Proceedings 2011

CANADIAN ASSOCIATION OF

PROFESSIONAL APICULTURISTS L' ASSOCIATION CANADIENNE DES PROFESSIONELS DE L' APICULTURE

Proceedings 2011

Winnipeg, Manitoba January 26, 2012

CONTENTS AGENDA MINUTES Members Present / Welcome / Approval of Agenda ...... 1 President's Report...... 2 CHC Report...... 3 Minutes of 2011 CAPA Meeting...... 4 Financial Report ...... 4 AAFC Honey Market Report ...... 6 CFIA Honey Report ...... 6 PMRA Report...... 8 CFIA Bee Importation Report ...... 11 USA Apiculture Report (AIA) ...... 12 AAPA Report...... 13 Provincial Apiarists’ Reports...... 14 National Harmonized Survey Report...... 14 Bee Importation Committee Report...... 18 Chemical Committee Report...... 21 National Small Hive Beetle Strategy...... 22 Research Report...... 23 NSERC CANPOLIN Report...... 23 Awards Committee Report...... 24 CBRF Committee Report ...... 25 Non-Apis Pollinators Committee Report ...... 26 Publication Sales Report...... 27 New Disease Publication Report ...... 29 Communications Committee Report...... 30 Africanized Bee Report...... 32 Archive Report ...... 33 Apimondia Symposium 2012 Committee Report ...... 33 Bee Biosecurity Committee Report ...... 34 Hive Health Committee Report ...... 38 Bylaw Changes ...... 40 CAPA 2012 Budget ...... 44 New Business ...... 45 Committee Selection ...... 45

RESEARCH REPORTS ...... 46

PROVINCIAL APIARISTS REPORTS Provincial Reports Summary, 2011 Production Season ...... 58 British Columbia ...... 59 Alberta ...... 60 Saskatchewan ...... 63 Manitoba...... 64 Ontario ...... 69 Québec...... 94 New Brunswick...... 97 Nova Scotia ...... 98 Prince Edward Island ...... 99

APPENDIX AAFC Honey Market Report Power Point Presentation...... 100 CFIA Honey Market Report Power Point Presentation...... 105 Report Pesticide Problems Brochure ...... 107 CFIA Bee Importation Report Power Point Presentation (English Version) ...... 109 CFIA Bee Importation Report Power Point Presentation (French Version)...... 112 AIA Business Meeting Minutes...... 116 Bee Importation Committee Report Power Point Presentation...... 125 Apimondia Symposium 2012 Power Point Presentation...... 127 2011 Executive & Committees ...... 128 BYLAWS ...... 130 CAPA MEMBERSHIP LIST...... 133

Canadian Association of Professional Apiculturists 2011 Business Meeting Fort Garry Hotel Winnipeg, Manitoba January 26, 2012

THURSDAY –JANUARY 26th ( 8:00 A.M. – 6:00 P.M.)

Welcome and Introductions - Rhéal Lafrenière

Agenda - Rhéal Lafrenière

President’s Report - Rhéal Lafrenière

CHC Report - Rod Scarlett and/or Corey Bacon

Minutes of 2010 Meeting - Chris Jordan

Financial Report for 2011 - Chris Jordan

AAFC Honey Market Report - Maxine Grier

CFIA Honey Report - Debbie Fishbein

PMRA Report - Kurt Randall

CFIA Bee Importation - Amy Snow

USA Apiculture Report - AIA - Danielle Downey

Provincial Reports - Provincial Apiarists

Committee Reports

National Survey Report - Stephen Pernal

Importation Report - Medhat Nasr

Chemical Report - Geoff Wilson

Research Report - Leonard Foster CANPOLIN Report - Peter Kevan

Awards Report - Alison Van Alten

CBRF Report - Rob Currie

Non-Apis Report - David Ostermann

Publication Sales Report - Rhéal Lafrenière & Janet Tam

New Disease Publication Report - Steve Pernal

Communication Report - Adony Melathopoulos

Africanized Bee Report - Ernesto Guzman

Archive Report - Rob Currie

Apimondia Report - Pierre Giovenazzo

Bee Biosecurity - Steve Pernal

Hive Health - Rhéal Lafrenière

Bylaw Changes - Rob Currie

Proposed Budget 2012 - Chris Jordan

New Business

Election & Committee Selection - Rhéal Lafrenière

Canadian Association of Professional Apiculturists 2011 Annual General Business Meeting Fort Garry Hotel Winnipeg, Manitoba January 26, 2012

Members Present:

Joanne Moran, Nicolas Tremblay, Claude Boucher, Amro Zayed, Janet Tam, Graham Parsons, Connie Lagrosh, Kevin Smith, Heather Higo, Jaquie Bunse, Ernesto Guzman, Shelley Hoover, Leonard Foster, Miriam Bixby, Amanda Van Haga, Geoff Wilson, Abdullah Ibrahim, Rob Currie, Melanie Kempers, Paul van Westendorp, Pierre Giovenazzo, Stephen Pernal, Chris Maund, Les Eccles, Paul Kozak, Rhéal Lafrenière, David Osterman, Rasoul Bahreini, Chris Jordan, Marta Guarna.

Guests & Speakers:

Amy Snow, Debbie Fishbein, Danielle Downey, Kurt Randall, Marion Ellis, Jerry Hayes.

Welcome and Introductions

President Rhéal Lafrenière called the meeting to order and welcomed everyone to the CAPA’S 54th Annual General Meeting. Rhéal indicated that our next meeting will be longer than one day given that it has been five years since our last Priority Setting meeting.

A round table of introductions was made.

CAPA AGM Agenda

The agenda was circulated.

Motion to approve agenda as circulated. Moved by Joanne Moran Seconded by Marta Guarna Carried

1 President’s Report Rhéal Lafrenière

I would like to welcome you all to “Winterpeg” Manitoba for the 54th Annual Meeting of the Canadian Association of Professional Apiculturists (CAPA). Given that W innipeg is my hometown, it may be viewed as less offe nsive when a Winnipegger jokingly refer to Winnipeg as W interpeg. I would like to ex tend a special thank you to the Manitoba Beekeepers’ Association, Canadian Honey Council and the CAPA m embers on the organizing committee for putting together what would appear to be an excellent research symposium and tradeshow.

It has been a busy 14 months since the last CAPA AGM in Markham Ontario, so we will have lots to discuss at th is years m eeting. CAPA’s import committee, chaired by Medhat Nasr was exceptionally busy this past year working with Provincial Apiarists and CFIA on a num ber of import and export issu es. None-the-less of which was providing recommendations to CFIA to allow the safe supply of queens from Hawaii and packaged bees and queens from New Zealand. Medhat and his committee worked tirelessly to help CFIA develop scientifically sound protocol s to support industry’s dem and for importing bees into Canada. T his committee has also been work ing with CFIA to loo k at reviewing the current bee im port conditions with the various trading partners to ensure consistency and that the condi tions are defendable. The smal l hive beetle discovery in queen shipments from Hawaii this spring really emphasized the importance for effective surveillance and disease/pest control program s in order to defend Canada’s bee stocks. More information on CAPA’s Import committee activities will be covered in the Import committee report.

The Chemical committee, chaired by Geoff Wilson also had another busy year. Working with Provincial Apiarists the committee chair took the l ead again to subm it another Emergency Use Registration for Apivar ®. This committee was also in volved in putting together the registration information for the use of acetic acid to decontaminate beekeeping equipment for nosema disease management. The Chemical committee chair also took the lead in hosting several conference call planning meetings to begin working toward developing a national m ite control evaluation project. More information on CAPA’s Chemical committee activities will be covered in the Che mical committee report.

Another standing committee that I know worked hard this past year to undertake the tasks associated with that committee was the Research committee, chaired by Leonard Foster. Leonard took over the chair position from Paul van Westendorp and I am sure there were times when Leonard probably began to second-guess his decision! The job is not without its frustrations and challenges, not the least of which is soliciting members to submit their research activity reports. Without question, we understand that everyone is tremendously busy, but is im perative that when th e call for research activity reports is sent out th at if you are unable to comply with the suggested deadline that you comm unicate that back to the chair in order to coordina te alternate arrangements. More inf ormation on this iss ue will be covered in the Research committee report.

2 I would like to thank the Awards committee an d CBRF Directors for their hard work and look forward to hearing their recomm endation for this year’s student award and successful CBRF proposals. There are also a number of Ad-hoc committees, which we will hear from as well. These comm ittees do a tremendous job of keeping us informed as well as helping the association communicate to the public.

It is not always easy and in some cases it can be somewhat of a thankless job. Especially when the inf ormation is be ing gathered from multiple sources, which in turn is information gathered from multiple sources. Case in poin t, I know how m uch of a struggle it was this year to coordinate gett ing the survey information on wintering losses across Canada for the national winter loss re port. I cannot stress enough the importance of communicating back to the coordinator if you are unable to meet the proposed deadlines. More information on this issue will be covered in the Na tional Survey report, but I feel I m ust go on record in saying that we need to addre ss some of these communication issues or else we run the risk of negatively affecting our reputation of being able to coordinate/generate national reports.

Lastly, Rob Currie and the Executive were tasked with making suggestions for changes to the CAPA bylaws to address som e concerns that members have raised about election voting procedure, Past-President positi on on the executive and m aximum term for officers. Rob will be p resenting some options for each of these issues and we will be looking to the membership to identify how we can incorporate some of these options into our bylaws.

As this is an election year, I want to take th is opportunity to thank my executive officers: Vice-president, Medhat Nasr; Secretary/Treasurer Chris Jordan and Past-President Steve Pernal for their h ard work these past two years. It was an d is a pleasure working with you!

Rhéal Lafrenière CAPA President

Motion to accept the President’s Report as circulated. Moved by Leonard Foster Seconded by Marta Guarna Carried

CHC Report Corey Bacon

CHC President Corey Bacon joined the meeting to give the annual CHC Report. Corey CAPA on several issues where the two organizations have worked together. Communication between the two organizations could be improved. CHC and CAPA worked together on BeeBAC. Was not a lot of buy-in early on, but industry now sees the potential benefits. Issues around New Zealand packages were important. Corey thanked

3 Medhat Nasr for his hard work on importation issues. The Hawaii issue was very significant. Corey also thanked CAPA / provincial apiarists for their hard work.

EUR for Apivar was critical for access to the industry.

Information sharing needs to be improved. Corey encouraged CAPA to contact CHC for more regular updates and more information sharing.

Rhéal sent greetings from CAPA to CHC. CAPA has the same goal as CHC in terms of information sharing.

Minutes of 2011 CAPA Meeting Chris Jordan

Secretary/Treasurer Chris Jordan indicated that the minutes of the 2011 Markham AGM were circulated on CAPA-L.

Motion to accept the Minutes from the 2011 Markham AGM Meeting as circulated on CAPA-L. Moved by Medhat Seconded by Joanne Carried

Financial Report for 2011 Chris Jordan

Secretary/Treasurer Chris Jordan circulated the 2011 financial report.

Questions around the IBRA donation. Long history to support and continue this organization. International Bee Research Association. This has been a long standing commitment. IBRA supports beekeeping in less developed countries.

Questions on website fee and if updates are planned. Changes for 2012 will be reflected in proposed budget for 2012.

Motion to approve the 2011 Financial Report as presented. Moved by Paul Kozak Seconded by Ernesto Guzman Carried

4 2011 CAPA Financial Statement

GIC Term Deposit Opening Balance (January 1, 2011) $20,089.49 Opening balance(01/01/11) $23,439.72

Jan. 01, 2011 - December 31, 2011 REVENUE Membership 1 2012 Full 40.00 14 2011 Full 560.00 6 2011 Associate 120.00 1 2010 Associate 20.00

Meetings Registrations (Markham AGM) 120.00 CFIA Supper Meeting (Markham Nov 2010) 25.00

Publication Sales 5,958.71

GST Rebate (2010) 345.67

$7,189.38 $30,629.10 EXPENDITURES

Publications Printing 4,596.90 S/H charges 1,210.21

IBRA Donation 500.00

Awards Student Award 600.00

Misc. (cards, postage, stamp pad) 10.55

Meetings AIA Meeting Galveston, Texas (R. Lafreniere) 300.00

Website Maintenance 168.00

$7,385.66 $23,243.44

GIC Term Deposit $20,192.86 Cash $23,331.72

5 AAFC Honey Market Report Maxine Grier

(Power Point Presentation can be found in the Appendix)

CFIA Honey Report Debbie Fishbein

Debbie Fishbein is with the Honey Program from CFIA.

EU Audit – carried out for honey and all animal related products. Drug residues, On Farm practices. Honey not a major part of this audit. EU seemed to be satisfied with protocols in place. Some treatments that we permit that EU does not permit.

Trade Related Issues – ruling by a German Court which stopped most exports to EU. Related to GMO pollens in honey. Exporters have been hesitant to send products to EU until situation is clarified. AAFC Market secretariat is attempting to rectify the situation. Working on export certificate for other countries (Algeria, Morocco). In process of developing those certificates.

Chemical Residue Testing – Fumigillin in response to a previous EU audit. Nitroimidazoles also being monitored.

Zero MRL for fumigillin. It has been registered for some time. No product action has been taken. No risk anticipated. These are random samples. Lots of beekeepers are using fumigillin more than ever. Europe was the source of investigating for fumigillin. We need to know levels in Canada. Fumigillin is zero tolerance. 0.1 ppm is for agricultural chemicals.

Steve Pernal will be able to generate threshold levels of fumgillin through a project in his lab which is ongoing. This may provide a yard stick with regards to rates. This could potentially lead to an MRL for fumigillin in the future.

Health Risk assessment is more for CFIA on enforcement issues.

ACTION ITEM: Chemical Committee has it under their mandate to look at fumigillin residues / MRL (Geoff Wilson responsible).

Industry is interested in looking at alternate methods to use fumigillin. There is a change in the way beekeepers are using the product compared to when it was first registered. Nosema ceranae is more the target with its use now.

Chemical Residue Testing (18 months period) – when a problem is suspected for imports / violations. Based on a country’s past history with poor compliance or have information which makes us more suspicious. Sampling done in labs. The product has been detained

6 and not circulated. If on market, may be a recall or other enforcement action. Not too many imports from China. India is on the radar in terms of violations, as well as Egypt (poor history recently on imports).

Benzaldehyde and Butyric Acid Residues (Bee Repellants) – a default max of 0.1 ppm residue limit. Most common violations. Many above 0.1 ppm limit. We know it’s not a health risk. No product is held up. Is it a natural constituent of honey? Undertaken a small study (not scientific) to get an idea of what is happening. Analysis of samples where we know bee repellent has been used. Ongoing study. Hope to circulate report in spring 2012 with Provincial Apiarists and others. Results will help direct future action (regulatory, policy). CFIA works with PMRA and Health Canada on these MRL’s - a joint effort. We still have to work with 0.1 ppm in the time being. Levels above this initiate a letter to producer if they use bee repellants. Purpose is to collect information on this product. Letter indicates that producer should be in contact with Provincial Apiarist. Fist step was CFIA to notify producers. PA’s should be notified so that they know action may be coming. Immediate action is not necessary. Let producer take responsibility to change. This protocol can be changed if required. Although federal government enforces this, provinces have an extension role to determine how they are using the product and ID ways of reduce levels. PA’s help as the extension arm for producers. CFIA does not produce the extension role and cannot advise on the product’s use. Product is not regulated by PMRA because they do not fall under the definition of a pesticide. This product is not regulated yet so extension has a role at the present time. BMP’s may be useful with this product.

ACTION ITEM: PA’s can sit down with Debbie Fishbein to review the notification process with regards to residues (e.g. Benzaldehyde and butyric acid). Currently the process is not effective. We need to create an effective system to provide some advice to producers (Chemical Committee responsible).

Provinces don’t have a regulatory authority to initiate change with bee repellants so we must proceed carefully on this issue. We have some history with regards to Tylson a few years ago. An agreement was followed at that time and it was effective. We need to work in partnership with CFIA to help producers. A separate meeting is required to work out details.

Most violations are between 0.1 and 0.2 ppm range in the preliminary study. Most sampling occurs in the western area so it may screw the results for bee repellants. Detection limits were discussed in relation to background noise levels.

(Power Point Presentation included in the Appendix)

Rhéal thanked Debbie for her presentation.

7 PMRA Report Kurt Randall

2011 Activities – Pest Control Products and Beekeeping

I. Apiculture Products: Regulatory Activities

1. New Registrations

a) Formic Acid

• Tracheal Mite Treatment (65% formic acid, Reg. No. 30106). Registered 20 May 2011 for control of tracheal mites in honey bee hives.

• Formic Acid 65% (65% formic acid, Reg. No. 30108). Registered 20 May 2011 for control of varroa and tracheal mites in honey bee hives.

• Mite Away Quick Strips (46.7% formic acid, Reg. No. 30324). Registered 18 January 2012 for control of varroa and tracheal mites in honey bee hives.

2. Under Review

a) Amitraz

• A Category A submission (received 27 July 2010) for amitraz for varroa mite in honey bee hives is currently under review by the PMRA.

b) Permethrin

• A User Requested Minor Use Label Expansion (URMULE) submission is currently under review to expand the Permanone Multi-Purpose 10% EC (permethrin) label to include suppression of small hive beetle in soil around honey bee hives.

3. Emergency Registrations a) Amitraz

• An emergency use registration was granted for Apivar (amitraz) for control of varroa mite in honey bee hives in BC, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and PEI from 1 July 2011 until 30 June 2012. This is the 4th consecutive year for this emergency use request.

8 b) Permethrin

• An emergency use registration was granted for Permanone Multi-Purpose 10% EC (permethrin) for suppression of small hive beetle in soil around honey bee hives in Ontario from 2 November 2010 until 1 November 2011.

• An emergency use registration was granted for Permanone Multi-Purpose 10% EC (pemethrin) for suppression of small hive beetle in soil around honey bee hives in Quebec from 10 June 2010 until 1 November 2011. c) Formic Acid

• An emergency use request (EUR) for Mite Away Quick Strips (MAQS) for control of varroa mite in honey bee hives in Ontario was received in March 2012. This EUR was not granted as the submitted rationale was not sufficient, as at the time of the request there were a wide range of registered products available, including formic acid.

• An EUR for MAQS for control of varroa mite in honey bee hives in Ontario an Manitoba was received in August 2012. This EUR was not considered as a review for full registration of MAQS was underway at that time.

4. Reassessment of Note to CAPCO C94-05

• Regulatory Directive DIR2010-03, Reassessment of Note to the Canadian Association of Pest Control Officials C94-05: Proposed Scheduling of 65 Percent Formic Acid for the Detection and Control of Honey Bee Mites (C94- 05) was published on 2 September, 2010.

• As a result of DIR2010-03, C94-05 was revoked as of 2 March, 2011. As of that date all uses of formic acid required registration. An interim measure was put on place to permit access to 65% liquid formic acid in water while submissions to register this product were under review. Submissions were submitted to register two 65% formic acid products by the 2 March deadline. Both of these products met the requirements of the interim measure, and were registered on 20 April, 2011.

II. Incident Reporting

• A pesticide incident is any unintended or unexpected effect to human health, domestic animal health or the environment, resulting from exposure to, or use of, a pesticide. This includes honeybees. A pesticide incident could be the result of intentional or accidental misuse of a pesticide product.

• Voluntary reporting of pollinator/bee incidents are highly encouraged as they allow the PMRA to more accurately understand potential risks to pollinators/bees in the field. Incidents can be reported either to the pesticide manufacturer who is required by law to report incidents to the PMRA, or directly to the PMRA. Anyone may submit an incident report.

• Since the incident reporting programme was started in 2007, only 5 incident reports on honey bees have been received by the PMRA. All of these reports were submitted from Quebec by MAPAQ.

• One incident report was received for honey bees in 2011. This incident occurred in Quebec, and is currently being evaluated by the PMRA. The conclusions of the investigations will be published on the PMRA website. The active ingredients reported in the incident were clothianidin, thiamethoxam, atrazine and fenitrothion. It was classified as a major incident, with 25 colonies affected.

• Detailed incident reports can be obtained on the PMRA website in the Public Registry.

Provinces are encouraged to submit Incident Reports to PMRA so that data points can be collected.

Questions were asked around the process of the investigation process. Provincial Apiarists are encouraged to get in touch with local PMRA representatives to initiate the investigation. One of the main objectives is to gather information. This is important because people see these incidents but don’t want to report on neighbours. This puts the beekeeper in a tough situation.

(The brochure entitled Report Pesticide Problems presented by Kurt can be found in the Appendix).

Rhéal thanked Kurt for his report.

10 CFIA Bee Importation Amy Snow

Dr. Amy Snow presented the CFIA Bee Importation Report

Largest request is for USA queens. Very few importation requests from Denmark. Packages from NZ, Australia, and some from Chile.

Australia – consistent with most diseases. Asian Honey Bee. Free of HBTM and Tropilaelaps. Mainland Australia and Tasmania remain free of varroa. Western Australia free of Asian Honey Bee. Asian Honey Bee detected in Cairns primarily. Since then more detections further south within restricted area. Applying an eradication strategy to control the bees. Transition from eradication to management strategy. Continuing to put measures in place to reduce spread from Asian Honey Bee. Restricted area remains to be far from main beekeeping areas. Ongoing surveillance activities so they are aware of spread. Still very tight control in the restricted area. Very small portion of the country. Essentially, there are very strict movement controls out of the area, as well as into the area. A lot of permits required. We can feel confident to import from Australia. As they change their strategy, this will be important for Canada in future years. CFIA will focus on this type of issue. They have been very good at communicating. They are interested in maintaining their markets. Information will come along on a regular basis.

New Zealand – Not much change from last year. They have an independent company that does general surveillance each year for many major bee diseases of concern. Results continue to be negative for many diseases (see power point listing). Absent from NZ are IAPR, SPV, CCD. Present in NZ include AFB, DWV, KBV, Noseama apis and N. ceranae, Varroa.

Discussion: Should we test for these viruses (listed in power point). Perhaps CFIA would require this testing. This may be part of our national reporting program. This might help us to develop the strategic plan. Listed viruses are not part of the import conditions at this time. In general, most viruses are not trade-limiting viruses from CFIA’s view point. This may be changing. Regular surveillance is done to document there is not movement outside the restricted area.

ACTION ITEM: Can Apis ceranae and Apis mellifera hybridize. Task the Import Committee. This issue may have been addressed at the meeting to some degree, but the Committee is still tasked to investigate. (Import Committee responsible).

SHB Imports – a successful season and tested the effectiveness of our working relationships.

11 Revision of Import Conditions – no interruptions from New Zealand this year. Will be focused on emerging issues going forward for general importation.

(Power Point Presentation included in the Appendix)

Rhéal thanked Dr. Snow for her report.

USA Apiculture Report - AIA Danielle Downey

Danielle Downey, Apiarist from Hawii and President of AIA, presented the report.

Apiarists in USA are not standardized. Promote uniform laws within USA. AGM in Maryland (APHIS Headquarters) on February 6-10, 2012. Most (75%) beekeepers are doing pollination contracts. 2.68 million colonies in US are managed. Almond pollination (800,000 ac in California). Required to have pollination to get crop insurance. Predicted we will need more colonies because more almonds being planted. Water issues in California. Florida to California to fruits or prairies or back to east coast to blueberries, cranberries, etc. Several crops that pay for pollination in US (see power point). Educating about Africanized honey bees. Letting people know that they are sensationalized. Don’t be afraid, but be educated and prepared. Modeling taking place for AHB.

Projects: Winter loss Survey (Bee Informed Partnership). Started with CCD. AIA decided to get some real data. Started in 2006/2007 with standardized questions. Moved into an online format. Started with 32% losses (first year), but has not changed too much. Winter loss Data. No real pattern emerging by state. Several standardized questions were asked of beekeepers to determine winter loss. Beekeepers say 13-14% would be acceptable levels of winter loss. Reasons beekeepers state for losses: starvation, weather, weak in fall, mites, queen, CCD, Nosema, pesticides. Starvation was biggest reason (32% overall or 18% commercial). Moving colonies did not increase losses. Number of honey producing colonies in USA has not changed.

National Honey Bee Project: Funded by Farm Bill Money. Want to protect our bees and there are reasons to be more careful. Aims to sample bees in uniform way throughout country and establish what levels problems we have. Included 32 states. From 25 beekeepers / state, samples taken from various pests/diseases plus visual inspection data. Giving good baseline information.

AIA Resolutions: AHB – to be declared a pest, it is difficult. Would like to regulate that more specifically. Require a more faster and cheaper way of testing.

12 Honey Bee Imports – like to continue to protect our borders against imports until we can prove it is safe. Closed border to Australia. Other countries asking to import. National Organization of Plant Protection wants to protect USA borders. Continuance of National Honey Bee Survey - Restrictions are warranted.

National Beekeeping Organizations – continue relationships.

AIA gets a lot of new support from high profile organizations such as Haagen Daz Ice Cream, Burt’s Bees Cosmetics. Continue with standard partnerships.

Losses are compensated by dividing their colonies. This is not sustainable even though this has been happening for several years. Apis ceranae has been the reason (and paralysis virus) for border closures.

New Manuals produced: A Field Guide to Honey Bee and Their Maladies Resource from New Zealand: Diagnosis of Common Honey Bee Brood Diseases and Parasitic Mite Syndrome

(AIA Minutes can be found in the Appendix).

Rhéal thanked Danielle for her report.

AAPA Report Marion Ellis

Marion Ellis presented the AAPA Report

Scholarships available to students. They present their research results. Encourage non- USA students to participate. Ideal for Graduate Students and Canadians should apply. Foundation is maintaining its balance. They are recovering expenditures.

Able to fund research projects from donations from companies. Major funding stream Coordinated Agriculture Project (CAP). It’s the way USDA wants to do research in the future; fourth year of funding with several labs. Brings in new researchers who traditionally do not work on honey bees. Denis Vanenglesdorp using epidemiological tools to study bee losses.

Climate for funding bee research in USA is very good. Seven dollar corn is having profound impact on beekeeping. Meadows bearing row crops now. A lot of alfalfa being taken out. Dehydrating plants are closing doors. Farmers are planting GMO crops and using systemic compounds. This has become very pervasive. The extent that these products are being used is very extensive. Has replaced many other pest control practices.

Rhéal thanks Marion for his presentation.

13 Provincial Apiarists’ Reports Provincial Apiarists

Provincial reports were circulated. Only main points were highlighted at the meeting.

Alberta – many new beekeepers in Alberta (mostly urban). Rent about 75,000 colonies of hybrid canola production. A position for Research Scientist will be added shortly. Food Safety Program in place and m onitor for antib iotics / chem icals. Exports to Jap an is growing very fast.

Manitoba – higher winter losses (34%) but th ere were some real variances. As high as 80% in some areas; indoor wintering seemed to have lower winter losses for nucs.

Ontario - Thunder Bay only region with no Tracheal Mites; SHB quarantine still in place.

Quebec – com pensating beekeepers at $250 / co lony to destroy SHB. Ontario is not compensating at this time.

Nova Scotia – A Risk Assessment was done to look at border issues. Border closed since 1990. Recommendation was to maintain closed border. This will be reviewed again due to HBTM find.

(Provincial Apiarist Reports can be found at the back of the proceedings).

National Harmonized Survey Report 2010-11 Stephen Pernal

Similar to efforts undertaken by CAPA in 2009-10, a common set of winter loss survey questions was devised in order to harm onize the nature of data collected across Canadian provinces and to enable better comparisons to be made across regions. In 2010-11 the harmonized survey questions were exam ined and the num ber and com plexity of questions reduced to accommodate requests by provincial apiculturists and to allow easier compilation of the data set. A finalized set of survey questions was circulated on 10 March 2011.

Also similar to last y ear, Canada was asked to participate in an in ternational survey of colony losses led by COLOSS (Prevention of Honey Bee Colony Losses), a European Union-funded Cooperation on Science and Technology (COST) Action (FA0803). The CAPA harmonized survey questions for 2010-11 did provide for data to be collected that answered the essential questions of the CO LOSS survey and would enable Canada to participate in this international effort to collect harmonized loss data from throughout the world.

