Bees for Development Journal Edition 106 - March 2013

Bees for Development

JOURNAL

ISSUE NO 106, MARCH 2013

PROFITABILITY, PRODUCTIVITY AND SUSTAINABILITY FOR AND AGAINST FOUNDATION PROBLEMS WITH PESTICIDES BEES FOR PROSPERITY WWW.BEESFORDEVELOPMENT.ORG

20 1993

YEARS 2013

COVER PHOTO © REINHARD FICHTL

Bees for Development Journal 106

Dear friends 2013 is Bees for Development’s 20th year. We believe that our sector is progressing, with beekeeping increasingly recognised as an excellent means for rural income generation.

Certainly the numbers of organisations running beekeeping projects has increased. Where projects seek to help existing beekeepers, many still cling to the belief that changing the technology used will automatically lead to increase in their productivity and profitability.

As an example of this approach read our interview with Mr Abebe on page 6. However life is not so simple. Therefore in the Journal this year, we will bring you new articles focussing on concepts that we believe to deserve greater consideration. To begin with on pages 10 and 11, we address the topic of productivity in beekeeping. This term is often used, but how should productivity be gauged, and how is it increased? We will also take a new look at equipment, starting opposite with a consideration of beeswax foundation – the thin layer of patterned beeswax used in the frames of frame hive beekeeping. Some beekeepers regard it as essential, while others will never use it in a lifetime of profitable beekeeping. This Journal is read by beekeepers in 130 countries around the world – practising beekeeping in different and wonderful ways. We aim for you to find something to interest you here, and please do write if you would like to contribute – we love to hear from you – and as we enter our 21st year will endeavour to provide the information that you need most.

A trader carries a live honey bee colony in his USAID bag on the road to Keren in the western Eritrean highlands

Errata BfDJ 105 page 13: the beautiful honeycomb pictured was actually harvested by Tilahun Gebey from one of his top-bar hives. Our apologies for this error.

In this issue

page

Practical beekeeping – Foundation.... 3 Forest conservers ........................... 6 Tree Bees Use.................................. 7 Bees for prosperity........................... 8 Seed freedom.................................. 9 Profitability, productivity and sustainability in beekeeping............ 10 Response to Warré experience in Africa......................................... 12 Response to Latin America’s path to sustainable beekeeping.................. 12 Smoking hives............................... 13 Pesticides kill bees in Ethiopia........ 14 Recent research............................. 15 Notice Board.................................. 15 News around the World ................. 16 Look and Learn Ahead................... 17 Bookshelf....................................... 18

Readers in developing countries may apply for a sponsored subscription. Apply online or use the form on page 20.

BfD Trust UK Registered Charity (1078803) works to assist beekeepers in developing countries.

Copyright You are welcome to translate and/or reproduce items appearing in BfDJ as part of our Information Service. Permission is given on the understanding that BfDJ and author(s) are acknowledged, BfD contact details are provided in full, and you send us a copy of the item or the website address where it is used.

SUPPORT: Bees for Development Trust gratefully acknowledge Marr Munning Trust, Panta Rhea Foundation, E H Thorne (Beehives) Ltd, Trade Advance Ltd, The Waterloo Foundation, and the many groups and individuals who support our work. Please encourage your friends and colleagues to help. See our website for how to become a Supporter.

PHOTO © BfD

ISSUE No 106 March 2013

BfD Journal Produced quarterly and sent to readers in over 130 countries Editor Nicola Bradbear PhD Co-ordinator Helen Jackson BSc

Bees for Development Post 1 Agincourt Street Monmouth

NP25 3DZ, UK Phone +44 (0)1600 714848 info@beesfordevelopment.org www.beesfordevelopment.org

Beeswax is white when it is first made by bees – see next page 2

Bees for Development Journal 106

PRACTICAL BEEKEEPING

FOUNDATION

Bees make wax Bees build comb from beeswax, which is produced by all species of honey bees, with each species having slightly different physical properties. In this article we are describing beeswax from Apis mellifera honey bees. Young worker bees secrete wax from abdominal wax glands and they can produce eight scales of wax every 12 hours. The size of the wax glands depends on the age of the worker bee: they are at their largest when the bee is 12-18 days old. Older worker bees can recover their ability to produce wax if the colony requires it.

Monica Barlow, Bees for Development, 1 Agincourt Street, Monmouth, NP25 3DZ, UK Keywords: acaricide, Apis mellifera, beeswax, cappings, fixed-comb hive, frame hive, honey, pollen, propolis, superorganism, top-bar hive Foundation is the term used for a thin sheet of beeswax embossed with the hexagonal pattern of comb. In frame hive beekeeping, a sheet of foundation is placed in each frame to encourage the bees to draw out cells in the size and orientation required by the beekeeper1.

Movable frame hives allow drawn comb to be re-used several times, for brood or honey storage. Beekeepers may use wire in foundation to increase the strength of the comb.

About one million wax scales are needed to make one kilogram of wax – the amount needed for a small nest. Bees chew the wax, mixing it with salivary secretions, and when the wax is the right consistency, they use it for comb construction or to seal honey cells.

Bees are stimulated to produce wax when there is a surplus of honey to be stored and a lack of honeycomb in which to store it. About eight kilograms of honey are consumed by bees to produce one kilogram of wax.

Comb construction The comb provides structure for the bees’ nest and has multiple functions. It is most obviously used for storage of honey and pollen, for egg laying and raising brood. It is also used as an essential element forming part of the bee colony as a superorganism, with important functions concerned with the colony’s communication, memory and immunity2.

Newly produced wax is clear white, but after manipulation by the bees it soon turns pale yellow. If the wax is used only for honey storage it will retain its light colour. The presence of pollen, propolis and other substances cause it to darken (see image below). Brood comb darkens with use because of build-up of the larval cocoons spun inside the cells during pupation.

Bees use their materials efficiently: the shape and dimensions of the cells in beeswax comb optimise the ratio of size to strength. The cells connecting the comb to the top of the nesting place can carry more than 1,300 times their weight. However if the temperature inside the nest exceeds 35°C, the wax will begin to soften and melt; the combs will lose strength and may collapse. Understanding the properties of beeswax comb brings understanding of the great effort that bees make to maintain nest temperature. If a hive is situated without shade, bees must expend more effort to keep the nest cool.

Comb function Propolis has antibacterial and antifungal properties, and is stored around the nest walls for use when necessary. It is used to line inside the brood nest cells to protect against disease.

Wax holds chemical memories for the bees: their family and nest Beeswax becomes coloured as it takes up pigments from pollen and honey stored within it

3

Bees for Development Journal 106

minimised by avoiding the use of synthetic chemicals in beekeeping.

In industrialised countries, the widespread use of chemicals in beekeeping and subsequent contamination of beeswax, makes the beeswax harvested from disease-free colonies in Africa and other regions more precious and valuable.

Pure beeswax has a good aroma, and when a wax block is broken, it shows a grainy surface. That is not the case if it has been adulterated with paraffin, fat or other oil. If pure beeswax is chewed, it does not stick to the teeth, and when rolled between fingers it softens but does not stick to the fingers. When paraffin wax is mixed with beeswax, the wax becomes more transparent and slightly greasy to the touch.

Beeswax is relatively expensive, and there has always been a tendency for people to try to falsify or dilute it with cheaper materials. Adulteration with paraffin wax depresses the melting point (64.5°C) and weakens the material. It follows that using adulterated wax for foundation will weaken the comb and cause problems for the bees and the beekeeper.

When bees are allowed to build their own comb, they choose the cell sizes they need and place propolis along the edges of the combs – one function for this is the role of combs in the colonies’ communication

Wax production

odour, and the history of each cell’s use. The cuticular wax covering bees’ bodies shares compounds with the comb wax, resulting in the unique colony-specific identity that allows guard bees to distinguish strangers. Foragers leave temporary chemical markers on the areas of comb where they dance, informing other bees about the food source they have found.

An important aspect of frame hive beekeeping is the reuse of empty combs after the extraction of honey, thus maximising honey production and minimising the production of wax. Therefore beekeeping using frame hives results in the harvesting of relatively little beeswax, and the production ratio of honey to beeswax production is approximately 75 : 1.

The bees also use comb vibrations to communicate between themselves. The rims of cells of cavity-nesting bees are slightly thickened, creating a network of thicker wax, mixed with propolis, resting on thin cell walls. This is easily displaced by vibrations, transmitting signals along rows of cells. The bees use this mechanism to communicate in the darkness of the nest. The comb must be kept under 35°C or the wax will deform rather than transmit.

