Current News

http://honeybees.ca/bulletins/

 Szabo Queens has posted an interesting article and response  on their website regarding last year’s infant botulism campaign by Health Canada.

Mite Away Quick Strips™ (MAQS) has now received registration for use in Canada! 

 After being available in some other markets for over 2 years Mite Away Quick Strips™ (MAQS) has now received registration for use in Canada! 

 MAQS is a 7-day, single application mite control product registered for use against varroa and tracheal mites.  There are two critical application times.   MAQS can be used during the honey flow but since it is best to have healthy colony populations going into the honey flow, spring treatment 4 to 6weeks before the flow is recommended.   A honey super can be on.   To allow the bees time to produce a healthy winter cluster, MAQS should be applied at the end of the honey flow, usually while the last super is still on.   For most parts of Canada this will be late August or early September.

 The active ingredient is formic acid and its formates, contained in a saccharide gel matrix, wrapped in a specially formulated wicking Ecopaper.   Formic acid vapour is released over a 3 to 4 day period at levels sufficient to kill varroa mites on the bees and the mites attempting reproduction under the cap.  The male varroa are particularly susceptible, so young surviving females are likely to be infertile.  Overall efficacy is expected to be in the 95% range over time, when compared to other products that just treat varroa on the adult bees (phoretic varroa).

 MAQS technology allows for an expansion of the temperature range.  Daytime highs, for the first three days, can be in the 10 to 33ºC (50 to 92ºF) range, which will allow for increased flexibility.  Beekeepers need to be certain that the temperatures will be below the maximum temperature on the critical first day, so a maximum high of 85ºF is recommended for the day of application.

 Beekeepers can expect a brief hic-up in brood rearing in some colonies, which is quickly made up by the queen laying enthusiastically.   Treatment may also trigger queen supersedure activity, so some colonies may replace their queens or may end up with mother/daughters both present.   This is also fairly common if the bees had already started queen cells before treatment.

 The bees will expand the cluster when treated so a bee-beard may form on the hive during the first stage of treatment. This is normal behavior, which varies widely between colonies, even in the same yard.   It is more likely to occur at higher temperatures.  The bees usually go back in a few hours later, or if the temperatures cool.  Having a super on may reduce the bearding behavior. 

 The colony should not be disturbed during the 7-day treatment period.   The hives should have good food reserves at time of treatment, ready to be converted into brood.  Feed reserves should be monitored after treatment, and supplemented if necessary.

 MAQS has been shown to suppress nosema spore levels in the one trial where levels were monitored.  Further work in this area will be undertaken in near future. 

 The mites are not expected to develop resistance to formic acid, so once the transition is made to consistently using MAQS the beekeepers of Canada can relax, knowing that varroa control will be sustainable, with no risk of chemical residues accumulating in wax or honey.

 For more information call toll free 866-483-2929 or check MAQS out at www.miteaway.com

CAPA Statement on Honey Bees Losses in Canada (2011)

 In 2011, a core set of harmonized winter loss survey questions was devised by CAPA which was used as a basis for each province to implement its own wintering survey.  This approach facilitated direct comparison of key winter loss data across regions.  Based on results from eight Canadian provinces, 30.9% of the colonies that were wintered during 2010-11 died or were deemed too weak to be commercially productive.  This represents 2.1x the long-term winter loss rate for Canada and a substantial increase over the loss rate for 2009-10 (21.0%). 

 Table 1.  Gross Losses by Province, Winter 2010-11. 

¹ Dead and commercially unproductive colonies as of 1 May 2011.  Figure calculated from provincial loss rates (derived from survey data) and total colonies put into winter.

^† Based on surveys of producers in Alberta with 400 or more colonies.

 General Trends

 In the years subsequent to the introduction of the ectoparasitic mite Varroa destructor into Canada, normal long-term overwintering mortality has been considered to be 15%.  During the winter of 2010-11, mortality due to wintering losses and spring dwindling was 30.9%.  This loss is greater than the 2009-10 mortality figure of 21.0% and is similar to the three winters previous: 33.9% (2008-09), 35.0% (2007-08) and 29.0% (2006-07).

 Compared with the winter of 2009-10, loss rates across all reporting provinces increased with the exception of Nova Scotia.  Highest losses were experienced in the province of Ontario. 

 For beekeepers experiencing the highest levels of loss, a number of common reasons were reported by extension professionals in Canada.  These include:  1) higher numbers of weak colonies in the fall months being prepared for winter, 2) ineffective Varroa control leading to higher mite populations on bees over the wintering period, 3) higher than normal rates of queen loss, and 5) high levels of Nosema ceranae.  A final common theme reported across all regions was, 6) the exceptionally cold and in many cases rainy weather during spring 2011 which contributed increased dwindling and loss of colonies that emerged from winter. 

 Losses in Ontario

 Though overall losses in Canada generally increased in 2010-11, the Province of Ontario experienced the highest rate of loss of any region in Canada at 43%.  The Province of Ontario, in addition to implementing national harmonized survey questions, also implemented a thorough wintering survey of its own beekeeping industry in 2010-11.  This report may be found at:

http://www.omafra.gov.on.ca/english/food/inspection/bees/2011-winter-loss.htm

 The survey revealed a wide range of wintering mortalities among Ontario commercial beekeepers (from 2 to 95%), nevertheless losses were similar among regions within the province.  The overall rate of loss in Ontario was the highest recorded since wintering surveys were undertaken in 2002, with the previous highest loss recorded in 2007 (35%).  In the winter of 2009-10, wintering loss in Ontario was recorded as being 21.6%, as reported in CAPA’s annual statement of national losses. 

