Conservation Evidence: Evidence Data

Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Manage wild honey bees sustainablyWe can find no evidence of the impact of reduced honey-hunting or improved harvesting methods on wild honey bee populations. One trial in southern Vietnam, showed that occupancy of artificial rafters by the giant honey bee Apis dorsata can be over 85% when rafters are placed by a large clearing greater than 25 m in diameter. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F32https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F32Thu, 20 May 2010 05:25:33 +0100Collected Evidence: Collected Evidence: Replace honey-hunting with apiculture One study reported that a programme to enhance take-up of stingless beekeeping in southern Mexico increased the number of managed colonies in the area. Five trials contributed to scientific improvement of stingless beekeeping methods. Two controlled trials showed that either brewer's yeast (one trial) or a mix with 25% pollen collected by honey bees Apis mellifera (one trial) can be used as a pollen substitute to feed Scaptotrigona postica in times of pollen scarcity. A study on the island of Tobago found a wooden hive design with separate, different-shaped honey and brood chambers allowed honey to be extracted without damaging the brood. One trial showed that 50 g of comb with mature pupae is enough to start a new daughter colony of S. mexicana. One trial found brood growth was higher in traditional log hives than in box hives with internal volumes exceeding 14 litres, and recommended smaller box hives. We have captured no clear evidence about whether these activities help conserve bees or enhance native bee populations. Collected Evidencehttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F33https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservationevidence.com%2Factions%2F33Thu, 20 May 2010 06:29:24 +0100