Foragers vibrate the cell rims with their legs to alert other bees to their dancing to share information about the locations of nectar and pollen sources. Vibrations travel along the comb surface to free edges which can expand and contract: where the comb is fastened to a frame or wall this vibration is restricted.

Beekeeping using local-style fixed-comb hives or movable-comb (top-bar) hives results in greater yields of beeswax as the delicate honeycomb is broken to enable the extraction of honey and cannot be returned to the hive. The ratio of honey to beeswax production is about 10 : 1. For this reason, countries with fixed-comb beekeeping and honey hunting produce significant amounts of beeswax, which can provide a valuable export crop. Wax rather than honey may be the most valuable product of beekeeping, although this value is not everywhere appreciated.

Beekeepers using frame hives require large quantities of beeswax for making foundation (see image below). Many beekeepers harvest, process and recycle their own beeswax, so this use is not evident in the trade statistics. In countries where frame hives are used, the major use of beeswax will be the beekeeping equipment sector manufacturing foundation. It is common practice for beekeepers to render the beeswax from their own bees into lumps of pure beeswax, and to exchange this for a smaller weight of ready-made sheets of foundation, made by commercial manufacturers of foundation.

Quality Beeswax is a very stable substance, resistant to natural oxidisation and insoluble in water. It is a complex material with a characteristic odour mainly derived from the bees themselves and honey, pollen or propolis. Wax is solid at room temperature and becomes brittle below 18°C. It is soft and pliable around 35-40°C, and melts at 64.5°C.

Cappings are the best source of beeswax, but scraps of brace A sheet of foundation inside a frame

Beeswax can be any shade of yellow, orange and red through to brown. Colour does not affect the quality of the wax, unless it is dark from over-heating, when its value is much reduced. The finest beeswax is considered to be from wax cappings (the wax seal with which bees cover ripe honeycombs) because it is pure and white. The use of bleach (sulphuric acid or hydrogen peroxide) is unnecessary and damaging to natural wax.

Contamination causes the main reduction in beeswax quality, primarily from residues of drugs used to control honey bee diseases.

Acaricides used to control mite predators are lipophilic and, because they are soluble in beeswax, they accumulate in it. Acaricide concentration in wax increases with the number of applications, but decreases very slowly after usage has stopped, with a half-life of five years3. Other chemicals, such as paradichlorobenzene that is still used in some countries to control wax moth, and wood preservatives (used to paint hives) may also accumulate in wax. This contamination of beeswax can be 4

Bees for Development Journal 106

or burr comb (bits of comb built by the bees as part of the nest structure), old honeycombs and old brood combs all yield a valuable beeswax harvest. The beekeeper with a just few hives can produce blocks of wax of excellent quality from these sources.

• Bees use their nest’s combs structure for communication – their scent, and their vibration – the use of foundation and frames must have effect upon this.

• The beeswax used to manufacture foundation is often from unknown sources and may be contaminated by chemicals.

• Bees may avoid using foundation preferring to build natural comb with their own wax. Every beekeeper knows that given some free space, bees will always build their own natural comb.

• Stored combs can harbour wax moth.

• Beeswax is a valuable product, obtaining higher incomes from its sale than honey in many countries.

• Beeswax as a product of beekeeping is easier to harvest and handle than is honey, which is a food.

• Frames and foundation may increase considerably the cost of beekeeping.

Whatever beeswax is to be used for, it has to be melted and filtered and turned to a solid wax block. It can be stored or transported without any problems and not eaten by wax moths. Expensive equipment is available to achieve beeswax rendering, but most beekeepers achieve perfect results without spending money on equipment.

Making foundation Foundation can be purchased from commercial suppliers or made by beekeepers using wax from their own apiaries. Molten wax is poured into a tray between two embossed moulds (lightly wetted with mild soapy water to enable easy removal). Alternatively thin, flat sheets of beeswax may be made in simple moulds and then rolled between embossed formers to create the hexagonal cell pattern. Presses can be made of metal, plaster of Paris4 or plastic. The sheets of embossed wax are then cut into the rectangular sizes needed for frame hive beekeeping. Wired foundation can be made by fastening wires into the frames, then heating these with a low electric current to melt them into the sheet of beeswax foundation and the frame.

References 1 BRADBEAR, N. (2009) Production and trade of beeswax. In: Bees and their role in forest livelihoods. FAO, Rome, Italy. Chapter 10.

2 TAUTZ, J. (2008) The buzz about bees, biology of a superorganism.

Springer, Berlin, Germany. Chapter 7 p 157 3 BOGDANOV, S. (2004) Beeswax, quality issues today. Bee World 85 (3): 46-50.

4 AHMAD,R. (1990) A low-cost foundation press. Bees for Development Journal 19: 9.

1 and 2 at www.beesfordevelopment.org/catalog 4 at www.beesfordevelopment.org/portal

The cell size required in foundation differs with species and race of bee. Most frame hives have been designed for European Apis mellifera and most foundation is made for this size of worker cell, usually 5.4 mm. Smaller cell sizes, for example 4.7 mm, are available in some countries. Larger drone cell size is also sold, primarily for Varroa control by means of removing drone brood (which is preferred for Varroa reproduction) from the colony.

Bees ‘draw out’ their combs from the foundation base. Here the comb has been used to store honey.

Reasons for using foundation • In frame hive beekeeping, foundation encourages the bees to build comb in the frames that are of the size and orientation required by the beekeeper.

• Foundation enables bees to draw out comb more quickly, reducing the effort and resources spent in wax and comb production, allowing more time and space for honey production.

• Cells of standard worker size are encouraged, rather than drone comb. This will increase the number of worker bees in the colony and save resources used for rearing drones.

• The use of foundation and frames allows beekeepers to manipulate colonies, remove and replace combs, and move combs with or without bees, brood or stores, between hives.

• Foundation and frames allow beekeepers to do many interventions that are convenient for them, and provide an easy way to handle bees, for example to help beginners to get started with bees.

• Manufacture of foundation creates income for equipment suppliers.

Reasons against using foundation • Frames and foundation are unnecessary: bees can build parallel combs of pure beeswax without assistance.

• Build-up of the old cocoons from generations of pupating bees, can harbour disease, and make cell size smaller. Frames and combs must be therefore changed regularly.

• Bees naturally have some variation in the cell sizes built, and will choose to build a higher proportion of drone comb in a natural nest.

• The use of movable frames and foundation encourages beekeepers to manipulate colonies, unaware that they are destroying the nest scent and heat that are carefully managed by the bees.

5

Bees for Development Journal 106

FOREST CONSERVERS

JL What is kobo?

BA Forest beekeeping depends upon hanging hives high in trees and in the kobo system families own groups of trees in which they can place their hives. These trees cannot be cut down and no one else can use these trees for beekeeping. However, because this is a traditional system – not written down or recognised by government – it was hard for the community to fully maintain the system.

With the PFM forest protection agreement the kobo system and forest beekeeping is stronger than ever and their tradition has been recognised!

JL You still faced the challenge of increasing the monetary value of the honey. How did you do that?

BA We knew that beekeepers would have to sell their honey in bulk to attract the best buyers and we looked at different group structures for collective selling: associations, co-operatives, partnerships, private limited companies (plcs) and unions.

The farmers chose plcs knowing these would be totally free from government interference. Seven honey trading plcs were established, each with 30-50 members.

JL Who are the ‘best buyers’ that you mentioned?

BA We looked for national honey trading and processing companies and identified two that were interested in our honey: Beza Mar and Tutu Mar. They began buying honey from the seven plcs. Initially the buyers complained that the way the honey was handled and stored was poor so we trained the beekeepers to improve this. We supported them for six years in organisation, business and quality control systems. Now they do everything on their own. They even buy honey from outside their companies so they can offer more to the buyers who have found export markets.

JL How did the beekeepers sell their honey before and why is the new approach better?

BA Before the Project they sold honey to local traders who offered low prices and were not always reliable. Sometimes the beekeepers struggled to sell all their honey. In fact even now these seven plcs do not trade in all the honey from the area. There are many beekeepers outside the plcs and there are still many local traders too. Some of these traders’ businesses have grown in recent years and are buying large quantities of honey from individual beekeepers – up to 40 tonnes in one case – and they are also selling to Beza Mar. So local traders have benefitted. The farmers much prefer the company system (although they complain about the 30% tax on profit) because it is their business, they control everything, and earn dividends. *Non-Timber Forest Product and Participatory Forest Management

Keywords: Ethiopia, forest conservation, frame hive, honey trade, kobo, local-style hive, non-timber forest product, top-bar hive Mr Biniyam Abebe is a specialist for the NTFP-PFM* Project based in three zones in south-west Ethiopia, aiming to secure forest conservation through forest-based economic incentives. Mr Abebe was interviewed by Janet Lowore from BfD, during the ApiTrade Africa ApiExpo held in Addis Ababa in September 2012.

