Showing posts with label CCD. Show all posts
Showing posts with label CCD. Show all posts
Sunday, October 10, 2010
Article: Honeybees' collapse caused by combination of virus and fungus study reports
Many of you are already aware of this news but I thought I'd provide a link to the Christian Science Monitor's article on this important development anyway. Thank you Chad for providing this link.
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
Bees In More Trouble Than Ever...
Another disturbing article on honeybee decline found in the Gainesville Sun. As the article states:
MERCED, Calif. — The mysterious 4-year-old crisis of disappearing honeybees is deepening. A quick federal survey indicates a heavy bee die-off this winter, while a new study shows honeybees' pollen and hives laden with pesticides.I wonder if death rates are the same for non-commercial beekeepers?
Monday, March 8, 2010
Article: U.S. Honey Bee Population Decreases Again
Another disturbing and mysterious decline in U.S. honeybee colonies is reported this winter:
“The reports that I have gotten from beekeepers is that about 30% of the healthy colonies that have gone to California - for this 2010 almond pollination to fulfill pollination contracts - have died in two or three weeks” - Jerry Hayes, Asst. Chief,
Apiary Inspection, Florida Dept. of Agriculture
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Article: "Bee Mortality Has Never Been So High..."
A disturbing article by a prominent Italian beekeeper.
Saturday, January 30, 2010
Frozen River Film Festival-- "Canaries in a Coal Mine" Film set
Winona Minnesota's annual Frozen River Film Festival is this week and I will be introducing a "film set" I have labeled Canaries in a Coal Mine films. Each of the three films concerns the plight of a living creature, its role in the ecological system, and the possible consequences its plight has for the ecological and socio-economic environments.
The first movie is Skylight (David Baas). This animated film concerns the ecological of penguins in the Antarctic and what their plight might mean human beings.
The second movie, End of the Line (Rupert Murray), is about the devastating effect that overfishing our oceans and the total disregard our politicians and famous restaurateurs seem to have for this problem. The movie predicts the end of most seafood by 2048.
As a beekeeper, I will be most interested in the last film: Jason Kushner's American Colonies- Collapse of the Bee. The film examines the place of the honeybee in our economy and biophysical environment and the threat Colony Collapse Disorder might pose to both. The film also presents possible solutions to this threat.
The three films will be shown at 3:30 at the Science Laboratory Center Lecture Hall (SLC 120) at Winona State University.
The first movie is Skylight (David Baas). This animated film concerns the ecological of penguins in the Antarctic and what their plight might mean human beings.
The second movie, End of the Line (Rupert Murray), is about the devastating effect that overfishing our oceans and the total disregard our politicians and famous restaurateurs seem to have for this problem. The movie predicts the end of most seafood by 2048.
As a beekeeper, I will be most interested in the last film: Jason Kushner's American Colonies- Collapse of the Bee. The film examines the place of the honeybee in our economy and biophysical environment and the threat Colony Collapse Disorder might pose to both. The film also presents possible solutions to this threat.
The three films will be shown at 3:30 at the Science Laboratory Center Lecture Hall (SLC 120) at Winona State University.
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Bees In An Iron Cage? Part I-- Introduction
On November 4th at 7:30 pm, I will be giving a presentation entitled "Bees in an Iron Cage?: The Formal Rationalization of 20th Century American Apiculture" at the Stark Auditorium at Winona State University. The presentation is part of Winona State's CLASP lecture series which has as its theme this year, Food. I will be collecting my thoughts for this lecture and writing my notes right here on my blog: Canaries In A Coal Mine.
About two years ago, the news media reported a mysterious "new" disease that was attacking and killing thousands of managed bee hives throughout the United States. Labeled Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD), the disease exhibited the following symptoms:
1. "Complete absence of adult bees in colonies, with little or no build-up of dead bees in or around the colonies.
2. [The]Presence of capped brood in colonies. Bees normally will not abandon a hive until the capped brood have all hatched.
3. [The]Presence of food stores, both honey and bee pollen:
i. which are not immediately robbed by other bees
ii. which when attacked by hive pests such as wax moth and small hive beetle, the attack is noticeably delayed." Wikipedia
As many in the beekeeping and entomology community can tell you, this is not the first time these symptoms have occurred nor are they the first major threat to the honey bee population. Over the last few decades, honey bee health has been threatened by other pathogens including both tracheal mites and, in the late 1980s, the varroa mite.
