Editor - Eugene Makovec

Advertising Manager - Marta Menn

Publishing Department -
Dianne Behnke & Susan Nichols
info@americanbeejournal.com
www.americanbeejournal.com
subscriptions@americanbeejournal.com
CONTENTS
DEPARTMENTS Volume 160 No. 9 September 2020
From the Editor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 943 ARTICLES
Letters to the Editor . . . . . . . . . . . . 945 • International Honey Market Report:
A Sea Change: Signs that markets are beginning to improve
News and Events . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 949 Ron Phipps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 957

U .S . Honey Crops and Markets . . . 953

• Darwin, Design, and the Honey Bee, Part 1
Classified Advertising . . . . . . . . . . . 951 Piers J. Hale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 985

Advertising Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 954 • Questing for the Wonder Bee, Part 1

From Brother Adam to Varroa Sensitive Hygiene
COLUMNS M.E.A. McNeil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1005
The Classroom
Jamie Ellis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 965 • Refining the Mite Wash, Part 3:
Beekeeping Basics:
Dislodgement, precipitation, and separation
Working with Queen Cells Randy Oliver . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1013
Meghan Milbrath . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 973
• Master Beekeeping Programs:
Science Insider: A Closer Look at Canola
Is there one for you?
Alison McAfee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 981
Dewey M. Caron . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1025
The Curious Beekeeper:
Thinking Like a Scientist
Rusty Burlew . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 993
• Florida’s New Online Master Beekeeper Program
Mary Bammer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1029
Beekeeping, Past and Present:
Queen Introduction: Part 4
Wyatt A. Mangum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 997 • Automated Remote Feeding:
For extreme weather and hungry bees
Notes from the Lab: Cory Momany and Madeleine Schwab . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1035
Neonic Risks vs. Benefits
Scott McArt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1019
• Beeswax is Foundation for Nashville Encaustic Artist
The American Bee Journal Justin Stokes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1042
ISSN 0002-7626
THE AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL (ISSN 002-7626) is
published monthly at American Bee Journal, 51 S. • Broadleaf Plantain: A source of pollen for honey bees
2nd Street, Hamilton, IL 62341. Periodicals Postage Al Avitabile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1047
Paid at Hamilton, IL and at additional mailing offices.
POSTMASTER: Send address changes to American Bee
Journal, 51 S. 2nd Street, Hamilton, IL 62341. In the United
States, $29.00 a year; two years, $55.00 and three years,
$78.00. Canada $47.00 a year; two years $90.00. Foreign
$54.00 a year; two years $99.00. Subscriptions stop at
expiration date printed on label. Available in microfilm
form at moderate prices by writing to National Archive ON THE COVER
Publishing Co., 300 N. Zeeb Road, P.O. Box 998, Ann
Arbor, Michigan 48106. ©Copyright Dadant & Sons, Inc., Katy Ciola Evans photographed these feral bees in an abandoned
2019. All rights reserved, printed in USA. The Publishers
cannot guarantee advertisements in this magazine, but
shed in Harrison Valley, Pennsylvania, during a 2018 Feral Bee
we ask that any advertising complaints be made known Project conducted at Pennsylvania State University . Katy is
to us, so we can further check the company’s reliability.
Opinions expressed in articles are not necessarily those entering the University of Maryland’s PhD program in Entomology
of the publisher. American Bee Journal, 51 S. 2nd St., this fall.
Hamilton, IL 62341. (888) 922-1293. Fax (217) 847-3660.

September 2020 939

940 American Bee Journal

I’m that guy who stoops to pick up
a penny on the sidewalk.
Well, not always — it depends
sometimes on who else is around.
(Even I am embarrassed at times
at how cheap I am.) But as the say-
ing goes, “A penny saved is a penny
earned.” (This is generally attributed
to Ben Franklin, though what he actu-
ally said in Poor Richard’s Almanack
was “A penny saved is a penny got”
— and, in another installment, “A
penny saved is two pence clear.”
But you get the picture. And since
I’ve never really had money, I figure
every little bit helps. Just consider:
Over the past decade I’ll bet I’ve
picked up at least a hundred pennies.
That comes to at least … a dollar.
Hmm, where was I? Oh yeah —
I’m that guy who stoops to pick up a
quarter on the sidewalk. And I don’t
care who’s watching.
One of the weirder things to come
out of the COVID pandemic was a
shortage of coins. I saw a blurb about
this one day in late June, but didn’t
read the story. Then about a week lat-
er I got an email from my bank:
We need your coin!
Coin is in short supply due to
COVID-19. The pandemic has
significantly disrupted the sup-
ply chain and normal circulation
of coin. If you have extra coin,
please bring it in so we get it back
in circulation. Thank you!
Given our paranoid nature these
days, much of social media sees this
as a plot by the government to force
a “cashless society,” rather than sim-
ply a product of a suddenly-dysfunc-
tional economy. I don’t know about
that; the stores that buy my honey
mostly redeem my invoice with cash
from the register, so I also use cash for
most retail purchases. To this point,
retailers continue to happily accept
September 2020
From the Editor
Eugene Makovec
editor@americanbeejournal.com
Got coin?
my money — some just prefer exact
change if I have it.
But back to my bank: As it hap-
pened, I did have extra coin. I have
a habit (like a lot of folks I’m sure) of
emptying my pocket of change after
a trip to the store and dropping the
coins into a jug in my closet. Last
year we dumped some into a small
coffee can, took it to a bank and got
over 200 bucks for vacation money.
I’d planned to take the rest this spring
but decided to hold off till the current
madness was over. Who knew that
the madness itself would demand
that I cash in my mad money?
About two-and-a-half jugs was what
I carried in. Minus the two Canadian
quarters the machine rejected, it netted
me $845.06 in vacation money. Now, if
we only had someplace we could go.
Here’s another recent oddity,
though it may be unrelated. Remem-
ber the “windshield effect”? This
is the observation, by many of us
who’ve been around awhile, that a
drive through the countryside during
the last couple of decades just didn’t
result in as much bug splatter as it
did in the 1970s or 80s. A common as-
sumption is that farm pesticides have
wiped out much of the biodiversity
we used to hit with our cars — al-
though Rusty Burlew takes a squee-
gee to that idea in her column this
month. But I have noticed this spring
and summer that, on my occasional
drives through farmland (which nor-
mally occur early morning and eve-
ning), I have encountered consider-
ably more insects than in recent years.
It is possible that this also is COVID-
connected? Do fewer cars on the road
translate to more bugs per car?
Something else we didn’t think
about: those photos of clearer skies
over Los Angeles and other cities, fol-
lowing a few weeks of economic con-
traction. All it cost us was 15 million
or so jobs and perhaps 5 percent of
GDP, and another $5-6 Trillion in debt.
Obviously, we can’t have that for any
length of time, but imagine this: As
the economy recovers, perhaps a few
of the thousands of employers whose
workers were, by necessity, able to do
their jobs from home, will allow some
of them continue to do so. What if just
10 percent of non-manufacturing em-
ployees are allowed to stay home for
four days out of five? Imagine what
that will mean for snarled rush-hour
traffic … for wasted commute times
… for high fuel costs … for blue skies.
Of course, if we’re keeping bees,
whether full- or part-time, we can’t
very well phone it in. But we are for-
tunate in other ways during these
times. For one thing, we are working:
As part of the agricultural economy,
we are recognized as an “essential in-
dustry,” whether we’re in the apiary
or somewhere in the supply chain.
And then there’s the nature of our
work. The beekeeping business is
challenging, and involves hard physi-
cal labor, but it is not drudgery. Un-
like many workers who dread punch-
ing the clock at the start of their shift,
most people who work with bees do
it because they love it.
One of our Market Reporters, Rob-
ert Fassbinder of Elgin, Iowa, put
it nicely: “With all the effects of the
Virus on our world we are thankful
for the lifestyle
beekeeping has
provided us. We
almost feel guilty
going about our
lives with busi-
ness as usual.
The seclusion of
the beeyard and
the hum of the
bees on a sunny
day make the
world seem OK
even when we
know it is not.”
943
 Send your letters to the editor,
Attn: Eugene Makovec,
Dadant, 51 S. 2nd Street,
Hamilton, IL 62341,
Fax: 1-217-847-3660,
or email: editor@americanbeejournal.com
Due to size and content, we may be unable to publish all information received.
We may also edit your letter to avoid offensive language. Thank You!

SUGAR SYRUP AND BEES —
A FOLLOW-UP
I’m grateful that Randy Oliver re-
sponded to my question of honey vs.
sugar syrup (July Letters). He urges
constantly “Don’t make assumptions”
and so I followed up on the assertion
that “There have been plenty of stud-
ies … that indicate that honey bee
colonies can thrive on ‘clean’ sugar
syrup.”
Ironically the first sources I found
all had cautions on the use of syrup.
They were, in my opinion, reliable
sources (e.g., Diana Yates reporting
on the work of Drs. May Berenbaum
and Gene Robinson, James Zitting
writing in Mother Earth News, and a
New Zealand based beekeepers’ site,
Kiwimana).
One three-year study showed that
bees fed with honey lived an average
of 27 days, with sugar syrup 21 days,
and with acid invert syrup only 12
days. And the New Zealand report
cites Dr. Michelle Taylor from Plant
and Food Research who concurred
that honey bees fed on sugar syrup
did not live as long as those feeding
off their own honey. She argues that
the minerals and proteins in honey
are vital supplements to the proteins
derived from the pollen and are cru-
cial to healthy larval development.
By contrast, white sugar may retain a
residue of chemicals from the process-
ing of cane or beet sugar to a granular
form.
A third study concluded that differ-
ent food sources have differing influ-
ences on the digestive tract of bees, es-
pecially in the midgut epithelial layer
— honey has no harmful effect while
adding yeast or malt to sugar syrup
had the worst impact.
A fourth study headed by Gene
Robinson focused on gene activity in
response to feeding with honey, su-
crose and HFCS. Hundreds of genes
showed differences in activity in bees
consuming honey compared to su-
crose or HFCS, and in particular ac-
tivities linked to protein metabolism,
brain-signaling and immune defense.
“Our results parallel suggestive find-
ings in humans,” Robinson said. “It
seems that in both bees and humans
sugar is not sugar — different carbo-
hydrate sources can act differently on
the body.”
In 2013 May Berenbaum reported
that some substances in honey in-
crease the activity of genes that help
break down potentially toxic sub-
stances such as pesticides.
Finally sugar has a different pH to
honey and lacks the enzymes of the
latter. “When you change the pH in a
bee hive,” James Zitting wrote, “it af-
fects the finely balanced world of the
little bugs and weakens the colony.
When they track pesticides and fungi-
cides into the hive, the life within the
bee bread is affected.”
Randy, I understand the argument
that in different parts of the country,
weather and foraging opportunities
can make supplemental feeding es-
sential for colony survival; I’m hoping
you can reference some of the studies
that counter the above negativity to-
wards white sugar.
Jeremy Barnes
Seven Valleys, Pennsylvania
Randy responds:
You are absolutely correct Jeremy
— for bees being fed for cage trials
in incubators, where it may be their
sole nutritional source, a high-quality
honey may be better than sugar syr-
up. In my own cage trials, however,
the longevity of bees on sugar syrup
is quite long. This may be due to my
using bees that had fed upon pollen
before caging, rather than the newly-
emerged (and pollen-starved) bees
typically used in cage trials.
On the other hand, most beekeepers
are not interested in keeping diet-re-
stricted caged bees alive in an incuba-
tor, but instead are feeding sugar syr-
up to full-sized, free-flying colonies in
the field, as an energy source in order
to increase colony health, buildup, or
for winter stores. Decades of practi-
cal experience by beekeepers around
the world indicates that honey bee
colonies can benefit greatly from the
feeding of sugar syrup during nectar
dearth, or for winter stores. In my
own dearth-prone operation, we find
that our colonies respond quite well
to the feeding of sugar syrup when
called for. Sugar is certainly not a
complete or perfect diet, but honey
bees (similar to hummingbirds) are
physiologically well-adapted for uti-
lizing sugar syrup for their nutritional
needs.
Randy Oliver
PRISON BEEKEEPING AMID
THE CORONAVIRUS
Last year was a difficult one for the
fledgling beekeeping program here
at Eastern Oregon Correctional In-
stitution (EOCI). On paper it looked
simple enough; set up two hives, pur-
chase nucs, split the class of eight into
two groups and we would be.up to
our elbows in honey by the end of the
season.
What actually happened was a vast-
ly different picture. We lost a queen to
a swarming event and then stepped
on her replacement during a routine
hive inspection.
We combined the two remaining
hives, bought a new queen late in
the season and then over wintered —
dazed but not defeated.
Flash forward to March 2020. The
four aspiring Journeymen hold our
first meeting to discuss what we
learned in the previous year and how
to approach the next season. As the
plan unfolds, all of the failures from
the previous year are addressed.
Instead of scraping those pesky
swarm cells off the frames we decide
to split the hives to multiply our api-
ary and provide room for crowded
colonies to grow. We decide to limit
our hive inspections and rely more on
deciphering peripheral cues as signs
to treat or invasively inspect. We also

September 2020 945

decide to use smoke properly; closing
the lid after smoking and waiting a
few moments will allow the bees to
begin their gorging and keep calm.
Being more cognizant of where we
step is also a concern that is brought
up. No more stepping on queens this
year! We will treat early in the sea-
son during the first brood cycles with
Hopguard II followed by Formic Pro
treatments during the summer honey
flows and at the end of the season
with an oxalic acid drip before tuck-
ing the bees in for the winter. After
just a few hours of discussion, all the
angles are covered.
On March 13th, in response to the
Coronavirus outbreak, the Oregon
Department of Corrections issued a
modified lockdown order for all pris-
ons in the state. This means no visita-
tion, no education and no program-
ming or group meetings for at least
90 days.
Since the EOCI Beekeeping Pro-
gram falls into the programming cate-
gory, we faced a major roadblock. But
we did what beekeepers do in times
of adversity; we adapted.
This year we have a new brood
cycle of beginning beekeepers; 12
new students are now engaged in the
Washington State Beekeepers Associa-
tion (WSBA) educational curriculum.
In order to continue with certification
on schedule we are working with the
EOCI multimedia program to record
classroom lectures to be aired on the
institution channel. Now the class
participants can view video lectures,
study their manuals and take quizzes
and tests via correspondence with the
program facilitators.
As for field work experiences —
class participants will be called out
to our apiary in teams of three to do
routine hive inspections, varroa treat-
ments and behavior studies while
maintaining social distancing require-
ments. Here on my housing unit, I’m
lucky to have a few beginning bee-
keepers whom I can mentor and a
bunch of free time to write and submit
articles to newsletters and magazines,
earning points toward my Journey-
man certification.
This is a hard time for all of us. EOCI
currently has zero confirmed cases of
Coronavirus, but our thoughts go out
to everyone outside who has been af-
fected. I know that we will come out of
this as a stronger, more united country.
Thank you to Patrick Gazeley-Romney
and the other Beekeeping Program fa-
cilitators, and Mr. Peters, the institu-
tion work program coordinator, for
946
keeping the program running during
the Coronavirus pandemic.
Jonathan
Pendleton, Oregon
BEES NEEDED IN
NORTH DAKOTA PRISONS
Hello fellow beekeepers,
In the past we have seen articles
about beekeeping and beekeeping
education as a form of skills training
in correctional facilities. States that
have beekeeping programs in them
have been shown to reduce prison
crime and lower recidivism. Once re-
leased it helps to prepare trainees for
job opportunities.
One bit of information I find quite
alarming is that a place commercial
beekeepers like to go during the long
summer months for the lush fields of
canola, sunflowers and clover does
not have such a program. The North
Dakota Department of Corrections
and Rehabilitation has three men’s,
one women’s, and also a youth facil-
ity. At all the adult facilities there are
vegetable gardens, flower gardens
and even service dog training pro-
grams. Where are the bees?
There are men and women here
willing to learn and eager about hon-
ey bees. North Dakota is the highest
volume honey producer in the U.S.,
and migratory operations as well as
domestic producers would benefit
greatly from having a pool of trained
workers from which to draw once in-
mates are released.
One doesn’t have to look far to see
the countless benefits educational
and vocational training provides;
this is especially true in a prison set-
ting, as that captive population will
soon be back in the public seeking
gainful employment. Please take a
moment to contact the ND Depart-
ment of Corrections and encourage
them to keep beehives at all four
state prisons.
Matthew
North Dakota State Penitentiary
Bismarck, North Dakota
JUNE COVER SHOWS
“HONEYBEE MAYHEM”
I take exception to the June 2020
cover picture. I hope this isn’t an ex-
ample of the normal or usual method
of making nucs or divisions.
If it were my operation I wouldn’t
want a picture record. To me it looks
like honeybee mayhem! I know they
will recover from such a disturbance.
But was it necessary, such a method,
in the first place?
God’s little creatures deserve more
respect.
Don Baker
The Evergreen Apiaries
Saguache, Colorado
SEELEY’S RESEARCH
CONFIRMED ONCE AGAIN
Tom Seeley is clearly the doyen of
bee researchers, as again demonstrated
in his July 2020 article (“The Astonish-
ing Behavioral Versatility of Nest-site
Scouts”), written in clear English with
carefully documented results. His
departure from Cornell to nowhere,
Maine, one hopes will not hinder him
from writing. I own all his books.
A pArAble
Early in my 20 years of beekeeping
(peaking at 55 hives producing 120
gallons) I hived a swarm into a deep
hive where I had placed it on top of
some tree roots so that the box was
directly below the swarm. I had re-
moved the center 5-6 frames to give
a target zone. I used a 5-gallon plastic
bucket to collect the swarm from the
overhanging branch, to dump directly
into the space.
As it were, a substantial portion of
bees fell outside, and proceeded to
clump up in the space under the box.
I suspect the queen was in that clump.
The bees inside, the vast majority, be-
gan the usual fanning from the en-
American Bee Journal
trance to announce to one and all, and
especially returning scout bees, that
home was no longer that branch but
here down below in this lovely dark
box the right size with all the scents
of home and already built comb. Well,
the hours passed and the clump was
still there. Quite clearly, there was no
consensus.
Then came a mass exit from within,
and below. They flew to a very low
bush in tall grass and resumed a now
re-united swarm clump. Most irregu-
lar. I followed the swarm carrying
my hive, realized that if I removed
the bottom board, carefully lowered
it onto the swarm, they would have
the opportunity to move up into it.
The next morning I returned to find
the bees inside. I mated the hive to its
bottom board, fed them some syrup,
and thanked them for staying in my
nice condo.
Quite clearly, consensus had been
achieved.
weeks ago, I was asked to participate
in a project for Chesterfield (I’m the
Planning Commission Chairman
there) regarding bees. The Parks folks
are very eager to teach the community
about bees ...
One of the components involved
pictures of my bees.
A wonderful photographer named
Elaine Collins spent several days at
my home, taking bee pix in my hives
and around the 5 acres. I was with
her part of the time and the rest, she
explored, being a great “appreciator”
of pollinators. She captured the photo
below and what she saw was no less
than amazing. Here’s the story ...

A Confirming pArAble
Some years ago, I learned what Dr.
Seeley’s experiment proved when I
got a call from a friend that he was
watching a swarm lift out of his hive
into a branch in a nearby tree.
Within 20 minutes I was over there
climbing my ladder with bee brush
and 5-gallon bucket to collect the
swarm and dump them into the love-
ly condo I had placed below. As I got
to them, the swarm lifted and sailed Siberian iris have surrounded my
over the fields into a mature woods pond and it is an incredible display
about a mile away. Those bees knew when they are in full bloom. Appar-
exactly where they were headed. ently, my bees visit those blossoms,
They had no time to have sent out too. Elaine saw them. She said, they
scouts, then send more to approve, and would fly into the blossom and to
then more to reach consensus. Quite navigate the narrow pathways, they
clearly, the old foragers had reached would roll over and over and over.
this consensus well before the swarm- As they rolled, they gathered pollen.
ing. They had planned ahead, a capa- And, they repeated the process again
bility that says “We are intelligent.” and again — she was convinced they
I happily waste huge numbers of seemed to be enjoying their time.
hours watching the bees and contem-
plating what are they doing and why.
A good strong cuppa in hand helps.
And that, besides the honey, is why I
keep bees. Fascinating little beasties.

Dave Pugh
Meadow Walk Bees
Staunton, Virginia
SIBERIAN IRIS
Greetings, Eugene. I’m Merrell
Hansen, a member of Three Rivers
Beekeepers [in St. Charles County,
Missouri], and a bee keeper. A couple
Please take the photo and look
closely. Enlarge this dynamic worker
in the pix and I bet you smile seeing
the dots of lovely yellow on her body.
I love this picture as it captures a vi-
sual few have seen.
Merrell Hansen
Chesterfield, Missouri

September 2020 947

 “We’re excited to be chosen. We want to make it one of
the best stops. It’s going to be a great thing for Auburn, our
county and our area. We want people to come and visit
and show them Nemaha County is the place to be. We’re
going to show them a great time,” notes Leslie Clark, proj-
ect director.
Sculptures designed by 26 regional artisans can be seen
throughout the county. There are 20 in Auburn; two each
in Johnson and Peru; and one apiece in Brownville and
Julian. Honeybees in the Heartland was the project of the
sixth Nemaha County Leadership Class. It honors the
Cornhusker State’s official insect as well as recognizing
the agricultural community.
Submit your News or Event to editor@americanbeejournal. Cafe’ Metro at 901 Central Ave. and El Portal Mexican
com, or to Editor, 51 S. 2nd St., Hamilton IL 62341. Deadline Restaurant at 1905 J St., both in Auburn, will be serving as
is 45 days prior to publish date ― e.g. January 15th for the locations where visitors can get their passports stamped.
March issue. Maps showing the locations of honeybees are available
at a number of businesses. Those include Auburn City
Hall, Casey’s General Store, Country Handmades, Glenn’s
NEBRASKA TOURISM PROGRAM Corner Market, Shell Speedee Mart and Sunmart. They
can also be accessed or downloaded from the Honeybees
FEATURES “HONEYBEES IN THE in the Heartland Facebook page. Further particulars are
HEARTLAND” SCULPTURES forthcoming.
The sculptures are among 70 attractions statewide in 10
Once again, a Nemaha County attraction is to be a Ne- themed categories announced by Nebraska Tourism.
braska Passport stop. The beginning of the Passport was delayed because
Honeybees in the Heartland is being featured on the Art of uncertainty with COVID-19. The program typically
Cetera tour. starts on May 1. The end date has also been extended
to Saturday, Oct. 31. In previous years the last day has
been Sept. 30.
Entering its 11th year, the Passport inspires Nebras-
kans and tourists to travel throughout the state collecting
stamps to earn prizes, while also supporting the state’s
tourism destinations. In 2019, the program generated $23.7
million in traveler spending. There has been a Nemaha
County attraction in eight of its first 10 years.
“The Nebraska Passport program has a huge positive
economic impact. We’re excited to encourage traveling
to hidden gems throughout the state when the program
launches on its new start date,” said John Ricks, Nebraska
Tourism Commission executive director.
“We’re encouraging travelers to start creating a road-
map of your future Nebraska Passport adventures now,
maybe a fun task while many are stuck at home during
this tough time,” states Madison Johnson, Nebraska Pass-
port program coordinator.
Passports were available at participating stops starting
May 23. They can also be ordered at NebraskaPassport.com.
Participants are also encouraged to download the Ne-
braska Passport App on their smartphone and get digital
stamps, supplementing the physical booklet for conve-
nience. Please note, the app has been updated with the 2020
information on the scheduled beginning date. Anyone who
used the mobile app last year will need to download the
update to see the new program information. To download,
search NE Passport 2020 in the Apple App Store or Google
Play App Store.
From the Nebraska Passport website: “The purpose of
the Nebraska Passport is to help travelers discover Ne-
braska’s hidden gems. The Nebraska Passport is special
because it offers a wide variety of travel adventures, in-
cluding museums, parks, restaurants, wineries, retail
stores and more. [This year’s] program runs from June 1
to October 31, 2020.”
A version of this story first ran in the Nemaha County Herald.
ABJ thanks the Herald for permission to reprint it.

September 2020 949

 ASPETUCK LAND TRUST EMBRACES
BACK YARD BEEKEEPERS
ASSOCIATION’S INITIATIVE
Abbie Winter, Aspetuck Land Trust Intern
This spring, Back Yard Beekeepers Association (BYBA,
based in Weston, Connecticut) apiarist David Blocher
contacted Aspetuck Land Trust’s Land Stewardship
Director Lou Bacchiocchi looking for a place to host a
honey bee queen rearing project. Bacchiocchi immedi-
ately thought of Aspetuck Land Trust’s Randall’s Farm
Preserve as the perfect spot to host bees. This Easton, CT
sanctuary is an all-encompassing haven for pollinators;
the preserve has 34 acres of early blooming trees, diverse
stretches of wildflower-filled meadows, prolific wet-
lands, and an abundance of surrounding farms whose
crops would thrive with the introduction of new neigh-
borhood pollinators.
A major goal of Aspetuck Land Trust’s Green Corridor
initiative is supporting pollinators, like Blocher’s honey
bees, due to the vital ecosystem services these insects pro-
vide. Aspetuck Land Trust is encouraging homeowners,
for example, to do three things to support pollinators:
1) Plant native plants,
2) Rethink your lawn, and
3) Avoid pesticide and herbicide use.
Since Randall’s Farm is located within the Green Corri-
dor and more importantly is directly adjacent to the newly
acquired 34-acre Gilbertie’s Organic Farm, these BYBA
bees will have an abundance of healthy forage nearby.
Blocher and his class of BYBA members, ranging in
skill from novice to experienced, now tend to the 120,000-
150,000 bees at Randall’s Farm while learning the delicate
skill of breeding queens. However, this project doesn’t just
aim to support locally-reared bees — its main goal has a
more scientific edge. These queens are strategically bred to
pass on genetic resistance to the varroa mite.
Varroa mite infestation, or varroosis, is the primary
reason for bee colony mortality. Fortunately over many
generations, some hives have adapted behaviors to de-
fend themselves and their offspring from varroosis, called
“Varroa Sensitive Hygiene” (VSH). Bees expressing this
VSH trait understand how to identify pupal cells contain-
ing mites, uncap these cells, and remove the mite-infected
pupae from the hive. This behavior can be passed down
Photo by Abbie Winter
950
from the queen to each of her offspring, until the entire
hive has the VSH trait. Blocher’s mission is to raise hives
at Randall’s Farm that are entirely resistant to the mites,
and meanwhile, teach local beekeepers how to do the
same in their own hives to combat varroosis throughout
the beekeeping community.
As these beekeepers practice rearing queens with the
ability to combat varroosis at Randall’s Farm and in their
own hives, queens from neighboring hives have the po-
tential to mate with these VSH drones. This would then
introduce the VSH trait to these colonies to grant them
the ability to defend against the mites. Blocher’s educa-
tion program has regional implications as his students
are empowered with the skills to eliminate varroosis in
their localities.
Bacchiocchi is especially proud that Aspetuck Land
Trust supports this BYBA research project. Randall’s Farm
isn’t the first Aspetuck Land Trust preserve to host research
projects; the Caryl and Edna Haskins Preserve in Westport
hosted a study on southern pine beetles and the Haskins
property is currently home to a 3-year study about how
pollinators respond to native plants being planted; the
Trout Brook Valley preserve was home to a study on emer-
ald ash borers and parasitic wasps. Aspetuck Land Trust is
always open to collaborating with groups and researchers
to host studies on its properties. “We’re using our proper-
ties not just for preservation and recreation,” Bacchiocchi
said, “but also for scientific research.”
REGIONAL
BECOMING 21ST CENTURY LEADERS:
OCTOBER 24-25, 2020
LEAD for Pollinators is excited to present a national con-
ference Becoming 21st Century Leaders: Women in Bee-
keeping and Agriculture. This national conference will be
held at Walsh University, 2020 E. Maple St., N. Canton, OH
44721, October 24-25, 2020. Using feedback from women
and men beekeepers, and other agricultural stakeholders,
this event addresses the issues raised by the beekeeping
and agricultural community.
This conference will offer three educational tracts: Lead-
ership, Business, and Safety for Women (in the bee yard
and in the board room), featuring a total of 32 different
topics. Speakers are trained, experienced, licensed experts
in law, accounting, biology, volunteer administration,
education, leadership, and more. Speakers will provide
you with the “how to” you need to start your business,
provide insightful “lessons learned” from real-world ex-
perience in management, and offer skills and strategies
for personal safety.
Our featured speaker at the opening day lunch will be
Denise O’Brien, founding Director of the Women, Food
and Agricultural Network. Denise has farmed in south-
west Iowa for 37 years with her husband Larry Harris, and
operated a CSA farm called Rolling Acres that includes
three acres of fruits and vegetables and six acres of apples.
She also raises organic chickens and turkeys. In addition
to farming, she has been involved with community volun-
teering and policy work in the agricultural sector. Denise
lobbied with the Iowa Farm Unity Coalition, directed the
Rural Women’s Leadership Development Project of Prai-
rie Fire Rural Action, Inc. and was president of the Na-
tional Family Farm Coalition.
American Bee Journal
 Learn more about our scheduled speakers on our
website under “Becoming 21st Century Leaders,”
(https://leadforpollinators.org/index.php/becoming-
21st-century-leaders/) Save the dates and plan to attend.
For more information, visit our website at www.lead
forpollinators.org, or contact Michele Colopy, Executive
Director, 330-803-3449, ExecDir@leadforpollinators.org
or Terry Lieberman-Smith, Coordinator at Coordinator@
leadforpollinators.org, 937-272-6549.
STATES
GEORGIA
Georgia Beekeepers Association is celebrating our
100 Year Anniversary with the first ever NATIONWIDE
BLACK JAR honey contest. We welcome all beekeepers
to join us in our Zoom conference September 25-26, 2020
featuring KEITH DELAPLANE, CINDY BEE, DAVE
TARPY, JAMIE ELLIS and VIRGINIA WEBB.
Register for virtual conference and Black Jar contest:
gabeekeeping.com
KANSAS
Kansas Honey Producers Association 2020 fall virtual
meeting is tentatively scheduled for Friday and Saturday,
October 23 & 24, 2020. Stay tuned for updates on speakers
and presentations at the KHPA website http://www.
kansashoneyproducers.org or contact Joli Winer, Program
Chair. joli@heartlandhoney.com 913.593.3562
LOUISIANA
24th Annual Field Day at the
USDA Honey Bee Lab in Baton Rouge
The USDA Honey Bee Breeding, Genetics and Physiol-
ogy Laboratory and the Louisiana State Beekeepers Asso-
ciation will hold the 24th Annual Field Day on Saturday,
October 10, 2020. The event will be held at the laboratory,
located at 1157 Ben Hur Rd, Baton Rouge LA 70820. This
is near the intersection of Nicholson Drive (Hwy 30) and
Brightside Dr., which is about two miles south of the LSU
football stadium.
Gates will open at 8:00 a.m. with presentations and ac-
tivities scheduled from 9:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. The Field
Day will include a series of talks in the morning from
members of the Louisiana Beekeepers Association and
the USDA-ARS staff about Louisiana beekeeping and re-
search being conducted at USDA-ARS lab. In addition,
there will be smaller breakout sessions in the morning for
various topics such as basic beekeeping equipment, hon-
ey processing, and supplemental feeding. The afternoon
features a rotation of hands-on modules for beekeepers of
all ranges of experience. Topics for these sessions include
introductory hive inspections, seasonal colony manage-
ment, varroa detection and treatment, pathogen recog-
nition and abatement, making colony splits, installing
queens and packages, supplemental feeding applications,
and queen rearing.
A nonrefundable pre-registration fee of $35.00 is re-
quired for attendees 12 years of age and above. Children
September 2020
11 and under must stay with their parents at all times.
Registration includes a catered lunch. Pre-registration
will open August 3, 2020. You may pre-register and sub-
mit payment at labeekeepers.org with the option to pay
by credit card or PayPal. A printable pre-registration form
will be located at labeekeepers.org that may be mailed
along with a check made payable to Louisiana Beekeepers
Association to Beth Derr, 210 Meadowlark Dr, Jefferson,
TX 75657 and must be postmarked by October 1, 2020.
Pre-registration will close September 25, 2020. All other
registration will be collected at the door for the increased
fee of $40 per person.
For additional information please visit labeekeepers.
org or contact Dr. Frank Rinkevich (225-276-3998 or frank.
rinkevich@usda.gov) or Joe Sanroma (318-346-2805). For
questions regarding online registration, Jennifer Brown
(601-493-3447).
New Hampshire Beekeepers Association Fall Meeting
Saturday October 17, 2020
Location: Manchester Community College
1066 Front Street, Manchester, NH
Keynote Speaker: Dr. Samuel Ramsey
Talks: Varroa Mites True Diet Feeding on Honey Bees and
A New Mite, A New Threat: Tropilaelaps Mercedesae.
Time: 9 am – 3 pm
(Lunch will be provided for a fee, if the event is held
in person.)
Registration form for the meeting will be available on
the NHBA website www.nhbeekeepers.org beginning
September 1, 2020.
If this meeting cannot be held in person it will be held
online. Check the NHBA website www.nhbeekeepers.org
for any change in location.
WISCONSIN
Wisconsin Honey Producers Fall Convention
Thursday, November 5 -
Saturday, November 7, 2020.
Chula Vista Resort, Wisconsin Dells
Keynote Marla Spivak, and also The American Honey
Tasting Society. www.wihoney.org
951

O
n the whole, the outlook for
bees and beekeepers is posi-
tive this year. Most of our
reporters have fair to good news to
share about honey production and
markets. We live in uncertain times,
but we are not without hope. While
seasonal labor is hard to get in some
areas, and equipment suppliers are
hard put to keep up with demand
driven by new beekeepers, most of
us feel fortunate to be in this indus-
try at this time.
Northeast—After a slow start in
Pennsylvania, the season kicked in
and colonies built up. Honey extrac-
tion was underway in July and an av-
erage crop was expected, with clover
honey leading the way. The whole-
sale market is up a bit, while retail
sales are average.
A hot, dry June and July (follow-
ing a cold spring) hurt the locust and
basswood blooms in northern New
York, causing the year’s honey fore-
cast to drop by 10-20 percent. But
clover and widlflower helped pick
up the slack in the northwest, and
mid-July rains could help the fall
flow.
Farmers markets were either
closed or sparsely attended due to
the pandemic, hurting retail sales.
It was also very dry in New Hamp-
shire, which brought down the bass-
wood flow. The best production so
far has been from clover, black locust,
honeysuckle and staghorn sumac.
Mid-July rain offered some relief, and
hope for beekeepers. The early-year,
COVID-related retail demand seems
to have settled down heading into
summer.
In Maine, the late, wet spring was
followed by an abnormally hot June,
causing many crops to bloom early,
and thus condensing the early sum-
mer nectar flow. As in much of the
region, late spring and early summer
were dry, but rains finally came in
mid-July.
Mideast—A Virginia correspon-
dent reports that April and May were
the “wettest on record.” Black locust
and tulip poplar failed to produce,
September 2020
though sourwood bloomed later than
usual and did better. Overall honey
procuction is down by 50 percent
from last year, though ground mois-
ture lengthened the flow well into
summer. Wholesale and retail mar-
kets are about normal.
It’s also been very wet in Tennes-
see, where production is down about
50 percent. White Dutch clover was
the best producer, while tulip poplar
and sourwood were very poor. Small
early-season splits failed to thrive
due to spotty conditions and were
wiped out by hive beetles. Sales are
about average for this time of year.
Kentucky’s cool spring slowed
buildup and wiped out the locust and
poplar blooms, but clover was helped
by the early rainful. Overall the crop
is up from last year but still below
average.
Honey supplies were tight by
early June in North Carolina, as wet
weather had dampened nectar flows
to that point.
Southeast—The Florida crop looks
about average to 10 percent lower,
with tallow and gallberry production
down a bit. Retail and wholesale mar-
kets are also about average.
Production is also down in Georgia,
due in part to a cold April. Black gum
tupelo was down, while orange blos-
som honey was up. The retail market
is about average, but cut-rate foreign
honey continues to be a problem for
our domestic wholesale market.
The Mississippi crop looks about
average, led by tallow.
Alabama production is up about 10
percent, with privet and clover doing
well, though blackberry was lower
than usual. Plants also seem to be
blooming longer this year. People are
West
still buying more honey due to the
pandemic, and Facebook is a valuable
marketing tool.
Southwest—The cool spring in
Louisiana hurt early crops like wil-
low, but clover and tallow flows
flows were better. Retail sales are
above average, boosted by COVID.
High demand for local honey con-
tinues in New Mexico, and some
sellers are offering drive-up service
to facilitate social distancing. Honey
production is down around 50 per-
cent vs. last year, with Russian knap-
weed one of the bright spots.
Wildflower honey production has
been good in Texas, while clover has
been average. Demand for nucs was
strong this spring. Retail demand
continues to be high, and supplies are
tight as a result.
East Central—As in other areas,
Wisconsin’s basswood and black lo-
cust blooms were compromised by an
overly wet spring, which also slowed
colony buildup and may have con-
tributed to an increase in nosema. But
colonies caught up by late spring and
collected good quantities of honey
from ladino and white clover. Cran-
berry bloom was late but progressed
will in the summer heat and humid-
ity. Retail demand continues strong.
Illinois has seen a good year for
honey production, due in part to what
a reporter near Chicago called “a per-
fect amount of rain. ... Clover is still
going [in mid-July], I have never had
a year in 20 years where we got this
much foundation drawn and filled.”
The early dandelion and locust flows
were also good. Local retail sales have
been average, and wholesale better
than usual.
Michigan honey production is up,
due to a combination of good colony
buildup and adequate spring rain re-
sulting in an extended nectar flow.
The basswood bloom was poor, but
clover more than made up for it.
Strong supermarket sales are boost-
ing the wholesale market.
Good moisture levels have also
boosted production in Indiana. Clo-
ver has led the way, again making
up for a poor locust bloom. Retail de-
mand continues to be good.
Much of Ohio saw good weather in
June, and excellent nectar flows from
such diverse sources as basswood,
milkweed and birdsfoot trefoil,
which has been spreading rapidly in
parts of the state.
West Central—Northeastern Kan-
sas had well-timed rains, and honey
production is estimated to be up 50
percent over last year. The outlook is
not so rosy for the rest of the state,
Northeast
Intermountain
West Central East Central
Mideast
Southeast
Southwest
953
 U.S. HONEY PRICES FROM OUR REPORTERS
North- Mid- South- South- East West- Inter-
HONEY MARKET FOR THE
east east east west Central Central Mountain West MONTH OF JUNE 2020
In volumes of 10,000 pounds or greater
Wholesale unless otherwise stated
White lb. Blk.$2.00-$3.50 $1.95-$4.25 $1.90-$2.25 $1.50-$1.85 $2.00-$2.15 $1.60-$2.50 $1.60-$2.60 $2.00-$3.00 (Courtesy July 24, 2020
Amber lb. Blk $2.00-$2.50 $2.10-$2.35 $1.20-$2.50 $1.65-$1.90 $1.75-$2.10 $1.20-$2.10 $1.50-$2.50 $1.85-$3.00 USDA National Honey Report)
1 lb. CS 24 $ 120.00- $ 108.00- $ 138.00- $ 120.00- $ 84.00- $ 84.00- $ 150.00- $ 144.00-
$ 134.40 $ 168.00 $ 168.00 $ 168.00 $ 134.40 $ 114.00 $ 180.00 $ 168.00 Prices paid to beekeepers for extracted, unprocessed
honey in major producing states by packers, han-
2 lb. CS 12 $ 102.00- $ 90.00- $ 126.00- $ 144.00- $84.00- $ 84.00- $ 57.00- $ 132.00- dlers & other large users, cents per pound, f.o.b. or
$ 116.40 $ 96.00 $ 138.00 $ 168.00 $115.20 $ 114.00 $ 110.00 $ 264.00
delivered nearby, containers exchanged or returned,
5 lb. CS 6 $ 80.00- $ 60.00- $ 120.00- $ 98.00- $ 87.00- $ 84.00 $ 60.00- $ 60.00- prompt delivery & payment unless otherwise stated.
$128.00 $ 120.00 $ 150.00 $ 102.00 $ 120.00 $ 127.50 $ 103.00 $ 104.00
-Report includes both new and old crop honey-
Retail
Jars 8 oz. $ 4.00- $ 3.95- $ 3.19- $ 2.95- $ 4.49- $ 2.75- $ 4.00- $ 6.00- California
$ 8.50 $ 6.00 $ 4.00 $ 4.00 $ 7.00 $ 3.25 $ 6.00 $ 12.00 Buckwheat Light Amber $1.60
Squeeze $ 7.50- $ 5.95- $ 3.69- $ 4.00- $ 3.00- $ 4.25- $ 3.50- $ 4.80- Mixed Flower Light Amber $1.80
Bear 12 oz.$ 12.00 $ 8.00 $ 6.00 $ 5.00 $ 10.00 $ 6.00 $ 4.85 $ 6.00 Sage White $1.60
Orange White $2.25
Jars 1 lb. $ 7.00- $ 8.00- $ 8.00- $ 5.00- $ 4.00- $ 4.65- $ 6.75- $ 7.00- Valley Light Amber $1.60
$ 14.00 $ 10.00 $ 10.00 $ 10.00 $ 8.00 $ 5.70 $ 10.00 $ 10.00 Dakotas
Jars 11/2lb.$ 12.50- $ 12.00- $ 7.29- $ 7.95- $ 6.00- $ 6.65- $ 10.00- $ 8.40- Canola White $1.50 - $1.60
(Pint) $ 14.00 $ 14.00 $ 8.75 $ 9.00 $ 12.00 $ 9.00 $ 12.50 $ 10.48 Canola Extra Light Amber $1.60
Jars 2 lb. $ 12.00- $ 12.00- $ 9.79 $ 15.00- $ 8.00- $ 9.20- $ 6.25- $ 19.00- Canola Light Amber $1.60
$ 20.00 $ 18.00 $ 13.00 $ 20.00 $ 14.00 $ 12.00 $ 11.25 $ 22.00 Clover White $1.40 - $1.65
Jars 3 lb. $ 19.50- $ 22.00- $ 12.00- $ 14.00- $ 11.00- $ 11.50- $ 20.00- $ 14.30- Clover Extra Light Amber $1.60
(Quart) $ 36.00 $ 25.00 $ 16.00 $ 14.99 $ 24.00 $ 17.00 $ 22.00 $ 18.00 Clover Light Amber $1.60
Jars 4 lb. $ 27.50- $ 10.00- $ 16.00- $ 18.00- $ 20.00- $ 14.00- $ 11.00- $ 10.00- Mixed Flower Light Amber $1.25
$ 44.00 $ 30.00 $ 24.00 $ 30.00 $ 24.00 $ 16.25 $ 28.50 $ 32.00 Sunflower White $1.65
Jars 5 lb. $ 25.00- $ 15.00- $ 15.50- $ 16.25- $ 17.00- $ 19.00- $ 16.00- $ 21.22- Florida
$ 32.00 $ 39.50 $ 35.50 $ 32.00 $ 29.00 $ 26.00 $ 33.25 $ 40.00 Gallberry Extra Light Amber $1.75
Creamed $ 7.25- $ 5.50- $ 5.49- $ 5.25- $ 3.99- $ 7.75- $ 4.75- $ 12.00- Gallberry Amber $1.85
12 oz. $ 12.00 $ 8.00 $ 6.95 $ 6.99 $ 9.00 $ 8.00 $ 7.00 $ 16.00 Mixed Flower Extra Light Amber $2.05
Mixed Flower Light Amber $1.75
Comb $ 8.00- $ 5.50- $ 5.25- $ 13.50- $ 10.00- $ 10.00- $ 12.00- $ 12.50-
Mixed Flower Amber $1.75
12 oz. $ 15.00 $ 13.00 $ 13.25 $ 15.00 $ 25.00 $ 12.00 $ 15.00 $ 15.00
Orange Blossom Light Amber $2.25
Round $ 8.00- $ 4.50- $ 4.50- $ 8.25- $ 10.00- $ 10.00- $ 4.25- $ 12.49- Orange Blossom Extra Light Amber $2.00
Plas. Comb$ 9.50 $13.00 $ 7.50 $ 11.00 $ 15.00 $ 12.00 $ 7.00 $ 15.00 Tallow Amber $1.75
Idaho
1 Gallon $ 55.00- $ 59.00- $ 55.00- $ 35.00- $ 38.00- $ 33.95- $ 24.00- $ 45.20-
Clover White $1.60
$ 83.00 $ 75.00 $ 60.00 $ 60.00 $ 96.00 $ 50.00 $ 50.00 $ 60.00
Clover Extra Light Amber $1.65
60 lb. $ 200.00- $ 210.00- $ 175.00- $ 150.00- $ 170.00- $ 150.00- $ 140.00- $ 197.40 Mint Amber $1.60
$ 240.00 $ 350.00 $ 235.00 $ 200.00 $ 420.00 $ 200.00 $ 225.00 $ 220.00 Louisiana
Tallow Light Amber $1.75
The above prices are not meant to provide a realistic picture of prices in all states of the Michigan
particular area. They are intended merely to show what a few beekeepers are receiving Basswood Light Amber $1.60 - $2.00
for their honey and we realize prices may vary tremendously, even within individual Mississippi
states. The bulk prices for honey are stated per pound, delivered buyer’s warehouse, Tallow Extra Light Amber $1.65
containers exchanged or furnished by buyer, unless otherwise noted. Where prices are Tallow Light Amber $1.60 - $1.65
not shown, insufficient data were available. Tallow Amber $1.50
Tallow Dark $1.50
which went from too cold and wet and supplies needed to be ordered Montana
to too hot and dry. But if conditions months in advance in some cases. The Clover White $1.65 - $1.68
are right, the third cutting of alfalfa locust did not even bloom in the east, Clover Extra Light Amber $1.68
Texas
could make a difference. but novel crops like Virginia water Clover White $1.65
Sunflowers were well ahead of leaf and garlic mustard helped feed Tallow Light Amber $1.60
schedule in the Dakotas, and im- the bees. Meanwhile, it’s getting
proved weather gave a boost to al- harder to feed our customers; small Prices paid to Canadian Beekeepers for unpro-
cessed, bulk honey by packers and importers in
falfa. Western North Dakota saw wholesalers are running out, and re- U. S. currency, f.o.b. shipping point, containers in-
good honey crops from sweet clover tail consumers are gobbling honey to cluded unless otherwise stated. Duty and crossing
and canola. Eastern South Dakota keep up their immunities. charges extra. Cents per pound. - No sales reported
also expects a slight improvement Intermountain—Colorado’s crop
Prices paid to importers for bulk honey, duty paid,
over last year, with clover leading looks slightly beter than 2019, al- containers included, cents per pound, ex-dock or
the way. though conditions have been dry point of entry unless otherwise stated.
Missouri’s wet spring turned there, as they have been throughout
around in the latter part of May and much of Idaho and Utah. Argentina
Mixed Flower White $1.15 - $1.43
brought a very nice June, along with West—Northwestern Oregon sees Mixed Flower Extra Light $1.14 - $1.41
a very good nectar flow, with white honey production down about a third Brazil
Dutch clover starting early and pro- from last year, and the southern part ORGANIC Extra Light $0.99
ducing well into July. However, the of the state sees worse due to lack of ORGANIC Light Amber $0.91 - $1.17
ORGANIC Amber $0.94
early, soggy soil meant that soybeans moisture: “Hot, no irrigation, and no India
were planted late, so for some areas rain.” Much of California was also af- Mixed Flower White $0.76 - $0.93
of the state the rest of the story is yet fected by drought. Some operations Mixed Flower Extra Light $0.71 - $0.82
to be told. are reporting difficulty in getting Mixed Flower Light Amber $0.70 - $0.76
Mustard Extra Light $0.80 - $0.83
In Iowa, a cold April was tough help due to H-2A restrictions on for- Mustard Light Amber $0.80 - $0.83
on bees ... and on inexperienced bee- eign workers. Ukraine
keepers whose over-wintered hives Washington, by contrast, was cool Sunflower White $0.89
starved. Yet another surge in new and wet. Crops were delayed, but Sunflower Extra Light $0.89 - $0.97
Vietnam
beekeepers meant that equipment wildflower honey was helpful. Mixed Flower Light Amber $0.67 - $0.79

