A good example what can be done is in the documentary film: Greening the
desert.

See:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sohI6vnWZmk

Bernhard

Hi Serg-

We have been indirectly reminded that this discussion is only marginally
on topic, so at the risk of being moderated, I will respond to your
post.

> Who knows, perhaps without human sources of fire aspen parkland of
Canada will be more widespread and this may affect to the neighbor arid
areas.

Anyone living on the prairies for very long has seen their share of
grassfires. Regardless of what the writer of that wikipedia entry says,
grassfires rarely do anything more to mature aspen trees than singe the
bark. And when you are talking about aspen parkland, you are not talking
about the rolling grasslands of southern Alberta. The absence of trees
in these grasslands has nothing to do with the activities of the native
buffalo hunters. It has to do with their position in relation to the
mountains, and with the Pacific Chinook winds.

Regards-
   John M.

--- In warrebeekeeping@..., "Serg" <novrooz@...> wrote:
>
> John,
> I admit southern Alberta is a rare exception, but I'm not very sure in
it.
> Look what the Wikipedia writes:
>
> "For 10,000-20,000 years Native people used fire annually as a tool to
assist in hunting, transportation, safety, and probably
entertainment.[2] Evidence of ignition sources of fire in the tallgrass
prairie are overwhelmingly human as opposed to lightning.[3] Humans, and
grazing animals, were active participants in the process of prairie
formation and the establishment of the diversity of graminoid and forbs
species. Fire has the effect on prairies of removing trees, clearing
dead plant matter, and changing the availability of certain nutrients in
the soil from the ash produced".
> ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prairie )
>
> Who knows, perhaps without human sources of fire aspen parkland of
Canada will be more widespread and this may affect to the neighbor arid
areas.
>
> Regards,
> Serg.
>
> --- In warrebeekeeping@..., "moersch51" moersch51@
wrote:
> >
> > Hi Serg-
> >
> > > in most cases if you dig deeper in history it will turn out that
so
> > called "already-balanced natural ecosystem" had enough forests in
the
> > past and lost them because of human actions or any natural
>disasters
> > and this ecosystem could not recover forests because the seeds of
the
> > trees were also lost.
> >
> > Yes, and in southern Alberta that means going back about 65 million
> > years to the humid sub-tropical forest that lined the northern
reaches
> > of the inland Bearpaw sea. The petrified remnants of this forest and
its
> > large reptilian inhabitants can be found everywhere in the badlands.
At
> > that point the Rocky mountains were just being formed. The land rose
and
> > cooled off, and was slowly covered with hundreds of feet of fine
> > volcanic ash.
> >
> > Regards-
> > John M.
> > --- In warrebeekeeping@..., "Serg" <novrooz@> wrote:
> > >
> > > John,
> > > in most cases if you dig deeper in history it will turn out that
so
> > called "already-balanced natural ecosystem" had enough forests in
the
> > past and lost them because of human actions or any natural disasters
and
> > this ecosystem could not recover forests because the seeds of the
trees
> > were also lost. Forests grow slowly, and moderate amount of forests
> > among the grassland don't disturb the ecological balance while
plowing
> > does.
> > >
> > > Some of the aboriginals of the East European Plain - Finno-Ugric
> > people of Chuvash and Mari had a heathen tradition in the past - if
a
> > person chopped down 1 full-grown tree, then he had to plant 20 tree
> > seedlings and care for them for some period of time.
> > >
> > > If people of the Easter Island had such a tradition they would not
be
> > pitiful handful of the humans as they are now.
> > >
> > > I think it's natural for humans to plant a new trees instead of
> > consumed ones.
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In warrebeekeeping@..., "moersch51" moersch51@
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Planting trees in already-balanced natural ecosystems will not
solve
> > the
> > > > problem of not enough trees, no matter how much good we think
we're
> > > > doing. The problem is that millions of trees are eliminated
every
> > year
> > > > in order to plant cash crops, provide more hydro-electric power,
and
> > to
> > > > build unbelievably large homes for the affluent. There is no use
> > blaming
> > > > big business or governments of third world countries for this.
We
> > demand
> > > > and are willing to pay for the products of deforestation. We are
the
> > > > problem.
> > > >
> > > > Regards-
> > > > John M.
> > >
> >
>

Scot wrote: "On a natural system, bees will raise as many drones as they
want. In my
experience and the experience of many other natural type beekeepers, the
drones are an important part of the ecology of the beehive besides being
flying sperm banks."

