I've seen a tree that had three large (~8in/20cm) balls of bees hanging off of branches. My grandfather (a beekeeper) said the queen had likely stopped at each spot to consider it for a hive (leaving pheromones), then moved on, and the swarm landed at each place. He was greatly entertained at the idea that the bees on the outside were trying to get to the queen (who wasn't there) and the bees on the inside had figured that out but couldn't leave because of the bees on the outside.
That said, my grandfather was a beekeeper and a father is a beekeeper and I'm a little uncertain about how much of their hobby is built on communal agreement, anecdotes, and personal experience as opposed to scientific data. (The same can be said about our profession though - what was the last good study on code readability you read vs the opinions on code readability you have?)
> My grandfather (a beekeeper) said the queen had likely stopped at each spot to consider it for a hive (leaving pheromones), then moved on, and the swarm landed at each place.
Usually (but not always) when you see multiple swarm clusters like that, a hive has sent out more than one swarm, each with it's own queen. The primary, largest swarm will contain the original hive queen while the others will contain virgin queens. If they happen to combine into one cluster, the queens will likely fight and only one will survive to lead the swarm.
The queen never leaves the swarm cluster, and has no bearing on the decision of hive location. The swarm sends out scout workers who inspect locations for suitability and report back to the cluster. Through a voting process, the workers decide and move as one to the permanent home.
If you're interested in this topic (which is fascinating), there is a great book on it called 'Honeybee Democracy' by the bee researcher Thomas Seeley.
> That said, my grandfather was a beekeeper and a father is a beekeeper and I'm a little uncertain about how much of their hobby is built on communal agreement, anecdotes, and personal experience as opposed to scientific data.
Partly because of the commercial value of honeybees to our food production, they have been studied to an extent not seen in many other organisms, certainly not most insects. We know a LOT about their behavior, although there is still much to learn.
What's really interesting is that beekeepers often neglect what we do know about how bees evolved to live so that we can keep them in ways that make our lives easier. This is often detrimental.
> The queen never leaves the swarm cluster, and has no bearing on the decision of hive location. The swarm sends out scout workers who inspect locations for suitability and report back to the cluster. Through a voting process, the workers decide and move as one to the permanent home.
> If you're interested in this topic (which is fascinating), there is a great book on it called 'Honeybee Democracy' by the bee researcher Thomas Seeley.
Fascinating! So it isn't a monarchy after all? :P Thanks for the recommendation.
I’ve seen this breeding research ant colonies in captivity. I would flood colonies that had overgrown their enclosure to move them into a new container. The queen resisted while workers fought to move her, until they reached a critical mass and forced her to the new enclosure
> What's really interesting is that beekeepers often neglect what we do know about how bees evolved to live so that we can keep them in ways that make our lives easier. This is often detrimental.
Do you have examples that don't apply to mobile hives? That sounds like an interesting topic.
There are some interesting points there but many are inaccurate.
Difference 4 discusses the loss of antimicrobial colony walls. They coat man man hives, it’s there. There might be less but the amount depends on the age of the gear.
Difference 6 relates to hive entrances and how snow blocks them and they are the wrong design. This maybe true somewhere, but many places have no snow and good beekeepers adjust their entrances to suit the conditions and prevent robbing. This is superior to an uncontrolled entrance.
There is criticism of wax removal. Old wax spreads diseases and makes disease management harder. Yes, making wax consumes energy, but it improves hive health.
Point 18 discusses the human selection of larvae for queens, or culling of poor queen cells. Strangely, bees choose queen larvae poorly. If a colony is queenless they need a new one. The best queens are fed royal jelly early, but a queen is needed fast if a colony is queenless. The first queen to hatch is usually the winner so the older larvae fed jelly wins. These queens tend to be poor.
Human management of bees keeps them alive. Unmanaged they die, fast. Often bees are kept where they wouldn’t be naturally, so deaths may not all be bad, but humans go to a lot of effort to keep colonies alive by working with bees, not against them.
I have a wonderful video from a festival we were at a few years ago where the bees were in a ball under a table. A bee keeper arrived, put a cardboard box underneath and gave the table a thud. The queen fell into the box and the rest followed. They were standing on the box doing a funny little pointy thing of the direction to fly in. He said that it was the hive splitting by producing a second queen. Apparently they set up a temporary home for a couple of days while scouting for a good place to establish themselves. It was insane how much of a wax honeycomb nest they had already created.
It’s excellent to watch. A big swarm has enough honey onboard to fill 2-3 full depth boxes. I’ve caught some big ones, but a full box in a week is my record.
It’s good to let them and not to help or give them frames. Getting them to make wax gets all the honey out of them as this honey can contain American Foulbrood spores. Locking it up in wax is lower risk than having them feed it to young larvae.
> My grandfather (a beekeeper) said the queen had likely stopped at each spot to consider it for a hive (leaving pheromones), then moved on, and the swarm landed at each place.
This happens a lot. I caught 3 or 4 this year with little clumps nearby where she had landed. You pick up the bees, put them in the box then douse the area in smoke (lasts 10 mins) or air freshener (works for hours) to hide her smell.
