2018----19 NH Winter Hive Loss 19 NH Winter Hive Loss Results- Good Success overwintering NUCs -...

2018201820182018----19 NH Winter Hive Loss 19 NH Winter Hive Loss 19 NH Winter Hive Loss 19 NH Winter Hive Loss

ResultsResultsResultsResults

6/18/2019 NH Beekeepers Association 1

2018-19 Survey Executive Summary

•Survey covered the period from Oct 1, 2018-Mar 31, 2019

•Excellent Survey Response covering 405 Beekeepers, 442 Apiaries, 182 towns, 1445 hives & 530 NUCs

•Out of state: 2 MA, 2 ME, 4 VT,

•1 New Mexico (data removed as an outlier)

• Overall Loss rates continue to decline over the 3 years of the survey

• Observations from the 2017 & 2018 surveys generally hold true for 2019.

• Data indicates beekeepers are using the data from the surveys to influence their management practices.

• Merrimack County continues to have the highest loss rates which we need to investigate further.

NH Beekeepers Association6/18/2019 2

47%

63%

58%

50%

73%

28%

61%

54%

60%

56%

2018-19 Loss by County

Survival Rate based on Management Practices

2018-19: 183 towns/442 apiaries

65%58%

55%

40%

49%

31%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

2016-7 2017-8 2018-9H

ive

/NU

C L

oss

Hive Loss NUC Loss

Trend is in the right direction!

0.00%

5.00%

10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

25.00%

30.00%

35.00%

Treated Nosema Treated Nosema & Mites

100-66% Apiary Survival rate 65-33% Apiary Survival Rate 32-0% Apiary Survival Rate

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Treated Treated > 1 time Counted Mites Practiced IPM

% o

f H

ive

s


Respondent’s Club AffiliationsRespondent’s Club AffiliationsRespondent’s Club AffiliationsRespondent’s Club Affiliations


Club Respondents

Participation

Rate

CABA 53 45%

Seacoast 49 64%

Pawtuckaway 43 50%

Monadnock 31 69%

KBA 41 72%

MVBA 48 27%

PBBA 35 34%

Winni 15 -

North Country 14 82%

CT River Valley 6 60%

Club Respondent

NHBA 99

EAS 8

ABF 2

VT Beekeepers 9

MA Beekeepers 5

ME Beekeepers 7

405 Respondents:

• 79 belong to NO Bee Club (~20%)

• belong to a NH “local” bee club• 64 belong to 1 Club + NHBA

• 8 belong to 1 Club + another state/nat’l club

• 189 belong to just 1 club & no other bee club

affiliations

• 94 belong to NHBA & a NH Local club

• 18 belong only to NHBA

-100

100

300

500

700

900

1100

1300

1500

Hives NUCS

Comparison of Hives/NUCs Alive 10/1/18(Blue) and

Alive on 4/1/19 (Orange)

Alive Oct 1, 2018 Alive Apr 1,2019

2018201820182018----19 Hive and NUC Winter Loss19 Hive and NUC Winter Loss19 Hive and NUC Winter Loss19 Hive and NUC Winter Loss


# Hives #NUCS

Alive Oct 1,

2018 1445 530

Alive April 1,

2019 651 362

2018-19 Winter Loss:

55% Hive & 31% NUC Loss

2018201820182018----19 Hive and NUC Winter Loss19 Hive and NUC Winter Loss19 Hive and NUC Winter Loss19 Hive and NUC Winter Loss


# Hives #NUCS

2016 1007 353

2017 1340 323

2018 1445 530

The trend is going in the right direction!