JL In some countries in Africa, beekeepers are accused of being ‘forest destroyers’ because they cause fires when they harvest honey. In your area it is the opposite and beekeepers are regarded as ‘forest conservers’: please explain more.

BA Beekeepers do not cause fires. The forests of south-west Ethiopia are moist forests, not dry, and more importantly the beekeepers are careful when they harvest honey. They use a little smoke and special herbs. This is not something the Project has taught them, they are using well-established local methods.

JL On your stand you are displaying different hive types: local-style, top-bar and frame hives. Which do you promote?

BA During the 1990s the forests in this region suffered from degradation as a result of smallholders clearing them for farming, and pressure from large-scale farm investment. The NTFP-PFM Project was introduced in 2003 with the aim of helping communities to start alternative non-timber income generating activities which could alleviate the pressure on the forest. Beekeeping was one of these activities and we introduced on-farm beekeeping with frame hives and top-bar hives.

JL Was it successful?

BA Only partly. During our mid-term review we learned that we had made a mistake: we overlooked the importance of forest beekeeping. We realised that to achieve forest conservation it would be better to increase the monetary value of the forest by marketing non-timber forest products. Therefore we turned our attention away from on-farm beekeeping and back to forest beekeeping. Forest beekeeping keeps people connected with the forest and this is essential if they are to conserve it. We could see that the honey quality from the local hives was just as good as from ‘modern’ frame hives so we scaled back from introducing ‘modern’ methods.

Instead we began to think how we could increase the value of the honey the beekeepers had always been producing from the forest.

JL Are these gazetted forest reserves?

BA No, the forests belong to the community. Some traditional ownership and management practices exist but these were not well recognised and outsiders did not respect the local rules. This meant that the forest was vulnerable to over-exploitation. The Project changed all this: at the heart of participatory forest management is the idea that local communities can, and will, protect forests that are important for their livelihoods, provided there is a legal mechanism by which they can protect the forest and enforce rules.

The Project demarcated 60,000 ha of forest designated for PFM and communities signed agreements with the government. These agreements gave the community the rights to use the forest, protect the forest and enforce rules.

JL Has this process reduced deforestation?

BA Yes, very much indeed: areas of forest which had been degraded are now regenerating and also grazing in the forest has stopped. One very important change has been the strengthening of the traditional kobo system.

Project statistics provided by Biniyam Abebe

1

Maximum amount of honey sold by one plc in one year

60 tonnes

Estimated total honey yield from the whole area

> 1,000 tonnes

Proportion of the honey harvest from bamboo and log hives

99%

Average number of colonies owned by one beekeeper

75 colonies1

Main bee forage in the area

Schefflera abyssinica

Income earned from honey sales/beekeeper/year

500 kg x 50 birr = 25,000 birr 25,000 birr = US$1,350; €1,000

Average production from one colony/year/local-style hive = 7 kg

We thank Mr Abebe for the interesting information he has shared with us.

6

Bees for Development Journal 106

TREES BEES USE Parkia Biglobosa Samuel Adelani Babarinde, Gabriel Olulakin Adesina, Mathew Oladejo Akanbi and Julius Ipadeola Olaifa Department of Agronomy, Ladoke Akintola University of Technology, PMB 4000, Ogbomoso, Nigeria Keywords: Africa, bee forage, honey production, Nigeria, pollen

and 20-40 cm long, with 8-30 pairs of alternate pinnate and 14-65 pairs of leaflets per pinnate. The bark is grey with a scaly texture in mature trees (up to 200 years old)

Apicultural value

Between 1100-1800 hours Parkia biglobosa is a good source of pollen for bees.

Flowering

December to May

Agricultural value

Flower

The soil beneath Parkia biglobosa is improved by leaf fall. An aqueous extract of its fruit pods is used as a crop spray to deter insect pests.

The inflorescence is a pendant raceme of red, pink or orange balls set at the end of a branch with a peduncle up to 40 cm long. Each ball is 5 cm in diameter and composed of about 1,700 flowers.

Names

Social-economic uses

English African locust bean, Monkey cutlass tree French Arbe a farine, Nerre Hausa (northern Nigeria) Dadawa Yoruba (south-west Nigeria) Igi iru, Igi igba

The fruits are eaten by humans and the seeds are fermented and used in cooking and medicine. The wood provides timber but is highly susceptible to fungi and xylophagous pests. Exudates can be used to produce good quality dyes.

Family

Which trees do your bees use?

Leguminoseae

Send information to the address on page 2

Origin

Parkia biglobosa is indigenous to Africa.

For other species that have featured in Trees Bees Use see www.beesfordevelopment.org/portal

Description

Parkia biglobosa is a tall deciduous tree growing 10-20 m high.

It has an umbrella shaped spreading crown, with drooping, but spineless dark green leaves. The leaves are alternate, bi-pinnate

PHOTOS © S A BABARINDE

Main photo: Parkia biglobosa; insets: Flowers of Parkia biglobosa

7

Bees for Development Journal 106

PHOTOS © MONICA BARLOW

BEES FOR PROSPERITY Monica Barlow, Bees for Development, 1 Agincourt Street, Monmouth NP25 3DZ, UK Keywords: Apis cerana, Coorg Province, endemism, Honey Festival, India, UNESCO World Heritage Site An International Honey Festival and Beekeeping Workshop was held in Madikeri (Coorg Province, Karnataka State, India) in November 2012. There were lectures, exhibitions, stalls, displays, and workshops demonstrating practical beekeeping techniques and bee products. Beekeepers, honey traders, farmers, scientists and teachers presented a comprehensive view of bees and beekeeping.

Coorg is famous for its honey, cardamom, coffee, oranges and pepper. The Province is in the Western Ghats, a prime hotspot for biodiversity, recognised by UNESCO as a World Heritage Site1.

Welcome to the Honey Festival!

Indigenous Apis cerana honey bees are widespread: most farmers keep a few colonies for crop pollination and to collect some honey, and some have scaled up their activities to bottle and sell their own honey. Others sell to local associations such as the Coorg Progressive Beekeepers Co-operative Society, who train beekeepers also buy their honey to bottle and sell. Branded Coorg honey is tested and certified to meet government quality standards2.

population and ruined many beekeeping businesses.

Enterprising beekeepers are now re-establishing Coorg as a major honey producing district. The recent Festival provided opportunities to discuss new ideas, sustainable beekeeping practices, value addition, and training for young people. Beekeeping was demonstrated to be an effective contribution to the livelihoods of small farmers, increasing crop yields through cross pollination, maintaining biodiversity, and providing useful income from honey5.

Until the 1990s Coorg was one of the largest honey co-operatives in India. The honey’s unique flavours were renowned: derived from nectars and pollens collected by the bees from the diverse indigenous flora. The forest cover provides excellent forage, while agricultural crops offer seasonal food sources. Farmers have good knowledge of the local flora worked by bees and identify 80 species as good bee plants, with 20 – mostly trees or epiphytic creepers – as important for honey production3.

Two of the most important commercial crops in the region, cardamom and coffee, are cultivated in the shade of forest trees and both depend on bees for optimum pollination and fruit set4.

However, honey bee populations are threatened by modern developments: a major problem is loss of tree cover, diversity and density. The forest is converted into monoculture plantations, and endemic shade trees are replaced by silver oak Grevillea robusta, fast growing but useless to bees. Other exotic plant species such as Lantana camara spread rapidly as weeds, reducing biodiversity.

Pesticides are used which can kill bees and taint their honey. Not least, two decades ago Thai sacbrood virus decimated the local bee

NOTES 1 MYERS, N. (2000) Biodiversity hotspots are biogeographic regions with significant levels of biodiversity under threat from humans.

UNESCO World Heritage Centre List http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1342/ 2 Visit to Coorg Progressive Beekeepers, Bhaga Mandala, November 2012 3 KUSHALAPPA,C. G. Native plants and sustainable honey production in Kodagu. Department of Forest Biology, College of Forestry, Ponnampet.

4 BELAVADI,V. V. Pollination of cardamom and coffee in the Western Ghats of Karnataka. Department of Entomology, University of Agricultural Sciences, Bangalore.

5 The Conference was supported by the Agricultural Scientists Forum of Kodagu, the Karnataka Department of Agriculture, and the Karnataka State Agricultural Produce Processing and Export Corporation.

The honey room at Meddappagowda

Honey for sale at this roadside shop 8

Bees for Development Journal 106

Apis cerana brood frame

Apiary in Meddappagowda

SEED FREEDOM

international philanthropies like the Gates Foundation, but an independent organisation with its own board and governance structure. “Our funding comes from a large number of international donors, but our base, approach and leadership are uniquely African,” says Agra.