954 American Bee Journal

September 2020 955
 LLC
PACKAGE BEES AND QUEENS
510 Patterson Road • Baxley, GA 31513
Ph: (912) 367-9352 Fax: (912) 367-7047
Over 100 Years of Experience • All Bees are State Inspected
*Italian Hybrid Queens
All Queens $19.00 each. No Minimum Order Required.
*Shipping rates are additional.*

Pick-up Price
Queens. . . . . . . . . . . . . . $19.00 Clipping . . . . . . . . . . . . . $4.00
Cells . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $4.00 Marking . . . . . . . . . . . . . $4.00

mAy god bless your endeAvors This yeAr

956 American Bee Journal


A SeA ChAnge
For the first time in a long time
we can realistically talk of the honey
market reaching an inflection point.
This period calls for the wisdom of
patience and resisting the siren calls
from Masters of Market Manipula-
tion which beekeepers in North and
South America are now hearing.
After the releases of:
1) the U.S. Pharmacopeia, Food
Chemicals Codex (FCC) Honey
Identity Standard,
2) the honey testing provisions in
the U.S. Congress’ 2020 Omni-
bus Appropriations Act,
3) the proposal from the Honey
Integrity Task Force, chaired
by Darren Cox, urging aggres-
sive sampling and the use of
advanced scientific tests by
government agencies, and
4) Apimondia’s “Evaluation of
the Direct Economic Impact of
Decreasing Prices of Honey,”
estimating over $1 billion of
economic losses to North and
South American beekeepers
during the past 5 years, re-
sulting from honey fraud and
honey adulteration,
the entire chorus is singing in uni-
son a new song.
When considering the problem of
adulteration, it is important, indeed
crucial, to realize that according to
Codex Alimentarius standards, to
which the U.S. is committed, the ad-
dition of any adulterated product to
a composite with other constituents
makes that composite adulterated.
Therefore, if a product contains 100%
adulterated products, 90%, 60%,
September 2020
by RON PHIPPS
40%, or even 10%, the composite is
adulterated.
The monumental Apimondia
meeting in September 2019 was the
largest assemblage of scientists, bee-
keepers and members of the inter-
national honey industry for a forum
on the reality, nature and solutions
to the plague of adulterated honey,
and helped set the stage for these
new developments.
The CurrenT MArkeT
The current situation includes:
a) a huge flood of incredibly cheap
honey imported into the U.S. from
India and Vietnam; b) U.S. honey
industry preparations underway for
2021, by which time strict testing re-
gimes from the U.S. government and
the market are anticipated; c) fear in
exporting countries of a new anti-
dumping petition in the U.S.; and d)
concern about impending shortages
in the supply of authentic honey in a
market, transformed by the compel-
ling fight against food fraud.
As early as the beginning of June
2020, some players were trying to
secure authentic honey for consider-
ably higher prices. Others anticipate
the demand for authenticity in honey
will move the prices in forthcom-
ing periods of high-quality honey
to $2.00-3.50/lb. and in later phases
$3.50-4.00/lb. That means there is
anticipation that the price of honey
in the first stage of a market freed of
the decade-long onslaught of adul-
terated honey may rise to $4,200 to
$4,500 per metric ton and in the sec-
ond stage to $6,000 per metric ton.
An inflection point of rising prices
reflects fear of both 1) the power of
a potential antidumping case, and 2)
the demands for authenticity and the
end of food fraud in the honey sphere.
There have been reports in many
exporting countries that an anti-
dumping petition is being prepared.
As we write this, we cannot confirm
or deny that this is the case. But the
widespread reports are already con-
tributing to price increases in some
countries.
Dr. Daberkow’s economic analy-
sis (see chart on next page) reveals
that the price gap between retail and
wholesale prices has been at a mod-
est and normal level. In contrast, the
gap between wholesale prices and
the cost of honey inputs has been ab-
normally large. Prices for imported
Indian and Vietnamese honey have
been declining since 2016, for U.S.
Dakota honey since 2018. That means
there have been high profits for a
few and huge losses for beekeep-
ers. The Apimondia report “Evalua-
tion of the Direct Economic Impact
of Decreasing Prices of Honey …”
regarding economic losses to North
and South American beekeepers,
which was released by the Ameri-
can Honey Producers Association
in June 2020, estimates what would
be expected of prices in a context
in which consumption of honey is
growing. Those selling to retailers
have ample room to increase their
prices for honey and, on the other
hand, beekeepers have a compelling
opportunity to recover losses which
have resulted from food fraud and
economically motivated adultera-
tion of honey.
Because of the international expo-
sure of the multiple modes of adul-
teration that have plagued the past
decade, we can anticipate that the
957
negative manipulation of the honey
market is coming to its conclusion.
This implies that a serious shortage
of authentic, high-quality honey is
impending.
Prices of honey have already sig-
nificantly increased, and efforts to
buy forward have surged. Beekeep-
ers and exporters anticipate that from
the nadir of non-remunerative prices,
prices of authentic honey will double
in the intermediary, and in the not too
distant future, triple. If advanced sci-
entific technology, which can detect
multiple forms of adulteration preva-
lent in the marketplace, is correctly
and fully utilized, very significant
quantities of adulterated honey will
be removed. A chart (Garcia, Phipps,
Adee) showing the great disparity be-
tween the number of global beehives
(stable) and the rapidly increasing
volumes of global honey exports was
shown by numerous scientists at Api-
mondia and recently in Japan, as one
of many important indicators of the
magnitude of adulteration. The U.S.
Pharmacopeia’s Food Fraud Data-
base concluded that honey was the
third most adulterated food within
958
the food supply. This conclusion was
reached without the use of advanced
technology, which would have surely
increased the magnitude of adultera-
tion present.
The ConfluenCe of PoSiTive
DeveloPMenTS
On June 30, 2020, the U.S. Pharmaco-
peia (USP), chaired by Prof. Norberto
Garcia, released a proposed Food
Chemicals Codex (FCC) Identity Stan-
dard. This document is an outcome of
the recommendation of Prof. Michael
Roberts, world expert on food fraud,
which first appeared in his important
White Paper. Prof. Roberts’ first and
second White Papers should be man-
datory reading for all members of the
American honey industry, and indeed
the international honey industry.
The USP’s cardinal description
is: “Honey is the natural sweet sub-
stance produced by species within the
Apis genus from the nectar of plants
or from secretions of living parts of
plants or excretions of plant-sucking
insects on the living parts of plants
which the bees collect, transform by
combining with specific substances of
their own, deposit, dehydrate, store,
and leave in the honeycomb to ripen.”
This reconfirms the formal State-
ment on Honey Fraud approved in
January of this year by Apimondia.
There is now growing awareness
that the authenticity of honey cannot
be defined without reference to its
modes of production.
Both documents represent the work
of prestigious scientific, academic
and beekeeping experts in the inter-
national honey community who have
collaborated to form these important
documents and guidelines. They
were formed as a result of 1) grow-
ing and comprehensive awareness
of the modern modes of adultera-
tion of honey, which singularly and/
or in combination, have caused the
erosion of authenticity and purity in
the international honey industry and
a collapse of the honey prices, and 2)
the development of powerful scien-
tific techniques which are helpful to
expose food fraud and economically
motivated adulteration not only in the
spheres of honey but in fruit juices,
wines, olive oil, coffee, fresh and fro-
zen fish, and pharmaceuticals.
American Bee Journal
 Concurrent with these cardinal doc-
uments, is the plan that U.S. Customs
intends to begin testing imported
honey for country of origin using ad-
vanced techniques, including Nuclear
Magnetic Resonance, and a proposal
in a Congressional Appropriations
Bill for the FDA to examine honey for
economically motivated adulteration,
using advanced techniques.
The Honey Integrity Task Force
proposal requests “consideration of
more robust regulation and enforce-
ment to counter the threat of Eco-
nomically Motivated Adulteration in
the honey industry … options includ-
ing increased surveillance at entry …
[and] use of the most advanced avail-
able analytical techniques.”
A recent BBC article by Pamela
Parker (June 26, 2020) described the
challenges to honey producers. It
stated, “Chris Hiatt, vice president
of the American Honey Producers
Association, says that something has
to be done. ‘We need a decent price
to keep our businesses going,’ he
says. ‘It is a serious problem.’” I was
also quoted in the article: “’The real-
ity is not that American beekeepers
are non-competitive,’ he says. ‘The
problem is other countries are using
means of production, which have
been observed and documented, that
allow production of huge quantities
of adulterated honey whose produc-
tion costs are extremely low.’”
These are all powerful tributaries
to a great river leading to justice and
integrity in the honey industry. More
media attention is on the horizon.
QuAnTifying loSSeS CAuSeD by
eConoMiCAlly MoTivATeD
ADulTerATion of honey
In June 2020, the Apimondia Re-
gional Commission of the Americas
and the Apimondia Scientific Com-
mission of Beekeeping Economy
jointly issued an analysis document-
ing the magnitude of the economic
losses suffered by beekeepers in
South and North America over the
past five years, described as “the
greatest damage to beekeepers in hu-
man history.”
If the honey industry had begun
rigorous testing, using powerful sci-
entific technology to detect the mod-
ern modes of adulteration, the losses
of over $1 billion dollars to beekeep-
ers would most likely not have oc-
curred. Those losses can be laid at the
feet of those who chose illicit profits
over economic fairness, bad science
over good science, fantasies over
September 2020
facts. The consequences were devas-
tating to U.S. beekeepers.
“If the price trend observed during
the period 2005-2014 had continued
(which could have been expected un-
der increasing demand and inelastic
offer), the price for honey would have
reached $4,700 per tonne by 2019, a
difference of more than $2,000 per
tonne with the observed price.”
We note that in the June 2020 Honey
Market Report a similar analysis for
the U.S. market was presented.
reCenT u.S. MArkeT STATiSTiCS AnD
TrenDS
A terrible trend toward even lower
prices from the exporting countries
India and Vietnam can be seen in the
2020 import statistics for the first 5
months. This represents an alarming
effort to flood the market with cheap
honey before new standards are vig-
orously implemented. In May, import
prices for Indian Extra Light Amber
and Light Amber respectively sank
to $0.63-0.64/lb., a 17% decline rela-
tive to May 2019. In the same period,
Vietnamese Light Amber prices de-
clined 16%, from $0.63/lb. to $0.53/
lb. Indian and Vietnamese honey im-
port volumes went from a combined
41% in 2019 to almost half of the total
honey import volumes in the first five
months of 2020. The price collapse left
the combined value at less than 30%
of the total import market.
These statistics create a Perfect
Storm providing the foundation for a
powerful and effective antidumping
suit against the lowest priced export-
ing countries.
Dr. Daberkow has observed that
based on the 2020 Honey report from
NASS/USDA and the ERS/USDA
honey export/import data, U.S.
honey consumption has declined two
straight years from the record of 596
million pounds in 2017 to 550 million
pounds in 2019 (down 46 million lbs.
or 7.7%). The Nielsen Sales Report
has indicated that honey volume fell
2.7% in 2019 compared to the previ-
ous year. Raw and Organic honey are
growing in market share. Imported
honey volumes peaked in 2017 at 448
million pounds, and fell to 417 million
pounds in 2019.
During the three months when the
Department of Commerce evaluates
whether to accept or deny a petition
claiming dumping, restrictions are
placed limiting any increase of quan-
tity of imports to under 15%. The pur-
pose is to prohibit a surge of dumped
honey into the market. At the onset
of the persisting China honey dump-
ing case, there was a surge of imports.
There is concern about the volumes in
the recent period.
The analysis of some experts is that
the collapse of pricing is not due to
dumping, which is selling under
cost, but to adulteration using rapid
extraction of unripened honey, blend-
ing of cheap bioengineered rice sug-
ars (syrups have been exported at
$0.15-0.39/lb.), use of resin technol-
ogy, and other methods. If that was
not the case, the huge volumes of
honey exports from low-priced ex-
porters could not be sustained over
such a long period. The fundamental
problem is not dumping, but adulter-
959

ation. That adulteration is the foun-
dation of the collapse of honey prices
and the endangerment of beekeepers
producing authentic honey.
It is astonishing to think that in
two decades India went from having
zero exports of honey to the world
to become a main source of U.S. im-
ported honey. Of course, people have
witnessed and there is abundant
evidence that India’s adoption of the
China model of honey production is
part of this achievement.
A beekeeper has succinctly summa-
rized the situation as follows: “The
dreadful collapse of honey prices is a
classic example of the manipulation
of markets benefitting a small cartel
and threatening the survival of bee-
keepers in North America.”
“loCAl honey”
On the one hand, the emergence
of local honey marketing is an ex-
ample of the creative marketing of
honey in its diversity, authenticity
and charm. Sales at farmers markets,
roadside stands, and online are serv-
ing as a godsend to many beekeep-
ers and also are harbingers of a new
era for marketing honey as a whole.
The marketing of wine by region of
production has achieved such growth
and provokes such intrigue, that the
wine industry has blossomed both
quantitatively and qualitatively,
while prices have dramatically in-
creased over past decades. The modes
of producing authentic high-quality
wines have become part of the at-
tractive story of wine, eliciting tours
of the vineyards. Unfortunately most
Americans are unaware of the beauty
of the botanical regions which pro-
duce honey. Chris Hiatt commented
that standing in the orange groves at
960
blossom time in northern California
is to experience the most beautiful
aroma in the world.
The farmers markets, as beekeepers
consistently report, achieve price levels
such as $8/lb. and in fact much higher.
We should remember that honey is
a marvelous product of nature, but
in the U.S. the per capita honey con-
sumption is only a little more than 1.1
lb. per year. Since there is such a huge
gap between input costs and retail
costs, the retailers can keep prices rela-
tively stable. Adulteration has created
huge profits, but generally not for the
retailers. As beekeepers have warned,
flooding the market with low-quality
adulterated honey will turn off con-
sumers. Evidence of consumption de-
clines have already emerged, which
some correlate with the flood of cheap
honey of questionable authenticity.
This follows years of increasing total
consumption, but steady per capita
consumption. Such declines are ex-
actly what beekeepers producing au-
thentic honey have feared whenever
they have contrasted the lovely honey
they produce with the honey being
sold on the mass market with fraudu-
lent country of origin, botanical source
and quality designations.
A new and serious form of food
fraud has emerged which involves
mislabeling of products as local which
are not local, and in some cases as
American, when the majority of the
honey is not produced in the U.S.
New scientific databases have been
established and are being enhanced to
allow correct and detailed identifica-
tion in respect to both geographic and
botanical sources.
The proposed USP FCC Honey
Identity Standard states, “If a re-
gional, territorial or topographical
origin of honey is listed on the label,
the product must come entirely from
the indicated place.”
We note that some state agricultural
organizations are encouraging bee-
keepers to use state designations on
their retail honey products, whether
sold in their own state or other states.
Integrity is integral to marketing. In
Europe, the marketing of honey by
geographic and botanical origin has
created a romantic appeal.
In July 2018, ABJ published an
article which stated that the proper
definition of authentic honey can-
not be separated from the modes of
production of honey. In November I
wrote that the creative marketing of
honey depends upon the elimination
of adulterated honey and the preva-
lence of authentic, pure honey, to
reflect honey’s diversity and charm.
The creative marketing of varietals,
geographic origin and authentically
local honey is comparable to the
marketing of wines, coffees, teas,
etc. Consumers’ interest in the de-
tails of production of many agricul-
tural products, including honey, is
unprecedented. Furthermore, when
honey is seen in its indirect role of
contributing to global food security
and ecological sustainability, the
value of bees and beekeepers is seen
more clearly.
u.S./ArgenTinA/brAZil/
CAnADA
United States
It was reported that in July the clo-
ver bloom in the Dakotas was weak.
Bismarck, North Dakota, set records
for heat and the region suffered heavy
winds. In 2019, the crop of North and
South Dakota was 53 million lbs.,
representing 34% of total U.S. pro-
duction. In terms of quantity, as of
the latter part of July, the overall crop
looks to be lower than average, and
less than last year’s crop. The total
U.S. crop in 2019 was 157 million lbs.
Argentina
During the period January to June
2020, Argentina shipped about 92.5
million pounds (42,000 metric tons) of
honey to the world out of a total crop
of about 65,000 metric tons. Most of
the remaining 23,000 tons are already
sold. U.S. imports Jan-May were 32.5
million pounds, slightly more than
the same period in 2019.
Prices have continued to rise from
January to now, to levels over $1.36/
lb., without significant quantities to
American Bee Journal
be sold till next crop, normally avail-
able in February 2021. There is no
white honey available in Argentina.
Brazil
U.S. imports from Brazil reached 3.9
million pounds for Jan-May, a signifi-
cant increase compared to the same
period in 2019. The prices dropped
to astonishingly low levels of about
$1.05/lb. Reports indicate that only
limited supplies of organic honey re-
main unsold as of July.
Canada
Canada’s honey production is ex-
pected to be only 40,000 MT, down
from their normal crop of 45,000 MT.
Prices in May were reported at $1.47/
lb. for Extra Light Amber and in July
were moving up, with demand in-
creasing. Imports in the U.S. for Jan-
May 2020 totaled 3.2 million pounds,
down from 8 million over the same
period in 2019. Total U.S. imports
from Canada in 2019 were 15.9 mil-
lion pounds.
Alberta is down over 50,000 hives
from its normal of 300,000 to 320,000
hives and its production will be below
normal. Beekeepers had to use flota-
tion tires to get into the bee yards,
which were extremely wet. Alberta
had a long, extensive series of rains
which washed away seeds and fertil-
izer and inhibited honey production.
The extraordinary productivity of
honey in Alberta has been subject to
environmental pressures.
Manitoba had sweet clover set-
ting seed already in July, earlier
than normal, and some reports indi-
cate 120 lbs. to 160 lbs. per hive. In
western Canada beekeepers expect
lower than normal crops and say
that their bees do not have vigor this
year. Canola in southern Canada
started an earlier downward swing
due to weather patterns.
The only sources of authentic
honey with comparable flavor pro-
files to U.S. honey are Argentina
and Canada. That is one reason
honey prices rose in mid-July. There
is a well-founded fear of a growing
and long-term shortage of authen-
tic honey. By mid-July higher prices
were being offered and forward
contracts being sought because of
the growing fear that 1) prices will
become much higher than current
offers and 2) a real shortage of au-
thentic honey is on the horizon. The
experience of rising prices is like
passing through the long tunnels
running through the Austrian Alps.
September 2020
Scientific Tools
It has become entirely impossible
to keep NMR, HRMS and other meth-
ods of analysis out of the scientific
toolbox. However, a concern remains
to ensure that the tools are fully and
properly used. Already, there have
been statements which point to us-
ing the wrong tool for a given mode
of adulteration and not fully, com-
prehensively using a given tool. Sci-
entists are preparing an article which
will address this issue in a technical
but readable manner.
It is like a carpenter’s toolbox; no
one would ask a carpenter to build
a house and expect him to use a saw
to nail together the various wooden
components, no less to use a hammer
to size and shape those wooden con-
stituents. Nor would anyone want a
surgeon to use anything less than the
most precise, advanced diagnostic
and surgical instruments.
NMR can reveal country of origin,
botanical source, region of origin,
extraction of unripened honey, and
the use of resin technology. Blatant
arrogance has surrounded the intro-
duction and promotion of resin tech-
nology (ion-exchange resins) for use
in some Eastern countries. The FDA
does not allow its use for products
labeled “honey” and the USP Honey
Identity Standard states “use of ion-
exchange resins … is not allowed.”
HRMS can reveal the blending of bio-
engineered extraneous sweeteners.
In July 2020, the QSI laboratory
in Germany offered to the interna-
tional industry a protocol on how to
use these advanced technologies ad-
vocated by both Apimondia and the
USP for the confirmation of the au-
thenticity of honey. Other laboratories
in the U.S. and Canada will surely fol-
low suit. The goal will be to see who
can most faithfully, effectively and
thoroughly implement these meth-
odologies to protect consumers and
beekeepers, and thereby broader ag-
ricultural and ecological interests.
Of course, we must note that the
USP FCC document is a proposal and
is open for comments prior to its final-
ization. This author, with the support
of others, is advocating that the docu-
ment should promote the authenticity
of all honey, irrespective of the use to
which the honey is put, whether for
retail, manufacturing, food service,
cosmetic or pharmaceutical purposes.
Authentic honey must be authentic. If
we leave a loophole, the flood of adul-
terated honey will be unabated and
the negative consequences upon au-
thentic honey will persist. It is a mat-
ter of principle. The back door should
not be let open because the front door
has been locked. This is vital for the
health of the U.S. market.
All modes of adulteration relevant
to the prevailing situation must be
scientifically and independently in-
vestigated. Otherwise analysis serves
merely as an exercise which provides
a smokescreen or a mask.
We are happy to see that some of
the laboratories are recognizing this.
In a newsletter sent in July 2020, QSI
asserted: “High Resolution Mass
Spectrometry is increasingly being
used to investigate the authenticity
of food. The great advantage of this
technique is the ability to detect even
novel adulterations. This is neces-
sary because adulterators are con-
stantly learning and adapting their
adulterations to the analytics cur-
rently available.” Different laborato-
ries are collaborating to cross verify
the power and application of these
multiple tools and their respective
databases. The results of these col-
laborations are very promising.
The adoption of these new stan-
dards represents considerable scien-
tific progress. Science does not stop.
As we look to the future, the creative
marketing of authentic honey, its
romance, history, charm, diversity
and health benefits, requires a much
more vigorous and comprehensive
traceability system. That means the
advancement of the science of the
chemistry and physics of honey will
require the understanding of vari-
ables which influence that chemistry
and physics. In work that was done
some years ago with Dr. McLaughlin
and Dr. Page of the FDA, and with
discussions with Dr. Joseph Bowden,
it was suggested that if we develop
a database more robust and compre-
hensive than has been collected so far
for honey, it will be possible to see
whether the specific product named
honey fits the specific, detailed, pro-
file. One size does not fit all. This is
not only relevant to issues of authen-
ticity and purity but it also is relevant
to assessing both the high quality
and/or the health benefits of particu-
lar honeys. Such a scientific scheme
will serve an emerging era of the cre-
ative marketing of honey.
Science continues and is not rel-
evant only to identifying adulteration
but to demonstrating honey’s qual-
ity and benefits. That is, the further
development of the science of honey
will serve a positive agenda. For ex-
961

Global Debt July 2020
ample, Dr. Daberkow has pointed
out that a study by the University of
Queensland (Profs. M. Fletcher, N.
Hungerford, and T. Smith) indicates
that the meliponini bee produces
honey which, as indigenous people
have known, has important health
benefits. Specifically the honeys con-
tain up to 85% of the sugar trehalu-
lose, which is important because it
can inhibit diabetic processes. Under-
standing this health benefit was de-
pendent upon scientific analysis.
The Pandemic
The current situation is deeply
affected by the pandemic which
emerged in the latter part of 2019
from Wuhan, China. While China
had a severe lockdown internally,
a million Chinese travelled to five
continents. In a 3-4-month period,
the coronavirus provoked a pan-
demic throughout the entire world.
The epicenters within and among
the nations were shifting. As of mid-
July, the total number of cases in the
world was 15 million, the number
of deaths 700,000, and the countries
with the highest number of cases
were the U.S., Brazil, India, Russia,
and Peru. The fear of a second and
third wave remains.
This is a crisis that integrates health,
economics, education and national and
global debt. For example, U.S. debt
has grown so that the total debt is $79
trillion, including federal, corporate,
consumer, muni and local. This means
that there are increasing risks for com-
panies around the world, including
exporters and U.S. beekeepers, who
need secure terms of sale in a climate
of increasing economic fragility.
Given the high rate of unemploy-
ment and high rate of bankruptcies,
the settlement of global debt creates
962
a daunting economic challenge to the
nation and the world. The magnitude
of international debt, given the im-
pact of the pandemic on the global
economy, has reached a point where
international monetary authorities
are talking about the necessity to
“forgive” debt, which could include
the enormous debt which many third
world countries owe China for their
new Silk Road projects.
Limited shipping availability and
routes, delays in internal transporta-
tion in honey producing and consum-
ing countries, the threat of recurring
lockdowns, and diminishing hospital
capacity, create great uncertainty for
the world.
Climate
Aberrational weather patterns
which have been reported this sum-
mer include temperatures over 100°F
in the Arctic, melting permafrost in Si-
beria, extreme flooding in central and
southern China, and protracted heat
waves in 90% of North America.
ConCluSion
The foxes are running away from
the henhouses, the wolves are wear-
ing Grandma’s garb. There is the ap-
pearance that many Sauls suddenly
became Pauls converted by the light
on the road to Damascus.
Though the events described in the
introductory sections have isolated
those who for so long had dismissed,
disparaged and denied the importance
of NMR and other advanced scientific
technologies, some continue to try to
delay implementation of the protocols
advocated by Apimondia, the Authori-
zation Bill and the USP. The media, the
government and the judicial system,
along with the retailers and manufac-
turers who are becoming more acutely
aware of their Social Responsibilities
to consumers, agriculture and the en-
vironment, are causing the Sea Change
and the Inflection of Prices.
A series of podcasts is being orga-
nized to address the new challenges
and opportunities during this period
when economically motivated adul-
teration and food fraud are being
confronted head on nationally and in-
ternationally, in both producing and
consuming countries. The first pod-
cast will involve Professor Michael
Roberts and myself. Subsequent pod-
casts will engage scientists, represen-
tatives of other industries such as the
wine industry, retail associations, con-
sumer advocate associations, business
leaders with expertise in exercising
Corporate Social Responsibility, ma-
jor media, and eminent legal experts
in food fraud. The series is planned to
run from August 2020 through 2021.
A new report by the Capgemini Re-
search Foundation, “Consumer Prod-
ucts and Retail: How sustainability is
fundamentally changing consumer
preferences,” finds that “sustain-
ability has risen up the customer’s
agenda: 79% of consumers are chang-
ing their purchase preferences based
on social responsibility, inclusiveness,
or environmental impact.” There is
growing appreciation for beekeepers
from people of all walks of life.
Honey cannot be defined without
reference to its modes of production.
Honey is not the product of blending
rice and beet sugars and other bio-
engineered sugars, nor is it the prod-
uct of “laundering” honey through
resin technology. Neither is honey the
product of the extraction of immature,
unripened nectars.
Honey is a product of nature which
involves the complete interaction of
pollinators and nectar, which trans-
forms honey into The Soul of a Field
of Flowers.
Mr. Phipps is President and founder of CPNA
International, Ltd. He is a former member of
the National Honey Board and Co-Chairman of
the Committee for the Promotion of Honey and
Health. He was a recipient of a National Sci-
ence Foundation Fellowship in the Philosophy
of Theoretical Physics. He was an Organizer of
the 2020 Beethoven Festival by the CPI at the
magnificent Planting Fields Arboretum. In 2017
he was appointed Vice President of the Api-
mondia Scientific Commission on Beekeeping
Economy. He has worked with FDA to develop
a research protocol for the global diversity of
honey. e-mail: info@cpnaglobal.com
American Bee Journal
964 American Bee Journal
Q EUROPEAN
FOULBROOD
I have read your excellent guide
on the treatment and diagnosis of
European Foulbrood at https://edis.
ifas.ufl.edu/in1272. In the past I have
tried:
1. Mite treatments
2. Shook swarm
3. Culling older frames (but not
all frames)
4. Feeding sugar syrup/pollen
patties
5. Requeening
Last year, requeening a hive was
very effective; this year’s results are
disappointing. I also find it strange
that in the middle of summer, with a
moderate-to-strong honey flow, this
disease would still be prevalent. My
questions have to deal with peren-
nial issues with this disease.
1. I have been advised that burn-
ing frames and hive bodies is
extreme and not necessary, I
hope this is true. Am I perpetu-
ating the infection each year by
using frames and hive bodies
that have contained foulbrood
at one time?
2. I have read that requeening
with a hygienic race is recom-
mended as these bees are ex-
pected to be more aggressive
at removing diseased larvae.
Would this make an apprecia-
ble difference?
3. If I were to add healthy brood
frames from strong colonies, are
those frames then contaminat-
ed? At what point can they be
September 2020
considered “clean,” after soak-
ing in a bleach water solution?
Chris Wynkoop
Illinois, July
A
I am glad that you enjoyed the EFB
guide my team and I produced. A stu-
dent in one of our beekeeping classes
put that together and we published it
as a University of Florida electronic
fact sheet.
Your comments about EFB are in-
teresting to me because they fit the
description of what a lot of commer-
cial beekeepers have been telling me
about a similar phenomenon that they
have seen in recent years. Basically, it
seems to be common for colonies to
get EFB, or something like it, after the
spring nectar flow when colonies oth-
erwise should be strong and healthy.
To your specific questions:
1) I do think that destroying the
combs/hives of these infected
colonies is a bit extreme and un-
necessary. If EFB really is the cul-
prit, then doing what you note
in your questions (the five steps)
should help the colonies pull out
of it. If those do not work, then a
perfectly reasonable option is to
treat the colonies with one of the
available antibiotics labeled for
use in honey bee colonies. This
should clear it up.
2) It is generally held that using
bees that display good hygienic
behavior will help manage the
disease. The research I have seen
on this topic usually concerns
American foulbrood and not
EFB. However, the consensus is
that it will help. Furthermore,
you get the added benefit that
hygienic bees help manage AFB,
Varroa, and chalkbrood (likely
among other problems). I do be-
lieve it will make an appreciable
difference.
3) When you add frames from
healthy colonies to EFB-infected
ones, the frames do become con-
taminated. To my knowledge,
there has been no work on how
long it would take the frames to
be free from infection post-expo-
sure. However, my guess is that
it would take weeks or months
after you see your last signs of
the disease. This is why I like the
antibiotic option as a last resort.
This controls the bacteria that
causes EFB and helps rid the
hive of it.
As an added note, the Bee Informed
Partnership has some good informa-
tion (and great pictures) about EFB
on their website. You can also check
out the information on EFB from the
following groups: BeeAware (Plant
Health Australia), eXtension (Bee
Health), and the Food and Agricul-
ture Organization of the United Na-
tions (FAO). To find that information,
just Google the names of those organi-
zations with “European foulbrood.”
The information is easy to find.
Q
PLASTIC HONEYCOMB
What is your opinion and experi-
ence with plastic hive frames with
965
fully drawn plastic honeycomb on
supers and brood? Being retired and
ending up being a full time beekeep-
er, I am always experimenting with
some of my hives. Was looking to get
10 frames and see what happens.
Terry Smalec
Colorado, July
A Terry, to be honest out-of-the-gate,
I have never used the frames that are
entirely plastic with fully “drawn”
plastic comb. I was sent a box years
ago and wanted to put it on hives, but
never did.
That said, I have discussed it with
some beekeepers who have tried it
and I will share what they told me.
First, some of the beekeepers I know
who have tried it really liked it. I
mean, they really really liked it. They
noted the standard benefits that the
bees do not have to make comb, that
they are sturdy, and there is no as-
sembly required.
The drawbacks they noted were the
standard ones you hear as well. Bees
can be reluctant to use it unless it is
all that is provided to them (i.e., they
have no other option but to use it). So,
they recommend not mixing the plas-
tic combs in a super with wax foun-
dation or wax combs. They say when
you elect to use it, go “all in.” I have
had one beekeeper suggest coating
them with a little bit of wax or spray-
ing them with sugar water to get the
bees to accept it easier. However, I
would take the radical approach and
give it to them just the way it comes
in the box.
Of course, the bees are the ultimate
decision makers so I would put the
test directly to them. You note that
you like to experiment. I say go for
it. Purchase one super, put it on your
hive, and let me know what your
bees do. I think that the bees will take
and use it during a major honey flow.
Good luck!
Q your input and time.
BEES NOT
BUILDING COMB?!?!
I am a new beekeeper and started
my beehive on May 22. I live on 25
acres in Georgia and there are al-
ways lots of flowers; so, I only fed
my girls the first two weeks. How-
ever, it has been five weeks now and
the girls have only drawn 3½ frames
966
of wax and only ½ frame in the past
two weeks. I was wondering if/how
I should encourage my bees to build
more comb.
Jonny Dorminy
Georgia, July
A
Johnny, in my experience, bees
build more comb when they have
the resources needed to build it.
What are the resources they need to
build wax comb? They need carbohy-
drates (sugar). This is converted into
the wax that they secrete and use to
make the comb. A new colony on new
foundation “wants” to draw comb.
Thus, if they are not drawing comb,
it is because they do not have enough
resources to do it. The bees can be
carbohydrate-starved even if there
are flowers in the area. Not all plant
species produce enough nectar need-
ed by bees to build comb. Based on
the fact that you live in Georgia (my
home state) and said you started your
hive on 22 May (near the end of the
standard spring Georgia nectar flow),
I suspect your bees simply ran out of
resources and that you need to feed
your bees.
Of course, there is an off chance that
the bees have some sort of issue that
keeps them from being productive.
This could include Varroa, viruses,
etc. However, this would be the ex-
ception rather than the rule for a new
colony that is otherwise programmed
to grow fast. I think feeding your bees
will solve the issue you are seeing.
Q
A HIVE UNDER
MY HIVE?
I was wondering if you have ever
seen this before. I have an open-air
hive below my main hive which has
two hive bodies and two supers. I
was thinking an after swarm may
have built a hive underneath this
hive. What do you think? Thanks for
Bob Eckenrod
Pennsylvania, June
A
Bob — your hunch is likely correct!
I also think this is a swarm that ended
up establishing under your hive. My
guess is that if you go down to that
comb, you will find brood, a queen,
pollen, honey, etc.
Here is what I think happened. As
you likely know, the primary (first/
main) swarm of a colony usually con-
tains the old queen. For many colo-
nies, this is the only swarm they will
issue during swarm season. Usually,
the old queen will slim down prior to
swarming so that she can get down
to her flying weight. My guess is that
this one did not lose enough weight
or that she could not fly for another
reason (tattered wings, etc.). I hap-
pen to clip my queens’ wings to keep
swarms from happening. In my case
(and I think in yours), my bees will try
to swarm and the workers will all take
to the air. The queen will come out of
the hive as well, but be unable to gen-
erate lift. So, she sort-of just glides to
the ground in front of the hive.
I have seen swarming workers land
on the queen on the ground, form-
ing their swarm cluster just a few
feet away from their hive. I have also
seen (more times than I can count),
the queen walk back to my hive and
crawl underneath, but not go into it.
At this point, the swarming work-
ers will coalesce underneath the hive
with the queen. Occasionally, the
queen and workers will go back into
the hive. However, if they do this,
they usually end up trying to swarm
again the next day, with the same out-
come happening. Given my queens
are clipped, they can never fly. So, I
end up finding swarms underneath
my hives all the time. My response is
that I am grateful that a swarm landed
somewhere I can actually get to it. ☺
I, then, just collect the bees from un-
derneath the hive, put them in a hive
American Bee Journal
of their own, and set up a place for
them in the same apiary. You could
hive them and move them away for
a week or two before bringing them
back, just to avoid any drift to the old
hive location that might happen.
You note specifically that this could
be an “after swarm.” For the benefit of
the reader, this is any swarm that oc-
curs after the primary swarm. After-
swarms are headed by virgin queens
that emerge after the colony has al-
ready swarmed. This can occur if two
or more virgin queens emerge at the
same time or if the colony is still large
after its primary swarm. In either case,
the bees will swarm again within days
of issuing its primary swarm. These
swarms are often smaller than pri-
mary swarms. Colonies can swarm
2-4 times this way. My only thought
about this being an afterswarm is that
virgin queens usually can fly (are less
likely to have tattered wings for ex-
ample), so it is less common for them
to end up establishing under the hive.
Furthermore, if they could not fly to
swarm, they likely could not fly to
mate, meaning that she would only
be laying drones in the combs under
the hive. If not an afterswarm, why
would it be so small? This can hap-
pen because a lot of bees in the swarm
underneath the hive end up just going
back into the hive, leaving few bees
and a queen underneath the hive to
fend for themselves. Double check the
combs, make sure the queen is mated
(if she is there), and hive those bees.
Despite all of this talk about
swarms, there could be another rea-
son for the combs underneath the
hive. I have, occasionally, seen strong
hives continue to build comb under-
neath their hive. This usually only
happens if they have direct access
to the space under the hive, usually
through a large hole in the bottom
board. I think this is the less-likely
scenario of the two. My gut tells me
that it was a failed swarm and that
you have a second colony underneath
the main colony.
Q
HONEY BEE
GENETICS
The queen bee has 32 chromo-
somes, 16 of which she received from
her mother and 16 from her father.
When the queen lays a drone egg, she
separates her chromosomes and only
places 16 chromosomes in the drone
egg. Which 16 chromosomes does she
put into the drone egg? Her moth-
September 2020
er’s? Or her father’s? Or something
different?
Michael Henderson
California, July
A
Thanks for the question. I had to vet
my answer with a colleague at UF: Dr.
Humberto Boncristiani. I wanted to
make sure and give him proper credit
for helping with this answer. (Thanks
Humberto!)
Queens do not purposefully place
certain chromosomes into drone eggs
during the production of the eggs.
It is a random process. You are cor-
rect that there are 16 pairs of chro-
mosomes (making the 32 total chro-
mosomes you note). So, each drone
egg will have, randomly, one of the
chromosomes from each pair. Fur-
thermore, there is crossover (DNA
sharing) between the chromosomes
within a pair (homologous recombi-
nation) and, possibly, even between
unpaired chromosomes (ectopic re-
combination), ultimately making the
chromosomes a drone has unique.
This recombination can even happen
during meiosis, when the sex cells are
being produced, making honey bees
pretty special. Thus, no two drones
are alike because they randomly re-
ceive one of two chromosomes each
queen has for the 16 pairs, and this
one can be mixed during meiosis.
Let us think about this further. Take
the first chromosome, for which there
are two copies in the queen: the one
she received from her drone father
and the one she received from her
queen mother. You can get crossover
between these paired chromosomes
(homologous recombination), where
they “exchange” pieces of DNA be-
tween the two, making a new, unique
chromosome during meiosis. Do this
for the 16 pairs of chromosomes and
you get a unique drone.
Q
WHAT DO LARVAL
BEES EAT?
I understand that royal jelly is se-
creted by the hypopharyngeal gland
in the nurse bee’s head. This is the
sole food for queen bee larvae and is
fed to the worker and drone larvae
for their first few days. I get conflict-
ing information on nutrition over
the latter days of a worker or drone
larva’s development. Some say that
they are fed pollen. But, over nearly
60 years of beekeeping, I have never
seen a speck of pollen or beebread in
any larval cell. Others say that older
larvae are fed mandibular jelly from
the mandibular glands in the nurse
bee’s head. What is the truth?
Blaine Nay
Utah, June
A
The food that larval honey bees
eat is a mixture of secretions from
the hypopharyngeal and mandibu-
lar glands of adult nurse honey bees.
The nurse bees eat bee bread the first
few days of their lives to mature these
glands. Once the glands are mature,
the nurse bees are able to secrete the
food. Hypopharyngeal gland secre-
tions are clear and have a high pro-
tein content, while the mandibular
gland secretions are white and con-
tain mostly lipids.
The first two to three days of de-
velopment, all larvae (queens, work-
ers and drones) are fed a diet com-
posed of ~20-40% mandibular gland
secretions, with the rest composed
of hypopharyngeal gland secretions.
Queens continue on this diet (some-
times called “royal jelly”), but with
nearly equal parts mandibular and
hypopharyngeal gland secretions.
However, from about the third day
onward, worker and drone diets no
longer contain mandibular gland se-
cretions. This different diet is often
called “brood food” or “worker jelly.”
The drone diet differs slightly from
that of the worker diet. It has higher
protein and carbohydrate levels.
Nevertheless, on about the last two
days of worker and drone develop-
ment, adult honey bees mix honey
and pollen into the hypopharyngeal
gland secretions fed to the larvae.
One normally does not see food at all
in the cells of older worker or drone
larvae. They eat it as fast as it is pro-
vided to them. I suspect that is one of
the primary reasons that the pollen is
difficult to see in the food.
Honestly, I have had some of the
same thoughts about pollen/honey
inclusion in the diet as you. I wonder
about the importance of these addi-
tions, given that we can rear worker
honey bees in the laboratory on modi-
fied royal jelly with no honey or pol-
len added. A member of my team and
I have considered investigating this
topic, so your question is timely.
967
Q OXALIC ACID
VAPORIZATION
TEMPERATURE
I wonder if you could explain the
differences in temperatures used for
oxalic acid vaporization? I currently
use the oxavap tool which heats to
a temp of 230 C. After reading Scott
McArt’s piece in the June 2020 issue,
I’m wondering about this high of a
temperature. He states “... 157 C to
sublimate, but if 189.5 C is reached,
OA decomposes ...” What am I miss-
ing?
Andrew Olson
June
A Thanks for the question. Dr. Cam-
eron Jack from UF is an expert on
this topic and has gotten a similar
question many times. Thus, I had to
pose your question to him. The short
answer is that there is no consensus
on the question. Here is what Dr. Jack
said:
“This is a tough one and honestly
something that I have struggled with
as well. I do not believe that I or any-
one has the complete answer for this.
I got the OA sublimation information
from two chemical books, which re-
ported the same thing:
1) Budavari, S. (ed.). 1989. The Merck Index
- encyclopedia of chemicals, drugs and
biologicals. Merck and Co., Inc., Rahway,
NJ. p. 1093.
2) Rumble, J. and W. M. Haynes (eds.).
2017. Handbook of chemistry and phys-
ics. CRC Press, Taylor and Francis Group.,
LLC, Boca Raton, FL.
“Something that is perhaps impor-
tant to consider is that this informa-
tion is in reference to pure OA. Most
people in the U.S. are going to be
using OA dihydrate, as per the U.S.
EPA label. According to the Interna-
tional Chemical Safety Cards (ICSC),
the melting point for OA dihydrate is
101-102 C, so it melts first, then va-
porizes into a gas. I do not know at
what temperature OA dihydrate va-
porizes or if it decomposes before it
vaporizes. I would assume that most
of it does not since we can recover OA
that has been vaporized.
“I would venture to say that most
vaporizers do go well beyond this
melting point or even the decomposi-
tion point of pure OA because no one
wants a vaporizer that takes forever.
Beekeepers are looking for a quick
968
treatment. There is much more to
learn about effective OA application
and it will likely involve those with
a strong chemistry background. Re-
gardless, OA vaporization seems to
be working somehow, even if the OA
is decomposing.”
Q
TREATING COLONIES
IN HIVES WITH
HONEY SUPERS
I’m a hobby beekeeper from New
Jersey, I’ve been keeping bees for 12
years. I just harvested my honey this
past weekend; it is the earliest I’ve
ever harvested. All six supers (from
two hives) were full and capped. I put
the supers back on the hives for the
bees to clean them. I went to remove
them today and the girls have already
started filling them. My question is:
Can I leave them on for the rest of the
summer? I have been successful treat-
ing for Varroa with MAQS using the
“knock down” method in July and
then again in September. In the mid-
dle of October, I install Apivar strips
which brings me to the start of De-
cember. I will test for mites later this
week and anticipate the count to be
reasonably high. I am under the belief
that I can keep my supers on while
treating with Formic Pro which is the
treatment I’ll be putting on. Can you
please share your thoughts?
Tom Kirgan
New Jersey, June
A
These are very important questions
to consider, so thanks for asking them.
If I understand you correctly, you are
asking your question under the prem-
ise that you hope to be able to harvest
the honey the bees are putting in the
super now, even though you will
need to treat for Varroa while the su-
pers are on the hives? Or, do you just
want to leave the supers on the hives
during summer, through the Varroa
treatment period, and hope to use
them for honey production next year?
Either way, I will try to provide some
basic information for you to consider.
I know this sounds cliché, but you
must follow the label for the product
(you mention Formic Pro specifically
in your question). Thus, I will answer
your question with a question. ☺
What does the label say?
I know it sounds like I am trying to
scoot around the issue, but let me ex-
plain my comment. First, by law, one
has to follow the label when applying
the pesticide. Second, the labels are
subject to change after review, re-reg-
istration, etc. Labels change frequent-
ly enough that I have been unable to
keep up with what they say. The label
should address your question spe-
cifically. It may say something like
“do not use when making harvest-
able honey,” or something similar. If
it does, you cannot use the product if
you have supers on the hives that you
hope bees fill with honey you intend
to harvest and sell/consume. If the
label permits use while marketable/
harvestable/consumable honey is be-
ing produced, then you would be ok
to use it. The label may also say some-
thing about when it is safe to add hon-
ey supers post-treatment. This would
be the period after treating that you
would be able to super your hives.
I realize that I have not given you a
concrete answer. I know this sounds
odd, but university administrators of-
ten do not like us to provide specific
treatment use recommendations in
the event we accidentally provide in-
formation contrary to the label. They
prefer us to say “follow the label” or
“the label is the law.” So, check the
Formic Pro label closely to see what
is included on it. If no information is
provided, contact the manufacturer
for more information.
Q
IS MY QUEEN OK?
I caught a swarm in a swarm trap
early-May. It was building up great
in a 4-frame nuc and was up to three
boxes (12 frames) by early June.
The queen had a good pattern and I
planned to keep a close watch on her
since a swarm I caught at the same lo-
cation last year has been doing a good
job dealing with the mites.
June 6, I moved the hive into
10-frame equipment on a double pal-
let. When I checked them a week later
there were emergency cells and I fig-
ured I must have squished the queen
somehow when moving the frames.
However, a few frames over I found
her walking about happily, acting as
if everything was fine. I left them be
and have checked them a few times
since. Each time I found the queen,
long and fat, as if she has been lay-
ing lots of eggs. Problem is there are
no eggs and the bees definitely “feel”
queenless. I visually inspected her
and she looks fine. Today I broke the
American Bee Journal
hive down and banked the queen
since I can’t quite bring myself to
squish a “perfectly good” queen. …
Any thoughts???
Jeffrey Detweiler
June
Q PRE-DRAWN
WAX COMB?
Having read Meghan Milbrath’s
article “Drawn Comb is Gold” in the
June ABJ, it reminded me of an effort
I made to produce a drawn comb.
produced. The University of Florida
has a 3D printing consultation labo-
ratory and I chatted with them about
this some time ago. The conclusion
is that it would be difficult to print
full wax comb using a 3D printer,
for all the reasons you note in your
question.