65%

58%55%

40%

49%

31%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

2016-7 2017-8 2018-9

Hiv

e/N

UC

Lo

ss

Hive Loss NUC Loss

Reported Hive and NUC Loss by County

Each pin represents

a town with at least 1 hive *MA: 15 hives (13% loss); VT: 9 hives (56% loss) ME: 9 hives (100% Loss)

# Hives

Reported Hive Loss

# NUCs

reported NUC Loss

Merrimack 241 73% 79 59%

Strafford 93 63% 22 64%

Belknap 80 61% 12 92%

Coos 30 60% 6 33%

Hillsboroug

h 226 58% 9 78%

Carroll 45 56% 10 30%

Sullivan 113 54% 285 12%

Grafton 216 50% 48 52%

Rockingham 227 47% 13 69%

Cheshire 121 28% 41 27%

Hives Reported & Loss Rate Year to Year (by County)Hives Reported & Loss Rate Year to Year (by County)Hives Reported & Loss Rate Year to Year (by County)Hives Reported & Loss Rate Year to Year (by County)

6/18/2019 NH Beekeepers Association 8*very small sample size

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

0

20

40

60

80

100

2016 2017 2018

Carroll

Hives Loss

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

0

10

20

30

40

2016 2017 2018

Coos

Hives Loss

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

0

50

100

150

200

250

2016 2017 2018

Grafton

Hives Loss

# of hives :

Hive loss :0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

0

50

100

150

2016 2017 2018

Belknap

Hives Loss

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

0

20

40

60

80

100

2016 2017 2018

Strafford

Strafford Hives Strafford Loss

Hives Reported & Loss Rate Year to Year (by County)Hives Reported & Loss Rate Year to Year (by County)Hives Reported & Loss Rate Year to Year (by County)Hives Reported & Loss Rate Year to Year (by County)


# of hives :

Hive loss :0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

0

50

100

150

200

250

2016 2017 2018

Hillsborough

Hives Loss

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

0

50

100

150

200

250

2016 2017 2018

Rockingham

Hives Loss

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

0

50

100

150

200

250

2016 2017 2018

Sullivan

Hives Loss

0%

20%

40%

60%

0

50

100

150

200

2016 2017 2018

Cheshire

Hives Loss

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0

50

100

150

200

250

2016 2017 2018

Merrimack

Hives Loss

Hive and NUC Loss By MonthHive and NUC Loss By MonthHive and NUC Loss By MonthHive and NUC Loss By Month


# Hives Lost # NUCs Lost

October 25 0

November 58 11

December 120 18

January 223 42

February 197 49

March 117 33

April 55 11

Don't Know 25 0

*note –When multiple months were listed

for the loss in the apiary, the number of

hives/NUCs lost was divided by the number

of months listed & then applied equally to

each month’s

- Jan & Feb were the biggest loss months for Hives

- Highest percentage of NUCs were lost in Feb

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

October November December January February March Don't

Know

2018-19 Loss By Month

Hives NUCs

Month of Loss Month of Loss Month of Loss Month of Loss –––– Year over YearYear over YearYear over YearYear over Year


- 25-30% Hive loss in January for last 3 years

- Feb NUC Losses were higher in 2018

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

Hive Loss Month Y2Y Comparison

2018 2016 2017

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35% NUC Loss Month Y2Y Comparison

2018 2016 2017

Reported Cause of LossReported Cause of LossReported Cause of LossReported Cause of Loss


“Other”: mice**, chalkbrood, “My fault”, poison, "Lazy beekeeping”, tracheal mites, froze/cover blew off, no pollen

*note –When multiple

causes were listed for the

loss in the apiary, the

number of hives+NUCs lost

was divided by the number

of causes listed & then

applied equally to each

cause

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%

DontKnow

Abscond

Nosema

QueenIssues

Bears

Dysentery

Robbing

Other

Weak

ColdTemps

Moisture

Starvation

Varroa

% of Hives & NUCs lost due to:

Yellow Jacket/Hornet/Wasp Robbing IssuesYellow Jacket/Hornet/Wasp Robbing IssuesYellow Jacket/Hornet/Wasp Robbing IssuesYellow Jacket/Hornet/Wasp Robbing Issues


13%

3%

3%

33%

15%

16%

0%

15%

24%

14%

% of hives that

had yellow

jacket robbing # hives

Maine 0% 4

Grafton 33% 198

Sullivan 24% 101

Cheshire 16% 106

Merrimack 15% 164

Belknap 15% 53

Coos 14% 29

Rockingham 13% 190

Hillsborough 3% 181

Strafford 3% 77

Carroll 0% 43

MA 93% 15

VT 22% 9

Upper Valley Area had biggest issues with

Yellow Jacket, etc. Robbing

Significantly different than 2017:

Strafford was 50% 3%

Rockingham was 41% 13%

Hillsborough 31% 3%

Grafton was 28% 33%

Sullivan was 0% 24%

Carroll was 19% 0 %

reports cover 1170 hives

Next sets of graphs are SURVIVAL RATES

(Red dash line in graph indicates hive survival rate for state)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Hives NUCs

Survival Rate

Treated Survival Rate Untreated Survival Rate

How does treating with commercial treatments affect survival rate?How does treating with commercial treatments affect survival rate?How does treating with commercial treatments affect survival rate?How does treating with commercial treatments affect survival rate?


# Hives

on 10/1

# NUCs

On 10/1

Treated 1144 254

Untreated 301 276

- Good Success overwintering NUCs

- Hives treated with commercial treatments had a 2X+ better survival rate.

Overall Hive survival rate across

state

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

Hives Apiaries

Treatment percentage Year to Year

2016 2017 2018

Has the percentage of hives/apiaries using treatments changed?Has the percentage of hives/apiaries using treatments changed?Has the percentage of hives/apiaries using treatments changed?Has the percentage of hives/apiaries using treatments changed?


- Percentage of hives that are treated with and apiaries that use commercial

treatment has increased in the last 3 year

20

16

20

17

20

18

20

16

20

17

20

18

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Hives NUCs

Single Vs Multiple Treatments

> 2 times 2 times 1 time 0 times

How does the number of times commercial treatments are used affect survival?How does the number of times commercial treatments are used affect survival?How does the number of times commercial treatments are used affect survival?How does the number of times commercial treatments are used affect survival?


Treating more than 1 time through the season increased survival rates .

(consistent with 2016-17 data)

# Hives

On 10/1

# NUCs

On 10/1

> 2 times 243 50

2 times 366 49

1 time 341 92

No treatments 301 276

Overall Hive survival rate across

state

How Does Number of Treatments Change YearHow Does Number of Treatments Change YearHow Does Number of Treatments Change YearHow Does Number of Treatments Change Year----totototo----Year?Year?Year?Year?


More apiaries (and hives) are being treated multiple times during the season.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%


Number of treatments by Hives – Y2Y

2018 2016 2017

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%


Number of treatments by Apiary - Y2Y

2018 2016 2017

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

1 year 2-4 years 5-10 years 11-15 years > 15 years

Hive/NUC Survival Rate

HiveSurvivalRate NUCSurvivalRate

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

1 year 2-4 years 5-10 years 11-15 years > 15 years

Hive/NUC Survival Rate

HiveSurvivalRate NUCSurvivalRate 2017-HiveSurvival

Does the Years of Experience Affect Survival Rate?Does the Years of Experience Affect Survival Rate?Does the Years of Experience Affect Survival Rate?Does the Years of Experience Affect Survival Rate?


# Hives

On 10/1

# NUCs

On 10/1

1 Year 92 6

2-4 Years 533 99

5-10 years 478 85

11-15 years 158 283

> 15 years 124 4

5 years experience seems to improve survival rate –

but less of an effect than previous years


# of hives for

beekeepers with >

5 years experience

# of hives for

beekeepers with 1-

4 years experience

Treated 601 483

Didn't Treat 159 142

No significant difference in % of beekeepers with > 5 years experience that treated for mites

Could this be the reason 2-4 year beekeepers survival rate rose from 33% in 2017 to 41% in 2018?

Could the difference now be related to how often or when hives are treated?

Is survival rate for > 5 years experience because a higher percentage treat?Is survival rate for > 5 years experience because a higher percentage treat?Is survival rate for > 5 years experience because a higher percentage treat?Is survival rate for > 5 years experience because a higher percentage treat?

% of hives Treated with At least 1 commercial product:

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

> 5 Year 1-4 years

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of

Hiv

es

by e

xpe

rie

nce

Survival Rate

Treated Untreated

5+ years

experience

1-4 years

experience

2018 79% 77%

2017 75% 63%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

MAQS/Formic OA Vapor unknown

Hive Survival by treatment type when 1

treatment used

> 1 time 1 time

Does one commercial treatment help survival better than others?Does one commercial treatment help survival better than others?Does one commercial treatment help survival better than others?Does one commercial treatment help survival better than others?


