that there is debate on the entire spectrum of beekeeping with
some choosing to question some of the practices in conventional use.
Report section: “Winter survival rates are far better in colonies that have swarmed and
overwintered on their own honey as opposed to sugar water or worse…” and “…mounting
evidence of feral colonies faring better than those kept by beekeepers.”
Comments on the report included that:
- Sugar water is the best energy source for overwintering bees as its lower ‘ballast’
places less pressure on bees’ digestive tracts and can help reduce the instances of
nosema virus
- No scientific study has shown that feral colonies are doing better than others.
Response: These points from the Natural Beekeeping Trust were included as part of
showing that debate exists; proper scientific comparisons would help this debate and cast
more light on the hearsay and observations of different beekeepers which do not always
come to light.
Report section: “smaller cell sizes, or ‘natural’ sized cells. A number of studies have linked
smaller cells to reduced Varroa mite populations.”
Comments on the report included that:
- A number of studies do not support the report on the use of smaller cell sizes
- Fries (2004) found no lasting difference in the effect of cell sizes
- Liebig & Aumeier (2007) found no effect on the pre-treatment natural mite drop and
the extent of varroa infestation of cells
- Dahle (2008) which concluded that smaller cell sizes supplement but not substitute
for oxalic acid treatment.
Response: As stated in the article a number of studies could not prove this assertion. Two of
the studies listed above observed slight drops in varroa mite numbers, they were just not
statistically significant.
Considering the importance of varroa as an issue, this finding, although statistically
insignificant, should be explored further and should be considered as one of several ways to
control varroa, as part of an integrated approach to pest management.
The importance of small cell sizes or, more importantly 'natural cell sizes' made from frames
without foundation, is still ongoing. We are aware of conventional beekeepers experimenting
with smaller cells.
Report section: Page 8 – “These include artificial feeding regimes, artificial insemination,
treatment with antibiotics and pesticides, inhumane transportation conditions and culling.”
Comments on the report included that:
- Artificial feeding regimes (mainly replacing high ballast honey with low ballast honey)
is healthier for the bees
- Treatment with antibiotics is not permitted in the EU
- Use of the term ‘pesticides’ in the report should differentiate between treatments for
varroa and crop spraying.
Response: Beekeepers feed various sugar solutions to bees in a number of circumstances
and some cite different recipe for sugar-based honey replacements
http://www.wimbledonbeekeepers.co.uk/Suggested%20sugar%20recipes.pdf
Antibiotic use within the EI is not permitted but many honeys on sale in the UK and EU come
from locations where no such regulations exist. The report is a consumers’ report about
products which may enter the EU and UK markets.
Apologies, the use of ‘pesticide’ in the report does create the wrong impression in this
instance and has been removed from the copy.
Report section: “Some beekeepers use cyanide gas while others will burn the beehives,
killing all the bees inside.”
Comments on the report included that:
- This is incorrect and use of cyanide would render hives, frames and products from
the hive poisonous
- Whole hives must be burnt when infected with American foul brood and the colony
put to sleep with sulphur dioxide.
Response: Apologies, this is a mistake. EC re-checked the source and do not regard it as
reliable. The reference to cyanide is removed.

[Calum]

continued..
Report section: “In many cases it is cheaper to kill off entire hives rather than feed the bees
through the winter.”
Comments on the report included that:
- The costs and worth of over-wintering a colony varies depending on the methods of
calculation used; an over-wintered colony may be worth between £100- £240
- Beekeepers would not cull given the high of concern about the scarcity of bees.
Response: Culling of drones is performed in the autumn to reduce the impact of mites or
indeed the potential impact of mites. Financial considerations are factored into the decisions
made by large scale industrial operations. The source of EC’s section on culling is The
Bioeconomics of Honey Bees and Pollination (Champetier et al, 2012)
http://aic.ucdavis.edu/publications/Beedynamics2012.pdf
Report section: “One tactic used by beekeepers (in both large- and smaller-scale farming)
to keep production high is clipping the queen’s wings. This helps to prevent swarming.
Because the queen is not able to fly, the swarm simply masses next to the hive. They are
then collected by the beekeeper and returned to the hive. A second tactic used by
beekeepers is to periodically kill and replace the queen.”
Comments on the report included that:
- Nowadays less clipping takes place.
Response: Accepted although clipping remains a practice which ethical consumer readers
and consumers in general may wish to be appraised of.
Report section: “In wild colonies the queen is selected by the worker bees and specially fed
to become sexually mature. In factory farmed hives the beekeeper selects the queen and
often replaces her every two years. In managed colonies the process of queen rearing is the
same as in wild colonies.”
Comments on the report included that:
- Beekeeping promotes the best stock through selective breeding rather than natural
selection and is the basis of all food production since the agricultural revolution.
Response: Agreed, although the thrust of this piece in the report is that bee farming is similar
to that of other forms of farming.
Report section: “A key natural defence for honey bees against Varroa is for the bees to
groom one another and become ‘hygienic’ and able to remove the mites from larvae and
their bodies.”
Comments on the report included that:
- This is hearsay; studies show that improved hygienic attributes help, but cannot
replace supplemental treatments
- Varroa is an alien infection specialised for Asian bees. Native European breeds with
a longer pupation, especially drones, have no defence
- Lack of treatment means accepting higher rates of mortality rate.
Response: We are aware that different beekeepers are trialling different ways of managing
their colonies and observing what works, what doesn’t and so on. An account of the method
described in the report is detailed here: http://scientificbeekeeping.com/choosing-yourtroops-
breeding-mite-fighting-bees/