Scientific research into the causes of CCD have discovered multiple factors connected to the outbreak, including: nutritional deficiencies in bees, new and emerging diseases (e.g.Nosema ceranae), the continuing infestation of varroa mites and its associated disorders, pesticide poisoning originating both inside and outside the hive, and a lack of genetic diversity in the honey bee population. (CCD Steering Committee 2007)
As an environmental sociologist, I agree with social ecologist, Murray Bookchin "... that nearly all [of] our present ecological problems arise from deep-seated social problems. " The biophysical factors connected to Colony Collapse Disorder, and the general decline of honey bee health over the last few decades have their foundation in human social structures that conflict with the biophysical needs of other living creatures. The aim of this presentation is to briefly examine one such structural process (formal rationalization) and its possible effects on honey bee health. In doing this, I clearly recognize the limitations of this presentation. First, I do not claim rationalization to be the chief social factor behind the decline of honey bee health. In other places, I have pointed to the possible effects of globalization, agri-business practices and techniques and the structure of the subfield of beekeeping within the larger field of modern agriculture. Secondly, I do not claim that all rationalization of apiculture has been bad to bee health, nor do I claim to be an expert in bee management. Lastly, I do not claim any original insights here. Much of what I will speak of tonight will be painfully recognizable to anyone familiar with the factory farming of other creatures humans find useful and profitable to manage.
My presentation will begin with a brief discussion of the term rationalization and its use in sociology. I will then turn to a short history of the rationalization of apiculture in the United States over the last 160 years. After this, I will give a few examples of ways that rationalized techniques of bee management may conflict with the biophysical needs of honey bees. Lastly, I will describe some of the anti-rationalization movements emerging in the beekeeping world today.
About two years ago, the news media reported a mysterious "new" disease that was attacking and killing thousands of managed bee hives throughout the United States. Labeled Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD), the disease exhibited the following symptoms:
1. "Complete absence of adult bees in colonies, with little or no build-up of dead bees in or around the colonies.
2. [The]Presence of capped brood in colonies. Bees normally will not abandon a hive until the capped brood have all hatched.
3. [The]Presence of food stores, both honey and bee pollen:
i. which are not immediately robbed by other bees
ii. which when attacked by hive pests such as wax moth and small hive beetle, the attack is noticeably delayed." Wikipedia
As many in the beekeeping and entomology community can tell you, this is not the first time these symptoms have occurred nor are they the first major threat to the honey bee population. Over the last few decades, honey bee health has been threatened by other pathogens including both tracheal mites and, in the late 1980s, the varroa mite.
Scientific research into the causes of CCD have discovered multiple factors connected to the outbreak, including: nutritional deficiencies in bees, new and emerging diseases (e.g.Nosema ceranae), the continuing infestation of varroa mites and its associated disorders, pesticide poisoning originating both inside and outside the hive, and a lack of genetic diversity in the honey bee population. (CCD Steering Committee 2007)
As an environmental sociologist, I agree with social ecologist, Murray Bookchin "... that nearly all [of] our present ecological problems arise from deep-seated social problems. " The biophysical factors connected to Colony Collapse Disorder, and the general decline of honey bee health over the last few decades have their foundation in human social structures that conflict with the biophysical needs of other living creatures. The aim of this presentation is to briefly examine one such structural process (formal rationalization) and its possible effects on honey bee health. In doing this, I clearly recognize the limitations of this presentation. First, I do not claim rationalization to be the chief social factor behind the decline of honey bee health. In other places, I have pointed to the possible effects of globalization, agri-business practices and techniques and the structure of the subfield of beekeeping within the larger field of modern agriculture. Secondly, I do not claim that all rationalization of apiculture has been bad to bee health, nor do I claim to be an expert in bee management. Lastly, I do not claim any original insights here. Much of what I will speak of tonight will be painfully recognizable to anyone familiar with the factory farming of other creatures humans find useful and profitable to manage.
My presentation will begin with a brief discussion of the term rationalization and its use in sociology. I will then turn to a short history of the rationalization of apiculture in the United States over the last 160 years. After this, I will give a few examples of ways that rationalized techniques of bee management may conflict with the biophysical needs of honey bees. Lastly, I will describe some of the anti-rationalization movements emerging in the beekeeping world today.