With two exceptions, the ability of provinces to communicate survey results was too slow to be useful. By the end of June 2010 onl y the provinces of Manitoba and Quebec

14 provided gross loss numbers. Gross loss rate s were received from Nova Scotia and Prince Edward I sland by ear ly September, British Columbia and New Brunswick in October, and Ontario and Saskatchewan by th e end of November. Alberta supplied loss information in January 2012.

With the data available, an initial winter loss report was produced in December 2011 and a revised version in January 2012. In general, some provinces expressed an ability to share detailed producer data, stripped of identifying inform ation (NS, PE, PQ, MB, BC) while others were unable to. Reasons for th is remain unclear as pr ivacy issues were thought to have been have been resolved in previous years.

National wintering loss and spring dwindle for 2010-11 was determined to be 29.3%, or 2x the normal rate. 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). Highest losses were recorded from the Province of Ontario at 43.0%. The complete wintering loss survey report and those for the previous 4 years are posted on the CAPA web site.

Though Canada was able to participate in COLOSS survey for the winter of 2009-10, participation in this year’s survey could not be considered due to the fragmentary nature of the data available. T his also precluded a more thorough analysis of domestic data, as was done for 2009-10.

Careful thought will hav e to be given as to how, or if, to proceed for 2011-12. Though survey results were substantially more comprehensive in 2009-10 and considerable gains were made in collecting standardized data, this effort appears to be unsu stainable. This year, CAPA as an organization was unable to comply with requests to supply national wintering loss information to external agencies in a timely manner.

Based on my experience over the last five years, if gross loss data (as a minimum) cannot be captured within a reasonable tim e frame from all pro vinces, I re commend that a national survey move to an independent, on-line format or be discontinued.

All participating provincial apiculturists are thanked for their efforts.

Discussion on Sim ilar to efforts undertak en by CAPA in 2009-10, a common s et of winter loss survey questions was devised in order to harm onize the nature of data collected across Canadian provinces and to en able better comparisons to be m ade across regions. In 2010-11 the harmonized survey questions were examined and the number and complexity of questions reduced to accommodate requests by provincial apiculturists and to allow ea sier compilation of the data s et. A f inalized set of survey questions was circulated on 10 March 2011.

15 CAPA harmonized survey questions for 2010-11 did provide for data to be collected that answered the essential questions of the CO LOSS survey and would enable Canada to participate in this international effort to collect harmonized loss data from throughout the world.

With two exceptions, the ability of provinces to communicate survey results was too slow to be useful. By the end of June 2010 onl y the provinces of Manitoba and Quebec provided gross loss numbers. Gross loss rate s were received from Nova Scotia and Prince Edward I sland by ear ly September, British Columbia and New Brunswick in October, and Ontario and Saskatchewan by th e end of November. Alberta supplied loss information in January 2012.

With the data available, an initial winter loss report was produced in December 2011 and a revised version in January 2012. In general, some provinces expressed an ability to share detailed producer data, stripped of identifying inform ation (NS, PE, PQ, MB, BC) while others were unable to. Reasons for th is remain unclear as priv acy issues were thought to have been have been resolved in previous years.

All participating provincial apiculturists are thanked for their efforts.

Discussion on Nation Harmonized Survey

There is a need to be more effective in collecting data in a timely manner. Discussion around a completely on-line national survey. There is some resistance to participating in

16 these surveys. Large number of questions does not encourage high level of participation. In Quebec, Statistic Quebec is doing a survey for the beekeeping sector. They collect data for beekeeping. They have a great interest on collecting data on mortality rate. In Quebec, it is mandatory to answer the questions. Very high answer rate. They also do a very high quality analysis. The survey will be conducted by phone during the month of May. There is value in the National Survey. The provinces are the ones working with the beekeepers i.e. they are registered and province is main point of contact. We have to retain the focus on the Canadian industry and how we compare amongst provinces. Most provinces do send out survey. Historically, we have good uptake of that from the provinces. Recommendation in getting data in earlier and work around the privacy issue. Not all provinces are the same on that. Beekeepers are interested in getting a timely result. An internet survey may make the results more timely and would not necessarily interfere with provincial surveys. The National Survey has an advantage to all provinces. Alberta focuses on commercial beekeepers (400 or greater colonies). A Pest Surveillance Net will be the mechanism for Alberta. If we would like to get quick results, we can go back to the system where the first part of the provincial part contains the basic questions (by May 15 or June 30). We need to modify our system of collection. July 15 is a potential deadline date. With the whole concept of on-line survey, there are reservations with that. Duplication: online report plus the provincial survey. Low response rate can greatly skew the data. In BC, early spring surveys have been done for years by phone calls which included 3-4 questions. Large numbers of questions greatly reduces the response rate. With a few questions, you will have greater response rate. Beekeepers don’t like really long surveys. Important to capture some management data. Last year’s report was timely because of the issues with data submission from the provinces. Some provinces submit data on time and other provinces are not submitting on time. This is frustrating for the provinces who are submitting on time. People should respond if they are not able to provide the data. If there is information missing from the National Report, it is not a National Report in the end. There seems to be some indication from the membership that the number of questions should be reduced. CHC was asking for this National Report and CAPA should be in a position to provide the results. The survey coincided with queens arriving from Hawaii. Provincial Apiarists were preoccupied with that huge task at the time. Maximum 5 question survey should be developed.

ACTION ITEM: The National Survey committee will consult with PA’s to see what size of survey they can produce. Provide some feedback on timelines. Get back to Executive with suggestions. (Paul Kozak responsible).

Chairs of all Committees are encouraged to circulate draft final reports before they are released to the general membership and other outside groups.

A suggestion that the committee should formulate a set of five questions which would allow a short conversation with beekeepers. This would greatly increase the response rate.

17 Geoff Wilson commended Steve Pernal for his hard work on chairing the committee and generating excellent reports.

Motion to accept the National Survey Report as presented. Moved Geoff Wilson Seconded by Medhat Nasr Carried

Bee Importation Committee Report Medhat Nasr

The import committee in 2011 had the busiest year to deal with several bee import issues. During the discussion of these issues all Provincial Apiculturists (PAs) were involved. It was important to include the PAs in these discussions as they always carry on the responsibility of implementing the Bee Act and Regulations in their perspective provinces. Accomplished activities: • Supported the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) and Canadian Honey Council (CHC) by providing timely advice and opinion on honey bee import issues as needed. • Continued to work with CFIA to harmonize bee import conditions from various countries. We continued to support and provided needed opinion as requested by CFIA on harmonization of bee import conditions based on the current bee health status in Canada. The conditions were reviewed. We ensured that the import conditions are in line with the health status of bees in Canada, international standards as well as bee health practices and conditions for inter-provincial movement within Canada. Considerations were also given to management practices and seasonality of the exporting countries. The last country to review import conditions was New Zealand. The proposed conditions were accepted and the importation of package bees and queens will resumed from NZ in 2012. • Respond to reported finding of small hive beetles in first shipments of queens from Hawaii to Canada. Live stages of the small hive beetle were found in the first shipment of queens to Manitoba in 2011. The CFIA, CHC, CAPA and PAs quickly responded to the report. Additional conditions were included in the protocols for importing queens from Hawaii to address the new findings of small hive beetles in shipped queens. To further mitigate any risk of introducing the small hive beetle with imported queens, inspection protocols were developed to inspect imported queens at the port of entry and importers locations. The inspection protocol to achieve an acceptable risk level based on scientific and epidemiological studies. Beekeepers were also advised to replace queen cages with new ones before introducing queens to their bees. CFIA and PAs worked closely to monitor the situation of the SHB in imported queens from Hawaii. Over 120,000 queens were inspected across the country by the PA’s and their staff. 70% of these queens arrived to Alberta where

18 many beekeepers used imported queens. Most of the positive findings were in early shipments during the season. • Respond the status of Apis cerana in Australia and the Australian surveillance program A. cerana was first detected in a port area of the city of Cairns in far-north Queensland in May 2007. Australia established a surveillance program in 2007. Although the surveillance program continued, there were no further findings until July 2008. A swarm of A. cerana was reported about 12 kilometers from the original site. Since then over 350 swarms and colonies of Asian honey bees (AHB) have been detected and destroyed. The region is tropical and there are only a few managed hives in the area. CFIA based on an advice from the import committee and PAs encouraged Australia to maintain the surveillance program. We were also ready to take further actions if needed to protect Canada from the introduction of A. cerana. Australia decided to keep the surveillance program and we continued to import bees according to established conditions. Annual reported about the spread of A. cerana is requested to maintain our imports of bees from Australia.

• Supported development of an export certificate to Chile. Based on a requested from CHC and CFIA (export section) a health certificate was developed with PAs to allow Canadian Bee Stocks to Chile for propagation and export to Canada. The CFIA presented the health certificate to the Chilean authority but it was not accepted.

• Initiated harmonization of listed diseases and pests in provincial regulations. The list of pests and diseases recommended to be included is the following: o The Africanized honey bee: Apis mellifera scutellata, o The Cape honey bee: Apis mellifera capensis o The Asian honey bee: Apis cerana o The Asian Nosema: Nosema cerana o The Asian giant hornet: Vespa mandarinia o The Asian mite: Tropilaelaps clareae

Discussion on Bee Import Committee Report:

CFIA is responsible for imports in a regulatory capacity. CHC is representing industry. CAPA provides information so they can make decisions with sound scientific advice. We also seek advice from other international contacts if we don’t have the expertise within Canada. CAPA’s role is to provide timely advice to stakeholders. Mandate to harmonize protocols across all borders. In the United States, there are two different regulations. Hawaii is different because of their circumstances.

Hawaii has been a major supplier of our queens in Canada. In 2010, they got Varroa mites. In 2011, SHB invaded Hawaii and spread very quickly. Conditions were implemented. Upwards of 110,000 queens imported which is about 70% of imports to Canada. We had to stop sending queens in battery boxes. This changed the whole system. SHB eggs were detected in Manitoba and reported. This lead to a change in

19 import conditions. Queens had to be inspected upon arrival in provinces to ensure no life stages of SHB were introduced. We inspected over 120,000 queens from Hawaii. Several imports were intercepted before release to beekeepers. These efforts were recognized by industry.

We established excellent relationship with federal partners. Chile requested to have Canadian market open for them. Accepted two years ago. Looked at sending queens to Chile for propagation and then sending back to Canada. Chile does not accept any bees from any part of the world. Chile refused the certificate from Canada.

New initiative – looked at different pests to make sure across Canada all provincial regulations include all diseases (see list on Power Point): AHB, Apis mellifera capensis, Asian Honey Bee, Asian Nosema, Asian giant hornet, Asian mite (Tropilaelaps clareae). Import Committee made a recommendation to harmonize provincial regulations to be the same with regards to listed pests/diseases. This still needs to be adopted by provinces.

It is important to have pests named on the Act prior to be identified in a province. If not identified, it makes it very difficult to act appropriately and effectively. CFIA (Amy Snow) indicated that it is important to have the pests identified.

ACTION ITEM: Follow-up to figure out what is needed to get Tropilaelaps identified on the notifiable list. Review the current list both at provincial and federal level. We will look for industry support (CHC) for this pest as well. (Import Committee responsible).

IF there are two national organizations (CHC & CAPA) coordinating their efforts, it adds extra weight to CFIA.

ACTIOIN ITEM: Get CAPA to write a letter to each province recommending that the list of pests be added to their regulations / acts. (Import Committee responsible).

Medhat thanked Dr. Amy Snow and the Committee for all their hard work during the past year.

(Power Point Presentation included in the Appendix)

Motion to accept the Importation Committee Report as presented. Moved by Chris Maund Seconded by Paul Kozak Carried

Chemical Committee Report Geoff Wilson

Registrations

Registration of Formic Acid

The Note to CAPCO C94-05 (formic acid to control Varroa and tracheal mites) was replaced by the full registration of 65% formic acid for control of Varroa and tracheal mites. The treatments must be applied as directed on the label.

Registration of Mite Away Quick Strips (MAQS)

MAQS received full registration for control of Varroa mites in early January 2012. The treatment must be applied as directed on the label.

Emergency Use Registrations

Emergency Use Registration (EUR) of Apivar® (Amitraz)

The Canadian Honey Council (CHC), Provincial Associations, Provincial Apiarists and PMUCS put the package together for an Emergency Use Registration application. Emergency Use was granted for July 1, 2011 until June 30 2012.

Full registration for Apivar was submitted in the summer of 2010. Full registration takes approximately 18 months for a decision by the PMRA. If Apivar® is needed for the fall of 2012 and possibly spring of 2013 an additional EUR will likely be needed.

There were reports that Apivar did not work in some beekeeping operations. In many cases, these were investigated and it does not appear that resistance caused the higher than anticipated level of Varroa mites and losses. In all most all cases it appeared that it was poor application of the control products that did not allow enough contact between the bees and the Apivar® strips. It appears that Apivar is more difficult to use than otherr strip treatments, and it may be necessary to give better directions of use to beekeepers.

EUR of Permanone (Permethrin)

The government of Ontario with support from the OBA, CHC and other provinces registered Permanone through the EUR process. Quebec later joined the EUR registration. This product is to be used as a ground drench for small hive beetles in ON. Future emergency use registration applications will likely include Ontario, Quebec and New Brunswick.

21 Products of Interest for future registration

Apiguard, Bayvarol produced by Bayer, a Thymol treatment as developed by Ernesto Guzman at the University of Guelph and HopGuard by Mann Lake show promise for use under Canadian conditions and should be further investigated. Other products are continued to be sought out but may have to be further developed before they are appropriate for registration.

Acetic Acid as a fumigant for hive equipment should be investigated for controlling Nosema.

Dr. Steve Pernal’s lab in Beaverlodge investigated Fumagillin, Fumagilin analogues, carbendazim and Toltrazurail for Nosema control.

Research groups in Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario and Quebec, have been working closely together to work collaboratively in identifying, adapting and providing background information for new Varroa control projects. The programs are attempting to work together to speed up the data development necessary for future product registrations.

Bee repellents

Honey is being inspected by the CFIA for bee repellents. Residues of butyric acid and benzaldehyde are being found that exceed the MRL of 0.1 ppm. Although the risk of honey with levels at greater than 1 ppm is unknown. Mitigating actions must be taken possibly including at registration of this product with higher MRL’s, best management practices for bee repellents, and better communication between beekeepers and various regulatory bodies.

President Lafrenière noted that with EUR, our relationship with CHC and PMRA has become stronger. PMUC involvement has also improved with recent submissions.

Motion to accept Chemical Committee Report Moved by Medhat Nasr Seconded by Paul Kozak Carried

National Small Hive Beetle Strategy Rhéal Lafrenière

President Lafrenière took the opportunity to update the membership on the fact that CAPA has been engaged in a national SHB control strategy with CHC. It is complicated issue in that we have PA as part of our membership who will have to wear their provincial hat on this issue. CAPA is an advisory group. CAPA has to remain an unbiased body which can provide scientific advice. We can’t get confused with Provincial Apiarists’ responsibilities. Each province will make their own decision on

22 this. CAPA has the opportunity to make recommendations or requests to CFIA. CFIA may be asked for their scientific advice. CAPA has always been involved in providing advice. The advice can be quite detailed and provide recommendations. CAPA provided advice during the Varroa mite detection. It is always up to the industry to make a decision as to what is best for their interests. CAPA is not directing the industry. A comment was made that each province has to be aware of which hat they are wearing on the issue. Sometimes it is difficult for industry to separate the two i.e. CAPA member or Provincial Apiarist role. CAPA needs to maintain that advisory status.

ACTION ITEM: Regarding the National Small Hive Beetle Strategy, Rhéal Lafrenière will get involved in writing a letter in an advisory role. He will consult with Executive on final wording (Rhéal Lafrenière responsible).

Research Report Leonard Foster

There were eight research reports submitted for 2011. Details on each report are outlined in the appendix.

Motion that Research Committee be accepted as submitted. Moved by Medhat Nasr Seconded by Stephen Pernal Carried

NSERC CANPOLIN Report Rob Currie

What is CANPOLIN? NSERC-CANPOLIN is a five-year NSERC Strategic Network that is addressing the growing problem of pollinator decline in agricultural and natural ecosystems in Canada. NSERC-CANPOLIN offers an exciting and unique approach to pollination research. For the first time, leading experts in entomology, ecology, plant reproductive biology, genomics, prediction and economics have joined forces to explore the full scope of the pollination problem – from pollinator health and conservation to gene flow in plants, the impact of climate change and the economics of pollination.

The diversity and abundance of insect pollinators are in a global state of decline. This decline represents a serious threat to the integrity of natural ecosystems and the production of many crops. Both managed pollinators (e.g., honey bees, leafcutter bees, bumblebees) and wild pollinators (e.g., numerous native bees, flower flies, moths, etc.) are suffering from a range of threats, including diseases, pesticide exposure, malnutrition, habitat loss and climate change.

23 In order to protect the vital ecological and agricultural services that insect pollinators provide, a better understanding of pollinators, the plants that they serve, and how environmental factors influence pollination systems is urgently needed. NSERC- CANPOLIN is a multidisciplinary research network that brings a unique, integrative approach to the pollination problem in Canada. The Network is truly national in scope, bringing together 44 researchers from 26 institutions across the country. Research activities fall under four themes (Pollinators, Plants, Ecosystems, and Prediction and Economics), with extensive connections between themes.

Over the five-year life of the Network, NSERC-CANPOLIN will make major contributions to the conservation of pollinator and plant biodiversity, improve the health of managed bees, enhance pollination by native pollinators and increase our knowledge of flower/pollinator interactions and gene flow in plants. The Network will also provide critical information on the economic aspects of pollination and future management needs based on expected changes in climate and land use. Ultimately, the information gained by the Network will provide policy makers and the wider public with the necessary tools to better protect and conserve some of Canada’s most important natural resources.

Rob Currie indicated that this is a network of researchers looking at pollinator decline and the effects of the environment. Various disciplines are represented. Working Group 2 (Managed Pollinators) are looking at problems associated with pollinators, not only honey bees. CAPA members are involved (Ernesto Guzman, Chris Cutler, Rob Currie). CANPOLIN is in year 4 of a 5 year program. Annual Report should be included in the Proceedings.

Motion made to accepted the verbal CANPOLIN Report. Moved by Joanne Moran Seconded by Leonard Foster Carried

Awards Committee Report Alison Van Alten

President Lafrenière gave the report in Alison’s absence. Alison submitted her written report.

The award information was distributed via the CAPA and AAPA list serves in both English and French. Five applications were received including one each from Laval University, York University, the University of Manitoba, the University of Alberta and the University of British Columbia.

Martine Bernier was chosen as the recipient of the CAPA Student Award. She is studying at Laval and is working on her M.Sc. Among other accomplishments, she is currently studying the life cycle and control methods for the small hive beetle.

24 CAPA is in favour of the recommended recipient Martine Bernier.

Motion to accept the Awards Committee Report Moved by Joanne Moran Seconded by Les Eccles Carried

CBRF Committee Report Rob Currie

The Canadian Bee Research Fund is an independent charitable organization that is headed by a board of directors composed of representatives from the Canadian Honey Council and Canadian Association of Professional Apiculturists. The Fund has been set up as a long- term endowment fund, where the interest generated by the fund is made available for annual grants. In most years, the CBRF has been able to contribute $18,000 to $25,000 a year toward apiculture research projects.

The board of directors consists of four voting members, two from CAPA and two from CHC and the CEO of the CHC. The board is responsible for making decisions about investments, fund raising, as well as disbursement of research grant funds. A grant selection committee is established each year that consists of CAPA members (whom are not submitting a research grant in the current competition) as well as two appointees from the Canadian Honey Council (not associated with research grants) and the CHC CEO. Industry research priorities and ability to leverage matching funding are used as the primary selection criteria for determining which projects receive funding.

Rob Currie and Leonard Foster served on the Board of Trustees as representatives of CAPA in 2011. Paul VanWestendorp was on the CBRF committee and was responsible for ensuring research supports were properly formatted and submitted to Hive Lights. CHC members were Gerry McKee, Tim Greer and Rod Scarlett. The board via conference call on 31, May, 2012.

The current balance of the fund on Dec 31, 2011 was $511,660 and it has been fairly stable at this level since 2001 despite major market fluctuations. Donations for the year were $476. Performance of the fund, which is held in a conservative mix of investments, as mandated by the terms of reference was reported at 2.21%. After a review of the investment performance a decision was made to maintain the current fund manager (RBC) for 2012.

Rob reported on the calculations for the disbursement quota required by Revenue Canada. According to CRA we are required to annually disburse 3.5% of the total assets of the CBRF averaged over the past two years. Grant funding for this year was set at $18,000. The grant selection committee reviewed the applications submitted this year and awarded $8,000 to Medhat Nasr, Alberta Agriculture and Rural Development and $10,000 to Dave

25 Shutler, Acadia University. Two grants were awarded last year totalling $21,036 (to Nasr and Shutler,).

For the coming year the grant application deadline will be 15 December.

Motion to accept the CBRF Report Moved by Rob Currie Seconded by David Ostermann Carried

President Lafrenière noted that Wink Howland passed away this year. He was a big part of the CBRF and was a significant contributor. He will be greatly missed.

Non-Apis Committee Report David Ostermann

The following is summary of some activities related to non-apis pollinators across Canada this past year (2011).

On the East Coast, among other activities bumble bees and alfalfa leafcutting bees are being used for blueberry and cranberry pollination. In New Brunswick, about 2500 gallons of leafcutting bees and 1,000 quads of bumble bees were used for blueberry pollination. Some bumble bee quads were moved to cranberry fields after blueberry pollination. Honey bees were the most commonly used pollinator on blueberry fields and cranberry beds. On the East Coast there was also study on the potential role of nocturnal pollinators in lowbush blueberries.

Leafcutting bee production and alfalfa seed pollination conditions in Manitoba were generally good, and the overall crop is expected to be average or better. For Saskatchewan and Alberta, it’s too early to say how the year went. Average stocking rate in Manitoba is about 3 gallons per acre. Wet conditions of the past few years have contributed to a reduction of acres in production. Last year (2010), there were about 15,000 acres of alfalfa seed in production in Manitoba. The price remained firm this year at around $80-90 or more per gallon of bees.

In Saskatchewan, funding was awarded by Canadian Agricultural Adaptations Program (CAAP) for a project entitled “Adaptation of technology for control of alfalfa leafcutter bee parasites and diseases in order to maintain healthy, productive alfalfa leafcutter bee populations which will maximize alfalfa seed production in western Canada.”

On the West Coast, bumble bees (Bombus impatiens) are being used for tomato pollination in greenhouses. Honey bees are used for the pollination of field crops (e.g. cherries, apples in the Okanagan).

26 The national Bee Biosecurity Advisory Committee continues to work with the CFIA and consultants on the development of an on-farm biosecurity standard for the managed bee industries in Canada. Surveys and/or survey notices were sent out to beekeepers this year. The standard will be a voluntary tool to guard against disease and pests in the honey bee, alfalfa leafcutting bee, and bumble bee industries, and is expected to be available in 2012.

There are also non-apis pollinator activities related to the CANPOLIN network. For information on the CANPOLIN network visit http://www.uoguelph.ca/canpolin/.

Thanks to the committee members and everybody who contributed to the report!

Discussion:

Saskatchewan leafcutting bee association just received a $250,000 grant for various topics for leafcutting bees. Medhat Nasr noted that almost 90,000 gallons of leafcutting bees for canola pollination.

Motion to accept the Non-Apis Report as circulated. Moved by David Ostermann Seconded by Janet Tam Carried

Publication Sales Report Rhéal Lafrenière & Janet Tam

A small inventory is on hand to carry us through until the new publication is ready. 185 copies have been sold so far in 2012. This latest edition is priced at $5.50 as opposed to $5.00 for the previous printing. A suggestion was made by Paul van Westendorp to donate copies to IBRA for distribution to other countries. This could be in place of our annual donation of several hundred dollars. Rob Currie noted that the old publications could be sold at Apimondia. Chris Maund suggested that they could be included in the registration package.

Motion to accept the Publication Sales Report as presented. Moved by Joanne Moran Seconded by Amro Zayed Carried

27 Honey Bee Diseases and Pests Publication Sales Report

Orders Filled in 2011 - English version Units Invoice # Date Purchaser Sold Inv 11-01 Feb 15 2011 Richard Brickner 20 Inv 11-02 Feb 28 2011 Brushy Mountain Bee Farm 100 Inv 11-03 Mar 8 2011 Mann Lake Ltd 100 Inv 11-04 Mar 8 2011 AARD ‐CDC North 100 Inv 11-05 Mar 18 2011 Bill Ruzicka 20 Inv 11-06 Mar 18 2011 Dadant & Sons Inc 100 Inv 11-07 Mar 18 2011 Rossman Apiaries Inc. 15 Inv 11-08 Mar 23 2011 W.T. Kelley 100 Inv 11-09 Apr 1 2011 Bob's Beekeeping Supplies 25 Inv 11-10 May 10 2011 Blessed Bee Farm 36 Inv 11-11 Jun 10 2011 Mann Lake Ltd 75 Inv 11-12 Jul 4 2011 Blessed Bee Farm 15 Inv 11-13 Jul 8 2011 To Bee or not to Bee 35 Inv 11-14 Sep 16 2011 Dadant & Sons Inc 100 Inv 11-15 Oct 25 2011 Mann Lake Ltd 100 Inv 11-16 Dec 11 2011 Ontario Beekeepers' Assoc - TTP 100 Inv 11-17 Dec 11 2011 GPRC Fairview campus 10 Inv-11-18 Dec 23 2011 Univ Maine Coop Extension 45 Inv-11-19 Dec 23 2011 Rossman Apiaries Inc. 25

Total number of units sold 1121

Orders Filled in 2011 - French version

Total number of units sold 0

New Disease Publication Report Steve Pernal

Steve encouraged members to submit pictures for the new publication. A list will be circulated on CAPA-L to members indicating which pictures are required. A name change has been suggested by Heather Clay. A name change may or may not be beneficial. The current name of the publication is well known and changing it could jeopardize its recognition. Any good document from CAPA would be well recognized. Price point is also attractive. A document sharing file could be set up online so that everyone could place the pictures there.

Motion to accept the New Disease Publications report as presented. Moved by Steve Pernal Seconded by Paul vanWestendorp Carried

Communication Committee Report Andony Melathopoulos

Report given by Steve Pernal in the absence of Andony Melathopoulos.

Discussion around changing website provider from IT Life to WordPress. Amro Zayed suggested that WordPress is very easy to update.

Andony should have PayPal up and running very shortly. This would be good for membership fees and publications. Paying membership would be password protected under the membership section. Joanne Moran suggested that email (e-transfers) payments be set up as well.

ACTION: Investigate direct payment options into CAPA bank account using email payments via online banking (Chris Jordan responsible).

Paul van Westendorp and Rhéal Lafrenière recognized that Andony has been a great contributor to CAPA and continues to do so even during his absence at meetings.

Motion to accept the Communications Report Moved by Steve Pernal Seconded by Leonard Foster Carried

29 Communications Committee Report 25 January 2012 Committee Chair: Andony Melathopoulos

1. Content The only new content added to the website in the past 12 months was the 2011 Colony Loss Report.

2. Statistics

Visitations at CAPABEES continued to grow through the past year (Table 1) and we have improved in our rankings on most key search parameters (Table 2).

