Project Overview
Commodities
- Animals: bees
- Animal Products: honey
Practices
- Animal Production: animal protection and health, preventive practices, therapeutics
- Crop Production: beekeeping, pollinator health
- Education and Training: demonstration, extension, farmer to farmer, on-farm/ranch research, technical assistance, workshop
- Farm Business Management: risk management
- Pest Management: prevention
- Production Systems: holistic management
- Sustainable Communities: quality of life
Proposal summary:
Beekeepers have traditionally relied on smokers to calm colonies during hive inspections, but these tools are not without problems. Biomass smoke can irritate lungs and worsen conditions like asthma in some beekeepers, and there is always a fire risk in drought-prone areas or when transporting hot smokers from out yards. Once lit, smokers can be hard to extinguish, and burns to hands are a common hazard. At the same time, new non-combustion options are becoming more available and deserve careful testing in real-world conditions.
This project will evaluate whether artificial, non-combustion alternatives such as liquid smoke sprays or similar "artificial smoke" products can calm colonies as effectively as a traditional smoker while reducing health and safety risks. We will work with 30 colonies to compare traditional smoke to artificial products, measuring how quickly colonies calm, how long they remain manageable, and how fast they return to normal behavior. We will also track ease of use, including setup time, handling, and any equipment problems, as well as beekeeper perceptions of safety, breathing comfort, and confidence while working the hive. Where possible, we will record differences in inspection time to look for potential labor savings. Results will be shared with Pennsylvania beekeepers through in-person workshops, field demonstrations, and presentations. By providing in-field testing data on artificial smoke options, this project aims to reduce respiratory exposure for beekeepers, lower fire risk around apiaries, and offer practical, repeatable tools to manage colonies more safely and sustainably.
Project objectives from proposal:
Our first objective is to measure and compare how well three non-combustion "artificial smoke" tools calm honey bee colonies compared to a traditional smoker that burns fuel. During routine hive inspections we will track three things: how long it takes from the first application until roughly 90 percent of guard bees pull back and entrance traffic drops to a calm level, how many stings the beekeeper receives per minute while the hive is open, and how many times the smoke or vapor must be reapplied during a standard 10-minute inspection. We will collect at least 120 observations across 30 colonies over the 2026 season. We will rotate treatments across colonies to reduce bias. We will compare averages for time to calm, sting rates, and reapplication counts across treatments and report practical effect sizes, using simple statistical comparisons as appropriate.
Our second objective is to see whether artificial smoke options provide equal or better safety and comfort for beekeepers than biomass smoke. For safety, we will record whether we see sparks or embers, how hot the outside of each device gets, and how much breathing irritation the beekeeper reports on a simple 0-5 scale right after each inspection. For comfort, we will time how long it takes to set up and put away each device and have the beekeeper rate ease of use with gloves on and perceived fire risk on 1-5 scales. The same 120 inspections will give us paired data so we can directly compare treatments.
The third objective is to measure how each smoke treatment affects short-term colony defensiveness and how quickly colonies return to normal. Using a standard "black ball" test, we will hold a small matte-black leather ball in front of the hive entrance for 60 seconds and count the stings, both just before treatment and again 30 minutes after treatment. We will run at least 120 of these paired tests across 30 colonies over the 2026 season. We will also track how soon entrance traffic returns to near its pre-treatment level and whether foraging, including pollen collection the next morning, looks similar to the day before treatment.
Our fourth objective is to test how practical, durable, and cost-effective the artificial smoke tools are over a full season of real-world beekeeping. For each inspection we will record setup and teardown time, any device failures or repairs, and the total cost of fuels or liquids per 100 inspections. After each use, the beekeeper will also rate confidence and workflow on a 1-5 scale.
Our fifth objective is to share clear, farm-tested recommendations with at least 150 Northeast beekeepers. We will present our results at three or more winter or early-spring meetings, publish at least two summary articles in major regional outlets, and track at least 50 follow-up questions from beekeepers. All recommendations will be based only on our 120+ on-farm inspections so they are practical, farmer-generated, and ready to use.