Unclear that a particular product improves survival rate – it is

more likely the # of treatments

through the year that had an effect.

# of hives on 10/1

that had > 1

treatment of a

single commercial

product

# of hives on 10/1

that had 1

treatment of a

single commercial

product

Apiguard 22 9

ApilLifeVar 3 9

Apivar 5 27

Hopguard 5 4

MAQS/Formic 105 145

OA Dribble 6 8

OA Vapor 169 17

Unknown 43 17

Total 358 236

Graph represents apiaries that were treated with

only 1 type of commercial product during the year. We did not include those apiaries that used multiple

treatments because we don’t know the split of treatments

between surviving hives when multiple products were used

- 687 hives were treated with only 1 commercial product

Overall survival rate across state

Was hive survival rate better because mites were counted and hives were treated with Was hive survival rate better because mites were counted and hives were treated with Was hive survival rate better because mites were counted and hives were treated with Was hive survival rate better because mites were counted and hives were treated with commercial treatments?commercial treatments?commercial treatments?commercial treatments?


# Hives Treated by

10/1

# Untreated

Hives by 10/1

Counted 650 291

Didn't Count 83 152

• Most hives that were treated counted for mites at least 1 time

Survival Rates appear to improve when both commercial treatments were used & mite counting was done

Overall survival rate across state

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Hives Treated Hives Untreated

Survival Rate by Mite Counting for treated &

untreated hives

Counted Not Counted

What mite count methods were most common?What mite count methods were most common?What mite count methods were most common?What mite count methods were most common?


Other methods:

• Drone brood observation (most common “other” - Need to add this as an answer option in the future)

Number of hives tested with Alcohol wash increased significantly in 2018 over 2017

Number of “Other” methods reduced significantly year-over-year

0 100 200 300 400 500

Stick Bottom Boards

Sugar Roll

Alcohol Wash

Other

Number of Hives

Mite Count Methods2018 2017

Sticky Bottom Boards 411 428

Sugar Roll 265 234

Alcohol Wash 255 169

Other 72 131Total 1003 962

Survival rate based on the frequency of mite testing Survival rate based on the frequency of mite testing Survival rate based on the frequency of mite testing Survival rate based on the frequency of mite testing


2018 2017

Monthly 315 234

Once during the

season 178 190

Twice during the

season 84 125

Twice a month 64 66

Three times

during the

season 26 17

drone 15 76

Weekly 12 17

Total 694 725

Graph is for methods used on > 50 hives

More frequent testing yielded better survival rates

Hives were tested more frequently in 2018

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Twice a month Monthly Twice during the

season

Once during the

season

Survival Rate By Frequency of Checking

What IPM Methods were used?What IPM Methods were used?What IPM Methods were used?What IPM Methods were used?


# Hives # Apiaries

Screened

Bottom Board 734 248

Powdered Sugar 130 45

Drone Frames 333 100

Break in Brood

Cycle 355 81

Other 128 21

• Numbers are similar to 2017

• Many apiaries use multiple IPM methods

• “Other” responses:

• fed bees with fresh thyme mixed in with sugar water

• Fogging with mineral oil

• Split

• Medium frame in slot #7 of brood boxes

• 3 comments that they didn’t know what IPM is

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

Screened Bottom Board

Powdered Sugar

Drone Frames

Break in Brood Cycle

Other

IPM Methods

# Apiaries # Hives

• Active Slovenian brood nest management, without smoke.

• rapid propagation of proven stock (queens) back into the

apiary via nucleus colonies

• Rhubarb leaves

Bee RacesBee RacesBee RacesBee Races


What kinds of bees do our apiaries have?What kinds of bees do our apiaries have?What kinds of bees do our apiaries have?What kinds of bees do our apiaries have?