Vandana Shiva is the Indian founder of Navdanya, which campaigns for biodiversity and against corporate control of food and seeds, says Africa is the battleground for two very different approaches to agriculture. One is the agroecological approach, based on the use of traditional seeds, diverse crops, trees and livestock, with smallholder farmers and the right to food at the core. The other is an industrial system based on monoculture, the use of fertilisers and genetically modified organisms (GMOs), where companies such as BASF, DOW, Dupont, Monsanto and Syngenta are dominant.

Ms Shiva’s fundamental argument against GMOs is that they represent a ‘petri dish’ view that fails to take into account the complexity of the real world. “The idea that you can have everything in one gene is too crude to handle a complex living system,” she argues. “You cannot run away from systems thinking: GMOs represent an attempt to find an escape route, to think of one gene and then to move it.”

She also rejects the notion that it is possible to isolate a gene to develop a salt or drought resistant variety crop. “If for example there are 1,500 climate resistant genes and we go to the gene bank to map drought resistant genes and make a bet on 100 varieties that have the highest potential. We still do not really know what is contributing to drought resistance. It is not a reliable way of finding drought resistant varieties. Diversity has to be the approach, there is no magic bullet. Diversity has to be our partner in adaptation and resilience.”

Vandana Shiva accuses these corporate giants of wanting to take over the world’s seed supply through genetic engineering and patents by writing the World Trade Organisation’s intellectual property rights treaty. She quotes a Monsanto representative as saying: “In writing this treaty, we were the patient, the diagnostician, the physician – all in one.” The USA will spend approximately US$1 (€0.8) billion this year on averting global hunger – but that includes supporting big farms. In 2009, the UK Department for International Development (DFID) spent about US$30 (€23) million. In the past few years, the Gates Foundation has invested more than US$2 (€1.6) billion in trying to help smallholder farmers in Africa and Asia out of poverty.

In Africa, the Foundation funds several research organisations testing GMOs, and also Alliance for a Green Revolution (Agra) in Kenya, which aims to double the income of 20 million small-scale farmers and halve food insecurity in 20 countries by 2020. Although GM crops are allowed to be grown in only three countries, this is likely to change in the next five years. The Foundation lobbies countries to accept GMO technology but is keen to see more investment in traditional breeding and staple crops such as cassava, millet and sorghum that have been largely ignored by big seed companies.

Ms Shiva explains that farmers in India have already developed drought tolerant varieties such as Inkiri, Kalakaya and Nalibakuri, and salt tolerant varieties such as Bhundi and Kalambank.

In her campaign for seed diversity, Ms Shiva is pushing for groups across the world to preserve seeds. She describes her movement as “open source seed” (a deliberate echo of open source software). For Ms Shiva, GMOs represent 20 years of failed promises and worse, leading to the emergence of super weeds and super pests. In India, Bt (Bacillus thuringiensis) cotton, sold under the name Bollguard, was supposed to control the bollworm pest, but according to a Seed Freedom report last year the bollworm has become resistant to Bt cotton. In addition new pests have emerged and farmers are using more pesticides.

Ms Shiva considers Agra to be making an assault on Africa’s seed sovereignty: “Agra by itself would have been insignificant, but because of the Gates Foundation ability to leverage funding, Agra can have a big impact,” she says, and that Agra ambassador Kofi Annan is trying to win funding from the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO).

Climate change, argues Ms Shiva, makes biodiversity even more crucial: “In a period of climate change, the world needs a biodiverse system. The system of seeds based on monoculture is wrong and inappropriate. The biodiverse system has produced more food, and biodiversity means that seeds must be in the hands of farmers.”

On its website, Agra insists it is not just an extension of big

Mark Tran, www.guardian.co.uk, 25 February 2013 9

Bees for Development Journal 106

PROFITABILITY, PRODUCTIVITY & SUSTAINABILITY IN BEEKEEPING

transport, feed and medicines to keep these bees producing at maximum levels. This high input cost type of beekeeping will be more profitable when practised on a larger scale.

Productivity Productivity is a measure of yield per unit of production and is much to do with scale and efficiency. Sometimes productivity and profitability coincide (the ideal system), but not always. For example, honey hunting can be quite profitable. Costs are low and comprise little more than some hours of hard (and dangerous!) work and when the honey is sold most of the income is profit – and in the case of stingless bees there can be a handsome profit. For example the Kani people of the Western Ghats, India sell stingless bee honey at twenty times the price of honey bee honey3. However, honey hunting is not easy to do at scale – it can be unreliable and in today’s environment may be considered an unproductive system.

Janet Lowore and Nicola Bradbear, Bees for Development, 1 Agincourt Street, Monmouth, NP25 3DZ, UK Keywords: Apis cerana, Apis mellifera, beekeeping system, extensive beekeeping, frame hive, honey hunting, miombo woodland, stingless bees, top-bar hive

Now consider a hobby beekeeper in the UK who typically uses the latest equipment and spends many hours checking, feeding and managing a few honey bee colonies. Each colony may be relatively productive: yields of 27 kg per colony can be achieved in a good year4. However many of these beekeepers will admit that their enterprise is being run at a financial loss5, if all input costs are considered.

In many agricultural systems there is trade-off between profitability, productivity and sustainability. For example, spending money on inorganic fertilisers boosts productivity but sometimes (unless the fertiliser is subsidised) high input costs erode profits. Irrigation systems have been widely developed to boost crop productivity but salinization of the soil may lead to total loss of production. For example, salinity levels in the Western San Joaquin Valley, California (USA), have reached a point where the long term productivity of the area is threatened 1. Productivity increases were achieved for some time, but in the long-term the irrigations systems were non-sustainable.

In beekeeping there are different ways to calculate productivity.

First let us dispel the myth that a hive is a unit of production. A hive is a container – of sorts – and produces nothing. In beekeeping – depending on the system – the actual units of production may be: • The land area: (hectares) of available bee forage; • The bees: either one honey bee colony, or an apiary, or a population of many honey bee colonies.

In this article we discuss how the considerations of profitability, productivity and sustainability apply to beekeeping. In subsequent articles we will use this approach to analyse different beekeeping systems.

Let us examine each in turn using some examples to explore meaning. Natural habitats such as mature miombo woodlands with a high density of large flowering trees, heather moors, chestnut forests or fields of sunflower are habitats that will produce an abundance of nectar. One hectare of these resources, well-stocked with a good number of colonies will be highly productive. It has been estimated for example that one hectare of mature chestnut trees can yield 500 kg of honey per year, whereas one hectare of mature lime trees can yield one tonne of honey per year6`.

Productivity can be increased by increasing the density of good nectar yielding plants.

Profitability Profitability is relatively easy to measure: it is the difference between cost and income. Costs in beekeeping may include hives, protective clothing, buckets, smokers, foundation, hire of an extractor – and in some systems – feed and medicines. Income is derived from the sale of bee products or pollination services. To give one example, a recent study carried out by SNV in Uganda2 compares a local Ugandan hive, costing UGX20,000 (US$8; €6) with a top-bar hive UGX100,000 (US$38; €28). Given that the selling price of honey per kilogram is the same regardless of hive type, the local style hive is more profitable with a yield of 10 kg of honey per annum. Even if the top-bar hive achieves a higher honey yield of 15 kg per annum the profit generated is still lower than with the cheaper hive. With a very low-cost hive, the beekeeper can increase profit by having more of them.

Honey bee colonies vary in their yield and many factors influence the volume of honey they make each year: genetics, age of the queen, race, environment, colony size and swarming tendency, are among the many variables. Some of these factors can be controlled by the beekeeper and, depending upon on their experience and skills, beekeepers vary in their interest and ability to manage bees to increase honey productivity. Management is a careful balancing act between profit and productivity. Feeding is expensive: sometimes it is worth it and sometimes not. Controlling (ie reducing) swarming may increase honey yield but there is a cost in terms of time spent checking and managing that may not always be worth it – especially in extensive systems where the swarms are assets for the beekeeper.

It is important to take a systems approach with beekeeping because rarely does a beekeeping system consist only of a bee hive. Labour is a cost and the wider honey bee population is an asset. Hives which are designed to involve management procedures by the beekeeper, such as top-bar hives and frame hives, will create higher labour costs than fixed-comb hives. Conversely the extensive forest beekeeping systems of Angola and Zambia have low input costs but it takes time for beekeepers to travel into the forest where hives are sited.