Friday, March 6, 2009
Experiences in My Global Issues Course
This semester I am using Michael Schacker's A Spring Without Bees in my Global Issues course. It has been serving as the basis for helping my students think about environmental global issues. I have supplemented this reading with the wealth of videos about honey bees and CCD available on the internet. The reaction toward this topic has been phenomenal. I am being constantly bombarded by student questions and interest. I am approached in the hallway after class with even more discussion about bees and their social and ecological environment. In all, this topic has peaked their interest in a way no other topic has.
I am left with mixed feelings as I do this, however. On the one hand, it is wonderful to discuss this topic with truly engaged students for a change. In my 27 years of university teaching, this has been a very rare experience. On the other hand, it has increased my bitterness toward the university that will not support me in expanding this topic into a full semester Global Issues course. I wish the institution trusted my intuition and experience more than they do.
I am left with mixed feelings as I do this, however. On the one hand, it is wonderful to discuss this topic with truly engaged students for a change. In my 27 years of university teaching, this has been a very rare experience. On the other hand, it has increased my bitterness toward the university that will not support me in expanding this topic into a full semester Global Issues course. I wish the institution trusted my intuition and experience more than they do.
Sunday, January 18, 2009
Bees and the Enduring Conflict, Part II
If the Treadmill of Production theory is correct, and if the treadmill economy is impacting the health of honeybees, than we are left to find solutions that are not in the current interests of any human being, whether rich or poor, whether an academic sociologist or a migratory beekeeper. All of us in growth economies have an interest in preserving that economy, which increasingly makes environmental withdrawals (e.g. resources, habitat) while increasing waste additions. We may delay the negatives, or ship these negative consequences off to developing countries, but ecological destruction globally will continue.
In a growth economy, social problems are dealt with by expanding the economic pie, rather than in cutting up the pieces more equally (redistribution). Expand the economy and you feed the poor. Expand the economy and you provide more jobs for the unemployed. Expand the economy so that scholarships are provided for education. Corporations can keep their profit with enough surplus so that no one is left out. (At least in theory and in rhetoric!) But increasing growth also means what I've said above-- increasing the amount of withdrawals from the ecosystem, and increasing the additions (i.e. waste) pumped back into it.
All of us might like to jump off the this treadmill but it isn't in our interests. My salary as an academic depends on the tuition of my students, endowments by generous donors, state and private aid to students, student loans, and research and teaching grants which all depend on the expansion of the economy. Migratory beekeepers find themselves stuck on the agribusiness treadmill and the realities of economic growth which, while no doubt negative for the health of the honeybee, is necessary for the economic survival of these relatively small family-run concerns. Hobby and Sideline beekeepers who use standard beekeeping equipment (whether natural beekeepers or their chemical-using brethren) are dependent on the success of commercial beekeepers on the treadmill, since the companies that provide them with equipment and bee packages primarily live off the purchases made by larger treadmill outfits. This demonstrates why pointing the finger at migratory beekeepers, and blaming them for honeybee decline is so unfair and almost hypocritical. If the treadmill of production theory is correct, the "enemy is all of us!."
The question, then, is it possible to stop or slow down the treadmill and what can we do, in the meantime, to save the honeybee? This calls for more than simply scientific/technological solutions, but to some type of social structural, cultural, economic and political changes that are well beyond any one of us to do and totally against our short-term interests.
In a growth economy, social problems are dealt with by expanding the economic pie, rather than in cutting up the pieces more equally (redistribution). Expand the economy and you feed the poor. Expand the economy and you provide more jobs for the unemployed. Expand the economy so that scholarships are provided for education. Corporations can keep their profit with enough surplus so that no one is left out. (At least in theory and in rhetoric!) But increasing growth also means what I've said above-- increasing the amount of withdrawals from the ecosystem, and increasing the additions (i.e. waste) pumped back into it.
All of us might like to jump off the this treadmill but it isn't in our interests. My salary as an academic depends on the tuition of my students, endowments by generous donors, state and private aid to students, student loans, and research and teaching grants which all depend on the expansion of the economy. Migratory beekeepers find themselves stuck on the agribusiness treadmill and the realities of economic growth which, while no doubt negative for the health of the honeybee, is necessary for the economic survival of these relatively small family-run concerns. Hobby and Sideline beekeepers who use standard beekeeping equipment (whether natural beekeepers or their chemical-using brethren) are dependent on the success of commercial beekeepers on the treadmill, since the companies that provide them with equipment and bee packages primarily live off the purchases made by larger treadmill outfits. This demonstrates why pointing the finger at migratory beekeepers, and blaming them for honeybee decline is so unfair and almost hypocritical. If the treadmill of production theory is correct, the "enemy is all of us!."