Agreed. Here's Warré on drones:

"In my childhood, I never heard males or drones mentioned. My father, like
our neighbours, called them couveaux ('brooders'). I think that the basic
role of drones is to keep the brood warm while the bees go to the fields. I
see the proof of this in the following facts:

* Bees do not get rid of the drones when their virgin queen has been mated.
They do it only when the nectar flow has finished, i.e. when they no longer
need to forage.
* The drones only leave the hive other than for mating with the queen when
the air temperature is very warm and during the hottest period of the day,
i.e. when the brood does not need warming.
* I have always noticed that the most productive hives have lots of drones.
I am therefore not of the opinion that we should try to reduce the number of
drones. In any case, wax foundation does not suppress them. The bees find a
way of providing the queen with the number of drone cells she needs. They
build them in the corners of frames. If need be they enlarge worker cells to
make drone cells. And they do this right in the middle of a sheet of
foundation. Moreover, the queen sometimes lays worker eggs in drone cells."
__________________________________________

David Heaf            North-West Wales, UK
Warré & 'National' hives at 30 metres OMSL
Warré beekeeping English web portal:
http://warre.biobees.com/index.html
__________________________________________

If you don't mind me being pedantic....No, it's not a feature of the Warre
hive. This is something bees do naturally all on thier very own. It is the
general modern beekeeper's compulsion to thwart drone rearing, and takes
measure to eliminate/reduce drone rearing, while the bees fight the
beekeeper and try to find ways and places to raise more drones.

On a natural system, bees will raise as many drones as they want. In my
experience and the experience of many other natural type beekeepers, the
drones are an important part of the ecology of the beehive besides being
flying sperm banks. A litany of tasks could be speculated with evidence, but
that's a whole other lengthy discussion.

Scot McPherson
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 3:17 PM, uncollandy <uncollandy@...> wrote:

>
>
>
> Thanks for the replies.
>
> So it seems drones observed now might indicate a queen problem or, as Scott
> says, may simply be another occasional (and harmless) feature of Warre hives
> on natural comb, not usually seen in framed hives.
>
> Interesting!
>
>
>



--
Scot McPherson, CISSP, MCSA
McPherson Family Farms
Le Claire, IA, USA


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Thanks for the replies.

So it seems drones observed now might indicate a queen problem or, as Scott
says, may simply be another occasional (and harmless) feature of Warre hives on
natural comb, not usually seen in framed hives.

Interesting!

Well David, the thread now is only loosely has to do with beekeeping, I
think it was brought up in relation to placing beehives at these
conservation/reclaimation sites to aid in the restoration, then it spun off
into heavy metal contamination, and all the rest of the discussion of biomes
and biotopes, etc etc.


However...your comment about deserts and such. Yes if you can plant
xeroscaping trees (trees that need no more water than natural present), you
can change the albido of the area (albido being a measure of how much light
is reflected or absorbed or it's "whiteness"). However, the primary factor
in the creation of a desert is rainfall, which is primarily but not always
affected an area's proximity to mountain ranges and the surrounding weather
patterns. When an area finds itself in the predominent "rain shadow" of a
mountain or mountain range it doesn't get the same rainfall as the areas
surrounding the desert because the mountains literally block the rainclouds,
forcing them to move around the mountain range or dump their water on the
windward side of the mountains. This is why most mountain ranges have a
verdent side and an arid side.

Not all deserts are created this way, the saharan desert is quite spacious
compared to the rain shadows that surround it's edge, the rain shadows are
however there and it is speculated they had a large part to do with creating
the greater Sahara.

Just saying that if you aren't in a suitable terraforming location, there
isn't much you can do to help and probably will at best be frustrated or at
worst making a bigger problem.
That being said, am all about planting trees and eco restoration in general.
--
Scot McPherson, CISSP, MCSA
McPherson Family Farms
Le Claire, IA, USA


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Serg wrote: "...in most cases if you dig deeper in history it will turn out
that so called "already-balanced natural ecosystem" had enough forests in
the past and lost them because of human actions or any natural disasters and
this ecosystem could not recover forests because the seeds of the trees were
also lost."

Well, what all this has to do with Warré beekeeping I am still trying to
reconcile in my own mind. Perhaps there is not much beekeeping going on now,
at least amongst we northerners, although I was visiting one of my out
apiaries today and pleased to see a bee coming in with half full pollen
baskets, presumably from Ulex europaeus, as the loads were a dull orange.