A
Jeff, it is pretty common for colo-
nies to requeen themselves after they
swarm and after the queen has laid
eggs. I am not sure why this happens,
but it may be related to the fact that
the old queen is the one that leaves
with the swarm. Perhaps the bees are
just trying to get a newer queen in the
colony to maximize its growth and
survival potential.
That said, I think something else is
happening in your case. It sounds, to
me, like the queen has failed. I would
have said that she may have just re-
duced pheromone output given her
You cannot extrude, cast, emboss or
3D print wax because of the heat it
retains for a long period of time in
any of the processes studied. I have
found a company in Hungary that
has been making drawn comb for a
decade with ALL the properties of
real comb. Quite an accomplishment.
Has anyone studied their product for
use in the U.S.? See their websites
for full information on their product,
hexacells.com or info@hexacells.
com. This would be a boon for the
bee industry since the bees’ efforts,
energy and time to make comb is
eliminated. After all, we use wax
foundation. Why not drawn comb?
Don Barth
June
I have heard of the company that
you note, but I am not aware of any
U.S.-based research on these combs.
Their product and claims are intrigu-
ing and worth studying. However, I
have not seen any data on this and
cannot really comment on it with any
expertise. Furthermore, I conducted
a quick literature search on the topic
and could not find any information
outside that provided by the compa-
ny. Nevertheless, it is an interesting
product so I hope some work is done
on it in the future.
I agree with you that it would be a
neat energy-saver to hive bees on ful-
ly drawn combs made of wax. I guess
this would only be valuable if the en-
ergy to produce such combs would

A
age. In this case, the bees would try be less than the energy required by
to replace her because they would bees to pull the combs. It would also
not know she was there, even if she be affected by the economics of pur-
is a prolific brood producer. However, chasing fully constructed combs vs
you note that she is not laying eggs You and I must think alike Don. I “paying” your bees to do it for you
any longer. Consequently, I think she do some toxicology work in the lab by feeding them or via a loss in honey
has failed, for whatever reason, and and wanted to find a way to incor- production related to the energy ex-
needs to be replaced. It is possible porate pesticides into wax combs to pense of bees constructing wax. Ei-
that the bees noticed this themselves which I expose bees. This led me to ther way, this is all fascinating and
and are in the process of trying to question if 3D wax comb could be worth studying.
remedy the problem, hence the pro-
duction of emergency cells. It is tough
to kill queens, especially ones that
otherwise seem so healthy. However,
I am not sure she is worth saving giv-
en that she has stopped laying eggs.
One final possibility is that the
colony was not making emergency
cells, but was actually preparing to
swarm again by making swarm cells.
You noted yourself that the hive was
growing and had filled three, four-
frame boxes in a nuc (i.e., they were
fully populating a small hive). Fur-
thermore, the queen had quit laying.
Both of these could be signs of swarm
preparation.
How can you tell what was actu-
ally happening? You can create a new
nuc and use her to requeen it. If she
starts laying again, then she was OK
the first time around. If she does not,
she needs to be replaced. The catch in
this case is the labor involved in try-
ing this, especially if she is destined
to fail. This strategy, then, would be
a waste of time. What would I do? I
would discard the queen and move
on to something else.

September 2020 969

March 2018 971
Beekeeping Basics
Working with
Queen Cells
by MEGHAN MILBRATH
Q ueen cells are the unsung heroes
of sustainable beekeeping. Most
beekeepers still seek out mated
queens for splits and replacements
when queen cells work just as well or
even better. There are many advan-
tages to using queen cells over mated
queens. A huge advantage is seen in
the spring, as queen cells are available
earlier in the season. By definition,
they are ready weeks before mated
queens. For those of us in the north,
a week can make all of the difference
in making splits for swarm control.
Where I live in Michigan, winter
tends to hang on as long as it can,
and then instantly and dramatically
flip a switch to summer. During the
cold spring, it is difficult to maintain
nucs and have good weather for mat-
ing, so it is almost impossible for me
to have mated queens ready by the
time I want to make splits for swarm
control. I can however, make a big
cell starter and have enough queen
cells ready for all my splits before the
weather turns.
The second benefit is that queen
cells are significantly cheaper. This
economic advantage is really impor-
tant when we are looking to replace
large numbers of older queens, or if
we don’t have good success in in-
troducing queens (many beekeepers
throw money away on mated queens
that aren’t accepted). Canadian re-
searchers looked at the economics of
queen rearing, and found that queen
cells cost the producers between $2
and $5 per cell, while mated queens
cost from about $10 to over $25 to pro-
duce (Bixby 2020). From the producer
side, the difference in labor is enor-
mous. I can raise 90 cells from just two
or three hives — I just need a strong
September 2020
starter and a hive with a good queen
and graftable larvae. I will have 90
cells in just over a week. If I want 90
mated queens, I need to manage well
over 100 mating nucs, which require
multiple hives to start, and I have to
feed and maintain them for a month.
Many times when I suggest using a
queen cell rather than a mated queen,
I am met with an objection — “Won’t
that cause too much of a brood break?”
While using a queen cell will indeed
cause a brood break, this is considered
an advantage in my book, and not a
concern. In the era of varroa, we have
to have a season-long management
strategy. A brood break is a lovely and
effective part of this strategy, because
it creates a period where varroa can-
not reproduce and when the mites are
vulnerable to grooming or at risk of
leaving the hive on a forager. We can
They're easier and
cheaper, and have a high
rate of acceptance.
even increase the effect on varroa con-
trol by adding in an oxalic acid treat-
ment while the colony is broodless.
Even better, a well-timed brood break
can actually increase honey produc-
tion. A broodless period means that
there are fewer young mouths to feed,
and more bees are available to gather
and process nectar for honey. Nectar
flow brood breaks have long been a
technique used by comb honey pro-
ducers to maximize honey production
during a strong flow.
Another advantage to using queen
cells is that they are often more avail-
able locally. As mentioned above, they
are easier and cheaper to produce,
and can be made earlier in the season.
This means that many smaller-scale
beekeepers that would not be able
to maintain a large apiary of mating
nucs for queens will be able to pro-
duce cells for beekeepers in their club.
Not only will you have bees from a
colony that thrived in your area, with
similar nectar flows and weather, but
you will also not have to worry about
the stress of transport. Shipping can
be incredibly damaging to queens;
heat loss during transport has been
linked to low sperm viability, which
can affect overall colony performance
(Pettis et al. 2016, McAfee et al. 2020).
If you are going to spend the money
and time on replacing a queen and
you are going to count on her pro-
duction over the next year, you want
to make sure that she is in excellent
health.
The final advantage to queen cell
use is the high rate of acceptance.
Many beekeepers struggle to intro-
duce mated queens in hives, especial-
ly when colonies are larger, or con-
ditions are not ideal. When a virgin
emerges in a queenless colony, there
is no concern about introduction. The
bees will accept her as she comes out
of a cell as a young virgin, and you do
not have to mess around with push-in
cages and candy plugs.
There are some downsides to using
queen cells. First and foremost, when
using a queen cell, you’ll only get half
of the genetics of the original colony.
The drone part of the equation will
come from wherever you are located.
This may be a positive thing, if you
have lots of good, overwintered colo-
nies thriving in your area, or it may be
less than ideal if you don’t know the
973
 for spring splits, for making up nucs
to overwinter, and to requeen old and
failing colonies. It is an excellent prac-
tice to make up a few nucs with some
queen cells to learn the process, and
to have them on hand to support or
replace your other colonies.

how To use queen Cells

Queen cells are just as easy to use as
mated queens, if not easier. They are
easy to transport and install. How-
ever, there are considerations to their
timing, transport, and introduction
that will allow you to have the best
success.
Timing. Queen cells vary in their
hardiness depending on where the
virgin is in her development. A larva
sitting on a pool of royal jelly in an
open cell is pretty hardy to tempera-
ture changes, but is vulnerable to dry-
ing out or being shaken off the food. A
queen that is mid-pupation, just form-
A frame of 72-hour cells. These cells traveled safely from Ohio to Michigan in a queen- ing her wings, is very delicate, and
less nuc with lots of nurse bees and food. I put the frame right into a strong queenright even a few shakes or short period at
hive (above a queen excluder) to finish, and I had lots of great queen cells to distribute the wrong temperature can have life-
to beekeepers in MI. This system is an easy and economical way to share genetics. long consequences. A completely ripe
The queen producer has to graft and then wait only a few days, so it is easy to organize cell that is just about to emerge will be
logistics. Thanks to Dwight Wells for both the cells and the photo.
just as hardy as a virgin, and can han-
genetics of the bees that are around. pare for it by making an extra split dle a few more knocks and swings in
The other downside to using queen or two, and planning on combining temperature. I will sell queens at a few
cells is that you have to account for those that fail. times in their development, at days I
some of the virgins not returning from There are multiple advantages to feel are safe for transport: as young as
their mating flights. This isn’t the end using queen cells instead of mated 72 hours old, the day they are capped,
of the world, but you’ll have to pre- queens. In my operation, I use them and right before emergence. I try not

Two homemade queen cell transport devices that use foam packing to keep the queen cells stable and upright. A hot water pack
can be added under the foam in the cooler on the left, and the box on the right used modified cell protectors to allow for extra pro-
tection — even if the queens emerged during transport.

974 American Bee Journal

to sell or transport queen cells when
they are in their sensitive develop-
ment phase, to reduce the chance of
harm to the developing queen.
It is important to know how old the
cells are (the day they are grafted) so
that you can know the best way to
transport them. Younger, uncapped
cells transport best in a queenless nuc
with bees to tend to them, but can
travel short distances in a container
as long as they aren’t jostled heavily
and don’t dry out. Usually if I have
to transport open queen cells, I’ll cre-
ate a nuc with nurse bees — it doesn’t
have to be full, but you want enough
bees to cover and care for the cells.
For short distances, I’ve had success
putting the cell into a Styrofoam cup,
and covering the cup with a wet pa-
per towel.
There are many ways to safely
transport capped queen cells. You
can purchase a commercial incubator,
but they are quite expensive, and in Here is another perfectly good way to transport multiple cells. The milk jug was filled
most cases not worth the cost. If you with hot water from the tap, and we were able to transport dozens of cells safely in
are traveling a long distance, you can the pine needles.
make an incubator out of materials time to realize that they are queen- you will know that the queen that
that you have at home. Basically, you less and to be very accepting of the you find in the nuc is the one with
want the cells to be warm, upright, new cell. If you want to ensure that the genetics that you want (and not a
and cushioned from bumps on the your new queen will have no com- rogue emergency queen). If you have
road. A really nice method is to use a petition when she emerges, make up to install a cell right after removal of
small cooler with a bottle of hot wa- the nuc a week in advance and then the old queen, it is best to use a cell
ter at the bottom, that is covered by a tear down any emergency cells be- protector — either a commercially
thick layer of sawdust or pine shav- fore you install the queen cell. This available model, or tinfoil. If you use
ings. The cells can be nestled into the way you will know that the bees will tinfoil, you want to cover the sides of
sawdust and will remain stable and not have young larvae to create any the cell, but leave the bottom open for
warm for hours. Shorter distances are competitive emergency cells, and the queen to emerge — you can either
even less concerning, especially on
warm days. A transport container can
be as simple as some toilet paper in
an egg carton. I have one beekeeper
who buys queen cells from me ev-
ery year, and every year he will take
them home by wrapping a piece of
paper around the cell like a tube, and
sticking it into the chest pocket of his
shirt. Often, if customers don’t bring
anything for transport I’ll grab a con-
tainer from the recycling bin, add
some pine needles or paper towels,
and nestle the cell so that it is gently
upright and protected. You’ll want to
keep the cells as close to 95˚F as pos-
sible, but if queen cells are kept at a
cooler temperature, it doesn’t seem
to affect the quality of the emerging
queen (Chuda-Mickiewicz et al 2015).

insTAllATion
For the best chance of success
(emergence and survival), install a
queen cell into a nuc that has been
queenless for some time (some stud- A chicken egg incubator that has been modified to transport queen cells. Incubators
ies say 5 days is best, others say a few work well for long-distance travel. Some are designed to plug right into your vehicle,
hours). You want the bees to have others can be used with an inverter.

September 2020 975


Good placement of a queen cell. Photo by Melissa Holohan
roll a small piece of tinfoil like a tube
vertically around the cup and cell, or
you can cut a hole in the middle of a
small square of tinfoil for the tip of the
cell, wrapping the sides.
For the greatest chance of emer-
gence and acceptance, place the queen
cell onto a brood frame, being careful
to handle the cell by the cup. If you
can find a small depression in the
frame, place it there, otherwise just
focus on putting it near the top of the
brood nest, in a place sure to be cov-
ered by bees.
Put one cell per hive. Unless some-
thing happens, most cells that are
capped will emerge. It isn’t worth the
extra cost or stress on the queen to
have two emerge in a single nuc (Boch
and Avitable 1979). If you are con-
cerned about the number of queens
you’ll end up with, it is better to make
up extra mating nucs, as the biggest
risk is not the queens not emerging,
but in not coming back from a mating
flight. Any colonies that are queenless
can just be combined with queenright
colonies later.
Finally, you’ll want to write out
your calendar. Check the colonies
when you can comfortably expect to
see brood. You’ll want to wait about
a month after grafting, so make sure
you know the age of the cell. Many
beekeepers check too early, and that
can wreck everything because they
disrupt the colony too much while the
virgin is not fully accepted or when
she is out on a mating flight.
If you have a chance to get queen
cells, but you don’t have your nucs or
976
splits made up, you can always bank
them in a queenright hive above a
queen excluder, or you can use an in-
cubator if they are capped. Just make
sure that you know exactly the day
they will emerge, so that you don’t
have one virgin emerge and tear
down the remainder of the cells, and
you are careful on which days you
handle them.
using queen Cells wiThouT removing
The old queen
I would be wonderful if we didn’t
have to remove the queen first, and
could just drop a queen cell into a
queenright hive. Finding the old
queen is intimidating to beginners,
and is a lot of labor for beekeepers at
all levels. We have been looking at this
process of “stimulated supersedure”
since at least the 1890s (Miller), and
it was studied heavily in the 1960s
to 1980s. These studies showed that
while most of the cells emerge in a
queenright hive, there is very low sur-
vival and replacement by the young
queen. Using nucs, one study found
only three of the 14 queenright nucs
successfully requeened, compared to
18 of the 20 nucs where the queen was
removed a few hours ahead of time
(Boch and Avitable 1979). Another
small study showed 17-31% success
in introducing queen cells with no
isolation from the original queen (Jay
1981). The largest study of requeen-
ing with queen cells without remov-
ing the queen used over 900 colonies,
adding ripe queen cells into honey su-
pers. While 70% of the cells showed
that queens had emerged, very few
colonies were actually successfully re-
queened (Szabo 1982). It didn’t seem
to help if the queens were young or
old, or if multiple queen cells were
added, or if the cells were added to
the brood nest instead of the honey
supers, or if the cell was left in the
honey supers above a queen excluder
(Boch and Avitable, 1979). There may
be some benefit if the brood nest is
split, the queen cell is accepted, and
then the colony is recombined. In a
study of 23 colonies with the nest split
with only a queen excluder and re-
combined a week later, almost 40% of
the young queens survived, and this
increased to 50% if a division board
was used (Boch and Avitable 1979).
It may make a difference how old
the original queen is. There is some
thought that the queens that didn’t
get replaced were fairly young and
productive, and the older queens
were more likely to get replaced. If
your main goal is to replace older
queens with better genetics, it may
make sense to periodically drop in
queen cells, under the assumption
that you’ll only replace the ones that
need it.
Peer (1977) showed that over 80%
of about 4000 colonies successfully
replaced queens over a 3-year pe-
riod when ripe queen cells were in-
troduced into the top of multi-story
hives 2-3 weeks before the end of the
honey flow. Studies in Lithuania also
were able to get a higher success rate
(71-81% over time) when they persis-
tently checked and re-added queen
cells (Skirkevicius 1963). Beekeepers
will have to evaluate their labor and
queen costs to see if this method is
economical for their operations.
Another method of requeening us-
ing queen cells that is fairly success-
ful is to split the brood nest into sec-
tions (either by physically splitting
the colony or using a division board),
adding a queen cell to the queenless
part, and then recombining them
with newspaper once the new queen
is accepted. Beekeepers can success-
fully requeen large colonies without
removing the queen by the follow-
ing method, outlined in Forster 1972:
First, raise the original queen and the
brood nest above a division board (a
sheet of wood or metal fitted with ris-
ers top and bottom and an entrance).
Add a queen cell to the bottom box,
and then later reunite both boxes by
removing the division board. This
method found an average survival
rate of over 90% for the young queens
American Bee Journal
(of the ones that mated successfully),
and was done without a break in the
brood cycle or loss in honey produc-
tion (this was done in New Zealand
in the early 1970s, so varroa was not
a concern at that time). For larger op-
erations that have more queen cells
and less time, you could simply add
a queen cell to both boxes (the one
with the queen and the one without
the queen), assuming that the queen-
right colony would tear down the cell,
as there was only slightly less success
when the new queen was in the up-
per box.
Consider using queen cells for mak-
ing your splits and for requeening.
They are cheaper, easy to transport
and handle, and you can really im-
prove the sustainability of your op-
eration with well-timed brood breaks
and young queens.

Bixby M, Hoover SE, McCallum R, et al.

Honey Bee Queen Production: Canadian
Costing Case Study and Profitability Anal-
ysis [published online ahead of print, 2020
Jun 2]. J Econ Entomol. 2020.
Boch R and Avitabile A. 1979. Requeening
Honeybee Colonies Without Dequeening,
Journal of Apicultural Research, 18:1, 47-51.
Chuda-Mickiewicz, Bożena & Sambor-
ski, Jerzy. 2015. The quality of honey bee
queens from queen cells incubated at dif-
ferent temperatures. Scientorum Polonarum
ACTA Zootechnica. 14. 25-32.
Forster IW. 1972. Requeening honey bee
colonies without dequeening. New Zea-
land Journal of Agricultural Research, 15:2,
413-419.
Jay, SC. 1981 Requeening Queenright Hon-
eybee Colonies with Queen Cells or Vir-
gin Queens, Journal of Apicultural Research,
20:2, 79-83.
McAfee A., Chapman A., Higo H., Under-
wood R., Milone J., Foster L., Guarna
M. M., Tarpy D. R., and Pettis J. S..
2020. Vulnerability of honey bee queens
to heat-induced loss of fertility. Nature
Sustainability.
Miller CC. 1890. Queens stinging workers.
Gleanings in Bee Culture. 18. 875-876.
Peer D. 1977. Requeening with queen cells.
Canadian Beekeeping 6, 89.
Pettis JS, Rice N, Joselow K, vanEngelsdorp
D, and Chaimanee V. 2016. Colony failure
linked to low sperm viability in honey bee
(Apis mellifera) queens and an exploration
of potential causative factors. PLoS One.
2016;11(2):e0147220. Erratum in: PLoS One.
2016; 11(5): e0155833.
Skirkevicius A. 1963. New method of re-
queening during the honey flow. Lzua
Moksliniai Darbai 3(19):25-41. Accessed
from Boch and Avitable 1979

Meghan Milbrath is a bee-

keeper and honey bee and
pollinator researcher and Ex-
tension specialist at Michi-
gan State University.

September 2020 977

March 2018 979
SCIENCE INSIDER
A Closer Look at Canola
Canola yields a lucrative honey crop. Is
there a downside, or is everything golden?
I
n July, much of the Canadian prai-
rie is an endless sea of yellow flow-
ers, broken only by roads every
mile or two and the occasional clump
of trees. By now, those fields are prob-
ably browning and farmers are likely
busy harvesting their mature crop.
Every two to four years, the field will
be seeded again in the spring, bloom
through July, and be harvested at the
end of the summer, with crops like
wheat or soybean planted in the inter-
vening years. And the cycle of canola
farming goes on.
Canola is a variety of rapeseed that
was developed by scientists at Agri-
culture Canada and the University
of Manitoba, Dr. Keith Downey and
Dr. Baldur Stefansson, in the 1970s.
September 2020
By Alison McAfee
Rapeseed is crushed to extract the oil,
and Downey and Stefansson wanted
to produce a variety that had lower
amounts of erucic acid, which was
predicted to be harmful to human
health. Indeed, the name “canola” is
derived from the phrase “Canadian
oil, low acid.”
Canada produces around 20 mil-
lion tonnes of crude canola each year
— used mostly for oil and animal
feed — which is grown on a land area
approximately equivalent to the en-
tire state of South Carolina. The Ca-
nadian canola industry is about ten
times bigger, in terms of production,
than the U.S. industry. This translates
into massive honey yields, with aver-
age production in the prairies ranging
A honey bee on
a male-fertile
flower. The de-
veloped anthers
are clearly visible,
and her pollen
baskets are full.
Photo by
Shelley Hoover
from around 126 lbs./hive in Alberta
up to, and sometimes surpassing, 200
lbs./hive in Saskatchewan.
“My honey farm will bring in
roughly 275,000 pounds of honey
annually, 75-85% of it being canola,”
says Ian Steppler, owner of Steppler
Farms in Manitoba, Canada. Step-
pler has been keeping honey bees
and growing canola for twenty years
— the duration of his farming career.
“My hives explode in growth as the
canola starts to flower,” he says, ex-
plaining that it probably has some-
thing to do with the high quality of
canola pollen.
“Canola has a high nectar yield
and the pollen is abundant and nutri-
tious,” says Dr. Shelley Hoover, presi-
dent of the Canadian Association of
Professional Apiculturists and apicul-
ture researcher for the Alberta gov-
ernment. “Bees do really well on it.”
Canola pollen is around 24-26%
crude protein — approximately
double that of buckwheat, fireweed,
and sunflower pollen. Unlike flowers
such as lavender and thistle, it also
contains all the essential amino acids,
which are the components of proteins
that bees can’t make themselves and
must acquire from their diet. Step-
pler says that this pollen is “very pre-
cious,” especially with forage diver-
sity and abundance disappearing in
the agricultural landscape.
To CoAT The seed or noT To CoAT The
seed?
Canola is widely considered an ex-
cellent crop for honey bees, despite
controversy over neonicotinoid seed
coatings. Today, most canola seed
981

Canola harvesting at the end of the summer. Photo by Ian Steppler
in North America is coated with the
neonicotinoids clothianidin or thia-
methoxam, and it is difficult to buy
untreated seed.
“What I hear from beekeepers is
that they would far prefer this kind
of seed treatment to any insecticidal
spray,” says Hoover. “The levels of
these insecticides that we detect tend
to be even lower than in Europe, of-
ten at the limits of detection by our
instruments.”
In Europe, before these neonicoti-
noid insecticides were banned, Dr.
Ben Woodcock — an ecological ento-
The crew pulls canola honey boxes off the hives placed at the perimeter of commodity canola fields. Canola honey has exception-
ally high concentrations of glucose, which causes it to crystallize quickly. Steppler leaves honey on the hives for no more than three
weeks before pulling it for extraction. Photo by Ian Steppler
982
mologist at the U.K. Center for Ecol-
ogy and Hydrology — and his col-
leagues conducted a large-scale field
study to investigate health effects of
seed treatment on three different bee
species.1 The researchers worked in
three different countries, Hungary,
Germany, and the U.K., and tracked
numerous health metrics for honey
bees, bumble bees, and mason bees
placed in treated and untreated oil-
seed rape fields.
The results, published in Science
three years ago, showed that the effect
of seed treatments varied substantial-
ly between countries. In Germany, the
only significant effects they identified
were actually beneficial, whereas in
Hungary, it was harmful, and in the
U.K., they found both beneficial and
harmful effects.
The take-home message is that the
seed treatments were not obviously
good or bad, in terms of direct im-
pacts on bee health outcomes. In Can-
ada, Dr. Chris Cutler and Dr. Cynthia
Scott-Dupree also investigated effects
of clothianidin seed-treated canola on
honey bees and found no significant
long-term damage.2 But this also does
not let systemic seed-treatments off
the hook: There are other crops, like
clothianidin-treated corn, where neg-
ative effects on honey bee health have
been clearly demonstrated.3
But what we do know is that seed
treatments substantially reduce
canola growers’ need to spray their
crops with insecticides. And if they
do need to spray, modern equipment
gives farmers more precision, unlike
historical aerial applications. “Ev-
eryone has a high-clearance sprayer
which can spray a quarter-section
within hours,” says Steppler. “It
keeps the chemical down, whereas
planes drift terribly.” Grower aware-
ness of agrochemical effects on bees
has improved, he says, mostly due
to education by the agronomists and
chemical dealers.
The rewards of lucrative honey and
abundant, nutritious pollen seem to
far outweigh the potential risks of
putting colonies in or near canola
fields. Those benefits are substan-
American Bee Journal
tial enough for beekeepers to drop
colonies at commodity canola fields
even though there aren’t pollination
contracts for this type of production.
That’s because commodity canola,
from which oil is pressed, is grown
entirely from hybrid seeds and can
easily self-fertilize with just a rustle
and gust of wind.
But even though hybrid canola
does not depend on insect pollina-
tion, honey bees still benefit grow-
ers by tightening the timing of seed
set, leading to higher yields and
less waste. Canola plants will keep
blooming until they have set their
maximum number of seeds, also
known as their carrying capacity.
By having active pollinators in the
fields, the plants reach carrying ca-
pacity faster, and the seeds mature
for harvest at roughly the same time. A hybrid seed production field. Fields are normally circular, with an irrigation system
This means that there will be fewer in the center, leafcutter bee shelters throughout, and honey bee colonies at the edges.
wasted, over-mature pods, as well as Photo by Shelley Hoover
fewer green, immature pods, which
decrease the value of the crop. The business side of seeds cross-pollination. This process is sub-
But with such vast production The two sectors of canola farming stantially enhanced by using both
fields, there aren’t actually enough — commodity (oil) canola production honey bees and leafcutter bees in the
honey bee colonies in all of Cana- and hybrid seed production — are same field.
da, or even all of North America, to fittingly well-oiled machines. Com- Seed production companies will
achieve the stocking rates needed to modity canola is grown throughout typically have contracts with bee-
maximize the yield of all the canola the prairies, while hybrid seed pro- keepers, leafcutter bee suppliers,
fields. According to research conduct- duction occurs entirely in southern and growers, coordinating manage-
ed in Quebec,4 there is about a 46% Alberta. The two sectors also have ment and timing between the parties.
increase in commodity seed yield very different relationships with bees This is already a huge production
left on the table, but tens of millions and beekeepers. scale, but the companies increase it
of colonies would be needed to fill Unlike commodity canola produc- further by coordinating operations
the pollination deficit. There are only tion, hybrid seed production, which in both the northern and southern
about 2.7 million colonies in the U.S. is conducted by crossing the male hemispheres, taking advantage of the
and 0.7 million in Canada. and female parent lineages, is highly inverted seasons to boost annual pro-
“Farmers will spend a lot of mon- dependent on insect pollinators for duction volumes.
ey on a 2% yield increase,” Steppler
points out. But after all, the incentive
for beekeepers to put their colonies
on canola is not compensation for
pollination, it’s the honey. “Canola
honey has a bad reputation for being
difficult to extract because it crystal-
lizes quickly,” says Hoover, “but it’s
not really an issue if the honey is ex-
tracted right away.”
Steppler has streamlined his ex-
traction methods to handle the fickle
canola honey: He pulls honey boxes
off the hive within three weeks, keeps
the hot room above 30°C (86 F), and
steams the extractor itself. “Many will
argue that canola is a ‘utility’ honey
because of the way it hardens into
course grains,” Steppler says. “But
when canola honey is prepared spe-
cifically into a creamed product, in
my opinion there is no better type A hybrid seed production field with male and female bays. The male bays are the thin-
of honey on the market.” And there ner rows, which are in slightly fuller bloom, interspersed by wide female rows. Leafcut-
is even more for beekeepers to gain ter bee shelters are set throughout the field, and inside each shelter are thousands of
from canola than honey. nesting holes and hatching cocoons. Photo by Shelley Hoover