The question, then, is it possible to stop or slow down the treadmill and what can we do, in the meantime, to save the honeybee? This calls for more than simply scientific/technological solutions, but to some type of social structural, cultural, economic and political changes that are well beyond any one of us to do and totally against our short-term interests.
Monday, August 18, 2008
Tuesday, July 22, 2008
Sociologists of Minnesota Conference
I sent this email today to the conference coordinator of the Sociologists of Minnesota.
I am interested in participating in the October conference but am a bit at a loss on how I might fit in.
I am a sociologist who teaches at Saint Mary's University of Minnesota. Over the last two years I've taken an interest, professionally, personally and politically, in the environmental issues surrounding the "disappearance" of honey bees. I think, as social ecologists might argue, this environmental issue has its roots in deep seated social problems, rather than simply just being a technical/scientific issue with a technical/scientific solution. The application of "Tayloristic" management practices to apiculture, the "grow or die" economic model of global capitalism, agribusiness practices like monoculture of crops, and aspects of global trade are all factors that interact and impact the survival of the honey bee.
These concerns have affected my sociological practice in two ways. In my interdisciplinary global issues course, the sociological story of the honey bees plight is used to illustrated the larger global forces that impact my students' daily lives in their own local environment. On the activist side, I have become involved in a global movement of sustainable beekeepers who not only "handle" their bees in a "greener" way but actively protest against those social forces and practices threatening the bees survival. (see http://biobees.com/ ) To be honest, I've only started this whole project but I'd like feedback and wonder if this might fit into the conference somewhere?
I am interested in participating in the October conference but am a bit at a loss on how I might fit in.
I am a sociologist who teaches at Saint Mary's University of Minnesota. Over the last two years I've taken an interest, professionally, personally and politically, in the environmental issues surrounding the "disappearance" of honey bees. I think, as social ecologists might argue, this environmental issue has its roots in deep seated social problems, rather than simply just being a technical/scientific issue with a technical/scientific solution. The application of "Tayloristic" management practices to apiculture, the "grow or die" economic model of global capitalism, agribusiness practices like monoculture of crops, and aspects of global trade are all factors that interact and impact the survival of the honey bee.
These concerns have affected my sociological practice in two ways. In my interdisciplinary global issues course, the sociological story of the honey bees plight is used to illustrated the larger global forces that impact my students' daily lives in their own local environment. On the activist side, I have become involved in a global movement of sustainable beekeepers who not only "handle" their bees in a "greener" way but actively protest against those social forces and practices threatening the bees survival. (see http://biobees.com/ ) To be honest, I've only started this whole project but I'd like feedback and wonder if this might fit into the conference somewhere?
Wednesday, July 2, 2008
Clarifying the Issues
This week on the Organic Beekeeping List, a heated discussion developed between a more conventional beekeeper, Jim Fischer, and members of this "no chemical" beekeeping list. The debate centered around the efficacy of Dee Lusby's "no dope" approach in saving hives from the threat of CCD. Fischer, a devotee of "scientism", claims that a good portion of Lusby's bees succumbed to CCD like symptoms this spring, and that she has hid this fact from her own "true believers" on the email list. I'm a new beekeeper, still learning, still critically digesting the vast amounts of beekeeping information available, so I will not presume to weigh in on the issues. However, this discussion was important for me in that it helped me clarify a few issues about my own apicultural "philosophy" and the importance of fairness, honesty, and compassion.
Firstly, the debate only highlighted for me why I call myself a sustainable beekeeper and not organic or natural, since my chief concern has always been the long-term survivability of bees and not being right, or ideologically "orthodox". If something doesn't work apiculturally in my locale in the long-term, I have to be willing to critically question my approach, whether it be a chemical treatment, or a method of "organic" orthodoxy. I have to be willing to even give up beekeeping if I find that I serve as a detriment to the bees. I know this might mean admitting I'm wrong, or ignorant, or, worse yet, incompetent, but my objective is not to be right; my objective is to sustain bees in the long-term. I need honesty and humility to be a sustainable beekeeper, remembering "I Could Be Wrong!"