(Reading your next message Serg, after writing this post, I realise that you
have been doing your homework, and therby lending more credence to my main
point below.)

My comment about relevance was not aimed at you, Serg. On the contrary, I
have waited to see if anyone would introduce the point that pre-agricultural
revolution man managed his habitat more or less intensively to suit the
hunter gatherer lifestyle. I do not know to what extent this happened
amongst North American indigenous peoples, but it seems plausible that if
wild herds need prarie, then helping prarie formation along a bit here and
there with fire would be within easy reach of people who could make fire.

Anyway, it is still going on here in Wales. In the summer farmers burn
hillsides covered with Ulex europaeus to try and improve their grazing. The
fires can be seen for many miles and I have seen smoke plumes from them at
least ten miles long. In burning the gorse, although it gives scope to
herbaceous plants and of course grasses, it also removes sheltered
microclimates which would allow trees to reestablish. A combination of
burning and intensive grazing by sheep helps keep our hillsides as bare as
they are. The plus side for the bees is that many are covered in Calunna
vulgaris which makes a strong tasting and much prized honey.

I was at a lecture once on Wales' landscapes and the speaker said if you
said the word 'scrub' to a Welsh farmer, he'd either strike you down or run
off screaming. Once scrub starts to establish itself -- and here Ulex
europaeus and Salix spp are front runners in the process, incidentally both
honey bee plants -- then it is very costly to get rid of in order to
reestablish the poor grazing that the scrub is 'trying' to replace.

I vaguely recall that even rainforests are managed hapitats but have no time
to look that up at the moment. The point is: pure 'natura naturans' (nature
naturing) is next to impossible to find. We are unavoidably participants.

Cernagor wrote: "We are prepared for desert here. During our life."

Oh dear! Well start planting trees for all you are worth. Forestry changes
the local albedo and causes other subtle climatic alterations which help to
promote rain. I think this was first noticed with experimental plantings on
the edge of the Sahara in Egypt.
__________________________________________

David Heaf            North-West Wales, UK
Warré & 'National' hives at 30 metres OMSL
Warré beekeeping English web portal:
http://warre.biobees.com/index.html
__________________________________________

Scot wrote: "Otherwise on a
natural system drones will often be raised through the year if the drone
cells happen to be placed where the cluster resides during winter at those
times when the bees decide to raise a little brood from time to time."

Thanks, Scot. I was not aware of this. Here, for a number of years, beeks
have been finding a surprisingly high proportion of hives with brood right
through the winter. Maybe it was not looked for in the past but has only
come to light with oxalic acid teatments that generally get done in December
or early January, when the hive is supposed to be broodless.
__________________________________________

David Heaf            North-West Wales, UK
Warré & 'National' hives at 30 metres OMSL
Warré beekeeping English web portal:
http://warre.biobees.com/index.html
__________________________________________

--- "Serg" <novrooz@...> wrote:
>
> heavy metals can be fixed by the earthworms. Humic acids prodiced by earthworm
fix heavy metals in the form inaccessible for plants.
>
> As for honey - ... It has to be particular control in every case, because it
may depend of the particular metal or particular species of flowers.
>

Well, this is kind of my point. Just planting any old bee plant and dropping
hives near a former toxic wasteland is a crap shoot. Species & biomes up top and
in the soil, rainfall, weathering.. pretty complex. Maybe you'll get lucky and
*not* end up eating or selling honey laced with Hg & Cd.

Beekeepers are traditionally mistrustful of scientists; given the recent
revelations about scientific fraud in the global-warming hoax, they've good
reason to be suspicious of boffins' funding and agendas.

But anybody can follow the Method: ask the Question: is honey from coal lands
toxic? Research & work up an hypothesis, and do a little experimentation
themselves. Share the results.

John,
I admit southern Alberta is a rare exception, but I'm not very sure in it.
Look what the Wikipedia writes:

"For 10,000-20,000 years Native people used fire annually as a tool to assist in
hunting, transportation, safety, and probably entertainment.[2] Evidence of
ignition sources of fire in the tallgrass prairie are overwhelmingly human as
opposed to lightning.[3] Humans, and grazing animals, were active participants
in the process of prairie formation and the establishment of the diversity of
graminoid and forbs species. Fire has the effect on prairies of removing trees,
clearing dead plant matter, and changing the availability of certain nutrients
in the soil from the ash produced".
( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prairie )

Who knows, perhaps without human sources of fire aspen parkland of Canada will
be more widespread and this may affect to the neighbor arid areas.