Table 1. Comparison of the number of visits in 2010 versus 2011 to CAPABEES across different months and number of pages viewed by visitors. Month Visits 2009 Visits 2011 Pages 2009 Pages 2011 Dec 2,400 13,423 8,216 25,990 Nov 2,736 12,552 7,672 29,614 Oct 3,247 10,794 16,260 27,726 Sep 2,688 13,605 24,693 35,816 Aug 1,803 13,954 28,780 42,028 Jul 1,824 11,573 14,877 40,842 Jun 1,713 5,762 21,038 31,626 May 1,764 4,592 19,101 32,899 Apr 1,538 4,220 15,506 32,127 Mar 1,693 5,085 11,974 37,083 Feb 2,094 4,728 12,379 40,359 TOTAL 23,500 100,288 180,496 376,110 (Mar-Oct)

Table 2. The ranking of CAPABEES for eight search terms using Google Search Term CAPABEES CAPABEES Ranking Ranking Jan 2010 Jan 2011 “Varroa Thresholds” 1 2 “Nosema” 3 7 “Colony Loss Canada” 6 10 “Wintering Honey Bees” 6 >25 “Varroa” >25 >25 “American foulbrood” >25 >25 “Colony Collapse Disorder” >25 >25

30 Reviewing the popularity of specific content on the site from our last report there has been growth in pages having to do with pollination and bee forages (Table 3). Our annual winter loss statements no longer appear in our top 10.

Table 3. Visits to specific pages October 2011 Rank Hits Pages

1 2,218 CAPA Crop Pollination Guide Chapter 3, Nectar and Pollen Plants, Beekeepers 2 1,772 W Canada 3 914 Nosema, CAPA Publication 4 828 Preparation of Honey For Market, OAC 5 668 Wintering Chapter 10, Fall and Winter, Beekeepers W 6 617 Canada 7 474 Varroa EIL 8 447 Alsike Clover, AAFC, Booklet 9 355 Honey House Equipment Layout Chapter 5, Spring Management, Beekeepers W 10 170 Canada TOTAL 8,463

3. Looking to 2012 a) Redesign The website looks dated and its online editing features have become archaic. Wordpress is a leading online website framework that is widely used and frequently updated. Within an hour Andony was able to construct a mock-up for a new site designed. It is easy to learn, easy to update and can deliver the features we currently are being offered by IT Life. We would save money in moving to a Wordpress website – the cost amounts only to annual hosting fees which run under $100 per year. b) PayPal for Paying Membership This is easy to do and the legwork has been done – it should be up an running this month. c) Content The most widely visited content on our website are old out of print extension publications. I encourage all provincial apiculturalists to look through their archives and digitize 2-3 of the best of such publications for uploading. d) An Assistant With Andony in school it would be ideal to have an additional CAPA member trained to update the website. Volunteers?

31 Africanized Bee Committee Report Ernesto Guzman

Africanized honey bees (AHB) have spread throughout most of the Americas, including the southern states of the U.S.A. As of 2011, they have been found in Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, California, Nevada, Utah, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Louisiana, Florida, and most recently in Georgia. In California, a major queen producer, AHB are widespread in the southern part of the state, but in July 2011, an AHB swarm was detected in Modesto (Madera county in northern California). The colony was destroyed and after further surveillance and investigation, Dr. Eric Mussen, Extension apiculturist of the UC Davis Department of Entomology, concluded that “it was probably an isolated case” and that Madera county “is not likely colonized” by these bees. Stinging incidents to animals and people caused by AHB continue to occur in southern U.S.A., in most cases without fatal consequences. As of 2010, U.S. officials recognized a total of 20 people killed by AHB since their arrival in 1990. In 2011, this figure increased to 23, with the death of a middle age man in Arizona and an elderly couple in Texas. Therefore, AHB continue to be a public safety concern. It is unlikely that AHB will spread naturally to the northern U.S.A. and Canada, but they might reach those regions through migratory beekeeping and with the importation of queens reared in Africanized areas. Thus, it is important to be vigilant and to monitor their spread in the U.S.A. constantly.

A new request from Argentinean queen breeders to export queens to Canada was received in 2011 by the CFIA. The petition was denied on the basis that no surveillance program is in place in Argentina to monitor and follow the distribution and spread of AHB. Additionally, the methods used to identify africanization in samples of bees are not fully reliable. Moreover, the Argentineans failed to prove to CFIA that no Oxitetracycline resistance exist for American foulbrood in their breeding operations. However, Argentina or other countries may come up with new arguments to try to introduce queen bees into Canada. It is therefore necessary to develop policies and strategies to protect the Canadian beekeeping industry from the potential introduction of AHB.

In addition to the above, we should develop contingency plans to act upon the presence of AHB to be prepared in case they eventually get to Canada. It would be also useful to conduct a national survey to determine if African genes are found in Canadian bee populations. This information could be utilized to support developing policies and strategies for public protection and bee imports regulations. In our lab at the University of Guelph we have established the techniques needed to identify them through measurements of wing length and mitochondrial DNA techniques. However, these techniques are not 100% reliable, because mitochondrial DNA is maternally inherited, and hybrids might not be detected through morphometrics, but so far, these are the only valid techniques available to identify AHB. Ideally, a sufficient number of nuclear markers should be developed that are species specific. Until that is achieved, the combination of morphometrics and mitochondrial DNA analyses is our best choice to identify AHB.

32 Discussion on Africanized Honey Bee Committee Report

Dr. Amro Zayed is doing research into the area of Africanized Honey Bees but not necessarily in relation to the Canadian population. He is doing work on genome sequencing in his lab.

There was discussion on the need for testing imported bees for Africanized Honey Bees. Perhaps this testing should be initiated within Canada. There are diagnostic chips which are available. Perhaps these can be used for testing AHB. There have been resolutions at AIA for years but nothing has happened yet.

Industry may be asking CAPA in the near future about what Canada should do in relation to AHB testing. Jerry Hayes indicated that testing is possible. Leonard Foster indicated that the science may not be there yet.

Motion that the Africanized Bee Report be accepted as presented. Moved by Ernesto Seconded by Paul Kozak Carried

Archive Report Rob Currie

Made a move to digitize and put them on CAPA website. Heather Clay was trying to find a home for a lot of material and the University of Manitoba took the material. Attempt was made to consolidate all material and put in one spot. The University Library appeared to be open to the idea of housing the material.

Motion to accept the Archive Report. Moved by Rob Currie Seconded by Amro Zayed Carried

Apimondia Committee Report Pierre Giovenazzo

CHC is now official host in Quebec City, November 16-18, 2012. Queen Breeding & Honey Bee Health Standing Commissions.

Apimondia Website: http://www.craaq.qc.ca/le-calendrier-agricole/apimondia-symposium-2012/e/1205

33 Several groups will be meeting during this conference. Discussion as to whether CAPA should meet at the same time. It is a great opportunity for CAPA to meet in Quebec at the same time as Apimondia.

Motion that CAPA AGM be held in conjunction with Apimondia 2012. Moved by Steve Pernal Seconded by Rob Currie Carried

It was suggested that perhaps the CAPA AGM should be held prior to the Apimondia. We need to determine what dates CHC will be having their AGM. Dates will be selected accordingly. It would be better to have CAPA before Apimondia, not after the event.

(Power Point Presentation included in the Appendix)

Motion to accept the Apimondia Report. Moved by Geoff Wilson Seconded by Leonard Foster Carried

Bee Biosecurity Committee Report Steve Pernal

A new initiative coming on the heels of the new office within CFIA. The Office of Animal Biosecurity has been developing Best Management Practices to prevent the spread of animal diseases within Canada. Commodity groups are involved, and honey bees have been selected to promote BMP’s for producers. Process was initiated. First step was to do a survey. A BeeBAC Steering Committee started and put together the basis of the survey. Serecon was hired to work on the project. A subcommittee of PA’s was struck and the survey was streamlined. The survey has been implemented and responses are coming in. Reasonable representation has been captured. Some provinces need more participation. It provides a baseline of where the industry is. This can be used to compare future surveys. A Guidance Document is being developed. A meeting in Ottawa in early March regarding BeeBAC. Some provinces have volunteered to review the Guidance Document.

The process also involves two other bee industries: leafcutters and bumblebees. David Ostermann has been instrumental. Response rate was good for leafcutter bees. A survey would not be conducted with bumblbees because of the nature of that industry.

Would the survey questions and responses be made available? Steve expects that it would not be available. There may be privacy concerns regarding releasing the information. There was concern that certain provinces may be identified. Dr. Lorne Jordan wanted to make the results national in nature.

Motion to accept the Bee Biosecurity Report Moved by Steve Pernal Seconded by Marta Guarna Carried

The following report was submitted by Scott Ingledew, Serecon:

NATIONAL BEE FARM-LEVEL BIOSECURITY STANDARD: PROJECT ACTIVITIES

Following the face to face meeting held in Winnipeg (March 2012) with the Bee Biosecurity Advisory Committee (BeeBAC) and other industry representatives, additional work has been completed on the bee biosecurity project. The following update outlines the current status of the project and projected developments. Background

The objective of implementing voluntary biosecurity measures on a national level include: prevention, early detection and a more rapid control of serious infectious disease, parasite and pest outbreaks. Farm level standards are meant to prevent these risks from entering, spreading and leaving a bee operation. Some benefits of farm level biosecurity may be: • increasing productivity and economic return at the farm level by decreasing the incidence of diseases, parasites and pests

• allowing the continuation or early resumption of inter-provincial and international trade in the face of an outbreak of a serious infectious disease, parasite or pest;

• Improved biosecurity may bring about improved marketability of honey, bees, and equipment

A few notes on the project:

• CFIA is project manager

• Industry Advisory Committee in place

• Serecon Management Consulting Inc. is the project consultant

• 21 month project, completed by June 2012

• Two Deliverables National Bee Farm Level Biosecurity Standard

35 Producer Guidance Documents for the three bee sectors (Honey Bee, Alfalfa Leafcutting Bee and Bumble Bee)

The national standard will be a higher level document that describes the risks and identifies voluntary target outcomes that have been agreed to at a national level. A producer guidance document will describe the specific management practices that beekeepers use to manage diseases, parasites and pests. This project will be producing 3 separate guidance documents for honey bees, alfalfa leafcutting bees, and bumble bees addressing the different management practices used in these 3 sectors.

Key activities in the project to date include:

• Research on bee diseases, parasites and pests

o Literature review of diseases, parasites and pests

o Case studies of honey bee, alfalfa leafcutting bee and bumble bee operations

o Mapping of management operations and risks

o Developing biosecurity questions for a comprehensive biosecurity study

• National biosecurity industry consultations on farm level practices were completed for all three industry sectors.

• Developing the standard and target outcomes:

o Together with provincial apiarists, the Canadian Honey Council (CHC), the Canadian Association of Professional Apiarists (CAPA) members, and other industry representatives a framework for a bee industry biosecurity standard was developed.

o Includes:

Bee Health Management

• Bee sources

• Prevention

• Monitoring

• Control

• Elevated response plan

Operations Management

• Equipment

36 • Supplies

• Building and premises

• Pest control

• Planning and training

Current Status:

National Bee FarmLevel Standard:

o The target outcomes and structure of the draft standard were agreed to, in principle, by BeeBAC at the March 2012 meeting. A complete draft has been submitted to CFIA for review. There will be one more round of industry consultation on the Standard before finalization. The Standard will then require endorsement by industry through the CHC, provincial alfalfa leafcutting bee associations, and a representative association of the bumble bee sector.

Guidance Documents:

o The Guidance Documents (GDs) are in the final phase of editing. Based on feedback at the March 2012 face to face meeting, Serecon, CFIA and industry will continue with the editing process before final submission to industry sector sub committees, representatives and associations for endorsement.

Projected Development:

o Review of the Standard and Guidance Documents is expected to be complete by the beginning of June 2012. Endorsement by industry is scheduled for late June 2012.

Hive Health Committee Report Rhéal Lafrenière

The CAPA Hive Health committee is actually part of a larger working group under the CHC Hive Health Committee. The Hive Health committee was initially chaired by Jerry Poelman (CHC Director) but recently Tim Greer (CHC Director) was appointed as chair. In addition to the aforementioned CAPA members and CHC chairs, the committee also include two industry representatives that are not CHC directors; Albert Robertson and Merv Malyon. Rod Scarlett (CHC Executive Director) also attends the Hive Health meetings to provide secretariat support.

The committee held three conference call meetings this past year to discuss progress on some of the initiatives that the committee have been focusing on, such as improving genetic stock of imported queens from Chile, mite control screening trials and small hive beetle threat.

Improving Genetic Stock of Imported Queens from Chile:

Although there appears to be some Chilean queen breeders interested in acquiring honey bee genetics from Canada to improve the adaptability of their queens to Canadian conditions, the restrictive importation conditions in Chile are extremely prohibitive of this ever happening. Efforts to reduce the restrictions have been marginally successful, but a big limiting factor now is that Chile will not accept queens or embryos from Canada until Tropilaelaps clareae is listed as a notifiable disease in Canada. An action plan to address this issue will be part of the committees focus for the upcoming year.

Mite Control Screening Trials:

The committee is very supportive of a nationally coordinated mite management evaluation program that will provide the necessary efficacy data on various mite control products and treatments regimes to facilitate the registration of effective mite control products. Members of this committee as well as the CAPA Chemical committee and the principle proponents of the Provincial screening trials have been developing a strategy to try to incorporate all of the various screening trials being conducted in Canada under a national project. The CHC and the CHC Hive Health committee will likely be the umbrella under which this project will be administered, but those details have yet to be determined.

Small Hive Beetle Threat:

The committee has been following the small hive beetle (SHB) situation in Québec and Ontario very closely. The principle concerns revolve around how Canada can maintain its SHB free status in areas outside of the SHB controlled areas. This recognition not only impacts trade outside the country, but also how inter-provincial movement of bees

38 could be impacted. CFIA has been consulting with CHC as well as the CAPA Import committee and Provincial Apiarists to determine what type of control program would be necessary in order to maintain Canada’s SHB free status.

Now that this issue has been elevated beyond the Hive Health committee level to the actual CHC Board of Directors, the CHC will likely be updating the committee rather that the other way around. As for CAPA’s position, the Import committee will likely take the lead in providing advisory to CAPA Executive as well as CFIA and Industry if required. It will be the Provincial Apiarists that will be more directly involved in the development of policy and regulations surrounding the decision of “if” and how a national SHB and control program would be implemented.

Discussion on Hive Health Committee Report

CAPA group is part of a larger working group involving CHC. Chaired by Tim Grier. Other CHC directors are involved. Usually meet via conference call. Three meetings in 2011 via teleconference. The potential of Chile as a replication site for our Canadian bees was discussed. They could then produce large quantities and then send back to Canada. It is very difficult to get anything into Chile. There are issues with their conditions. No easy solution to getting our genetics into Chile. Industry is losing interest.

Mite control screening trial and try to link what has been done in each province. The Chemical Committee has taken the lead so duplication of effort with this committee.

SHB discussion around moving bees from one area with high losses. A lot of details are being covered with other groups / committees. Perhaps there is no need for a Hive Health Committee within CAPA. Perhaps an ad hoc committee is not required within CAPA, but the President and some other key CAPA members should be involved. Perhaps we can run the ad hoc Committee one more year and evaluate its relevance at that time. It was suggested that the Committee was should be abolished and the CAPA Executive could restrike a new ad hoc committee at any time if it is needed.

Geoff Wilson noted that there is a lot of duplication of effort.

Motion to abolish the Hive Health Committee Moved by Paul van Westendorp Moved by Rob Currie Carried

Bylaw Changes Rob Currie

One concern raised by member(s) is whether CAPA would consider other forms of voting such as e-mail or mail-in ballot. Currently the bylaw is as follows:

ARTICLE IV - Officers of the Association

IV(1): The members shall, at the general meeting, elect a president, vice-president and secretary- treasurer and the executive may appoint such other officers and committee members as may be required

Options:

A. Status quo (no change to the bylaws)

B. Replace email or mail-in ballot option for the election at the general meeting

Option B. Example:

ARTICLE IV - Officers of the Association

IV(1): The members shall elect the officers of the association; President, Vice- President, Secretary-Treasurer by e-mail or mail ballot and the elected officers may appoint such other officers and committee members as may be required.

1. Each officer nomination shall be accompanied by a signed statement from the nominee indicating willingness to accept office if elected, and a brief biography of the nominee.

2. The election ballots will be e-mail or mailed by a member of the nomination committee to the voting members in the association no later than thirty (30) days prior to the general meeting.

3. All election ballots must be received by the nomination committee no later than ten (10) days prior to the Annual meeting. Ballots received less than ten (10) days prior to the meeting will be considered spoilt ballots.

4. The results of the election will be announced at the general meeting.

Another concern raised by member(s) is whether CAPA should include in the bylaws Past-President as an official officer of the association. Currently Past- President is not named in the bylaws but is captured under the following Article subsection:

40 ARTICLE IV - Officers of the Association

IV(1): The members shall, at the general meeting, elect a president, vice-president and secretary- treasurer and the executive may appoint such other officers and committee members as may be required

Options:

A. Status quo (no change to the bylaws)

B. Include Past-President in the list of non-elected officers.

Option B. Example:

ARTICLE IV - Officers of the Association

IV(1): The members shall, at the general meeting, elect a president, vice-president and secretary- treasurer and appoint the past-president to the executive. The executive may in turn appoint other officers and committee members as may be required.

IV(6): The past-president shall be that person who has most recently completed a term of association president.

1. Should the offices of the president and vice –president both become vacant, the past-president shall fill the office of President until an election can be held.

Another concern raised by member(s) is whether CAPA should have a maximum number of consecutive terms for the officer position. For example, the President would not be able to let her/his name stand for more than two consecutive terms (i.e. four years).

Options:

A. Status quo (no change to the bylaws)

B. Set the maximum number of consecutive terms in office for a specific officer position to two consecutive terms.

Option B. Example:

ARTICLE IV - Officers of the Association

IV(2): All officers shall be elected for a two year term of office and no officer shall do more than two consecutive terms in the same office position.

41 Discussion on Four Issues for bylaw changes:

1) Should we have a vote that doesn’t occur at a meeting and allow submission of votes outside the meeting.

Question to membership: Do you think physical attendance is necessary, including via conference call.

Motion that only members present at the AGM of CAPA being eligible to vote for officers, electronic means are acceptable. Moved by Rob Currie Seconded by Chris Maund Carried

The technology does exist to have several people join the meeting via electronic means. Eg Skype is free and will accommodate several call-ins. We have to make sure that our leadership is aware of industry issues. Technology is evolving and travel restrictions are a reality. We should embrace these changes and keep up with the changing times.

“shall at the meeting, through electronic link, ….”

This person would have made the effort to participate, so it should be recognized.

Wording: member shall, at the AGM, through personal attendance or electronic means e.g. telephone or videoconference, etc.)

2) Issue around the structure of the Executive as defined in the By-Laws. No mention of Past-President in the by-laws.

Motion that the bylaws reflect wording that person holding the office of Outgoing President be appointed into the Executive as Past President. Moved by Rob Currie Seconded by Medhat Nasr / Joanne Moran Carried

3) Term limits for officers: none currently in by-laws

President has served two terms (4 years) traditionally.

Motion that the bylaws would reflect wording to the effect that the officers in the society shall not serve more than two consecutive terms in the same office position. Motion Rob Currie Seconded Geoff Wilson Carried

42 ACTION ITEM: Amend the CAPA by-laws to reflect changes as passed at the CAPA AGM (Chris Jordan responsible).

43 2012 CAPA Budget

GIC Term Deposit Opening Balance December 31, 2011) $20,192.86 Opening balance(December 31, 2011) $23,331.72

Jan. 01, 2012 - December 31, 2012 REVENUE Membership 40 2012 Full @ $40 1,600.00 17 2012 Associate @ $20 340.00 8 2011 Full @ $40 320.00 7 2011 Associate @ $20 140.00

Meetings 35 Registrations (Winnipeg AGM) @ $56 1,960.00 35 Registrations (Quebec AGM) @ $56 1,960.00

Publication Sales 1,000 Old @ $5 6,000.00 580 New @ $10 5,800.00

GST Rebate (2011) 166.27 $18,286.27 $41,617.99 EXPENDITURES

Publications Printing 0.00 S/H charges 1,000.00

New Publication Contracting 9,500.00 Printing 10,000.00 Electronic Version 0.00

Meeting Charge AGM Winnipeg 1,000.00 Meeting Charge AGM Quebec City 500.00

IBRA Donation 500.00

Awards Student Award 600.00

Apimondia 2012 1,500.00

Wink Howland Memorial Fund One-Time Donation 500.00

Travel for Board Member 1,000.00

Misc. (cards, postage, etc.) 20.00

CAPA Website Maintenance 170.00 Redesign 500.00

$26,790.00 $14,827.99

GIC Term Deposit $20,292.00 44 Cash -$5,464.01 Proposed Budget 2012 Chris Jordan

Motion that the Proposed Budget for 2012 be accepted as presented. Moved by Janet Tam Seconded by Ernesto Guzman Carried

New Business

Election & Committee Selection Rhéal Lafrenière

The current Executive of CAPA were re-elected for another term in office:

Rhéal Lafrenière President Medhat Nasr Vice-President Stephen Pernal Past-President Chris Jordan Secretary / Treasurer

President Lafrenière reviewed the membership of each Committee and revised accordingly with input from the membership.

Adjourn

Motion that the meeting be adjourned. Moved by Chris Maund Seconded by Chris Jordan Carried

Research Reports

46 2011 CAPA Research Report

Project title: Nutritional value and pesticide content of pollen collected by commercial honey bees in the Maritimes

Principle Investigator: Name: Megan Colwell Address: 33 University Avenue, Wolfville, NS, B4P 2R6 Email: [email protected] Fax: 902-585-1059 Telephone: 902-880-6419

Co-Investigators (including graduate students): Name: Dave Shutler & Geoff Williams Address: 33 University Avenue, Wolfville, NS, B4P 2R6 Email: [email protected] & [email protected] Fax: 902-585-1059 Telephone: 902-585-1354

Abstract: Apiculture has an estimated worth of $1 billion a year in Canada alone, but it faces several threats. One of five principal causes reported for overwintering mortality in Canada in 2009 was starvation. Proper nutrition can improve resistance to disease. Nectar supplies energy for honey bees, but pollen is their chief source of protein, lipids, minerals, and vitamins. Nutritional content of pollen is highly variable among plant species and among geographic regions. Thus, to obtain sufficient nutrition from pollen, honey bees may have to forage on a variety of plant species to obtain all their essential nutrients. An additional problem for honey bees is agricultural pesticides; honey bees are sometimes more susceptible to insecticides than are target pests. In this inter-provincial study, we are quantifying nutrition that Maritime crops and wild forage offer honey bees, and honey bee pesticide exposure. Nutritional quality and pesticide content of honey bee-collected pollen from hives in the three Maritime Provinces will be evaluated. Pollen was collected using pollen traps in Nova Scotia (5 operations, 19 hives), New Brunswick (4 operations, 12 hives), and Prince Edward Island (3 operations, 9 hives), during the pollination season of 2011. Collection took place during pollination of apples, blueberries, cranberries, and at post-commercial crop areas. Analyses are ongoing, including: identifying pollen source, amino acid content of pollen, and pesticide screening.

Start Date: 01 September 2010

End Date: 31 August 2012

Total Funding for Project: $85,300.00

Funding Sources: Canadian Agricultural Adaptation Program, Acadia University, NS Beekeepers’ Association, NB Beekeepers’ Association, PEI Beekeepers’ Association

47 Project Title: Integrated Management of Nosema and Detection of Antibiotic Residues

Principal Investigator: Co-Investigators: Name: Dr. Stephen F. Pernal Name: Dr. Jeff Pettis Address: AAFC Beaverlodge Address: USDA-ARS Box 29, 1 Research Road Bee Research Laboratory Beaverlodge, AB Bldg. 476 BARC-E T0H 0C0 Beltsville, MD USA 20705 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Fax: 780-354-5150 Fax: 301-504-8736 Tel: 780-354-5135 Tel: 301-504-7299

Name: Mr. Andony Melathopoulos Name: Dr. Tom Thompson Address: AAFC Beaverlodge Address: Chemistry Section Box 29, 1 Research Road AAFRD, Agri-Food Laboratories Beaverlodge, AB O.S. Longman Bldg. T0H 0C0 6909 – 116 St. Edmonton, AB T6H 4P2 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Fax: 780-354-5150 Fax: 780-415-4527 Tel: 780-354-5130 Tel: 780-415-4530

Other Personnel: Dr. Abdullah Ibrahim (PDF), AAFC Beaverlodge; Johan van den Heever, Ph.D. Candidate, University of Alberta.

Abstract: Nosema ceranae is an emergent world-wide pathogen, and it, in combination with N. apis, have been linked to wide scale depopulation of colonies in North America and Europe. We propose to examine more effective chemotherapeutic control for these parasites and generate a modern antibiotic residue dataset for fumagillin-based therapies. Our objectives are to: 1) Develop optimal application methods and dosages for fumagillin against N. apis and N. ceranae; 2) Document residues associated with different methods of fumagillin application; 3) Screen alternative therapies for nosema; and 4) Examine the seasonal phenology of N. apis and N. ceranae in Canada. These data will benefit the Canadian beekeeping industry by providing optimal treatment options to control both microsporidian species causing nosema disease without contaminating honey with unwanted residues. It will also provide for the development of modern analytical techniques for the detection of fumagillin and its degradation products, which currently do not exist. Finally, this research may lead to identifying other effective therapies so as to lessen dependency on fumagillin treatments. In 2011, results of our study comparing disinfection methods and their effects on Nosema development, colony productivity, and colony mortality were finalized with the analysis of all remaining samples and the use of PCR techniques to confirm Nosema species present. During the summer, we continued our work testing two promising structural analogues of fumagillin, identified from previous laboratory bioassays conducted during the summer of 2010. We also tested four additional compounds synthesized by Johan van den Heever, a Ph.D. candidate at the University of Alberta. We are continuing to evaluate the effect of fall fumagillin treatments on over-wintered colonies in a commercial apiary during the fall winter and spring 2011-12, and will be validating our novel LC-MS/MS residue detection technique for fumagillin.

Start Date: 1 April 2008 End Date: 31 March 2012

Total Funding: $ 117, 000 (Awarded in 2010) Funding Sources: AAFC MII ($56,000), ACIDF($30,000), Alberta Beekeepers ($20,000), Canadian Bee Research Fund ($8,000), Bee Maid Honey ($3,000).

48 Project Title: Detection of Chemical Residues in Hive Products

Principal Investigator: Co-Investigators: Name: Dr. Stephen F. Pernal Name: Dr. Tom Thompson Address: AAFC Beaverlodge Address: Chemistry Section Box 29, 1 Research Road AAFRD, Agri-Food Laboratories Beaverlodge, AB O.S. Longman Bldg. T0H 0C0 6909 – 116 St. Edmonton, AB T6H 4P2 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Fax: 780-354-5150 Fax: 780-415-4527 Tel: 780-354-5135 Tel: 780-415-4530

Name: Dr. Greg Appleyard Name: Dr. Norine Best Address: CFIA Veterinary Drug Residue Address: Chemistry Section Laboratories AAFRD, Agri-Food Laboratories 3650-36 Street N.W. O.S. Longman Bldg. Calgary, AB 6909 – 116 St. T2L 2L1 Edmonton, AB T6H 4P2 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Fax: 403-299-7629 Fax: 780-415-4527 Tel: 403-221-3293 Tel: 780-422-0223

Abstract: Agricultural and apicultural pesticides have been hypothesized to be one factor that may contribute to declining honey bee populations. The CFIA national chemical residue monitoring program does not currently include apicultural products other than honey, consequently very little work has been carried out in Canada to quantify pesticide residues in pollen or wax. In addition, residue accumulation has not been compared from hives placed in different agricultural crop settings and simultaneous comparison of residues across different hive matrices (honey, pollen, wax, bees) has not been performed. Differences in agricultural practices in Canada compared with the United States also speak to the need for generating baseline data for pesticides found within hive products in this country. The need for a better understanding of residue levels in pollen is especially true as it is the hive product most frequently contaminated with agricultural crop pesticides, it is a key component of honey bee nutrition and it is also consumed as a human health supplement. We propose to further develop analytical methods (LC-MS/MS) for the determination of multiple antibiotics and pesticides in pollen, honey and wax with particular attention to new generation agricultural pesticides and apicultural products. We will generate residue information related to environmental contamination of hive products and analyze whether beekeepers are using antibiotics and acaricides in a manner that reduces the risk of violative residues entering the food chain. We further aim to provide recommendations for the management of colonies to avoid environmental contamination. As an associated aim of this project, we will also continue to examine fumagillin residues in honey including its photolytic and thermal degradation products. We will attempt to characterize biological activity and residue deposition patterns related to treatment application techniques and dosages, as well as developing recommendations for producers so as to enhance the activity of fumagillin against N. ceranae with minimized residue risk. In 2011, we have focussed on the development of analytical methodologies to support this work and the characterization of thermal and photolytic degradation patterns of fumagillin. Wide-scale collection of honey, pollen and wax samples is scheduled for the summer of 2012. Contingent upon receiving extended funding, this project is anticipated to continue until March 2015.