Considering an apiary (or an entire population of honey bee colonies) within a local area as the unit of production makes the analysis look different again. An extensive beekeeper does not count the yield per colony, but instead works with totals. A beekeeper in Manica Province in Mozambique places over 100 local-style hives in a forest and at the end of the year harvests from a proportion of the hives, achieving up to 500 kg of honey per year7. Is this a productive system? Productivity as a concept is about efficiency

Naturally healthy bees cost less to maintain than colonies prone to pests and diseases. In some parts of Asia the lower yielding – but better adapted – local honey bee Apis cerana may be more profitable than using the higher yielding, imported Apis mellifera because beekeepers using this bee species must spend more on 10

Bees for Development Journal 106

and scale: therefore it is more pertinent to ask: is this system efficient and scalable? The answer looks positive: it is efficient because the Mozambican beekeeper has achieved a high rate of return for time and money invested, and this is scalable. The system is easily expanded and replicated and can be undertaken on a large scale, allowing very good use of the available nectar resources.

Beekeeping system This refers to the bees, the technology, the management approach and the wider environment which a beekeeper manages, uses or interacts with, as they work to secure their yield of bee products.

Profitability is a measure of cost and income.

Productivity is a measure of yield per unit of production.

In beekeeping the unit of production could be a colony, a population of honey bees or a hectare of forage, Sustainability concerns the capacity for endurance and requires the reconciliation of environmental integrity, social equity and economic demands. It is often helpful to define sustainability within context. Therefore one can find definitions for sustainable development, sustainable forest management and sustainable energy. Here we are considering sustainable beekeeping systems.

Sustainability Any gain in productivity and/or profitability achieved to the detriment of sustainability is not progress. Where sustainability is compromised it is possible that the system as a whole may collapse after a period of time. Sustainability may be social, economic or ecological and there are a number of scenarios where beekeeping systems have been shown to be non-sustainable. For example in parts of Ethiopia frame hives have been introduced for use by rural beekeepers. However beekeepers found that they had no access to an extractor, they could not afford or find foundation to buy, and drawn comb was destroyed by wax moth. This frame hive system was unsustainable and the beekeepers reverted to other, more sustainable systems.

REFERENCES 1. LETEY, J. (2000). Soil salinity poses challenges for sustainable agriculture and wildlife. California Agriculture. March-April: pp 43-48.

2. DATHINE (2012). Appropriate hive technology: towards resolving the appropriate hive technology debate. SNV Uganda.

3. KUMAR,M.S.; RANJIT SINGH,A.J.A.; ALAGUMUTHU,G. (2012).

Traditional beekeeping of stingless bees by Kani tribes of Western Ghats, Tamil Nadu, India. Indian Journal of Traditional Knowledge.

Vol 11 (2).

4. British Beekeepers Association (2013) Honey. [online] Available at http://www.bbka.org.uk/learn/general_information/honey. [Accessed 14 February 2013].

5. BAKER,G. (2013) Personal communication; REES,J. (2013) Personal communication.

6. CRANE,E.; WALKER,P.; DAY,R. (1984). Directory of important world honey sources. IBRA, Cardiff, UK. 7. TOTAL TRANSFORMATION AGRIBUSINESS (PTY) LTD. (2006) Situation analysis of the beekeeping industry. [online] Available at http://www.apiservices.com/articles/us/beekeeping_regional_ situational-analysis.pdf. [Accessed 14 February 2013].

8. REUTERS (2008) Argentine beekeepers no longer in clover. [online] Available at http://www.reuters.com/article/2008/10/07/us-argentinahoney-idUSTRE49606B20081007 [Accessed 14 February 2013].

Ecological sustainability is compromised when the activities of beekeepers inadvertently spread diseases, pathogens and pests, or the activities of farmers and land users destroy forage. For example, in parts of Argentina beekeeping is no longer sustainable on the same scale as previously because millions of hectares of wild flower meadows have been converted to soy bean production with a huge loss of available nectar8. Also beekeeping systems in parts of the USA rely on continual replacement of honey bee stocks from Australia, a practice of questionable sustainability. Honey hunting in parts of Asia is non-sustainable when colonies are destroyed at a greater rate than natural colonies can reproduce.

Ideal beekeeping system An ideal beekeeping system for income generation in any context must be profitable, productive and sustainable. Beekeepers need to use their skills and experiences to make decisions on how to develop and improve systems within the constraints of their environment. In forthcoming editions of this Journal we will analyse a range of beekeeping systems by considering these three dimensions.

PHOTOS © FERNANDO VIDAL , REIGNITE ACTION FOR DEVELOPMENT

Low-cost hives are affordable and productive

11

Bees for Development Journal 106

RESPONSE TO

Stanley Mbobua writes

Is green wood the problem?

WARRÉ EXPERIENCE IN AFRICA

In my experience in Africa, I would look at the colour of the timber of the hive. If the colour is as green as the colour of the timber of the stand in the image of the Warré hive shown in BfDJ 105 – I know the reason for non-occupancy - because the stand colour is different from the hive box colour. If the timber that was used to make the frame hives in the article had not been properly seasoned then it will become mouldy. Bee colonies dislike mouldy hives!

David Heaf, Wales, UK writes I raised the question posed by Asade Elijah in BfDJ 105 in the Warré Yahoo eGroup. Below is the reply from Andrew Janiak. Andrew was astonished to learn that Asade Elijah already has 40 Warrés.

I have managed top-bar hive workshops in Kenya and Uganda. In both countries I ‘hot-perfumed’ (see Mould and hives and history below) mouldy frame hives and managed to raise the occupancy of these hives from as low as 0-10% to 60-80%, and so confirmed that mould was the primary cause of the unoccupied hives.

Andrew Janiak, Australia writes In my view the most likely suggestion for the relative lack of success with frame hives compared with Warré hives is that swarms like to hang in an empty cavity. This explains why, if a few frames of foundation are left in a hive, an incoming swarm will prefer to build wild comb in the space at one side. Would anyone like to comment?

When I collect swarms, I use a Langstroth sized box with just a few frames with starter strips and never had a failure. A friend wanted to collect a swarm and I assisted. He provided a Langstroth size box with frames and foundation. The swarm absconded from the box twice before finally, having been loaded into it for a third time, departed to “greener pastures”.

My take on it is simple: the bees measured the “box” as they could perceive it and each time saw only a single narrow passage between foundations, unsuitable for long term occupation. Give the bees an empty box with a small entrance and they will be happy.

In my opinion the exact dimensions are not critical but the perceived volume is1,2. You can push a colony into any location and they will try to do their best there. A swarm has a choice and can fly away to look for better options so they will abandon any less than suitable location. For example a colony with brood would tolerate it due to lack of options. And if they have the option of building comb on foundation, or in free space to their own specifications, they would go for their own specification. It seems that bees are not fond of foundation, while narrow starter strips are accepted.

1 SEELEY,T.D. (2010) Honeybee democracy. Princeton University Press, Princeton, USA. Available from our webstore www. beesfordevelopment.org

Hives supplied by the Government of Kenya for hive workshops do not have this problem. This is because a revolving fund is set aside for timber purchase which gives the timber four months to dry in timber drying sheds. We are not doing this now – mainly due to timber scarcity.

A long term solution could therefore be to develop a culture of timber seasoning. Timber boards must be piled with spacers in well-aerated timber sheds - to dry for a minimum of four months.

Mould and hives and history Log hives are hollowed out when the log is still green, then the hives are left to season. They are subsequently hot smoked with herbs then perfumed with beeswax and propolis. For over 40 years I have encouraged beekeepers to smoke all hive boxes with combs. This problem is known here and there is a local solution – an indigenous solution. Do not therefore blame the frame hive or bees. Blame mouldy hives and their artisans. Scientists can tell us about the bee repelling chemicals in mouldy timber.

Editor’s Note: The hive stand shown in the picture in BfDJ 105 had been treated with green environment-friendly stain and was not mouldy.

RESPONSE TO

LATIN AMERICA’S PATH TO SUSTAINABLE BEEKEEPING

SEELEY,T.D. (1985) Honeybee Ecology: a study of adaptation in social life. Princeton University Press, Princeton, USA. 2

A very useful economic comparison honey production from frame hives and from Warré hives, considering five hives over ten years is available at http://warre.biobees. com/guillaume_cost_benefit_analysis_2012.pdf Translated by David Heaf (with permission) from the 430-page manual on Warré beekeeping L’apiculture écologique de A à Z, by Jean-Marie Frèrès and Jean-Claude Guillaume.

David Heaf observes: Please bear in mind that the cost comparison is for the authors’ way of managing frame hives and their version of the Warré hive. Other beekeepers might do their frame and Warré beekeeping quite differently.

Perone hive – wood is charred!

