This chapter explains the concept of integrated pest management, and shows how it
applies to varroa control.
10.1 History of pesticide use in New Zealand
Pesticide use in New Zealand has gone through, and is continuing to go through, a revolution. The revolution started in the 1940s, when it was thought that all our agricultural pest problems could be solved with a ‘silver bullet’, or at least a collection of them.
Foremost among these silver bullets was the insecticide DDT. It was inexpensive, easy to use and very effective. We thought we had won the war against insects that were damaging our crops, and in other countries adversely affecting human health. DDT was used everywhere. Thousands of tonnes were applied to pasture to kill grass grub and other pests, used in home gardens, put into water to kill mosquitoes, and even dusted on human beings to control lice and fleas.
However, by the late 1950s, our silver bullets were starting to cause disquiet in some quarters. Increasingly, more insects were building up resistance to DDT. Residues of the chemical were turning up in foods such as milk and meat, and in humans, fish and other animals. Some bird species were becoming scarce because the chemical was making their eggshells too thin.
Rachel Carson’s book Silent spring, published in 1963, highlighted what the world would look like if we carried on with the extensive use of pesticides. The public began to develop an understanding of the risks of pesticides, and in the last several decades there has been an ever-increasing pressure to reduce pesticide use, especially for chemicals that persist in the environment, kill a wide range of insects and have adverse
environmental effects.
Domestic consumers and overseas markets are demanding reductions in pesticide use.
All areas of agriculture in New Zealand have been affected by these pressures, but most especially those relying on export markets. We have seen the growth of a number of organic and low-pesticide-use movements, both here and overseas. Some of our important markets are also not only demanding product without pesticide residues, they are
requiring proof that the food was produced in a sustainable way that didn’t cause ecological damage to the countryside. Now that the beekeeping industry has to rely on pesticides to control varroa, it will be under the same pressures regarding pesticide use faced by the rest of agriculture in New Zealand.
10.2 What is integrated pest management?
One of the ways New Zealand and other countries have been able to reduce pesticide use is through a technique called ‘integrated pest management’ (IPM). Traditional pest control involved applying chemicals at a prescribed time, regardless of whether the pest was actually present. IPM is different because it applies controls only when the pests are present, and uses a variety of suitable techniques to keep pest populations below the level where they cause economic damage. For a technique to be considered suitable, it
INTEGRA
TED PEST
should be inexpensive, cause few or no chemical residues, not result in pest resistance, and not cause environmental damage.
Integrated pest management (IPM) uses a variety of techniques to keep pest populations below a level where they cause economic damage.
IPM is already in use in New Zealand beekeeping for American foulbrood (AFB) control, although it is usually not referred to as an IPM programme. The programme consists of monitoring hives for the presence of AFB, destroying affected material, sterilising equipment, and managing colonies to avoid the spread of AFB.
10.3 Economic threshold
A basic concept used in IPM is the ‘economic threshold’. The economic threshold of a pest is the population level where the pest begins to cause a level of economic damage that is greater than the cost of controlling the pest.
The economic threshold for a pest is the population level where the pest causes significant economic damage.
The threshold can vary according to the pest or disease, or the tolerance an export market has for the presence of the pest. For example, one cell of AFB means the hive must be destroyed, but the presence of a single varroa mite in a hive is actually of very little significance, unless of course it has never been reported in the area before. A mite’s presence is not a reason to treat a colony, as by itself it will not cause any detectable damage.
In an IPM programme, the time to treat a colony is when the population of varroa reaches a level where it is causing economic levels of damage, or more correctly where the population will have reached this level before the beekeeper visits the colony again. Unfortunately, we do not have good information about the population development of varroa in honey bee colonies under New Zealand conditions (especially in relation to climate and length of brood rearing season), or the mite population level at which our colonies begin to experience economic levels of damage.
Until such figures are determined through experience and research, beekeepers in New Zealand should use the threshold figures that have been developed overseas. These thresholds are discussed in detail in chapter 5 for each detection method. There is some dispute about the mite population level that causes significant damage, however. Some researchers say 2500 mites, while a US study in a climate similar to the north half of the North Island suggests 3200. Nevertheless, until we have better information, 2500 mites in a colony should probably be taken as the threshold level under New Zealand conditions. Remember that when using a method that surveys a sub-sample of bees or brood in the hive, the number of mites in the sample has to be multiplied by a conversion factor to determine the total number of mites in the hive (see appendix 1).
Economic threshold levels for varroa are discussed in detail in chapter 5.