Regards,
Serg.

--- In warrebeekeeping@..., "moersch51" <moersch51@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Serg-
>
> > in most cases if you dig deeper in history it will turn out that so
> called "already-balanced natural ecosystem" had enough forests in the
> past and lost them because of human actions or any natural >disasters
> and this ecosystem could not recover forests because the seeds of the
> trees were also lost.
>
> Yes, and in southern Alberta that means going back about 65 million
> years to the humid sub-tropical forest that lined the northern reaches
> of the inland Bearpaw sea. The petrified remnants of this forest and its
> large reptilian inhabitants can be found everywhere in the badlands. At
> that point the Rocky mountains were just being formed. The land rose and
> cooled off, and was slowly covered with hundreds of feet of fine
> volcanic ash.
>
> Regards-
> John M.
> --- In warrebeekeeping@..., "Serg" <novrooz@> wrote:
> >
> > John,
> > in most cases if you dig deeper in history it will turn out that so
> called "already-balanced natural ecosystem" had enough forests in the
> past and lost them because of human actions or any natural disasters and
> this ecosystem could not recover forests because the seeds of the trees
> were also lost. Forests grow slowly, and moderate amount of forests
> among the grassland don't disturb the ecological balance while plowing
> does.
> >
> > Some of the aboriginals of the East European Plain - Finno-Ugric
> people of Chuvash and Mari had a heathen tradition in the past - if a
> person chopped down 1 full-grown tree, then he had to plant 20 tree
> seedlings and care for them for some period of time.
> >
> > If people of the Easter Island had such a tradition they would not be
> pitiful handful of the humans as they are now.
> >
> > I think it's natural for humans to plant a new trees instead of
> consumed ones.
> >
> >
> > --- In warrebeekeeping@..., "moersch51" moersch51@
> wrote:
> >
> > > Planting trees in already-balanced natural ecosystems will not solve
> the
> > > problem of not enough trees, no matter how much good we think we're
> > > doing. The problem is that millions of trees are eliminated every
> year
> > > in order to plant cash crops, provide more hydro-electric power, and
> to
> > > build unbelievably large homes for the affluent. There is no use
> blaming
> > > big business or governments of third world countries for this. We
> demand
> > > and are willing to pay for the products of deforestation. We are the
> > > problem.
> > >
> > > Regards-
> > > John M.
> >
>

I thought I wrote this earlier, but I don't seem to see it in the thread.

Drones when driven out by the bees does NOT mean they don't raise more. Many
hives when left to their own devices without using foundation meticulously
checked from drone comb, will keep drones around all year round. What
happens in foundation-frame hives is the center of the comb "usually" has
little to now drone comb, and the drone comb is more often around or near
the edges. In the fall the brood nest compresses and the drone cells are
outside the brooding range of the cluster and so no drones. Otherwise on a
natural system drones will often be raised through the year if the drone
cells happen to be placed where the cluster resides during winter at those
times when the bees decide to raise a little brood from time to time.


--
Scot McPherson, CISSP, MCSA
McPherson Family Farms
Le Claire, IA, USA


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi Serg-

> in most cases if you dig deeper in history it will turn out that so
called "already-balanced natural ecosystem" had enough forests in the
past and lost them because of human actions or any natural >disasters
and this ecosystem could not recover forests because the seeds of the
trees were also lost.

Yes, and in southern Alberta that means going back about 65 million
years to the humid sub-tropical forest that lined the northern reaches
of the inland Bearpaw sea. The petrified remnants of this forest and its
large reptilian inhabitants can be found everywhere in the badlands. At
that point the Rocky mountains were just being formed. The land rose and
cooled off, and was slowly covered with hundreds of feet of fine
volcanic ash.