 In Ontario, beekeepers reported mortality to occur because of ineffective Varroa control, Nosema levels, poor queens, weak colonies and poor weather conditions. 

 Based on the Ontario survey results, 50.8% of responding beekeepers reported monitoring for Varroa mites.  All respondents reported treating for Varroa in the fall, with 82% treating between late August and mid-September and 12% from late September onwards.  No relationship was found between treatment date and levels of wintering mortality.

 In Ontario, 37% of respondents used Apivar^® (Amitraz), 19.5% used formic acid while smaller proportions of beekeepers used a combination of treatments, including oxalic acid.  Few beekeepers (2.4%) used used CheckMite+^® (coumaphos) and 1.2% used Apistan^® (fluvalinate).  No relationship was found among Varroa treatment methods and rates of loss.

 Forty-five percent of Ontario respondents also treated for nosema disease in the fall, however, no difference was found among wintering mortality levels of beekeepers that treated or did not.

 Varroa is still considered to be a major factor in colony mortality in Ontario, with the impact of Nosema ceranae being less clear.  Early spring conditions in Ontario may have led to the production of greater quantities of brood which would have also increased Varroa levels more greatly than in a typical year.  A cool, long spring in many parts of this province is also suggested to have contributed to a greater number of weak colonies and substantial increases in calculated winter mortality as colonies dwindled and died until mid-spring.

CANPOLIN 2010 Beekeeping Survey Report

I am please to inform you that the CANPOLIN 2010 Beekeeping Survey Report is now available.

Thank you all for your support in distributing the questionnaire.

The attached document is also publicly available from:
http://www.uoguelph.ca/canpolin/Survey/survey.html

That's the CANPOLIN website ( www.uoguelph.ca/canpolin ), under the Beekeeping Survey tab.

The Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) has begun a systematic review of its regulatory frameworks, to improve consistency and reduce complexity in regulation.

The CFIA will be consulting on its multi-year plan for regulatory modernization. It will do this internally with staff and externally with the industry it regulates.  

A discussion paper outlining the CFIA’s proposed approach for this review is ready for comment. On December 22, 2011, this discussion paper will be posted on the CFIA website (www.inspection.gc.ca) and the Consulting with Canadians (http://www.consultingcanadians.gc.ca)
(December 23rd) website for a 60-day period.

As outlined in the document, the CFIA will develop an agenda for regulatory modernization that meets the needs of stakeholders and is strategic, balanced and achievable.

The CFIA encourages you to actively participate in this regulatory review process. We want your perspective. As you go through the discussion document, please think about the following questions.
       
●        Consider the key questions we have used in our scan of the
regulatory frameworks. Are there additional questions that should influence prioritization?

●        Are the proposed guiding principles relevant and appropriate to
you as a stakeholder?

●        Are you satisfied with the priorities?

●        How can the industry and government work together to approach
the issues?

●        What would be the most effective way to continue to engage you
in future regulatory review?

●        What is the nature of the issues and gaps in the CFIA’s
regulatory framework, and how would you characterize the level of consensus in your industry regarding this? What type of change is necessary to achieve a modern framework?
       
       Please send your input to:
CFIAPROGRAMS_ACIAPROGRAMMES@inspection.gc.ca by February 21, 2012.
       
For more information on this initiative, please refer to the attached questions and answers.

Thank you.

George Da Pont
President
***********************
L’Agence canadienne d’inspection des aliments (ACIA) a entrepris l’examen systématique de ses cadres réglementaires dans le but d’harmoniser et de simplifier la réglementation.

Pour ce qui est de son plan pluriannuel de modernisation de la réglementation, l’Agence consultera tant ses employés que les parties réglementées.
       
Le document de consultation donnant l’approche que propose l’Agence est prêt pour commentaire. Ce document de discussion sera affiché le 22 décembre 2011sur le site Web de l’Agence (www.inspection.gc.ca) et sur le site Consultations auprès des Canadiennes et des Canadiens
(http://www.consultingcanadians.gc.ca) (le 23 décembre 2011), pour une période de soixante jours.

Comme il est dit dans le document (insérer le lien ici), l’ACIA établira un plan de modernisation de la réglementation stratégique, équilibré et concret, qui sera en ligne avec les besoins des intervenants.
       
L’Agence vous encourage à prendre part activement au processus d’examen de la réglementation. Nous tenons à connaître vos vues. En prenant connaissance du document de discussion, vous devez tenter de répondre aux questions qui suivent.
       
●        Étudiez les questions clés dont nous avons tenu compte lors de
notre analyse des cadres de réglementation. Y a-t-il d’autres questions qui devraient influencer l’établissement des priorités?

●        Les principes directeurs proposés sont-ils pertinents et vous
conviennent-ils en tant qu’intervenant?

●        Êtes-vous satisfait des priorités?

●        Comment l'industrie et le gouvernement peuvent-ils collaborer
pour aborder ces questions?

●        Quel serait le moyen le plus efficace de vous amener à continuer
à participer à l'examen de la réglementation?

●        Quelle est la nature des préoccupations et des lacunes en ce qui
se rapporte au cadre réglementaire de l’ACIA? Quel est le niveau de cons ensus dans le secteur à cet égard? Quels types de changements faut-il pour obtenir une réelle modernisation du cadre?

Veuillez nous envoyer vos suggestions et commentaires par courriel à l’adresse CFIAPROGRAMS-ACIAPROGRAMMES@inspection.gc.ca au plus tard le 21 février 2012.
       
Pour obtenir plus d’information concernant cette initiative, veuillez vous référer au document Questions et réponses ci-joint.

Merci.

George Da Pont
Président