September 2020 983


A commodity canola field. There are no separate female and male bays, because all
commodity plants are hybrids and self-fertile. Photo by Shelley Hoover
“You might have a beekeeper here
with 5 or 10 thousand colonies,” says
Hoover, “and they’ll contract them all
to one or two seed production com-
panies.” The company, she explains,
will then dictate how many colonies
will be dropped off at each location,
when they will be dropped, and the
GPS location.
In an amusing article,5 Heather
Clay — former national director
of the Canadian Honey Council —
writes, “GPS is an important piece
of equipment to help new crew find
the fields. One beekeeper reported
arriving to find hives already at the
location. He was upset at the waste of
time and walked in to see whose bees
they were. It turned out they were
his.” He had reportedly dropped his
hives there earlier and drove in a big
circle in the night to what he thought
was the next drop location, but really
it was the one he’d just visited.
The seed company also hires an
agronomist who advises farmers on
what agrochemicals to apply and
when, and liaises with the beekeep-
ers. This system works well because
then the beekeeper has one point-
person to communicate with to stay
informed about what’s going on in
all the fields, instead of talking to,
say, twenty different farmers. These
pollination contracts are so big that if
there are any insecticide-related bee
kills, there is compensation written
into the beekeeper’s contract. And
if an agronomist isn’t trusted by the
beekeepers, Hoover says, they gener-
ally don’t last long in the industry.
984
why do CommodiTy growers use
hybrid seed?
Canola, like many crops, benefits
from a biological phenomenon called
“hybrid vigor.” Hybrid vigor is the
concept that hybridization between
two distantly related genetic lineages,
or breeds, can result in progeny that is
robust to stressors or produces greater
yields. In the case of canola, hybridiza-
tion can lead to a 45% increase in yield,
and commodity canola today is pro-
duced exclusively from hybrid seed.
The parental lineages are produced
by some careful breeding strategies
and genetic tricks. Because canola
is normally able to self-fertilize, this
makes it difficult to control who gets
what pollen. It would be impossible
to propagate a totally hybrid popula-
tion. But in the early days of canola
breeding, researchers noticed that
some plants were male-sterile — that
is, they could produce seeds, but not
anthers or pollen.
Since they can’t produce their own
pollen, male-sterile plants are unable
to self-fertilize and must get their pol-
len from elsewhere, enabling breed-
ers to control who the pollen donor
is and making it possible to produce
crops of entirely hybrid seeds that can
then go into high-yielding commod-
ity production.
Beekeepers are paid well for hybrid
seed pollination, about $175 per colo-
ny in Canada, but produce less honey
per hive than in commodity canola
because of higher stocking rates and
more competition with leafcutter
bees. Leafcutter bees are very efficient
pollinators, foraging in a pattern that
is ideal for hybridization: The male-
sterile (seed producers) and male-fer-
tile plants are sown in separate rows,
or “bays.” While honey bees tend to
forage from plant to plant within a
row, leafcutter bees are more likely to
criss-cross, which is necessary to get
the pollen from male-fertile rows to
the seed producers.
Bee-for-bee, leafcutter bees (par-
ticularly females) are superior polli-
nators, but honey bees have the asset
of sheer numbers and greater willing-
ness to forage in cooler weather. Hon-
ey bees will also fly farther to forage,
so the colonies are usually dropped
in the corners of a quarter-section,
whereas leafcutter shelters are set up
throughout the fields.
For most beekeepers, the clear ben-
efits of canola — seed pollination
contracts, light-colored honey, high
yields late in the season, and nutri-
tious pollen for the bees — outweigh
the potential risks. And the fact that
beekeepers are happy to have their
colonies on commodity canola with-
out a contract says it all. If the bee-
keepers thought the crop was tough
on bee health, like blueberries or
cranberries, they would be unlikely
to drop them off for free.
referenCes:
1 Woodcock BA et al. 2017. Country-spe-
cific effects of neonicotinoid pesticides
on honey bees and wild bees. Science.
356(6345): 1393-95.
2 Cutler GC and Scott-Dupree C. 2007.
Exposure to clothianidin seed-treated
canola has no long-term impact on hon-
ey bees. Journal of Economic Entomology.
100(3): 765-72.
3 Tsvetkov N et al. 2017. Chronic exposure
to neonicotinoids reduces honey bee health
near corn crops. Science. 356(6345): 1395-97.
4 Sabbahi R et al. 2005. Influence of honey
bee (Hymenoptera: Apidae) density on the
production of canola (Crucifera: Brassica-
cae). Journal of Economic Entomology. 98(2):
367-72.
5 Clay H. 2009. Pollinating hybrid canola –
the southern Alberta experience. Online:
http://www.honeycouncil.ca/documents/
CanolaSthAB2009.pdf.
Alison McAfee has a
PhD in genome science
and technology from
the University of Brit-
ish Columbia, where
she studied mecha-
nisms of hygienic be-
haviour in honey bees.
She is now a post-doc
at North Carolina State University in David
Tarpy’s lab, and studies what keeps honey
bee sperm alive.
Email her at alison.n.mcafee@gmail.com.
American Bee Journal
 Darwin,
Design,
and the
Honey Bee
Part 1 of 2
by PIERS J. HALE
T
he life and works of the honey
bee have long been seen to speak
to the existence and character of
a divine Creator. Indeed, in his 1853
work, “Hive and the Honey-Bee,”
which is still much-loved by beekeep-
ers, the Reverend Lorenzo L. Lang-
stroth argued exactly this. Paraphras-
ing Shakespeare, he saw “tongues in
trees, books in the running brooks,
Sermons in bees, and GOD in every
thing” (Langstroth 1853, 34).
While Langstroth’s work brought
new and important information to
the beekeeping community about the
design of the honey bee hive, his lyri-
cal commentary upon the evidence of
beneficent design that he saw in the
workings of the hive’s residents was
nothing new. Indeed, the renowned
eighteenth-century beekeeper Fran-
çois Huber had made similar state-
ments in his own work, which was
first translated into English in 1806
under the title “New Observations
on Bees,” as did William Kirby and
William Spence in their popular and
influential “Introduction to Entomol-
ogy,” which, first published in 1815,
ran through seven editions across the
following half century. Their whole
volume was aimed at drawing the at-
tention of their readers “from nature
up to nature’s God”: The honey bee in
particular, they wrote, spoke to “the
glory of an all-wise and omnipotent
Creator” (Kirby and Spence 1856, 356).
In this respect, each of these books
was a contribution to Natural Theol-
ogy, the belief that the investigation of
nature revealed evidence of God’s ex-
istence, his goodness, and his benefi-
cent care of each and every creature he
had made.
September 2020
Charles Darwin,
c. 1857.
Photograph by
Maul and Fox.
Image in the
public domain
The modern tradition of natural the-
ology goes back at least to the work of
the English naturalist John Ray (1627–
1705). Langstroth’s readers, though,
would have been prompted more im-
mediately to think of the most famous
and more recent author on the subject,
the English theologian William Paley
(1743–1805). Even though Paley’s work
was written some half a century be-
fore Langstroth’s, his “Natural Theol-
ogy, or, Evidences of the Existence and
Attributes of the Deity,” published in
1802, was still regarded as the clearest
and most persuasive account of “the
argument from design,” as the natural
theological argument was often called.
dArwin And design
Such was the perceived force of the
logic of the argument from design
that it had become intimately bound
up with the prevailing Anglican the-
ology of the Church of England, and
although this perspective was not
exclusive to Anglicanism, this fact is
important here because it was while
studying at Cambridge University,
with the intention of taking Holy
Orders to become a parish priest,
that the young Charles Darwin first
encountered Paley’s works. Darwin
Charles was the original
“Darwinian beekeeper.”
enrolled at Cambridge not because
he felt any deep religious calling, but
rather because his father recognised
that if he would not follow family
tradition and become a physician —
Darwin had found he could not stand
the sight of blood after witnessing a
particularly gruesome operation on a
child — the church was at least a re-
spectable alternative.
Darwin was moved by Paley all
the same, and he later recalled in
his autobiography, “I was charmed
and convinced by the long line of ar-
gumentation” (Darwin 1958, 59). It
was the same style of argument that
Darwin would later employ in his fa-
mous 1859 work, “On the Origin of
Species.”
The argument from design, which
was the basis of natural theology, was
also often referred to as the “argument
from analogy,” because analogy was
central to its reasoning. Paley had ar-
gued that whenever and wherever we
see complexity that serves a clear pur-
pose in the world of human affairs, it
is always the result of skillful design,
and so, by analogy, it was only rea-
sonable to infer that complexity that
appeared so well suited to a purpose
in nature was likewise the product of
design. Given the almost perfect de-
sign and purpose that seemed evident
across the natural world, natural theo-
logians therefore held to the idea of
“special creation,” the belief that God
had especially designed each species
to fit its unique place in the world.
Although Darwin noted that he
had found Paley’s argument compel-
ling in his student days, by the early
1850s his own studies of the natural
world had led him to quite different
conclusions regarding the origin of
new species. He had come to believe
that each and every living organism
had come into existence not through
individual acts of special creation, but
rather, were the modified descendants
of some other species; the result of a
985

Charles Darwin’s “On the Origin of Spe-
cies” was published November 24, 1859.
Image in the public domain
severe competition both for resourc-
es and for mates; a process he called
Natural Selection.
Darwin had been led to his conclu-
sions not only through extensive ob-
servation of the natural world, but by
his reading of “An Essay on the Prin-
ciple of Population,” the tract in which
the Reverend Thomas Robert Malthus
had famously claimed that population
would always increase at a much fast-
er rate than the available resources.
While Malthus drew from this what
he took to be the truism that the poor
would always be with us, Darwin saw
that such a disparity would prompt a
fierce competition for scarce resources.
In such a struggle for existence, any
organism with even a slight variation
that aided it in its quest to survive
and reproduce, would, on the aver-
age, do so, whereas any that were less
well equipped would just as surely be
driven toward extinction.
Darwin’s theory was thus really
quite simple, but he realized that
there were many examples of com-
plexity in the organic world that he
would need to explain carefully if his
readers were to accept his argument
as a compelling alternative to the spe-
cial creationism of natural theology.
Understandably, therefore, many of
the examples that Darwin discussed
in “Origin of Species” were those that
had frequently been cited as the most
telling examples of divine design —
the eye, for instance, had been cen-
986
tral in Paley’s argument as clear evi-
dence of God’s caring and benevolent
hand. Indeed, Paley had gone to great
lengths to explain, by analogy to the
telescope — the human contrivance
for aiding vision — that the eye was
even more so cleverly designed, and
even more so clearly suited to its pur-
pose. The inference, Paley argued,
was that the Divine architect was
abundantly more skilled than even
the most talented human artificer.
Darwin, who sought to make the
case that the eye was the result of the
selection and accumulation of chance-
but-favourable variations across in-
numerable generations, rather than
an instantaneous special creation, rec-
ognised that there was not in any one
species a long chain of existing varia-
tions, each representing a stage in the
evolution of the eye from the most
simple to the most complex. How-
ever, he too could reason by anal-
ogy, and could show that there was
evidence across the natural world of a
range of different optical instruments,
from the most simple light-sensitive
nerve through to the most complex
form as witnessed in the human eye.
The fact of the existence of this full
range in nature suggested that it was
not impossible that the most complex
had had its origins in the most simple,
each gradation being “selected” as it
better served the interests of its pos-
sessor in the struggle for existence.
While Darwin gave considerable at-
tention to explaining how an organ as
complex as the eye might have come
about by the selection of slight chance
improvements that occurred across
many generations, he also gave sig-
nificant time to the study of bees.
The Cell-mAking insTinCT of The
honey bee
Among the books in Darwin’s li-
brary, his copy of François Huber’s
work is quite heavily annotated, but so
too is his copy of Henry Brougham’s
“Dissertations on Subjects Connected
with Natural Theology” (1839). Echo-
ing Paley on the eye, Brougham had
commented that such was the perfect
design of the honey bee cells, that the
skill demonstrated in their construc-
tion surpassed that of even the most
talented draftsmen — “as indeed we
might well suppose when we recollect
who is her teacher” (Brougham 1839,
I: 25, 77). In the margin alongside this
text, however, Darwin had commented
that for all that the honey bee cell-mak-
ing instinct was “very wonderful,” he
noted too that “… it is as wonderful in
the mind as certain adaptations in the
body — the eye for instance, if my the-
ory explains one it may explain other”
(evolution of honeycomb).
Darwin opened his discussion of
the subject in “Origin of Species” with
a full acknowledgement of the bees’
skilled craftsmanship: “He must be a
dull man who can examine the exqui-
site structure of the comb, so beauti-
fully adapted to its end without en-
thusiastic admiration” (Darwin 1859,
224). Clearly referring to Brougham’s
comments, he continued, “It has
been remarked that a skilful work-
man, with fitting tools and measures,
would find it very difficult to make
cells of wax of true form, though this
is perfectly effected by a crowd of bees
working in a dark hive,” and Darwin
acknowledged it might seem “quite
inconceivable how they can make all
the necessary angles and planes, or
even perceive when they are correctly
made.” However, he added, “the dif-
ficulty is not nearly so great as it first
appears: all this beautiful work can be
shown, I think, to follow from a very
few simple instincts,” and he went
on to show how even such an amaz-
ing phenomenon as the cell-making
instinct of the honey bee could quite
readily be the result of natural selec-
tion (Darwin 1859, 224).
Just as he had attempted to explain
the likely step-wise evolutionary de-
velopment of the eye, Darwin applied
a similar line of argument in his ex-
planation of the evolution of the bees’
cell-making instinct. Darwin again
asked his readers to pay attention not
only to the fully developed feature
that so excited their admiration, but
to look at the wide variety of instincts
that were evident across the many dif-
ferent species of bee. “Let us look to
the great principle of gradation, and
see whether Nature does not reveal
to us her method of work” (Darwin
1859, 225).
Although in his own work
Brougham had claimed that there
were no instances in nature of bees
that produced cylindrical cells from
which the honey bee cell might be an
adaptation, Darwin pointed out that
this was not the case, and that in fact
there were a number of species that
did so, and importantly, that did so to
varying degrees.
“At one end of a short series we
have humble-bees [as the bumble
bee was commonly known in
nineteenth-century England],
which use their old cocoons to
American Bee Journal
 hold honey, sometimes adding to
them short tubes of wax, and like-
wise making separate and very
irregular rounded cells of wax.
At the other end of the series we
have the cells of the hive-bee …
In the series between the extreme
perfection of the cells of the hive-
bee and the simplicity of those of
the humble-bee, we have the cells
of the Mexican Melipona domes-
tica, carefully described and fig-
ured by [François Huber’s son]
Pierre Huber.”
Darwin noted that the cells of Meli-
pona were intermediate between the
simple structure of the bumble bee and
the more complex cells of the honey
bee. However he also pointed out that
the “nearly regular waxen comb of cy-
lindrical cells” of the Melipona were
always made close enough together
that they “would have intersected or
broken into each other if the spheres
had been completed,” although this
was never actually the case because
the bees built “perfectly flat walls of
wax between the spheres which thus
tend to intersect.” As a result:
… each cell consists of an out-
er spherical portion and of two,
three, or more perfectly flat sur-
faces, according as the cell adjoins
two, three, or more cells. When
one cell comes into contact with
three other cells which, from the
spheres being nearly of the same
size, is very frequently and neces-
sarily the case, the three flat sur-
faces are united into a pyramid;
and this pyramid, as Huber has
St. Mary’s Church
Photograph by the author
September 2020
Down House, the Darwin residence from 1842. Photograph by the author
remarked, is manifestly a gross
imitation of the three-sided pyra-
mid basis of the cell of the hive-
bee. (Darwin 1859, 225–6)
dArwiniAn bee keeping
While Darwin had clearly read the
works of both François and Pierre Hu-
ber carefully, on such an important
issue he was not content to base his
comments solely on the secondhand
testimony of even such renowned
sources. While the Darwins kept bees
at Down House (the Darwin residence
from 1842), it seems that prior to these
particular enquiries Charles left the
day-to-day management of the hives
to the gardener, looking into them
himself only occasionally. However,
once he had turned to the question of
the bees’ cell-making instinct he took
things a step further.
Darwin was on friendly terms with
the vicar of St. Mary’s church in the
village of Downe, the Reverend John
Brodie Innes. Innes not only kept bees,
but was happy to help install a glass-
sided observation hive at Darwin’s
home. Darwin wrote to his colleague,
and fellow evolutionist, Alfred Russel
Wallace, telling him of his new-found
fascination with bees: “This is an es-
pecial hobby of mine, & I think I can
throw light on the subject” (Burkhardt
et al 1991, 240–1). Darwin also wrote
to experts at the Entomological Soci-
ety of London including George Rob-
ert Waterhouse. Waterhouse informed
Darwin that this very subject had been
the subject of debate across a number
of the Society’s recent meetings, and
provided detailed commentary. This
led Darwin to also consult the animal
breeder and beekeeper William Bern-
hard Tegetmeier, who later presented a
paper “On the formation of the cells of
bees” to the British Association for the
Advancement of Science (Burkhardt
et al 1990, 377–8). Encouraged by such
experts, Darwin performed a number
of experiments in which he manipulat-
ed the wax in the hives to investigate
first-hand exactly how the bees began
the creation of the comb. Satisfied that
the honey bee cell was indeed a modi-
fied cylinder, he concluded that “if we
could slightly modify the instincts al-
ready possessed by the Melipona, and
in themselves not very wonderful, this
bee would make a structure as won-
derfully perfect as that of the hive-bee”
(Darwin 1859, 227).
bumble bees And The eCology of
nATure
Darwin was just as interested in the
bumble bee as he was the honey bee.
He paid attention to the navigational
skills and flight paths of the bees, set-
ting his children at intervals across the
meadow that adjoins the rear of Down
House. Each was to call out, “Here is
a bee,” as a bee flew past them, and
so on down the line, while Darwin
charted the flight paths in his note-
books. From his close attention to the
bees, as well as from his familiarity
with the work of Edward Newman, a
founder member of the Entomological
Club and editor of their journal, The
987

Bumble bee in the gardens at Down
House. Photograph by the author
Entomologist, Darwin recognised the
complex web of interdependence of
one species upon the many others in
its locale, and thus he was one of the
first naturalists to think of nature in
terms of what we now call ecological
relationships.
As he wrote in “Origin of Species”:
From experiments which I have
tried, I have found that the vis-
its of bees, if not indispensable,
are at least highly beneficial to
the fertilization of our clovers;
but humble-bees alone visit the
common red clover (Trifolium
pretense), as other bees cannot
reach the nectar. Hence I have
very little doubt, that if the whole
genus of humble-bees became ex-
tinct or very rare in England, the
heartsease and red clover would
become very rare, or wholly dis-
appear. The number of humble-
bees in any district depends in
a great degree on the number of
field-mice, which destroy their
combs and nests; and Mr. H.
Newman, who has long attended
to the habits of humble-bees, be-
lieves that “more than two-thirds
of them are thus destroyed all
over England.” Now the number
of mice is largely dependent, as
everyone knows, on the number
of cats; and Mr. Newman says,
“Near villages and small towns I
have found the nests of humble-
bees more numerous than else-
where, which I attribute to the
number of cats that destroy the
mice.” Hence it is quite credible
that the presence of a feline ani-
mal in large enough numbers in a
district might determine, through
the intervention first of mice and
988
then of bees, the frequency of cer-
tain flowers in that district! (Dar-
win 1859, 73–4)
Recognising that natural selection
would also lead to co-adaptive rela-
tionships between species, he contin-
ued, “I can understand how a flower
and a bee might slowly become, either
simultaneously or one after the other,
modified and adapted in the most
perfect manner to each other, by the
continual preservation of individu-
als presenting mutual and slightly
favourable deviations of structure”
(Darwin 1859, 95).
The “one speCiAl diffiCulTy” of
inferTile soCiAl inseCTs
Even though Darwin was con-
vinced that such apparently perfect
and complex characteristics and in-
stincts as those exemplified by the
honey bee could quite reasonably
have come about through the long
and slow process of the selection of
slight variations across innumerable
generations, he recognised that there
remained other instances in nature
that his readers would find it even
more difficult to believe were the re-
sult of such a mundane process. In-
deed, Darwin confessed that initially
he had found one or two such in-
stances so challenging that they had
made him feel quite ill! “The sight of
a feather in a peacock’s tail … makes
me sick,” he confessed to a colleague
in the April of 1860 (Burkhardt et al
1993 140–41). The most troubling ex-
ample he gave, though, came from
the same class of insects as the honey
bee; the social insects. These present-
ed “one special difficulty, which at
first appeared to me insuperable, and
actually fatal to my whole theory”
(Darwin 1859, 236).
What bothered him most was the
existence of the sterile females in
these insect-communities, “for these
neuters often differ widely in in-
stinct and in structure from both the
males and fertile females, and yet,
from being sterile, they cannot propa-
gate their kind” (Darwin 1859, 236).
This was surely a problem for any
theory of biological inheritance; fur-
ther though, because up to this point
Darwin had presumed that natural
selection would work only in favour
of each individual organism, it was
initially quite problematic that the in-
dividuals of these specialized neuter
castes certainly did not seem to ben-
efit as individuals by dedicating their
lives to benefit others.
Darwin turned to the problem of
sterility first. Again appealing to the
evidence of existing variations across
nature, he noted that there were plen-
ty of examples of sterility in nature.
Significantly though, in the instance
of such a trait becoming so dominant
among a species as was the case in
so many of the social insects, Darwin
recognised that instead of serving the
interests of the individual, the insect
community functioned as a supraor-
ganism, and thus he argued that in
these cases natural selection had se-
lected both physiological characters
and instincts that benefited the com-
munity as a whole. If “it had been
profitable to the community that a
number should have been annually
born capable of work, but incapable
of procreation, I can see no great
difficulty in this being effected by
natural selection,” he wrote (Darwin
1859, 236). In the case that a particular
variation was useful to the survival
of the community — larger jaws in
some ants, for example, or the dedi-
cated work ethic of the worker bee,
and this happened to be correlated
with sterility, then the fertile mem-
bers of the community would flour-
ish, and they would in turn transmit
to their fertile offspring “a tendency
to produce sterile members having
the same modification.”
Darwin concluded, “I believe that
this process has been repeated, until
that prodigious amount of difference
between the fertile and sterile females
of the same species has been pro-
duced which we see in many social
insects” (Darwin 1859, 238).
“There is grAndeur in This view
of life”
Although Darwin recognised that
many of his readers might find the
idea that one species had derived
from another through natural pro-
cesses rather than through special cre-
ation challenging, in the book’s final
paragraph he offered the consolation
that the view he had put forward was
far from degrading:
There is grandeur in this view
of life, with its several powers,
having been originally breathed
into a few forms or into one; and
that, whilst this planet has gone
cycling on according to the fixed
law of gravity, from so simple a
beginning endless forms most
beautiful and most wonder-
ful have been, and are being,
evolved. (Darwin 1859, 490)
American Bee Journal

Charles Kingsley c. 1860. Photograph by
J. & C. Watkins, in public domain
friends in high plACes:
While many of Darwin’s contempo-
raries were deeply concerned about
the implications of his theory for hu-
manity — the implied relationship be-
tween humans and apes loomed large
— this was not the case among many
of even the most religious of thinkers.
The Reverend Charles Kingsley was
among the first to welcome the pub-
lication of Darwin’s book.
Kingsley is remembered by many
today as the author of the charming
children’s fairy story “The Water-
Babies” (1863). In his own day, how-
ever, he became a most significant
champion of Darwin’s views. Kings-
ley was Chaplain to Queen Victoria,
and thereby a member of the Royal
Household. He was tutor to her son,
the Prince of Wales, as well as a noted
poet, author, and theologian. In addi-
tion, though, Kingsley was a compe-
tent naturalist and amateur geologist,
to the point that he was elected Fellow
of both the Linnean Society of London
and the Geological Society of London.
Kingsley’s opinion, both as a man
of God and as a man of science, was
respected and sought after. Darwin
had had his publisher send Kingsley
an advance copy of “Origin,” and he
wrote back thanking Darwin for the
gift immediately, telling him that “Or-
igin” had given him an even greater
conception of God than he had previ-
ously entertained. A God who made
things make themselves through the
laws which he himself had ordained
was so much more inspiring than
what he called the “ever interfering
God” of special creation (Burkhardt
et al 1991, 379–80).
Darwin was thrilled to hear Kings-
ley’s favourable opinion, and quoted
from his letter in the second and sub-
sequent editions of “Origin” accord-
ingly. Kingsley’s support, he said,
September 2020
suggested that there was “no good
reason why the views given in this
volume should shock the religious
feelings of any one” (Darwin 1860,
481). He also amended the poetic and
much quoted last paragraph of the
book, which now proclaimed that
life’s several powers had been origi-
nally breathed into a few forms or
into one, “by the Creator.” It seemed
that Darwin was very much in agree-
ment with Kingsley’s own reading of
the natural history of Creation — cer-
tainly, Kingsley thought so. Kingsley,
who had also long appreciated the
works both of Huber and of Kirby
and Spence, wrote to his mentor and
friend that while it might be necessary
to revise the theories of Paley and the
other natural theologians in light of
Darwin’s work, there was certainly
no need to abandon them. It was clear,
he said, that Darwin had described
an evolutionary natural theology in
which God created through natural
law, rather than having to trouble
himself to meddle incessantly in his
own creation.
Kingsley remained an ardent advo-
cate of Darwin and his ideas for more
than a decade. However, when Dar-
win finally published his big book on
human evolution, “Descent of Man”
in 1871, Kingsley was not the only one
who was shocked to see the full im-
plications for humankind that Darwin
drew from his theory. The honey bee
was again at the center of things — a
story that will be continued in next
month’s Journal.
referenCes:
“The evolution of honeycomb”, The Dar-
win Correspondence Project, https://www.
darwinproject.ac.uk/commentary/life-
sciences/evolution-honeycomb
Brougham, Henry. (1839). Dissertations on
Subjects of Science connected with Natural
Theology. 2 Vols. London: C. Knight & Co.
Burkhardt, Frederick. et al. (eds.). (1990).
The Correspondence of Charles Darwin, vol-
ume 6, Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, pp.377–8.
Burkhardt, Frederick. et al. (eds.). (1991).
The Correspondence of Charles Darwin, vol-
ume 7, Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, pp.379–80.
Burkhart, Frederick. et al., (eds.), (1993). The
Correspondence of Charles Darwin, volume 8,
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
pp.140–141.
Darwin, Charles Robert. (1859). On the Ori-
gin of Species by Means of Natural Selection,
or, the Preservation of the Favoured Races in
the Struggle for Life. London: John Murray.
Darwin, Charles Robert. (1860). On the Ori-
gin of Species by Means of Natural Selection,
or, the Preservation of the Favoured Races in
the Struggle for Life. London: John Murray,
2nd ed., 1860.
Darwin, Charles Robert. (1958). The Auto-
biography of Charles Darwin, 1809–1882.
Edited by Nora Barlow. London: W.W.
Norton & Co.
Huber, Francis. (1806). New Observations on
the Natural History of Bees. London: Long-
man, Hurst, Rees, and Orme, 1806.
Kirby, William and William Spence. (1856).
Introduction to Entomology, or Elements of the
Natural History of Insects. London: Long-
man, Hurst, Rees, Orme, and Brown.
Langstroth, Lorenzo Lorraine. (1853). The
Hive and the Honey Bee. Northampton:
Hopkins, Bridgman.
Malthus, Thomas Robert. (1826). An Essay
on the Principle of Population. London: John
Murray.
Paley, William. (1802). Natural Theology, or,
Evidences of the Existence and Attributes of
the Deity. London: J. Faulder.
Piers J. Hale
is Deisenroth
Presidential Pro-
fessor in the His-
tory of Science
at the University
of Oklahoma. He
writes on the his-
tory of evolution-
ary ideas and
the social, politi-
cal, and religious
ideas that they
have been taken
to have had, and
is author of “Po- Image credit: Travis Isom
litical Descent.
Malthus, mutualism, and the politics of evolu-
tion in Victorian England” (Chicago 2014). He
is currently working on two other books; one
on Charles Kingsley, the other on Darwin and
the Darwinian Revolution.
Piers is a member of the Central Oklahoma
Beekeepers Association, and proprietor of
the Big Cat Beekeeping Company. He cur-
rently has ten hives, and several cats. He has
been fascinated by bees ever since a trip to
Buckfast Abbey as a child. Although he was
born in England, he has been living and work-
ing in the United States since 2000.
989
March 2018 991
992 American Bee Journal
A
s scientific thinkers, we need
to re-examine our beliefs con-
stantly and question what we
“know” to be true. As we learn, our
cumulative knowledge increases, of-
ten giving us a better perspective. For
example, I recently had a wake-up
call that forced me to re-evaluate the
idea of the windshield effect.
The windshield effect is a phenom-
enon that people have noticed the
world over. In decades past, car trav-
el from town to town often entailed a
good bit of windshield cleaning as the
glass became laden with squashed
bugs that blocked the driver’s view.
In those days, gas station attendants
often did this for us as they filled the
tank, and many travelers kept a sup-
ply of cleaners, rags, and scrapers in
the car.
When I was young I couldn’t reach
the windshield, so I was given head-
light duty. The lenses would get so
burdened with dead insects that light
barely passed through, and the slop
needed to be removed frequently in
order to see the road. I can still smell
those ammonia-soaked rags and the
wormy odor of bug goop that perme-
ated my clothes.
For the most part, we no longer
clean car parts between stops, which
most of us see as a good thing. But en-
vironmentalists around the world are
horrified by clean windshields and
blame pesticides, urbanization, cli-
mate change, and habitat loss for the
missing bugs. So last year, when an
September 2020
entomologist told me the windshield
effect was nonsense, I was taken
aback. Then I decided he was simply
too young to remember.
A differenT view
But several months later, when I
was interviewing Dr. John Ascher of
the National University of Singapore,
I asked him about the windshield
effect, and his answer stopped me
short. He explained that the relative
number of bugs on windshields then
and now doesn’t mean much because
we have no idea what was in the
mix. Did it contain a great diversity
of critically important insects or did
it comprise several species in huge
out-of-control numbers like a plague
of locusts? In short, are we mistaking
insect “blooms” for healthy and di-
verse ecosystems? Are we confusing
biodiversity with sheer volume?
The truth is we will never know.
No one back then thought the bugs
were of any long-term consequence,
so no one saved the windshield scrap-
ings for posterity. We’ll never know
if those legions of road bugs were a
good thing or a bad thing because we
don’t know what species they were
or their relative abundance in those
ecosystems.
And other variables can enter the
picture, too. In the past, busy roads
often traversed agricultural land, but
now much of our cropland is set back
from heavy traffic. Also, cities and
towns frequently spray herbicides
along roadways, which suppresses
insect populations along long stretch-
es of pavement.
In truth, we probably do have few-
er insects than we used to and less
biodiversity, too. But the windshield
effect doesn’t prove that theory be-
cause it’s merely anecdotal evidence.
whAT is AneCdoTAl evidenCe?
An anecdote is a story, so anecdotal
evidence is story evidence. Right now,
I’ll tell you a story about swarms.
This spring I had three swarms in the
trees in my backyard, and all three
swarms selected my one and only
top-bar hive as their preferred home
and nixed my baited Langstroths.
True tale. From this observation, I
could easily conclude that honey
bees are attracted to top-bar hives, or
perhaps they are repelled by Lang-
stroth hives. The evidence for such a
conclusion is story evidence and it is
useless. Countless factors could have
swayed the bees’ decision, so the sto-
ry is merely a red herring.
You scoff and say, “No one would
come to that conclusion from just
three swarms.” Maybe not, so let’s
take another, one that regularly aris-
es on my website. Someone writes, “I
had a colony that was strong and do-
ing great when I checked on it four
months ago. But last week when I
opened the hive to harvest the hon-
ey, there was nothing left but wax
moths. Wax moths totally destroyed
my colony.”
993

What kinds of bugs might this old pickup truck have collected?
My turn to scoff. You had a strong
colony, didn’t check on it for months,
and now the hive is full of moths?
Sounds normal. Moths love a weak
or dying colony and somehow you
provided one. But you can’t conclude
moths killed the colony because you
have nothing but anecdotal evidence
— a story about what you observed.
Oftentimes, anecdotal evidence illus-
trates a truth, but a story by itself can-
not prove it.
whAT AbouT ThAT red herring?
A red herring is a distraction that
throws someone off course. The
phrase comes from a fictional story,
written in the 1800s by William Cob-
bett, about a boy who saves a hare
from the hounds by diverting the
dogs with a dead fish, which just hap-
pened to be a red herring. Red her-
rings are common literary devices, of-
ten used in mystery novels, to divert
the readers’ attention from the true
villain, but the term is also commonly
used to describe logical fallacies.
In the wax moth example, the pres-
ence of so many moths and larvae
fouling the interior of the hive diverts
you from the true cause of the colo-
ny’s demise. We follow the deceptive
trail which leads us away from the
answer.
vArious vAriAbles
Both of these stories ignore the
many possible variables that could
have produced the outcome you saw.
A variable is an element, feature, or
condition that can easily change. Go-
ing back to my swarms, perhaps it
wasn’t the architecture of the top-bar
994
hive that attracted the swarms, but
maybe it was the amount of sunlight.
Maybe it was the odor of the comb
or the recently deceased colony that
used to live there. Maybe it was the
size of the entrance hole, the height
off the ground, or the internal volume
of the hive that attracted the bees.
Sometimes conditions exist that
we don’t account for, simply because
we have no idea they are important
or because we forget about them. In
science, variables that are outside the
scope of the experiment, but still affect
the outcome, are called extraneous
variables or confounding variables.
I knew an entomologist who did
extensive controlled testing to learn
how much of a certain pesticide
caused harm to bumble bees. All the
colonies received carefully measured
doses, and she had an ample number
of control colonies. However, in the
course of the experimentation, she
forgot to account for ambient levels of
pesticide that drifted in from nearby
fields, a situation that botched the re-
sults.
TApping The sCienTifiC liTerATure
Most of us backyard beekeepers are
not in a positon to perform detailed
scientific experiments on our bees.
We usually don’t have enough colo-
nies for statistical rigor, or we don’t
have the manpower to make timely
changes, take quality notes, and keep
detailed records. Furthermore, do we
even want to? Science done right is
complex and time-consuming and of-
ten doesn’t work as a hobby.
Still, it helps to think like a scien-
tist when you are observing your bees
and trying to discover what is right or
wrong with them. One important skill
is the ability to read peer-reviewed
scientific papers.
shredding pApers
When I was working on a master’s
degree in environmental studies, I
was surprised at the amount of time
that was accorded to reading and
evaluating scientific literature. We
spent months and months reading
papers that were deemed poor, okay,
and excellent by the professors. We
would pick them apart, line by line,
searching for errors in experimen-
tal design or implementation, and
shortcomings in logical reasoning
and statistical analysis. At first, I saw
little wrong with these papers and,
because they were peer-reviewed, I
didn’t expect to see egregious errors.
But as time passed and we learned
what to look for and how to find it,
the errors became glaring. We began
to wonder how any of it got pub-
lished. Years later, when I took a mas-
ter beekeeping course, we were given
similar assignments: read and evalu-
ate. Both of these institutions under-
stood that scientific thinking begins
with reading and understanding the
literature. It requires a thorough ap-
preciation of the scientific method
and knowledge of its shortfalls. If a
beekeeper cannot evaluate the stuff
that’s published, he will be pulled
asunder as each succeeding paper
claims a different outcome.
reAding sCienCe
You can find papers to support any
thought. Neonics are killing bees or
they’re not. Corn syrup is bad for
bees or it isn’t. Varroa must be micro-
managed, maybe.
To understand these papers, the
beekeeper needs to evaluate the sci-
ence for himself and decide if the
conclusions are valid based on the
experiment. Letting someone else do
the thinking is a crapshoot. Often-
times, two people can evaluate a pa-
per and think it means categorically
different things. Members of the press
and Facebook can be dangerous, too,
often determining a paper’s validity
based on the title alone or maybe the
abstract.
I’m not saying the scientists are at
fault. Far from it. Science done well
is extremely difficult. Every single
step, from stating the hypothesis, to
designing the experimental protocol,
to implementing the plan, gathering
data, and ultimately analyzing the
American Bee Journal
statistics, is fraught with potholes. Sci-
entists must be diligent, but because
research is so exacting, those reading
science must be just as scrupulous.
Two Types of reAsoning
Discussions of scientific think-
ing often center on the differences
between the two major types of rea-
soning. The first type, called induc-
tive or bottom-up reasoning, reaches
generalized conclusions from specific
instances. The opposite type, called
deductive or top-down reasoning,
reaches specific conclusions based
on proven facts. If that pan-fries your
brain, you’re not alone.
Inductive reasoning is often con-
sidered unscientific because it’s not
based on facts. Instead, it starts with
an observation followed by a search
for the explanation. Day-to-day hu-
man thinking is mostly of the induc-
tive type. In fact, we’re more-or-less
hard-wired to think inductively.
While that’s not always a bad thing, if
we don’t realize its limitations, it can
easily lead us astray.
On the other hand, deductive rea-
soning is associated with the scientific
method, and it is used extensively in
scientific research. It often begins
with a pair of proven facts, and draws
a conclusion based on those facts.
When done properly, deductive
reasoning will lead to sound con-
clusions. The trouble is the “when
done properly” part. Unknowns lurk
everywhere, and we often don’t see
them or even know they exist, which
means the statements of fact may be
inaccurate. If the facts are not accu-
rate, the conclusion won’t be accu-
rate either.
starvation, or something you haven’t
thought of? Come now! You simply
took a wild guess.
Inductive reasoning is faulty when
it takes a problem and assigns a cause
without any experimentation. Worse,
we often blame the first thing that
comes to mind, or sometimes the
thing that bugs us the most, like that
ugly tower.
Deductive reasoning is more nu-
anced, and starts with facts. For ex-
ample, if you say honey bees belong
to the order Hymenoptera (true) and
all Hymenopterans go through com-
plete metamorphosis (true), you can
conclude that honey bees go through
complete metamorphosis (true). It’s
mathematical. If A equals B, and B
equals C, then A equals C.
However, if you say John is a bee-
keeper (true) and all beekeepers get
stung (most likely, but we don’t know
for sure), then you cannot conclude
that John will be stung. Even if we
see John acting like an idiot around
his bees, we can’t deduce he will get
stung because we don’t know if the
second statement is always true.
logiCAl fAllACies
I’m not saying backyard beekeep-
ers need to sit down and plot their
logical thinking strategies. That’s
nearly inhuman. But when we are
trying to figure out what went wrong
or understand how we can improve
our beekeeping skills, it doesn’t hurt
to be aware of some of the more com-
mon logical fallacies.
You can find lists of logical fallacies
online, sometimes 15 or 20 per article
or, in one case, 229. Logical fallacies
are most often variations on inductive
reasoning, traps that are easy to fall
into. And fall we do. All of us.
I’ve picked out a few common logi-
cal fallacies, just to give you an idea
of how irrelevant thoughts can inter-
fere with logic. Be aware that many of
these fallacies overlap in such a way
that one circumstance can fall under
several categories at once.
flAwed Thinking
Confusion between correlation and
causation is all around us. Remember
those wax moths in the dying colony?
Wax moths are opportunists, adept at
finding and exploiting weak colonies.
But just because wax moths and fail-
ing colonies often occur simultane-
ously doesn’t mean one caused the
other. Something caused the colony
to weaken, and the moths took full
advantage of the situation. Did the
moths cause a strong colony to weak-
en? Not likely.
A hasty generalization is easy to
make, especially when it provides an
easy answer and eliminates future
work. The new beekeeper who says,

beekeeper reAsoning
Let’s look at a typical example of
beekeeper inductive reasoning. Let’s
say you kept bees successfully for
five years until someone erected a cell
tower a mile from your apiary. Dur-
ing the following winter, all your bees
died. Since you didn’t change your
management protocol or anything
else, you conclude that cell towers
kill bees.
In this case, you came to a gener-
alized conclusion (cell towers kill
bees) based on a specific observation
(a cell tower was built near your api-
ary and your bees died). This type of
reasoning is conclusory and fails to
take any other circumstances into ac-
count. Isn’t it possible your bees died
of pesticide poisoning, disease, or
parasites? Or perhaps cold weather,

September 2020 995

“Based on my very first mite count, thropomorphism assigns human traits gument, step back and see if you
I can see my bees are immune,” is to non-humans, as in “My bees were can find the false reasoning. And
bound for trouble. angry at me for mowing the lawn.” It remember, your bees will be better
An ad hominem fallacy finds fault sounds logical but anger is a human off and your skills as a beekeeper
with the person rather than his ideas. construct, not an insect one. More like- will improve when you think like a
“Joe is an electrician, so what can he ly, the noise was alarming to them. scientist.
possibly know about beekeeping?” If
you don’t like what Joe says, it’s easy beTTer for The bees Rusty Burlew has stud-
to roll your eyes and say, “Consider The list of potential fallacies is end- ied agriculture, honey
the source.” less and often entertaining. Logical bees, and environmen-
A beekeeper makes an appeal to fallacies are a good reminder that tal science for over 30
authority when he says, “A master our thinking can quickly get mired in years. She is a passion-
beekeeper taught me, so it must be information, ideas, biases, and emo- ate advocate of native
bee conservation and
right.” This type of fallacy invokes a tions that have nothing to do with ra- founded the Native Bee
person’s title, education, position, or tional thinking. Conservancy in Wash-
fame as proof that he is an authority When you feel yourself getting ington State. https://honeybeesuite.com
and, therefore, correct. pulled into a less-than-logical ar- or email her at rusty@honeybeesuite.com.
We often like to set up a false di-
lemma by arguing there are only two
positions and nothing in between. A
statement like “You’re either a natural
beekeeper or you’re not” does not al-
low for any flexibility or creativity in
thinking.
Beekeepers aren’t the only ones to
use the alphabet soup fallacy, but
they are particularly skilled at it. You
simply convince people you are right
by using so many abbreviations they
can’t possibly follow your (lack of)
logic. “Last year my TBH had DWV,
BQCV, and PMS all at once. So I de-
cided to use an SBB, a QX, and a UE.
Then I treated with OA and FGMO
mixed with HFCS. That worked until
they picked up AFB, or maybe EFB,
not sure, while foraging in OSR.”
Sure, whatever you say.
The slippery slope assumes one
wrong choice will lead to a cascade
of undesirable consequences. “If we
keep treating for mites, pretty soon
no genetic resistance will remain, and
before you know it, we’ll be treating
monthly, weekly, and daily until no
bees are left, no plants, and we all
starve to death.”
Another time-honored favorite
among beekeepers is the appeal to
tradition. “My grandfather kept bees
in skeps for fifty years. If it was good
enough for him, it’s good enough for
me.” This thinking disregards chang-
es that occurred during those 50
years, including the addition of var-
roa mites, tracheal mites, small hive
beetles, deformed wing virus, Nosema
ceranae, neonics, and climate change.
In a non sequitur fallacy, the con-
clusion does not have any logical con-
nection to the argument. “My bees
died because my boss made me work
every second Saturday.”
Although it’s fun to use anthro-
pomorphism to illustrate a point, it
should not be taken too seriously. An-

996 American Bee Journal

I
n this series of queen introduction First though, permit me to briefly received a queen cage without at-
articles, the candy release method introduce a concept far from beekeep- tendant bees. The number of ballers
counts down the time to release ing, although one that can be funda- on the screen of the queen cage de-
the queen. With my queen cages mentally important in learning new creased to zero faster than an expo-
mounted on the glass of the obser- concepts, namely, an Einstein thought nential decay, resulting in a very fast
vation hives in the bee house, I can experiment. In his theoretical physics queen acceptance.
even see the bees tunneling their way research, Albert Einstein would think Now here is the thought experi-
through the candy to the queen. up physical situations that were ex- ment: What if we could go back in
Figure 1 shows a closeup of the tremely difficult or impossible to ac- time to just before the queen was
candy end of the cage at the screen tually conduct. Then he worked out given to the colony? So the colony
level. To the lower left in the brown the consequences of these situations back in time would begin exactly the
wooden access hole, a bee removes or at least saw what new questions same. The colony would begin with
white candy. She opens a tunnel be- these thought experiments would the same number of bees in their
fore her. As an aside, the bees on the motivate. same beginning physiological states.
cage have managed to move the wax Here is an Einstein thought experi- Colony demographics would begin
paper covering the candy. A corner of ment motivated from the queen intro- the same, on and on –– all beginning
the wax paper is visible in the upper duction setup of Experiments 1 and the same as before. Moreover, the
right corner under the screen. Within 2. In reality, the thought experiment new queen would begin the same
tongue reach, the bees remove the is impossible to do, but easy to think too, reverting to her initial physi-
candy, speeding up the release time about. First, let’s arbitrarily pick out ological state. Other things like the
too much. In case you have wondered one of the hives from the prior experi- queen cage and candy would begin
about the wax paper over the candy, ments. By random chance, the colony the same. Include here the subtle
here is its critical function. The wax
paper keeps the candy clock running
at the correct speed. In the results pre-
sented below, keep in mind the candy
clock is running in the background,
counting down the time until the bees
can directly contact the queen, wheth-
er they accept her or not.
Experiments 1 and 2 from the pre-
vious articles shared a common fea-
ture. The treatment, that is, the pres-
ence or absence of attendant bees,
was applied to the entire colony. So
a colony either had attendant bees
or not in the introduction cage. One
colony could not have both. Yes, I
know that is a rather obvious fact. In
this article on queen introduction, we
will break that obvious fact, which
will lead to the results of a new ex- Fig. 1 The side and internal view of a queen introduction cage showing a bee at the
periment. And we will find ourselves lower left tunneling into the candy. Notice the screen edge ending at the glass. This
in a new realm of queen introduction, situation occurred while I was testing out the cage before any data collection. Here the
with an experiment so novel no one wax paper shifted, leaving its corner over to the right and exposing the candy to the
has conducted it. bees on the outside of the cage.