Start Date: 1 April 2011 End Date: 31 March 2013 Total Current Funding: $ 59,500 (nominal cash per annum) Funding Sources: AAFC National Project Grant

49 Project Title: Next-Generation Integrated Pest Management for Beekeeping

Project Leader: Co-Project Leader: Name: Dr. Leonard Foster Name: Dr. Stephen F. Pernal Address: Dept Biochem & Molecular Biology Address: AAFC Beaverlodge Michael Smith Laboratories Box 29, 1 Research Road 301 – 2185 East Mall, UBC Beaverlodge, AB Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4 T0H 0C0 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Fax: 604-822-2114 Fax: 780-354-5150 Tel: 604-822-8311 Tel: 780-354-5135

Co-Applicants: Dr. Rob Currie (Univ. of Manitoba), Dr. Katherine Baylis (Univ. of Illinois), Dr. Eric Jan (UBC), Dr. Ashebar Sewalem (AAFC), Dr. Marta Guarna (UBC).

Other Personnel (Marker-Assisted Selection): A. Melathopoulos (AAFC), Dr. Shelley Hoover (PDF- Breeding), Heather Higo (Langley, BC), Elizabeth Huxter (Grand Forks, BC), Dr. M. Bixby (PDF-Econom.)

Abstract: Our large-scale applied research project has 3 major objectives: 1) to demonstrate the utility of using proteomic-based marker assisted selection (MAS) to increase pathogen and mite-resistance in bee stocks; 2) to develop new RNAi reagents for controlling bee pathogens and parasites; and 3) to develop an economic model of current beekeeping management and production practices against which to evaluate the impacts of ‘omic-based disease and pest management technologies. Pernal’s lab at AAFC has been leading the first aim of this project in collaboration with Foster, Currie and other project contributors. Several studies have indicated that knowledge linking genetic markers to quantitative traits can increase the selection response in breeding programs, especially for traits that are difficult to improve when using traditional selection. MAS is used in other sectors of agriculture but has yet to be applied in apiculture. By discovering heritable protein biomarkers of disease-resistance traits in our previous “APIS” project, the preliminary data we needed to launch the current project was put in place. Within this project aim we intend to: 1) validate the use of our putative proteomic markers, 2) demonstrate that MAS in bees is effective at enriching the targeted trait(s), 3) show that selected bees offer an economic advantage to beekeepers, and 4) provide beekeeper-friendly tools for practical adoption of MAS. In 2011, considerable activity took place. In the spring, 625 breeder colonies from 38 beekeeping operations across Western Canada were evaluated for hygienic behaviour, with the top-testing queens sent to the lower mainland of BC to establish two breeding populations. These populations will be used for breeding using MAS as well as traditional phenotypic measures in 2012 and 2013. Once assembled, all colonies in the breeder pools were further assayed for varroa sensitive hygiene (VSH). Other, randomly selected, queens from cooperating beekeepers were sent to AAFC and the University of Manitoba to establish unselected benchmark populations against which selection gains for Varroa and AFB resistance will be evaluated in subsequent years. Worker antennal samples were also collected from each of the 625 breeder colonies to characterize the levels of putative protein markers present. Results from these assays will be compared with hygienic behaviour and VSH results over the winter of 2011-12 to validate the use of our putative markers for MAS selection in 2012. In support of the economic aim of our project, 12 co-operating commercial producers from Western Canada agreed to set up apiaries of approximately 40 standardized colonies which were monitored over the spring, summer and fall of 2011. Samples of adult bees were collected from the brood nest and the periphery of 465 colonies, during each of these time periods, for an analysis of Varroa infestations, Nosema spp. prevalence, Paenibacillus larvae spore levels, and the presence of major honey bee viruses. Management and production information was also collected from co-operators in order to determine an economic and pathogenic baseline for colonies under typical management paradigms. These data will be used to evaluate the relative improvement that selected stock, bred by MAS, may confer to co-operating beekeeping operations when stock is distributed to them in 2013.

Start Date: 1 April 2011 End Date: 31 March 2014 Total Current Funding: $5.7 M - Total project life. (~$200 K per annum to SFP) Funding Sources (total): $2.8 M Genome Canada (Cash); $1.4 M Genome BC (Cash); $100 K Genome AB (Cash); AAFC, UBC, USDA, Univ. Manitoba, BCHPA, BC Blueberry Council (Cash or In-Kind).

50 2011 CAPA Research Report L.J. Foster

Project title: Next Generation Integrated Pest Management Tools for Beekeeping

Principle Investigator: Name: Leonard Foster, PhD Address: 2125 East Mall, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4 Email: [email protected] Telephone: 604-822-8311

Co-Investigators (including graduate students): Name: Stephen Pernal, Kathy Baylis, Marta Guarna, Rob Currie, Eric Jan, Miriam Bixby, Brian Gross, Asheber Sewalem

Abstract (300 words or less): Novel Integrated Pest Management (IPM) approaches, such as selection and maintenance of honey bee stock resistant to diseases or novel targeted treatments, could reverse most of the recent declines in managed bee populations. This project strategically aligns a multidisciplinary team of researchers towards the goal of developing an economically- justified, practical, integrated and targeted pest management solution for apiculture, resulting in an estimated $200 million in annual benefits to Canadian agriculture based on the expected decrease on colony losses, increased honey production and availability of bees for pollination. Our biological research will focus on developing two distinct tools: a) marker- assisted selection of disease resistant honey bees, and b) double-stranded RNA reagents for simultaneous, RNA interference (RNAi)-based control of the most damaging honey bee pathogens. On the GE3LS side, economists will work with biologists and beekeepers to estimate the economic viability of the new tools mentioned above and to develop a set of best-practices recommendations for beekeepers to integrate the use of these new tools with optimal use of existing tools. We will employ highly multiplexed quantitative proteomics approach known as multiple reaction monitoring (MRM) and genotyping to implement marker-assisted selection of disease resistant honey bees, building on previous Canadian investments in biomarker discovery work amongst the applicants. At the same time, we will use a combination of directed (MRM) and discovery (liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry on a Orbitrap Velos instrument) quantitative proteomic approaches, together with measures of pathogen load and pathology, to develop and evaluate RNAi approaches for controlling pathogens. In both approaches, the ultimate tests of efficacy will occur at the whole colony level, even in commercial apiaries, where on-going, parallel GE3LS work on the economic fundamentals of the beekeeping operations will provide a baseline against which the performance of the developed tools can be evaluated. The specific outcomes of the project will include: 1) demonstrated efficacy of and tools for marker-assisted selection (MAS) in bees by Q9, 2) disease-resistant honey bees with higher economic output than existing stocks by Q12 3) new RNAi tools and best-practices recommendations for the use of RNAi for controlling the most damaging pathogens by Q12 With our biologists and economists having direct input into each others’ research questions, the ultimate success of the tools developed here will be measured in net economic benefit to beekeepers and agriculture, and will represent the first substantive, industry-wide step towards reversing the steady decline in honey bees. Consumers, crop growers and beekeepers will benefit from improved food security and healthier, more abundant, more effective pollinators.

Start Date: April 1, 2011 End Date: March 30, 2014

51 2011 CAPA Research Report L.J. Foster

Total Funding for Project: $5,800,000 Funding Sources: Genome Canada, Genome BC, Genome Alberta, UBC, BC Blueberry Council, Boone-Hodgson-Wilkinson Fund, USDA

52 2011 CAPA Research Report L.J. Foster

Project title: Protecting our honey: the immune response in Apis mellifera

Principle Investigator: Name: Leonard Foster, PhD Address: 2125 East Mall, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4 Email: [email protected] Telephone: 604-822-8311

Co-Investigators (including graduate students): Name: Amanda Van Haga, Mandy Chan Address: 2125 East Mall, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4 Email: [email protected] Telephone: 604-822-9022

Abstract (300 words or less): Honeybees are critical components of our agriculture and ecosystems as they are responsible for pollinating numerous flowers, including those of many economically significant fruits, as well as for producing honey that Canadians consume 25,000 t of each year. Unfortunately several pests threaten domesticated honeybees, including Africanized honeybees, Varroa mites and American foulbrood (AFB). On-going efforts are directed at fighting these invasive species but we are starting to lose ground. AFB is a bacterial pathogen that, as the name suggests, attacks the young larvae, or brood, of bees and if left unchecked can kill an entire colony. For decades AFB has been treated with the antibiotic Terramycin but in recent years has developed resistance to this drug. Honeybees have an immune system that is similar to mammals in that it has specialized cells that can recognize, engulf and destroy invading bacteria in a process called phagocytosis. However, AFB appears to have developed a method for avoiding this immune response, allowing them to live contentedly in the bee larvae, feeding off it until it dies. Relative to our knowledge of mammals we know very little about immunity in insects. We propose to apply cell biological methods and an emerging technology called proteomics to study bacterial phagocytosis in insect cells. One aspect of proteomics involves the use of exquisitely sensitive mass spectrometers to track changes in the abundance of hundreds or thousands of proteins within a single sample. This powerful technology has been applied with great success in several model systems before but not in honeybees and only very rarely in insects. We will use mosquito and fruit fly cell cultures as model systems for the immune response and, combined with knowledge gained from similar parallel experiments using isolated bee hemocytes, build a model of phagocytosis in insects. The ultimate goal of these studies will be to better understand the immune system in beneficial insects and particularly how pathogens such as AFB are able to avoid the natural bee immune response. Such knowledge could lead to the design of drug therapies for domestic bee colonies afflicted with AFB.

Start Date: April 1, 2010 End Date: March 30, 2011 Total Funding for Project: $27,000 Funding Sources: NSERC

53 2011 CAPA Research Report

Project title: Impact de l’introduction de nouveaux moyens de phytoprotection des cultures (enrobage de semences) dans la mosaïque agricole sur la mortalité des abeilles

3nd year – FINAL REPORT

Principle Investigator: Name: Madeleine Chagnon Address: Centre de recherche en sciences animales Deschambault (Québec) Email: [email protected] Fax: 450-792-2343 Telephone: 450-792-2227

Co-Investigators (including graduate students): Name: Monique Boily Address: Université du Québec à Montréal - TOXEN Email: [email protected] Telephone: 514-987-3000 ex.

Abstract (300 words or less): It is often difficult to asses whether pesticides are in concerned in a multifactorial case of honeybee mortality. Biomarkers can indicate if an agricultural pesticide is involved, even if the chemical molecule is degraded. Our objective was to develop a biomonitoring system by the use of biomarkers. In a controlled light and humidity environment, honeybees were put into Plexiglas/net cages by groups of 30. Six different sub-lethal doses of pesticides were feed to them in a 1:2 sugar syrup during 10 days. Two insecticides were tested and doses were replicated 4 times. Numbers of dead honeybees were counted and behavioural responses were noted. Surviving honeybees were put on dry ice for quick die and kept at -80oC until analysis. Results show evidence of abnormal AChE and calcium measures, showing that neurological reactions are being impaired. Cage testing was validated by field data. Thirty two experimental hives were distributed in 8 sites selected to meet the objectives of our study. Dead bees were counted and collected, live foragers as well as sick bees were captured for enzyme analysis and brood development was followed during and after exposure of hives to treated fields. Age of foragers was determined by wing damage observations. Results show that honeybees from hives with high mortality had less wing damage, suggesting that young worker bees from inside the hives are forced to advance their foraging role. Honeybees from colonies with high mortality showed similar abnormality in biomarkers as those feed pesticides in experimental cages, while honeybees from healthy hives were comparable to those from the control cages.

Start Date: May 2008 End Date: May 2011 – Final report Total Funding for Project: 115,000 Funding Sources: Quebec ministry of agriculture (PROGRAMME DE SOUTIEN À L’INNOVATION EN AGROALIMENTAIRE). UQAM (Université du Québec à Montréal.

54 2011 CAPA Research Report Lise Charbonneau

Project title: Effect of fungal parasites on honey bee learning and memory

Principle Investigator: Name: Lise Charbonneau, MSc candidate Address: 15 University Avenue, Wolfville, NS, B4P 2R6 Email: [email protected] Telephone: 902-757-2382

Co-Investigators: Name: Dave Shutler, Kirk Hillier, Dick Rogers Address: 15 University Avenue, Wolfville, NS, B4P 2R6 Email: [email protected] Telephone: 902-585-1059

Abstract (300 words or less): Western honey bees, Apis mellifera, face a range of challenges that in recent years have led to significant population declines and concomitant economic impacts for agriculture. Nosemosis is a fungal infection of honey bees and can lead to dysentery, queen bee replacement, and winter die offs. Nosema apis has been known in Western honey bees for some time. Recent detection of a second Nosema species, Nosema ceranae, and its putative greater virulence, has spurred interest in understanding how it differs from N. apis. Little is known of effects of N. apis or N. ceranae on honey bee learning and memory. In natural systems, honey bees use olfaction and vision to remember favourable locations, making odour-learning and recall important to honeybee foraging success. Following a Pavlovian model, the proboscis extension reflex (PER) can be used to test if bees learn to associate an odour with a sucrose reward and, in subsequent trials, respond to the odour in the absence of sugar. We are testing if learning and memory are compromised by Nosema infection. Newly emerged bees were collected from a healthy colony and transferred to a temperature-controlled and humidity-controlled growth chamber. They were randomly assigned to one of 4 treatments: uninfected control, N. apis alone, N. ceranae alone, or co-infection. PER was run on individuals 7 and 14 days post-infection to assess effects of parasitism on learning and memory. Bees were dissected to confirm and quantify infection, and molecular analyses were used to confirm Nosema species.

Start Date: 01 September 2008 End Date: 01 March 2012 Total Funding for Project: $44,900 Funding Sources: NSERC IPS Program, Acadia University

55 2009 CAPA Research Report

Honey bee stock evaluation, reproduction and genetic selection.

Principle Investigator:

Pierre Giovenazzo Département de biologie Faculté des sciences et de génie Université Laval Québec, Québec Canada G1K 7P4 [email protected] 418-656-2131(8081)

M.Sc. student: Andrée Rousseau (2011-)

Abstract The main goal of this project is to establish a permanent provincial bee stock evaluation and genetic selection program at the Centre de recherche en sciences animales de Deschambault (CRSAD). The specific objectives are: 1) To scientifically evaluate and compare zootechnical performances of selected honey bee stock (Buckfast, VSH and Québec local); 2) To develop a breeding program aiming for a constant amelioration of the zootechnical performances of honey bee stock available in Québec via its Queen breeders. Inbreeding and character concentration will be insured by isolated reproduction and artificial insemination ; 3) To establish a provincial redistribution and an in situ evaluation of the selected honey bee stock with the collaboration of the CRSAD, the Quebec Queen breeders and the Québec Apiculturists.

Start Date: June 2010

End Date: December 2013

Total Funding for Project: $610,550

Funding Sources: Conseil pour le développement de l’agriculture du Québec et Centre de recherche en sciences animales de Deschambault

The Small hive beetle (Aethina tumida Murray, Coleoptera : Nitidulidae) : dévelopment, reproduction and wintering survival in Québec.

Principle Investigator:

Pierre Giovenazzo Département de biologie Faculté des sciences et de genie Université Laval Québec, Québec Canada G1K 7P4 [email protected] 418-656-2131(8081)

M.Sc. student Martine Bernier (2010-)

Abstract: Our beekeeping industry is confronted with a new enemy. The SHB biology and adaptation capacity to our climate are not well known. The principle objective of this study is to obtain knowledge on the biology of this new hive scavenger and to describe the dynamics of its life cycle in our climatic and beekeeping conditions. The secondary objective is to determine how the SHB was introduced in southern Quebec and to evaluate its dispersion capacity.

Start Date: July 2009

End Date: December 2011

Total Funding for Project: $180,000

Funding Sources: Ministère de l’agriculture des pêcheries et de l’alimentation du Québec et Centre de recherche en sciences animales de Deschambault

2011 PROVINCIAL APIARISTS REPORTS - SUMMARY

. BC AB SK MB ON QC NB NS PE Number of Beekeepers 1,938 750 825 501 - 457 209 222 43

Number of 38,159 264,000 90,000 77,000 - 39,700 5,808 7,200 4,379 Colonies

Average Honey 48 120 175 200 - 46.3 57 62 Production per - 22 47.1 - 91 40 21 26 28 colony (lbs & kg) Total Production per 1000 wt. (lbs & 1,825 3,180 15.75 15,400 208 410 271 - - kg) 830 1,400 - 7,007 94.5 186 123

Number of Colonies Wintered 41,900 265,000 100,000 80,000 - - 9,200 16,500 4,291 in 2010-11

Average Winter Mortality (%) 28 27 22 34 - 28 36.9 22.4 23

Colonies inspected for AFB 1,821 4,550 260 4,400 2,063 1,022 417 389 - (% incidence) (10) (2.0) (2.5) (1.9) (-) (2.9) (-) (3.8)

Colonies inspected for EFB 1,821 260 4,400 2,063 1,022 417 389 - - (%incidence) (3) (0) (0) (-) (2.0) (-) (5.6)

Colonies inspected for 1,821 260 2,063 1,022 417 389 Chalk Brood - - - (11) (5.0) (-) (3.2) (-) (3.8) (%incidence)

inspected for sacbrood 1,821 260 2,063 1,022 417 - - - 389 (%incidence) (1) (0) (-) (0.3) (-)

Colonies inspected with 1,081 223 215 26 HBTM 0 - - - - (5 positive (composite (29) (-) (%incidence) samples) samples)

Colonies inspected with 1,386 1,081 289 2,063 - - - - - Varroa (21) (90.3) (-) (-) (%incidence) Colonies inspected Small 624 426 ------Hive Beetle (0) (10.6) (%incidence) Colonies for 355 Nosema ------(-) (%incidence)

Note:- indicates information not available.

British Columbia Provincial Report 2011

Provincial Apiarist: Paul van Westendorp

A. Beekeeping Industry Statistics

. No. of Beekeepers 1,938 . No. of Producing Colonies 38,159 . Average Yield/Colony (lb/kg) 48 / 22 . Total Estimated Crop (lb/Kg x1000) 1,825 / 830 . Colonies Wintered Last Year (10/11) (est.) 41,900 . Average Winter Mortality (%) 28%

B. Diseases and Pests Number of Number of Disease Disease Colonies Beekeepers Colony Beekeeper Disease/Pest Inspected Inspected Incidence Incidence _ (%) (%) . AFB 1,821 na 10 na . EFB 1,821 na 3 na . Chalkbrood 1,821 na 11 na . Sacbrood 1,821 na 1 na . Tracheal Mite 0 0 na 25 . Varroa Mite 1,386 na 21 na . Other (Supers) 1,063 na 118 (burned) na

C. Comments • The overall provincial winter colony mortality was estimated at 28% which was comparable to the year before. Significant regional variability of winter mortality was reported with a high of 74% in the Vancouver Island region and a low of 17% in the Okanagan region. • Vancouver Island experienced a second year of extraordinary high winter losses. No obvious cause has been identified at this time. • The 2011 production season was marked by unusually cold and wet spring/summer season until August when hot and dry summer weather conditions prevailed. • Colonies continued nectar collection well into September which may have resulted in young wintering bees being exhausted by the time cold weather conditions arrived in October. As a result, there may be higher than average winter mortality. • Bees and beekeeping continue to draw strong public interest. Courses, seminars and educational days remain very popular. There has been a slow but steady rise in the number of registered beekeepers in the province despite ongoing challenges in disease control and management.

ALBERTA PROVINCIAL REPORT 2011

Provincial Apiarist: Dr. Medhat Nasr

A. Beekeeping Industry Statistics

. No. of Beekeepers 750 . No. of Producing Colonies 264,000 . Average Yield/Colony (lb/kg) 120 lb/47.1 kg . Total Estimated Crop (lb/Kg x1000) 31.8 mil lb/14.1 mil kg . Colonies Wintered Last Year 265,000 . Average Winter Mortality (%) 27%*

* The Provincial survey showed that winterkill was 15% by the end of March 2011. However, an additional 12% were reported dead by end of May, 2011.

B. Diseases and Pests Number of Number of Disease Disease Colonies Beekeepers Colony Beekeeper Disease/Pest Inspected Inspected Incidence Incidence (%) (%) . AFB 4550 85 2.0 . EFB 0.01 . Chalkbrood . Sacbrood . Tracheal Mite . Varroa Mite . Other

C. Comments • Beekeepers reported winterkill lower that 15% by the end of March, 2011. However, this percentage was doubled by the end of mid May due to extended winter conditions.

• All regions of the province reported abundant snow fall this past winter, cool temperatures in March and April and several precipitation events in spring that resulted in a slow snow melt and delayed soil dry down and warming. These challenging weather conditions affected honey bee survivorship and doubled the winterkill in spring 2011. Despite these challenges beekeepers were able to replace all winterkill and increase their number of bee colonies by 5% to reach 264,000 in 2011.

• Over 97% of beekeepers reported that they had enough time to treat colonies for varroa mites in the fall of 2010. Most beekeepers reported using Apivar for varroa mite control making it

the most widely used form of mite control since it has been made available in 2008. Most beekeepers used Apivar as a spring treatment to achieve high efficacy results.

• Formic Acid continued to be used by most beekeepers primarily as a treatment for tracheal mites and supplementary treatment for varroa mites in spring or fall. The most common method of formic acid application is Mitewipes (45-90 ml/hive, 3 times at 7-10 days intervals).

• Beekeepers monitored varroa mites. Results showed that there is a significant increase (+24%) in the number of operations that kept mites less than or equal to 5% before wintering bees. This is a remarkable achievement in protecting honey bees from irreversible damages that can be caused by varroa.

• Nosema has continued to be present at variable infection levels. Overall majority of beekeepers (78%) reported that Nosema like symptoms were found in their bee colonies in spring of 2011. • Honey production was low due to climatic conditions. In some regions there was too much rain and other regions such as the Peace River suffered from drought. • The pedigreed hybrid canola seed production industry continues to grow in Southern Alberta. Beekeepers in Alberta supplied 70,000 colonies for canola pollination. The average fee for renting a bee colony was $150/ colony.

• Brood Disease During the inspection of bee colonies across the province as our surveillance program expanded, American Foul Brood was found in few commercial operations. Swift action was taken to replace combs, burn heavily infected hives and treat. Samples of AFB infected cells were tested for resistance to Oxytetracycline. Results reported to beekeepers for further actions.

● Parasitic Mites Apivar showed excellent results of Varroa control (>95% efficacy). When Apivar was placed in the second brood box in fall, the efficacy was low. Bees in these hives did not get good exposure to Apivar. Beekeepers are required to follow instructions on the label for Applying Apivar in bee colonies and encouraged to move their Apivar treatment to spring.

● Nosema Over 900 bee samples were examined for Nosema. Results of examining samples collected in spring showed that high levels of Nosema spores. These results might be related to confinement of bees due to cold temperatures for long periods during spring.

●The small hive beetle Visual inspection of examined 2040 bee colonies in 85 commercial and hobby beekeepers operations did not yield any positive finding of the small hive beetle in Alberta.

● Alberta Apiculture Research Program:

The honey bee pest surveillance research project continued for the 3rd year. Over 75 beekeepers participated in the program. 24 bee colonies were sampled (6 colonies/apiary)

61 for varroa and nosema. Results were shared with the participant beekeepers for taking appropriate actions to keep healthy bees. Screening and evaluation of five new miticides for controlling present resistant varroa mites were conducted in 2011. One potential miticide showed high mite kill under laboratory conditions. Futher testing will be conducted in 2012. A field test of HopGuard, Thymovar and formic acid MiteWipe (80ml/hive) were tested in fall 2011. Data are being analyzed.

An outreach educational program was implemented across Alberta. The purpose was to educate beekeepers on implemintation of pest surveillance, pest monitoring and taking treatment actions as needed.

This project is sponsored by Alberta crop Industry Development (ACIDF), Alberta Agriculture, Alberta Beekeepers, Bayer Cropscience- Canada, Pioneer Hi-bred, Poelman Apiaries, and Southern Alberta Beekeepers Association (Sponsored by beekeepers pollinating canola, Bayer Cropsciences, Pioneer Hi-Bred Hytech Production ltd. and Monsanto Canada).

SASKATCHEWAN PROVINCIAL REPORT 2011

Provincial Apiarist: Geoff Wilson, Saskatchewan

A. Beekeeping Industry Statistics

. No. of Beekeepers 825 . No. of Producing Colonies 90 000 . Average Yield/Colony (lb/kg) 175 . Total Estimated Crop (lb/Kg x1000) 15 750 lbs . Colonies Wintered Last Year (10/11) 100 000 . Average Winter Mortality (%) 22%

B. Diseases and Pests Num ber of Number of Disease Disease Colonies Beekeepers Colony Beekeeper Disease/Pest Inspected Inspected Incidence Incidence _ (%) (%) . AFB 260 27 2.5 11 . EFB 260 27 0 0 . Chalkbrood 260 27 5 25 . Sacbrood 260 27 0 0 . Tracheal Mite 1081 56 29 10 . Varroa Mite 1081 56 90.3 85 . Other (SHB) 624 26 0 0

C. Comments

• Many beekeepers are overwintering nucleus col onies, there were approximately 20 000 nuclei wintered in SK in 2011/2012 • Disease prevalence for AFB may be exaggerated. When infected colonies were discovered in an operation, more colonies were investigated. • Honey production was affected by poor weather during the peak production period. A week of rain moved into large portions of the province during the peak canola bloom. • Beekeepers seem to be doing a good job of keeping Varroa and tracheal m ites under control, while Varroa mites were present in many samples, the vast majority of samples were below the economic threshold.

MANITOBA PROVINCIAL REPORT 2011

Provincial Apiarist: Rhéal Lafrenière and David Ostermann

A. Beekeeping Industry Statistics

. No. of Beekeepers 501 . No. of Producing Colonies 77,000 . Average Yield/Colony (lb/kg) 200 lbs (91 kg) . Total Estimated Crop (lb/Kg x1000) 15,400 lbs x 1000 (7,007 x 1000 kg) . Colonies Wintered Last Year (10/11) 80,000 . Average Winter Mortality (%) 34%

B. Diseases and Pests Num ber of Number of Disease Disease Colonies Beekeepers Colony Beekeeper Disease/Pest Inspected Inspected Incidence Incidence _ (%) (%) . AFB 4400 188 1.9 3.2 . EFB 4400 188 0 0 . Chalkbrood n/a n/a n/a n/a . Sacbrood n/a n/a n/a n/a . Tracheal Mite 223 samples 109 n/a 11.0 . Varroa Mite 289 samples 117 n/a 72.6 . Other - Nosema 355 samples 120 n/a 83.3

C. Comments

The best way to describe the honey bee losses this past winter would be “drastic” or “extreme”. For some beekeepers it was a complete disaster but for others it was one of the best winters in terms of colony losses that they have seen in years. From one drastic extreme to the other! The data used in this article comes from the Harmonized National Survey, which was conducted by Manitoba Agriculture Food and Rural Initiatives (MAFRI) on behalf of the Canadian Association of Professional Apiculturists (CAPA). No personal information will be shared with CAPA (i.e. no names or addresses). The information collected from the various provinces will be used to try to determine if there are specific trends in the mortality data that may give rise to a better understanding of what are the major factures behind the losses or perhaps more importantly behind successful wintering.