Secondly, the debate showed me the need for compassion. When a beekeeper loses his/her bees, no matter what methods s/he uses, I hope we might all show some empathy for the loss and not glee. Before you organic beekeepers think I am only wagging my finger at Mr. Fischer, you might consider why he got such a kick at rubbing your face into Dee's losses. Isn't there often a certain self-righteous glee taken on this list when reports of conventional beekeepers' losses appear on the 'net? Most beekeepers I know are looking into the "glass darkly". We are all sorting through a complex array of interacting factors that impact our bees. No one has all the answers, and while I may not agree with other beekeepers' choices, I do not rejoice anytime a hive dies.
I do not rejoice in writing this. I feel very presumptious and hypocritical.
Firstly, the debate only highlighted for me why I call myself a sustainable beekeeper and not organic or natural, since my chief concern has always been the long-term survivability of bees and not being right, or ideologically "orthodox". If something doesn't work apiculturally in my locale in the long-term, I have to be willing to critically question my approach, whether it be a chemical treatment, or a method of "organic" orthodoxy. I have to be willing to even give up beekeeping if I find that I serve as a detriment to the bees. I know this might mean admitting I'm wrong, or ignorant, or, worse yet, incompetent, but my objective is not to be right; my objective is to sustain bees in the long-term. I need honesty and humility to be a sustainable beekeeper, remembering "I Could Be Wrong!"
Secondly, the debate showed me the need for compassion. When a beekeeper loses his/her bees, no matter what methods s/he uses, I hope we might all show some empathy for the loss and not glee. Before you organic beekeepers think I am only wagging my finger at Mr. Fischer, you might consider why he got such a kick at rubbing your face into Dee's losses. Isn't there often a certain self-righteous glee taken on this list when reports of conventional beekeepers' losses appear on the 'net? Most beekeepers I know are looking into the "glass darkly". We are all sorting through a complex array of interacting factors that impact our bees. No one has all the answers, and while I may not agree with other beekeepers' choices, I do not rejoice anytime a hive dies.
I do not rejoice in writing this. I feel very presumptious and hypocritical.
Saturday, March 15, 2008
Bee Activism
Suppose you had the revolution you are talking and dreaming about. Suppose your side had won, and you had the kind of society that you wanted. How would you live, you personally, in that society? Start living that way now!-- Paul Goodman, sociologist.
I've been monitoring various beekeeping lists and forums over the last few months as CCD continues to ravage bees all over the country. Recently, on one of these lists, some individuals called for "bee activists" to rise up out of the midst of the beekeeping community and lobby and fight for more public awareness, government funding and scientific research to find answers to the current "bee" crisis. It might seem presumptuous for a person like me to weigh in on this issue. I've read much about bees, spoken with beekeepers, monitored all these internet forums but, as of yet, have not practiced beekeeping myself. But I am also a student of social/political movements and the sociology of science and these areas are as much involved in the question of how to approach "bee activism" as the actual husbandry of bees is.
Recently on Bee-l, a poster mocked the users of small cell foundation for ignoring current scientific research that finds small cells as having no significant effect on controlling varroa mites and/or the resulting virus that weakens and kills bees. The poster compared small cell supporters to followers of a "religious cult" who continue to hold on to their beliefs even in the face of scientific evidence. I won't go into the difficulty methodologically of using one or two experiments for drawing definite conclusions or the whole question of how scientific change actually occurs. (I'll leave the reader to read the works of Geiryn, Kuhn, or Feierabend.) My issue here is with the total inconsistency of such a poster, for "small cell" beekeepers are not the only people in the beekeeping world who tend to ignore scientific research. Large-scale commercial beekeepers do this all the time but in the name of short-term profit, labor saving efficiencies, and the "realities of the market". When a commercial firm says, "I know my use of chemicals is creating a stronger, resistant mite, but I won't survive unless I use chemicals", they are also ignoring, in a very pragmatic fashion, scientific research as well. And if I was a commercial beekeeper, who must support a family and pay debts, I suppose I would argue the very same thing!
It seems to me that Phil Chandler is correct. Given the above "reality" for commercial beekeepers, the survival of honey bees as a species cannot simply depend on commercial beekeepers, and government funding for scientific research focused on keeping "factory" beekeeping afloat. Bee survival may also depend on getting more and more individuals to approach beekeeping as a "cottage industry" where labor-intensive, "inefficient", sustainable husbandry is possible. It is modeling and "evangelizing" this idea that might sustain the honey bee.