September 2020 997

too, like having the queen cage be-
gin with the same initial scent, a mix
from all prior causal scent contami-
nations from being near other bees,
queens, hands holding the cage, and
the rest. Of course, the weather con-
ditions and microenvironment in
and around the hive would begin the
same too. In the beginning, in of all
that almost unimaginable exact be-
ginning, there is only one difference
–– six attendant bees are with the
queen.
Although a bit subtle, the sec-
ond queen introduction is exotically
unique, because we know how the
colony reacted for the first queen in-
troduction, without attendant bees.
Now here is the question from the
beekeeper’s perspective.
At the beginning of the second
queen introduction, the beekeeper
knows the bees accepted the queen
quickly without attendants. Does that
indicate how the next queen introduc-
tion will proceed with attendants?
Experiments 1 and 2 demonstrated
that the time until balling ceased was
longer when attendants were present.
Should we expect a “slow” exponential
decay to be the counterpart to a rapid
acceptance (without attendants)? At-
tendants were associated with chronic
balling and reversion. Could these in-
tense aggression patterns ever be the
counterparts to a rapid acceptance
(without attendants)?
While we cannot rerun time for real,
tinkering with its infinite variables
(probably for the best), to generate
two identical queen introductions, ex-
cept for the attendant bee status, our
experimental unit (the colony) pos-
sesses a most remarkable feature un-
like laboratory rats and mice.
A honey bee colony –– is divisible,
and it continues to live and func-
tion as smaller colonies, certainly for
queen introduction. Therefore we
could have two queen introductions
from carefully dividing a parent col-
ony to produce a pair of colonies. Di-
viding several parent colonies would
produce the corresponding replicate
pairs.
I consider dividing the parent colo-
nies to produce equal pairs extremely
critical. Numerous unknown factors
divided unequally might influence
the queen introductions differently in
the two colonies, thus breaking their
paired status. My working assump-
tion is that numerous components of
the colony could affect the time until
acceptance, and also how the num-
ber of ballers (B) fluctuates over time,
998
producing the aggression patterns we
observed in the previous article.
Colony components like the total
number of bees, honey, stored pollen,
and total area of comb were obvious
to equalize. So was the brood, with
care. Sealed (pupal) brood would be
the source of new bees in the near
term. The best I could do was to bal-
ance the sealed brood by its area (no
uncapping to ascertain age structure)
up to the amounts I found on the
combs (no comb cutting).
Bee larvae produce brood phero-
mones, some documented to affect
adult worker bees. Those chemical
signals should be balanced in the pair
of colonies. Although the larval area
is less of a brood nest component, par-
ticularly during a dearth, I balanced
it or at least made sure each smaller
colony had some larvae. At least
roughly, I sought to balance the age
structure of both colonies too. While
the younger nurse bees came with the
brood, the older foraging bees needed
equal division too. Here is where a
detailed knowledge of honey bee bi-
ology becomes so important.
Early on a summer morning, when
I plan to divide the parent colonies,
where are the older foraging bees? Are
they just scattered around in the hive?
No. Older bees tend to be on the pe-
riphery of the overall colony cluster.
More precisely though, unemployed
foragers, those bees inactive from re-
cent work on nectar or pollen plants,
tend to collect on the comb near the
hive entrance. That could be pollen
combs or empty combs close to where
bees perform their dances. During
an intense spring nectar flow, large
groups of idle foragers become more
noticeable in these areas, easily identi-
fied from the wear pattern in their plu-
mose hair and from their frayed wings.
While I employ my frame hives in
my scientific bee research, I used my
top-bar hives for the queen introduc-
tion experiments since I needed to re-
enter the brood nest with a minimum
of vibration. In addition, my style of
top-bar hive has the entrances at one
end of the hive. In response, the bees
place the brood nest near the entrance
end and the honey in the back end.
Therefore I need not lift honey to
check the brood, even in the middle
of the main spring nectar flow, saving
considerable work. My top-bar hives
are up on 30-inch-high hive stands,
so I need not bend over to inspect
colonies, which saves on back stress
during experimental setup and data
collection.
For Experiment 3, I began on the
morning of August 16, 2001 before ap-
preciable bee flight. I dequeened and
carefully divided four colonies. For
most top-bar hives, the first comb has
empty cells facing the entrances (un-
less the colony is extremely crowded,
suggesting a bee management prob-
lem). The other comb side could be
empty, or it could have pollen. Typi-
cally in just a few combs, I find the
usual brood nest location. In these
front pollen combs and the begin-
ning of the brood nest, I find the un-
employed foragers waiting to resume
their work. Because I have not jolted
the top-bar hive like when I remove
the cover and supers from my frame
hives, working down the stack to the
brood nest, the bees on the top-bar
combs have been hardly disturbed.
The older bees and the younger bees
both remain in their natural places so
I can divide them reliably.
The parent hive remained on its
original stand during the division.
I had the bee truck backed up to the
parent hive with the hive bodies for
the pair on the tailgate. (My api-
ary design rule: The tailgate reaches
all full-size top-bar hives and frame
hives, which keeps my entire opera-
tion extremely mobile, very agile, in
case I suddenly lose a location and
need to move out my hives quickly.)
As I removed the parent top-bar
combs proceeding from the front to
back of the hive, the comb contents
usually occurred in a natural reliable
order: empty, pollen, brood, pollen,
honey, and empty. Each comb went
into one of the “splits” on the tail-
gate. For efficiency, I only wanted to
handle each comb once. As I changed
parent colonies, I repositioned the bee
truck to greatly limit the number of
steps between the parent colony and
the tailgate. The tailgate becomes a
mobile workbench supported by the
bee truck, which is full of general bee-
keeping equipment, and in the cab are
one or more toolboxes containing spe-
cial tools depending on the research.
Working alone, all of these efficiency
techniques became crucial during ex-
perimental setup and data collection,
letting me devote my energies to the
technical matters. For this special split-
ting, I could only divide four parent
colonies before the bee flight became
too frequent. Instead of this small pre-
liminary experiment, for a larger one I
would need several days to divide the
parent colonies and run the pairs stag-
gered through time. (Say for 16 parent
colonies, giving 16 pairs, I would need
American Bee Journal
four sequential “splitting” days to
keep the divisions as close together as
possible to reduce the sequential envi-
ronmental variation.)
With the four parent colonies care-
fully divided, the eight colonies were
immediately moved to my next near-
est rural apiary site to prevent the
bees from returning to their former
hive sites. From each parent colony,
the treatment (attendants or not at-
tendants) was randomly applied to
each pair so each pair had both treat-
ments. For example, in a pair of colo-
nies, I arbitrarily picked one. For the
randomization I flipped a coin. Heads
meant “gets attendants.” Tails meant
“no attendants.” Whatever treatment
was randomly assigned to the first
colony, the other colony in the pair
just got the other treatment.
For a given parent colony, its bees
“experience” both attendants and
no attendants in the queen cage. We
have now officially “broken” the
obvious fact mentioned above with
a new experimental design. Never-
theless in Experiment 3, random- Fig. 2 Parent Hive 180. To get started I used vertical down pointing arrows to draw
ization remains critically important attention to where the balling stops (B = 0). As noted in the text, the actual number
to help break any hidden spurious of balling bees (data points) is shown where the line segments connect. I positioned
connections, unknown bias, etc. be- those numbers to minimize overlap where the two graphs come close together. For
tween the treatment and the colony this graphic situation I positioned the balling numbers for 180A before the data point
pairs. For counting the number of positions, and for 180NA after the data point positions. Eventually, over to the right on
ballers on the introduction cages, I the x-axis, both graphs are all zero and the numbers overlap.
followed the protocols of the previ-
ous two experiments, but with my dants). (Although the pair of colonies graphs, look to the left where the lines
morning count starting at 9:00 a.m. had their individual hive numbers, begin. I put 180NA and 180A (color
and what I call my late afternoon for this article the NA or A notion is coded green and black respectively)
count at 6:00 p.m. easier to follow.) at the beginnings of the graphs. No-
Although I started with four parent The next three figures show the tice also the data points (numbers)
colonies, which doubled to eight, on time series data for the three par- at the “kinks” in the connecting line
the second count, a new queen in one ent colonies. Time (t) in hours is on segments. Those are the actual baller
of the pairs had died suddenly from the horizontal x-axis. The number of numbers (B). This way, you get the
unknown causes. With all the setup ballers (B) is on the vertical y-axis. overall aggression pattern along
work per pair, and beginning with The notation Bt gives the number of with the actual recorded baller count.
not many pairs, essentially 25% of the ballers (B) and the time (t) when that See how the two graphs begin fairly
experiment had just vanished. That amount of balling occurred. For ex- close together. On the first count (at
was a disappointing morning, but ample, B24 = 34 indicates 34 ballers nine hours), Hive 180A was B9 = 14
one must keep going. For the whole were present at 24 hrs (1 day) into the while Hive 180NA was B9 = 9. Then
experiment, twice a day for 10 days, experiment. The scale (length) of the comes a huge difference in the dy-
I drove out to this remote rural api- vertical axis will vary depending on namics (the changes in the balling).
ary and carefully counted the ballers. the maximum number of ballers, to With attendants, Hive 180A spikes
From three parent colonies, six colo- show the details of the graphs. higher than the usual maximum of 40
nies total, Experiment 3 did yield Like the time series graphs in Ex- ballers packed on the screen over the
very relevant information. periments 1 and 2, each figure gives two compartments with bees inside
For parental colony identification, unprecedented detail of a colony’s –– attaining B24 = 46 ballers, a rare
I used their hive numbers. (All my reaction to the new queen during large number. That is a considerable
hives — top-bar hives, frame hives, that forbidden time when beekeepers amount of aggression.
active in research or not — always should not disturb the hive. Except Without attendant bees at 24 hrs,
carry identification numbers.) The now with the paired experimental de- 180NA was B24 = 2 ballers, usually
suffix NA means no attendants during sign, we see a colony’s reaction to both a minor amount of aggression. Now
queen introduction. Likewise A indi- attendant bees and no attendant bees both graphs decrease roughly expo-
cates attendants present. For example, at the same time. Now let’s begin the nentially to zero (B= 0), a state of pro-
I carefully divided the parent colony results of Experiment 3. visional queen acceptance, but look
in Hive 180 into the pair: Hive 180NA Figure 2 shows the time series data at the “amount of aggression” that
(no attendants) and 180A (with atten- for the parent colony 180. To read the needs to change.

September 2020 999


Fig. 3 Parent Hive 125. For Hive 125NA, B = 0 occurred at 24, 57, and 96 hrs (1, 2 3/8,
and 4 days respectively). For Hive 125A, B = 0 occurs at 144 hrs (6 days). If we use the
first time balling stopped for queen acceptance, we have one day for no attendants
compared to six days with attendant bees (1 day vs. 6 days).
In 48 hrs (2 days), Hive 180NA has
attained B48 = 0, queen acceptance.
That time would probably beat the
candy release. Notice also something a
bit subtle. Even right before two days,
the balling is minor, which might help
provide some protection should the
bees release the queen very early.
With attendant bees, at 81 hrs, Hive
180A attained B81 = 0, which is 3.375
days (3⅜ days) or roughly three and
a half days (3½ days). Even with the
large amount of aggression early on,
Colony 180A still comes to queen ac-
ceptance fairly quickly. Except now
look at the balling before B81 = 0,
which is in that huge spike. If the bees
could remove enough candy to make
direct contact with the queen, the
bees might even kill the queen still
in her cage, which I have observed
in my bee house in the observation
hives. Even after Hive 180A attained
B81 = 0, a pulse of balling occurred
with a maximum of B119 = 6. Even
though the next count is B128 = 2 ≠ 0,
this return of balling seems more like
the transient nonpersistent balling,
rather than claiming it as a very small
reversion.
Experiments 1 and 2 demonstrated
that attendant bees delayed the time
until balling stopped, a result at-
tained by averaging their times to B =
1000
0 for different colonies. Now for Col-
ony 180, carefully divided, we see its
consistency with those experiments:
two days with no attendants and over
three days with attendants until ball-
ing stopped.
Figure 3 shows the time series data
for the parent colony 125. First note
the vertical scale extends to only 20.
Therefore, the “large” fluctuations
in Hives 125A are inherently smaller
in actual numbers than for example
180A. Figure 3 is a “zoomed in“ view
so we can see more details. The over-
all aggression pattern is similar to
Hive 180.
After the first count, the next counts
both decrease for Hives 125NA and
125A. Hive 125NA quickly attained B
= 0 on the second count (24 hrs), al-
though minor transient balling, one
or two ballers, follows until at 96 hrs.
Then B = 0 remained. Where to claim
queen acceptance becomes somewhat
murky when the graph goes to zero
more than once, and with variable
intervening balling. From observing
numerous queen introductions in
my bee house, also where I can see
inside the queen cage, I know this is
a complicated question (which might
involve a philosophical subject called
epistemology, the theory of knowl-
edge and what is knowable).
In most cases I take the first zero
as provisional queen acceptance. (I
do not ignore the following tran-
sient balling. One baller can start an
aggressive ball. In some sense, the
remaining ballers might represent a
tentative status of the queen’s provi-
sional acceptance.)
With attendant bees, the graph
for Hive 125A seems to show a
smaller baller spike, if compared to
180A. With attendants, the number
of ballers in Hive 125A oscillates
much more than Hive 125NA, al-
though, at the second count (when
Hive 125NA attained B24 = 0), Hive
125A only had two ballers (B24 = 2),
which seems close to queen accep-
tance. If we imagine the number of
ballers continuing to decrease, the
colony would be now on the verge of
queen acceptance. Observations and
new concepts destroy this pleasant
fiction. We have the observations.
For the new concept, think of water
waves; the water basically fluctuates,
or oscillates, up and down, form-
ing the waves. The top of a wave is
called the crest. The low point be-
tween two crests is called a trough. A
single baller count should be seen as
among its nearby counts (the recent
aggression, or the context of that sin-
gle observation). For Hive 125A, the
count B24 = 2 is not part of an imag-
ined trend soon to be zero.
Rather the count B24 = 2 is the
trough of the first oscillation. The
next count goes up, not down. The
next count happens to be the crest
at 19 ballers (B33 = 19), the top of the
first wave. From there, the number
of ballers decreases exponential-like
to zero with oscillations, the fluctua-
tion mostly becoming smaller. Finally
by 144 hrs (6 days), the balling ceases
(B144 = 0). Six days to queen accep-
tance is too long. The bees, constantly
consuming the cage candy, would
have released the queen before six
days. Observing the graph before that
time, maybe with the balling in single
digits, the queen could survive the
aggression. Those determinations are
difficult, closer to impossible. Some
of it depends on the particular queen,
her behavior, maybe her piping and
her running (when she escaped from
the balling), and I suspect her blend
of pheromone at release time.
While Hives 180 and 125 have in-
triguing dynamics, overall the colo-
nies without attendants transitioned
to queen acceptance faster than their
“sister” counterparts with attendant
bees. Moreover, after some early-on
American Bee Journal

Fig. 4 Parent Hive 205. Here we see what was wondered at the beginning of the ar-
ticle. Without attendant bees, Hive 205NA showed a rapid queen acceptance in just
24 hrs (1 day). With attendant bees, Hive 205A showed an oscillating decreasing trend
changing into chronic balling with an increasing trend, dooming the queen. Is this
drastic difference in aggression patterns, all because of the attendant bees?
surges in the colonies with atten-
dants, all the graphs went to B = 0,
queen acceptance, roughly in some
exponential-like decrease.
Now we come to Hive 205, which
fundamentally breaks the exponential-
like decrease in the attendant versus
no attendant pairs. Keep in mind the
startling aggression pattern of Hive
205 occurred from sampling from just
three hives. That suggests the follow-
ing results could be fairly common (or
maybe it was beginner’s luck).
Figure 4 shows the time series data
for the parent Colony 205. After the
morning setup, first late afternoon
count for 205NA was 36 (B9 = 36), a
considerable amount of aggression
for no attendant bees in the queen
cage. With 36 ballers, they almost
covered the screen over the two cage
compartments with only the queen
inside. Remarkably by the next morn-
ing count, the balling had — ceased
(B24 = 0). The two ballers observed on
next late afternoon count were never
followed by additional balling. Over-
all here was an extremely rapid tran-
sition to queen acceptance.
With attendants for 205A, the first
count was 42 (B9 = 42), again another
count over the usual maximum of
40. For the following morning count
September 2020
(when its pair lacking attendants had
stopped balling), 205A decreased to
28 ballers (B24 = 28), still a consider-
able amount of aggression.
The aggression pattern for 205A
continues decreasing in an exponen-
tial-like or maybe a linear pattern
with large oscillations (sometimes
called noise). After passing close to
queen acceptance at B107 = 2 ballers,
at 107 hrs (4.45 or about 4½ days), the
aggression pattern took on a funda-
mental change soon after. The next
count jumps up to B119 = 14 ballers.
Following the “forces” governing the
old decreasing pattern, the next num-
ber of balling should be another size-
able decrease close to or at B = 0, at-
taining provisional queen acceptance.
But no. The large decrease stalls
into the next to small ones, B128 = 13,
and B144 = 10, followed by a bit of in-
crease, B152 = 11. To me these baller
counts are reduced noise on a “con-
stant level” of balling. Something
fundamental happened here. Then
the fluctuating pattern emerges again.
Now whatever new configuration of
“forces” are at work, their net effect is
an increasing trend. Now we have a
case of –– chronic balling. The queen
is doomed. In the bee house, this is
the hive I want in my observation
hive with the see-inside queen cages.
Then we could see the underlying be-
havioral mechanics causing the baller
count pattern to change so drastically.
Indeed, the decreasing trend (lin-
ear or exponential) and chronic ball-
ing might comprise a new category.
Table II from the previous article has
no category for the aggression pat-
tern shown by 205A (a decrease and
chronic balling). On the other hand,
the closest category in Table II (rever-
sion and chronic balling) might be too
restrictive and both scenarios are fun-
damentally the same, a difference be-
ing the reversion manages to briefly
“tag” B = 0, but otherwise the under-
lying forces are largely the same.
The aggression pattern of Hive
205A is all the more intriguing be-
cause we know the behavior of Col-
ony 205 without attendant bees. We
observed its rapid switch to queen
acceptance when attendants were
not in the cage. That time series is the
one for Hive 205NA. Colony 205 in
some sense was very sensitive to the
presence of attendant bees. Let me
say that more carefully. Colony 205
in some sense was very sensitive to
those six particular attendant bees in
the presence of that particular queen.
For colonies like Hive 205, which
display complicated aggression pat-
terns (reversions, chronic balling,
and both in series) are they sensitive
to particular sets of attendant bees?
Does that govern the frequency of
colonies displaying those behaviors?
Or for these colonies, could any six
attendant bees (or just some number
of attendant bees) cause these compli-
cated aggression patterns?
While one can envision numerous
ways to divide the parent colonies so
long as the mother queen remains the
same and the environmental condi-
tions remain similar for various ex-
perimental designs, here is a straight-
forward one right from Experiment
3 that could generate paired colonies
with complicated aggression patterns.
Conduct another experiment like
Experiment 3, but each pair of di-
vided colonies gets a queen with six
attendants. Controlling the queen
source (all sisters for example) and the
attendants (all from the same mother
queen and a particular age) could be
detrimental, if both groups in a col-
ony cause little aggression, produc-
ing just exponential decays. Since we
have frequency estimates from Table
II (27%) and Experiment 3 (33%) for
when some kind of decreasing behav-
ior changes to chronic balling, 10 par-
1001
ent colonies could give about three
colony pairs with the sought-after
behavior, not to mention observing
the reproducibility of chronic balling
and reversions occurring separately.
(Now this experiment is a baller-bee
counting marathon, counting in 20
colonies twice a day. All those top-
bar hive efficiencies mentioned above
become decisive now with the large
counting workload.)
Pushing so deep into the unex-
plored realm of attendant bee effects
in queen introduction, I think I can
safely say such an exotically revealing
experiment has not been conducted.
However, here we are as predicted at
the beginning of this article.
In the next article, we will continue
our exploration into the unknown as-
pects of queen introduction.

ACknowledgmenTs
The author thanks Suzanne Sumner
for her comments on the manuscript.
Visit TBHSbyWAM.com and
BeeChildTheBook.com.
Dr. Wyatt Mangum,
author of Top-Bar Hive
Beekeeping: Wisdom
and Pleasure Com-
bined, is an internation-
ally known top-bar hive
beekeeper, who started
keeping bees at age 10.
He switched all his colonies to top-bar hives
back in 1986, long before it became popular.
He is also an apicultural historian, who blends
his knowledge of beekeeping history with his
study of honey bee behavior. email: wmangum
@umw.edu. www.TBHSbyWAM.com

1002 American Bee Journal

 Sanders Honey
Queens
For Sale
Josh Sanders
7288 Perdie Lee Rd
Nicholls GA 31554
912-399-8480

South Georgia Apiaries

Quality Italian Queens
Queen cells
for pick-up only at:
300 Wisteria Ln.
Baxley, GA 31513
Tel (912) 366-9022
Fax (912) 367-0012

rN Ca lif o
rt he
N PaCkage BeesrNia
o
QuAlity itAliAn And
CArniolAn Queens
All bees fed Fumagilin Fall & Spring
Powell APiAries
4140 Co. Rd. KK
Orland, CA 95963
Phone: 530-865-3346
Fax: 530-865-3043
Package Delivery Available
Member:
California Bee Breeders Assoc.
American Honey Producers Assoc.

1004 American Bee Journal

 Questing for the Wonder Bee
“To judge and select, essentially it’s a gift.”
T
“ hey have just begun to bring
forth their super-bee,” an-
nounced a press clipping
marked 1939-40 from the USDA-ARS
bee lab at Baton Rouge, Louisiana.
Now, with eighty years of experience,
that lab is still at it, albeit with less
hubris. An overview of breeding proj-
ects there, as well as elsewhere, com-
prises the first part of this article. That
survey will provide context to best
understand a new project from the
USDA as well as some others, the sub-
jects of the second part next month.
Nature has been at bee selection
for some 250 million years. Surely
man has added to evolutionary pres-
Brother Adam, the legendary Benedic-
tine breeder of the Buckfast bee, was
also known for dry still and sparkling
meads, by those fortunate enough to
drink with him. His recipe was good hon-
ey, rain water, a French wine yeast and a
used oak cask.
September 2020
Part I of 2
Brother Adam
by M.E.A. McNEIL
sure by knocking off colonies for bad
behavior, the bees’ and his own, but
humans have gotten into the game in
earnest quite recently. Nature breeds
for survival, which results in consid-
erable variation within her subspe-
cies, like the Caucasians or Italians.
Man has tended to breed for spe-
cific characteristics, as evidenced by
nearly ten thousand years of animal
breeding, from Siberian dogs to an
eventual barnyard of animals serv-
ing specifically for transport or fat
chops and udders. But humans have
not, until the last century, successfully
bred bees.
Why not bees? Honey bee repro-
duction was a mystery wrapped in
incredulity: A worker egg becomes a
queen? Impossible. Once the observa-
tion was made, it took centuries for
it to be accepted. Although Gregor
Mendel began to reveal the rules
of heredity in his work with sweet
peas, he failed at breeding honey bees
because he did not know that the
queen flies from the hive and mates
with drones from another colony.
About when basic bee reproduction
was becoming known, Langstroth’s
movable frame hive in 1852 gave
beekeepers the means to manipu-
late the colony and access the queen.
“Nasty” was the adjective forever
linked to the original European bee in
this country, A.m. mellifera. A chance
to replace it with the gentle Italian
bee, A.m. ligustica, fueled an interest
in queen rearing, and multiple other
subspecies were imported from Eu-
rope and North Africa. Ingenious egg
grafting systems, such as that of G.M.
Doolittle, promoted queen replica-
tion. Controlling the drone side was
quite another matter. Dozens of at-
tempts were recorded between 1860
and 1940 to induce queens and drones
to mate in all manner of confined ar-
eas, from jars to greenhouses. What-
ever successes there may have been,
none were verified or repeated.
seleCTion
Nonetheless, beekeepers have long
selected stock by behavior and color.
Eric Mussen, UC Davis emeritus api-
arist, described a queen auction near
Chico, California in 1976. Sellers each
placed a frame in an observation hive
with a queen and a representative
brood pattern. “One beekeeper af-
ter another looked at them and said,
‘That’s a Park, that’s a Koehnen’ and
so on; they knew just by looking at
the color, size, brood. Although these
were not breeding programs as such,
they were definitely hard-core selec-
tion programs.”
And prized golden queens, he re-
members, were “a yellow colored
stock used in scientific studies so that
you could follow matings and see the
color of the offspring. They were kind
of a lab rat used to follow the move-
ment of genes.”
The buCkfAsT bee
A young Benedictine monk, Broth-
er Adam, took over what was left
of the apiary at Buckfast Abbey in
Devon, England, in 1916. His mis-
sion, grounded in the order’s ethos
of self-sufficiency, was to foster reli-
able honey-producing bees, but tra-
cheal mites had ravaged the apiary.
The few surviving colonies were
hybrids of the small English black
bee, A.m. mellifera, with Ligurian
Italians, A.m. ligustica from the Alps.
To stabilize his stock against the
mite, he started a program modeled
on mammal breeding pedigree pro-
grams. He established an isolated sta-
tion, an innovation at the time, where
1005

A 1969 ad for two lines of bees, the Starline and the Midnite, bred by Chuck Dadant
and Bud Cale Jr. From the Library of Peter Borst
he mated multiple queen lines to a
single drone line in a three-year cycle.
He introduced subspecies from trav-
els throughout the mellifera world
— Europe to Iran and North Africa.
Each new strain, over two dozen of
them, was first crossed with the ex-
isting Buckfast bees. He worked with
each addition for as long as a decade
to fix the desired genes into the breed.
Brother Adam’s project spanned 70
years, and he succeeded in develop-
ing a vigorous, gentle, honey-produc-
ing bee. Because of its resistance to
tracheal mites, it was brought to the
U.S. in the 1970s by the USDA and
Weaver Apiaries, and it continues to
be bred, among others, by the Federa-
tion of European Buckfast Beekeep-
1006
ers. Breeder Sue Cobey said, “You
could mate those bees with almost
anything, and you’d come up with
something pretty good.”
lAidlAw’s disCovery
Queen production in the U.S. was
initially concentrated in the South
because of the weather. When the De-
partment of Agriculture established
the honey bee lab in Baton Rouge,
this magazine wrote in 1928, “Scien-
tific breeding probably will constitute
one of the major problems to be taken
up by the laboratory.” But controlled
breeding was handicapped until a
discovery by Harry Laidlaw, Jr., who
had grown up keeping bees with his
grandfather. By 1929, working on his
master’s degree, he figured out why
instrumental insemination of queen
bees was so ineffective. A tongue-like
structure in the median oviduct of the
queen, the valve fold, prevented the
placement of the semen. He and oth-
ers redesigned equipment to allow
the discovery to become practical, and
controlled bee breeding began.
The ChemiCAl soluTion
In the meantime, American foul-
brood, the destructive spore-forming
bacterial bee disease, had been ram-
pant in the United States. Among
the researchers committed to devel-
oping resistant bees was O.W. Park,
who started a cooperative breeding
program in 1934. Continuing the re-
search, in 1942 Woodrow and Holst
reported bees uncapping and remov-
ing larvae in the latent, non-infectious
state, a trait named hygienic behavior
in the 50s by Walter Rothenbuhler.
But sulfa drugs had become available,
and treatment was easier than breed-
ing. Support for the development of
disease-resistant bees ended.
Natural selection, however, carried
on. A series of pesticides was used to
treat tracheal mites, and the varroa
mite subsequently spurred the use of
a progression of miticides beginning
in the 1980s — each of which fostered
resistance. In hindsight, and there is
plenty of it, it’s been found that chem-
ical treatments can harm honey bees
and leave residues in hive products as
well. They also remove natural selec-
tive pressure toward stabilizing the
host-parasite relationship. All of that
became recognized, but there seemed
to be no going back. It took a sequence
of misfortunes to stimulate interest in
taking up where Rothenbuhler left
off: The American bee market col-
lapsed in 1986 when the Canadian
border was closed in an unsuccessful
attempt to keep the mite out. To add
injury to insult, the bee population
was declining unsustainably from
multiple causes, notably varroa. But
these timelines overlap, and the story
gets ahead of itself.
The sTArline And midniTe bees
The phenomenon of heterosis, the
uptick of vigor with hybridization,
was discovered in plant breeding and
adapted to bee breeding in the 1940s
by W.C. Roberts. Dadant and Sons
acquired his instrumentally insemi-
nated lines. From them, beginning
in the 1960s, two strains of bees were
started by Chuck Dadant and Bud
Cale, Jr., whose father C.H. Cale was
American Bee Journal
editor of American Bee Journal. They
named them Starline and Midnite.
Their goal was to raise stock for mid-
American producers based on Illinois
conditions.
The partners worked with the
USDA lab and with Laidlaw, whose
queen rearing book had been pub-
lished by Dadant and Sons. They de-
veloped a strict protocol using inbred
hybrid breeding to create genetically
uniform lines. These lines were sys-
tematically crossed, with the purpose
of producing hybrid vigor. It’s a tricky
proposition, as the instrumentally in-
seminated lines are very difficult to
maintain, and inbreeding depression
can cascade into other harmful condi-
tions. But they pulled it off. “Those
were perhaps the most successful
commercial breeding program ever,”
said Bob Danka of the USDA.
The Starline was a yellow bee, one
quarter Carniolan outcrossed back
to Italian for color. The Midnite was
darker, from Caucasian and Carnio-
lan stock and known to gather more
propolis — at a time when the value
of that trait was not known. When
queens were selling for a dollar, bee-
keepers who bred from the unique
lines paid a royalty of 25 cents for
each queen they produced.
In 1976, Cale’s health was failing,
and he asked Larry Connor, then an
entomologist at Ohio State, to move
the project to Florida and maintain it.
A new company, set up by the Dada-
nts and Harvey York, was called Ge-
netic Systems, Inc. Connor started
with one experienced beekeeper and
the rest to be trained. “It was an excit-
ing time,” he said. “We were trying to
do something that no one had done.
We produced hundreds of queens a
day. It was a challenge. And a hell of
an education.”
More lines were started, not all of
them as successful, particularly an at-
tempt at an alfalfa pollen gathering
bee. The cost was daunting, $5000 per
year to maintain a single line, times 13
inbred lines. “We didn’t have the biol-
ogy worked out with the drone age,
and they would have been better five
days older,” said Connor. “The con-
cept of stock improvement was very
young.”
Connor ran the project for four
years, later becoming publisher of
Wicwas Press. Eventually the breed-
ing company was sold to Richard
Adee. “The tracheal mites arrived in
the 80s,” said Connor, “and the in-
bred lines had no natural resistance
to it. The program succumbed. Some
September 2020
Subspecies of
Apis mellifera
were imported
from Europe and
North Africa and
bred for sale
in response to
burgeoning bee-
keeper fascina-
tion in the 19th
century.
From the Library
of Peter Borst
people were still advertising Starline ing population was in 1989. Thomas
queens 20 years later, but I’m pretty Rinderer, director of the Baton Rouge
sure there was no instrumental insem- honey bee lab, had worked for some
ination or lines maintained.” years to improve a strain of bees
found in Yugoslavia with a researcher
The CArniolAns there, Jovan Kulencevic. His hope was
In 1980, Sue Cobey started a queen that the bees, which he called the Yu-
breeding business and observed the gos (officially ARS Y-C-1) would have
varied behavior of different subspe- resistance to varroa mites.
cies, eventually developing an in- The bees were quarantined in colo-
strumental insemination program nies for several months at the USDA-
for disease-resistant bees. “I had two ARS Honey Bee Quarantine Station
of the major bee geneticists of the located on Grand Terre Island, Loui-
time filling my ear,” she said, “Harry siana, a barrier island separated from
Laidlaw and John Harbo.” She uses mainland honey bee populations by
a closed system, which she contrasts about 25 miles of coastal estuaries.
to the “round robin” system used by Further trials were conducted before
Cale. “My system follows [Rob] Page the department proposed leasing the
and Laidlaw pretty tightly, which is exclusive right to propagate and sell
just working with the population — Yugo queens to three breeders with
closed in the sense that there is no
open mating and introductions are
controlled.” To strengthen traits such
as hygienic tendencies and overwin-
tering, she chose to revive a then-
mongrelized subspecies that showed
some resistance to varroa, the Car-
niolans. She has successfully brought
them back — resistant but not entirely
treatment-free. She finds them exqui-
sitely attuned to the environment.
“It’s wintertime and you think oh,
these bees are just a fistful, they’re not
going to do anything. They will shut
down brood production while the
Italians will just starve. And then they
just explode.” Her project has been
involved with bee research centers at
Ohio State, UC Davis and Washington
State, where she is currently. Larry Connor took over breeding the
Starline and Midnite bees, which in-
The yugos volved an intricate system of inbred lines
The first time the USDA purposeful- to create hybrid vigor.
ly imported a new honey bee breed- Photo Courtesy of Larry Connor
1007
 The bond bees
John Kefuss, an American re-
searcher and beekeeper working
near Toulouse, France, was a first to
breed varroa-resistant bees. In Tuni-
sia, he’d observed untreated hives
that survived infestation. He’d been
told by his PhD advisor Friedrich
Ruttner that resistance was impos-
sible, but he was curious. In 1993 he
crossed black Tunisian bees with yel-
low Starline progeny, and it appeared
that the resistance was genetic. He
found that aggressive hybrids could
be selected for gentleness as well.
“By 1996 we knew we could select
for varroa resistance,” said Kefuss,
who stopped all treatment of his
bees. Kefuss’ bees were the most ro-
bust in a test of 13 lines of bees from
different areas in Europe for resis-
Tom Rinderer, head of the USDA Russian bee project, works at a microscope in a tance to varroa from 1999 to 2005.
barnyard on one of several trips to Russia in the mid-1990s to select stock for ex- “I don’t know if it is very relevant to
port. The progeny are now maintained by selected commercial breeders in the U.S. list the different races we have worked
USDA Photo with — Carniolans, Caucasians, Ital-
ians, K-Stars from our old Starline
the best proposals. From hundreds of at tracheal mites, which were a seri- lines, intermissa. What is important is
applicants those chosen were in Flori- ous threat at the time. She found that that all races can be selected for bet-
da, California and Maryland. resistance to tracheal mites was the ter tolerance to varroa. What we are
A graduate student from Louisiana strong suit of the bees. trying to do is develop bees with as
State University, Lillia de Guzman, “They weren’t really as varroa resis- many different types of alleles as pos-
now with the USDA, did field evalu- tant as he had hoped,” said Bob Dan- sible because there are many types of
ations of the bees over long hours for ka, who was there at the time the bees resistance.”
three years under adverse weather were imported. Bringing the Yugos to He has developed the Bond Test
conditions. “It really was an act of sci- market was a decade-long process. — a live-and-let-die approach to se-
entific creation,” said Rinderer, “the “It was a good overwintering bee, al- lection for varroa resistance. His Soft
kind of energy and care it took.” The though they weren’t all that popular Bond Test is more gradual. He invites
intent was to test the Yugo resistance in the industry. Bees got over tracheal all comers to search for mites in his
to varroa, but de Guzman also looked mite in a couple of years essentially.” apiaries, offering a Euro cent for each,
although they find few. His success
has been criticized for the isolation of
his apiaries, although he gladly sup-
plies his queens to beekeepers within
flight range.
Other resistant bee projects have
succeeded, among them one by Inge-
mar Fries in Sweden. Yves LeConte
found resistant feral colonies after
varroa swept through France. Thomas
Seeley studies the surviving feral bees
in the Arnot Forest in New York. The
largest population that survives natu-
rally with the mite is A.m. scutellata in
the Americas. In addition, it’s worth
noting that the Washington State api-
ary has not used chemical treatments
for 14 years, the USDA has not treated
for 25 years, and a number of Ameri-
can beekeepers maintain treatment-
free apiaries.
The question in the commercial
John Kefuss, an American working in France, is a researcher and breeder of mite- world is whether varroa-resistant bees
resistant stock. He invites any comers to his apiary to find mites, and rewards can be suitable for honey production
one Euro cent for each one. Here Kefuss, left, has paid Finnish visitor J. Lun- or the rugged requirements of pollina-
den a cent for the mite he was able to locate after searching through the hives. tion. At the very least, they are valu-
Photo Credit: Gabriele Steinig Foto able for studying the mechanisms of

1008 American Bee Journal

a stable host-parasite relationship, for
small-scale beekeepers, for genetic di-
versity and pollination in wild areas.
The minnesoTA hygieniC bee
“Minnesota Hygienic was really
groundbreaking work, really for-
ward-looking,” said Bob Danka of the
USDA. Marla Spivak, a professor at
the University of Minnesota, revived
abandoned research into hygienic
behavior in bees by W.C. Rothen-
buhler. Although he was looking for
resistance against the bacterial disease
American foulbrood and the fungal
pathogen chalkbrood, when Spivak
started in the 1990s the prime adver-
sary was the parasitic mite varroa, and
she was looking for proof of concept.
“My purpose was not to create a line
of honey bees,” she said. “My primary
goal was to wean bees and beekeep-
ers off chemicals.” Bees with this trait
are more likely to remove diseased or
parasitized brood from cells. It was
known that the timing of adult bees’
removal of the infected brood was key.
They safely removed the non-infec-
tious rod form of AFB before it reached
the highly infectious spore stage.
Spivak said, “I wondered, why
aren’t beekeepers using this trait? Is
there a problem with it?” As a proxy
for diseased or parasitized brood,
she used a freeze-killed brood test,
evaluating the time it takes a colony
to clean out the dead brood. In breed-
ing bees for this behavior, she found,
as she has observed many times since,
the first generation was not promis-
ing. “And then the second year, the
F2, the F3, it pulls itself together. I
don’t have an explanation for that.”
Over several years, she and Gary
Reuter bred highly hygienic colonies
that removed experimentally mite-in-
fested brood better than non-hygienic
colonies. She eschewed the expecta-
tion that the line would become pat-
ented and commercially available.
Spivak said, “My whole goal was to
make sure the beekeepers did this.”
To that end, she started the first Tech
Team to offer testing to California
queen breeders for what became the
Bee Informed Project.
“One thing I would say about the
process of the Minnesota hygienic line
that people don’t understand,” she
said, “is that it wasn’t just hygienical-
ly bred bees.” Overwintering, gentle-
ness and productivity were criteria.
“There was a lot of subjective selec-
tion going on.”
In looking at the mechanisms un-
derlying hygienic behavior, Spivak
September 2020
Marla Spivak, second from left, is the entomologist at the University of Minnesota
who developed the Minnesota Hygienic Line of bees with Gary Reuter, standing
behind her. Here they are demonstrating the CO2 method of testing bees for hy-
gienic behavior in which a colony’s ability to remove dead brood is measured.
Photo Courtesy of Marla Spivak
found that bees from hygienic colo-
nies were able to detect and discrimi-
nate between odors of diseased and
healthy brood at a lower stimulus
level compared to bees from non-hy-
gienic colonies.
Spivak has not finished her quest
for the resistant bee. Selection for
hygienic behavior has not resulted
in populations that do not require
treatment against mites to survive.
She said, “The freeze killed brood
test just selects for one thing. What
if varroa resistance is due to many
other things? It probably is multiple
mechanisms.” Her quest continues.
The russiAn bee
The third USDA bee import, after
the Buckfast and Yugo bees, was the
Russians in 1997. The strain originates
in the Primorsky region of Russia, in
the original native range of the varroa
mite. The original host of the mite,
A.m. capensis, has a balanced host-
parasite relationship but the mites
reproduce primarily on drone brood.
In the Russian bees, mites also target
worker cells as they do in other mel-
lifera strains, but the Russians have
undergone long selective pressure to
deal with them.
“It’s not easy to import bees,” said
Bob Danka. “It’s a huge bureaucratic
hurdle. I went to Russia three times.
We imported 362 queens to a quaran-
tine station on the coast on Barrier Is-
land. Then Dr. Rinderer went to work
here selecting those bees for resis-
tance.” The process, beginning with
work in Russia, took twelve years,
including multi-state field trials. The
level of resistance was sufficiently
high to reduce mite treatments signifi-
cantly. The strain has also been found
to attack small hive beetle.
Of the Russians, Sue Cobey said,
“You see fewer mites in them. And
they are even more conservative in
their brood production then Carnio-
lans.” After winter, however, their
rapid buildup can lead to swarming
unless they are carefully managed.
“There’s something in those bees
that’s unique,” said Danka. “To me, the
biggest problem has been to stabilize
the stock. We know, for example, from
the Starline program and the Buckfast
bees in Europe that there are bees that
are very uniform. It can be done.”
In 2008, the USDA transferred all of
the lines of the stock to the 18 com-
mercial honey bee breeders of the
Russian Honeybee Breeders Associa-
tion. They sell the bees commercially
as they continue to follow USDA
guidelines for maintaining them. Lil-
ia de Guzman recently confirmed that
their bees have substantial markers
that relate them to the original Rus-
sian population.
vsh
Varroa Sensitive Hygiene (VSH) is a
term used for the expression of a par-
ticular bee trait as well as for the lines
of bees originally bred for that trait
by the USDA at Baton Rouge. In VSH
activity, infested brood is uncapped
and removed in the same way as in
hygienic behavior. The difference is
in degree: Although both behaviors
focus on mite and diseased or dead
brood removal, VSH removes more
mite-infested brood. The removal ac-
tivity is the same, whether the brood
is diseased, mite-infested, or dead.
Interpreting the behavior led to initial
1009
 It’s worthy of note that hygienic be-
havior may not be the main mechanism
for survivor stocks that thrive without
treatment such as African populations
in Africa and the Americas as well as
populations in Sweden, France and
the New York Arnot Forest. Various
traits, such as frequent swarming and
grooming, appear to contribute.
“I think we are in the infancy stages
of what is possible,” said Sue Cobey.
What’s known thus far informs the
current USDA project, the Hilo bee.
That is the subject of Part II of this
article, which includes other new
projects including the use of genetic
markers. Until next month.