Seventy-two Manitoba beekeepers replied to the national winter loss survey, which is similar to previous years. In terms of number of colonies, we usually get about 50% - 60% of the colonies represented in the survey results, but this year we are slightly down from that at approximately 48%. For this reason and the fact that the postal strike has interrupted the normal process of gathering the survey data, the estimates provided in this article must be considered preliminary. Given that these results are still preliminary and that there is a pending investigation into a compensation program for losses in a specific region, the data in this article will be presented as provincial averages and not broken down into regions. A more detailed report on regional difference will be presented in a separate article once the data is no longer considered preliminary. 64

That said, this year there were significant numbers of beekeepers in most regions of the province that had experienced high winter losses but the northwest region in particular appears to be reporting the highest losses. Many commercial beekeepers in that region are reporting that they lost 50%, 60% and 70+% of their colonies over winter. This has had a significant influence on the provincial average bee mortality calculation, which at this time is estimated to be 34%. The long-term average winter loss in Manitoba has been typically in the range of 15% - 25%, but lately it has been in and around 30% (e.g. 28% -32%). So this year’s losses would appear to be significantly higher than usual.

The colonies or nucs wintered in indoor facilities on average were reported to have lower losses than colonies or nucs wintered outdoors. Figure 1, illustrates that bee mortality losses in outdoor wintered colonies and nucs was generally higher than the calculated average bee mortality lose (i.e.34%), whereas indoor wintered colonies and nucs experienced bee mortality losses lower than 34%.

Figure 1. Average winter and spring bee mortality losses of honey bee colonies and nucs wintered indoors and outdoors.

When we compare the lose differential between indoor and outdoor wintered colonies last year, which was approximately 8% to the 14% lose differential this year, we see that the difference between indoor and outdoor wintered colonies was 1.75x higher this year than last year. (Figure 2).

Figure 2. Average winter and spring bee mortality losses in 2009/10 and 2010/11

65 As part of the national survey, beekeepers were asked to comment on a number of management activities such as queens and feeding. For example, figure 3 outlines that 2/3 of the queens used by Manitoba beekeepers were imported and that US imported queens (i.e. Hawaii and California) represented 54% of the queens. Beekeepers were also asked what percent of queens are replaced in their operation on an annual basis and the average was calculated to be 27%.

Figure 3. Queen origins used by Manitoba beekeepers in 2010.

In regards to feeding in the fall, 79% of the respondents indicated that they feed their hives individually using pails, frame feeders, or hive-top feeders. Whereas 21% indicated that they feed the bees in the Fall using barrel or rob feeding. Figure 4, illustrates that 2/3 of the respondents indicated that they used a sucrose based feed (i.e. liquid sucrose syrup or table sugar syrup and 1/3 used a fructose based feed (i.e. high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) or honey).

Figure 4. Type of carbohydrate feed used in Fall 2010.

The survey also asked questions about pest and disease monitoring and control activities. In regards to nosema disease, only 17% of the respondents indicated that they monitored nosema levels in the Fall, but 76% indicated that they treated for nosema. Of the respondents that indicated they treated for nosema disease in the Fall, 80% of them indicated that they used Fumagilin-B in syrup, whereas the other 20% used another method of administering the antibiotic. In the case of varroa mite, Figure 5, illustrates that 76% of the respondents reported monitoring for varroa mite in the Fall and that ¾ of them used the mite wash method.

Figure 5. Varroa mite monitoring methods used in Fall 2010. In terms of control activities for varroa mite, 93% of the respondents indicated that the treated for varroa mite in the Fall. Apivar® was the most commonly reported varroa mite control product used in Fall 2010, followed by formic acid, oxalic acid, Apistan® and CheckMite+™ (Figure 6).

Figure 6. Varroa mite control products used in Fall 2010 Many beekeepers have reported that the coloni es that survived appear to be strong. Unfortunately due to the wet cold conditions in many parts of Manitoba this spring, nuc production has been severely com promised. Overland flooding along m any of the rivers and creeks this year has not only washed out roads and hampered access to beeyards but in some cases it has flooded entire beeyards a nd washed the colonies downstream . The Province of Manitoba has announced several compensation programs for producers affected by flooding.

67 Despite a very wet start to the season, once the fields dried up enough to get seeded, the rain stopped and July and August were actually on the dry side. Most regions of the province reported average to above average honey production

This spring/summer Manitoba imported 13,634 queens from Hawaii and MAFRI inspected a total of 9,582 for the presence of SHB. SHB was found in 5 separate shipments of queens from Hawaii – One live adult SHB and 12 live larvae were found in the first shipment (April 7th) – Two dead SHB larvae were found in shipment #3 (April 20th) – One dead adult SHB was found in shipment #4 (April 21st) – One live adult SHB was found in shipment #7 (May 10th) – One dead adult SHB was found in shipment #8 (May 17th )

68 2011 Provincial Apiarist Annual Report

Paul Kozak, Provincial Apiarist

Weather:

Weather was a major factor negatively affecting honey bees in many areas of Ontario in 2011. The spring of 2011 was characterized by a very prolonged, cool and rainy period throughout most regions of the province. These cool conditions stressed weakened colonies and delayed the building of worker population by honey bee colonies. This may have contributed to a further decline in weakened colonies into the late spring resulting in increase spring mortality. The summer conditions were mostly hot and dry in many areas of the province.

Despite a long, cold winter (2010 – 2011) in Essex County the small hive beetles (SHB) found in the fall of 2010 were able to survive. Adult SHB were found in honey bee colonies in the spring of 2011. Furthermore, these adults were capable of reproduction.

Honey Production: It was a mixed year for honey production in Ontario. In many cases beekeepers reported a large variation of production from site to site. In areas of North Wellington and in areas surrounding Kingston many beekeepers reported average to higher-than-average levels of production. Production in northern regions of the province was reported to be well below expected levels. The main issue identified by producers was insufficient numbers of foragers in the colony to capture the nectar flow. This was mostly attributed to the cool and late spring which held back colony development and growth. At the same time, beekeepers in the south-western parts of the province produced an unexpectedly large honey crop from an area which typically has a much smaller honey crop. Based on the responses to the provincial honey survey, the estimated average honey production in Ontario in 2011 was 90 lbs / colony, down from 107 lbs / colony in 2010.

Varroa and tracheal mites: Varroa and tracheal mites are well established and widely distributed throughout Ontario as it is elsewhere. The only region where varroa or tracheal mites have not been recorded is the region of Thunder Bay. Varroa mites resistant to both fluvalinate and coumaphos are established in multiple regions of Ontario. At present, there have been no confirmed cases of varroa mites resistant to the active ingredient amitraz (Apivar®).

American Foulbrood and Other Brood Diseases: The bacterial disease American Foulbrood (AFB) is resident within Ontario, as it is elsewhere. In 2011, 24 instances of AFB, representing 57 colonies, were found in Ontario. This is still the most contagious and virulent brood disease of honey bees. When found, AFB samples are sent to the USDA Lab in Beltsville, Maryland to test for antibiotic resistance. Resistance to Oxytetracycline has not been found in AFB in Ontario. All beekeepers should take particular care to only use approved and registered antibiotics for the prevention of AFB infections. To prevent the development of resistance to antibiotics, beekeepers should only use oxytetracycline in icing sugar.

69 “Extender” or “grease patties” should never be used. This method has risks for contaminating the honey crop and the development of antibiotic-resistant AFB.

Other brood diseases that were tracked by the inspection program include European Foulbrood, Mellisococcus pluton (found in 0.01 per cent of inspected colonies), chalkbrood, Ascophaera apis (found in 3.6 per cent of inspected colonies) and sacbrood (found in 0.01 per cent of inspected colonies).

Pollination: Pollination demand for berry crops in New Brunswick increased from 12,600 honey bee colonies in 2010 to 14,700 in 2011. This represents approximately 17 per cent of the managed colonies in Ontario. There are reports that blueberry growers in Eastern Canada were still in need of up to 6,000 additional honey bee colonies. There are also indications that the blueberry acreage will increase substantially in Eastern Canada and that as much as 6,000 acres will be developed in Northern Ontario within the next 10 years, further increasing the demand for pollination services provided by Ontario honey bee colonies.

Honey bee colonies moving to New Brunswick and Quebec from Ontario require inspections for the presence of AFB and SHB and an import permit from Ontario and the receiving province. No SHB were found in, or in areas associated with, loads of honey bee colonies leaving Ontario.

Industry Make-Up: At present there are 2,900 beekeepers in Ontario. This represents 41 per cent of the beekeepers in Canada. The 87,000 managed honey bee colonies in Ontario represent 15 per cent of the honey bee population in Canada. Although Ontario has a very large proportion of beekeepers with relatively small operations, the vast majority of honey bee colonies are managed by a thriving commercial sector. Two hundred and thirty commercial beekeepers manage 70,000 of the 87,000, or 80 per cent, of the colonies in the province. Honey bee colonies are currently managed at approximately 6,000 sites.

This industry is one of the most diverse in Canada with beekeepers invested in honey production for a large domestic market, honey bee colony and queen production and sales, as well as pollination of a vast fruit and vegetable sector. A substantial proportion of the blueberry crop in Eastern Canada is reliant on the numbers and early build of colonies from Ontario. There is also a considerable production of domestic honey bee colonies in Ontario. In 2011, 82 beekeepers held queen and nuc permits allowing for the sale of honey bee material to other beekeepers.

Pollination value: Honey bees provide $171 million in annual pollination value to Ontario agriculture, not including the high pollination value of blueberries outside of Ontario. Michigan recently revised their estimates for pollination value of honey bees at approximately $1 billion for the state. For comparison purposes, see: http://bees.msu.edu/2010/03/bees-worth-a-billion-in-michigan/

70 2011 Apiculture Survey Results: Based on the results from the 2011 Apiculture Survey, the provincial mean for estimated colony mortality over the winter of 2010-2011 was 43 per cent, while the median was 41 per cent. This survey represents a response rate of 39.4 per cent amongst 218 commercial beekeepers. This is the highest level of average winter loss recorded in Ontario. A normal level of winter mortality typically ranges from 5 to 15 per cent (Furgala and McCutcheon , 1992).

Many of the beekeeping operations that responded to the survey reported their losses well above the mean, up to 60 per cent in the 75th percentile of the respondents. At the same time, some beekeepers reported much lower wintering losses in the 5th percentile, at 10 per cent mortality. Although the range of wintering losses reflects a wide variation in mortality among different operations (2 to 95 per cent winter mortality), both the median and mean are indicative of high levels of loss.

Based on research from the University of Guelph (Guzman et al., 2010) and reports and field observation from other provinces (Currie et al., 2010), varroa is still the main factor in colony mortality. The overall virulence of Nosema ceranae in honey bees is somewhat unclear (requiring further research) and there are many other pathogens such as viruses that further impact honey bees.

Weather patterns may have had some impact on the survival of colonies into spring. In 2010, in most parts of the province, the spring was early, up to three weeks earlier than normal in most regions (April). This would have resulted in much earlier brood production in honey bee colonies and varroa reproduction. Without effective varroa control in spring of 2010, it is possible that many colonies may have gone into the fall with much higher varroa levels than a typical year. This is only speculation as no data was collected to demonstrate varroa levels increasing earlier than normal.

As mentioned above, the extremely wet and cool spring conditions in 2011 may have contributed to further colony decline, particularly in weak colonies that could not increase their numbers. This was anecdotally reported from many different beekeeping operations.

Colony Collapse Disorder has been identified in the USA. This disorder’s distinct set of conditions has not to date been identified in Canada (vanEngelsdorp et al., 2008; Currie et al., 2010).

Figures 1 and 2 below show average winter mortality of honey bee colonies in Ontario from 2003 to 2011, and a comparison of winter mortality between provinces in 2010 and 2011.

For more information on winter mortality in honey bees see: http://www.omafra.gov.on.ca/english/food/inspection/bees/2011-winter-loss.htm

71 Figure 1. AVERAGE WINTER MORTALITY OF HONEY BEE COLONIES IN ONTARIO 45 40

Average Mortality 30 25

20 15

5 0 2003/ 2004/ 2005/ 2006/ 2007/ 2008/ 2009/ 2010/ 2011/

Year

Figure 2. GRAPH of WINTER MORTALITY AMONGST PROVINCES

Winter Mortality of Honey Bee Colonies in Canada - 2010/2011

ty 40 li ta

o 30 2010

M t 2011 n 20

ce r

e 10 P 0 BC AB SK MB ON QC NB NS PEI

Province

72 Small Hive Beetle Distribution: The distribution and population levels of small hive beetles (SHB) in Ontario are being tracked by the Apiculture Inspection Program (OMAFRA). All honey bee colonies that are inspected for the presence of American Foulbrood are also inspected for SHB. This includes all colonies that belong to beekeepers applying for a permit to sell, move or import queens and nucs. Colonies are visually inspected for the presence of SHB adults and larvae with particular attention to areas of the hive where SHB is more likely to be found.

In addition to regular visual inspection of honey bee colonies throughout Ontario, Apiary Inspectors have also monitored targeted sites on an ongoing basis. These targeted sites are located in areas that are of potentially higher risk of being infested by SHB(Counties of Lambton, Niagara, Chatham-Kent and those along the St. Lawrence), either by their geographic proximity to areas known to have SHB or by suspected association with a known area (e.g. through known or suspected trace-outs, selling, or movement of honey bees).

The standard SHB trap used this season (2011) was the bottom board trap. This trap is a shallow black plastic pan that fits underneath the colony, resting on top of the bottom board, elevated by a wooden slat. The pan is filled with food grade vegetable oil and covered with a grid that is too small for honey bees to fit through but big enough for adult SHB to fit through. Two other types of traps (top bar traps and bucket traps) were used in the field inspections, although at much lower levels and only under certain conditions.

Two hundred and forty-four sites were monitored in the 2011 beekeeping season, representing 123 beekeepers and 3,896 honey bee colonies (See Figure 4).

SHB was found to be present in four of the 244 sites (See Figure 5): • One site less than 10 km outside of the quarantine area in Chatham-Kent County — There were six full-size honey bee colonies on site. The presence of SHB was self reported by the beekeeper. The beekeeper involved had purchased honey bee colonies from a beekeeper within the Quarantine Area a year earlier. Action Taken: The site was placed under quarantine. The beekeeper agreed to voluntarily move all colonies to a site within the Quarantine Area. Ground drench (Permethrin) was then applied to the soil where the bees had been kept.

• One site in Stormont, Dundas and Glengarry County, east of Cornwall — The yard is located on the north side of the St. Lawrence River and is approximately 10 km from New York State where SHB is considered resident. The yard contains 25 full-size colonies. The beekeeper involved is a commercial beekeeper with multiple sites. Other yards of the beekeeper and surrounding beekeepers were inspected for the presence of SHB and none were found to be positive. The levels of SHB in the yards where the beetle was found is considered low (there was only one beetle found in all colonies examined. • Action Taken: The beeyard was placed under individual quarantine.

73 • Two sites in Dufferin County — The sites are located near the town of Shelburne, approximately 80 km northwest of Toronto. There are 17 colonies in one yard and 23 in the second. Both yards belong to a single beekeeper. This finding may be considered a traceout given that the colonies were purchased from another beekeeper who has an association with the Quarantine Area. Action Taken: Both beeyards have been placed under quarantine.

• Two sites in Lambton County, near the city of Sarnia — There are 26 colonies in one yard and 23 in the second. Both beeyards belong to the same beekeeper. Both yards are very close to Michigan where SHB is resident. Action Taken: Both beeyards have been placed under quarantine.

All positive sites have been reported to the CFIA and the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE). The CFIA has recognized all action that has been taken on the sites and has reclassified the Chatham-Kent site as free of SHB. Ontario will continue to work with the CFIA on monitoring and mitigating SHB.

The Quarantine Area (encompassing the entire County of Essex and all of that part of the Municipality of Chatham-Kent lying south-westwards of a line made up of a Town Line Road, Pump Road and Merlin Road also known as County Road 7) is still being maintained. This was the first area where SHB was found in Ontario and is the epicentre of the infestation.

OMAFRA’s SHB inspection and monitoring activities are covered in greater detail in the Small Hive Beetle Report for Ontario – 2011: http://www.omafra.gov.on.ca/english/food/inspection/bees/apicultu.html

Currie R., Guzman E. and Pernal, S. 2010. Honey bee colony losses in Canada. Journal of Apicultural Research. 49 (1): 104-106.

Guzman-Novoa E., Eccles L., Calvete Y., McGowan J., Kelly P. and Correa-Benitez A. 2010. Varroa destructor is the main culprit for death and reduced populations of overwintered honey bees in Ontario, Canada. Apidologie. 4 (4) 443-451.

-Furgala, B; McCutcheon, D M (1992) Wintering productive colonies. In Graham J M (Ed). The hive and the honey bee (revised edition). Dadant and Sons; Hamilton, IL, USA. pp. 829-868.

SMALL HIVE BEETLE REPORT FOR ONTARIO – 2011

Overview: The small hive beetle, Aethina tumida, (SHB) is an emerging pest of honey bees in many parts of the world. Small hive beetle can impact the health of honey bee colonies, especially colonies that are in a stressed or weakened state. The larvae feed on honey bee brood and can spoil honey stores, further weakening and damaging a colony. The SHB can also spoil honey in extraction facilities when harvested supers are not promptly extracted.

The SHB is native to sub-Saharan Africa and first spread to the United States in 1996. Since then the SHB has been found in most of the United States, Australia (2002), Mexico (2007) and the island of Hawaii (2010). Small hive beetle was found in Manitoba in 2002 at a wax rendering facility and in Manitoba and Alberta in honey bee packages from Australia in 2006. The beetle did not establish a resident population in either case of introduction to the Prairies. In 2008, 2009 and 2010, SHB was found in south-western Quebec, near the New York State border.

2010 Season: In September of 2010, SHB was self-reported by a commercial beekeeper in Essex County, Ontario. This is significant because this was the first time that SHB had been found in Ontario. The Apiculture Program of the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs (OMAFRA) had been inspecting for this pest for a number of years through regular inspection of honey bee colonies, focusing particularly on the thousands of colonies that are shipped to Eastern Canada every spring.

Shortly after the discovery of SHB in 2010, the Apiculture Program conducted a broad and intensive survey at multiple sites throughout the province to determine the distribution of the beetle. Colonies were inspected by visual inspection and by using corrugated traps with Checkmite++™ strips (with coumaphos as the active ingredient) were placed on bottom boards. After targeted inspections of 202 bee yards, representing approximately 5,400 honey bee colonies across the province, it was determined that SHB was restricted in distribution to the area where it was first discovered, Essex County. Multiple sites (17 bee yards) were found within Essex County in 2010. At the end of 2010 there were 15 infested sites left due to the destruction of two yards following detection of American Foulbrood (AFB) and discovery of abandoned colonies.

The fact that experienced beekeepers in Essex County had not encountered SHB until that point and that there were many bee yards in that area not yet infested with SHB. indicate that this is likely a recent infestation. It is possible that SHB arrived from the neighbouring state of Michigan where SHB has an established population. Although there is no movement of honey bee colonies permitted across the border with the United States, SHB has the ability to fly up to 14 km and may have flown across the river, either individually or with a swarm of honey bees. That SHB has only recently been found in Ontario and has not been found in other border regions, despite its presence in the United States since 1996, indicates that the current limitations on moving honey bees between

the United States and Canada, as well as the geographic barriers (lakes and rivers) have played some part in slowing down the distribution of SHB.

OMAFRA consulted closely with the industry through the Ontario Beekeepers Association (OBA) and determined that the best strategy would be to create a Quarantine Area to mitigate the spread of this new and emerging pest. The Quarantine Area was established in March 2011 and includes all of Essex County and part of Chatham-Kent County (all of that part of the Municipality of Chatham-Kent lying south-westwards of a line made up of a Town Line Road, Pump Road and Merlin Road, also known as County Road 7) therein. Honey bees and equipment are permitted to enter the Quarantine Area so that beekeepers within Essex County are able to obtain supplies of honey bee colonies and can satisfy the pollination requirements of the local fruit and vegetable growers. No honey bees or used equipment is permitted to move out of the Quarantine Area without a moving permit. In cases where a moving permit is issued, it only applies to equipment, and the equipment must be treated in secured cold storage and validated by an Apiary Inspector.

2011 Season: In the season of 2011, the Apiculture Program monitored the presence of SHB in targeted regions of the province. The Apiculture Program continued visual inspections for SHB during all regular inspections in addition to using traps designed to capture and detect SHB. Traps were placed in honey bee colonies at selected sites and monitored for the presence of SHB. Once SHB is found to be present in a bee yard, the entire site is considered infested.

Visual Inspection for SHB: Visual inspection for SHB in honey bee colonies was standard practice during regular inspections of colonies throughout the beekeeping season. Apiary Inspectors focused on areas of the colony where SHB is most likely found. This was based on field experience from infested colonies in the Quarantine Area and advice from other jurisdictions.

An effective way to detect SHB by using visual detection is to quickly scan the top bars immediately after opening the inner cover. Adult beetles will often quickly move away from light, seeking hiding spots during inspection, making them difficult to see. Therefore, it is very important to look for SHB immediately upon removing the inner cover. Inspectors typically have a few seconds to observe an adult SHB immediately after the colony is opened. In regions of the United States where SHB is found at high concentrations, SHB may also be found accumulating on the bottom board. Inspectors also examine the surface of the frames within the honey super as SHB may be found amongst honey bees at any time. During inspection, it is important to look for SHB first, and then go about inspecting the honey bee colony for colony development and other pests and diseases.

Other details of SHB biology and behaviour relevant for identification in the field include: • Adults will seek warmth right under the inner cover, especially during cooler weather, and will congregate along the top bars, most often along the ends of the bars. • Hiding spots can include: o Uncapped wax cells o Underneath adult bees o The crevices of plastic frames o The folds of canvas or bag material used as inner covers o Pollen traps • Larvae are often found feeding on pollen patties. They are more likely to be found in weak colonies. • Adults can be found in honey supers or brood chambers, and on frames with or without bees. • SHB damage is more likely to be found in weak and compromised colonies, however the adults can be found in either strong or weak colonies. • Adult SHB can be very difficult to capture as they are fast and easily slip between fingers. An easy way of catching them is to dab them with a sticky surface, for example a finger dipped in honey or a piece of duct tape.

In addition to the Apiculture Program, the Technology Transfer Program of the Ontario Beekeepers’ Association has been conducting applied research on small hive beetle within the Quarantine Area with the goal of identifying the biology, best management practices and the potential impacts of SHB specific to Ontario. Furthermore, the Technology Transfer Program has worked with researchers from the Université Laval in Quebec City to identify the efficacy of additional trapping methods. This applied research will be used to inform future inspection procedures in the field and will provide further information to Ontario beekeepers on best management practices for this pest.

SHB Traps: Three SHB traps were used by the program: The top bar trap (beetle blaster®), the bucket trap and the bottom board trap (the latter was the main SHB trap used during the 2011 season).

Top bar trap — The top bar trap consists of a small reservoir filled with vegetable oil with a grid entrance that rests on the top bars and fits in between frames (see figure 8). The grid is too small for adult honey bees to fit through but big enough for adult SHB to fit through. Adult beetles are attacked to entering the traps and drown in the oil after entering. Top bar traps are commercially available and can be purchased from bee equipment suppliers.

Bucket trap — The bucket trap method was developed by the Apiculture Program and consists of a white plastic, 12-litre bucket with a ¼-inch wire-mesh screen fitting halfway down the depth of the bucket. The bottom of the bucket is filled with a thin layer of vegetable oil. A frame is banged against the rim of the top bucket so that bees and any

potential SHB are jarred off of the surface of the frame. The bees will be captured by the wire mesh, unharmed, while any SHB adults will fall through the wire mesh and be captured in the bottom bucket in the vegetable oil.

This method of sampling for SHB only requires one visit to a yard and proved to be effective at detecting SHB at very low levels and when adults can not be confirmed through visual inspection. In some cases, following visual inspection of an entire honey super frame by frame, where no beetles were observed, shaking each frame over the screened bucket revealed numerous beetles that were not seen during visual inspection. An infosheet on this method is in development, see: www.omafra.gov.on.ca/english/food/inspection/bees/apicultu.html

Bottom board trap — Bottom board traps are constructed of black plastic and consist of two parts including a pan and a removable grating that fits over the top the pan. The traps work on the principle that beetles will move down through the grating as they are attracted to tight spaces. The bottom pan is filled with food-grade oil which will drown the beetles. The grating is too small for adult honey bees to fit through. The traps are placed underneath the colony and rest on the bottom board. A wooden rim fits underneath each trap to raise the trap above the bottom board. This also allows the bottom of the trap to slide out for observation and to collect material from the traps.

Bottom Board SHB Trap – Additional Comments: • Bottom board traps have proven to be very effective in detecting SHB (Technology Transfer, personal communication with colleagues in the United States). The traps have a large surface area, covering the entire bottom board, which increases the likelihood of capturing beetles. • Bottom board traps can be used throughout the beekeeping season and also have the added benefit of being chemical free. • Bottom board traps also have the advantage of killing the adult beetles, thereby potentially reducing the population of SHB at an individual bee yard.

The bottom board traps are commercially available and can be purchased from bee equipment suppliers.

Methodology for Assessing the Presence of SHB in Bee Yards: The Apiculture Program followed a standard practice to monitor for the presence of SHB in bee yards using bottom board traps. For all other inspections (standard inspections for selling and import permits, monitoring with other traps) apiary inspectors used different protocol.

Two bottom board traps were used on two different colonies for each site. The traps were typically monitored every 10 to 14 days, depending on inspection scheduling and weather. All bottom board traps were retrieved from honey bee colonies at the end of the beekeeping season. Inspectors also visually inspected additional colonies within the bee yards (top bars, frames) on a regular basis.

Monitoring these traps involved sliding out the pan and examining the contents for the presence of SHB (larvae or adults). All debris that collected in the pan was visually inspected or, when required, was filtered and collected from the traps and stored in plastic containers labelled with the date, beekeeper name, inspector name and bee yard identification number. The samples were processed by Apiary Inspectors, who examined all debris under a microscope.

In cases where there was no debris, or limited debris in the pan, the presence or absence of beetles was determined in the field by Apiary Inspectors. Specimens of SHB in new locations were sent to the Provincial Apiarist for verification and then sent to the National Identification Service Laboratory through Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada for final confirmation.

Other Similar Species Found During Inspection: Many insect species were collected during inspection that closely resembled SHB, either in the larval or adult stages. The following species were formally identified by the National Identification Service Laboratory: • Cynaeus angustus, Tenebrionidae (larger black flour beetle) • Dermestes lardarius, Dermestidae (larder or carpet beetle) • Glischrochilus quadrisignathus, Nitulidae (four-spotted sap beetle) • Cryptarcha ampla, Nitulidae (common sap beetle) • Carpophilus lagubris, Nitulidae (dusky sap beetle) • Larvae Galleria mellonella, Pyralidae (Greater wax moth) • Larvae of phorid fly, species unidentified

Among these, the only species that is a common pest of honey bees is the Greater wax moth. It is worth noting that although other species of beetles from the same family of SHB were found in traps, all are endemic to Ontario and none are known pests of honey bees. Although larger beetles are often found in association with stored beekeeping equipment, they are not considered pests of the honey bee.

Regions: A risk based approach was used for allocating resources for monitoring SHB in various sites across Ontario. Apiary Inspectors focussed inspection activity in potentially higher risk areas but also included some areas of minimal risk to further confirm that SHB was not present in these regions.

Potentially high-risk areas included the following: • Eastern Ontario — SHB is known to be resident on the south shore of the St. Lawrence River in New York State. • Niagara County — SHB is known to be resident on the east shore of the Niagara River in Western New York State. • The Counties of Lambton and Chatham-Kent —Close to the Quarantine Area and Michigan State where SHB is resident.

• The Counties of Dufferin and Wellington were given priority for SHB monitoring after Apiary Inspectors became aware of unregulated beekeeping activity in the area.