A "bee" social movement approached this way doesn't need the resources of the full-time professional lobbyist but of sideline and hobby beekeepers maintaining colonies, and having their activities visible enough so that other potential backyard beekeepers might join this "crusade" to save the bee. You do not need (or want) everyone in a community to beekeep, just a small critical mass of individuals who provide bees with an environment where these insects have a better chance of surviving and adapting. Perhaps these local beekeepers could even form a "Queen Rearing Cooperative" to lessen the ill effects of any inbreeding as well.
A colleague and friend of mine recently attended Dr. Marla Spivak's beekeeping extension course at the University of Minnesota. Spivak has 30 or so hives right there on the St. Paul campus where they are legal, but across the river in Minneapolis, these hives would be in violation of city ordinances. According to my friend, the illegality of beekeeping in Minneapolis didn't keep Spivak from urging that city's residents to keep hives there as well. It seems to Spivak that the keeping of even a few hives is a small but important step toward honey bee survival, and if this means violating the law, so be it. This type of apicultural, civil disobedience intrigues and inspires me.
I've been monitoring various beekeeping lists and forums over the last few months as CCD continues to ravage bees all over the country. Recently, on one of these lists, some individuals called for "bee activists" to rise up out of the midst of the beekeeping community and lobby and fight for more public awareness, government funding and scientific research to find answers to the current "bee" crisis. It might seem presumptuous for a person like me to weigh in on this issue. I've read much about bees, spoken with beekeepers, monitored all these internet forums but, as of yet, have not practiced beekeeping myself. But I am also a student of social/political movements and the sociology of science and these areas are as much involved in the question of how to approach "bee activism" as the actual husbandry of bees is.
Recently on Bee-l, a poster mocked the users of small cell foundation for ignoring current scientific research that finds small cells as having no significant effect on controlling varroa mites and/or the resulting virus that weakens and kills bees. The poster compared small cell supporters to followers of a "religious cult" who continue to hold on to their beliefs even in the face of scientific evidence. I won't go into the difficulty methodologically of using one or two experiments for drawing definite conclusions or the whole question of how scientific change actually occurs. (I'll leave the reader to read the works of Geiryn, Kuhn, or Feierabend.) My issue here is with the total inconsistency of such a poster, for "small cell" beekeepers are not the only people in the beekeeping world who tend to ignore scientific research. Large-scale commercial beekeepers do this all the time but in the name of short-term profit, labor saving efficiencies, and the "realities of the market". When a commercial firm says, "I know my use of chemicals is creating a stronger, resistant mite, but I won't survive unless I use chemicals", they are also ignoring, in a very pragmatic fashion, scientific research as well. And if I was a commercial beekeeper, who must support a family and pay debts, I suppose I would argue the very same thing!
It seems to me that Phil Chandler is correct. Given the above "reality" for commercial beekeepers, the survival of honey bees as a species cannot simply depend on commercial beekeepers, and government funding for scientific research focused on keeping "factory" beekeeping afloat. Bee survival may also depend on getting more and more individuals to approach beekeeping as a "cottage industry" where labor-intensive, "inefficient", sustainable husbandry is possible. It is modeling and "evangelizing" this idea that might sustain the honey bee.
A "bee" social movement approached this way doesn't need the resources of the full-time professional lobbyist but of sideline and hobby beekeepers maintaining colonies, and having their activities visible enough so that other potential backyard beekeepers might join this "crusade" to save the bee. You do not need (or want) everyone in a community to beekeep, just a small critical mass of individuals who provide bees with an environment where these insects have a better chance of surviving and adapting. Perhaps these local beekeepers could even form a "Queen Rearing Cooperative" to lessen the ill effects of any inbreeding as well.
A colleague and friend of mine recently attended Dr. Marla Spivak's beekeeping extension course at the University of Minnesota. Spivak has 30 or so hives right there on the St. Paul campus where they are legal, but across the river in Minneapolis, these hives would be in violation of city ordinances. According to my friend, the illegality of beekeeping in Minneapolis didn't keep Spivak from urging that city's residents to keep hives there as well. It seems to Spivak that the keeping of even a few hives is a small but important step toward honey bee survival, and if this means violating the law, so be it. This type of apicultural, civil disobedience intrigues and inspires me.
Sunday, August 26, 2007
Some Random Thoughts in Ethnographic Mode
It's been a little over a month since I began this exploration in beekeeping as both a novice beekeeper and an ethnographer. I've primarily focused on the actual mechanics of apiculture and developing a sense of the different philosophies and approaches within this world. At this point I've been somewhat limited, primarily depending on books and internet information, including involvement in the biobees forum and the organic beekeeping list. I have also corresponded with a number of beekeepers through email. I am much less overwhelmed but still have many questions.