Regards-
John M.
--- In warrebeekeeping@..., "Serg" <novrooz@...> wrote:
>
> John,
> in most cases if you dig deeper in history it will turn out that so
called "already-balanced natural ecosystem" had enough forests in the
past and lost them because of human actions or any natural disasters and
this ecosystem could not recover forests because the seeds of the trees
were also lost. Forests grow slowly, and moderate amount of forests
among the grassland don't disturb the ecological balance while plowing
does.
>
> Some of the aboriginals of the East European Plain - Finno-Ugric
people of Chuvash and Mari had a heathen tradition in the past - if a
person chopped down 1 full-grown tree, then he had to plant 20 tree
seedlings and care for them for some period of time.
>
> If people of the Easter Island had such a tradition they would not be
pitiful handful of the humans as they are now.
>
> I think it's natural for humans to plant a new trees instead of
consumed ones.
>
>
> --- In warrebeekeeping@..., "moersch51" moersch51@
wrote:
>
> > Planting trees in already-balanced natural ecosystems will not solve
the
> > problem of not enough trees, no matter how much good we think we're
> > doing. The problem is that millions of trees are eliminated every
year
> > in order to plant cash crops, provide more hydro-electric power, and
to
> > build unbelievably large homes for the affluent. There is no use
blaming
> > big business or governments of third world countries for this. We
demand
> > and are willing to pay for the products of deforestation. We are the
> > problem.
> >
> > Regards-
> > John M.
>

Good for you
The rain is abundance
We are prepared for desert here. During our life.

--- On Wed, 11/25/09, David Heaf <david@...> wrote:

From: David Heaf <david@...>
Subject: Re: [warrebeekeeping] Re: Out of Beekeeping Topic but...
To: warrebeekeeping@...
Date: Wednesday, November 25, 2009, 2:34 PM







 









       Johan wrote: "Also I'm sure I saw some maiden flights outside the hive

yesterday."



Yes, if you mean the flight of the young worker bees, I'm pretty sure it was

partly that which I was witnessing the other day in the sunny, calm spell in

this unseasonally mild but wet and windy weather we're having. Here it has

rained every day for 15 days.

____________ _________ _________ _________ ___



David Heaf            North-West Wales, UK

Warré & 'National' hives at 30 metres OMSL

Warré beekeeping English web portal:

http://warre. biobees.com/ index.html

____________ _________ _________ _________ ___

























[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

John,
in most cases if you dig deeper in history it will turn out that so called
"already-balanced natural ecosystem" had enough forests in the past and lost
them because of human actions or any natural disasters and this ecosystem could
not recover forests because the seeds of the trees were also lost. Forests grow
slowly, and moderate amount of forests among the grassland don't disturb the
ecological balance while plowing does.

Some of the aboriginals of the East European Plain - Finno-Ugric people of
Chuvash and Mari had a heathen tradition in the past - if a person chopped down
1 full-grown tree, then he had to plant 20 tree seedlings and care for them for
some period of time.

If people of the Easter Island had such a tradition they would not be pitiful
handful of the humans as they are now.

I think it's natural for humans to plant a new trees instead of consumed ones.


--- In warrebeekeeping@..., "moersch51" <moersch51@...> wrote:

> Planting trees in already-balanced natural ecosystems will not solve the
> problem of not enough trees, no matter how much good we think we're
> doing. The problem is that millions of trees are eliminated every year
> in order to plant cash crops, provide more hydro-electric power, and to
> build unbelievably large homes for the affluent. There is no use blaming
> big business or governments of third world countries for this. We demand
> and are willing to pay for the products of deforestation. We are the
> problem.
>
> Regards-
> John M.

Johan wrote: "Also I'm sure I saw some maiden flights outside the hive
yesterday."

Yes, if you mean the flight of the young worker bees, I'm pretty sure it was
partly that which I was witnessing the other day in the sunny, calm spell in
this unseasonally mild but wet and windy weather we're having. Here it has
rained every day for 15 days.
__________________________________________

David Heaf            North-West Wales, UK
Warré & 'National' hives at 30 metres OMSL
Warré beekeeping English web portal:
http://warre.biobees.com/index.html
__________________________________________

Bernhard,
heavy metals can be fixed by the earthworms. Humic acids prodiced by earthworm
fix heavy metals in the form inaccessible for plants.

As for honey - it is easy to make analysis of samples of any particular honey
for content of the heavy metals. It has to be particular control in every case,
because it may depend of the particular metal or particular species of flowers.