349 Apiaries

• 210 have 1 race of bees

• 108 have 2 races

• 28 have 3 races

• 3 have 4 races

• 0 has 5 races

*northern is defined as a

hive with a northern mated

queen

# o

f a

pia

rie

s

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

Number of Apiaries by Bee Race

Does the “race” of bees affect survival rate? Does the “race” of bees affect survival rate? Does the “race” of bees affect survival rate? Does the “race” of bees affect survival rate?


- To answer this question -

- Only used data from apiaries that reported only 1 race of bees (194

apiaries of 434)

- For apiaries with multiple races, our data was not fine grain

enough to understand which races survived and which didn’t

- 480 hives

- NUC Sample size is small so only the hive data is presented

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Northern Italians Carniolans Russian

Survival By Race & Number of Treatments

2 or more 1 time 0 times

How does the race of bees combined with number of mite treatment affect How does the race of bees combined with number of mite treatment affect How does the race of bees combined with number of mite treatment affect How does the race of bees combined with number of mite treatment affect survival?survival?survival?survival?


*Small Numbers but some interesting observations

- More than 2 treatments gave higher survival rates for all but Italians

- Carni, Northern and Russian survival with more than 2 treatments is far above the average

- Note 0 treatments for northern bees is low survival

"Northern

" Bees Italians Carniolans Russian Saskatraz

2 or more

treatments 114 56 61 34 12

1

treatment 59 27 40 14 1

0

treatments 17 56 33 3 9

*Russian/0 treatments not included because only 3 hives


Nosema Treatments

Did Nosema treatment affect survival?Did Nosema treatment affect survival?Did Nosema treatment affect survival?Did Nosema treatment affect survival?


2018 Hives

10/1

2017 Hives

10/1

Did Not Treat 953 947

Spring

Treatment only 164 167

Summer 3 0

Fall Treatment

only 166 178

Spring & fall

Treatment 103 105

Total 1389 1397

Hives treated for Nosema in 2018 had better survival

Number of hives treated in 2018 was approximately the same as in 2017

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%

Hive Survival

Overlaying mite treatment with Nosema treatmentOverlaying mite treatment with Nosema treatmentOverlaying mite treatment with Nosema treatmentOverlaying mite treatment with Nosema treatment


# hives on 10/1

that had a

varroa &

Nosema

Treatment

# hives on 10/1

that had only

Nosema

Treatment

Spring

Treatment only 149 15

Fall Treatment

only 153 13

Spring & fall

Treatment 93 10

These are small sample sizes, but:

- Treating for Nosema in Spring & Fall as well as at least 1 time for Mites significantly improved survival

- Most hives treated for Nosema were also treated for Mites

- Interesting that hives with only a spring nosema treatment have the same survival rate

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

Did Not Treat Spring Feeding Fall Feeding Spring and Fall

Hive Survival Nosema treatment with and without

Mite treatments

Mite Treatment No Mite Treatment


Feeding (Fall, Winter & Protein Supplements)

Did fall feeding help survival rate?Did fall feeding help survival rate?Did fall feeding help survival rate?Did fall feeding help survival rate?


# Hives on

10/1

# NUCs on

10/1

Fed 1083 468

Did Not Feed 284 8

Fall feeding in 2018 appeared to help survival rate*consistent with 2017 & 2016 findings

% Hives being Fed in the Fall has been steady over the 3 years

% of NUCs being Fed in Fall increased – Why? Weather? – to be

investigated

49%

72%

37%

13%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

Hives NUCs

Survival based on Fall Feeding

Fed Did Not Feed

75% 80% 79%

86% 89%98%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

2016 2017 2018

Change In % of Hives/NUCs Fed in Fall

Hives NUCs

Did the amount of sugar syrup fed affect survival rate?Did the amount of sugar syrup fed affect survival rate?Did the amount of sugar syrup fed affect survival rate?Did the amount of sugar syrup fed affect survival rate?