So far, I've only been in contact and interaction with beekeepers through the internet which leads me to ask: how important is this media to the "socialization" of future beekeepers? I know that I live in a place where the closest beekeeping club is twenty miles away in another state and there seems to be no beekeepers in my immediate vicinity since I never observe honey bees in my own yard. How common is it for new beekeepers to learn the "craft" through internet sources without one-on-one mentoring? Has this changed beekeeping and, if so, how? How important was a mentoring relationship in the past? Or were clubs and apiculture books the primary transmitters?
I've read accounts about beekeeping clubs being primarily the domain of older men, yet many of the resources available on the web are provided by younger people both men and women. Is this pattern stereotypical or is there some generalizability to it? If it is a general pattern, how might it be explained?
I'll be interested in finding out how beekeepers are adapting both cognitively and "apiculturally" to the "threat of CCD". Is the sustainable beekeeping movement attracting more interest than just a few short years ago? How are commercial beekeepers coping with this "threat"? Is it changing viewpoints on husbandry or are they simply searching for another "silver bullet"?
I'm very interested in the way beekeepers think and talk about their bees. I've observed some beekeepers anthropomorphizing bee behavior. How does this activity vary with the type of beekeeping done? Do hobbyists talk of the bees differently than let's say a commercial apiculturalist?
Ethnographically speaking, I have questions about how to approach this blog. Should I see this as the place to record my own field notes albeit in a very unique and challenging way? Placing my field notes online like this has both advantages and disadvantages. One advantage is that it allows me immediate feedback on my insights as I do this ethnography. Other beekeepers, sociologists and anthropologists can become collaborators in my work, pointing out problems in what I've written and offering useful suggestions on the direction I might go. This never really happens in regular field research. No one but the ethnographer ever sees his/her field notes. Others simply read monographs based on those notes. The chief disadvantage, as I see it, is confidentiality. Many observations I make might need to be kept from the public for ethical reasons. Also, I can see field notes becoming quite boring to many readers as they will often appear to be narratives without a real point.
So far, I've only been in contact and interaction with beekeepers through the internet which leads me to ask: how important is this media to the "socialization" of future beekeepers? I know that I live in a place where the closest beekeeping club is twenty miles away in another state and there seems to be no beekeepers in my immediate vicinity since I never observe honey bees in my own yard. How common is it for new beekeepers to learn the "craft" through internet sources without one-on-one mentoring? Has this changed beekeeping and, if so, how? How important was a mentoring relationship in the past? Or were clubs and apiculture books the primary transmitters?
I've read accounts about beekeeping clubs being primarily the domain of older men, yet many of the resources available on the web are provided by younger people both men and women. Is this pattern stereotypical or is there some generalizability to it? If it is a general pattern, how might it be explained?
I'll be interested in finding out how beekeepers are adapting both cognitively and "apiculturally" to the "threat of CCD". Is the sustainable beekeeping movement attracting more interest than just a few short years ago? How are commercial beekeepers coping with this "threat"? Is it changing viewpoints on husbandry or are they simply searching for another "silver bullet"?
I'm very interested in the way beekeepers think and talk about their bees. I've observed some beekeepers anthropomorphizing bee behavior. How does this activity vary with the type of beekeeping done? Do hobbyists talk of the bees differently than let's say a commercial apiculturalist?
Ethnographically speaking, I have questions about how to approach this blog. Should I see this as the place to record my own field notes albeit in a very unique and challenging way? Placing my field notes online like this has both advantages and disadvantages. One advantage is that it allows me immediate feedback on my insights as I do this ethnography. Other beekeepers, sociologists and anthropologists can become collaborators in my work, pointing out problems in what I've written and offering useful suggestions on the direction I might go. This never really happens in regular field research. No one but the ethnographer ever sees his/her field notes. Others simply read monographs based on those notes. The chief disadvantage, as I see it, is confidentiality. Many observations I make might need to be kept from the public for ethical reasons. Also, I can see field notes becoming quite boring to many readers as they will often appear to be narratives without a real point.
Thursday, July 26, 2007
And Another Article on CCD
I've been traveling a bit the last week. While traveling I came across this article.
Tuesday, July 17, 2007
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