Indigenous log hive beekeepers ‘roast’ their hives (from the inside) in a similar manner for water proofing. The firewood is collected from the trees bees use to collect nectar. The fire is covered with green herbs which prevent the timber from charring: smoke and flames are avoided and a moderate heat is maintained until the hive turns a yellow colour. Some smoke will repel bees (for example Cassia spp, Acocanthera spp).

If charring is widely adopted complications avoided by our ancestors will resurface: charcoal is sharp and will cut the bees.

I hope Mr Perone adopts roasting rather than charring (BfDJ 105) and then the beauty of the hive will also remain. I have similar experience in timber seasoning from Israel.

Stanley Mbobua, Bee-Honey Self-help Group, Nanyuki, Kenya 12

Bees for Development Journal 106

PHOTOS © REINHARD FICHTL

SMOKING HIVES IN ETHIOPIA Traditional beekeeping is entirely dependent on the occupation of baskets by wild swarms. Thus the beekeeping community in Ethiopia and elsewhere has developed various methods to make empty hives or baskets attractive to swarms.

First the basket is smeared inside with a layer of fresh cow dung which is considered to prevent diseases and provide better insulation. After drying, the hive will be smoked inside with selected herbs and shrubs. The smoking materials vary from region to region. Most commonly the bark of Ekebergia capensis, Olea capensis subsp welwitchii, Olea europaea subsp cuspidate and Otostegia integrifolia are used. Many beekeepers prefer to bait the hives inside with fresh leaves of Ocimum basilicum and in western parts of Ethiopia the hive will be baited with endemic Echnops longisetus.

After smoking, the baskets will be closed on both sides with woven straw discs. A small hole is made for the entrance so that a wild swarm can occupy the basket before it is hung high up in a tree.

Reinhard Fichtl, Zurich, Switzerland

BfD welcomes your comments and observations on all the points raised – contact details on page 2 The inside of the hive is smoked using selected herbs or shrubs

Hives are fastened high in trees

13

Bees for Development Journal 106

PESTICIDES KILL BEES IN ETHIOPIA

Janet Lowore, Bees for Development,1 Agincourt Street, Monmouth, NP25 3DZ, UK PHOTO © BfD

Keywords: Lathyrus sativa, Malathion, organophosphorus insecticide Farmers Tewebe Nigru and Muluken Anteneh live on a smallholding in the hills overlooking the expanse of the Andassa plain in northern Ethiopia. In addition to crops and cattle, like many Ethiopian farmers they are also beekeepers. Tewebe learnt beekeeping from his father and has kept bees all his life and says: “In the past I had many more colonies but due to deforestation and lack of bee forage the number has reduced. These days bees are dying also from poisons”. When the main growing season ends, to shore up food supplies, many farmers plant grass pea Lathyrus sativa as it grows well in the dry season, benefiting from residual moisture in the soil. However, possibly because it is one of the few plants to flower at this time of year, it is attractive to both honey bees and insect pests. Farmers intentionally apply insecticides to tackle the pests, and unintentionally kill honey bees at the same time. The pest incidence associated with Lathyrus sativa used not to be so severe but - with intensification of planting – so has followed intensification of pest attack. Farmers habitually spray the flowering crop with Malathion. Tewebe explained that he understands that it is this pesticide that is affecting his bees because he detects that the colonies dwindle during this period and he observes dead bees in the fields.

Tewebe Nigru and Muluken Anteneh

Malathion

GENERAL ADVICE TO AVOID PESTICIDE POISONING • Choose pesticides which are not the most toxic • Apply pesticides before the crop is in flower • Apply pesticides at night, when honey bees are not foraging • Beekeepers can temporarily confine their bees to the hives by closing the entrances – but this can only be done for a short time and where there is no risk of the colony overheating

Malathion is an organophosphorus, synthetic insecticide used widely in agriculture and also to kill insects to protect public health. This pesticide is categorised as highly toxic to honey bees.

The Pacific Northwest Extension Publication How to reduce bee poisoning from pesticides1 states that it should never be applied to flowering crops and has a 2-5 day residual toxic effect. The Apiculture Programme of North Carolina State University states2 Malathion to be “highly toxic” and that “severe bee losses may be expected” when used in the vicinity of honey bees.

1 2

20 YEARS OF BfD

www.cru.cahe.wsu.edu/cepublications/pnw0518/pnw0518.pdf www.cals.ncsu.edu/entomology/apiculture/pdfs/2.12%20copy.pdf

too difficult to move the hives away, the bees can be confined inside the hives. The hives can be covered by large burlap sacks. It is necessary to put water on the sacks to cool the bees. The bees should also be provided with water inside the hives, so that they are able to cool the brood. If the hives are placed in shade, and the sacking is kept wet, the bees can be covered for up to two days.

• It may be necessary to apply water to the sacking every 1-3 hours to keep the colony sufficiently cool - overheating of a colony can lead to rapid death. Larger colonies are more sensitive to overheating than small, and it is important that there is plenty of space and good ventilation in the hive.

• If the bees are near a water pipe it can be possible to keep them inside their hive by constantly sprinkling them, so that they believe it is a rainy day. * available at www.beesfordevelopment.org/portal

In BfDJ 34 (March 1995) we published our first full colour centre fold Bees and Pesticides written by Ole Hertz*. The article offered suggestions for protecting bees against pesticides which are still pertinent today.

How to protect bees against pesticides Beekeepers can help reduce bee poisoning in different ways: • Bees can be kept at a distance safe from areas where pesticides are being applied. This must be at least 7 km, although the farmer will not get crops pollinated.

• The beekeeper and the farmer can co-operate. If beekeepers learn about different pesticides, they can discuss with farmers, warn them against the most dangerous pesticides and develop beneficial agreements concerning pollination services and the prudent use of pesticides.

• Bees can be moved away before the spraying and kept away as long as the poisons are still in the flowers.

• If pesticides are used on flowering plants near hives, and it is

Bees for Development 14

20 1993

YEARS 2013

Bees for Development Journal 106

RECENT RESEARCH

EU RESCUE PLAN

In the article Detecting insect pollinator declines on regional and global scales Gretchen LeBuhn and co-authors outline a simple method for a global network of people monitoring bee populations to form an early warning system alerting scientists to dangers threatening the world’s food system and economies. The study found that counting and identifying bees, using seven different methods of sampling, regularly for five years in 200 locations, would produce data accurate enough to detect a 2-5% annual decline in bee populations. The monitoring programme would cost an estimated US$2 (€1.5) million and includes international sampling sites, although it could be scaled to fit different regional monitoring needs. The cost is a relatively small investment compared to the potential economic cost of severe pollinator losses: 35% of the global food supply depends on bees and other pollinators, including crops worth US$200 (€150) billion each year.

The study explains that a monitoring programme must be simple, repeatable, inexpensive, and, most importantly, have the ability to quickly detect declines if they are occurring. The proposed system relies on paid workers around the globe to count and identify bees using simple pan traps, in which bees are attracted to a brightlycoloured pan filled with liquid. To determine scalable sampling techniques, costs and time scales for completing the work, the researchers designed simulations using data from 11 previously published multi-year studies. The research was funded by the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). The programme has already been used in Brazil, Ghana, India, Kenya, Nepal, Pakistan and South Africa, with support from the Global Environment Facility and UN Environment Programme. LeBuhn said the long-term goal of the project is to establish a network of monitoring stations to provide data for global analysis and to centralise data collection so that people who are counting bees regionally can contribute to a larger data set.

LeBuhn is known also for organising the annual Great Sunflower Project when 100,000 citizen-scientists volunteers across North America count bee populations in their own backyards. The project, now in its fifth year, found low numbers of bees in urban areas across the USA adding weight to the theory that habitat loss is one of the primary reasons for sharp population declines.

The EU has launched a ban on three widely used neonicitinoid1 pesticides that the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) says pose “high acute risks” to pollinators. Member States are requested to suspend for two years the use of these pesticides on seeds, granular atom sprays and for crops that attract bees – cotton, maize rape and sunflower. After a vote on the two-year ban the Commission hopes to have a proposal ready by March and law by 1 July 2013.

Source: Arthur Neslen, www.Euractive.com Neonicotinoids are insecticides that affect the central nervous system of insects, causing paralysis and death. A number of recent studies have suggested that exposure to neonicotinoids at sub-lethal doses can have significant negative effects on bee health and bee colonies.

1

EFSA MEETINGS Scientific Colloquium to discuss holistic approaches to the risk assessment of multiple stressors in bees EFSA will share and debate developments in bee health risk assessment with a range of stakeholders and scientific experts at national, European and international levels on 15-16 May 2013.

Discussion will cover issues including: protection of pollination services; monitoring of bee colonies and testing stressors in bees; and assessment of multiple stressors to bees including chemicals and diseases. Stakeholders wishing to attend can register their interest online.