--- In warrebeekeeping@..., Bernhard Heuvel
<bernhard_downunder@...> wrote:
>
> pnwbeek wrote:
> >
> >
> > there's the problem of bioaccumulation of heavy metals by anything
> > planted on reclaimed lands.
> >
> >
>
>
> You can lower the problems of bioaccumulation of heavy metals by
> planting varieties of plants with their accompanying microbes, which fix
> the heavy metals, so the heavy metals get bound. Those microbes
> encapsulate heavy metals making them less dangerous for other species.
>
> I have to go through my notes to find the particular species of plants
> and microbes, if you are interested.
>
> Here is a quick search at Plants for a Future:
> http://www.pfaf.org/database/search_use.php?K[]=Pollution
>
> So, it is a good idea to repair such land, although I agree, that food
> production should be avoided at least for a decade or so. I think it is
> important, too, that such land gets repaired. Bill Mollison says: "Stay
> out of the bush - it is already in order!"
>
>
> Bernhard
>

David Heaf wrote:
I even saw a drone go in one hive, which does not bode well for that particular
colony.
---
The drone could indicate brood in the hive. They do help to keep the brood warm.
Also I'm sure I saw some maiden flights outside the hive yesterday.

Johan
South Derbyshire

pnwbeek wrote:
>
>
> there's the problem of bioaccumulation of heavy metals by anything
> planted on reclaimed lands.
>
>


You can lower the problems of bioaccumulation of heavy metals by
planting varieties of plants with their accompanying microbes, which fix
the heavy metals, so the heavy metals get bound. Those microbes
encapsulate heavy metals making them less dangerous for other species.

I have to go through my notes to find the particular species of plants
and microbes, if you are interested.

Here is a quick search at Plants for a Future:
http://www.pfaf.org/database/search_use.php?K[]=Pollution

So, it is a good idea to repair such land, although I agree, that food
production should be avoided at least for a decade or so. I think it is
important, too, that such land gets repaired. Bill Mollison says: "Stay
out of the bush - it is already in order!"


Bernhard

--- In warrebeekeeping@..., "pnwbeek" <pnwbee@...> wrote:
>
> "good point that honey bees are basically a forest species, not a grasslands
one, there's the problem of bioaccumulation of heavy metals by anything planted
on reclaimed lands".

- Some races of the honey bee are grassland inhabitants. For instance, the
Ukrainian steppe bee (Apis mellifera sossimai Engel) adapted itself to steppe
and forest-steppe during natural evolution.

Hi-

> Habitats will change anyway without human intervention and we can only
act in accordance with our state of knowledge - it seems that the planet
needs more trees and the bees need more crops and >soil stabilisation
would seem to be a good goal for most locations

Planting trees in already-balanced natural ecosystems will not solve the
problem of not enough trees, no matter how much good we think we're
doing. The problem is that millions of trees are eliminated every year
in order to plant cash crops, provide more hydro-electric power, and to
build unbelievably large homes for the affluent. There is no use blaming
big business or governments of third world countries for this. We demand
and are willing to pay for the products of deforestation. We are the
problem.

Regards-
John M.


--- In warrebeekeeping@..., sally glendinning
<wirlybirdone@...> wrote:
>
> Hi !
>
> Habitats will change anyway without human intervention and we can only
act in accordance with our state of knowledge - it seems that the planet
needs more trees and the bees need more crops and soil stabilisation
would seem to be a good goal for most locations.
>
> Most of the UK has a beautiful landscape - but only minute portions of
it are almost untouched by human actions - some of the landscaped
gardens created centuries ago are only now coming to their full
potential - would we really think their creators were wrong by the
standards of their time - and we work hard to preserve these amazing
creations through the National Trust .  We are part of the picture too.
>
> BWWB
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

--- Scot Mc Pherson <scot.mcpherson@...> wrote:
>
> It would also speed eco recovery of those lands since the additional
> conistent pollination would increase good seed setting.
>
> > > In Appalachia, a Researcher Makes Honey From Coal
> > > Tammy Horn, aka the Bee Lady, has a plan to sweeten the region's
> > > economy by planting beehives on reclaimed mining land.

I'd be very leery about such plans. Aside from John M.'s good point that honey
bees are basically a forest species, not a grasslands one, there's the problem
of bioaccumulation of heavy metals by anything planted on reclaimed lands.

Mercury and cadmium are known contaminants in certain coals. Marrubium vulgare
(White Horehound), a good honey plant, has been shown to accumulate mercury;
potheads risk their health (even more) by smoking weed grown on cadmium-rich
soils.