# Hives on 10/1 # NUCs on 10/1

Did Not Feed 284 8

< 1 gallon 86 23

1-2 gallons 410 83

3-4 gallons 283 315

> 4 gallons 198 37

Fed but don't

know how much 106 10

Feeding 1 gallon or more helped survival

NUCs took a lot of feed this year

Hives also took more feed than in past years

27%

17%

53%

64%

49%

83%

47%

35%

54%

30%

37%

13%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

Hive Survival NUC Survival

Survival based on Amount Fed

< 1 gallon 1-2 gallons 3-4 gallons > 4 gallons Fed, but don't know how much Did NOT Feed

Did winter feeding help survival rate?Did winter feeding help survival rate?Did winter feeding help survival rate?Did winter feeding help survival rate?


# Hives on

10/1

# NUCs on

10/1

Fed 1023 459

Did Not Feed 364 18

Winter Feeding appears to help survival

% of Hives/NUCs fed has increased each year… Why?

Weather? Awareness?

52%

73%

31%

6%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

Hives NUCS

Survival Based on Winter Feeding

Fed Did Not Feed

58% 61%

74%

30%

43%

96%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

2016 2017 2018

Change in Winter Feeding Rates (2016-2018)

Hives NUCs

What types of winter feed was used?What types of winter feed was used?What types of winter feed was used?What types of winter feed was used?


Other includes: sugar syrup and honey added from other sources (not the hives own stores)

Does NOT include pollen patties or a hives own stores

# Apiaries

1 Type of Feed 186

2 types of feed 58

3 types of feed 4

0 100 200 300 400 500

Did NOT Feed

Fondant

CandyBoard

GranulatedSugar

WinterPatties

SugarBricks

Other

Types of Winter Feed

NUCs Hives

Does feeding protein supplements help survival?Does feeding protein supplements help survival?Does feeding protein supplements help survival?Does feeding protein supplements help survival?


# Hives on

10/1

# NUCs on

10/1

Fed 708 391

Did Not Feed 470 64

Feeding NUCS pollen supplements in 2018 helped survival.

Interesting that Hives that were fed had a worse survival rate - is it attributable to other factors?

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

Hives NUCS

Protein Supplements

Fed Did NOT feed

What types of protein supplements were used?What types of protein supplements were used?What types of protein supplements were used?What types of protein supplements were used?


Other included: Ultrabee, powdered/frozen pollen, Hive Alive, Honey-B-Healthy

0 100 200 300 400 500

Did NOT Feed

Pollen Patties

Global Patties

AP23

Megabee

BeePro

Other

Types of Pollen Supplements

NUCS Hives


Wrapping & Moisture Control

Winterizing HivesWinterizing HivesWinterizing HivesWinterizing Hives


Other includes:

- Black plastic, ty-par, Tyvek, tarps, landscape fabric

- Various wind breaks= hay bails, banks of leaves, old windows

- Apimaye plastic hives

- bubble wrap variations – aluminized, painted black

- Wool fleece on top

- Water proofed couch pillow on top

- Various sheds/lean-tos/greenhouse

- Hot box winterizer

86% of hives & 97% of NUCs were winterized in 2018

50%

75%

48%

15%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

Hives NUCs

Winter Insulation

Wrap Didn't Wrap

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400

Did NOT Warp

Bee Cozy

Tar paper

Quilt box

Shaving box

Polystyrene

Other

Methods of Winterizing

# NUCs # Hives

Winter Moisture ControlWinter Moisture ControlWinter Moisture ControlWinter Moisture Control


Many apiaries used more than 1 type of moisture control system

- Moisture board includes homasote, sound insulation

- Venting includes vent holes & open screen boards

- Other includes:

- Wool, hay, pine needles, newspaper, burlap, Vivaldi

box, spacer under inner cover, ventilation box, slotted

rack below deep, angling hive, reptile heaters

~88% of the reported hives used a moisture system

~96% of the reported NUCs used a moisture system

49%

75%

43%

0%0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

Hives NUCs

Survival Rate

Moisture System No Moisture System

0 100 200 300 400

No Moisture System Used

Quilt box

Shavings box

Homasote

Shim top cover

Winter inner cover

2" Insulation

Venting

Other

Types of Moisture Systems

NUCS Hives


Swarming

Apiaries reporting swarmsApiaries reporting swarmsApiaries reporting swarmsApiaries reporting swarms


- 75 apiaries reported swarms (23.5%)

- 245 apiaries (840 hives) did not have swarms

We do not have granular enough data to tie

swarming to survival rate

More swarming in August of 2018 than in previous year.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

#A

pia

rie

s

Swarm Month

2018 2017


Big Picture: Can we determine “best management” practices

from those apiaries that had high survival rate?