Low-level monitoring was conducted in the following areas: • The Counties of Grey, Bruce, Simcoe, Parry Sound, Nipissing, Waterloo, Huron, Middlesex, Elgin, Norfolk and Oxford were included in the monitoring program to represent random surveillance as well as areas that are adjacent to the higher risk regions. • Essex County was monitored for SHB at lower levels than the surrounding regions because SHB has already been identified within the region and there is a Quarantine Area in place. Essex County was also an important setting to validate the trapping and visual inspection methods for SHB. It is worth noting that the SHB found in Essex County in 2010 survived through the winter and according to field reports from local beekeepers and the Technology Transfer Program were capable of reproducing in the spring of 2011.

In total, 244 bee yards representing 123 beekeepers and 4,006 colonies were monitored from summer to fall of 2011 with bottom board traps. See Figure 13. Table 1.

Biosecurity Practices: Biosecurity practices were standard practice amongst Apiary Inspectors in the field. These practices were communicated and encouraged amongst beekeepers.

Results: In total, SHB was found in eight new bee yards in Ontario in 2011. Six of these sites were outside of the Quarantine Area, and belong to four beekeepers. All but one infested site were discovered through monitoring by Apiary Inspectors The third site was self- reported by a beekeeper and was later verified by an Apiary Inspector. All findings of SHB and action taken have been reported to the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA).

All sites outside of the Quarantine Area have been placed under quarantine for the individual beeyard. As a result, no honey bee colonies or beekeeping equipment are permitted to move from these locations. Apiary Inspectors and the Provincial Apiarist advised the affected beekeepers on biosecurity practices to prevent the spread of SHB. The Ministry is in consultation with the industry and the affected beekeepers and considering a range of approaches to limit the spread or eliminate the pest from these sites. At this time, there have been no destruction orders for any of the affected colonies.

Additional details for each site are provided below:

• The first bee yard is within the Quarantine Area, in the County of Essex, Township of Leamington. There are 44 honey bee colonies at this location. Two were found to be infested with adult SHB by Apiary Inspectors on August 11, 2011.

Provincial Response: The beekeeper was informed of the infestation, best management practices and the conditions that apply to the colony within the Quarantine Area. • The second bee yard is in the Quarantine Area, in the County of Essex, Township of Essex. There are 80 honey bee colonies at this location. One colony was found to be infested with adult SHB by Apiary Inspectors on August 16, 2011. Provincial Response: The beekeeper was informed of the infestation, best management practices and the conditions that apply to the colony within the Quarantine Area. • The third bee yard was approximately 10 km outside of the Quarantine Area. The site was in the County of Chatham-Kent, Township of Chatham-Kent. There were six honey bee colonies at this location. The source of the infested honey bee colony was a direct trace-out to a site within the Quarantine Area that had been found to have SHB. The original colonies had been moved to this location before the discovery of SHB in Ontario and had been inspected in November 2011. This was confirmed by Apiary Inspectors and the Provincial Apiarist on August 25, 2011. Provincial Response: The site was initially quarantined by the Apiculture Program. Shortly afterwards all honey colonies and beekeeping equipment at this site were relocated to a bee yard within the Quarantine Area in September. A ground drench (permethrin) was applied to the site to kill any potential life stages of SHB in the soil. The CFIA has since considered the outbreak to be over at this site. • The fourth bee yard is approximately 10 km from the New York State border, along the St. Lawrence River in the United Counties of Stormont, Dundas and Glengarry in Eastern Ontario. There are 25 honey bee colonies at this location. One adult beetle was discovered in one colony at the site. No other signs of the SHB have been detected at the site. The source of the infested honey bee colony may be considered to be a direct geographic link to neighbouring New York State where the beetle is resident. Provincial Response: Following this finding , Apiary Inspectors expanded their monitoring to include 30 additional sites, based on their proximity and potential association with the positive site. No further positive sites were detected. Apiary Inspectors and the Provincial Apiarist consulted with the affected beekeeper on biosecurity practices to prevent the spread of SHB. • The fifth and sixth bee yards are located near the town of Shelburne in Dufferin County. There are 23 honey bee colonies at the fifth site and 17 colonies at the sixth site. One adult beetle was detected in SHB traps in each yard. At this time both sites are considered to have low levels of infestation. No other signs of the SHB have been detected at these sites. The source of the infested honey bee colonies in both yards are likely linked to the sale of colonies from a beekeeping operation that has associations with the Quarantine Area. From an epidemiological perspective this is significant as these finds may be traced directly to another infested site. Provincial Response: Following this finding , Apiary Inspectors expanded their monitoring to include additional sites, based on their proximity and potential association with the positive site. No further positive sites were detected. Apiary Inspectors and the Provincial Apiarist consulted with the affected beekeeper on biosecurity practices to prevent the spread of SHB.

• The seventh and eighth bee yards are located near the city of Sarnia in Lambton County. There are 25 honey bee colonies at the seventh site and 35 colonies at the eighth site. One adult beetle was detected in SHB traps in each yard. At this time both sites are considered to have low levels of infestation. No other signs of the SHB have been detected at the site. The source of the infested honey bee colonies in both yards is likely linked geographically to adjacent Michigan State where the SHB is known to be resident. Provincial Response: Apiary Inspectors have not found other infested sites within the additional 46 sites in the same region. Apiary Inspectors and the Provincial Apiarist consulted with the affected beekeeper on biosecurity practices to prevent the spread of SHB.

Inspection of Extraction Facilities: Site inspections were conducted at three honey houses in beekeeping operations associated with SHB infested sites to assess the possibility of SHB infestation of the facilities. Baited traps were set with pollen and vegetable oil and inspectors randomly examined stored frames. Although other insect species were found, no SHB were detected. Inspectors also examined cracks and crevices of the facilities and noted practices in extracting honey, storage of equipment and winter temperatures within each extraction facility. In all cases they determined that it is unlikely that SHB had established a presence in the extraction facility.

Special Measures Regarding Hawaiian Queens: In 2011, no large shipments of Hawaiian queens received import permits into Ontario. This has been a concern for Ontario and other jurisdictions in Canada since SHB has been discovered in Hawaii and there are some risks associated with imports from that State . Protocols have been implemented through the CFIA and the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) / Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) to minimize the potential for SHB to be introduced through imports of Hawaiian queens.

In cases where Hawaiian queens were imported into Canada, other Canadian provinces worked closely with importers and Provincial Apiarists to inspect Hawaiian queens and packaging for the presence of any life stage of SHB before the material is forwarded to receiving beekeepers.

Information to Beekeepers: Advisory and outreach material was distributed to all registered beekeepers by registered mail and made available on the OMAFRA Apiculture Program webpage. In addition, the Provincial Apiarist provided information to beekeepers at local beekeeping association meetings regarding the biology, identification, best practices for management and avoiding the spread of SHB

Apiary Inspectors met with, and answered many questions from, local beekeepers in the field. The OBA’s Technology Transfer Program also provided extension and outreach on

these topics through workshops and meetings with local beekeepers’ associations. Additional advisory material will be produced by the Apiculture Program and the Technology Transfer Program in 2012.

Author: Paul Kozak Provincial Apiarist Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs Foods of Plant Origin Food Inspection Branch 1 Stone Road West, 5th Floor NW Guelph ON N1G 4Y2 Tel: 519 826-3595 or 1-888-466-2372 Ext. 63595 Fax: 519 826-4375 Email: [email protected]

Area Counties # of Beeyards # of Colonies Duration of sampled / sampled / sampling # of Beekeepers # of colonies represented represented Eastern Ontario Lennox and Addington; 47 / 17 94 / 1185 Aug 8 to along the St. Frontenac; Leeds and Oct 12, Larwence Grenville and Stormont; 2011 Dundas and Glengarry Niagara Niagara 31 / 27 62 / 225 Aug 11 to Peninsula Oct 8, 2011 South-West Lambton; Chatham-Kent 48 / 17 96 / 854 July 5 to Ontario Oct 1, 2011 North Central Dufferin; Wellington 27 / 9 54 / 370 Aug to Oct Ontario 28, 2011 South Central Huron, Middlesex, Elgin, 34 / 30 68 / 687 May 6 to Ontario Norfolk, Hamilton, Oct 23, Waterloo, Halidmand, 2011 Oxford Northern Bruce, Grey, Simcoe, Parry 15 / 15 30 / 326 May 6 to Ontario Sound, Haliburton, Nipissing Oct 23, 2011 Quarantine Essex, part of Chatham-Kent 11 / 5 22 / 259 May 6 to Area Oct 23, 2011 Total 244 / 123 426 / 4006

Table 1. Colonies, bee yards and beekeepers monitored for SHB.

92 2011 PROVINCIAL APIARIST ANNUAL REPORT

Provincial Apiarist: Claude Boucher, Québec

A. Beekeeping Industry Statistics

. No. of Beekeepers: 457 registered beekeepers . No. of Producing Colonies: 39,700 registered colonies . Average Yield/Colony (lb./kg): 40 kg . Total Estimated Crop (lb./kg x1,000): ----- . Colonies Wintered Last Year (09/10): undetermined . Average Winter Mortality (%): 28% (winter and spring losses)

B. Diseases and Pests Number of Number of Disease Disease Colonies Beekeepers Colony Beekeeper Disease/Pest Inspected Inspected Incidence Incidence (%) . AFB 2.063 63 10 . EFB 2,063 63 6 . Chalkbrood 2,063 63 6 . Sacbrood 2,063 63 0 . Tracheal Mite see comment 4.a below . Varroa Mite 2,063 63 . SHB** see comment 6 below

C. Comments

1. Average winter mortality (2010–2011) includes winter and spring colony losses and was 28% according to a postal survey send to all registered beekeepers in the spring.

2. Data in Section B, except that for SHB, is the result of passive surveillance (e.g., inspections carried out by request for beekeepers who suspected a disease problem in their hives or for health certification). The indicated proportion should not be interpreted as real annual incidence or prevalence of these diseases throughout the entire beekeeping industry in Québec.

3. No AFBr strain detected in 2011.

4. Results from all samples entering the animal pathology laboratory, resulting mostly from passive surveillance: a. Tracheal mite: 151 samples from 40 beekeepers; 8 beekeepers found positives. b. Bacteriology: 73 samples from 21 beekeepers; 5 beekeepers positives for Paenibacillus larvae and 5 for Melissococcus plutonius/Paenibacillus alvei. c. Nosemosis: 350 samples from 105 beekeepers; 40 beekeepers had some results higher than 1M spores.

5. We are investigating suspected cases of bee poisoning by pesticides reported by beekeepers. Pesticides were detected in bees only (targeting acute poisoning). When mortality/morbidity can be linked to certain pesticides, the incident is reported to PMRA. In 2011, one reported incident was suspected to be linked to neonicotinoid pesticides during planting of corn in the spring.

6. Specific information concerning surveillance of SHB infestation in Québec for 2011

• Québec requested an ER for permethrin, which was granted by PMRA for June 2011 to November 2011. • Our regulation is currently being amended to include mandatory notification of SHB infestation. • Four sites infested with SHB were identified in 2010 (three were part of a research project on SHB and one was found after active surveillance). These sites were in a limited zone in southwestern Québec near the border with the U.S. and Ontario. All hives on these four sites (33 hives) were killed during the 2011 season (in May and July 2011 following the research project, as SHB had been found in all hives at the beginning of the 2011 season). • Active surveillance for SHB was carried out in southwestern Québec along the U.S. border (between the municipalities of Dundee and Lacolle, up to 20 km from the border) during summer 2011. A combination of visual inspection and specific traps was used for surveillance. Thirty-eight (38) apiaries with a total of seven hundred and fifty-two (752) hives were subject to surveillance during the 95 season. Apiaries were inspected according to OIE requirements to recover a free status zone (inspection of a representative sample of hives in each apiary to provide a confidence level of at least 95% detection of A. tumida infestation if at least 5% of the hive were infested). • In late summer 2011, four (4) new apiaries infested by SHB were identified (two in August and two in September). All are in the known risk zone near the U.S. border. They are owned by three beekeepers, for a total of 58 hives. Quarantine and treatment with Chekmite+ was ordered. No specific epidemiological link was found between these beekeepers. The furthest distance for these SHB- positive apiaries from the U.S. border is 12 km. Very light infestation with few adult beetles in all apiaries. No mature larva seen in hives. In late September, one apiary was moved to a wintering site, also identified as SHB positive, owned by the same beekeeper. So, we actually have three SHB-positive sites under quarantine. • Quarantine will be maintained through June 2012 for the three positive sites. An inspection will then be conducted to determine SHB infestation status and/or the required control strategy. • All new SHB cases were reported immediately to CFIA. • Presence of SHB not reported elsewhere in Québec as regular hive inspection includes SHB detection.

Claude Boucher, Médecin vétérinaire MAPAQ, DSAIV Complexe scientifique 2700, Einstein F.1.106 Québec (Québec) G1P 3W8 Phone: 418-643-1632, extension 2661 Fax: 418-644-6327 [email protected]

NEW BRUNSWICK PROVINCIAL REPORT 2011

Provincial Apiarist: Chris Maund (New Brunswick)

A. Beekeeping Industry Statistics

. No. of Beekeepers 209 . No. of Producing Colonies 4,500 producing (5,808 registered) . Average Yield/Colony (lb/kg) 46.3 / 21 . Total Estimated Crop (lb/kg x1000) 208 / 94.5 . Colonies Wintered Last Year (10/11) 9,200 . Average Winter Mortality (%) 36.9

B. Diseases and Pests Number of Number of Disease Disease Colonies Beekeepers Colony Beekeeper Disease/Pest Inspected Inspected Incidence Incidence (%) (%) . AFB 1,022 91 2.9 4.4 . EFB 1,022 91 2.0 7.7 . Chalkbrood 1,022 91 3.2 9.9 . Sacbrood 1,022 91 0.3 3.3 . Tracheal Mite na na na na . Varroa Mite na na na na . Other

C. Comments

• The number of registered beekeepers includes beek eepers registered in the current y ear and in the previous three years. • No rAFB found. • There were not any honey bees imported from Hawaii into NB in 2011. • Small hive beetle (SHB) and border m onitoring: AJ’s Beetle Eater traps were used to monitor for the SHB in New Brunswick along the New Brunswick / Maine border. Colonies from 20 beekeepers were m onitored. Forty five out of 74 colonies were m onitored with a SHB trap. Traps were placed, removed and examined by the inspector. Visual inspections were also done. There were not any SHB found. • na = not available

NOVA SCOTIA PROVINCIAL REPORT 2011

Provincial Apiarist: Joanne Moran, Nova Scotia

A. Beekeeping Industry Statistics

. No. of Beekeepers 222 with colonies 30 registered no colonies yet . No. of Producing Colonies 7200 . Average Yield/Colony (lb/kg) 57/26 . Total Estimated Crop (lb/Kg x1000) 410/186 . Colonies Wintered Last Year (10/11) 16,500 . Average Winter Mortality (%) 22.4

B. Diseases and Pests Num ber of Number of Disease Disease Colonies Beekeepers Colony Beekeeper Disease/Pest Inspected Inspected Incidence Incidence _ (%) (%) . AFB 417 41 . EFB 417 . Chalkbrood 417 . Sacbrood 417 . Tracheal Mite 215 samples 5 positive . Varroa Mite . Other

C. Comments

• The 2010-2011 overwintering m ortality was significantly lower at 22.4 compared to the 2009- 2010 winter at 41%. Colony numbers wintered were down 12% at 16,500 compared to 18,750. • Various treatment products were used for varroa control – Thymovar was used for the first tim e by 11% of the beekeepers treating approxim ately 5 % of the colonies, Apivar and Oxalic was used by 36 % of the beekeepers treating over 80% of the colonies. Formic acid and Apistan were used at the 15% level. Many beekeepers used a combination of Apivar and Oxalic and Formic and Oxalic. • The spring was long and wet as was the sum mer that really only arrived in late July . Honey production was down from the above average crop of 2010. • All shipments of queens from Hawaii were inspected for Sm all Hive Beetle. As well visual inspection was carried out in the field. • Colony numbers operated in 2011 were down at 16,500 but beekeepers worked to but m ore hives into winter wit an estim ated 18,000. Around 14,400 colonies were available for blueberry pollination up from the estimated 12,000 in 2010. • Of significant importance to Nova Scotia was the discovery of tracheal m ites found through the annual provincial random sampling process. Two ap iaries have tested positive with 4 out of 5 samples in one apiary and 1 out of three in the other. The infestation level in the Wallace area apiary was at 1, 1, 1 and 4% whereas the single sam ple in New Annan was at 14%. All samples were from individual hives with 100 bees per sam ple taken in October and Novem ber 2011. Further sampling will be done in these areas as early as possible in the spring of 2012.

2011 PROVINCIAL APIARIST ANNUAL REPORT

Provincial Apiarist: Chris Jordan - Prince Edward Island

A. Beekeeping Industry Statistics

. No. of Beekeepers 43 . No. of Producing Colonies 4,379 colonies . Average Yield/Colony (lb/kg) 62 lbs / 28 kg . Total Estimated Crop (lb/Kg x1000) 271 lb / 123 kg . Colonies Wintered Last Year (10/11) 4,291 . Average Winter Mortality (%) 23%

B. Diseases and Pests Num ber of Number of Disease Disease Colonies Beekeepers Colony Beekeeper Disease/Pest Inspected Inspected Incidence Incidence (%) (%) . AFB 389 20 3.8% 20% . EFB 389 20 5.6% 25% . Chalkbrood 389 20 3.8% 35% . Sacbrood 389 . Tracheal Mite 26 composite samples (no HBTM detected) . Varroa Mite . Other

C. Comments

• Majority of beekeepers used Apivar & oxalic acid in Fall 2010 for Varroa control. • Cool/wet spring made it difficult to increase colony numbers for blueberry pollination • Summer was also cool/wet and honey flow w as reduced significantly until about mid-August when the goldenrod produced very heavily. • Very warm, mild fall (2011) resulted in honey and sugar stores being used up prematurely. • Reasons for overwintering losses (2010/2011): poor queens; weather; weak colonies in the fall; honey bound; ineffective varroa control (too late in fall); starvation. • 1,500 queens were imported from Hawaii in 2011; all were quarantined and individually inspected for SHB. No life stages of SHB found during quarantine; all queens released to beekeepers. • Inspectors looked for visual signs of SHB in colonies while doing routine inspections; no life stages found. • No rAFB found as confirmed by lab tests.

99 AAFC Honey Market Report Power Point Presentation

Canadian Honey Production Quantity (Metric Tonnes)

Canadian Beekeeping Annual Convention 2012 50,000 48,366 45,000 Honey Trade and Production 40,000 37,072 37,251 35,000 36,119 34,603 34,242 33,718 Statistics Overview 30,000 31,489 31,925 29,444 25,000

20,000 Metric Tonnes Metric 15,000 Maxine Grier 10,000 Deputy Director, Horticulture Division, AAFC 5,000

0 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011P

Source:Source:Winnipeg, MB · Jan 26th, 2012 Source:Source:Statistics Canada

Provincial Honey Production Manitoba Honey Production Quantity (Metric Tonnes) Quantity (Metric Tonnes)

22,000 12,000 20,000 18,000 10,000 16,000 8,000 14,000 12,000 6,000 10,000 8,000 Metric Tonnes Metric Tonnes 4,000 6,000

4,000 2,000 2,000 0 0 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011P 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011P PEI NS NB QUE ONT MAN SASK ALTA BC MAN

Source:Source:Statistics Canada Source:Source:Statistics Canada

Canadian Honey Bee Colonies Honey Bee Colonies Number by Province

700,000 250,000

600,000 615,541 628,401 620,291 627,713 588,485 597,890 589,254 592,120 200,000 563,330 570,070 500,000

150,000 400,000 Number

Number 300,000 100,000

200,000 50,000

100,000

0 0 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011P 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011P PEI NS NB QUÉ ONT MAN SASK ALTA BC

Source:Source:Statistics Canada Source:Source:Statistics Canada

100 AAFC Honey Market Report Power Point Presentation

Honey Bee Colonies Canadian Average Yields Manitoba Pounds per Colony

100,000 180

90,000 160 170

80,000 140 70,000 139 135 120 129 132 126 125 60,000 119 118 114 100 50,000

Number 80 40,000 60 30,000 Colony per Pounds

20,000 40

10,000 20

0 0 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011P 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011P MAN

Source:Source:Statistics Canada Source:Source:Statistics Canada

Provincial Average Yields Manitoba Average Yields Pounds per Colony Pounds per Colony

250 300

220 250 200 200 200 182 174 150 165 160 160 165 150 145 150

100 Pounds per Colony Pounds per 100 Pounds per Colony per Pounds 50 50

0 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011P PEI NS NB QUÉ ONT MAN SASK ALTA BC 0 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011P

Source:Source:Statistics Canada Source:Source:Statistics Canada

Number of Canadian Beekeepers Number of Beekeepers by Province

8,958 4,500 12,000 8,310 7,971 7,925 7,695 7,313 7671 4,000 6,931 7403 7028 10,000 3,500

3,000 8,000

2,500

6,000

Number 2,000 Number

4,000 1,500

1,000 2,000 500

0 0 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011P 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011P

PEI NS NB QUÉ ONT MAN SASK ALTA BC

Source:Source:Statistics Canada Source:Source:Statistics Canada

101 AAFC Honey Market Report Power Point Presentation

Manitoba- Number of Canada- Beekeepers Number of Colonies per Beekeeper

1,000 90

80 86 84 82 81 82 82 800 70 75 77 800 68 60 65 66 66 600 59 623 632 580 610 50 550 523 Number Number 490 492 40 400 474 30

20 200

0 0 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011P 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011P

Source:Source:Statistics Canada Source:Source:Statistics Canada

Number of Colonies Manitoba – per Beekeeper ·by Province Number of Colonies per Beekeeper

350 180 170 300 160 150 159 157 250 140 145 149 130 141 138 136 141 120 200 110 123 100

Number 109 150 90

Number 80 70 100 60 50 50 40 30 20 0 10 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011P 0 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011P PEI NS NB QUÉ ONT MAN SASK ALTA BC

Source:Source: Statistics Canada Source:Source:Statistics Canada

Value of Canadian Honey Canadian Honey Price per Pound

180,000 2.5

160,000 $160,805 $155,805 140,000 $145,853 2 2.04 1.97 120,000 $126,253 1.87 $121,105 1.79 $111,255 1.5 100,000 $105,184 1.60 1.62 $92,918

$ '000s 80,000 $84,916 1 1.19 1.22 Canadian $ / lb 1.04 60,000

40,000 0.5

20,000

0 0 2001 2002 2003 2004 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2001 2002 2003 2004 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Source:Source:Statistics Canada Source:Source:Statistics Canada

102 AAFC Honey Market Report Power Point Presentation

Recent Canadian Honey Export Honey Price per Pound Prices 2011 by Province in 2010 per Pound

4.00 2.5 $3.95 3.50 $3.71

3.00 2 2.09 2.03 $3.00 $3.01 1.94 1.84 1.70 1.87 1.82 1.77 1.83 2.50 1.80 $2.51 1.5 $2.49 2.00

$1.87

Canadian $ / lb. $ Canadian 1.50 $1.76 1 Canadian $ / lb $1.50 $1.55

1.00

0.5 0.50

0.00 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct PEI NS NB QUÉ ONT MAN SASK ALTA BC Canada

Source:Source:Statistics Canada Source:Source:Statistics Canada

Recent Export Honey Price per Exports of Honey from Canada Pound Quantity (Metric Tonnes) by Province, 2011 to date

3.50

25,000 3.00 21,926 $2.97 22,341

2.50 20,000 14,932 15,297 16,129 2.00 14,721 13,383 15,000 $1.98 12,691 13,032 11,953 12,254 11,929 $1.83 $1.80 $1.74 11,208 8,591 1.50 $1.67 $1.56 Canadian/ $ lb. 10,000

1.00 Metric Tonnes

0.50 5,000

0.00 0 NS QUÉ ONT MAN SASK ALTA BC 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

United States Germany United Kingdom Japan France Other

Source:Source:Statistics Canada Source:Source:Statistics Canada

Exports of Honey from Canada Imports of Honey into Canada Value ($’000 Cdn) Quantity (Metric Tonnes)

100,000 $87,955 90,000 14,000

80,000 $69,843 12,000 70,000 $62,884 $56,995

60,000 $47,200 8,893 $47,122 10,000 8,830 $35,215 8,122 8,200 50,000 $37,546

$'000 8,000 $32,632 $33,063 40,000 $30,983 $30,098 5,205 4,883 30,000 6,000 4,931 4,310 3,732 Metric Tonnes Metric 20,000 3,257 4,000 2,859 2,826 2,593 10,000 2,000 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 0 United States Germany United Kingdom Japan France Other 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 United States China Argentina Other AustraliaWorld

Source:Source:Statistics Canada Source:Source:Statistics Canada

103 AAFC Honey Market Report Power Point Presentation

Imports of Honey into Canada Beekeeping Value ($’000 Cdn) ANNUAL CONVENTION 2012 30,000

$25,335 $23,031 25,000 $23,253 $19,504 $20,770 20,000 $12,091 $15,172 $14,488 $13,305

15,000 $12,099

$'000 $8,403 10,000 $4,747 5,000

0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 United States China Argentina Other Australia

Source:Source:Statistics Canada Source:Source:

104 CFIA Honey Market Report Power Point Presentation

Program Highlights

1. EU Audit 2. Trade Related Issues 3. Chemical Residue Testing / Bee Repellents 4. Honey Regulations / Regulatory Modernization 5. Communications CFIA Honey Program

Debbie Fishbein Chief, Honey Program Agri-Food Division, CFIA

Winnipeg, Manitoba January 2012

Honey Analysis – 2011 / 2012 Honey Violations – 2011-2012 (Q1) Preliminary Data ALAR GLYCOSIDES AMITRAZ IONOPHORES/NICARBAZIN MACROLIDES 18 BENOMYL 16 14 BENZALDEHYDE METALS 12 BUTYRIC ANHYDRIDE NITROFURANS 10 Domes tic NITROIMIDAZOLES ** 8 Impor t EBDC(DC) 6 PENICILLINS violations # 4 EBDC(EBDC) 2 PESTICIDES-FPH053 EBDC(ETU) 0 l n o PHENICOLS e id s lin si n d l e e e Lead FLUOROQUINOLONES y gi n h a li Tylo Ph lde um PHENOL a uty ric Ac Pesticide F acyc enz B tr FORMETANATE B Metronidazol SULFONAMIDES FUMAGILLIN ** epi-Oxyte TETRACYCLINES The ** indicate new analysis (added fall 2010) THIABENDAZOLE 3 4

Chemical Residue Testing Honey Violations – 2010-2011

Preliminary Data Directed (Targeted) Residue April 09 – Sept.10 Tests Violations Chloramphenicol 4 (India, Egypt) 83

Fluoroquinolones 20 (Egypt, India, Mongolia, 128 Ukraine) Nitrofurans 9 (Mongolia, Iran) 99

Macrolides (Tylosin) 1 (US >wrl) 98

10 (Egypt, Mongolia, Ukraine) 84 Sulfonamides Tetracyclines 0 82

Penicillins 0 20

5 6

105 CFIA Honey Market Report Power Point Presentation

Benzaldehyde Levels in Honey 2011-2012 Q1 Benzaldehyde and Butyric Acid Residues in Preliminary Data Honey • Maximum Residue Limit is 0.1 ppm

• Ingredient in some bee repellents 12 • Natural constituent of honey ? 10 • Small scale study by CFIA (44 samples) • Includes samples where bee repellent used and those where it 8 was not

Violations Domestic 6 of • Preliminary report will be available this spring Import

• Results could provide basis for future direction 4 Quantity

2 • CFIA will work with Health Canada on this issue 0 • Policy change ? 0.100‐0.199 0.200‐0.299 0.300‐0.399 0.400‐0.499 0.500‐0.599 0.600‐ • Regulation change ? Benzaldehyde Level (PPM)

7 8

Benzaldehyde Levels in Honey 2010-2011 Butyric Acid Levels in Honey 2011-2012 Q1 Preliminary Data Preliminary Data

