American beekeepers watched 55.6% of their managed honey bee colonies die between April 2024 and April 2025, setting a new record for annual losses. That figure followed a 55.1% loss rate the prior year, meaning the industry has now endured back-to-back seasons in which more than half of all colonies failed to survive. Federal researchers have traced the collapses to viruses carried by parasitic mites that have developed resistance to common chemical treatments, raising hard questions about whether the nation’s pollination supply chain can absorb this level of attrition much longer.
Why consecutive record colony losses threaten U.S. crop pollination
Two straight years above 55% losses represent a sharp escalation from historical norms. The national honey bee colony loss survey covering April 2025 through April 2026 is now in the field, and early institutional reporting from Auburn University indicates that losses have stabilized near these elevated levels rather than declining. For commercial beekeepers who truck hives to almond orchards in California, berry farms in the Pacific Northwest, and citrus groves in Florida, stabilization at a record-high death rate is not relief. It means the cost of replacing dead colonies each spring has become a fixed, recurring expense that erodes already thin margins.
The biological driver behind the losses is now well documented. USDA Agricultural Research Service scientists conducted pre-almond sampling in February 2025 and found elevated viral loads in colonies headed to California’s Central Valley. The mites responsible, Varroa destructor, have evolved resistance to miticides that beekeepers have relied on for years. When standard treatments fail, mite populations surge inside hives, and the viruses they transmit, including deformed wing virus, overwhelm colonies faster than beekeepers can intervene.
One hypothesis that emerged from industry discussion is whether beekeepers who rotated between different miticide products more frequently in 2023 experienced measurably lower virus-driven losses in 2024 and 2025 compared to operations that stuck with a single chemical. The available federal data does not break losses down by treatment regimen in enough detail to confirm or reject that idea. The USDA’s Honey Bee Colonies program collects quarterly data from operations with five or more colonies, according to the NASS methodology, but those quarterly reports track colony counts, not individual management practices at the apiary level. Testing the miticide-rotation hypothesis would require linking treatment records to colony survival outcomes across hundreds of operations, a dataset that does not yet exist in public form.
Federal research ties mite-borne viruses to the 2024-2025 collapse
The strongest scientific evidence connecting Varroa destructor and its viral payload to the recent losses comes from a peer-reviewed study published in PLOS Pathogens. That research documented a major honey bee loss event stretching from mid-2024 through January 2025 and identified the mite-virus complex as the primary mechanism. The study’s timeline aligns with the 55.6% annual loss figure reported through the national survey, reinforcing the conclusion that this was not a diffuse, multi-cause decline but a concentrated collapse driven by a specific biological threat.
USDA ARS researchers built on that finding with field sampling ahead of the February 2025 almond pollination season. Their work, summarized through the agency’s research highlights, confirmed that colonies arriving for pollination duty carried high pathogen burdens linked to miticide-resistant mites. The practical consequence is straightforward: bees that are sick when they arrive at almond orchards pollinate less effectively, and many die before the season ends, forcing beekeepers to split surviving hives or purchase replacement packages at rising prices.
The USDA’s Honey Bee Colonies data series provides the quarterly census that tracks how these losses aggregate nationally. Prior-year releases available through that portal show the downward trajectory that culminated in the current record. The 55.1% loss rate in 2023-2024 had already alarmed researchers; the subsequent jump to 55.6% confirmed that the problem was accelerating rather than correcting itself.
Gaps in loss data and the next survey to watch
Several important questions remain unanswered. The national survey methodology counts colonies at operations with five or more hives but handles smaller operations differently, collecting annual rather than quarterly data. How those smaller-scale beekeepers are faring in an era of record losses is not yet clear from the published tables. Hobbyists and sideline beekeepers often lack the capital buffers and replacement strategies that large commercial operators can deploy, raising the possibility of unmeasured exits from the sector as repeated winter losses discourage continued participation.
Regional differences are another blind spot. While the quarterly census can show broad geographic patterns, it does not capture microclimates or local management practices that might blunt or intensify mite and virus impacts. Some state extension specialists have reported that operations using integrated pest management approaches-combining careful monitoring, biotechnical controls, and limited chemical use-appear to be weathering the crisis somewhat better. But without standardized, national-scale data on those practices, such observations remain anecdotal.
The current survey cycle, running through April 2026, will be the next major indicator of whether the industry is stabilizing at a high loss plateau or sliding into a deeper crisis. If losses remain above 50% for a third consecutive year, economists warn that more beekeepers may decide that rebuilding each spring is no longer viable. That could translate into fewer colonies available for pollination contracts, especially for crops that bloom early and require large numbers of hives on short notice.
Economic pressure on beekeepers and growers
For beekeepers, the financial math is unforgiving. Replacing a dead colony typically requires either purchasing a new “package” of bees or splitting surviving hives and buying new queens. Both options carry rising costs, particularly when many producers are trying to restock at the same time. Fuel, labor, and equipment expenses add further strain, especially for migratory operations that move thousands of colonies across multiple states each year.
Growers, in turn, face higher pollination fees as beekeepers attempt to recoup their replacement costs. Almond producers, who depend almost entirely on managed honey bees for pollination, are especially exposed. If colony losses continue at current levels, some growers may struggle to secure enough hives at any price, forcing changes in planting decisions or prompting investments in alternative pollination strategies such as self-fertile varieties or habitat enhancements for wild pollinators.
These economic pressures interact with biological risk in ways that can worsen outcomes. When margins shrink, beekeepers may delay or reduce mite treatments, skip equipment upgrades, or cut back on supplemental feeding, all of which can leave colonies more vulnerable to disease and environmental stress. The result is a feedback loop in which high losses drive cost-cutting that, in turn, makes further losses more likely.
What researchers are watching next
Scientists are now focusing on several key questions. One is how quickly Varroa mites are evolving resistance to newer control products and whether combinations of treatments can slow that process. Another is how viral strains circulating in U.S. apiaries are changing over time and whether some variants are becoming more virulent or better adapted to spread within stressed colonies.
USDA ARS teams are also looking beyond chemical controls, exploring breeding strategies for bees that can better tolerate mites or exhibit behaviors such as hygienic brood removal that limit parasite reproduction. Field trials, often described through the agency’s story platform, are testing whether such traits can be scaled up without sacrificing honey production or other desirable characteristics.
At the same time, researchers are urging improvements in data collection. Linking management practices, pathogen loads, and survival outcomes in a standardized way would allow more rigorous testing of hypotheses like miticide rotation, nutritional supplementation, and the role of landscape diversity. Such work would require closer collaboration among federal agencies, universities, and industry groups, as well as new investments in sampling and data infrastructure.
For now, the picture is stark: two consecutive years in which more than half of U.S. honey bee colonies were lost, driven largely by a single parasite and the viruses it carries. Whether the next round of survey results shows stabilization, modest improvement, or further deterioration will help determine if today’s crisis remains a severe but manageable challenge-or the beginning of a more profound restructuring of American pollination agriculture.
More from Morning Overview
*This article was researched with the help of AI, with human editors creating the final content.