Workshop on the risk assessment of plant protection products on bees A one-day workshop in September 2013 will present to Member States, applicants and all stakeholders the new EFSA guidance on the Risk Assessment of Plant Protection Products on Bees (Apis mellifera, Bombus spp and solitary bees), which is due to be published in May, following a second round of public consultation.

How to register for the event will be published in May.

Philip Riley, San Francisco State University Communications Citation: Lebuhn, G., Droege, S., Connor, E. F., Gemmill-Herren, B., Potts, S. G., Minckley, R. L., Griswold, T., Jean, R., Kula, E., Roubik, D. W., Cane, J., Wright, K. W., Frankie, G. and Parker, F. (2012), Detecting Insect Pollinator Declines on Regional and Global Scales. Conservation Biology. doi: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2012.01962.

Source: www.efsa.europa.eu/en/events/event/130515.htm

NOTICE BOARD FUNDING FROM FAO TeleFood Special Fund Beekeepers’ groups and associations may apply for project funding of up to US$10,000. Request documents should include a brief description of project objectives, proposed food production or income-generating activities, work plan, number of participants, detailed list of inputs with cost estimates and reporting arrangements. See www.fao.org 1% for Development Fund Small grants enable community based beekeeping projects in developing countries to get off the ground.

Applicants must define clear objectives and describe how they are to be attained. Email One-Per-Cent-Fund@FAO.org 75 YEARS 2013 marks the 75th anniversary of the founding of the Biodynamic Association the oldest sustainable agriculture organisation in the USA See www.biodynamics.com GRANTS TO SCIENTISTS IFS Research Grants are for citizens of a developing country who are scientists under 40 years of age, with at least a Master’s or equivalent degree or research experience and attached to a university, national research institution or research-orientated NGO in a developing country. See www.ifs.se 15

Bees for Development Journal 106

Tell us your story at www.beesfordevelopment.org/what-we-do/tell-yours

NEWS AROUND THE WORLD CAMEROON The International Centre for Environmental Education and Community Development (ICENECDEV) promotes conservation and protection of the Mount Cameroon Forest Region through practical activities. In June and July 2012 we organised a mountain sensitisation campaign to create awareness of beekeeping. ICENECDEV informed inhabitants of the local villages and primary schools on the importance of beekeeping in conserving the forest, generating income, reducing wood consumption and alleviating poverty.

PHOTO © ICENECDEV

in front of the closed entrance and you can see the number of honey bees collecting pollen. This will also show if the plants growing around your apiary are good sources of pollen.

Your honey bees may need feeding if there are no flowering plants around the apiary.

You may notice that the bees are unusually defensive, worker bees are removing drone larvae from cells, the queen is not laying eggs, or worker bees are aggressively searching for a sucrose source.

It is preferable to split honey bee colonies 45 days before the main season begins because it is important to give the colony the chance to rebuild and to become strong with field bees. Apis mellifera honey bee workers need 21 days to emerge from the cells and 21 days working in the hive. After 42 days worker bees become foragers (field bees) to collect nectar and pollen.

Eric Fongoh, Executive Director ICENECDEV, Buea, SW Region

Children as young as six were part of the recent beekeeping training and they have since formed the Wainadoi Community Junior Beekeepers Group. The Group’s leader Jeremaia Naivalarua said that beekeeping brought the community together despite their religious differences and that they are now working to expand the project. Assistance worth US$13,000 (€9,600) from the government of New Zealand to a youth group in Navua has helped them to establish a thriving beekeeping operation. The Department of Agriculture’s national co-ordinator for Apiculture, Kamal Prasad, said the assistance including equipment, bee suits and smokers would enable the group to develop five apiary sites with about 20 hives.

in-depth technical expertise and experience at training and empowering rural people with the knowledge to carry out sustainable beekeeping.

Olusola Adeniyi, AFRICON, Lagos

SAUDI ARABIA Beekeepers all have their own experience and experiments in beekeeping. I would like to present some common skills of beekeeping.

To tell the strength of foraging bees without opening a hive, close the hive entrance for about five minutes: forager bees will collect

Beekeepers must take care to: • not spread disease within the apiary • watch out for colonies that need feeding • watch out for robbing behaviour between colonies • notice queenless colonies or colonies with egg laying workers • recognise if colonies are weak before or during flowering seasons.

Hossam Farag Abou-Shaara, King Saud University, Riyadh PHOTO © HOSSAM FARAG ABOU-SHAARA

FIJI

Apiary balance means that the beekeeper gives all the colonies the same number of frames to ensure approximately the same strength. However, in striving for such a balance very great care must be taken not to transfer diseases from one colony to another.

Fiji Times online

NIGERIA It was with delight that we received our Resource Box here at African Custodians of Nature (AFRICON). The materials will be put to good use. We are organising a seminar with Bees Extension Education Services (Ogun State) and their main resource person is Mr Elijah Asade, (also a BfD beneficiary). This is because of his

Forager and guard bees in front of the hive 16

Queen cells in a queenless colony

Bees for Development Journal 106

LOOK AHEAD ARGENTINA

18° Expo Macia Fiesta Nacional de Apicultura 22-24 March 2013, Macia Further details www.macia.gov.ar

BRAZIL

II Seminario Brasileiro de própolis e pólen 15-17 May 2013, Bahia Further details www.sbpp2013.com.br I° Congresso de Apicultura e Meliponicultura da Amazônia 20-22 October 2013, Palmas Further details to be confirmed

COSTA RICA

VIII MesoAmerican Congress of Native Bees 26-31 August 2013, Héredia Further details www.una.ac.cr 3rd International Symposium on MultiStrata Agroforestry Systems with perennial crops 16-20 September 2013, Turrialba Further details contact@symposium--multistrata2013.org

EL SALVADOR

X Congreso Centroamericano y del Caribe de Integracion y Actualizacion Apicola 22 -24 Mayo 2013 Further details www.comisionapicolanicaragua.org

GERMANY

XI International Apitherapy Congress 21-26 March 2013, Passau Further details www.apitherapie.de

NIGERIA

ZIMBABWE

1st National Beekeeping Congress 5-6 May 2013, Abuja Further details www.cebrad.com

4th ApiTrade Africa Event 2014 Further details will appear here

SOUTH KOREA

APIMONDIA 44th International Apicultural Congress 15-20 September 2015, Deajeon Further details will appear here

SWEDEN

World Forests Summit 5-6 March 2013, Stockholm Further details www.cemea. economistconferences.com

Diploma in Organic Beekeeping May, July, September, November 2013 Further details cetbiobio@gmail.com Irish Beekeepers Summer Course 21-26 July 2013, Gormanston Further details www.irishbeekeeping.ie

TURKEY

12th Asian Apicultural Association Conference 2014 Further details will appear here

UK

Beginner’s Natural Beekeeping Course April, May, June 2013, Embercombe Further details www.embercombe.co.uk/bees

UK

Conwy Seed Fair 26 March 2013, North Wales Further details www.conwybeekeepers.org.uk

BfD UK Courses

BBKA Spring Convention 12-14 April 2013, Harper Adams College Further details www.britishbee.org.uk Conwy Honey Fair 13 September 2013, North Wales Further details www.conwybeekeepers.org.uk

UKRAINE

APIMONDIA 43rd International Apicultural Congress 29 September - 4 October 2013, Kiev Further details see page 20

USA

MEXICO

VENEZUELA

XI Congreso Iberolatinoamericano de Apicultura 24-27 April 2013, Puerto la Cruz Further details rafaelnoria@gmail.com

Strengthening livelihoods in developing countries through beekeeping 5 April and 20 September 2013, Monmouth Sustainable beekeeping 6-7 April and 21-22 September 2013 Ragman’s Lane Permaculture Farm, Gloucestershire

2nd Global Conference on Entomology 8-12 November 2013, Sarawak Further details www.gce2013.com 20° Congreso Internacional de Actualización Apícola 26-28 June 2013, Pablo de Villavicencio Further details www.amverasc.com/

CHILE

IRELAND

2nd International Conference on Pollinator Biology, Health and Policy 14-17 August 2013, Penn State University Further details www. agsci.psu.edu/ pollinator-conference

MALAYSIA

LEARN AHEAD

Further details www.beesfordevelopment.org

BfD Beekeepers Safaris

2013 Vietnam 2-13 September Grenada 14-24 October 2014 Trinidad and Tobago 3-13 February Turkey 14-26 June Further details www.beesfordevelopment.org

If you want notice of your conference, workshop or meeting to be included here and on our website send details to Bees for Development, address on page 20

In the next issue • Practical beekeeping: Smokers • Forest beekeeping • Top-bar hives • Honey trading and marketing

ADVERTISE IN BfDJ

A great opportunity to reach thousands of our readers. Various size ads available.