Methodology:

• Divided the apiaries in 3 groups: 0-32% survival; 33-65% survival & 66-100%

survival

• Hive breakdown in these groups was :

• 0-32% survival: ~37% of hives



• For each major category, report what percentage of the hives were managed

using a specific technique:

• Ex: Report the percentage of the hives in each of the 3 categories that used

commercial varroa treatments.

• Assumption: all hives in an apiary were managed the same way.

Big Picture: Varroa ManagementBig Picture: Varroa ManagementBig Picture: Varroa ManagementBig Picture: Varroa Management


Hives in Apiaries with the best survival rates used a commercial varroa treatment at least one time

~60% of those hives were treated multiple times during the season.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Treated Treated > 1 time Counted Mites Practiced IPM

% o

f H

ive

s


0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

100-66% 65-33% 32-0%

Treated > 1 time

2018 2017 2016

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

100-66% 65-33% 32-0%

Treated For Mites

2018 2017 2016

Big Picture: Varroa Management Big Picture: Varroa Management Big Picture: Varroa Management Big Picture: Varroa Management –––– comparing 2018 & 2017comparing 2018 & 2017comparing 2018 & 2017comparing 2018 & 2017


0

20

40

60

80

100

100-66% 65-33% 32-0%

% o

f H

ive

s

Counted Mites

2018 2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

100-66% 65-33% 32-0%

% o

f H

ive

s

Practiced IPM

2018 2017

✅

❔ ❔

✅

Big Picture: Nosema ManagementBig Picture: Nosema ManagementBig Picture: Nosema ManagementBig Picture: Nosema Management


% o

f h

ive

s

If Hives in the High & Medium survival groups were treated for Nosema they were also treated for mites

0.00%

5.00%

10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

25.00%

30.00%

35.00%

Treated Nosema Treated Nosema & Mites


Big Picture: Nosema Management Big Picture: Nosema Management Big Picture: Nosema Management Big Picture: Nosema Management –––– comparing 2017 & 2018comparing 2017 & 2018comparing 2017 & 2018comparing 2017 & 2018


% o

f h

ive

s

0.00%

5.00%

10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

25.00%

30.00%

35.00%

100-66% 65-33% 32-0%

Nosema Treatments

2018 2017

0.00%

5.00%

10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

25.00%

30.00%

35.00%

100-66% 65-33% 32-0%

Nosema & Mite Treatments

2018 2017

Drop in the % of Hives treated in the Low Survival Group compared to 2017

Feed ManagementFeed ManagementFeed ManagementFeed Management


The higher survival groups has slightly higher percentages of winter & fall feeding

Since feeding needs are so hive & region specific, in the future should look at data more regionally

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Winterized Hives Used Moisture Control

% o

f H

ive

s


Big Picture: Feed Management Big Picture: Feed Management Big Picture: Feed Management Big Picture: Feed Management –––– comparing 2018 & 2017comparing 2018 & 2017comparing 2018 & 2017comparing 2018 & 2017


✅

0.00%

20.00%

40.00%

60.00%

80.00%

100.00%

100-66% 65-33% 32-0%

Fed Protein Supplements

2018 2017

✅

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

100-66% 65-33% 32-0%

Fed in Fall

2018 2017 2016

✅

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

100-66% 65-33% 32-0%

Fed in Winter

2018 2017 2016

Big Picture: Winter wrapping & moisture control systemsBig Picture: Winter wrapping & moisture control systemsBig Picture: Winter wrapping & moisture control systemsBig Picture: Winter wrapping & moisture control systems


Most Hives were Winterized in 2018. High Survival group had slightly higher percentage of Hives that used Moisture Control

In the future should look at data more regionally to see if there is more impact

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Winterized Hives Used Moisture Control

