Browsing by Author "Masehela, Tlou Samuel"
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Results Per Page
Sort Options
- ItemAn assessment of different beekeeping practices in South Africa based on their needs (bee forage use), services (pollination services) and threats (hive theft and vandalism)(Stellenbosch : Stellenbosch University, 2017-03) Masehela, Tlou Samuel; Veldtman, Ruan; Stellenbosch University. Faculty of AgriSciences. Dept. of Conservation Ecology and Entomology.ENGLISH ABSTRACT: Two honey bee subspecies indigenous to South Africa, Apis mellifera capensis Escholtz (Cape honey bee) and Apis mellifera scutellata Lepeletier, are actively managed by beekeepers for honey production, other bee related products (e.g. bees wax) and to provide pollination services. Historic records show that managed colonies of both subspecies to rely on a mix of exotic - (Eucalyptus species, agricultural crops, weeds and suburban plantings) and indigenous forage (genera and vegetation units). However, their extent of use and importance for honey production, pollination, colony maintenance and swarm trapping (together referred to as beekeeping practices), have not been fully explored across South Africa. Additionally, acts of hive theft and vandalism have become a key concern for the industry, threatening and potentially limiting beekeeping in some areas. Related to this is also a concern that growers need more colonies for crop pollination than beekeepers can supply. Furthermore, beekeepers currently face challenges related with their industries’ organisation and governance. The broad aim of my study was to understand the multiple challenges facing the South African beekeeping industry and to contribute detailed knowledge on forage use for beekeeping practices in South Africa. The knowledge thereof would provide a practical understanding of these aspects and ultimately contribute towards the planning and decision making where beekeeping is concerned. Using two questionnaire surveys I determined: 1) the current status of beekeeping in South Africa based on beekeeper opinion; 2) forage use for honey production; 3) the use and demand for pollination services; 4) forage use for colony maintenance and swarm trapping; and 5) trends and implications of hive theft and vandalism for the beekeeping industry. The forage use survey captured the most managed colonies (50067) and respondents (218) compared to the hive theft and vandalism survey, which had 161 respondents constituting 48386 managed colonies. Results showed that beekeepers have concerns similar to those captured in previous studies and reports, with the lack and loss of forage being very important. Across all four beekeeping practices exotic forage was predominantly used, although the level of preference differed provincially. The important forage types and significant species were highlighted in each province on the basis of number of colonies using individual forage species and followed a similar trend to that of forage categories. Some species were both important and of significant use for more than one beekeeping practice (e.g. Eucalyptus grandis, Eucalyptus cladocalyx, Helianthus annuus, Macadamia spp. and Senegalia mellifera) in the same or different provinces. The preference of trapping swarms on different forage highlighted the value of this practice compared to hive splitting, removal of problem swarms and buying of colonies from other beekeepers. Also, the number of localities used for forage differed across provinces, although in some cases the same locality was used for more than one beekeeping practice. Furthermore, some beekeepers used localities situated in their neighbouring provinces. These results suggest that exotics remain the predominantly used forage source for beekeeping in South Africa, and that some forage types and sources are more important that others in their respective localities. Also, provinces have different forage needs in relation to the different beekeeping practices. Therefore, the planning, management and promotion of bee forage at regional or national level should consider all four practices. It was challenging to obtain reliable planting data (given in hectares) and number of colonies used for pollination per hectare for respective crops. This prohibited a thorough understanding of the relationship between pollination service provision and demand, highlighting the importance of formally capturing this data. However, the derived results indicated pollination demands to be stable at a national level while inconclusive for certain provinces (e.g. Free State). The Western Cape had the highest pollination demand overall, while crops such as oil seeds, deciduous-, subtropical fruit, and nuts had high pollination demands. Trends in hive theft and vandalism showed most losses to occur through human induced vandalism. Although the magnitude of losses varied between provinces, factors contributing to the losses were similar with respect to the positioning (agricultural lands) and visibility (medium) of the colonies within the landscape. This means that for these colonies to continue accessing forage for various beekeeping practices, various sites need to be protected from theft and vandalism.