M.E.A. McNeil is a jour-

nalist and Master Bee-
keeper. She lives with her
husband and son on a
A visit by Bob Danka of the USDA, second from right, to beekeepers of the Rus- small Northern California
sian bees in the Primorsky Provence in 1995. Among the beekeepers and their organic farm. She can be
family members is Dr. Victor Kuznetsov, fourth from the left, in the green jack- reached at
et, the main scientific contact for the development of stock for import to the U.S. mea@meamcneil.com.
USDA Photo
had an ability to somehow reduce mite
misunderstanding and an eventual reproductive success. In 2007, Jeffrey
name change. Harris renamed the line VSH to reflect
USDA researchers John Harbo and the understanding that the main mech-
Roger Hoopingarner began in 1997 anism leading to non-reproductive
to search for traits involved in varroa mites is hygienic behavior.
resistance. They observed that in colo- The presence of non-reproducing
nies showing resistance there was low mites continues to be used as a crite-
reproductive success of the mites on rion for selection, but there is no field
worker brood. They named the result- assay for beekeepers to determine
ing line SMR, Suppression of Mite Re- how much their bees retain.
production, supposing that the brood

1010 American Bee Journal

September 2020 1011
1012 American Bee Journal
 REFINING THE
MITE WASH
Part 3
Dislodgement, precipitation,
and separation
by RANDY OLIVER
ScientificBeekeeping.com

In my last article I showed how mites will quickly drop off the bees’ bodies if immersed
in 91% alcohol. But there are still more steps remaining to separate the mites from the
sample of bees.

I
’m writing this series of articles dusts to monitor for varroa,3 with the a life of its own, and nowadays, de-
as I’m doing the research, since recommendation to use powdered scriptions of the sugar roll technique
I want to get my findings to you sugar. This was followed by extension often mention something to the effect
as quickly as possible. So please for- publications,4 where the term “sugar that “The sugar acts as an irritant and
give me if this series seems disjointed. roll” was coined, due to rolling bees bees will generate heat when trying
A number of my findings have sur- in a jar to coat them with powdered the remove the sugar. It’s the heat that
prised me, so I’m continually coming sugar. But Macedo and Ellis only sug- dislodges the Varroa mites from the
up with new questions, and thinking gested possible mechanisms for why bees”5 (Figure 2).
of ways to answer those questions. the sugar roll worked. The heating-up claim makes com-
As with many things in beekeep- plete sense, until you think about it.
underside inspeCTion, TAke 2 ing, “common knowledge” takes on Honey bees heat up their flight mus-
While working with volunteer bee-
keeper Michelle Lucadello, we identi-
fied one of my test colonies with an
extremely high mite infestation —
around 100 mites per 300 bees. That
works out to there being an average
of 1 mite for every 3 bees. This pre-
sented a perfect opportunity for me to
see whether the “clamshell method”
of mite monitoring that I mentioned
in my last article could be useful.
So we shook samples of those bees
into plastic clamshell food containers,
let them settle down for a minute, and
took advantage of Michelle’s sharp
young eyes (and my reading glasses)
to see whether we could estimate the
infestation rate by looking at the bees’
bellies (Figure 1).

revisiTing The sugAr roll/shAke

Kamran Fakhimzadeh, from Hel-
sinki, Finland, first brought sugar
dusting to our attention back in the
year 2000, in this very journal,1 with
a photograph of how the sugar par-
ticles stuck to the mites’ empodia,
causing them to lose their grip, and
suggested it as a mite-control meth-
od.2 Then in 2002, researchers in Dr.
Marion Ellis’ lab tested using inert
Fig. 1 It was easy to spot mites on the undersides of the bees (two circled), but we
were amazed at how few we saw — certainly not a mite on every third bee. We were
lucky to see a single mite in 15 bees, and have no idea where the rest of the expected
mites were. So although this technique initially looked promising, it needs to be vali-
dated, which will require first counting mites visually, then washing the bee sample to
recover any unseen mites. I hope to collect that data soon.

September 2020 1013

(L) Fig. 2 Rolling the bees in powdered sugar clearly bothers them, but does it bother them enough to make them heat up enough
to make varroa mites abandon them? (R) Fig. 3 To our great surprise, the temperature of the pile of bees slowly warmed from
around 86-90°F to a maximum of only 95-96 F — right at broodnest temperature! We got the same results in a second replicate.
These results do not support the claim that mites release due to the heating of the bees after rolling them in powdered sugar.
cles to around 105 F, and return to we rolled a half cup of mite-infested Wow, we thought — perhaps
the hive with thoracic temperatures bees in enough powdered sugar to there’s no need to beat up the bees,
above 102 F, and abdominal temps thoroughly coat them (Figure 4), then slamming them up and down by hard
above 95 F,6 and can exhibit body tem- inverted each screen-topped plastic shaking. There is clear release and
peratures on hot days of up to 113 F.7 jar over a cup to catch any mites that dislodgement of the mites without any
Thus, if a bit of heating was all that it dropped off of their own accord as shaking, so maybe all that you need to
took to get a mite to let go, a bee could the bees clambered around grooming do to sift them out is to just bounce
lose attached mites by simply taking themselves (Figure 5). the bees gently up and down a bit.
a flight on a hot day — an incredibly So I performed 15 sugar roll shakes
simple resistance mechanism. Practical application: I often see — 5 gentle, and 10 vigorous. I allowed
It occurred to me that the “heat- beekeepers using heavy glass Mason 60 seconds of rest after rolling the bees
ing due to irritation” claim would be jars for the sugar shake. It’s far easier in powdered sugar, then immediately
simple to test. So we scooped bees on the arm to shake a lightweight followed with 60 seconds of shaking,
into a covered cup, rolled them in plastic jar, such as the peanut butter then a detergent “clean up” wash. I
powdered sugar, and measured their jar pictured below. You can cut the alternated hard and soft shakes, but
temperature over 5 minutes as they center of the lid out with a hole saw since I was short on high-mite bees,
struggled in a clump, using both a (or by other means), and then use hot after five disappointing soft shakes,
thermal probe and an infrared ther- glue to attach ⅛” hardware cloth. I focused upon getting more data on
mometer (Figure 3). the hard shake. Results: Mite recov-
So, if it’s not the heating, do you After allowing 15 minutes for the ery was substantially better with a
really need to beat the bees up with mites to drop, we washed the bees in “vigorous” shake — giving a median
a hard shaking? We made a bunch of detergent to recover any remaining 88% mite recovery in 60 seconds of
shaker jars to see. For our first test, mites (Table 1). banging the bees up and down in the

(L) Fig. 4 Rolling bees in powdered sugar to get the mites to release and lose their grip. Note the cup and magnifying mirror holder
in the background, which we use for counting mites washed using detergent. (R) Fig. 5 Once inverted, mites started dropping
into the lower cups immediately. The photo above was taken after 15 minutes, by which time the bees had pretty well groomed the
sugar dust off their bodies.

1014 American Bee Journal

jar (n=10), as opposed to only 59% for
a soft shake (n=5). (I’ll show the histo-
gram in my next article.)
Practical application: As much as
I hate to see bees being beaten by a
hard shake, it appears that with pow-
dered sugar, it is necessary in order
to obtain decent mite recovery.
Michelle was curious as to whether
the hard-shaken bees actually survive
for long once returned to the hive.
I’ve often watched powdery-white
bees walk back into the entrance. Un-
fortunately, during our experiments,
there was a weak nectar flow on, and
after a shake, their disgorged nectar
often left the bees sticky with dis-
solved sugar. I caged some of these
bees, plus a control group, into the in-
cubator. There was some mortality of
the sticky shook bees held overnight,
as opposed to zero mortality of sug-
ared bees not shaken.
We realized that for a meaningful
test, the bees would need to be re-
turned to their hive, where their nest-
mates could groom the sugar from
their bodies. So we paint-marked 600
bees shaken from a hive, 300 with
yellow, 300 with blue. I then sugar-
rolled the blue bees and shook them
for 60 timed seconds, by which time,
they had gotten wet and sticky, and a
number looked as though they were
dying (Figure 6). We then returned
both groups back into their hive.
We placed a dead bee trap in front
of the entrance, and checked it and
the bottom board for casualties the
next morning. Surprisingly, other
than the three yellow control bees
that we expected to find dead due to
their having stung me as I put them
into their container, I found no dead
blue-marked bees. This experiment
needs to be repeated.
Practical application: I’ve long
wondered whether the traumatized
hard-shook bees survive after you’ve
returned them to the hive. It appears
that they can, at least overnight.
bACk To miTe wAshing wiTh liquid
releAse AgenTs
Review of the steps
Allow me to refresh you on the
four steps involved in a mite wash or
sugar roll:
Step 1: To cause the mites to re-
lease their grip on the bees,
Step 2: To then dislodge the mites
from the bees’ bodies,
September 2020
Table 1 Mite drop from powdered sugar roll, no shaking
Run
Drop from sugar alone
Drop from detergent follow up
Total mites
% drop from sugar dusting without shaking
Step 3: To then agitate or wash
the bee sample enough to allow
for the precipitation of the mites
through the tangle of bee bodies,
and finally
Step 4: To separate the mite sam-
ple from the bee sample, typical-
ly by allowing the much-smaller
mites to drop through a screen.
During a sugar shake, the mites
precipitate through air, and thus fall
rapidly. No so when they must sink
through a liquid, such as alcohol or
water.
The precipitation (sinking) rate of
the mites
In the first installment of this series,
I showed how we obtained much bet-
ter mite recovery in mite washes by
using 91% alcohol rather than 50%.
Was this due to the greater toxicity of
the 91% alcohol, or because of its less-
er density? Since alcohol is less dense
than water, we’d expect mites to sink
more quickly in alcohol of higher con-
centration.
If you’ve shaken mites into water
while performing a sugar shake, you
Fig. 6 Marked
bees after rolling
in powdered sugar,
then shaking
vigorously for 60
seconds. Due to
disgorged nectar,
these poor bees
look beat up, sticky,
and bedraggled.
1 2 3 4
58 48 75 62
31 3 14 36
89 51 89 98
65% 94% 84% 63%
likely noticed that they will float for
a while, but that is not because they
are less dense than water, but rather
because of their hydrophobic (water-
hating) cuticle. If you add a bit of
detergent to the water, they will im-
mediately begin sinking, albeit not
as quickly as they sink in alcohol
(ditto for bees, which turns out to be
important).
As I was typing this article, I won-
dered just how dense mites actually
are, compared to water or alcohol.
So I did my usual thing — got up
from the keyboard and performed
a kitchen investigation to find out.
I washed some mites off of bees us-
ing detergent in water, then quickly
rinsed and drained them on a sieve
before they could absorb any water. I
then filled a tall jar with water and a
bit of detergent, and checked its den-
sity (actually specific gravity) with a
hydrometer, confirming the instru-
ment’s calibration.8
I dropped mites into the water and
watched them sink to the bottom.
Then I added salt bit by bit to increase
the density of the solution, dropping
mites in again at each 0.01 increase in
1015
 as the mite passed the marked start
and finish lines (Figure 10).
Rather than showing you a bunch
of calculated means and statistics, I
feel that a picture is worth a thousand
numbers. For this sort of information,
I like histograms (frequency distribu-
tions), which allow your own brain to
look for patterns (Figure 11).
Since my agitators run for 60 sec-
onds, the difference between sinking
for 3 or 5 seconds is likely not going to
make a huge difference — so long as
there is no vertical agitation stirring
them back up.

Practical application: When wash-

ing mites, swirl rather than shake
up and down — up-and-down shak-
ing simply keeps stirring the mites
back up into the bees. When using
91% alcohol (or Dawn detergent),
there is actually little need to agitate
Fig. 7 Ignore the tiny bit of foam at the top — it’s an artifact of dissolving salt in water. to achieve mite detachment — you
Once mites stopped sinking (you can see some floating, others hung suspended in the only need to keep the bees in mo-
water column), I had a figure for their density which I could compare to that of water
tion in the solution so that the mites
and alcohol (Figure 8).
can precipitate down through their
density. They kept sinking, although maximum distance that a mite might bodies.
slower and slower, until I reached a need to precipitate through the alco-
specific gravity of 1.1, at which point hol (Figure 9). whAT i’ve leArned so fAr
they stayed in suspension or floated Assisted by my assistant Brooke This has been quite a learning ex-
(Figure 7). Molina, I shook live mites from bees perience for me. I’ve now covered
But would the small differences in using powdered sugar. Using soft release and dislodgement of the
densities between the alcohols make forceps, I dropped them one at a time mites, and their precipitation. The
much difference in the sinking rate of into a graduated cylinder filled with a sugar shake requires hard agitation,
mites? Besides density, there is also concentration of alcohol to be tested. whereas some of the liquid release
the molecular attraction of mite cu- We watched as the mite began to sink, agents require scant agitation. I’ve
ticle to the alcohol or water, as well the sugar dissolved, and the mite learned that with the better methods,
as viscosity (liquid “friction”). I need- reached its terminal sinking velocity. you can recover 95% of the mites in
ed to run a test. I first measured the Brooke would then hit the stopwatch 60 seconds.
In my next article, I’m going to fo-
cus upon the liquid release agents, to
try to figure out why some work well,
and some don’t.

A spoiler
Since alcohol is in short supply, I’ve
been asked by many beekeepers what
they can use for monitoring varroa,
and I don’t want to make you wait
until I publish my full results next
month.

Practical application: I’ve switched

to using Dawn Ultra dishwashing
liquid (my data is from using the
clear “Lemon essence” product),
which works very well for mite
washes, on par with 91% isopropyl,
and better than any other release
agent I’ve tested.

Fig. 8 The greater the difference in density, the faster something will sink. Note that Disclaimer: I have no connection
mites are not much denser than water, but considerably more dense than 91% alco- with, or interest in, the manufacturer
hol.9 This is confirmed by my field observations that mites sink more slowly in a deter- of any products. I’ve tested Dawn
gent wash than in an alcohol wash. dishwashing liquid and two other de-

1016 American Bee Journal

 Fig. 10 We timed the sinking rates of 51
mites in all. There was some variation,
but a clear difference between alcohol
Fig. 9 I live in California’s Gold Country, and have plenty of experience in precipitat- concentrations.
ing gold flakes through gravel when panning or sluicing. The same principles apply to
dropping varroa through bee bodies. In the mite wash cups that we use, a mite may Warning: A magnifying mirror, ca-
need to sink as much as 2½ inches. I want them to do so in less than 60 seconds.
sually placed, can easily start a fire
tergents (which weren’t impressive); with no up and down shaking. Little should the sun hit it. The focus point
but other foaming detergents may agitation is required for basic mite is a few inches from the mirror, and
work as well. monitoring. sunlight through a truck window is
Dilute the Dawn at the rate of 1-2 For counting after agitation, a won- enough to start a fire within seconds
tablespoons per gallon of water. A derful trick I’ve found is to build a (practical experience by my sons).
weaker solution is less efficacious, stand to hold the mite wash cup 4 ALWAYS place the mirror into an
and there is no benefit to making it inches above the face of a 6-inch di- opaque holder when not in use!
stronger. ameter 10x magnifying mirror (make- Next month: the results of testing
Don’t agitate immediately — in- up mirror) placed horizontally below various solutions, and trying to un-
stead allow the bees to soak in the the cup (10x is the best magnification, derstand why some work better than
solution for a full minute before and 6” diameter the best size). Look- others.
agitation, by which time most of the ing down, this gives you a greatly
mites will have already dropped to enlarged view of the mites (you can
the bottom of their own accord. Final see their legs) and makes counting a
agitation should be a swirl action, piece of cake (Figures 4 & 12).

Fig. 12 Viewing from the bottom up

means that the foam from the detergent
is not a problem. Since your treatment
threshold should be no more than 6
mites, counting is a breeze. Since I often
Fig. 11 It only takes a mite around 3 seconds to sink 2½” in 91% alcohol (the clump of count in the 50s to 70s for testing, I’ve
red columns), compared to nearly 5 seconds (on average) in 50% alcohol (with wider found that it helps to close one eye for
clump of blue columns). counting, and use a pointer.

September 2020 1017

ACknowledgemenTs
My research is supported by do-
nations from beekeepers. If you find
it to be of benefit, I appreciate dona-
tions at ScientificBeekeeping.com. I
also thank Peter Borst, Brooke Mo-
lina, and Michelle Lucadello for their
assistance.

referenCes
1 Fakhimzadeh K. (2000) Potential of su-
per-fine ground, plain white sugar dust-
ing as an ecological tool for the control of
Varroasis in the honey bee (Apis mellifera),
Am. Bee J. 140: 487–491.
2 http://scientificbeekeeping.com/pow-
dered-sugar-dusting-sweet-and-safe-
but-does-it-really-work-part-1/
3 Macedo, P, J Wu & M Ellis (2002) Using
inert dusts to detect and assess varroa in-
festations in honey bee colonies, Journal of
Apicultural Research, 41(1-2): 3-7.
4 https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/
viewcontent.cgi?article=2174&context=e
xtensionhist
5 https://gpmb.unl.edu/varroa-sugar-roll-
sampling
6 Cooper, P, et al (1985) Temperature regu-
lation of honey bees (Apis mellifera) forag-
ing in the Sonoran Desert. J. exp. Biol. 114:
1-15.
7 Bernd Heinrich (1996) How the honey
bee regulates its body temperature, Bee
World, 77:3, 130-137.
8 Before any nitpickers write to correct me,
I converted all the specific gravity figures
to densities with regard to temperature.
9 Lebo, R (1921) Properties of mixtures of
isopropyl alcohol and water. J. Am. Chem.
Soc. 43(5): 1005–1011.

Randy sees beekeeping

through the eyes of a biolo-
gist. He’s kept bees for over 50
years, and with his sons runs
around 1500 hives in the Cali-
fornia foothills. He closely fol-
lows bee research, engages in
some himself, and enjoys sharing what he’s
learned with others.

1018 American Bee Journal


Neonicotinoid insecticides: When there’s risk to bees, when there are economic
benefits to users, and when there are viable replacements
N
eonicotinoid insecticides. If
you’re like many people who
we interact with, you just read
those two words and already have
an opinion. Perhaps such a strong
opinion that there’s little point to us
writing more.
But for those brave souls who are
willing to wade into the science on
neonicotinoids (neonics, for short),
here’s your chance. We just pub-
lished a 432-page report in which
we comprehensively synthesized all
literature on risk to pollinators (>400
peer-reviewed studies regarding ex-
posure to and effects from neonics)
and economic benefits to farmers/
applicators (>5,000 paired neonic/
control field trials) for each context in
which neonics are used. In addition,
we summarized all application con-
texts in which neonicotinoid insec-
ticides could be reliably replaced by
alternative chemical insecticides or
non-chemical pest control technolo-
gies or techniques.
So, for our thirty-third Notes from
the Lab, we’re going to summarize
the main take-home messages from
“Neonicotinoid insecticides in New
York: Economic benefits and risk
to pollinators,” written by us and
freely available for download at:
h t t p s : / / p o l l i n a t o r. c a l s . c o r n e l l .
edu/pollinator-research-cornell/
neonicotinoid-report/.
Why did we write this report?
Two reasons. First, like many of you,
we’ve been surprised by the lack of a
September 2020
by Scott McArt and Travis Grout
comprehensive synthesis on this top-
ic that’s relevant to policy makers. A
synthesis that quantifies risk to polli-
nators and benefits to farmers/appli-
cators for each context in which neon-
ics are used. There is potentially risk
to pollinators from every chemical
insecticide, and there are potentially
economic benefits to users for every
chemical insecticide. But how much
risk is there from neonics? And how
large are the benefits?
Second, here in New York, we have
a governor and state agencies that are
committed to ensuring our Pollinator
Protection Plan (PPP) is more than
just a list of guidelines. In addition to
surveying wild pollinators, improv-
ing habitat, working with beekeepers
to improve management practices,
and many other actions, there is real
money being put toward research on
poorly understood or controversial
topics, including pesticides. Since the
state’s PPP was initiated in 2016, New
York has allocated $1.2 million to ap-
plied research so we can improve our
understanding of factors shaping pol-
linator health. And that includes neo-
nicotinoids.
Why is this report unique? The
scope of the report is limited to direct
economic benefits to users and risk
to pollinators. Thus, it is intended to
complement existing studies and risk
assessments, particularly the com-
prehensive reviews of neonicotinoid
active ingredients conducted by the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agen-
cy (USEPA). At the same time, the re-
port is unique (and hopefully useful
for policy makers!) since it summariz-
es new analyses and quantifies ben-
efits to users and risk to pollinators
in a side-by-side manner for the five
major application contexts in which
neonics are used: field crops (corn,
soybean, wheat); fruit crops (e.g.,
apple, strawberry, blueberry); veg-
etable crops (e.g., squash, pumpkin);
ornamentals, turf, & landscape man-
agement (e.g., golf courses, ornamen-
tal plant nurseries); and conservation
& forestry (e.g., control of hemlock
woolly adelgid in forests).
OK, let’s get to it. What did we
find regarding risk to pollinators?
For risk, lots of exposure data exist
for field crops, while less is known
regarding neonicotinoid exposures in
tree fruits, vegetables, and turfgrass
& ornamentals settings. And no ex-
posure data exist that are relevant to
pollinators in conservation & forestry
settings. This means we have better
insight about risk in field crops com-
pared to all other settings.
Taking an LOEC approach to quan-
tifying risk (i.e., using Lowest Observ-
able Effects Concentrations from the
peer-reviewed literature for neonic
impacts on honey bees to set the bar
for what’s defined as risk), the 4-panel
figure in Figure 1 shows when risk oc-
curs in each setting. All the blue data
points above the red line indicate risk,
while all the data below the red line
indicate no risk. In and near corn and
1019
 Fig. 2 Number of North American field
trials reporting significantly better per-
formance (green), significantly worse
performance (red), or no significant dif-
ference (gray) in terms of yield, crop
damage, or pest control for neonicoti-
noid-treated plots compared to no-insec-
ticide controls.
Fig. 1 Quantitative neonicotinoid exposures to bees in field crops, fruit crops, veg-
etable crops, and turf & ornamentals settings expressed as a proportion of the lowest
observed effect concentrations (LOECs) for adverse impacts on honey bee behavior, extends this window before the vin-
physiology, and reproduction. Dashed line (at y = 1) indicates the LOEC for each re- ing stage, since applications before
sponse. Thus, all data points above the dashed line are above the LOEC and indi- or during planting (i.e., treatments
cate risk, while all data below the dashed line are below the LOEC and indicate no applied to soils before seeding or at
risk. Mean values for each individual study and setting are represented by open blue the time of transplanting) result in ex-
circles; each mean value includes all neonicotinoid exposure data (including zero val- posures known to impact honey bee
ues) from each study. Note that because the log of zero is undefined, all zero values reproduction.
(i.e., when no neonicotinoids were found) were set to 0.1 in this figure. Data points are Second, exposures in ornamentals
jittered in each effects category to improve visualization. (i.e., flowering plants in nurseries) are
likely to impact honey bee reproduc-
soybean fields that are planted with are literally hundreds of studies that tion in 70% of cases. While this con-
neonicotinoid-treated seeds, 74% of have assessed hazard from neonics clusion is based on only 18 exposure
exposures are likely to impact honey (i.e., studies that dose bees with neon- assessments, the results are likely in-
bee physiology (cellular respiration), ics and assess how those doses impact dicative of broader patterns given the
58% of exposures are likely to impact mortality, reproduction, behavior or widespread use of neonicotinoids on
honey bee behavior (worker memory physiology), surprisingly few studies ornamental plants at nurseries.
and foraging efficiency), and 37% of have assessed exposure to bees in the Finally, it’s important to note that
exposures are likely to impact honey settings where neonics are used. Since each neonicotinoid insecticide is
bee reproduction (egg laying and sur- risk is the product of hazard and ex- not created equal. Specifically, acet-
vival of new queens). With 96 exposure posure, we’re therefore often limited amiprid (a cyanoamidine neonic-
assessments, we have high confidence in what we can say about risk without otinoid) is three orders of magnitude
in these results; risk from neonics is of- knowing more about exposure. less toxic to bees than clothianidin,
ten high in field crops settings. That said, there are three additional imidacloprid and thiamethoxam (ni-
Risk can also be high in other set- take-home messages regarding risk. troguanidine neonicotinoids). Thus,
tings, but less data exist (i.e., there are First, risk from neonicotinoids used even though acetamiprid is a neo-
fewer blue data points compared to on cucurbits (e.g., squash, pumpkin) nicotinoid to which bees are often
field crops in Figure 1). Therefore, we result in exposures that are likely exposed, it poses little risk compared
have less confidence about conclu- to impact honey bee reproduction to the nitroguanidine neonicotinoids
sions regarding risk in these settings. in 85% of cases. The USEPA has re- and other chemical insecticides that
This is an important conclusion in cently recognized the high risk of are much more toxic.
and of itself; we actually don’t know neonicotinoids in cucurbits, issuing What about economic benefits
much about risk to pollinators from a recommendation to prohibit use of neonics? To assess benefits, we
neonicotinoid insecticides in most ap- of imidacloprid-, clothianidin-, and tapped into data from >5,000 paired
plication contexts because few stud- thiamethoxam-based products on cu- neonic/control field trials that have
ies have quantified exposure in these curbits between vining and harvest assessed impacts on pest populations,
contexts. In other words, while there to protect pollinators. Our analysis crop damage or yield. For many ap-

1020 American Bee Journal

plication contexts, there are clear ben-
efits from using neonics. As shown
in Figure 2, the majority of trials that
have been conducted on fruits, veg-
etables and turfgrass (e.g., on golf
courses) find that using neonicoti-
noids reduces pest populations, lim-
its crop damage, or improves yield
compared to untreated control plots.
And this often results in direct eco-
nomic benefits to users since the ben-
efits overcome the cost of neonics. For
a handful of important pests, includ-
ing root-form phylloxera (grape), root
weevils (berries), boxwood leafminer
(ornamentals), and thrips and Swede Fig. 3 Number of corn field trials reporting significantly higher (green), significantly
midge (cabbage), there are few or no lower (red), or no difference (gray) in yields in plots using neonicotinoid-treated seeds
effective chemical alternatives avail- compared to plots using a non-neonicotinoid treatment or untreated control. Non-
insecticidal seed treatments are seeds treated with fungicides, bactericides and/or
able. In addition, removal of any one
nematicides. Alternative insecticides include a pyrethroid (tefluthrin), anthranilic di-
insecticide (including neonics) from a
amides (chlorantraniliprole and cyantraniliprole), organophosphates (chlorethoxyfos,
rotation increases the risk of develop- terbufos), and a phenylpyrazole (fipronil).
ing insecticide-resistant pest popula-
tions and increasing long-term pest should address those products’ value insecticides are the most likely re-
management costs to farmers. as inexpensive crop insurance as well placements for neonics. To that end,
But benefits aren’t always observed as pest management tools. it’s worth reiterating that alternative
when neonicotinoids are used. That If neonicotinoids will be re- chemical insecticides exist for nearly
fact is particularly clear in field crops placed, what should replace them? all relevant target pests. However,
settings. As seen in the figure for field No chemical insecticide is risk-free, switching from neonicotinoids usu-
corn (Figure 3), neonicotinoid-treated and the potential chemical insecti- ally entails a direct or indirect cost to
corn seeds rarely provide yield bene- cide replacements for neonicotinoids users. Farmers and pesticide applica-
fits to farmers. Specifically, 83-97% of possess risks of their own. Thus, tors choose products with care. When
field trials find no significant increase throughout the report, we make note they use a neonicotinoid insecticide,
(or a decrease) in corn yield when of contexts in which IPM approaches, it is typically because that product
neonicotinoid-treated seeds are used non-synthetic chemical insecticides is the best option when considering
compared to chemical alternatives or (e.g., biocontrols, biopesticides, or price, efficacy, safety, insecticide rota-
untreated controls. Even when com- RNA-based approaches), and other tion pattern, and other factors.
pared to plots using no insecticides, pest control technologies are likely to In field crops settings, the most
87% of field trials observe no increase be effective. promising alternative chemical in-
in corn yield when neonicotinoid- But we also realize that, at least in secticides are pyrethroids (e.g.,
treated seeds are used. The results for the short term, alternative chemical tefluthrin) and anthranilic diamides
corn are similar to those from soybean
(Figure 4). Specifically, 82-95% of field
trials find no increase (or a decrease)
in soybean yield when neonicotinoid-
treated seeds are used compared to
chemical alternatives or untreated
controls.
As should be expected, the unfa-
vorable results for yield in corn and
soybean translate to infrequent eco-
nomic benefits for farmers who use
neonicotinoid-treated seeds. Never-
theless, neonicotinoid-treated seeds
are used by nearly all conventional
field corn farmers and the majority
of soybean producers. In part, this is Fig. 4 Number of soybean field trials reporting significantly higher (green), signifi-
due to the insurance value of neonic- cantly lower (red), or no difference (gray) in yields in plots using neonicotinoid-treated
otinoid-treated seeds. Even if routine seeds compared to plots using a non-neonicotinoid treatment or untreated control.
use of neonicotinoid-treated seeds Non-insecticidal seed treatments are seeds treated with fungicides, bactericides and/
does not increase net income, such or nematicides. Alternative insecticides include foliar sprays based on pyrethroids
preventative pest control products (beta-cyfluthrin, bifenthrin, cyfluthrin, deltamethrin, esfenvalerate, gammacyhalothrin,
protect growers against unpredict- lambda-cyhalothrin, zeta-cypermethrin), organophosphates (acephate, chlorypri-
able, potentially severe, losses from fos, dimethoate), carbamates (carbaryl), tetronic acids (spirotetramat), butenolides
early-season pests. We suggest that (flupyradifurone), flonicamid (flonicamid), avermectins (abamectin), pyridine azome-
incentives and policies to reduce us- thine derivatives (pymetrozine, pyrifluquinazon), sulfoximines (sulfoxaflor), and pyro-
age of neonicotinoid-treated seeds penes (afidopyropen).

September 2020 1021

 (chlorantraniliprole and cyantranilip-
role). Because pyrethroids are not
systemic and are less environmen-
tally persistent, they likely pose less
risk to pollinators compared to neo-
nicotinoid-treated seeds. But at the
same time, they likely pose more risk
to pesticide applicators due to greater
toxicity to vertebrates (including hu-
mans) compared to neonics.
Anthranilic diamides are systemic
insecticides, but they’re much less
toxic to pollinators compared to neo-
nicotinoids. Chlorantraniliprole and
cyantraniliprole show promise as
alternative systemic insecticide seed
treatments for corn and soybean, re-
spectively, though they are currently
more expensive than neonics.
Finally, a main reason why preven-
tative seed treatments are used so ex-
tensively in field crops is due to the un-
predictable nature of early-season pest
outbreaks. Further work to improve
Some alternatives to neonics bring their
the predictability of such outbreaks
own risks.
via degree-day modeling that includes
site-specific characteristics clearly has
potential to increase the sustainability
and security of field crops production
in the United States and beyond.
Alternative chemical insecticides
in other application contexts are nu-
merous, and we encourage readers
to dive into the full report if inter-
ested. But in the interest of space, we
will only highlight one additional
example here. As noted above, acet-
amiprid is three orders of magnitude
less toxic to bees than the nitroguani-
dine neonicotinoids clothianidin, imi-
dacloprid and thiamethoxam. Thus,
acetamiprid poses little risk to bees in
each application context in which it’s
used, while it often results in econom-
ic benefits to users. This is important
since some people are currently push-
ing for a full ban on neonicotinoids.
If such a ban occurred, it is likely the
1022
replacement chemical insecticides for
acetamiprid would pose greater risk
to bees in most application contexts.
This project was made possible by
the NYS Environmental Protection
Fund via New York’s Pollinator Pro-
tection Plan. We hope the report is
useful to researchers, extension folks,
policy makers and other stakeholders
within and beyond New York.
Until next time, bee well and do
good work.
Scott McArt
referenCe:
Grout, T. A., P. A. Koenig, J. K. Kapuvari
and S. H. McArt. 2020. Neonicotinoid in-
secticides in New York: Economic benefits
and risk to pollinators. 432 pp. https://
pollinator.cals.cornell.edu/pollinator-
research-cornell/neonicotinoid-report/
Scott McArt, an
Assistant Professor
of Pollinator Health,
helps run the Dyce
Lab for Honey Bee
Studies at Cornell
University in Ithaca,
New York. He is par-
ticularly interested
in scientific research that can inform man-
agement decisions by beekeepers, growers
and the public.
Email: shm33@cornell.edu
Lab website: blogs.cornell.edu/mcartlab
Pollinator Network: pollinator.cals.cornell.edu
Facebook: facebook.com/dycelab
Travis Grout is the
Agricultural Econo-
mist on the New
York State Bee-
keeper Tech Team.
He works directly
with beekeepers to
evaluate their busi-
nesses, track perfor-
mance, and identify areas for improvement,
based on the premise that basic business
tools can make beekeeping more rewarding
for operations of any size.
American Bee Journal
September 2020 1023
1024 American Bee Journal
Master Beekeeping
Programs
Is there one for you?
by DEWEY M. CARON
H
ow did you learn beekeeping?
Or it should be asked, how are
you currently learning — the
learning is never really over. Most
experienced beekeepers will say the
bees are the best teachers. It takes
skill and some knowledge to be able
to “speak their language” and to fig-
ure out what they are saying.
Are you a book learner? Do you
like the discipline of a course (al-
though hate taking tests associated
with some courses)? Do you have a
lot of beekeeping knowledge but are
afraid to stand up in front of groups
or take on a leadership role in your
bee club? If yes to any or all of these,
then a Master Beekeeping program is
not for you.
At one time Cooperative Extension
developed and taught most bee cours-
es (although courses often included
local experts). Some still do. But today
most bee courses are offerings of local
bee clubs. Course content is at the be-
ginner level, though increasingly in-
termediate or advanced courses may
be offered.
The newest movement to learn how
to become a beekeeper is to enroll in a
Master Beekeeper program.
As with much in beekeeping there
is no one opinion of how to manage
bees — or how to learn how to be a
beekeeper. Bee-L had a long running
discussion of master beekeeping pro-
grams. Some respondents thought
these programs were the best way to
learn while others expressed opin-
ions that they were a stupid waste
of time that would yield nothing in
return. Beekeepers are never of the
same mind.
Master beekeeping programs, like
beginner bee courses, are not all the
same. In fact they vary a great deal. The
September 2020
EAS MB Buddy May working with young mentee
oldest MB program, that of the Eastern
Apicultural Society (EAS), continues
testing to certify Masters. The vast ma-
jority however include a series of lev-
els (Starting/Beginner/Apprentice),
an intermediate (Journeyman) and fi-
nally one or two Master certifications.
And by and large they all involve tak-
ing tests — but tests meant to enhance
the student learning experience, not
meant to punish. If there is one weak-
ness, it is that there is too little in-hive
teaching; students need to self-learn
practical bee care.
eAs mAsTer beekeeper progrAm
The very first U.S. Master Beekeeper
program was developed at Cornell
by Dr. Roger Morse. He invited select
experienced New York beekeepers
to Cornell for a 2-day Short Course
followed by a written-and-lab exam.
Those scoring 80 or better earned
a Master Certification. In all, 40
individuals were so recognized in 1978
and in a repeat session in 1979. The
impetus of the NY MB certification
was an education program in the U.K.
of the British Beekeepers Association
( h t t p : / / w w. b b k a . o r g . u k / l e a r n /
examinations_assessments).
The NY program was transferred
to EAS in 1980 with a major differ-
ence: The EAS certification did not in-
clude instruction, although there was
some discussion of having a Bee Short
Course, initiated by EAS at the same
time, serve as instruction/review be-
fore the testing.
The basic concept was, a Master
Beekeeper should be able to answer
questions about bee biology at a
University-level apiculture course,
identify equipment and disease in a
lab-exam setting of actual pieces of
equipment/disease, and finally take
a field exam to demonstrate the expe-
rience and working skills to open, ex-
amine, diagnose and then close a hive.
The first EAS exam was held in con-
junction with an EAS meeting at Rut-
gers University in New Jersey. Eight
of 16 individuals were certified by
taking written, field and lab examina-
tions that first year. More recently a 4th
examination, an oral exam, has been
added. Over 300 individuals, mostly
from the EAS region but also a hand-
ful outside the EAS region, and even
a few outside the U.S. and Canada,
have been certified. Cost is $100 (+
must register for the EAS conference).
Many do not pass all four exams on
the initial effort, and retakes (of only
those not passed) are $25 (+ again cost
of meeting attendance).
Requirements are minimal. Indi-
viduals must have 5 years experience
and have a recommendation from an
existing MB or other recognized ex-
pert in beekeeping. Lacking program
instruction, candidates need to learn
beekeeping from local/state club
courses or mentors; a few are self-
taught. Many taking the tests are bee
association leaders, active in bee out-
reach, and sought-after mentors.
For more information consult the
EAS website https://www.easternapi
culture.org/master-beekeepers.html.
Cornell mAsTer beekeeping Course
After a hiatus of 30+ years Cornell
is again offering a Master Beekeeping
certification program: https://
www.ecornell.com/certificates/
beekeeping/master-beekeeping/
Currently the Cornell University
Master Beekeeper Program is an
advanced training program for bee-
keepers who have at least 3 years of
beekeeping experience. The program
1025