% o

f H

ive

s


Big Picture: Winter Management Big Picture: Winter Management Big Picture: Winter Management Big Picture: Winter Management –––– comparing 2018 & 2017comparing 2018 & 2017comparing 2018 & 2017comparing 2018 & 2017


✅ ✅

0.00%

20.00%

40.00%

60.00%

80.00%

100.00%

100-66% 65-33% 32-0%

% o

f H

ive

s

Winterized Hives

2018 2017

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

100-66% 65-33% 32-0%

Used Moisture Control

2018 2017

• 2018-19 Winter Survey data indicates:

• 55% Hive Loss & 31% NUC Loss

• Overall Loss rates continue to decline over the 3 years of the survey

• Beekeepers are using the data from the surveys to influence their management practices.

• Merrimack County continues to have the highest loss rates which we need to investigate further.

• Hives with the highest survival rate are treated for mites and often Nosema.

• We need to continue to collect multiple years of data to really understand trends


2018-19 Hive Loss Survey Summary

• Work with our UNH coop extension colleagues using this data to continue :• Support grant applications to further beekeeper education.

• Help shape future grant requests

• Do additional analysis to determine:• Why Merrimack county continues to have such high loss rates

• Combine with data from the other citizen science projects

• Add weather and other factors as overlays to gain more insight.

• Make this summary data public on our website • Present data at club meetings if the clubs are interested.

• Email the summary (or a pointer to the info on the website) to :

• All NHBA Membership

• All participants that submitted information to the survey

• Send paper copies of the summary to members who participated via postal mail.

• Submit an article to ABJ and/or Bee Culture describing our findings – both about the loss as well as running surveys for the beekeeping community

• Run this survey in 2020


2017-18 Hive Loss Survey Recommendations & Request for Approval


Additional Information

• Hive & NUC Loss per month – If there was more than 1 month listed, I assume that the hives/NUCs were lost equally across the months.. Ex: If 2 hives were lost & 2 month were listed, I applied 1 hive loss in month1 and 1 hive loss in month 2

• For “survival by Type” graphs, I only used the data for apiaries with 1 race of bees, because I had no way to know the split of which hives survived and which died when there were multiple races reported in a given apiary.

• For “survival by treatment type” graphs, I only used the data for apiaries that used 1 type of commercial treatment because I had no way to know the split of what products were used on which surviving hives in a given apiary


Notes

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Hudson 2018 2019 Winter

Hillsboro County

Daily Temperature High and Low

TMAX TMIN

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

Hudson Daily Precipitation (water inches)

Winter 2018-2019

-20

0

20

40

60

80

100

Hopkinton 2018-2019 Winter

Merrimack County

Daily Temperature High and Low

Tmax Tmin


0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2

Precipitation Winter 2018-2019

Berlin Coos Co

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Temperature Differences Winter 2018-2019

Berlin Coos Co

TMAX TMIN


-20

0

20

40

60

80

100

Durham Winter 2018-2019

Temperature Differences

Strafford County

TMAX TMIN

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5


Durham Strafford Co


-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Greenland Winter 2018-2019


Rockingham County

TMAX TMIN

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5


Greenland Rockingham Co


-20

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Lakeport Winter 2018-2019


Belknap County

TMAX TMIN

0

0.5

1

1.5

2


Lakeport Belknap Co


-20

0

20

40

60

80

100

Newport Winter 2018-2019


Sullivan County

TMAX TMIN

0

0.5

1

1.5

2


Newport Sullivan Co


-40

-20

0

20

40

60

80

100

Lebanon Winter 2018-2019


Grafton County

TMAX TMIN

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6



-20

0

20

40

60

80

100

Keene Winter 2018-2019

Cheshire County

TMAX TMIN

0

0.5

1

1.5

2


Keene, Cheshire Co


-20

0

20

40

60

80

100

White Mountain National Forest Winter 2018-2019

Daily Temperature Differences

Carroll County

TMAX TMIN

2018----19 NH Winter Hive Loss 19 NH Winter Hive Loss Results- Good Success overwintering NUCs -...

Documents

Transcript of 2018----19 NH Winter Hive Loss 19 NH Winter Hive Loss Results- Good Success overwintering NUCs -...