Otherwise they go back there. Then leave the new hive sitting nearby with the queen inside and they’ll all go in at nightfall. It’s always interesting coming back at night as you fear they all left, but picking up a box that has gained 5-6kgs is satisfying.
Those little clumps that can be left behind are just so sad. They cling there in the rain at night. I’m the weird guy out there grabbing them.
A little bit of a tangent to the main topic but...
>I'm a little uncertain about how much of their hobby is built on communal agreement, anecdotes, and personal experience as opposed to scientific data.
Scientific data, which we interpret to mean a more thoughtful hypothesis and data gathering mechanism, is not always more correct than anecdote and personal experience. For example, it turns out we'd have been better off taking nutrition advice from our great-grandmas in the old country, rather than the mid 20th century scientific analysis (gathering data and running regressions) on the optimal way to eat macro-nutrients.
In some cases when knowledge is generated by a complex non-linear system, the default human approach of building anecdotes and personal experience is stronger.
Similarly, I'd sooner trust the sage wisdom on code readability from some 50 year old open source hackers, then a team of PhDs in their 20s or 30s, who studied a bunch of teams and summarized their results.
Nutritional science is a dumpster fire due to economic reasons. Schools and other institutions had to serve their charges something, and they'd get sued if it wasn't "healthy" according to what science knows, so there was immense economic pressure to get scientists to declare some kind of nutritional standard.
I've taken a class and had a look at the literature.
Because it's such a compelling and charismatic topic (bees are a symbol of eternal life, hard work, etc.) there are A LOT of books out there. One bibliography is included in this PDF by the ScientificBeekeeping.com guy: http://scientificbeekeeping.com/scibeeimages/BEGINNERS-OUTLI...
Some books, like the recent "The Bees" by Laline Paul, take huge narrative liberties and don't really care about the scientific truth. Poetic licence. Beekeepers ostensibly don't have any time for that kind of thing, but...
I do think that, at least in my part of the world, people who keep bees often tend to be a bit vague and scatterbrained when it comes to theory. They aren't scientific about their beekeeping—it's more like home cooking. There are superstitions, and rarely enough empirical data in one person's experience to disprove them.
It was really off-putting on the course I attended, actually, to have the biological principles of bee colonies explained in such an inept and confused way. The variation, in terms of beekeeping practice, from one person to another is only going to be more arbitrary and quixotic.
It is not really a flaw in the scientific progress, but in the distribution of trust. The scientific method essentially offer eventual correctness, that is that every mistake made now will be eventually corrected.
How we decide when it is enough is a separate hard problem we still do not know how to handle. This is also the reason why science as arbiter of truth is at best sketchy (out of very specific instances e.g. black holes).
>eventual correctness, that is that every mistake made now will be eventually corrected.
That is not a feature unique to the scientific method, though. The same could be said of narrative tradition, or the heat death of the universe for that matter.
I disagree, I hold in very high regard the truth of traditions, but they clearly lack an internal method to correct wrong assumptions. They have an external method, that is a society dies and a "better" one take its place. Science does not need to (either figuratively or literally) die to fix wrong information.
With a stretch of the meaning then, ok. But it is like saying that evolution will create the perfect creature eventually without mentioning that everything resembling us will be long dead at that point.
>Our epistemological process is primarily scientific reasoning
"Our" is a pretty loaded term there. Empiricism is "primary" in only a few limited bubbles of society. Religion, common knowledge, consensus, rationalism, etc are other epistemological processes familiar to many.
The person who was worried someone would kill them was not silly.
I have been called to remove 2 swarms this year after the homeowner had already doused them in flyspray.
The last one was a bit bigger than a basketball. Depressing.
>As the first film streamed across the Internet in 1993, the New York Times declaring Wax or the Discovery of Television Among the Bees an “historic event.”
>Blair performs in the film, which additionally features a cameo by William Burroughs. As an anti-war statement, Wax provided an early critique of the Gulf War and current-day drone warfare. A combination of innovative digital animation, found footage, and live action, Wax’s visual form is a unique representation of the technologies and politics that it critiques, which still reverberate today.
Shades of the movie Jupiter Ascending. I wonder if the woman is related to Jupiter Jones. In seriousness, someone should have made an inventory of the products in her car and on it, because if that's something that's going to happen again it could put even more strain on a a fragile bee ecosystem. It could also lead to more effective bee repellents, and/or tools for beekeepers.
I've seen a tree that had three large (~8in/20cm) balls of bees hanging off of branches. My grandfather (a beekeeper) said the queen had likely stopped at each spot to consider it for a hive (leaving pheromones), then moved on, and the swarm landed at each place. He was greatly entertained at the idea that the bees on the outside were trying to get to the queen (who wasn't there) and the bees on the inside had figured that out but couldn't leave because of the bees on the outside.
That said, my grandfather was a beekeeper and a father is a beekeeper and I'm a little uncertain about how much of their hobby is built on communal agreement, anecdotes, and personal experience as opposed to scientific data. (The same can be said about our profession though - what was the last good study on code readability you read vs the opinions on code readability you have?)