40 6

35 5 30

25 4

Domestic Violations 20

Violations Butyric acid Domestic of

Import 3 of

Butyric acid Import 15

Quantity 2 10 Quantity

5 1

0 0.100‐ 0.200‐ 0.300‐ 0.400‐ 0.500‐ 0.600‐ 0.7‐ 0.8‐ 0.9‐ 0 0.199 0.299 0.399 0.499 0.599 0.699 0.799 0.899 0.999 1.0‐1.9 2.0‐2.9 3.0‐3.9 4.0‐4.9 Benzaldehyde Level (PPM) Butyric acid Level (PPM)

9 10

Butyric Acid Levels in Honey 2010-2011 Preliminary Data

Violations Butyric acid Domestic 10 of

Butyric acid Import 8

Quantity 6

0 1.0‐1.9 2.0‐2.9 3.0‐3.9 4.0‐4.9 5.0‐5.9 Butyric acid Level (PPM)

11 12

106 CFIA Bee Importation Report Power Point Presentation (English Version)

Topics for discussion

1. Honeybee import statistics

2. Health reports 1. Australia 2. New Zealand Canadian Association of Professional Apiculturists Annual General Meeting, January 26, 2012 3. Small Hive Beetle – 2011 response to imported Winnipeg, Manitoba bees from Hawaii CFIA Honeybee Import Report

Dr. Amy Snow Acting Senior Veterinary Officer, Live Animal Import Section, 4. Revision of import conditions Terrestrial Animal Health Division, CFIA 1. New Zealand

Import Statistics Import Permit Trends, 2007-2011

• Difficult to confirm exact numbers (quality of data recorded is variable) QUEENS 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 United States * 35 (72%) 38 (72%) 43 (72%) 42 (73%) 46 (72%) Australia 9 (18%) 6 (11%) 4 (6.5%) 3 (5.5%) 8 (12.5%) New Zealand 3 (6%) 3 (5.5%) 1 (1.5%) 3 (5.5%) 4 (6%) Chile 2 (4%) 5 (9.5%) 11 (18.5%) 7 (12%) 5 (8%) • Better to report on trends Denmark 0 1 (2%) 1 (1.5%) 2 (4%) 1 (1.5%) PACKAGES • Similar number of import permits issued 2007-2011, but New Zealand 2 (67%) 4 (100%) 3 (27%) 3 (50%) 4 (66%) gradual increase in permits issued is apparent Australia 1 (33%) 0 7 (64%) 2 (33%) 1 (17%) Chile 0 0 1 (9%) 1 (17%) 1 (17%) • Generally, the largest percentage of import permits for TOTAL PERMITS queens issued each year pertain to shipments from the US Queens 49 53 59 57 64 (California usually greater than Hawaii), then Australia or Packages 3 4 11 6 6 Chile, NZ, and Denmark * includes California, Hawaii, Louisiana (2009 only) • Packages from NZ and Australia, only occasionally Chile

Import Statistics, cont’d Health Status Update - Australia

• Nationally notifiable diseases: • New Zealand provided export data for 2010 • Tracheal mite, AFB, EFB, SHB, Tropilaelaps mite, Varroa mite • Other diseases notifiable at the state level • 26, 800 kg of honeybee packages exported to Canada • AFB endemic except for isolated areas • Export date for packages has fluctuated somewhat over the years, • EFB endemic except for state of Western Australia and the but 2010 total is consistent with 2008 and 2009 data Northern Territory (free)

• 8660 queens exported to Canada in 2010 (no historical data • SHB – endemic in Queensland, NSW, Victoria, not provided) identified in Tasmania, S. Australia, Northern Territory • SHB is present in the far north-west of Western Australia, but remains confined to that region • Surveillance is ongoing in the south-west and no SHB detected • Movement controls exist • Australia can continue to certify SHB freedom in the area from which packages are exported

109 CFIA Bee Importation Report Power Point Presentation (English Version)

Health Status Update - Australia Health Status Update - Australia

Area of concern • Australia remains free of Tropilaelaps mites and SHB (Kununurra) tracheal mites

• Mainland Australia and Tasmania remain free of varroa • V. jacobsoni has been identified on 2 islands in the Torres Strait that are administered by Australia (V. destructor never reported)

• Western Australia confirms freedom from Asian honeybees and Nosema ceranae

Health Status Update - Australia Asian honeybee surveillance activities • examining flowering plants and sweep netting for bees

• placing and monitoring sugar traps to attract and trap bees • Asian honeybee (Apis cerana) • beelining foraging Asian honeybees back to their nest • Asian honeybees have been found in Cairns (primarily), also at Mareeba and Lake Eacham, and as far south as Innisfail • collecting and testing Rainbow Bee-eater regurgitated pellets to detect the • Currently in transition from an eradication strategy into a presence of Asian honeybees

management strategy (government-industry collaboration), July • conducting monitoring and awareness-raising activities at transport depots and 2011-June 2013 other businesses that may inadvertently be assisting the movement of Asian • In the interim, measures aimed at reducing long distance spread honeybee swarms remain in place • destroying and examining all detected Asian honeybee nests and swarms • Restricted area for Asian honeybees continues to be (eradication response performed as recently as January 9, 2012) far from the major beekeeping areas • monitoring the movements of commercial hives to prevent interference with surveillance activities and reduce the risk of unintentional movements of Asian honeybees

• public reporting

North Queensland Restricted Area Restricted Area

• A restricted area has been declared in North Queensland to monitor the movement of commercial European honeybees and beekeeping equipment until the Asian honeybee is contained. • The movement of bees and beekeeping equipment may be allowed into and within the restricted area under permit but not out of the area except under exceptional circumstances. • Permits are issued at no cost • Significant fines + possible jail time if bees or bee equipment are moved without permit

110 CFIA Bee Importation Report Power Point Presentation (English Version)

Health Status Update – New Zealand Health Status Update – New Zealand • New Zealand publishes the “Honey Bee Exotic Disease Surveillance Report” (July 2010 – June • Diseases reported to be absent (in addition to those 2011) present on the “exotic” disease list) • Conducted and reported by AsureQuality Limited on behalf of MAF • Israeli Acute Paralysis Virus NZ Biosecurity group • Slow Paralysis Virus • Surveillance conducted for: • Colony Collapse Disorder • European foulbrood, SHB, “the parasitic fly” (Braula coeca), • Diseases reported to be present in NZ tracheal mite, Asian mites (Tropilaelaps spp.), Africanized honey bees, cape bee, and Apis species other than mellifera • American Foulbrood (managed by the National Beekeepers’ Association Pest Management Strategy) • Data collected from: • Deformed Wing Virus – endemic • High-risk areas (targeted sampling) • Kashmir Bee Virus – endemic • Export testing requirements • Nosema apis and Nosema ceranae (just identified in the last • Disease investigations reporting period) • Results: all hives sampled, inspected, and tested for • Varroa listed exotic bee diseases were NEGATIVE

Small Hive Beetle – 2011 response to Revision of Import Conditions

imported bees from Hawaii • New Zealand • SHB first detected in shipment from Hawaii April 7, 2011 • Discussion with NZ is ongoing to harmonize their import conditions to be more consistent with what we require for • A co-ordinated response followed: other countries • Provincial apiculturists performed post-import inspections on shipments • Negotiation is required in order for import conditions to meet from Hawaii; a scientifically justifiable inspection level was established, but our health standards but consideration must be given to provinces could (and did) exceed the minimal requirement; protocols for particular management issues in NZ handling potentially infested shipments were established • The CFIA amended import requirements for queens from Hawaii and • CFIA has been in contact with the CAPA import committee discussed compliance issues with USDA and the CHC throughout negotiations • Several additional shipments contained SHB early in the import • No plans to disrupt the import season this year season but overall, the situation improved over the course of the import season • This completes our review of honeybee import conditions • Well over 100,000 queens were inspected across the country • Our priority moving forward will be to focus on emerging issues related to honeybee health as they pertain to • No SHB was reported to have infested Canadian colonies importation

Thank You!

Questions?

111 CFIA Bee Importation Report Power Point Presentation (French Version)

Sujets de discussion

1. Statistiques sur les importations d’abeilles mellifères

2. Rapports sur l’état sanitaire

1. Australie 2. Nouvelle-Zélande Assemblée générale annuelle de l’Association canadienne des apiculteurs

professionnels, 26 janvier 2012 Winnipeg, Manitoba 3. Le petit coléoptère des ruches : intervention de 2011 concernant les abeilles importées d’Hawaï. Rapport sur l’importation d’abeilles mellifères de l’Agence canadienne

d’inspection des aliments DreAmy Snow 4. Révision des conditions d’importation Vétérinaire principale par intérim, Section de l’importation des animaux vivants, Division de la santé des animaux terrestres, ACIA 1. Nouvelle-Zélande

Statistiques sur les importations Tendances en matière de permis d’importation, 2007-2011

• Il est difficile de confirmer les chiffres exacts (la REINES 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 États-Unis * 35 (72%) 38 (72%) 43 (72%) 42 (73%) 46 (72%) qualité des données saisies varie). Australie 9 (18%) 6 (11%) 4 (6,5%) 3 (5,5%) 8 (12,5%) • Il vaut mieux présenter un rapport sur les tendances : Nouvelle-Zélande 3 (6%) 3 (5,5%) 1 (1,5%) 3 (5,5%) 4 (6%) Chili 2 (4%) 5 (9,5%) 11 (18,5%) 7 (12%) 5 (8%) Danemark 0 1 (2%) 1 (1,5%) 2 (4%) 1 (1,5%) • Un nombre similaire de permis d’importation a été délivré de EMPAQUETÉES 2007 à 2010, mais on assiste à une augmentation Nouvelle-Zélande 2 (67%) 4 (100%) 3 (27%) 3 (50%) 4 (66%) Australie 1 (33%) 0 7 (64%) 2 (33%) 1 (17%) progressive du nombre de permis délivrés. Chili 0 0 1 (9%) 1 (17%) 1 (17%) Nombre total de permis • En général, la majorité des permis d’importation délivrés délivrés Reines 49 53 59 57 64 chaque année pour des reines se rattachent aux importations Empaquetées 3 4 11 6 6 en provenance des États-Unis (la Californie est

habituellement un fournisseur plus important qu’Hawaï), * Notamment la Californie, Hawaï, et la Louisiane (2009 seulement) suivies des importations de l’Australie ou du Chili, de la Nouvelle-Zélande et du Danemark. • D’abeilles empaquetées en provenance de la Nouvelle- Zélande et de l’Australie et, à l’occasion seulement, du Chili.

Statistiques sur les importations (suite) Le point sur l’état sanitaire de l’Australie

• Maladies à déclaration obligatoire à l’échelle nationale : • La Nouvelle-Zélande a fourni ses données en matière d’exportation pour 2010. • Acarien de l’abeille, loque américaine, loque européenne, petit coléoptère des ruches, Tropilaelaps, varroa • Autres maladies à déclaration obligatoire dans les états • 26 800 kg d’abeilles mellifères empaquetées exportées vers le Canada. • La loque américaine est endémique sauf dans les régions isolées. • Les données sur les exportations d’abeilles empaquetées ont quelque peu fluctué au fil des ans, mais les données totales pour 2010 correspondent à celles de 2008 et de 2009. • La loque européenne est endémique sauf en Australie- Occidentale et dans le Térritoire du Nord (exempte). • 8 660 reines exportées au Canada en 2010 (aucune donnée historique fournie).

5 6

112 CFIA Bee Importation Report Power Point Presentation (French Version)

Le point sur l’état sanitaire de l’Australie Le point sur l’état sanitaire de l’Australie

Secteur préoccupant • Le petit coléoptère des ruches est endémique au Petit coléoptère des Queensland, en Nouvelle-Galles du Sud et à Victoria, mais ruches (Kununurra) n’a pas été dépisté en Tasmanie, en Australie-Méridionale ni au Territoire du Nord. • Le petit coléoptère des ruches est présent dans les régions éloignées du nord-ouest de l’Australie-Occidentale, mais il se limite à cette région. • La surveillance se poursuit dans le sud-ouest et aucun petit coléoptère des ruches n’a été détecté. • Des contrôles des déplacements ont été mis en œuvre dans les états. • L’Australie peut continuer de certifier que les régions d’où proviennent les exportations d’abeilles empaquetées sont exemptes du coléoptère.

Le point sur l’état sanitaire de l’Australie Le point sur l’état sanitaire de l’Australie

• L’Australie demeure expempte de Tropilaelaps et • Abeille mellifère asiatique (Apis cerana) des acariens de l’abeille • les abeilles mellifères asiatiques ont été retrouvées pour la plupart • L’Australie continentale et la Tasmanie demeurent dans le Cairns mais aussi à Mareeba et Lake Eacham, et aussi exemptes de varroa. loin (en direction Sud) que Innisfail. • la stratégie d’éradication est en cours de transition vers une • V. jacobsoni a été identifié sur 2 îles du Torres Strait stratégie de gestion (collaboration de l’industrie et du administrées par l’Australie (V.destructor n’a jamais gouvernement) – Juillet 2011 à Juin 2013 été rapporté) • les mesures destinées à réduire une propagation sur de longues • L’Australie occidentale a confirmé sons statut distances demeurent durant cette période de transition. exempt d’abeilles mellifères asiatiques et de Nosema ceranae • La zone d’accès restreint pour les abeilles mellifères asiatiques continue d’être loin des grands secteurs apicoles.

Activités de surveillance pour les abeilles Activités de surveillance pour les abeilles mellifères asiatiques mellifères asiatiques

• examen des plantes à fleurs et utilisation de filet fauchoir (``sweep netting for bees``) pour capturer les abeilles • Destruction et examen de tous les nids et essaims d’abeilles • mise en place d’appâts sucrés pour attirer et capturer les mellifères asiatiques détectées (plan d’éradication le plus abeilles récent-Janvier 9, 2012) • ``beelining`` des abeilles mellifères asiatiques qui butinent vers • Suivi des déplacement des ruches commerciaux afin de ne pas leur nid interférer avec les activités de surveillance et de réduire le • Récolte et analyse des boulettes de régurgitation des Guêpiers risque de mouvements involontaires d’ abeilles mellifères arc-en-ciel afin de détecter la présence des abeilles mellifères asiatiques asiatiques • rapports du publique • Activités de sensibilisation et de suivi au niveau des entrepôts de transport et autres endroits susceptibles de faciliter de façon involontaire le déplacement des essaims d’abeilles mellifères asiatiques

113 CFIA Bee Importation Report Power Point Presentation (French Version)

D’accès restreint – North Queensland D’accès restreint – North Queensland

• Une zone d’accès restreint a été établie dans la région du North Queensland afin d’évaluer les déplacements des abeilles mellifères européennes commerciales de l’équipement apicole jusqu’à ce que le problème des abeilles mellifères asiatiques soit sous contrôle.

• La possibilité d’autoriser les déplacements sous permis des abeilles et de l’équipement apicole vers et à l’intérieur de la zone d’accès restreint (mais pas hors de la zone, excepté sous circonstances exceptionnelle) pourra être envisagée.

• Les permis sont émis gratuitement • Des pénalités importantes (y compris des peines de prison) sont prévues lors de déplacement d’abeilles et d’équipement apicole sans permis.

Le point sur l’état sanitaire de la Nouvelle-Zélande Le point sur l’état sanitaire de la Nouvelle-Zélande

• La Nouvelle-Zélande publie le rapport sur la surveillance des maladies • Maladies déclarées absentes (en plus de celles qui exotiques des abeilles mellifères (juillet 2010 à juin 2011). se trouvent sur la liste des maladies « exotiques »)

• Réalisé par AsureQuality Limited au nom du MAF NZ Biosecurity Group • Virus israélien de la paralysie aiguë • Surveillance des espèces suivantes : • Virus de la paralysie lente • Syndrome d’effondrement des colonies • Loque européenne, petit coléoptère des ruches, « pou de l’abeille » (Braula coeca), acarien de l’abeille, acarien asiatique (Tropilaelaps spp., abeille mellifère africanisée, • Maladies déclarées présentes en Nouvelle-Zélande abeille du Cap et espèces Apis autres que mellifera • Loque américaine (gérée par de la stratégie de lutte antiparasitaire • Source des données recueillies : du National Beekeepers’Association)

• Zones à risque élevé (échantillonnage ciblé) • Virus des ailes déformées – endémique

• Exigences d’analyse des exportations • Virus de l’abeille du Cachemire – endémique

• Enquêtes sur les maladies • Nosema apis et Nosema ceranae (ont été identifiées seulement à la dernière période de rapport) • Résultats : toutes les ruches échantillonnées, inspectées et analysées • Varroa ont donné des résultats NÉGATIFS pour les maladies exotiques figurant dans la liste.

15 16

Petit coléoptère des ruches – Intervention de 2011 Examen des conditions d’importation concernant les abeilles importées d’Hawaï • Nouvelle-Zélande • Le petit coléoptère des ruches a d’abord été détecté dans un envoi en provenance d’Hawaï le • Des discussions avec le gouvernement de la Nouvelle-Zélande 7 avril 2011. sont en cours afin d’harmoniser autant que possible les exigences

• Des mesures d’intervention coordonnées ont été mises en œuvre : d’importation canadiennes pour le différents pays.

• Les apiculteurs des provinces ont inspecté les importations en provenance d’Hawaï; un niveau d’inspection valable • Des négociations sont nécessaires afin que les conditions d’importation

scientifiquement a été établi, mais les provinces pouvaient (et l’ont fait) dépasser les exigences minimales; des répondent à nos normes en matière de santé, mais il faut tenir compte

protocoles pour la manipulation des envois possiblement infestés ont été établis. des enjeux particuliers liés à la gestion en Nouvelle-Zélande. • L’ACIA était en communication avec le comité d’importation de • L’ACIA a modifié les exigences en matière d’importation de reines en provenance d’Hawaï et a discuté des enjeux liés à l’ACAP et le Conseil canadien du miel tout au long des la conformité avec le département américain de l’Agriculture (USDA). négociations. • Au début de la saison d’importation, plusieurs envois supplémentaires contenaient des petits coléoptères • On ne prévoit aucune perturbation de la saison d’importation cette des ruches, mais dans l’ensemble, la situation s’est améliorée durant la saison d’importation. année.

• Plus de 100 000 reines ont fait l’objet d’une inspection au pays. • Ceci termine notre revue des conditions d’importation pour les abeilles mellifères • Aucun cas d’infestation des colonies d’abeilles canadiennes par le petit coléoptère des ruches n’a été • Dès lors, notre priorité sera axée sur les problèmes sanitaires signalé. émergents reliés à l’importation des abeilles mellifères.

17 18

114 CFIA Bee Importation Report Power Point Presentation (French Version)

Merci!

Questions?

19 20

115 AIA Business Meeting Minutes (2/8/12)

Meeting was called to order by the President Danielle Downey

President ask for secretaries report

Secretary Paul Poling presented the minuets and Berry Smith motioned to wave the reading, seconded by Mark Stoll motion passed. Secretary reported on the replies from letters sent to Eastern Plant Board, USDA-APIS Cindy J. Smith, ARS Edward B. Knipling and two replies from USDA Thomas Vilsack.

Pres. Danielle ask for treasures report

Treas. Keith Tignor gave financial report, Motion by Mark Stoll was made to accept and second by Berry Smith financial report was accepted. See attached report

Danielle Downey gave her presidents report. See attached report

AIA contribution from AAPA, ask that we nominate Don Hopkins.

Presentation was presented by Colin Stewart on the Importation of Pollen & Royal Jelly.

Presentation was presented by Karen Rennich, for Robyn Rose who was absent, on the USDA Honey Bee Pest Survey. Thirty four states to participate in the 2012 survey.

Presentation was given by Jeff Pettis on Tropilaelaps mite, how survey was developed

Business meeting continued with old business,

Discussion on the MAAREC Brochure was brought up by Mike Studer. Rhéal Lafrenière said that Canada has a booklet for $5.50 and that a new and bigger addition would soon be available for around $20.00 or more. Price was not yet known.

Discussion on AHB resolution by Mike Studer and Berry Smith, apiary inspectors need a faster economic test for AHB. Paul Kozak and Paul Cappy ask who will fund. Further discussion by David Westervelt and Ed Levi on what method could be used to determine AHB aggression.

New business Paul Cappy reported on 2013 meeting site at Hershey Pa with ABF and AAPA. Second option was San Francisco. Rhéal Lafrenière suggested of Canadian site in November 2012, tabled until Thursday.

Mike Studer asked for resolution on bee feeds, conclusion, will leave for state to state consideration.

David Westervelt reported on EFB not responding to TM or TY. Samples Confirmed EFB by USDA. Samples are currently being checked by USDA for resistance.

116 Jack Hanel raised question about HopGuard

Paul Kozak requested joint committee to work with CAPA on other pesticides. A motion was made by David Westervelt and second by Danielle to form chemical committee. Discussion followed by Rhéal Lafrenière, Mike Studer, Paul Kozak and David Westervelt. David talked about FL possible section 18 for Apivar (amitraz). There was also discussion to work on this jointly with AAPA. David Westervelt withdrew his motion.

Those attending: Jim Wellwood, Alan Dowdy, Pat Bone, Karen Roccasecca, Jack Lance, Wayne Wehling USDA-APHIS, Leo Donovall, Cam Loy MT Dept of Ag, Susan Kinkko, David Westervelt FDACS, Breuda Kierscing visitor, Paul Cappy NYDA, David Williams GA Dept of Ag, Barry Smith Ga Dept of Ag, Rhéal Lafrenière MB Ag Food, Aman Minick AR Dept of ASPB, Mark Stoll AR State Plant Board, Andrew Joseph Iowa, Paul Kozak Ontario Ministry of Ag, Michael Hanson WA Dept of Ag, Dennis vanEngelsdorp guest, Judy Carlson ND, Keith Tignor VA, Michael Studer TN, Joyce Frey WV, Barbara Bloetscher OH, Wade Stiltner WV, Colin Stewart USDA-APHIS Steve Parise VT, Liz Meils, WI, Tim Schuler NJ, Jeff Pettis MD, Paul Poling WVDA, Ed Levi retired and Danielle Downey HI.

Meeting adjourned

AIA & AAPA Round Table Meeting

Round table discussion with AIA and AAPA on 2-9-12, a presentation was given by Dennis vanEngelsdorp on Beeinformed.com. Tom Webster then moderated the round table discussion. First topic was nutrition, what percentage of protein is needed by Bees? Proper labeling of bee feed, how to determine the need for feeding. Eric Mussen suggested measuring brood area and amount of jelly larvae is floating in. What is a good formula for protein that the bees will consume? What sugars are better feed for carbohydrates?

Second topic was breeding for genomics. AHB, no genetic test at this time for identification, only DNA can be performed. The issue is very complex in the developing of a test. Some EHB are just as protective of nest as AHB.

Third topic was Tropilaelaps, what do we do when we find it, question by Dr. Jeff Pettis? USDA is looking to AIA for answer. Begin by training inspectors to look for it. Jeff reported that tropolalaps was unable to feed on adult bees. Need for a response plan, risk analysis, impact study.

Fourth topic was EFB resistance

Fifth topic was Nosema, How bad is it?

117 Next AIA/AAPA meeting to be held at Hershey PA, meeting date is Jan. 8-12-13.

Round table meeting adjourned

AIA Business Meeting 2-9-12

Meeting called to order by Pres Danielle Downey reported on National Honey Board Campaign

Roll call for states, those present were Iowa, Georgia, Arkansas, Hawaii, Indiana, Maryland, Montana, Manitoba, New York, New Jersey, North Carolina, Ontario, Pennsylvania, North Dakota, Ohio, South Carolina, Virginia, Tennessee, West Virginia, Wisconsin and Vermont.

Auditing of treasurers books reported by committee and approved

Membership report, refer to audit sheet

Awards committee reported those who are up for awards: Ed Levi, Phil Craft, Henry Fulton Patrica Danke, Dennis vanEngelsdorp, Doug McRory and Jerry Hayes. Keith Tignor nominated Dennis V. for research award, second by David Westervelt. Motion passed. AIA needs to get information on where plaques are made from Paul Jackson.

Sites committee reported that on Hershey Lodge in Pa committee made motion and Keith Tignor second and motion passed. Meeting date is Jan. 8-12-13.

Discussion on tri-fold disease pamphlet for beekeepers, Pres appointed committee to produce book for AIA website. Committee appointees are Leo Donovall, Keith Tignor, David Westervelt and Mark Stoll

Committee on AHB to report on new development for diagnosis, Rhéal Lafrenière, Paul Kozak, David Westervelt to chair, Don Hopkins, Mike Studer and Berry Smith.

Committee on Tropilaelaps to develop plans Danielle Downey, David Westervelt, Daniel Downey to chair, Paul Kozak and Paul Cappy.

Committee on chemical treatments, Andrew Joseph to chair, David Westervelt, Tim Schuler, Paul Kozak and Michael Hanson

Committee on leaflet, Keith Tignor and Leo Donovall

Thank you letters from AIA will be written by Danielle Downey to USDA & APHIS, naming those who went out of their way in hosting

118 Danielle Downey reported on talk presented at CAPA meeting in Winnipeg Canada, AIA update and queen production. Rhéal noted that she represented AIA very well. Michael Hanson also gave positive input.

Keith Tignor attended the NAPC. Michael Hanson stated that honey bees should be in the for front, that they are the important pollinators.

Keith Tignor motioned that AIA no longer participate in NAPC, Cam Lay 2nd, opened for discussion on cost and impact. Collin would report on any regulatory issues. Motion was defeated.

Resolution Committee Michael Hanson and Michael Studer reported. Group discussed points of concern, corrections were made by group.

Meeting adjourned.

Attendance roll: Paul Cappy NY, David Westervelt FL, Berry Smith GA, Paul Kozak ON Canada, Michael Hanson MI, Judy Carlson ND, Cam Lay MT, Collin Stewart USDA-APHIS, Mark Stoll AR, Wayne Wehling USDA-APHIS, Aman Minick AR, Jerry Fisher MD, Rhéal Lafrenière Manitoba Canada, Andrew Joseph IA, Liz Meils WI, Joyce Frey WV, Tim Schuler NJ, Karen Roccasecca PA, Jack Lance NC, Steve Parise VT, Leo Donovall PA, Keith Tignor VA, Fred Shinleton SC, Susan Kivikko IL, Wade Stiltner WV, Michael Studer TN, Danielle Downey HI, and Paul Poling.

Meeting adjourned

2/10/12 meeting called to order by Vice President Paul Cappy

Nominations for elections were presented by committee members Danielle Downing & Judy Wilson

1. For President Paul Cappy

2. For Vice President Mike Studer

3. For Directors Bob Reiners, David Westervelt, Andrew Joseph,

4. For continuing positions, Secretary Paul Poling, Treasurer Keith Tignor

Motion by Mike Studer to accept nominations, second by Mark Stoll call for vote, motion carried

Continuing Directors for 2nd year of 2 year term are Leo Donavall Mike Hanson Paul Kozak,

Invasive species reported by Mike Studer, work to eliminate nap weed in Michigan and other plants. Comments were made by Paul Cappy on Nap weed and purple loosestrife other plants

119 are targeted New York. Addition al comments were made by Leo Donvall, Rhéal Lafrenière and Paul Kozak.

Resolution for NHBS were read

Resolution for continuance of the honey bee importation

Resolution for evaluation and registration of pesticides affection honey bee colonies

Motion by resolutions committee was made to accept all three resolutions second by Mark Stoll motion carried

Make all address for resolutions before AIA meeting and give to Mike Hanson & Mike Studer

Comments were made about the AAPA and AIA meeting. Group felt the need to continue meeting with AAPA

Attendance roll Paul Cappy, David Westervelt Michael Hanson, Mark Stoll, Tim Schuler, Andrew Joseph, Jerry Fisher, Joyce Frey, Leo Donovall, Karen Roccasecca, Wade Stiltner, Liz Meils, Steve Parise, Jack Lance, Cam Loy Keith Tignor, Paul Kozak Fred Singleton, Michael Studer and Paul Poling.