Dr. Clyde Strang taking EAS MB field exam. He passed!
takes 15 months to complete. Partici-
pants take four online classes:
• Honey Bee Evolution, Biology,
and Behavior
• The Science and Art of Bee-
keeping
• Managing Pests and Diseases
• The Rewards and Contributions
of Beekeeping
There are three in-person final ex-
ams at Cornell’s Dyce Bee Lab. The
exam series includes a written exam,
the delivery of a 15-minute presenta-
tion, and a field exam where individu-
als need to demonstrate key beekeep-
ing skills. Cost is $899. They are surely
doing something right, as the current
class that started in March was fully
subscribed.
whAT sTATes hAve mb progrAms?
A number of state beekeeping or-
ganizations/university apiculture
programs have developed Master Bee-
keeper programs. The Southeastern
states of Tennessee, Georgia, Florida,
Alabama, North Carolina and South
Carolina each have 4-level programs.
Beyond a Master they offer a Master
Craftsman certification, the highest
level. Each level includes instruction
and testing for appropriate beekeeping
skills. All perform testing as an adjunct
activity at a state bee meeting. The
Master Craftsman involves completion
of an individual research project.
The programs of these states have
the highest enrollments. All coinci-
dently have strong extension support,
either initially in the development of
the MB program and/or continuing
currently despite in some instanc-
es vacancies in the bee extension
positon. But the programs are also
1026
strongly supported by individuals
of the state associations. State apiary
disease inspection programs also of-
fer substantial support as part of their
outreach activities. Proper disease di-
agnosis and treatment are strengths of
these Master Beekeepers.
The Texas Master Beekeeping
Course https://masterbeekeeper.
tamu.edu/master/ is another ex-
tremely popular MB program. It was
developed by the State Apiary Inspec-
tion program and the state beekeep-
ers association and modeled after the
Florida MB program. The program
is a five-year (minimum) beekeeper
training and certification program.
The Texas Apiary Inspection Service
considers the MB program an effort to
increase overall health of the beekeep-
ing industry. A goal is that the TMBP
will produce highly knowledgeable
beekeepers to lead the industry and
act as honey bee ambassadors to the
general public.
There are four levels in the Texas
MB program (as in Florida’s pro-
gram): Apprentice, Advanced Bee-
keeper, Master and Master Craftsman.
The TMBP is a self-study program
with students using suggested read-
ing materials of the program require-
ments document as study materials.
Public service is required. Costs are
minimal — $75 to take the tests. All
exams but the Master Craftsman are
offered in conjunction with a Texas
Beekeepers Association meeting, usu-
ally the day preceding the meeting.
Other MB programs, not otherwise
reviewed here, include:
Illinois — originally part of a
Midwest MB program from Mis-
souri. Several of the state regional
groups (Heart of Illinois, South-
ern Illinois) are offering beekeep-
ing instructional courses, some
with certification.
Ohio — www.ohiostatebee
keepers.org/.../master-beekeeper-
program/questions-and-answers/
Washington State — http:/
/masterbeekeeper.brownpaper
tickets.com/ — recently revised
with updating of training mate-
rials.
West Virginia — www.wvbee
keepers.org/certification-levels.
html
There are several additional MB
programs under development in-
cluding:
California — https://cambp.uc
davis.edu/
Colorado — www.colorado
beekepers.org
Great Plains MB — https://
gpmb.unl.edu/about-master-
beekeeping-program — is a col-
laborative effort of Wyoming,
Kansas, Iowa and Missouri, with
a University of Nebraska lead.
There are four levels: Apprentice
(offered without cost), Journey-
man ($80 test fee), Masters ($100
test fee) and Certified Masters. To
advance, beekeepers must meet
a set of educational goals, obtain
field training, and volunteer or
fulfill mentoring service require-
ments designed to build off the
knowledge and skills gained
from the previous level. Note: An
earlier regional effort from the
University of Missouri has been
discontinued.
Hawaii — MB program pat-
terned after Florida was initiated
on Oahu and Big Island. The per-
son in charge has left the state.
Last posting 2018. Status unclear.
There was an initial connection
to AMVETS and that effort is
continuing.
New Mexico — apprentice cer-
tification program started with
the state association and city of
Albuquerque.
georgiA mAsTer beekeeper progrAm
The GA Master Beekeeping pro-
gram is one of the most successful.
American Bee Journal
To participate you must attend the
Young Harris Beekeeping Insti-
tute (https://pollinators.msu.edu/
programs/pollinator-champions/
register-for-pollinator-champions/),
held annually in late spring on the
campus of Young Harris College in
northern Georgia. The Institute is
a three-day (Thursday-Saturday)
meeting for Certified Level candi-
dates. Lectures and exams for the
Journeyman and/or higher are held
on Wednesday. The Young Harris In-
stitute also runs Welsh Honey Judge
training in conjunction with the an-
nual MB program. The GA MB pro-
gram, like most MB programs, is not
restricted just to GA residents.
To date the GA program has certi-
fied 884 individuals at the basic level
(Certified), 45 Journeymen, 45 Mas-
ters, and 5 Master Craftsmen. In an
interesting twist, the GA MB program
is also offered in the state prison sys-
tem: Beekeeping Behind Bars. Cur-
rently seven prisons participate and
another will likely join this spring. To
date 126 inmates have been certified
(initial level), 7 have been certified
as Journeymen and 2 have achieved
Master Beekeeper status.
Recommended texts across the GA
Master Beekeeper levels are Keith
Delaplane’s 2007 edition of “First
Lessons in Beekeeping”; Thomas D.
Seeley’s “The Wisdom of the Hive”
and “Honeybee Democracy”; Jurgen
Tautz’s “The Buzz about Bees: Biol-
ogy of a Superorganism”; and Mark
Winston’s “The Biology of the Honey
Bee.” There is a study guide and out-
line of written and lab test contents
for the Journeyman level. Fees are
reasonable: $45 for Certified exam,
$55 for Journeyman and Master ex-
ams and $75 for the Master Crafts-
man exam.
Jennifer Berry has written about
the GA Beekeeping Behind Bars
program. She has an interesting ac-
count of a few of the inmates in the
program at https://bees.caes.uga.
edu/content/dam/caes-subsite/
honey-bee-program/documents/
OctoberBerry2018.pdf and about
the GA beekeepers, all MBers, who
make the prison instruction and cer-
tification all possible: https://bees.
caes.uga.edu/content/dam/caes-sub
site/honey-bee-program/documents/
NovemberBerry2018.pdf
floridA mAsTer beekeeper progrAm
The Florida program has recently
been revised and converted to a
modular online program designed
September 2020
by Dr. Jamie Ellis. All levels of the
program allow individuals to submit
a video to demonstrate their bee hive
inspection prowess or take it in per-
son. (See the separate article by Mary
Bammer in this issue about the new
Florida Master Beekeeper program.)
universiTy of monTAnA online mb
CerTifiCATion progrAm
The Montana MB program of 3
levels is an online course. Online
modules were developed through
the School of Extended and Lifelong
Learning (SELL). The courses were
four years in development. The first
Apprentice class was offered in 2012,
and the first Master course in 2016.
Costs are $325 for Apprentice level.
Textbook is “Storey’s Guide to Keep-
ing Honey Bees, 2nd Edition: Honey
Production, Pollination, Health,” by
Malcom T. Sanford and Richard E.
Bonney. Journey level course fee is
$430 and Master is $495. Latest 2015
edition of “The Hive and the Honey
Bee” is a required text for the Mas-
ter course. Signup should be done as
soon as offered, as courses fill up and
close rapidly. http://www.umt.edu/
sell/programs/bee/
The UM online program provides
immersion in each week’s topic via
extensive interactive discussions
combined with a rich complement of
multi-media resources. Numerous an-
imations and videos are used to illus-
trate concepts and methods. Instruc-
tors include Dr. Jerry Bromenshenk,
Scott Debnam, and Phil Welch, all of
UM. Contributing experts include Dr.
Colin Henderson, an expert in experi-
mental design and statistics; Dr. Cam
Lay, the Montana State Entomologist
and Apiarist; and Dr. Dale Hill, an
animal nutrition specialist.
The UM program takes three to
five years to complete all three lev-
els. University enrolled students have
the option of taking the courses for
academic credit through the Univer-
sity of Montana. The rigorous courses
require participation in discussion
forums and successful completion of
assignments and quizzes. A micro-
scope is required for the Journeyman
and Master-level courses. Completion
of a research project is required at the
Master level.
The program requires student as-
sessment surveys for each section of
each course. Students from nearly ev-
ery U.S. state and Canadian province,
as well as Europe, Asia, S. Africa, S.
America, New Zealand and Australia,
have successfully completed course
work. The UM program is endorsed
and recommended by the Montana
Beekeepers Association, the American
Honey Producers, and Project Apis m.
On the course entry page Dr. Bro-
menshenk is quoted as saying, “While
no beekeeping program can guarantee
your success with honey bees, our pro-
gram will give you the strongest possible
foundation and therefore the best chance
at keeping healthy, prosperous hives.”
oregon mAsTer beekeeper progrAm
The Oregon Master Beekeeper pro-
gram is administered by Oregon State
University extension and utilizes re-
sources of the OSU Bee and Oregon
Bee Project programs. A committee
of beekeepers from backyard to com-
mercial developed the program in
cooperation with OSU. Grant funds
from the OR Department of Agricul-
ture Specialty Crops program provid-
ed initial funding. https://extension.
oregonstate.edu/mb
Oregon has a 3-level program.
The first or Apprentice level focuses
on acquiring a strong foundation of
knowledge through instruction and
working with a mentor. With a men-
tor, students complete four seasonal
activity worksheets (usually in the
apiary of the apprentice beekeeper),
keep a field log of hive activities, earn
educational opportunities outside of
the course instruction, and complete
a minimum of 10 hours of instruction.
The program has developed an Ap-
prentice level course, offered around
the state by experienced beekeepers,
of 16-20 hours total. Courses begin in
January and may be biweekly in the
evening, monthly, four 4-hour Satur-
day sessions, or some mixture of days
and time. Each spring five or more
courses are in progress. Some instruc-
tors take students into bee hives at
one or more sessions. There is also
an online OSU Apprentice course, of-
fered for the first time in 2020, of eight
sessions (15 hours instruction time).
All the course instructors, including
for the OSU online offering, access the
same outlines of topics and visuals for
uniformity.
The exam is open book and can be
done at the end or during the year.
The textbook is “The Beekeeper’s
Handbook” by Sammataro and Avita-
bile. Students are encouraged to com-
plete the program within two years.
Cost is $150.
After the initial five years, it was ap-
parent the Apprentice level program
was in need of a dual track. Some
individuals who seek to enroll in the
1027

Oregon MB mentor working with mentee
program do not yet have a bee colony
or they are not sure they want to keep
bees. To service these individuals and
because there is strong demand to find
qualified mentors in some parts of the
state, a Getting Started program was
devised. It is designed for individu-
als thinking of or with little bee expe-
rience. Individuals take 10 hours of
online instruction and an open-book
quiz. Those who complete the activi-
ties in a 6-month period then can pass
to the Apprentice level and are given
priority for mentor assignment the fol-
lowing year. Fee is $75 and if continu-
ing on an additional $75 fee is required.
Journey and Master levels rely on
self-starting, independent learning.
The Journey program includes com-
pleting a series of 12 Guided Studies
that revolve around appropriate top-
ics as individuals gain more years of
experience. Topics include anatomy,
pollination, disease and pests, varroa,
contemporary topics, etc. Each are
3-4-page study guides developed by
the committee. They consist of open-
1028
ended questions that participants seek
to respond to, citing their sources.
Journey students also have to pass
an open-book written exam, take a
practical exam (given at OSU a couple
of times a year), earn 30 points of pub-
lic service credits, actively maintain
at least one colony and keep a hive
log for three successive years. One or
more program workshops are offered
each year for individuals enrolled in
the Journey level. Fee is $200.
The Master level graduated the first
two candidates in 2019. Requirements
are as follows:
1. Read an assigned research ar-
ticle and write a critique based
on the scientific method.
2. Participate in an Extension/
Outreach or a University-spon-
sored scientific research project.
3. Develop and demonstrate pro-
ficiency in two areas — Honey
Bee Pests and Disease and an-
other area of interest to candi-
dates. Newly acquired profi-
ciency is strongly encouraged.
4. Earn 100 public service points.
5. Pass an oral exam offered once
yearly.
For the Pests and Disease Proficien-
cy, students take a one-hour oral/field
and lab test. The field test includes ef-
ficiently opening a colony and inspect-
ing for diseases and pests, plus show-
ing how to properly do a varroa mite
sampling with analysis of results. A
full-day optional workshop is offered
each year on diseases and pests to pre-
pare students for this proficiency. Ser-
vice points accumulate for individuals
who take a leadership role in their lo-
cal beekeeping community as mentors
and club officers. Fee is $200.
The additional proficiency can be
earned by contributing to the Oregon
Bee Project. This citizen science proj-
ect is developing an atlas of Oregon
native bees. Students need to collect
over 100 bees and identify them (with
Oregon MB student taking Disease Pro-
ficiency exam
80% accuracy to the Genus level,
bumble bees to the Species level) from
at least four (of seven total) bee Fami-
lies. Alternately they can contribute to
one of the project activities that might
be a bee census of some area or ID of
native bees visiting some crop.
And finally, one other certificate
program of interest:
miChigAn pollinATion ChAmpion
CerTifiCATe
Michigan State University has
a program to Certify Pollinator
Champions. Students first register
for and complete the free Pollinator
Champion Online Course (https://
pollinators.msu.edu/programs/
pollinator-champions/register-for-
pollinator-champions/). The course
is a free, self-paced online course of-
fered by Michigan State University.
The course is packed full of videos,
articles, and fun activities to guide
you through the amazing world of
pollinators and pollination. Once suc-
cessfully completing the Pollinator
Champions online course, you can be-
come registered as an MSU Certified
Pollinator Champion, for a fee of $30.
Dr. Dewey M. Caron is
Emeritus Professor of En-
tomology & Wildlife Ecol-
ogy, Univ. of Delaware, &
Affiliate Professor, Dept.
Horticulture, Oregon State
University. He retired in
2009 and moved to Port-
land, OR to be closer to grandkids. Dewey
remains active in bee education, writing for
newsletters, giving Bee Short Courses, as-
sisting in several Master beekeeper programs
and giving presentations to local, state and
regional bee clubs.
American Bee Journal

An example of the structure of a lesson within the UF/IFAS MBP. Each
lesson contains specific objectives, the lesson content, and learning ac-
tivities, which support the lesson content.
T
here are at least 22 unique Mas-
ter Beekeeper Programs (MBPs)
in the United States. It may seem
the most obvious choice to join the
MBP that is closest to you geographi-
cally. I, however, would argue that
you should choose the program that
is closest to you functionally. Can you
access it when and where you would
like? Does it offer the type of educa-
tional opportunities that meet your
beekeeping needs? It can be difficult to
sift through all the programs to tease
out how each differ, so I have done
some of the initial research for you.
In this article, I cover what an MBP
is and some basic similarities and dif-
ferences between the available MBPs.
Throughout (in the boxed text), I also
introduce you to the newly rebuilt, on-
line University of Florida/Institute of
Food and Agricultural Sciences (UF/
IFAS) MBP. (See the separate article,
“Master Beekeeper Programs,” by
Dewey Caron in this issue.)
The UF/IFAS MBP was established
in 2008, but a major overhaul of the
program began in earnest in 2017. The
result is a program of which we at the
UF/IFAS Honey Bee Research and
Extension Laboratory are incredibly
proud. It offers targeted, purposeful,
science-based education directly to
beekeepers wherever they are.
The similAriTies
Although there is no set of stan-
dards that unify the MBPs across the
country, each program does involve
some sort of testing. Most programs
September 2020
Targeted,
Purposeful,
Science-based:
The new online
UF/IFAS
Master Beekeeper
Program
by MARY BAMMER
use a combination of theoretical test-
ing and practical tests of beekeeping
skills. You need to demonstrate that
you can talk the talk and walk the
walk.
Participants in the UF/IFAS MBP
are assessed throughout the learn-
ing process (online assessments)
as well as at the end of each level
(in-hive practical assessments). This
format has been proven to improve
learning by allowing each partici-
pant to check their progress regu-
larly. Misconceptions can be cor-
rected along the way, rather than
being committed to memory and
then force-corrected later.
Most MBPs have some compo-
nent of “public service,” in which
beekeepers are required to share their
bee knowledge with others. There are
notable exceptions to this, including
the Eastern Apiculture Society’s Mas-
ter Beekeeper Certificate Program.
Regardless, the component of public
service is what most distinguishes
MBPs from other forms of beekeeper
education. MBPs certainly exist to
help beekeepers in their individual
operations, but they also work to sup-
port bees and the beekeeping indus-
try as a whole. By educating the gen-
eral public about bees, participants in
MBPs are building communities that
care for their pollinators.
Most MBPs are organized into
multiple levels. While there are a few
programs with only one level, most
One objective of the UF/IFAS
MBP is to provide research-based
education to the non-beekeeping
public and serve as mentors to new
beekeepers. Requirements for such
outreach begin in the second level
(Advanced), following a full train-
ing module on effective communi-
cation and education strategies.
are comprised of two to as many as
six levels. The title of each level, how-
ever, varies by program.
The UF/IFAS MBP consists of
four levels: Apprentice, Advanced,
Master, and Master Craftsman.
Finally, we see similarities in the
time it takes to complete MBPs. For
all programs with two or more lev-
els, participants are required to spend
considerable time in each level. Often,
for example, participants must spend
a full year at Level 1 before advanc-
ing to Level 2. The purpose here is to
ensure that participants are spending
time with their honey bees. MBPs that
incorporate both targeted education
and hands-on practice through many
seasons of beekeeping are structured
to set participants up for success in
their operations.
The differenCes
Likely the greatest difference in
MBPs lies in how participants in
each program learn. First, it is im-
portant to make clear that not all pro-
grams offer training. Some, rather, en-
1029

Submission examples from the UF/IFAS MBP Apprentice level in-hive practical as-
sessment. These assessments were recorded on smartphones and submitted within
the online Apprentice course.
No experience is needed to begin
the UF/IFAS MBP. Anyone with in-
ternet access and an interest in honey
bees can start learning online before
they install their first colony. How-
ever, before becoming an Apprentice
Beekeeper and in each subsequent
level, participants must actively
keep bees for at least one year. We
do not, however, want your experi-
ential learning to replace your theo-
retical learning. Rather, beekeepers
in our program actively participate
in online learning throughout their
years of beekeeping, allowing the
theoretical and the practical to over-
lap and build upon one another.
courage self-study through suggested
topics and recommended reading
lists. Other programs take this a step
further by suggesting or requiring
attendance at annual or semi-annual
educational events in a given state, by
requiring attendance at local bee club
meetings, and/or by offering online
review sessions or classes. As a result,
the educational component of most
MBPs is loosely structured.
The most structured of the avail-
able programs, which teach you what
you need to know and then test you
on that knowledge, are less common.
1030
One example is the Great Plains Mas-
ter Beekeeper Program, which clev-
erly delegates its educational compo-
nent by approving external training
opportunities to qualify for specific
educational requirements.
Structured education in MBPs of-
ten involves learning about not just
honey bee management, but also
honey bee biology, as well as the lat-
est research in best management prac-
tices. Understanding the biology (the
why) behind what bees are doing has
the power to turn a reactive beekeeper
into a proactive beekeeper. Rather than
reacting to problems in the hive, you
are able to stay a step ahead of such
issues, preventing many of them from
ever occurring.
Another area in which the various
MBPs differ is in the schedule and
frequency of education and testing
opportunities. Programs that utilize
in-person training are often restricted
to one or two training events each
year, although some programs, like
the New Mexico Master Beekeeper
Program, offer in-person training once
a week for a set number of weeks.
A few MBPs, including those in
Florida (UF/IFAS), New York (Cor-
nell University), and Montana (Uni-
versity of Montana), have moved to
One of the main drivers for the
overhaul of the UF/IFAS MBP was
a lab-wide shift in teaching phi-
losophy. In all of our educational
programs, we are putting in a great
deal of effort to teach with purpose.
We are not just testing for the sake
of testing or sharing information for
the fun of it. While historically our
MBP followed a loose educational
structure, based largely in self-
study, this new iteration has grown
into a well-rounded, direct-to-bee-
keeper learning experience with
specific learning goals throughout.
One of the specific learning objec-
tives is for participants to learn and
adopt research-based beekeeping
best management practices. This
means we do not want to test your
knowledge exclusively; we want
to teach you the latest information
that science and experience have to
offer in a way that allows you to in-
corporate that knowledge directly
into your beekeeping operation.
fully online education for participants.
The benefits of online learning have
been well-researched, often leading to
greater accessibility in terms of learner
schedule and location as well as for
individuals with learning disabilities.
Overall, in a distance learning envi-
ronment, the learner tends to have
more control over their education.
Prior to the online transition, the
UF/IFAS MBP included two in-per-
son review and testing days each
year. We found that year after year,
even with events held in centralized
locations, there were participants
who were unable to attend due to
scheduling conflicts and distance
issues. This was the second major
driver for transitioning to an online
program. The new program allows
you to access high-quality, purpose-
ful education at any time, from any-
where. We are the only fully online
MBP in the country that is complete-
ly self-paced with no start or end
dates. You pick the times, seasons,
and pace that work for you.
Since our online transition, we
have had nearly as many beekeep-
ers participate in the UF/IFAS MBP
as we had in the program’s first ten
years. We attribute this to the accessi-
bility of the online program, in which
beekeepers from not just Florida, but
also at least seven other U.S. states
and the Dominican Republic are cur-
rently participating. If you think the
American Bee Journal

An example of a UF/IFAS MBP learning activity at the end of a lesson about varroa
monitoring. Each learning activity is directly tied to a learning objective for the lesson.
UF/IFAS MBP might be a good fit
for you, we encourage you to join the
program at any time, from anywhere
in the world (even if you are on lock-
down during a pandemic) by going
to www.ufhoneybee.com.
misConCepTions AbouT The new online
uf/ifAs mAsTer beekeeper progrAm
Misconception #1: You cannot be-
come a good beekeeper from a computer.
I would simply amend this
to, “You cannot become a good
beekeeper only from a computer.”
Theoretical knowledge by itself does
not make one a good beekeeper.
Practical skills must also be
developed though experience.
Conversely, though, you cannot be
a top-notch beekeeper by experience
alone. An understanding of what
the bees are physically doing and
why that is important to them as an
organism is the difference between
September 2020
reactive and proactive beekeeping.
To add to this, experience cannot
be taught. Application of the
theoretical requires practice. This
is why we incorporate at least one
year of beekeeping into each level of
the program. In addition, practical
assessments of your beekeeping
skills are conducted throughout the
program. We teach you a skill and
the reason behind that skill, you take
that theory into your own apiary, you
apply the theory practically (through
practice), then prove you have
learned the skill through a practical
assessment. Such assessments
include lighting a smoker, inspecting
a colony, monitoring for varroa,
and harvesting honey. Practical
assessments can be recorded in your
apiary with your smartphone and
submitted online.
Misconception #2: This program is
only for Florida beekeepers.
The UF/IFAS MBP is developed
and managed by the Honey Bee
Laboratory at the University of
Florida. However, the educational
content was specifically designed
to be relevant to all beekeepers, re-
gardless of location. While Florida
is sometimes used as an example
during lessons, the theory behind
the example is applicable around
the world. When there are practical
differences between some manage-
ment activities between, say, Flori-
da, North Dakota, and Australia, we
discuss those differences.
Misconception #3: This program is
only for beginner or backyard beekeepers.
The Apprentice beekeeper course
is certainly appropriate for new bee-
keepers; however, by focusing on
the biology of the bee and the lat-
est best management practices from
the latest research, we truly feel that
everyone can learn from the online
content that we have produced.
To learn more, visit www.ufhoney
bee.com, where you will find full
program requirements, online course
registration, and a discussion of Master
Beekeeper Programs in episode three
of the UF/IFAS HBREL podcast “Two
Bees in a Podcast.”
Mary Bammer has
been a member of the
UF/IFAS Honey Bee
Research and Exten-
sion Laboratory since
2014. She currently
works remotely for
the lab in Milwaukee,
WI as an instructional designer. Mary devel-
ops and manages the lab’s online Extension
courses, including the UF/IFAS Master Bee-
keeper Program and the new BeeLearning
Short Courses.
1031
September 2020 1033
1034 American Bee Journal
 Automated
Remote Feeding:
For Extreme Weather
and Hungry Bees
by CORY MOMANY and
MADELEINE SCHWAB
inTroduCTion
Feeding bees during the late fall
or early spring is often performed to
ensure that the bees have adequate
stores for the winter or do not starve
in the spring (a serious problem in
Georgia). Obviously, leaving enough
honey for colonies to overwinter is
desirable, but many management
scenarios create situations where
shortages occur or supplemental feed-
ing is desirable, for example mating
boxes or nucleus hives. In situations
where winter stores are inadequate,
sugar water mixtures are often the
only alternative. Bees are very capa-
ble of moving considerable amounts
of sugar water, which can necessitate
frequent restocking of the feeders.
Some of our bees are kept year-
round 70 miles from home at Yonah
Mountain Vineyard, so feeder restock-
ing is a logistical challenge. To solve
this problem, we constructed a simple
automated feeding system using an
electric pump powered by solar elec-
tricity. With this system, sugar water
can be distributed to many hives (as
many as 24 in our case) and can run
continuously over a multi-week or
even multi-month period. This project
offers an affordable solution (<$160
excluding the solar panel) that can be
utilized by hobbyist and professional
beekeepers alike. However, there are
interesting challenges associated with
running an automated pump system
for extended periods of time — espe-
cially in weather extremes as we saw
this year. Here, we will present the
pump design and discuss the prob-
lems we encountered during its devel-
opment as well as our novel solutions.
September 2020
The AuTomATed feeding sysTem
The design of our pumping system
is based on diaphragm pumps, which
are used for moving food-grade mate-
rials like beer, and simple float valves
that restrict the flow and build up
back-pressure when a feeder is full.
The components of the pump system
and electronics are shown in Figure 1.
A wiring schematic of our system is
shown in Figure 2 and the parts list is
in Table 1. All the plumbing consists of
food-grade polyethylene tubing com-
monly used in reverse osmosis and
other potable water systems. Long
runs use ⅜” tubing to move the fluid
from the holding tank to the distribu-
tion lines. Short runs that are ¼” tubing
move the fluid from the distribution
lines to the individual feeders. Using
the less expensive ¼” lines minimizes
costs and does not affect feeder perfor-
mance. Connections use Guest-style
quick connects. Valves are strategically
placed to allow different components
of the plumbing to be shut off.
While the parts can be purchased
at the standard big box supply stores,
bulk purchases of connectors and
valves (Amazon or eBay) can save a
considerable amount of money. Any
large container can be used to hold
the sugar water feed source, but we
want to minimize access by insects
and may want to connect several con-
tainers together for a larger capacity.
The 5- or 7-gallon storage jugs de-
signed for emergency water storage
work great since they can be fully
sealed and are opaque, which mini-
mizes algae growth.
There must be a sensor that turns
off the pump when the stock con-
tainer is empty. Diaphragm pumps
are resilient, but it is still best practice
to not let them run dry and filter the
solution with a strainer. The pump
can be shut down by using an electric
float switch positioned at the bottom
of the jug that is directly interfaced
with a relay that controls the pump. A
more sophisticated electronic sensor,
placed in the strainer just before the
pump, measures the optical changes
between liquid and air. When liquid
is present, the sensor’s state is on and
a relay turns on the pump. A pressure
cutoff between the pump and the float
valves in the feeders controls overall
power to the pump and the liquid
sensor. The pump is turned off either
when there is no liquid to pump or
the pressure has built up because all
the feeders are full. No electricity is
drawn when the pressure switch is
activated.
After the pump, the liquid passes
through a very small expansion tank
designed for recreational vehicles.
People with well water will recognize
this component as the storage or ac-
cumulator tank. This tank is critical to
the overall performance of the pump
system. Because of the high viscos-
ity of the sugar solution, and the low
flow rate through the float valves at
the feeders, pressure builds up rap-
idly and the pump will go into rapid
on/off cycles if an expansion tank is
not used. The expansion tank buffers
the cycling and allows flow to contin-
ue slowly while the pump is off.
The flow issues associated with
moving a high-viscosity sugar solu-
tion are largely neutralized by this
design. The pressure switch, located
1035

Fig. 1 Components of the
pump and electrical systems.
Panel A shows the pump sys-
tem. Panel B shows the elec-
tronics components. Panel C
shows the feeder configured
with a float valve on an inner
cover. The ¼” tubing can
exit the notch of the inner
cover. Not shown are tubing
and valves that are useful in
practice. The bottom left inset
in panel C shows an inline air
filter that should be used to
allow air to enter the sugar
water tank. This prevents a
vacuum from building in the
tank, but also keeps bacteria
and ants from contaminating
the feed solution.
1036
after the tank, disconnects the electric-
ity at 60 psi and cuts back on at 40 psi.
The expansion tank is pressurized a
few PSI below the cut-on value, so it
is charged to 38 psi in this use.
After the distribution lines, which
include several 4-way and 3-way tees
as needed (⅜” lines), each feeder has
a valve outside the hive for individ-
ual shutoff and then the line extends
into a top feeder with a float valve. A
medium super surrounds the feeder.
A spacer with a cutout for the tubing
to exit is useful, but not necessary. For
winter use, we cover all the feeders
with reflective bubble-cell insulation
(R-6) to retain heat within the feeder.
The feeders we use are square boxes
with entrances for the bees in the mid-
dle via a cone that extends up from the
center of the inner cover (Figure 1C).
At the low point of the feeder, which
should be at the front if the hives are
properly tilted forward for rain drain-
off, we position a plastic float valve
that has a quick connection. A hole
is drilled through the feeder wall to
introduce the float valve. The choice
of float valve location defines the low-
est level of liquid that the bees access,
while still allowing the float valve to
open and close. One could use a di-
vision board/frame feeder inside the
hives with these float valves if that is
your preference. These are more dif-
ficult to monitor and clean but do well
in the winter.
Because our apiary site is remote,
electricity is generated by a 40W solar
panel. A solar charge controller charg-
es a 12V battery and delivers a con-
trolled output of 12V to the pump and
other electrical components. Gener-
ally, a second charged battery is used
while filling the feeders during initial
setup. The charge controller shuts off
power to the entire system before the
battery is drained. Many solar panel
kits equipped with a charge control-
ler should work, but the solar panel
needs to be assembled and secured to
resist winds.
The strainer, pump, expansion tank,
pressure sensor, and electronics are
mounted on a follower board to fit
into a standard deep box sitting above
a bottom board. For ease of mount-
ing and minimal backpressure, the
plumbing parts use ½” swivel connec-
tors. The battery takes up the remain-
ing space in the deep (elevated off the
bottom board or placed in a battery
box for more protection) and a stan-
dard telescoping cover is placed over
the deep. The feeding inlet and outlet
lines extend out the landing board. A
American Bee Journal
ratcheting strap is used to keep the
hive parts together through storms.
Using a sealed battery is a good idea
to reduce corrosion of the electronics.
The electrical circuit has two loops.
One loop goes in series from the posi-
tive pole of the battery to the pressure
switch, to a 12V-to-5V DC converter
that provides power to a CQRobot liq-
uid level sensor (which uses 5V DC),
and to the pump via a relay. The liquid
level sensor, which conveniently can
be introduced into the center of the
strainer situated just before the pump
by drilling a hole in the plastic cover
of the strainer, energizes the 5V relay.
When energized, the relay closes the
electrical circuit to the pump, turning
it on. When the pressure switch opens
due to back pressure from the float
valves on the feeders (e.g. the feeders
are full), power to the entire circuit is
turned off.
To minimize fermentation of the
sugar water due to yeast, especially Fig. 2 Wiring schematic. The 12V input from the solar controller can be replaced with a
when delivered over extended times, 120V AC to 12V DC transformer if AC power is available. The pushbutton bypasses the
one should sanitize the system com- sensor to prime the pump. Note that the wires from the pressure cutoff shown in Figure
pletely and process the sugar water 1, as they come with the unit, are colored black.
appropriately. To clean the system
parts before first use and between from the simple fact that table sugar Nordic Sugar.1 Crystals in the pump
feedings we use a product called One (L-sucrose) is maximally soluble at and valves along with frozen lines
Step. One Step (primarily sodium room temperature in this ratio (2 lb. will damage them or block the flow.
percarbonate with some citric acid sucrose + 1 lb. water or 2 kg + 1 kg). To address the crystallization, we
and salt) is used in home beer and Thus, this solution is as concentrated need to lower the concentration of L-
wine making to clean and sanitize as we can practically use when the sucrose slightly to work at below 32 F
equipment. One Step is advertised as weather is around 75 F, but it will (0 C). We acknowledge this is well be-
a no-rinse product since the residues crystallize out at temperatures below low an appropriate feeding tempera-
are edible: sodium carbonate (wash- room temperature, which is what we ture since bees cannot drink solutions
ing soda) and hydrogen peroxide. encounter in the fall, winter, and early that are colder than 40 F, but address-
Everything that contacts the sugar spring. A wonderful summary of the ing this covers that odd late spring
water should be treated with One properties of sugars is available from weather event. If we utilize 1.6:1 w/w
Step. Feeders can be sanitized in a
dishwasher. A quick rinse of boiled
water can flush out the sanitizing so-
lution. To prepare a sugar solution to
last for several weeks, add the sugar
to boiling water and bring the tem-
perature to 167 F (65 C) with stirring
for 10 minutes. That is adequate to
kill the osmophilic yeasts that com-
monly grow in the concentrated sug-
ar solutions. If the sugar solution is
overheated and turns brown, throw
it away. Unfortunately, the bees will
introduce yeasts while they feed, so
ultimately the solutions in the feeder
can ferment.

Cold weATher feeding ConsiderATions

And some sCienCe
Sugar water solutions used in
beekeeping are prepared following
weight to weight ratios. Sugar wa-
ter for the winter is usually 2 parts
sucrose and 1 part water by weight.
The choice of the 2:1 ratio comes In the process of winterizing, with plumbing showing and feeders on hive tops

September 2020 1037

Table 1. Parts List and Cost the water freezing point of 32 F (0 C)
to 16.1 F (-8.78 C). Until we have sub-
Item Cost* freezing temperatures, we should not
Pump get crystals and the solution will not
freeze readily.
SHURFLO Swivel Nut Strainer-½” (255-325) $14.55 However, with this 1.6:1 ratio, there
IEIK Diaphragm Pump, 12VDC, 5A 116PSI $17.97 is a loss in antimicrobial properties
(water activity, aw) to deal with. A
SEAFLO Accumulator Tank (SFAT-075-125-01) $28.99
simple solution is to add L-fructose
AQUATEC Tank Shut Off Pressure Switch 60 psi; ⅜” (PSW360-00) $18.99 (crystalline, “corn” sugar), which is
SHURFLO Elbow Adapter Fitting (244-3366) [two used] $6.04 significantly more expensive than
table sugar, but can be purchased in
SHURFLO Straight Adapter ½” F-NPT Swivel (244-2866) [two used] $13.95 bulk at a reasonable price. Addition
Plastic Female ½” to ⅜” Tube Quick Connector [two used] $3 .36 of any amount of fructose will cause
additional freezing point depression
Sanitary air filter for brew keg $4.25 and decrease the likelihood of fermen-
Assorted ⅜” polyethylene tubing and Guest-style quick adapters tation by lowering the aw. Growth of
organisms, like yeasts, is dependent
on the aw. A low aw, below 0.7, is in-
Electronics hospitable to yeasts and bacteria and
DC Converter Regulator DC 12V Step-Down to DC 5V 1A, 5W $2.94 is achieved by bees when they invert
sucrose and concentrate the nectar
CQRobot liquid level sensor (CQRSENYW002) from cqrobot.com $12.99 to honey (along with lowering the
5V One Channel Relay Module Switch with OPTO Isolation, HiLetgo $5.79 pH and making hydrogen peroxide).
Honey bees add invertase to convert
4 Positions Dual Row 600V 25A Screw Terminal Strip Blocks w/ cover $1.12 the sucrose to fructose and glucose.
Momentary Push Button Switch (>6A) $1.00 Fully inverting sucrose doubles the
freezing point depression and low-
ers the aw further. The bees figured
Feeder this out long ago. However, honey
Plastic Inside Hive Top Feeder from Glory Bee (Item# 16349) $15.79 bees find sucrose (a binomial sugar
or disaccharide) significantly more
Float ball valve ¼” quick release, purchase bulk from Ebay (Hong Kong or China) $2.00 palatable than the monomial sug-
ars (monosaccharides), fructose and
glucose, that are the primary sugars
Power source in cured honey. An optimal feeding
Thunderbolt 100W Solar Panel Kit from Harbor Freight, $189.99 solution winds up being 1.6:0.4:1 su-
contains the solar charge converter. An older 40W system will work. crose: fructose: water by weight. This
Duracell Dura12-8F2 (sealed, non-spillage) from Batteries Plus $39.99 solution will not freeze or crystallize
(verified in a home freezer, but add-
Alternative to above if you have AC power ing more fructose will crystallize out),
120V AC to 12 DC converter, 6A or greater $20.00 but has improved antimicrobial prop-
erties. Some beekeepers introduce
additives to their sugar water, like
Total w/ solar panel and battery (excluding feeders) $367.27 essential oils, that confer additional
antimicrobial properties to the sugar
Total w/ 120V AC to 12 DC converter (excluding feeders) $157.29
water and are phagostimulants. Be
forewarned that adding essential oils
*Unless specified, items were purchased from Amazon Prime. Prices are for single items, but can induce robbing when used for
they may come in packs.
winter feeding.
Another important factor to con-
ratio, the solution will not crystallize w/w sugar solution can be made by sider is that bees must dilute a 2:1
— even if the bees completely invert mixing 1.6 kg sugar + 1 kg of water. sugar solution, like honey, before
this to glucose and fructose. Using the formula, ∆TF = KF·m where consumption. To rescue starving bees
High concentrations of solutes, e.g. KF is the molal freezing point depres- in an emergency, one should use a 1:1
sugar, cause a drop in the freezing sion constant and m is the molality of sugar solution instead of 2:1. But we
point of solutions — known as “freez- the solute (moles per kilogram), we have observed that feeders containing
ing point depression,” a property can calculate how much the freezing a 1:1 solution have significant conden-
that we can take advantage of. This point goes down (approximately) for sation in colder temperatures. The
characteristic is defined by a simple our 1.6:1 w/w sugar water. KF for bees drown because they cannot hold
equation, but it works with molal so- water is 1.86 K kg/mol. 1.6 kg of su- onto the wet surfaces. High fructose
lutions, which is different from the crose is 4.68 m (MW of sucrose is 342 corn (HFC) syrup has many physico/
more commonly used term: molar. g/mol). So, the freezing point of the chemical properties that are desirable,
Molal works with moles of solute solution drops by 8.78 Kelvin, which but has complex sugars that are not
molecules (sugar) and 1 kg of solvent is the same degree change in the Cel- metabolized by honey bees and some-
(water) instead of a 1L volume. A 1.6:1 sius scale. This results in a shift from times is high in hydroxymethylfurfu-

1038 American Bee Journal

ral (HMF), a toxic compound derived
from monomial sugars, heat, and
acid. A lot of commercial beekeepers
use it successfully. However, one can
expect more digestive issues in the
winter with HFC than pure sucrose or
sucrose supplemented with fructose.
The sCienCe of pumping visCous solu-
Tions
The use of an expansion tank al-
lows the system to work well even
with viscous solutions. But fluid dy-
namics can help us understand how
to improve the system. Poiseuille’s
equation (Q ~ r4/(η × L) states that
flow (Q) of a solution is proportional
to the radius of the pipe to a 4th power
(r4) and is inversely proportional to
viscosity (η) and length of the pipe
(L). Based on this, there are several
considerations: 1) the diameter of the
tubing really matters — larger is bet-
ter, but does not need big leaps (⅜”
sheet_policies_news/Download_center/
Functional_properties_of_sugar_on_a_
technical_level/Functional_prop_on_
tech_level_uk.pdf
Cory Momany, president of
the Oglethorpe County Bee
Club, is a Georgia Journey-
man Beekeeper. While Dr.
Momany makes his living
teaching immunology and
physiology to pharmacy
students at the University of Georgia in Ath-
ens, his passion is teaching a Freshman Od-
yssey seminar on honey bees and pollinator
challenges.
Madeleine Schwab,
vice-president of the
Oglethorpe County Bee
Club and a Georgia
Certified Beekeeper, is a
Biomedical Engineering
student at the Univer-
sity of Georgia. She too
is passionate about her bees.

Browning Cut Stock

diameter is significantly better than
¼” diameter); 2) lower viscosity is
better, but this cannot be manipulated
greatly (2:1 is very viscous and worse, Boxes are Ponderosa Pine
viscosity increases dramatically as the 9-5/8 Com. Boxes $10.50 / Budget Boxes $9.00
temperature decreases); and 3) longer 7-5/8 Com. Boxes $8.20 / Budget Boxes $7.95
pipes result in higher back pressure or
lower flow rate. The take-home mes- 6-5/8 & 5-11/16 Com. Supers $7.50 / Budget $6.85
sage is to minimize the runs of small All #1 frames $.70
tubing and use ⅜” or larger for longer 1-3/4 Cleats $.22
runs. For a large, permanent scale,
larger pipes might be used, but fit-
1571 Hwy. 3 • Juliaetta, ID 83535
tings get more expensive as the diam- Phone 208.276.3494 FAX 3491
eter increases, and the pump would
need to be larger as well.

