In the past weeks, I’ve stumbled upon the complaint of “being depending on chemicals” when it comes to varroa treatments quite a bit. This reflects a general tendency of black-and-white-thinking that is increasingly common. Because the solution for this supposed dependency is obviously “natural”. So, at one side we have the “bad” chemistry, at the other side we have “good” nature. Dependence versus liberty. Which, in my humble opinion, is taking people for fools.
I know that varroa is a pain. It would be much better if it wasn’t there. But it is. Varroa won’t disappear miraculously. It’s here to stay. That’s the reality we have to deal with. So, what we depend on is to keep honey bee colonies healthy and productive. We have to think how to deal with this situation. Varroa treatments aren’t a conspiracy to make some companies rich and keep beekeepers under control.
Some context on “depending on chemicals”
Varroa treatments can be a pain. You have to put effort into it, time and money. It may seem overwhelming to know what to do when and how. That’s why I say that learning makes you stronger. That’s how you build a foundation that makes it easier to deal with varroa – and other issues.
That we’re currently “depending on chemicals” has, as often, historical reasons. When varroa mites began to spread, colony losses were extremely high. The parasite spread so fast, that eradication never was an option – at least here in Europe. The question from the beginning was: “How can we control this parasite?”. First, different substances against other mites in agriculture or veterinary medicine were tried out. With some success. Some of these are still on the market, like amitraz or fluvalinate.
So, that was the fast solution to an urgent crisis. I dare to say that without these chemical solutions, beekeeping wouldn’t be at the levels it is nowadays. In the first years, colony losses were so high that many beekeepers gave up. So, only with the bad, bad chemicals varroa mites didn’t have a devastating effect.
Thinking further than the fast solution
Obviously, after this initial issue was solved, others appeared: First cases of resistance against the chemicals used came up. In addition, all of them were not suitable for organic beekeepers. So, alternatives were necessary as well as a more integrated approach to varroa treatments.
This was the birth of the “European varroa group”. A group of scientists from different European countries that wanted to develop treatments that could be used by organic beekeepers. In addition, they wanted to search for substances that wouldn’t leave residues in the honey or at least wouldn’t change its properties. Except the hop beta acids, all organic treatments we have now were developed by this group: formic acid, oxalic acid, and thymol.
Collaboration for better solutions for beekeepers
This included a lot of work and testing, as well as meetings to compare the results and talk about protocols. It was an atmosphere of very intense collaboration and friendship. I was lucky enough to do my PhD with Dr. Peter Rosenkranz. Who always brought his students with him to all sorts of meetings. So, I was just a few weeks into my PhD, when I went with him to a varroa group meeting. It made quite an impression on me, though I may not have understood everything they were talking about. But it was a very formative experience.
You get a good example of how this group worked in this paper about the development of the oxalic acid trickling method. This was before the “publish or perish” practice, so most of this work was published in beekeeping magazines, not scientific journals. It should get to the beekeepers, the direct beneficiaries as soon as possible. It was also this group that is responsible for the current “Guideline on veterinary medicinal products controlling Varroa destructor parasitosis in bees”. This guideline was directly taken from the internal protocols from the varroa group.
Next generation working on the old issues
As good as it was that the varroa group had the freedom to directly transfer the new developments to the beekeepers, this also bears some problems. The next generation of researchers doesn’t look at beekeeping magazines, they check the scientific journals only. Those are published in English, and accessible for all of them (at least if the university provides the service…). Beekeeping magazines, obviously, are in the language of the country they’re published in. So, new researcher miss all this information. That’s the good thing about conferences and meetings: There, the generations overlap and, hopefully, collaborative projects carry the information and experience into the next one.
Here’s where the “depending on chemicals” story comes in though. From the very beginning, there were attempts to breed varroa-resistant bees – something I’m very sceptical about. But I often hear “we need a long-term solution” or something like that. And I always wonder how this should look like.
“Long-term solution” suggests that you do something once and have your peace for a long time. Like buying “varroa-resistant” stock and then never have to treat again. But is this realistic? As a biologist, I very much doubt it. Even if there was something like “resistant stock”, varroa mites aren’t little unchangeable machines that can’t adapt to change. That they switched from Apis cerana to our bees as a host is already a proof that they can. Also breeding will mean a continuous effort.
Are chemicals bad?
There are no miracle cures. Chemical varroa treatments aren’t and breeding won’t be. Yes, there are some populations that survive longer without treatments. But they lose this miraculous trait when transported elsewhere. At least they did in the past 30 years I’m dealing with this. And coordinating a breeding project for varroa resistance even convinced me more that it’s only a lot of promises.
Which doesn’t mean that I advocate for treatments without borders. No, varroa treatments are veterinary medicine and have to be treated as such. Which means, you treat when it’s necessary to help your colonies to deal with the parasite. In my opinion, varroa is like a chronic disease that you need medication for. You take your meds as your doctor prescribed them. Sometimes there’s some adjusting to do.
It’s the same with varroa. We have some treatment schemes and recommendations, that keep your colonies healthy and productive. It’s like the medication of a chronic disease: you take it to avoid the negative effects you would have without them. Even if you’re feeling well, you should stay on your meds. Taking a chemical to keep your blood pressure stable is better than having high peaks that increases your risk of dying early. Same for varroa treatments.
So, are chemicals bad? No, they aren’t bad. At least not if you use them correctly. Then they bring you this unsexy preventive effect, that many forget when everything goes well. And are we depending on them? Yes, maybe. Because until we have that miraculous “long-term solution”, it’s the only thing we have to avoid large colony losses.