10.4 Monitoring
While the goal of any IPM programme is to reduce pesticide use, there is always a trade- off, since more labour needs to be invested in monitoring to determine when the pest
CONTROL OF VARROA: INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT
INTEGRA
TED PEST
reaches an economic threshold. The way to make good IPM varroa control decisions in a beekeeping outfit is to routinely sample at least a portion of the hives in each apiary for mites.
CONTROL OF VARROA: INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT
In order to make good IPM varroa control decisions, it is important to routinely sample at least a portion of your hives in every apiary for mites. The various types of detection methods suitable for IPM monitoring are discussed in detail in chapter 5. Important points to remember are to use a method that fits with other beekeeping work, and provides accurate information. Some detection methods are very accurate (e.g., soapy water wash), but also take a lot of time. Other detection methods are very quick (e.g., the ether roll), but aren’t very good at determining mite levels. Use the various conversion factors in order to work out the likely total number of mites in the hive. Chapter 5 also gives good information on using mite numbers obtained from monitoring to make predictions about when the mite population will reach the economic threshold level. As time goes on, there is no doubt that New Zealand beekeepers will become quite skilled at carrying out IPM survey work, calculating likely mite numbers, and making predictions about when mite populations will reach the economic threshold level.
The following recommendations for varroa monitoring come from British Columbia, Canada: • Acute stage – Where varroa has just come to an area, survey before applying spring
treatment to see if treatment is required. Survey after treatment to see if treatment has been successful. Survey towards the end of summer to determine if a second treatment is necessary, and survey after the treatment to determine if it has been successful. If a spring treatment was not necessary, survey in mid-summer to avoid colony damage before autumn treatment.
• Chronic stage – After the acute stage has passed (about 3 years) and mite population
growth is more stable (i.e., there is infrequent invasion), survey twice per year (spring and autumn). Be prepared for years of severe infestation, followed by lulls where varroa is easy to control, followed once again by a difficulty of control. Varroa infestation comes in ‘waves’.
• Number of hives to survey – For hobbyists, every hive; for commercial beekeepers,
10% of hives in each apiary.
Be prepared for years of severe mite infestation, followed by lulls where varroa is easy to control, followed once again by a difficulty to control. Varroa infestation comes in ‘waves’.
10.5 Decision-making and control
When assessing mite numbers, the decision a beekeeper using IPM has to make is whether the population of varroa is high enough to cause a greater economic loss than the cost of treatment. To be able to do this, beekeepers need to accurately assess the cost of treating colonies. This should include the cost of materials, labour and travel. In any IPM programme, preventative (also called ‘prophylactic’) treatments are generally not
considered to be cost-effective (with the possible exception of slowing down the spread of a pest into a new area).
In an IPM programme, only treat colonies when varroa numbers are high enough to cause more economic damage than the cost of the treatment.
INTEGRA
TED PEST
The goal of any IPM programme should be to limit the use of controls to an economic minimum. However, in the early stages of varroa infestation in an area (the acute stage), caution needs to be used when making assessments of mite numbers and predicting how populations will develop, since mite invasion from feral and untreated colonies is likely to result in quick mite population increases. Under such circumstances, there is a role for prophylactic treatment until invasion pressure from outside sources reduces.
CONTROL OF VARROA: INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT
In the acute stage, chemical control should be used on a routine basis until mite invasion pressure from outside sources reduces.
Once the acute stage has passed, and mite population growth in colonies is more predictable, beekeepers ideally should try to reduce chemical control treatments to no more than two (and hopefully one) per year.
There are also a number of factors influencing the choice of varroa control method: • Availability – Not all of the methods used overseas are likely to be available in New
Zealand. To be able to use a pesticide legally to control varroa, it must be registered by going through the same process as all other agricultural chemicals. The registration process is relatively expensive. There are direct costs in having a pesticide assessed, and an even larger cost in supplying the information necessary for the assessment. Because of the relatively small size of our industry and the cost of registration, some companies may decide not to register their varroa control products in New Zealand.
• Cost – The cost of some control methods (e.g., drone trapping) may limit their
usefulness to commercial beekeepers. Because economics is usually of lesser importance to hobbyist beekeepers, they are likely to use a wider range of techniques.
• Residues – The need to limit pesticide residues in honey and wax will restrict the
range of pesticides that can be used and when they can be applied. • Resistance – The need to prevent or delay resistance will influence both the
pesticides used, and how often a particular compound is applied.
• Toxicity – The toxicity of the products to the beekeeper and bees is very important,
and some beekeepers may decide not to use a chemical such as formic acid because of the potential dangers involved.
• Environmental concerns – Most beekeepers take these concerns very seriously,
especially since environmental problems that are often out of their control can have big impacts on their beekeeping. Beekeepers need to assess the effect of the varroa control products used (and their disposal) on the environment.
INTEGRA
TED PEST