See www.beesfordevelopment.org/journal/ advertising 17

Bees for Development Journal 106

BOOK SHELF

Buy these titles at www.beesfordevelopment.org/catalog or at our shop in Monmouth, UK

Top-bar hive beekeeping – wisdom and pleasure combined Wyatt A Mangum 2012 411 pages £55 (US$85; €64) M570 A culmination of 25 years of experience of keeping and observing bees in top-bar hives in North Carolina, USA. The author runs 200 top-bar hives for pollination and honey and beeswax production - meaning that his designs, methods and practical tips are proven and efficient. Ensuring that the bees build straight combs, the advantages of selling honeycomb, how to make an external feeder, are all covered – and more – with utmost practical detail. The author uses mobile two foot (60 cm) hives for pollination, and five foot (150 cm) hives for honey production. While the context is US, there is a great abundance of interest for beekeepers in other countries. For example, how do you make foundation starter strips when no foundation is available? The answer is to make starter strips from intact comb cut from a bees’ nest! This book reminds us that keeping bees for profit requires an excellent understanding of bees, a whole lot of ingenuity and a willingness to learn from trying things out. The excellent pictures on their own make this book worth buying. Although your wildlife might be different (lovely endnotes on night-time game photography in the apiary) this is the ultimate and excellent reference book for commercial top-bar beekeeping. An original text full of reliable advice.

Pot-honey – a legacy of stingless bees Patricia Vit, Silvia R M Pedro & David Roubik (eds) 2013 697 pages Hardcover £144.50 (US$226; €167) V555 An important new compilation of information about stingless bees. Forty chapters contributed by dozens of experts in their fields, covering all aspects of stingless bees: origin, biodiversity and behaviour; stingless bees’ role in culture, traditions and environment; plants used by them; sensory attributes, composition and biological properties of honey and their marketing and standards. This is a wonderful gathering of data and detail, highly valuable and interesting for beekeepers, anthropologists and researchers working in this sector.

The thinking beekeeper – a guide to natural beekeeping in top-bar hives Christy Hemenway 2013 195 pages £17 (US$26; €20) H555 An excellent new resource offering clear and practical advice on how to keep bees in top-bar hives. The author takes a fresh approach, briefly describing how we reached our current beekeeping status explaining why It’s all about the wax (as discussed on page three of this Journal). The author presents reasons why frame hive beekeeping denies to beekeepers the perfection of the natural systems that are at work in the honey bee colony.

By using foundation-less hives (for example top-bar hives or Warré hives) bees are able to live and nest in a more natural way than they are able to do in frame hives.

The rest of the text provides information on making a top-bar hive, obtaining bees, overwintering and many other skills for looking after bees thoughtfully. Written primarily for beekeepers in North America, this text is a stimulating read for beekeepers world-wide.

Home and away – adventures in beekeeping in the UK and Africa John Home 2012 136 pages £12 (US$18; €14) H550 A childhood passion for bees turned into his profession and for many years John Home was a commercial beekeeper owning and running Fosse Way Honey. At its peak, he managed 350 colonies in 30 different locations - transporting his hives around the UK for pollination contracts and marketing top quality honey that won numerous prizes at the UK National Honey and Royal Shows. He was also Chairman of the UK Bee Farmers Association and joined several of the campaigns by British beekeepers, for example concerning problems caused by insecticides, and issues surrounding EU legislation. Much of this book is about John’s experiences since retirement when he became a volunteer with the UK charity Bees Abroad, of which he is currently Chair. He describes his experiences of visiting associations in Africa with his wife Mary, sharing expertise and knowledge with beekeepers he has met on his many travels.

Prices in US$ and € are approximate and for guidance only

Buying from Bf D – Ways to pay • Secure order and payment at www.beesfordevelopment.org/catalog • to store@beesfordevelopment.org • Credit/Debit card Maestro/MasterCard/Visa. We need card number, name on card, valid from and expiry dates, card issue number (if given), security number on back of card.

• Cheque/bank draft in GBP or Euros payable to Bees for Development 18

ORDER THROUGH OUR WEB STORE

Bees for Development Journal 106

Publications from ICIMOD Quality assurance for the honey trade in the Hindu Kush Himalaya Region Uma Partap, Min B Gurung and Surendra R Joshi 2012 50 pages The countries of the Hindu Kush Himalayan (HKH) region produce more than 20% of all honey sold worldwide.

However many producers in the region have limited access to markets in developed countries, and face difficulty meeting stringent trade requirements. This publication provides information on the standards needed for trade in the HKH and international markets and is especially focused on the needs of Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Myanmar, Nepal, and Pakistan.

China and India already have established honey quality assurance systems.

Value of insect pollinators to Himalayan agricultural economies Uma Partap, Tej Partap, Harish K Sharma, Pushkin Phartiyal, Aungsathwi Marma, Nar B Tamang, Tan Ken and Muhammad Siddique Munawar 2012 55 pages This study assesses the economic value of pollination services to agriculture in areas of the HKH region using the FAO array of crop categories*. The economic value of insect pollination for the crops and areas covered by the study (the Chittagong Hill Tracts of Bangladesh, Bhutan, the Chinese Himalayan provinces, Himachal Pradesh and Kashmir - north-western Indian Himalayas, Uttarakhand - central Indian Himalayas, and the Himalayan region of Pakistan) is estimated at US$2.7 (€2) billion annually. The study considers the vulnerability of different crop categories to pollinator decline and concludes that the countries of the HKH must include provisions for management and conservation of pollinators as a part of their agricultural policies, together with plans to improve the food security and livelihoods of mountain farmers. * Methodology provided by Gallai and Vaissière in 2009 based on the hypothesis that the economic impact of pollinators on agricultural output is measurable through the use of dependence ratios that quantify the impact of a lack of insect pollinators on crop production value. It also looks at the vulnerability of different crop categories to pollinator decline.

These publications are available on line at www.icimod.org/publications ICIMOD have kindly donated several printed copies for distribution in BfD resource boxes (see page 20) to recipients living in Asia.

If you are on Facebook remember to ‘like’ BfD! 19

Bees for Development Journal 106

XXXXIII APIMONDIA INTERNATIONAL APICULTURAL CONGRESS 29 September – 4 October 2013 Kiev, Ukraine Scientific Conference BEYOND THE HIVE: BEEKEEPING AND GLOBAL CHALLENGES

WORLD BEEKEEPING AWARDS

The foremost global competition in excellence, creativity and innovation in beekeeping

CULTURAL AND SOCIAL PROJECTS • • • • • •

Innovative Technologies in Beekeeping Public Fair Apimondia for Children Famous Scientists and Figures in Beekeeping Modern Art Gallery Beekeeping Museum Tours

Technical, pre- and post- Congress tours will provide an insight into both the beekeeping and places of interest in Ukraine - this fascinating European Honeyland

Plenary sessions and Symposia of the Seven Apimondia Standing Commissions 800 scientists from around the world will present 300 scientific papers and 800 poster presentations

10,000 participants from over 115 countries expected

ApiExpo-2013

For more information visit

Early bird registration deadline 1 June 2013

www.apimondia2013.org.ua/en

200 international exhibitors

SUPPORT FOR TRAINING SUBSCRIPTIONS AVAILABLE Sponsored subscriptions to Bees for Development Journal are available for resource-poor beekeepers, projects, schools and groups in developing countries.

Supported with funds raised by Bees for Development Trust Name.................................................................................................

What is your involvement with bees and beekeeping? ......................................................................................................... .........................................................................................................

Organisation .....................................................................................

Postal address................................................................................... ......................................................................................................... .........................................................................................................

Country.............................................................................................

E-mail address...................................................................................

Date of application.............................................................................

Additional copies of this form are available from our website Email journalrequest@beesfordevelopment.org Post to BfD Trust at the address below

BfD Training Booklets and Training Cards are for use by beekeeper trainers in Africa.

Each booklet provides one day of training on one topic. The cards provide pictures and plans illustrating techniques discussed in the booklets. These are included in our Resource Boxes for training events and workshops.

Projects and associations in developing countries are welcome to apply for a Sponsored Resource Box by filling out an application form on our website, or request the form by email. Projects in other areas can purchase Resource Boxes through our website store.

www.beesfordevelopment.org

ISSN 1477-6588

Telephone +44 (0)1600 714848

Bees for Development

Printed on environmentally friendly paper

info@beesfordevelopment.org

1 Agincourt Street, Monmouth

© Bees for Development 2013

www.beesfordevelopment.org

NP25 3DZ, UK