ConClusion
We believe that this pump feeding
system is a valid and effort-conserv-
ing method that can be utilized to
safely feed an entire apiary, while be-
ing respectful of the price point that
is accessible for hobbyist beekeepers.
Attention to several issues makes
it possible to leave the system unat-
tended for several weeks despite wide
temperature swings. As a final note,
a bee buddy asked, why not use a
deer stand and gravity feed the sugar
water to the feeders? We are not en-
thused about carrying a couple hun-
dred pounds of sugar water up a deer
stand. But more relevant, pressure
head can be calculated using the for-
mula, 2.31 feet of head = 1 PSI. Thus,
a 12-foot-high stand generates a little
more than 5 PSI, a meager pressure.
The bees will be waiting all winter.

referenCes
1. https://www.nordicsugar.com/filead-
min/Nordic_Sugar/Brochures_fact-

September 2020 1039

1040 American Bee Journal
September 2020 1041
 Mayter Scott Photography

1042 American Bee Journal

 Beeswax is foundation for
Nashville encaustic artist
by Justin Stokes

September 2020 1043

 Beeswax has a number of everyday
uses. From making furniture to the
control of bleeding during surgical
procedures, it’s plied by industries all
over the world. For Nashville-based
artist Randy L. Purcell, beeswax is the
foundation of his art.
“It’s literally what holds my art-
work together,” he says. “And getting
to know more about beeswax helped
make me a better artist.”
Randy’s creative calling came to
him later in life. At 37, he enrolled in
Middle Tennessee State University to
get an art degree. Initially focused on
design, his plan was to start a furni-
ture design company that specialized
in odd or whimsical pieces. It was
during his time on campus that he fell
in love with the world of fine art. His
exposure to this world of creative ex-
pression inspired him to want to know
more about how painters and sculp-
tors were able to find their own voice.
“While at MTSU,” he explains, “I
was exposed to so much more of the
art world than what I initially knew.
Experiencing the art-making process,
alongside learning about the works
of masters and contemporary artists,
was exciting and changed my direc-
“Mother Church of Country Music,” the Ryman Auditorium. Note the mirror-image let-
tering below the bottom windows. “The text in all my work is in reverse,” says Randy,
“because I’m transferring the ink from the magazine pages.”
1044
tion completely. I guess you could
say the whole art college experience
opened my eyes and helped me find
my passion.”
As part of a painting class project,
Randy got to play with the different
techniques of encaustic painting (or
hot wax painting), a process usually
involving beeswax mixed with damar
gum, a tree resin from India and east
Asia, and colored pigments. The term
“encaustic” means “to burn in,” so the
hot medium is put on a surface and
then fused with a torch or heat gun.
Randy wanted to do something a
little differently than the typical en-
caustic artist. He found that transfer-
ring the ink from magazines had a
unique effect, and specific magazines
offered more color and visual texture.
Transferring imagery is a common
technique used by encaustic artists,
but the images are rarely transferred
in color, and they are limited to the
size of the printed image. He liked the
idea of the transfer, but not the direct
image transfer. He wanted something
with more color and visual textures.
That’s what the magazine transfers of-
fered. So, he developed a way to create
a collage, or piece together the maga-
zine paper into a larger composition.
After the transfer, he fuses the ink into
the beeswax with a heat gun. He eluci-
dates the evolution in his work thusly:
“What I noticed over time is that bees-
wax that lacked the damar resin and
wasn’t super-filtered made for a bet-
ter transfer. I found this out by trying
to save some money and buying my
beeswax directly from a beekeeper,
instead of from an art supply store.”
That beekeeper just so happened
to be Barry Richards. In addition to
being a fourth-generation beekeeper,
Richards was then the President of
the Tennessee Beekeepers Association
and a board member of the Nashville
Area Beekeepers Association. Rich-
ards provided a wealth of knowledge
for Randy, whose transfer process saw
major improvements with the use of
unfiltered wax. Why? “The traces of
honey and other impurities that keep
the wax tacky make a big difference,”
he explains.
Randy’s friendship with this bee-
keeper gave him two things he was
looking for as an artist: an intimate and
unique understanding of his medium,
and inspiration — in this case, to in-
clude bees as a subject in his artwork.
Using his own photos or drawings
as reference, Randy is able to create
a mosaic-style effect from high-end
magazines on beeswax-coated pan-
els. The individual segments of each
piece are composed of carefully se-
lected text, color, and imagery from
the magazines used. “The images I
paint often reflect my own life experi-
ences,” Randy shares. “And the frag-
ments of images or text transferred
onto the beeswax are meant to reflect
how information is relayed between
the eyes and the mind.” Each piece
is meant to show how everyone pro-
American Bee Journal
cesses information differently, and the regional art competition ArtFields
often features linework scratched into in South Carolina. “This painting in
the surface to underscore certain de- particular was kind of wild,” Randy
tails or non-native colors (e.g., added shares. “A buddy of mine and I were
blue pigments in a naturally yellow drinking on my deck, and we were
surface) to attract the attention of a talking about my next project. I want-
viewer from afar. ed a large piece that was more than
A major theme in Randy’s paintings just a painting of a subject. I wanted a
is the bees that make the beeswax he painting that told a story. We started
uses, and the iconography of bees. His talking about clowns, the stress they
fascination with bees led to research- must endure to entertain children, and
ing them so he can raise awareness that nothing helps a person kick back
of the importance of their contribu- like a snifter of bourbon.” Wanting to
tions to the world. His installation at show the archetype of a clown in a
Nashville’s Honeytree Meadery was a more personal moment, Randy made
nine-hexagon piece featuring a Viking “Clown Off the Clock” and submitted “Happy Viking” in process
standing in a field of flowers, looking it to ArtFields. While he didn’t win
up at a large bee, and drinking mead the competition, his eventual sale of dle Tennessee art community make
with a smile on his face. This was a the large painting made his involve- him a familiar face within many so-
show to reflect the personality of Ross ment worthwhile. He adds, “I have a cial circles. Randy is also part of Four
Welbon; the co-owner of Honeytree pool of subjects I want to paint, but Artist TN, a creative outfit that’s been
and a beekeeper friend who also sup- not to fit any agenda, just for my own showing work for several years, based
plied Randy with beeswax. curiosity. I feel my best work comes on their collective thoughts regarding
While Randy’s love for bees is ob- from my wondering how something specific subjects. He has a mural in the
vious, his subjects vary greatly. He would look done in my process. Same Donelson, on the side of Party Foul,
states, “The art is an extension of my for when I’m working with other ma- titled “In Concert.”
perception and my memory. Because terials. I like following my curiosity, In addition, Randy makes func-
I’m a happy person, many of the piec- or asking a question and playing with tional artwork, including a Metro
es show things that make me happy. materials until I find the answers.” Arts Nashville public installation bike
I’m not one to focus on things that I Regardless of the occasion, Randy’s rack “Bee Cycle,” and a custom-built
feel are negative.” Included in that is art is certainly not limited to a style beer display for the Mount Juliet Beer
a steady focus on architectural stud- or thought. His diverse interests and Co. He was also involved with Re-
ies of notable landmarks or historic strong relationships within the Mid- Tune Nashville, where he built seats
buildings, such as “Mother Church of
Country Music” The Ryman Audito-
rium, whose stained glass windows
have been recreated by Purcell a num-
ber of times.
Biology in general seems to be a
favorite topic of the artist. One of his
current pieces is being created for the
2020 Art of Science exhibit in Mem-
phis, which was postponed from its
planned exhibition date. The exhibi-
tion is the result of a partnership be-
tween Crosstown Arts Galleries, Le
Bonheur Children’s Hospital, and the
University of Tennessee Health Sci-
ence Center. The showcase pairs a vi-
sual artist with a researcher so that au-
diences can better understand science.
Randy says he can’t reveal what his
entry is, but stresses that it’ll be worth
the wait for those eager to know. “I
really like these types of exhibits be-
cause it does start with a question and
it’s up to me to research, experiment,
and play with materials until I feel I
have an answer worth presenting,” he
explains. “It’s so rewarding knowing
that my art might encourage someone
to learn about science.”
Randy is also drawn to concepts
that play with people’s perceptions
of certain ideas. His 2019 “Clown Off
The Clock” is a 16-panel painting for “Clown Off the Clock”

September 2020 1045


out of flood-damaged speaker boxes,
turned old drums into shelves, and
used parts of a violin to make a paint-
ing. He’s presently on the boards of a
regional art magazine, Number, Inc.,
and Turnip Green Creative Reuse.
He’s also a co-founder of the Nash-
ville Collage Collective, a member of
Arts and Business Council of Greater
Nashville, and an alumnus of their
entrepreneur program, Periscope.
At the time of this writing, Randy
was preparing for two art shows
which have now been postponed.
One is a retrospective of his work
and process at the Southern Ken-
tucky Performing Arts Center. That
show has been moved to a tentative
date in 2021. Just like the Art of Sci-
ence exhibit or the postponed Nash-
ville Centennial Arts Show (a show
held in Centennial Park honoring
the park’s pollinators), schedules
may change at a moment’s notice.
“Of course, my plans for 2020 had to
be retooled,” Randy says. “With the
derecho and tornadoes that have im-
pacted Nashville, a global pandemic,
1046
and the general state of where we
are, I’ve had to plan around a lot. I’m
taking the rest of the year one day at
a time because most of the venues
I’m scheduled to work with are fac-
ing unusual circumstances.”
However, far from crippling this
artist, the unusual circumstances
brought on by 2020 are triggering
creative possibilities. While thinking
about how he could share his art-
making during the pandemic, since
his class at Centennial Art Center had
been canceled, Randy came to a real-
ization. “I was sitting in my studio at
home, and I was thinking about the
number of people who’ve wanted to
learn about my process. I remember
that fascination that I had when I first
discovered what the beeswax could
do, and how I felt when I found my
voice as an artist. It’s a process that’s
all my own, but that doesn’t mean I
have to have all of the fun. I also be-
gan thinking about how bees them-
selves work. They work as a colony,
with each bee making up a part of
the hive.”
So, Randy surveyed a group of his
friends and followers all over the
United States and Canada, and put
together kits for what people would
need to replicate his process. Using
the popular video-conferencing soft-
ware Zoom, Randy has taught over
one hundred people through multiple
classes how to transfer ink onto bees-
wax. “Moving over to online projects
has provided me with the only con-
stant for me right now,” he says. “The
students I’ve been teaching were the
ones that helped me put together the
SKyPAC community art project. It’s
been a great experience for me. We’ve
come together to stay connected and
to learn something new, or some just
wanted to be a part of something
different. I’ve enjoyed meeting new
friends from all over the U.S. and in
Canada, and I feel like we have our
own colony now, working toward a
similar goal.”
Randy believes that the efforts of
his students will help with some of
his future endeavors. This has become
a great way for his followers to expe-
rience the joys and difficulties of his
process and be a part of a larger com-
munity. It’s also provided a means for
other artists to try their hand at Ran-
dy’s process, and for him to both learn
more and teach more about what he’s
doing. Randy appreciates this since he
does a fair amount of promoting other
artists. “Once people experience the
fun of encaustic transfer, they’ll see
a whole new world of art,” he says.
“I’m grateful that I’m able to share my
process with people who enjoy it, and
can come together at a time when ev-
eryone still feels so separated.”
Randy will be offering more online
classes throughout the year. For
further information about the art of
Randy L. Purcell, including details
on his process, info for upcoming or
rescheduled art projects, and how you
may purchase pieces of art, you can
visit randylpurcell.com or https://
www.instagram.com/randylpurcell/
American Bee Journal
BROADLEAF
PLANTAIN:
A source of
pollen for
honey bees
by AL AVITABILE
I
n his 1926 classic book entitled
“Honey Plants of North America,”
John H. Lovell describes the char-
acteristics of the Plantago ignata or
broadleaf plantain. Note that the spe-
cies named ignata has now been des-
ignated as major, hence Plantago major.
Lovell states that broadleaf plantain
flowers are entirely nectarless and are
visited by bees for their pollen only. In
all my years as a beekeeper, I had nev-
er witnessed honey bees working this
plantain’s flowers to obtain their pol-
len. But it turns out Lovell is correct.
This perennial weed is widespread
throughout North America. Its leaves
grow in a rosette close to the ground,
shading the area underneath, thus
preventing other plants from growing
within the area of its leaves. This gives
the plantain a permanent foothold,
particularly in highly-compacted soil.
The plantain’s flowers shoot up from
the center of the rosette of leaves in
spikes approximately 3-12 inches tall.
More than one online source states
Honey bee collecting pollen from the flowering stalk of broadleaf plantain
Photo by Sandy Greenhalgh
September 2020
that this plant is wind-pollinated, but
Lovell states otherwise. In 2019, while
visiting Dan and Sandy Greenhalgh,
beekeepers in Harwinton, Connecti-
cut, they told me that honey bees do
in fact collect pollen from the flowers
of broadleaf plantain. On one of my
trips to their property, I actually wit-
nessed this activity; then again this
year I observed a honey bee in the act
of collecting pollen from the flowers
of a broadleaf plantain.
Originally native to Europe and tem-
perate parts of Asia, the early settlers
likely brought broadleaf plantain seeds
to North America to grow the plant
as a source of food as well as for the
plant’s purported medicinal remedies,
which are widely recommended by
herbalists. It has a rather remarkable
history of medical uses, dating back to
the ancient Greeks and Romans. In his
play “Romeo and Juliet,” Shakespeare
references the plantain for its healing
qualities. Unfortunately, it was not
enough to wake the starcrossed lovers.
The edible leaf of the plantain
is considered to be nutritious and
have anti-inflammatory properties.
Note that these claims are not unani-
mously supported by scientific stud-
ies, but an online search results in a
wealth of information with regard
to its benefits. There are several Na-
tional Institutes of Health studies that
explore the worth of Plantago major’s
medicinal uses. The FDA’s position
is somewhat unclear. It is noted that
some people do not tolerate ingesting
plantain and/or may be allergic to it,
but many bear witness to the plant’s
effectiveness.
People also use a salve, tincture, or
poultice made from plantain leaves
to reduce the pain of a sting, includ-
ing those from honey bees. These can
be applied topically to also treat in-
sect bites, minor wounds or eczema.
There are numerous recipes online as
to how to make these salves, tinctures,
and poultices; you can even purchase
the plantain leaves online. But before
ingesting or applying any parts of this
plant to your body, first check with a
medical health care provider. And for
sure, if you think you are having an
allergic reaction to a bee sting, the use
of topical plantain as a remedy is not
recommended. Seek medical attention
immediately.
You might be surprised to learn
that there are more than 200 species
of plantain. In Connecticut, another
common plantain is Plantago lanceo-
lata, otherwise known as buckhorn
plantain. I have yet to witness hon-
ey bees collecting pollen from this
plantain. But again, I must note that
while looking up some information
in Jurgen Tautz’ book, “The Buzz
about Bees,” I stumbled on a photo
on page 60 of a honey bee collecting
1047

Buckhorn plantain in flower
Photo by Sebastian Vitarelli
pollen from what appears to be Plan-
tago lanceolata.
In a 2008 study conducted in Por-
tugal by Bernardo Sabugosa-Madeira
et al., we learn that honey bees do
collect pollen from plantain (Plan-
tago spp). The authors state that these
plants are considered to be primarily
wind-pollinated (anemophilous), and
that their pollen is of low nutritional
value to bees. However, the authors
speculate that when bees are observed
working the flowers of plantain, they
do so only when highly nutritious
sources of pollen are less available.
This may account for why I never see
bees collecting pollen from broadleaf
plantain in my area but why one can
witness them doing so in another part
of Connecticut.
Almost everybody has seen Plan-
tago major, as it is an invasive plant.
It was known among some Native
Americans as “white man’s foot-
print” because it was introduced into
1048
the North American ecosystem by the
early colonists. Because it is indeed a
weed, those with manicured lawns
certainly do not welcome it. But don’t
overlook the contribution it makes to
the bee world in providing pollen.
Pollen contains essential amino ac-
ids, fats, and minerals. It is modified
and stored in the honeycomb by the
bees as bee bread. This is ingested by
nurse bees to produce the substance
referred to as brood food, which is
synthesized in their mandibular and
hypopharyngeal glands. So whether
or not the broadleaf plantain’s pollen
is highly nutritious, don’t be too quick
to try and eliminate this tenacious
plant from your yard. In a pinch, it
just might provide the nutrition the
bees need, and perhaps you can use
the broadleaf to calm the itch of that
predicted bee sting.
And don’t overlook the gem that is
Lovell’s book “Honey Plants of North
America.” Lovell is published widely
on the topic of pollination; among his
other accomplishments, he along with
Professor D. A. Cockerell identified
32 species of bees in his home state of
Maine.
As an aside, in Part IV of Lovell’s
book, in the section labeled A Sur-
vey of Beekeeping in the United States,
Lovell notes that a veteran Connecti-
cut beekeeper (not me) reports that
Connecticut should not be ranked
more than third-rate when compared
to New York. However, we wish to
note that Connecticut has made many
important contributions to the field of
beekeeping. Among others, The Con-
necticut Beekeeper’s Association is
129 years old, and in the 1970s, two of
its members went their separate ways
and were responsible for the forma-
tion of both the Eastern and Backyard
Beekeeping Associations. And recent-
ly, in an article in American Bee Jour-
nal, Peter Borst writes, “Philip A. P.
Mason has diligently compiled a bib-
liography of all the books of bees pub-
lished in English in the United States
and Canada. His book is an excellent
resource for anyone interested in the
progress of apiculture in the Ameri-
cas. He tells us that Thaddeus Minor
of Woodbury, Connecticut wrote one
of the earliest, quite possibly the first,
original works on beekeeping in the
New World, which was published in
1804.” I think Thaddeus Minor would
be pleased to know that, to date, we
have many successful beekeepers in
Connecticut.
The author wishes to acknowledge
Peter Borst for his kind assistance in
preparing this article.
referenCes:
1. Lovell, John H. (1926). Honey Plants of
North America. A. I. Root Company in Me-
dina, Ohio.
2. Borst, Peter L. (2020). Coming to America
Part 2: The Slow Advance of Beekeeping,
1600-1800. American Bee Journal, 160 (5):
515-519.
3. Tautz, Jurgen. (2007). The Buzz about Bees:
Biology of a Superorganism. Springer Science
& Business Media.
4. Bernardo Sabugosa-Madeira, Helena Ri-
beiro, Mário Cunha & Ilda Abreu (2008).
The importance of plantain (Plantago
spp.) as a supplementary pollen source in
the diet of honey bees, Journal of Apicul-
tural Research, 47:1, 77-81, DOI:10.1080/00
218839.2008.11101427
Al Avitabile, professor
emeritus, became ac-
quainted with honey bees
in 1965 when a swarm
clustered in a forsythia
bush near his campus of-
fice. He continues to teach
beekeeping short cours-
es, lecturing and mentoring new beekeep-
ers. He is past president of The Connecticut
Beekeepers Association and co-author with
Diana Sammataro of The Beekeeper’s Hand-
book, Cornell press, 4th edition.
American Bee Journal
September 2020 1049
 E. Suhre Bees
Package Bees available April and May

Queens available April through October

For information, pricing or ordering

call Eric (530) 228-3197

1050 American Bee Journal


MarketPlace
FOR SALE
1000 hives 10-frame two-story on 4-way pallets,
new outfit & queens, excellent condition, available
in May in California. (530) 671-6188.
Singles and Doubles in 8 frame equip. 50 hive
minimum purchase. Call for quantity and pric-
ing Jon (208)412-1092 or Sheila (208)863-0855
www.tvbees.com
PACKAGED BEES AND 5-FRAME NUCS.
CALL (231) 735-1203.
Singles for sale, delivery possible on orders over
200. For pricing and availability call: 800-736-6205.
2000 10-frame hives, new queens, on 4-way pal-
lets, very good equipment in FL. Now or after al-
monds in CA. Limited numbers of 4 and 5-frame
deep nucs. Also available in FL starting in March.
Call NOW!! (262) 689-1000.
HONEY PRICE UPDATES. Call Honey Hot
Line. (763) 658-4193.
Parsons’ Gold Apiaries - The
Herbal Solution For keeping
Honeybees Healthy - Safe Around
Honeybees and Honey - 33 Treat-
ment syringe $20.00 Plus S/H $9.00.
Facebook - Parsons Gold Apiaries
Robert B. Parsons, 2092 Town-
ship Road 195, Forest, OH 45843.
419-235-7037.
For Sale – 3000 10-frame singles. 2015
queens, new equipment. Also, 5-frame
nucs available. Call Chris (941) 720-
6025.
Bobcat, Hummerbee and Superbee Trailers cus-
tom built. New S450 Bobcat’s, set up with masts
and fifth wheels complete. Fifth Wheels sold
separately. Used Bobcat’s bought, sold and trade-
ins welcome. Custom truck bodies and Custom
smoker boxes, all built by a beekeeper FOR bee-
keepers. www.tropictrailer.com - Eli Mendes
239-340-0484, eli@tropictrailer.com
CLASSIFIED ADVERTISING-Net price $1.00 per word per insertion. Initials, letters as in street address, counted as individual words. No advertisement accepted for less than 10
words. Payable cash in advance. Blind Classified 10% additional. (A blind ad is one in which responses are addressed to the ABJ and then forwarded to the advertiser.) Extreme care
always is exercised in establishing the reliability of all advertisers, but the publishers do not guarantee advertisements. Orders close the 20th of the second month preceding cover
date. Send typed copy to : Advertising Dept., American Bee Journal, 51 S. 2nd St., Hamilton, IL 62341 or FAX to 217-847-3660 or e-mail to: abjads@dadant.com.
September 2020
American Bee Journal
Packages, Nucs, Queens -
Russian/Italian, April, May & Be-
yond, Facebook - Parsons Gold
Apiaries, Business 419-235-7037,
(419) 273-3066. Forest, OH 45843
5 Frame nucs in NorthEast Oklahoma. Available
Late April through Fall. No minimums. Taking
orders now for Spring 2020. www.RoarkAcres.
com Michael Roark (918)578-9201 nucs@
roarkacres.com
New Beekeepers Forklift Trailers: 8000 lb. torflex
axle, 17.5/16 ply tires, electric brakes, tilt bed, ex-
panded metal treads. $6,500.00 For photos E-mail:
gcamfab@yahoo.com 269-685-1000 (cell/text).
Top quality cut comb honey. Comb in the jar,
and extracted star thistle, basswood, Florida or-
ange and melaleuca free pepper honey. 10 frame
singles and 5 frame nuc’s available for almonds.
Call Larry at 231-735-1203 or email debbie@
hilbertshoney.com
5-frame nucs for sale in
southeast Georgia - $115.00 each
Available April 2020. (912) 520-8464 or
sgnucsales@hotmail.com
Two story hives for sale in California, after al-
monds. (231) 735-1203.
400 Deep Supers w/Frames ($20) and 200 unas-
sembled boxes for sale ($5) North Dakota. Call
701-509-7623 -Chris for info.
Queen cells and live queens available Central FL.
Will ship at cost to buyer. Royalty Honey Bees
LLC (352) 385-5075. RoyaltyHoneyBees@
Gmail.com
5 Frame Nucs for sale. Wholesale and retail, call
for availability. Available year round in Florida.
Also available in Pennsylvania in the spring. W.
Fisher Bee Farm 800-736-6205. Ask for Aaron.
A & W Enterprises, Northern California Queen’s.
Now taking orders for Queens, competitive pric-
ing, Mated Italians and Carniolan Queens. Order
100 Queens or more and get special pricing. All
orders shipped next day UPS, pick-ups are wel-
come. Call for pricing Dave @ 208-861-8303. All
orders email to BeesAWenterprise@gmail.com
for confirmation.
200-300 1 1/2 story doubles, good equipment on
4-way pallets. Southern California 714-746-3967.
4000 colony, complete turn key operation
in western North Dakota. Trucks, bobcats,
trailers and housing. 120 registered North
Dakota locations plus California almond
contracts in the Modesto area. Brent Woodworth
Halliday, ND. 701-290-0175 cell. brentw@
ndsupernet.com
For Sale: 3,000 8-Frame 5 11/16 Shallows, 1,000
8-frame Hive Bodies. Contact Dave Kaneaster at
208-539-6843 or Tony Kaneaster 208-358-0661.
We specialize in all metal fabri-
cation. We offer quality work &
material with the best competitive
pricing. We build custom Flatbeds,
Tilt Trailers, Fuel Tanks & any other
custom fabrication project you
have been dreaming about. Let us
help you with your next project! Call
Brice for quote at (772) 631-0309.
Singles for sale SE Texas. Call or
text 409-880-9914.
1000 singles on four-way pallets. 2020 queens,
treated, good condition, ready to pick up in
Northeast Georgia in Sept. Bob Binnie 706-782-
6722.
Wanted plate filter. Honey barrels - $8.00
(each). Foundation making equipment.
Raymond Cooper. (620) 365-5956 or (620) 228-
0154.
For Sale: 1992 Ford F700 Diesel. 100 gallon fuel
capacity, 5-speed manual transmission, 2-speed
overdrive rear end, factory Detroit locker, air
brakes, 21 foot bed, atlas loader and much more.
Excellent condition. (619) 302-0275.
Singles For Sale: September in North Dakota.
9 frames with feeder. 4 way pallets, good equip-
ment. All 2020 queens. Semi load lots. Leave
contact info at 936-755-2599.
Semi Load, two deep Colonies on pallets w/
honey locations, 1000 supers, extracting & mis-
cellaneous equipment. Retiring SW WA. 360-
263-2425.
For sale: 300 1 1/2 story hives, 200 wire-
bound queen excluders. 507-635-5745.
8,000 Singles for Sale starting January
8th, 2021. The Equipment and Queens
are less than a year old. Place your order
now to reserve your ship date. Nucs &
Singles are available for the remainder
of the year. Phone: (561) 261-2599.
HONEY FOR SALE
Excellent clover honey in drums and light beeswax
available. Mark Gilberts Apiaries, (608) 482-1988.
U.S. sweet clover, alfalfa, thistle mix, (9 drums of
black locust-limited supply), white honey, melter
honey, filtered, new drums, excellent honey- f.o.b.
several loads available. Produced by Baldwin
Apiaries, Darlington, WI (608) 776-3700.
Very nice looking & good tasting Nebraska
bottling honey. (402) 319-5125.
CLOVER – Buckwheat, Orange, Tupelo, and
Wildflower – pails or drums. PURE SWEET
HONEY FARM, 514 Commerce Parkway,
Verona, Wisconsin 53593. (608) 845-9601.
Clover, Basswood, Wildflower honey available in
pails and drums in WI. Great tasting! Light bees-
wax available. Call (262) 689-1000.
1051
Honey and beeswax for sale. Clover, Orange
Blossom, Wildflower. Many varietals available.
Smitty Bee Honey (712) 748-4292.
QUALITY HONEY, barrels, your buckets.
Hollenbeck, Kirksville, Missouri. (660) 665-2542
evenings.
55 Gallon Drums & Bulk Honey For Sale - NY/
PA Light Summer Honey & Fall Honey - FL Or-
ange Blossom & Saw Palmetto. Call The Bee-
keeper’s Daughter Plains, PA 386-383-4051 or
email bkdhoney@gmail.com
North Dakota white honey for sale after August 1st
2020. Call (701) 824-4585.
SELLING GALBERRY AND HIGHBUSH
HONEY @ $ 2.20 POUND. I HAVE 50
BARRELS. CONTACT: SERGIO S. (786)
277 0011.
200 clean Honey Drums $15.00 each, “HANNA”
Pfund Honey Color grader (Like New). Rick
Dominisse, Randolph, NE (402) 360-0952.
Oregon varietal honey for sale. Meadowfoam,
blackberry, radish, chicory, fireweed. Lebanon,
Or. 541-977-8848.
HONEY AND
BEESWAX WANTED
HONEY WANTED—Extracted or comb.
LEIGHTON’S HONEY, INC., 1203 Commerce
Ave. Haines City, Florida 33844. (863) 422-1773.
FAX (863) 421-2299
HONEY WANTED– all grades. Also, honey barrels
for sale. Contact Pure Sweet Honey Farm Inc., 514
Commerce Parkway, Verona, WI. (608) 845-9601.
HONEY PRICE UPDATES. Call Honey
Hot Line. (763) 658-4193.
ROYAL JELLY
BEST 100% PURE FRESH ROYAL JELLY.
$75.00 per kilo + shipping. HIGHEST PO-
TENCY. LOWEST PRICES guaranteed on large
orders. TOP QUALITY. Stakich, Inc. 248-642-
7023
0 2020. Double deep 10-frame and 8-frame hives.
POLLEN
QUALITY, CLEAN, LOW MOISTURE POL-
LEN $6.20/lb. Min. 10 lbs. + shipping. LOW-
EST PRICES guaranteed for large orders.
Stakich, Inc. Phone 248-642-7023
Bee Pollen – Any size order is welcome. A fam-
ily owned business in Nebraska. We specialize in
fast & friendly service. Free sample on request.
402-274-3725.
PROBIOTICS
Strong Microbials, Inc. Creator of the ORIGI-
NAL, most effective, most concentrated honeybee
probiotic on the market: SuperDFM-HoneyBee.
Contact us at: 1-844-MY-MICRO (696-4276) or
248-385-3248 www.strongmicrobials.com
POLLINATION
Almond Pollination 2021. Wintering yards with
full service maintenance, feeding and medication.
Self-service bee yards available. We have trucks,
forklifts and crew to place hives in orchard. You
are paid 50% on February 25th and 50% April
20th. Visit: www.almondbeepollination.com
for more details. California Almond
Pollination Service, Inc. (209) 202-8915 E Mail:
steve@almondbee.buzz
Don’t Get Stung By Your Transportation Needs.
Call Debbie at Bee Smart Logistics 928-727-9885
Your Apiary Logistics Specialists
1052
I have locations along the central coast of CA,
enough to winter 4,000 colonies. You would ship
them to me in December and I can feed them and
move them into the almonds then ship back to you
after almonds. (559) 361-6893
“Building Relationships for a Better Future”
Looking for good beekeepers for Cali-
fornia Almond Pollination. Contact us at
info@pollinationconnection.com or call
877-970-BEES.
BEES AND QUEENS
Pacific Northwest mated queens. Orders of 50 or
more only. Availability May through July. Call for
pricing Jon (208)412-1092 or Sheila (208)863-
0855 www.tvbees.com
QUALITY QUEENS from HAWAII, available
year round. Call KARRUS QUEENS (808)
854-5308.
3 lb Packages Bees for sale, for pick up in
Wisconsin. Contact: Mark Gilberts Apiaries 608-
482-1988.
Doubles, singles, brood for sale
year round. FOB Jan-April, Oak-
dale, CA. April-Dec., Milton Freewa-
ter, OR. Queens less than 6 months,
great equipment. Ryan@sweetbee
honeyco.com (360) 907-0842. $5k min.
purchase.
WILD SURVIVOR BREEDER QUEENS
NW Feral Stock - Hardy - Hygienic
Mite Tolerant - Disease Resistant.
– OLYMPIC WILDERNESS APIARY
Isolated Yards – (360) 928-3125. www.
wildernessbees.com
HONEY-BEES-HIVES-SUPPLIES-SERVICES.
South and Central Texas source for Nucs
From Beekeeping Classes to Crop Pollination
210.289.0583 - www.TheBeePlace.com
2020 Early-bird pricing – School House Bees.
Italian & Russian Hybrid package bees & queens:
P/U – KY ship-Midwest. 5-frame nucs & single
hives P/U – KY. Pails of Spille’s honey all year.
www.schoolhousebees.com (859) 356-1350.
PACKAGE BEES AND QUEENS for sale Spring
Powell Apiaries, 4140 Co. Rd. KK , Orland, CA
95963. Phone (530) 865-3346. FAX (530) 865-
3043.
Northern QUEENS and 5-Frame Nucs produced
in Pennsylvania. Buzzin Acres bznacres@gmail.
com 717-376-6784.
DUNCAN APIARIES. Queens for sale. Ital-
ian/Carniolan Hybrids. Call for pricing.
951.355.4370 Southern Ca 92220.
JERRY FOSTER QUEENS quality Carniolan
and hybrid Italian queens at competitive prices.
NUCS and packages also. Jerry Foster Apiaries,
937 9th St., Colusa, CA 95932 Phone (530) 458-
4234.
Northern California Queens – Good Quality Bred
Italians. Call Jake: (530) 517-0359.
Spring-summer queens @ 20 in 100 quantity or-
ders. Postage paid and insured. Call Steve 239-
896-0777 or 7bees7@gmail.com
Zia Queen Bees, 15 years of Breeder selec-
tion using Longevity and now Mite Zero selec-
tion for Breeders. Queens 48$. 505-929-8080.
Longevibees@gmail.com ZiaQueenBees@
hotmail.com
NUCS
NEW! ZipNetBags.com! 36”x26”
double layered net bag w/36” zip-
per to transport NUC of bees.
281-556-6798, info@ZipNetBags.com
WANTED
Honey and Beeswax wanted. All colors and
varietals. Send samples or call Smitty Bee Honey
(712) 748-4292.
HELP WANTED
Full time position available in Oregon. Bee-
keeping experience and CDL required. Contact
Ryan@sweetbeehoneyco.com PO Box 558,
Milton Freewater, OR 97862 (360)907-0842.
Seasonal and full-time help needed at our migratory
bee operation. We are located in FL and WI. We do
pollination, queen rearing and honey production.
Some experience preferred, team environment,
wages dependent on experience, good opportunity
or advancement. Prior work history and references
required. Contact Gary at (262) 689-1000.
Olivarez Honey Bees/Big Island Queens is seek-
ing motivated beekeepers to join our Hawaii
team! Experience preferred. Self-motivator and
ability to work in a team environment a plus.
Positions are full time, salary based on experience.
Great Benefits Package. Prior work history and
references required. Advancement opportunities
available. Submit resume to info@ohbees.com
or Olivarez Honey Bees Inc/Big Island Queens,
P O Box 847 Orland Ca 95963, Fax: 530-865-
5570, Phone 530-865-0298
MISCELLANEOUS
The AMERICAN BEEKEEPING FEDERA-
TION has many benefits to offer its mem-
bers. Send for a membership packet of
information today! We also offer a free Beginning
Beekeeping Packet. Contact the AMERICAN
BEEKEEPING FEDERATION, 3525 Piedmont
Rd. NE, Bld. 5. Suite 300, Atlanta, GA 30305-
1509, Phone (404) 760-2875, Fax 404-240-0998, or
email info@abfnet.org.
PERIODICALS
L’ABEILLE DE FRANCE—The most impor-
tant of the monthly publications in France - for all
beekeepers, from the amateurs to the professional.
Each month: an article for beginners, reports from
specialists, a review of the latest information all
over the world. Ask for a sample Annual subscrip-
tion: 40$ US. ABEILLE DE FRANCE- 5, rue du
Copenhague-F 75008 PARIS.
THE AUSTRALASIAN BEEKEEPER—
Senior Beekeeping Journal of the South-
ern Hemisphere. Complete coverage of all
beekeeping topics in one of the world’s largest
beekeeping countries. Published by Pender
Beekeeping Supplies Pty. Ltd., “Bilga” 79
Naylor Road, Urila, N.S.W. 2620, Australia. An-
nual subscription paid in advance $160 AUD.
THE AUSTRALIAN BEE JOURNAL—
Caters to both amateur and commercial
apiarists. Subscription $120.00 Australian
currently for all overseas subscribers per annum.
Published monthly. Victorian Apiarists’
Association, Inc., P.O. Box 40, California Gully,Vic.
Australia 3556 Ph: 03 5446 1543, Email:
vaa@vicbeekeepers.com.au.
BEECRAFT The UK’s leading monthly beekeep-
ing magazine. View a digital copy and subscribe on
line at www.bee-craft.com.
DIE BIENE – ALLGEMEINE DEUTSCHE
IMKERZEITUNG (ADIZ) – IMKERFREUND
The Bee magazines with special publications in
bee science and management for the hobbyist as
well as for the sideliner and professional beekeeper.
Three regional titles but same content today for
Germany except partly Imkerfreund for Bavaria.
Monthly publications with 64 pages. Subscription
Euro 44.50 per year Deutscher Landwirtschafts-
verlag GmbH, Postfach 870324, 13162 Berlin, Tel.
+49(0)30/293974-87, Fax +49(0) 30/293974-59,
www.diebiene.de
American Bee Journal
HIVELIGHTS, National magazine of
the Canadian Honey Council. Published
quarterly. Free sample on request, write to
Canadian Honey Council, Suite 236, 234-5149
Country Hills Blvd. NW, Calgary AB T3A 5K8,
CANADA. Subscription information available at
WWWwww.honeycouncil.ca
HONEYBEE NEWS, The Journal of the New
South Wales Apiarists’ Association, Inc., Inter-
national Subscription AUS$50.00 (Airmail) Bank
Draft, Visa or MasterCard payable to NSW AA.
Published bi-monthly—For more information
contact: The Editor, PO Box 352, Leichhardt
NSW 2040 Australia. E-mail: honeybee@
accsoft.com.au
IBRA (the International Bee Research
Association) is a unique organization established
in 1949 for the advancement of bee science and
beekeeping. It publishes two magazines: JAR – the
Journal of Apiculture Research, for scientists, and
BW - Bee World, for beekeepers who want broaden
their horizons by learning about other beekeeping
traditions, other bees, other ideas. Members chose
which magazine(s) to include in their membership.
IBRA is a vital bridge between the local (hive)
and global concerns. IBRA is registered under UK
charity law (Office: 91 Brinsea Road, Congresbury,
Bristol, BS49 5JJ, UK) www.ibrabee.org.uk
IRISH BEEKEEPING—Read An Beachaire
(The Irish Beekeeper). Published monthly. Sub-
scription $50.00 per annum post free. Dermot
O’Flaherty, Journal Manager, Rosbeg, Westport,
Co. Mayo, Ireland
ATTENTION LIVESTOCK PRODUCERS—
Ranch Magazine is your monthly information
guide for Angora, Cashmere and meat goats, as
well as sheep and cattle. Comprehensive Breeder
Directory. 1-Yr $27, 2-Yrs $54. Foreign &
Canada add $36 per yr. postage. Subscribe today!
Box 2678-ABJ, San Angelo, TX 76902. Call for
free sample. (325) 655-4434
THE SCOTTISH BEEKEEPER—Monthly Maga-
zine of the Scottish Beekeeper’s Association. Inter-
national in appeal, Scottish in character. View back
numbers and Subscription rates at: http://scottish
beekeepers.org.uk
SOUTH AFRICAN BEE JOURNAL – The
official magazine of the South African Bee
South Florida
Industry Organization (SABIO). Published Bees-N-Honey
quarterly in English, with Afrikaans articles, on
the South African Honeybee sub-species of Cape
18299 Clearbrook Circle
Bees and African bees. For enquiries send to Boca Raton, FL 33498
info@sabio.org.za or refer www.sabio.org.za Queens and Nucs
ULADAG BEE JOURNAL - Publication of
Uludag Beekeeping Association, published
available for sale
quarterly in Turkish (with English titles
For information and pricing
and summaries of all articles) and Eng- please call, text or fax.
lish in all aspects of beekeeping; beekeep-
ing news, practical beekeeping, and research
Credit cards accepted.
articles, and considered a link between Turkish Phone: (561) 715-5715
beekeeping and the world. Gazcilar Cad. No. 9/2
16220 Bursa-TURKEY Fax:+90 224 224 3964 Fax: (561) 423-0304
http://www.uludagaricilik.org.tr

September 2020 1053


A.N. Bees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1012
A & O Forklift . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 940
Acorn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 948
American Bee Journal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1011
American Honey Producers . . . . . . . . . . . 1041
Barkman Honey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1004
BeeCulture.com . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 971
BeeInformed.org . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 951
Beekeepingins.com . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1055
Beeline Apiaries & Woodenware . . . . . . 1024
Beelite Wax Works . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1010
Bee Smart. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1011
BetaTec . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1033
Betterbee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 978
Blue Sky Bee Supply . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 952
Brand New Industries, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . 1046
Brown Honey Co. Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1004
Browning Cut Stock. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1039
Brumley Apiaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1050
Bucko Gloves. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1022
Butte Valley Apiaries. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1053
Buzz’s Bees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1023
CC Pollen Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1012
California Almond Pollination. . . . . . . . . . 992
Complete Bee. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1041
Contract Pros Mfg.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1012
Cook & Beals. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1011
Cowen Manufacturing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1049
Dadant & Sons, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 941
& Back Cover
Dakota Gunness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 969
Draper’s Super Bee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 989
EasyonHiveCovers.com. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1034
Ernst Seeds. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1049
Gardner's Apiaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 956
Globalpatties.com . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 979
Groteguth Queens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1041
1054
Advertising Index
Hardeman Apiaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1023
Hawaiian Queen Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1050
Heitkams Honey Bees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1049
Hilbert’s Honey Bees. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1002
Hive Alive . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 977
Hogg Halfcomb . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1004
Honey B Healthy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1018
Horace Bell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1011
JJ’s Honey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1004
Jarrett Apiaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1053
Kelley Beekeeping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 990
Koehnen, CF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1033
Kona Queen Hawaii. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 942
Lassen Queen Bee Company . . . . . . . . . . 1012
Lega . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1050
M & N Apiary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1002
Mackrill Honey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 947
Mann Lake Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 944, 980
Maxant Industries, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1050
Medi Balls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1004
Meyer, A.H. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 956
Miller Bee Supply . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1024
Mother Lode Products . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1040
Nod Apiary Products . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 972
Nucs & Singles Apiary, Inc . . . . . . . . . . . 1053
Old Sol Bees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1010
Olivarez Honey Bees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 963
OxaVap.com . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1041
Park-Burris Queens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 996
Pierco . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 970
Plastics Packaging Concepts . . . . . . . . . . 1004
Powell Apiaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1004
Queen Right Colonies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1039
R.M. Farms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 947
Resilience Apiary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1053
Roberts Bee Company . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1002
Rock Bridge Trees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1010
Ross Rounds. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1054
Rossman Apiaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1040
Sanders Honey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1004
Selby Apiaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1048
Shastina Millwork . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 992
Sherriff, B.J. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1039
Simpson’s Bee Supply . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1028
Southeast Bee Supply . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1032
South Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1053
South Georgia Apiaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1004
Spell Bee Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 956
Stan’s Pure Honey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1012
Stayer's . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1046
Strachan Apiaries Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1053
Strong Microbials. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1031
Suhre, Adam Enterprises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 955
Suhre, Dan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1053
Suhre, E. Bees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1050
Superior Bee. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 947
Swienty Beekeeping Equipment . . . . . . . 1050
Texas Insurance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1050
T.R.S. Industries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1022
Vidalia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1049
Vita Bee Health . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 964, 991
VP Queen Bees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1028
Weaver, R. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1004
Western Bee Supplies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 938
Wicwas. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1003
Wilbanks Apiaries, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1034
Wintersun. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1050
Wooten’s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1018
Z’s Bees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 955
American Bee Journal
March 2018 1055