It's not too hard to imagine that bee plant pollen and nectar might contain
these and other toxins. A simple assay of honey & wax from hives or wild nests
near coal lands would be illuminating.


ref Mercury bioaccumulation and phytotoxicity in two wild plant species of
Almadén area, Chemosphere , Volume 63, Issue 11, June 2006, Pages 1969-1973.

ref Mercury in Marijuana, by B. Z. Siegel, Lindley Garnier and S. M. Siegel,
1988 American Institute of Biological Sciences.

--- In warrebeekeeping@..., "uncollandy" <uncollandy@...> wrote:
> David Heaf wrote:
>  "I even saw a drone go in one hive, which does not bode well for that
particular colony."
>
> Revealing my extreme ignorance here, but maybe to help other 'new-bees'
following the forum - why is that such a bad sign, specifically?
> ...
> Presumably the drone in question entered its own hive - so this implies that:
1) the hive has either not efficiently culled its summer drones or 2) has been
actively incubating 'new season' drones for some weeks now, am I right?

These sound reasonable, but there may be more subtle things at work.

One bit of useful lore that has been overlooked was pointed out by Howatson long
ago, and possibly earlier in the observances of Huber.

"…for if a hive is deprived of its queen, no [autumn] massacre of the males
takes place… The drones are also suffered to exist in hives that possess fertile
workers, but no proper queen; and, what is remarkable, they are likewise spared
in hives that have a queen whose impregnation has been retarded. Here, then, we
perceive a counter instinct opposed to that which would have impelled them to
the usual massacre."
       - T. M. Howatson, The Apiarian's Manual, 1827, pp.21-22

So it's likely that non-absence of drones in autumn suggests that the colony is
in peril, in that the queen may be dead/absent, failing or infertile, or has
only a virgin queen waiting for the next spring.

I guess this makes sense because preservation of the drones would be a colony's
last-ditch effort to pass on the former queen's bloodline, even though drones
possess but 13 out of the queen's 23 chromosomes, being reared from unfertilized
eggs.

Hi !   
 
Habitats will change anyway without human intervention and we can only act in
accordance with our state of knowledge - it seems that the planet needs more
trees and the bees need more crops and soil stabilisation would seem to be a
good goal for most locations. 
 
Most of the UK has a beautiful landscape - but only minute portions of it are
almost untouched by human actions - some of the landscaped gardens created
centuries ago are only now coming to their full potential - would we really
think their creators were wrong by the standards of their time - and we work
hard to preserve these amazing creations through the National Trust .  We are
part of the picture too. 
 
BWWB




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi ! I'm making an email swarm today ! 
 
It occured to me that most of the time non-intervention does indeed mean that
the bees learn how to defend themselves - but could it also be true that in some
instances intervention when the bees are under extreme attack actually wins them
time to learn, rather than their being wiped out and therefore that particular
hive will not have had the opportunity to be learning how to cope ? 
 
BWWB




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi Uli !  Thank you for your kind thoughts - you said
             
            " I hope things are getting better verrysoon! "  actually it's due
to get wetter verry soon !  we are almost underwater at 500' off a well drained
15 degree slope and with three sides of the farm having almost vertical drops ! 
Fields around Carmarthen were underwater with marooned sheep munching at the
tussocks they were stranded on;  like the bees - saltmarsh sheep tend to have to
fend for themselves so they are bred to the land - or so I've been told.  

All we can do here, is sit round the wood burner and play x-box games and look
through next years seed catalogues and work out what crops we are going to have
washed away next summer.  We are at risk of being flooded in - cos the bridge at
the end of the farm road topped out - and we are only about a fifth of the way
down the hill ! If that's how bad it is for the Cambrians - what must it be
like for the Cumbrians !

Wishing you all warm, dry surroundings and good company, WirlyBird.




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

David wrote: I hold that although they are largely innate, they are
potentially modifiable by the application of the thinking, feeling and willing
by anyone willing to reflect on their intuitions, motives and actions.

Thank goodness for teachers! Always looking for the best in people. Even those
teachers not employed in formal education.

Hi  All !

" And he recognised that the square shape was a compromise: "And the square is
the shape that best approaches that of a cylinder, an ideal shape because it
favours the distribution of the heat in the inside of the hive. But the
cylinder is a shape that is hardly
practicable. " (p. 40) "


Having seen a hiveless colony comb for the first time on this site and seen its
shape the same thing occured to me - all I could think of was

                                        .............bring back wooden barrels
.....................

BWWB




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi Katherine-

>It is such a rich
> biome! I find it so sad that so little of America's central prairie
> is left.