Motion to adjourn made by Mike Hanson and second by David Westervelt, motion carried meeting adjourned

2012 AIA Resolutions

Apiary Inspectors of America 2012 continued resolution (from 2000, etc.)

Title: Honey Bee Imports

Author: Wording Revised by 2012 Resolutions Committee

The Apiary Inspectors of America (AIA) appreciates the action taken by USDA-APHIS to close the United States border to further introduction of honey bee queens and packages from Australia. Surveys conducted by USDA-APHIS and AIA members show that the Apis cerana honey bee and Slow Paralysis Virus which has been reported in Australia do not occur in the US.

At the same time AIA would like to express concern that APHIS is giving consideration to allowing honey bee importation from Argentina, Brazil and/or Chile.

The apiary inspectors are concerned about possible importation of honey bees due to Africanized bee concerns, new pathogen, pest, and parasite introduction. In recent years imported honey bees were used to supplement domestic honey bees for almond pollination in California. However,

120 the market is relatively small while the risk of introducing a new bee pathogen when most of the US bees are in California could have widespread consequences. More than half of the nation’s bees are brought to California for almond pollination. A disease or parasite that came in undetected could rapidly spread throughout the continental United States when these colonies are returned to their home States or moved to pollinate other crops.

AIA has been continuously working to mitigate the movement of Africanized bees in the United States due to concerns for public safety. AIA is deeply concerned with the possible introduction of Africanized Honey bees from these and other countries into areas currently free of Africanized bees. It is our understanding that once bees move into the United States they can move freely between the States. The States are increasingly saddled with an increased number of stinging incidences due to Africanized bees. Direct importation of these bees will increase this burden on the States.

At this time, when US bee losses of 32-35% are attributed to viruses and other pathogens it would be irresponsible to introduce a new problem.

At the annual meeting of the AIA on February 10, 2012, the AIA does resolve that:

1) USDA-APHIS PPQ protects American agriculture by keeping United States borders closed to honey bee introductions.

2) USDA-APHIS PPQ discuss with North American Plant Protection Organization (NAPPO) members, encouraging NAPPO agreement to protect North American beekeeping from the risk of pest, parasite or pathogen introduction into North America. The AIA believes that there is a strong need for NAPPO members to agree to uniform standards on the acceptance of queen bees and packages into NAPPO member states. We strongly encourage APHIS to petition NAPPO partners to allow each country to review data from a country to import bees before allowing them into the country.

3) USDA-APHIS-PPQ require that countries requesting importation into the US produce survey data of equivalent rigor to that being conducted by the APHIS and AIA.

Audience: USDA-APHIS PPQ

NASDA

Copies to: Canadian Association of Professional Apiculturists

American Association of Professional Apiculturists

North American Plant Protection Organization Biological Control Committee

121 2012 RESOLUTIONS

Apiary Inspectors of America, 2012

Apiary Inspectors of America 2008 and Continued, 2012

Wording Revised by 2012 Resolutions Committee

Title: Continuance of the National Honey Bee Survey

Author: Resolutions Committee

AIA recognizes and appreciates that since 2009 USDA-APHIS-PPQ has organized and funded the National Honey Bee Survey.

USDA-APHIS is under increased pressure to allow the importation of honey bees from other countries. Tremendous losses of honey bee colonies in recent years occurred due to “colony collapse disorder” or other unresolved causes. Viral diseases have been introduced into the U.S. and are vectored by introduced parasites. These events prove undoubtedly that the U.S. beekeeping industry is vulnerable to other exotic pests and the USDA should take stricter measures to prevent the introduction of exotic pests. But first, a baseline of honey bee diseases, parasites and other pests of honey bees must be established to adhere to international policy and trade agreements in order to restrict movement of honey bees into the U.S.

Be it resolved that the Apiary Inspectors at its annual meeting on February 10, 2012;

1) Urgently requests USDA, both APHIS and ARS, to fund and continue to implement surveys of honey bee colonies not only for Tropilaelaps species, but for virus complexes, Varroa species and their variants as well as other organisms capable of adversely affecting honey bee health.

2) Such survey should continue to utilize current infrastructure among cooperating state agencies to collect and prepare samples for USDA analysis. Therefore, assuming state cooperation in supplying in-kind services utilizing current personnel, AIA requests that adequate funding be budgeted and approved for this much needed baseline survey.

Audience: USDA/APHIS/PPQ

U.S. Secretary of Agriculture

122 Copy to: National Plant Board

Regional Plant Boards

National Beekeeping Organizations

Apiary Inspectors of America 2009 and Continued, 2012

Wording Revised by 2012 Resolutions Committee

Evaluation and registration of pesticides affecting honey bee colonies

Author: Resolutions Committee

The cause of colony collapse disorder (CCD), a disorder associated with the loss of hundreds of thousands of honey bee colonies in the United States during the last five years, has not been determined. Pesticide residues at chronic and/or sub-lethal levels appear likely to be attributing to colony losses. Concerns identified by the research, regulatory and public communities point to the unknown effects of pesticides, including systemic insecticide, fungicide and herbicide products, on honeybees. Research has identified as many as 31 different pesticide residues in one environmental (pollen) sample taken from a honey bee colony, as well as an average of 6 or more pesticide residues in each of a pool of 669 colonies sampled. Research has identified that risk to honey bees from pesticide activity is both synergistic and cumulative when bees are exposed to multiple pesticides.

The Apiary Inspectors of America (AIA), exists for purpose of protecting the health and welfare of honey bee colonies in the United States.

Be it resolved that the AIA, at its annual meeting on February 10, 2012 hereby expresses concern and requests the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) re-evaluate the protocol used to assess the risk of pesticide chemistries on honey bees, with particular interest in the potential sub-lethal and synergistic activities of pesticide chemistries under field conditions, and take such action as needed to understand the activity of pesticides on all life stages of honeybees and to provide adequate protection of honey bees in the U.S.

Be it further resolved that AIA would like to work cooperatively with the EPA and USDA in an effort to exchange knowledge regarding honey bee health concerns, and in the development of pesticide registration protocols affecting honey bee health.

Audience: USDA/APHIS/PPQ

EPA

U.S. Secretary of Agriculture

North American Pollinator Protection Campaign

123

Copy to: National Plant Board

Regional Plant Boards

National Beekeeping Organizations

124 Bee Importation Committee Report Power Point Presentation

Bee Import Committee Report 2011

Bee Import Committee Report 2011 Importation Committee: Medhat Nasr, Chair Import Committee: Rob Currie, Ernesto Guzman, Claude Boucher, Medhat Nasr, Chair Paul Kozak, Chris Maund, Geoff Wilson, and Leslie Eccles

- Provincial Apiculturists

Canadian Honey Industry Stakeholders

Accomplished activities in 2012: Accomplished activities in 2012: Supported the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) and Respond to reported finding of small hive beetles in Canadian Honey Council (CHC) by providing timely advice and first shipments of queens from Hawaii to Canada: opinion on honey bee import issues as needed. Over all Canada imports 175,000 - 200,000. Continued to work with CFIA to harmonize bee import conditions Over 120,000 queens were inspected across the from various countries: country by the PA’s and their staff. Additional spot - New Zealand. The proposed conditions were accepted and the inspection for other imported queens was conducted . importation of package bees and queens will resumed from NZ in 2012. In Alberta we inspected 92,500 queens mostly from Hawaii and (5000 queens)USA.

125 Bee Importation Committee Report Power Point Presentation

Accomplished activities in 2012: Respond the status of Apis cerana in Australia and the Australian Accomplished activities in 2012: surveillance program Supported development of an export certificate to Chile. Respond to reported finding of small hive beetles in first shipments Based on a requested from CHC and CFIA (export section) a health of queens from Hawaii to Canada: certificate was developed with PAs to allow Canadian Bee Stocks to Chile Changed conditions to address finding the SHB in imported queens. for propagation and export to Canada. The CFIA presented the health Developed inspection protocols for imported queens at port of entry certificate to the Chilean authority but it was not accepted. and importers locations CFIA and PAs worked closely to monitor the situation of the SHB in imported queens from Hawaii.

The Small Hive Beetle Action Plan Accomplished activities in 2012: Initiated harmonization of listed diseases and pests in provincial regulations. The list of pests and diseases recommended to be included is the following: • The Africanized honey bee: Apis mellifera scutellata, • The Cape honey bee: Apis mellifera capensis • The Asian honey bee: Apis cerana • The Asian Nosema: Nosema ceranae • The Asian giant hornet: Vespa mandarinia • The Asian mite: Tropilaelaps clareae

126

2011 CAPA EXECUTIVE & COMMITTEES

Executive Rhéal Lafrenière President Medhat Nasr Vice-Pre s. Stephen Pernal Past-Pres. Chris Jordan Secr/Trea s

Standing Committees Chemical Geoff Wilson Chair Claude Boucher, Paul Kozak, Rhéal Lafrenière, Medhat Nasr, Stephen Pernal

Importation Medhat Nasr Chair Rob Currie, Ernesto Guzman Paul Kozak, Chris Maund Geoff Wilson, Claude Boucher, Les Eccles

Research Leonard Foster Chair Paul van Westendorp, Ernesto Guzman Pierre Giovenazzo, Kenna MacKenzie Cynthia Scott-Dupree, Les Eccles

Awards Alison Van Alten Chair Kenna MacKenzie, Janet Tam Nicolas Tremblay, Paul van Westendorp

CBRF Directors Rob Currie, Paul van Westendorp Leonard Foster

Ad-Hoc Committees Publications Janet Tam Chair Chris Jordan, Steve Pernal Cynthia Scott-Dupree, Rhéal Lafrenière

Archives Rob Currie Chair Heather Higo, Adony Melathopoulos Alison Van Alten

Non-Apis David Ostermann Chair Pollinators Rob Currie, Geoff Williams

128

Editorial Stephen Pernal Chair Disease Rob Currie, Ernesto Guzman, Publication Melanie Kempers, Adony Melathopoulos, Janet Tam, Nicolas Tremblay, Paul van Westendorp, Paul Kozak, Geoff Williams,

Communications Adony Melathopoulos Chair Claude Boucher, Rob Currie, Suresh Desai, Melanie Kempers Rhéal Lafrenière, Nicolas Tremblay, Tanya Copley

National Survey Stephen Pernal Chair Rhéal Lafrenière, Claude Boucher, Melanie Kempers , Paul Kozak, Medhat Nasr, Geoff Wilson

Africanized Bee Ernesto Guzman Chair Medhat Nasr, Steve Pernal Rhéal Lafrenière, Geoff Wilson, Les Eccles, Paul Kozak

Apimondia Pierre Giovenazzo Chair Paul Kozak, Leonard Foster, Cy nthia Scott-Dupree, Paul van Westendorp Rhéal Lafrenière, Rob Currie, Medhat Nasr, Les Eccles

Bee Biosecurity Steve Pernal Chair David Osterman, Paul Kozak, Claude Boucher, Rob Curie

Hive Health Rhéal Lafrenière Chair Steve Pernal, Medhat Nasr, Alison Van Alten

129 CAPA BYLAWS

CANADIAN ASSOCIATION OF PROFESSIONAL APICULTURISTS L'ASSOCIATION CANADIENNE DE PROFESSIONELS DE L'APICULTURE

BYLAWS

Objectives of the Association 1. To pr omote, develop and maintain good fellowship and coopera tion among professional apiculturists (individuals whose work in government, university, or similar professional capacity involve managed bee species) 2. To create a meeting of administrative and research professionals for the purpose of discussing common interests related to bee m anagement and effectively coordinating, where possible, their activities. 3. To aid in the dissemination of information regarding the beekeeping industry in all its forms. 4. To maintain a consultative rapport with th e Canadian Honey Council and other organizations concerned with managed bee species. 5. To maintain a rapport with professional in apiculture and related fields in other countries.

ARTICLE I - Membership I (1): Full membership, with voting privileges is open t o personnel employed by Canadian Federal and Provincial governments, universities or college, and consultants who are employed in the field of apiculture or other related fields as: • federal apiculturist • provincial apiculturist • full-time or part time extension apiculturist • full-time or part time teaching and/or research apiculturist • full-time or part time apiary inspectors • full-time or part time apicultural technicians • full-time or part time professionals i n any other capacity whose work i nvolves managed bee species

I (2): Non-voting, associate membership in the association may, upon receipt of application, be granted to persons who are: • Part or full-tim e graduate students involved in projects involving managed bee species • Part-time technicians associated with personnel or projects invol ving managed bee species • Part-time disease inspection staff • Representatives of appropriate programs within federal government agencies such as Agriculture and Agri-Foo d Canada, the Ca nadian Food Inspectio n Agency and the Pest Management Regulatory Agency • The representative of the Canadian Honey council and a representative of any other organizations concerned with managed bee species. • Members of the American Association of Professional Apiculturists • Members of the Apiary Inspectors of America.

I (3): Membership or associate membership may be exte nded to persons other than those defined in Clauses I and II upon ratification by a majority of the membership.

130 I (4): The privileges of membership in the Association shall terminate when a current member resigns or retires from the position which established his/her eligibility. I (5): Membership fees shall be prescribed by the members in general meeting. I (6): Every member shall receive a copy of the bylaws annually. I (7): Privileges of membership shall be restricted to those holding current membership. I (8): The decision to grant life memberships, honorary memberships, and awards of merit shall be made by a 75% majority of the members present at the general meeting.

ARTICLE II - General Meeting II (1): The annual meeting shall be held at a time and place designated by the executive. II (2): The secretary shall send a ll members a notice of a general meeting sixty (60) da ys in advance of the date of such a meeting unless a majority of the me mbers waive the sixty day requirement. II (3): A quorum of a duly called general meeting shall be six (6) members. II (4): Attendance at the Association's meeting shall be limited to members and guests invited by the executive. II (5): Minutes of t he general meeting shall, wh en printed, be of a confidential nature and permission to use the information presented must be obtained from the executive.

ARTICLE III - Finances III (1): The fiscal year of the A ssociation shall be fro m January 01 to Decem ber 31 of the calendar year. III (2): All monies and securities held by the Association shall be in the name of the Canadian Association of Professional Apiculturists. III (3): All money transactions made by the Association shall be made by cheque signed by the secretary-treasurer and the president.

ARTICLE IV - Officers of the Association IV(1): The members shall, at the general m eeting, through personal attendance or virt ual attendance via electronic means (e.g. telephone , video conferencing), elect a President, Vice-President and Secretary-Treasurer and appoint the Past-President into the executive. The executive may in tur n appoint other officers and committee members as may be required. IV (2): All officers shall be elected for a two year term of office and no officer shall serve more than two consecutive terms in the same office position. IV (3): The president shall preside over all m eetings of the Association and shall be ex-officio, a member of all committees. IV (4): The vice-president shall perform the duties of the president in his/her absence or inability to act. IV (5): The secretary-treasurer shall: 1. Record the m inutes of all m eetings of the Association and distribute copies of these minutes to the membership sometime during the sixty (60) days following a meeting, and, 2. Send information and notices of motions and meetings etc. to the membership as required, and, 3. Collect th e annual fees fro m each member and maintain an up-to-date membership list, and, 4. Look after all financial matters of the Association and maintain accurate records relating to same. IV (6): The Past-President shall be that pers on who has most recently completed a ter m of Association President. Should t he offices of the President and Vice-President both

131 become vacant, the Past-President shall fill the office of President until an election can be held.

ARTICLE V - Amendments of Bylaws V(1): Bylaws may be am ended only by a rec ognized quorum at a general meeting and all members must be notified by the secretary-treasurer of any proposed changes in the thirty (30) days in advance of the meeting date.

The foregoing are the B ylaws of the Canadian Association of Professional Apiculturists a s amended at the annual meeting held in Winnipeg, Manitoba, January 26, 2012.

**********

132

CAPA MEMBERSHIP LIST

Name & Address Phone/Fax/Email

Bahreini, Rasoul ( 204) 269-1684 (Associate Member) ( 204) 474-7628 Department of Entomology raso [email protected] Animal Science Building, [email protected] University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB R3T 2N2

Bates, Daniela 6 04-556-3152 (Associate Member) [email protected] Apiculture Program B.C.M.A.L 1767 Angus Campbell Road Abbotsford, B.C. V3G 2M3

Bixby, Miriam ( 604) 228-8488 3950 W10th Avenue [email protected] Vancouver, BC VGR 2G8

Boucher, Claude ( 418) 643-1632 MAPAQ, CQIASA ( 418) 644-6327 télécopieur Complexe scientifique [email protected] 2700, Einstein F.1.106 Quebec, PQ G1P 3W8

Bunse Jaquie 6 04-521-4493 (Associate Member) 6 04-240-7600 cell (505-7151 Edmonds St. [email protected] Burnaby BC V3N 4N5

Clark, Kerry ( 250) 784-2559 BC Ministry of Agriculture and Lands (250) 219-2715 cell 4th Floor, 1201 – 103rd Ave 1 -877-772-2200 Dawson Creek, B.C. V1G 4J2 ( 250) 784-2299 [email protected]

Colpitts Fletcher (506 ) 756-8203 (Associate Member) ( 506) 461-5645 cell 188 Baseline Rd [email protected] Glenvale NB E4Z 2Z5

Copley, Tanya ( 514) 467-2470 (Associate Member) ( 514) 467-2470 McGill University [email protected] 16A St-Hyacinthe Ste-Anne-de Bellevue, QC H9X 1Y2

133

Craft, Phil ( 502) 564-3956 (Associate Member) ( 502) 564-7852 Retired [email protected]

Cutler, Chris ( 902) 896-2471 Dept. of Environmental Sciences [email protected] Nova Scotia Agricultural College PO Box 550, Truro, NS B2N 5E3

Currie, Rob ( 204) 474-6020 Dept. of Entomology ( 204) 474-7628 University of Manitoba [email protected] Winnipeg, Manitoba R3T 2N2

Desai, Suresh ( 204) 275-8346 (Associate Member) ( 204) 474-7628 12 Dafoe Rd, 214 Animal Sci Bldg [email protected] Department of Entomology University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB R3T 2N2

Foster, Leonard J 6 04-822-8311 Centre for High-Throughput Biology [email protected] Dept. of Biochemistry & Molecular Biology University of British Columbia Vancouver, BC

Giovenazzo, Pierre ( 418) 656-2131-8081 Département de biologie, Pavillon Vachon (418) 656-2043 Faculté des sciences et de genie [email protected] Université Laval Québec, Québec G1K 7P4

Guarna, Marta ( 604) 822-9022 Centre for High-Throughput Biology [email protected] 405 – 2015 east Mall Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4

Guzman, Ernesto ( 519) 824-4120 x 53609 School of Environmental Sciences ( 519) 837-0442 University of Guelph [email protected] Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1

Head, Krista ( 709) 637-2079 Natural Resources Development Officer ( 709) 637-2591 Department of Natural Resources [email protected] Forestry and Agrifoods Agency Production & Market Development Division Fortis Building, Box 2006 Corner Brook, NL, A2H 6J8

Halsall, Brent (Associate Member) (613 ) 447-4479 RR4, 7328 Stone School Rd. Ab.halsall@sy mpatico.ca Greely, Ontario K4P 1M3 [email protected]

134

Higo, Heather ( 604)532-6904 (Associate Member) [email protected] 1077 237A St Langley, BC V2Z 2Y2

Hoover, Shelley ( 780) 354-5130 Beaverlodge Research Farm [email protected] PO Box 29 Beaverlodge, AB T0H 0C0

Houle, Emile ( 418) 286-3353 227 CRSAD ( 418) 286-3597 120 A Chemin du Roy [email protected] Deschambault, Quebec G0A 2Y0

Kempers, Melanie ( 519) 836-3609 Ontario Beekeepers’Association Research Office [email protected]. Orchard Park Office Centre 5420 Hwy 6 North Guelph, Ont. N1H 6J2

Ibrahim, Abdullah ( 780)354-5122 AAFC Research Station ( 780) 354-5150 Box 29 [email protected] Beaverlodge, Alberta T0H 0C0

Jager, Brenda ( 250) 755-5834 (Associate Member) [email protected] 948 Harrison Way Gabriola Island, BC V0R 1X2

Jordan, Chris ( 902) 314-0816 PEI Department Of Agriculture & Forestry (902) 368-5729 P.O. Box 1600, 440 University Avenue [email protected] Charlottetown, PEI C1A 7N3

Kelly, Paul ( 519) 836-8897 School of Environmental Sciences ( 519) 837-0442 University of Guelph [email protected] Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1

Kevan, Peter ( 519) 824-4120 x52479 Environmental Biology ( 510) 837-0442 University of Guelph [email protected] Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1

Kozak, Paul ( 519) 826-3595 Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food & Rural Affairs [email protected] 1 Stone Road West [email protected] Guelph, ON N1G 4Y2

Kumpula, Clarke ( 604) 992-3020 2964 Glassford Rd. [email protected] Quesnel, BC V2J 6K2

Lacey, Brian (519) 836-3609 123 Elizabeth Street [email protected] Guelph, ON N1E 2X4 [email protected]

135

Lafrenière, Rhéal ( 204) 945-4825 MAFRI ( 204) 945-4327 204 - 545 University Crescent Rhéal.Lafre nière @gov.mb.ca Winnipeg, Manitoba R3T 5S6

MacKenzie, Kenna ( 250) 494-6358 AAFC Research Centre ( 250) 494-6515 PO Box 5000, 4200 Hwy 97 [email protected] Summerland, BC V0H 1Z0

Marceau, Jocelyn (418) 643-7255 MAPAQ ( 418) 644-8263 edifice 2, RC-22 [email protected] 1685 Bld. Hamel Ouest Quebec, PQ G1N 3Y7

Maund, Christopher ( 506) 453-3477 Crop Development ( 506) 453-7978 N.B. Dept. of Agriculture, Aquaculture & Fisheries [email protected] P.O. Box 6000 Fredericton, NB E3B 5H1

Melathopoulos, Adony ( 780) 354-5130 AAFC Research Station ( 902) 817-1185 P.O. Box 29 [email protected] Beaverlodge, Alberta T0H 0C0

Moran, Joanne ( 902) 679-8998 N.S. Dept. of Agriculture ( 902) 679-6062 Kentville Agriculture Centre [email protected] Kentville, Nova Scotia B4N 1J5

Muirhead, Samantha ( 780) 415-2309 17507 Fort Rd. [email protected] Edmonton, AB T5Y 6H3

Nasr, Medhat ( 780) 415-2314 Crop Diversification Centre North (780) 422-6096 Agriculture Research Division [email protected] Alberta Agriculture and Rural Development 17507 Fort Road Edmonton, AB, Canada T5Y 6H3

Ostermann, David ( 204) 945-3861 MAFRI ( 204) 945-4327 204 - 545 University Crescent [email protected] Winnipeg, Manitoba R3T 5S6

Otis, Gard ( 519) 824-4170 x52478 School of Environmental Sciences ( 519) 837-0442 University of Guelph [email protected] Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1

Parsons, Graham ( 302) 221-4970 Saskatchewan Beekeepers’ Association [email protected] PPO Box 44 Meskonow, SK S0K 2S0

136

Pernal, Stephen ( 780) 354-5135 AAFC Research Station ( 780) 354-5150 Box 29 [email protected] Beaverlodge, Alberta T0H 0C0

Plante, Scott ( 418) 834-5616 1045 de la Prairie Quest ( 418) 839-1232 St. Jean Chrysostime, PQ G6Z 3G5 [email protected]

Rawn, Devon ( 519) 803-5567 5420 Hwy 6 North, Suite B47 ( 519) 836-3609 Guelph, ON N1H 6J2 [email protected]

Scott-Dupree, Cynthia (5 19) 824-4120 x 52477 School of Environmental Sciences ( 519) 837-0442 University of Guelph [email protected] Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1

Sproule, Jason ( 902) 896-2472 Dept. of Environmental Sciences [email protected] Nova Scotia Agricultural College PO Box 550, Truro, NS B2N 5E3

Stromgren, Eric (Associate Member) [email protected] Cunningham 260 Department of Biology University of Victoria Box 3020, Station CSC Victoria, BC, V8W 3N5

Tam, Janet ( 519) 836-3609 Ontario Beekeepers’Association Research Office [email protected] Orchard Park Office Centre 5420 Hwy 6 North Guelph, Ont. N1H 6J2

Tremblay, Nicolas ( 418) 286-3353 ext 224 Conseiller Provincial en Apiculture (418 ) 806-1311 cell 120-A Chemin du Roy ( 418) 286-3597 Deschambault, Québec G0A 1S0 [email protected] [email protected]

Tuckey, Kenn ( 780) 440-3420 (Honourary Member) ( 780) 463-3986 3211-42A Ave [email protected] Edmonton, AB. T6T 1E3

Van Alten, Alison (Associate Member) ( 289) 260-7434 300 Carlisle Rd. [email protected] Carlisle, ON, L0R 1H2

Vandervalk, Lynae ( 780) 964-2144 Alberta Agriculture & Rural Development [email protected] PO Box 425 Granum, AB, T0L 1A0

137

Van Haga, Amanda ( 902) 882-6552 University of BC 302-23rd Ave. E [email protected] Vancouver, BC V5V 1X5 van Westendorp, Paul ( 604) 556-3129 BC Ministry of Agriculture ( 604) 556-3030 1767 Angus Campbell Road [email protected] Abbotsford, B.C. V3G 2M3 [email protected] vanEngelsdorp, Dennis ( 717) 772-5225 (Associate Member) ( 717) 783-3275 State Apiarist ( 717) 497-1514 Department of Agriculture dennis.vanengelsdorp@gmail,com 2301 North Cameron Street Harrisburg, PA 17110

Williams, Geoffrey (902) 585-1604 Department of Biology (902) 585-1059 24 University Avenue [email protected] Acadia University Wolfville, NS B4P2R6

Wilson, Geoff ( 306) 953-2304 Saskatchewan Agriculture ( 306) 953-2440 Box 3003, 800 Central Avenue [email protected] Prince Albert, Saskatchewan S6V 6G1

Winston, Mark ( 778) 782-7894 Morris J. Wosk Centre for Dialogue (7 78) 782-7892 Simon Fraser University, Harbour Centre [email protected] 3309 – 515 W. Hastings St. Vancouver, B.C. V5B 5K3

Zayed, Amro ( 416) 736-2100 x 20213 Department of Biology [email protected] York University 4700 Keele Street, Toronto, ON M3J 1P3

HONOURARY MEMBERS

Beauchesne, François ( 418) 653-2185 (Honourary Member) 3365 Hertel Rue Sainte-Foy, QC G1X 2J6

Clay, Heather ( 250) 275-4701 (Honourary Member) 7925 Wilson-Jackson Rd Vernon BC V1B 3N5

Colter, Douglas ( 780) 925-3787 (Honourary Member) General Delivery Donnelly, Alberta T0H 1G0

Corner, John ( 604) 545-2914 (Honourary Member) Site 9, C.10, RR#6 Vernon, B.C. V1T 6Y5

138

Dixon, Don (Honourary Member) 2 04-668-8847 Box 27, Grp. 374, RR# 3, [email protected] Winnipeg MB R3C 2E7

Gates, John ( 250) 546-6212 (Honourary Member) [email protected] 1262 Round Lake Rd. Armstrong, B.C. V0E 1B5

Gray, Don (Honourary Member) RR# 1 Portland, Ontario K0G 1V0

Gruszka, John ( 306) 953-2790 (Honorary Member) ( 306) 953-2440 [email protected]

McCutcheon, Doug ( 205) 546-9870 (Honourary Member) ( 250) 546-0070 2525 Phillips St. Armstrong, B.C. V0E 1B1

McRory, Doug ( 519) 823-8191 (Honorary Member) [email protected] 187 Dawn Avenue Guelph, ON N1G 5J9

Nelson, Don ( 780) 354-8612 (Honourary Member) ( 780) 354-8171 913 5th Ave [email protected] Beaverlodge, Alberta T0H 0C0

Slessor, Keith ( 604) 462-9059 (Honourary Member) 10105 Rolley Cres Maple Ridge, BC, V2W 1J9

139