Ironically, it has been the military in Canada that has been responsible
for preserving much of our natural prairie and badlands. They have
reserved huge tracts of land for testing weapons and training.
No hunting, no farming, no trespassing. The occasional bomb going off or
the odd cruise missile flying overhead doesn't seem to have disturbed
the ecosystem. These, plus the provincial and national parks, have kept
much of the prairie wilderness intact. This wilderness does not support
honeybees, however. They are forest dwellers.

Take care-
John M.
--- In warrebeekeeping@..., Barry White <bkwhiteky@...>
wrote:
>
> I stand corrected, John, and heartily agree. I shouldn't have used
> the word "anywhere" with regard to planting trees. We lived in
> Chinook, Montana about 40 miles below the Canadian border for a
> couple years, and tree-lover that I am, I fell in love with the
> prairie. (I did relish the occasional cottonwood, though;o)
>
> Prairie can hardly be equated with desert in my mind, though
> geographically speaking, Chinook is "high desert." It is such a rich
> biome! I find it so sad that so little of America's central prairie
> is left. It used to extend several feet into the soil as a thick mat
> of interwoven roots of grasses, etc. Prairie like that takes a long
> time to establish, and a short time to destroy with plowing.
>
> Katherine
>

Candy wrote: "Can anyone tell me what happened here?"

Welcome to the group. Like, Scot, I can't tell much from that pile of
debris, even with viewing 'Original'.

What is the history of the colony? Was it populated with a swarm of 2 kg as
Warré recommends, or was it more like a cast? Your remark about rain could
be significant if you have had a worse than average season for weather, thus
foraging opportunities. What is the condition of the combs? Was there a deas
cluster with heads in cells at the top of combs empty of honey? If so, it
was most likely starvation. Is there evidence of robbing? -- a lot of small
comb fragments on the floor and ragged edges to empty cells with bits of
capping hanging off -- combs looking generally unkempt. It seems too early
for mouse mouse damage to have occurred. How many boxes did the colony fill
with comb? Did you heft or weigh the colony in September to check the stores
available for winter? Was it OK then? (A fairly precise, though moderately
laborious estimate can be made by the method shown at
http://www.dheaf.plus.com/warrebeekeeping/hefting.htm.) At what point did
the die-out occur?

Then you could examine combs for signs of disease. What do you see on them?
Empty but clean cells? [that's enough questions, Mod.]
__________________________________________

David Heaf            North-West Wales, UK
Warré & 'National' hives at 30 metres OMSL
Warré beekeeping English web portal:
http://warre.biobees.com/index.html
__________________________________________

The other option is that the bees don't destroy all drones, just most of
them. Perhaps you just never noticed them before or since it is winter they
are inside and not often observed. My bees still have a few drones as well,
and it's pretty normal for me to to see a few in each hive.

Scot McPherson

On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 2:29 PM, David Heaf <david@...> wrote:

>
>
> Andy wrote: "...but maybe to help other 'new-bees' following the forum -
> why
> is that such a bad sign, specifically?"
>
> I have never seen drones this late before. The massacre of the drones
> usually starts late July here or at least in August. Colonies with drones
> in
> September (possibly October) are probably replacing their queens (or
> keeping
> their options open?). But November?
>
> Andy: "Presumably the drone in question entered its own hive - so this
> implies that: 1) the hive has either not efficiently culled its summer
> drones or 2) has been actively incubating 'new season' drones for some
> weeks
> now, am I right? "
>
> It might have culled its drones at the right time. It would not be
> producing
> 'new season drones' because they do not normally overwinter. Next year's
> drones will most likely start in April.
>
> The third option is that either the queen has turned drone layer or there's
> no queen and some workers have developed ovaries and are now laying eggs
> which will of course be unfertilised thus become drones. I had four frame
> hives with failed queens and patches of drone instead of worker brood in
> September last year.
>
> A fourth option is that it may just be anomalous. Or possibly the drone
> came
> from elsewhere and had not been expelled by the time I left the hive.
> __________________________________________
>
> David Heaf North-West Wales, UK
> Warré & 'National' hives at 30 metres OMSL
> Warré beekeeping English web portal:
> http://warre.biobees.com/index.html
> __________________________________________
>
>
>



--
Scot McPherson, CISSP, MCSA
McPherson Family Farms
Le Claire, IA, USA


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]