Beemaster's International Beekeeping Forum
BEEKEEPING LEARNING CENTER => TOP BAR HIVES - WARRE HIVES - LONG HIVES => Topic started by: BjornBee on October 25, 2008, 09:06:01 am
-
Seems earlier this year, there was much chatter about the warre hive.
I know there is a site with some followers. But I wanted some feedback from anyone with personal experience, that is not directly involved in promoting or has some slant towards them.
Has anyone thrown one together just for the fun of it? And how did it go? Pitfalls, advantages or comments?
I want to add one for demonstration and learning, but have held back this year. Would like to possibly build one this year, but could care less if this was just a passing fancy and if it will fade out very quickly anyways.
Warre hives have been around hundreds of years, and I think there was renewed interest, for one reason or another. But wanted to hear actual in-field first time experiences and not stuff posted on a website.
Thank you.
-
I started 2 of them this spring. One from a swarm and the other I converted from a langstroth on natural comb. Don't really have much to say yet, just waiting to see how they make it through the winter. They seem to be doing fine, and have low mite drop, but since one was a swarm and the other was on natural comb and untreated for 3 years, I guess I expected it. The hardest part has been to resist the urge to look inside. You get a new perspective of trying to judge only by what you witness at the entrance. It is human nature these days to want instant gratification and opening a hive up you get that. I did give in and did a quick peak on one that I thought might have been queenless since they slowed down. Turned out the queen was just cutting back earlier than the rest. You can definitely feel the heat and smell the scent above the quilt. So far things have been going as expected, but will have a better opinion come spring.
-
Isn't using starter strips on the top of frames in regular Lang frames essentially the same thing? I have several boxes of natural comb started this way. The only difference I see is the 8 frame set up and the quilt. Of course, I may have missed something in that I did not study it closely.
-
Isn't using starter strips on the top of frames in regular Lang frames essentially the same thing? I have several boxes of natural comb started this way. The only difference I see is the 8 frame set up and the quilt. Of course, I may have missed something in that I did not study it closely.
Essentially yes. It does use the concept of under supering or building comb below the existing comb, which is good. This allows the bees to draw brood comb, instead of honey comb above the brood chamber. But it's the way many build comb anyways with standard setup, natural comb, etc. I use this same concept in building natural comb in frames with no foundation.
The whole quilt thing is but yet another way, that has been used over the years in moisture control, and is nothing unique unto itself.
The whole, trapped heat concept is nothing new either. Yes, the concept is one I use, but I don't need an entire new hive design to take advantage of this. It's one of the reasons I do not use top entrances, like the notch in the inner cover. I use upper entrances, but they are different than top entrances.
One of the talking points about the warre hive, is that you should not open the hive but for couple times a year, etc. Which is crap to me in that beekeeping should be fun, educational, and beekeepers should be encouraged to open their hive every once in awhile. The way comb in stacked upon itself while making free hanging comb, makes inspections and opening the hive a real challenge as comb rips apart. It's no wonder you should open it as little as possible. Using under supering, while using natural comb in frames, is easily done with traditional hives with frames.
All the benefits of the Warre hive can be used and duplicated in other type hive arrangements, with better management and more practical arrangements.
But as with all things, beekeepers are always looking for a new mouse trap, something to set themselves apart, or willing to try new things. Yes, the concept and use of the Warre goes back hundreds of years. But there is nothing magical, nothing easier, and nothing worth getting excited about.
I have seen one first hand after much looking. I will be putting one on the farm for others to experience. But I will not be pushing these as some better way of beekeeping and hyping the crap out of them.
-
Isn't using starter strips on the top of frames in regular Lang frames essentially the same thing?
Not at all. Warre hives are square and much smaller so that the cluster can span the whole width of the hive keeping it warm and eliminating condensation. The idea is for the comb to be built to the walls so that there is no dead air space between the hive walls and frames. This dead air space is cooler and causes condensation. Warre and many others feel that the invention of removable frames was perhaps the most detrimental thing man has done for modern beekeeping. But Warre's management principles are just as important has the hive design. Warre's principle is the nest heat, scent, and humidity is the bees strongest defense and that opening up the hive disturbs these aspects of the bees defense and productivity. Warre only suggests opening the top of the hive once a year in the fall to remove excess honey. The remainder of the time all monitoring is done by observing the activity at the entrance. Supering is done from the bottom by lifting the whole hive so not to disturb the nest heat, scent, and humidity. Warre hives and principles are about the closet you are going to get to replicating the conditions of a feral colony.
I have 2 that I started in the spring, and so far they have been quite interesting and I pleased.
-
Robo,
I do not want to get into a debate with you. But maybe as you have time, you can explain the concept of marking queens as it relates to the scent importance of the Warre hive and how this fits into the replication of a feral hive.
-
There is no correlation between marked queens and Warre hives. If one follows Warre's protocol there is no need to mark a queen because you will never see her. If one strictly follows Warre's principles, one must be willing to have hives fail from queen issues just like ferals. You will truly breed "survival of the fittest" and the goal would be that these "fittest" bees would produce "fitter" offsprings and you would capture swarms/make splits at a rate equal or higher than your loss rate. Warre seemed to have no problem with creating increase.
But if one is going to practice continual "look, see, react" beekeeping and react based upon their ability to locate a queen, or try and save a hive with queen issues, than I strongly recommend marked queens.
FWIW, I started one Warre with a marked queen. May be an interesting piece of data if I capture a swarm from it next year and it has a marked queen. At least I know they didn't supersede her. From a human standpoint, the non-existant scent of dried paint pales in comparison to the natural scent of the hive.
On a side note, the hardest part of the Warre method is resisting the urge to open up the hive and take a peek. But, learning to evaluate the condition of the hive by monitoring the activity at the entrance is quite refreshing and relaxing. We as humans have become some conditioned to wanting immediate answers regardless of the consequences. I truly have taken a new perspective on this method of beekeeping.
-
Interesting about the "fittest" comments. One of the points I have read that is with an endless amount of room below the brood chamber by adding a bottom box, that swarming would be suppressed. So, I am a bit confused about a rate of offsprings, etc., in relation to a Warre hive.
My comment about marking, was the fact that Warre had very clear ideas of hive scent. And I do not think that marking queens went into his ideas. I actually do not mark queens as I, like him, have very distinct ideas of hive smell and what constitutes "natural". And for someone to understand what Warre was promoting, it may fly against your "No good reason for unmarked queens", as at least for me, having a queen running around with a paint spot (and yes, giving off an odor) is a bit contradictory.
I admit my beekeeping methods are no more natural than Warre's, in that I do many things that are a bit different than what a hive does in the wild. But Warre, by taking off comb off the top and crushing and straining, is also not allowing the bees to achieve equilibrium as bees often times make comb based not just on need, but by time of the year and flow. I can agree with the benefits of new comb. But if you study how, when and why bees build comb as they do, you may see that taking comb off the top and replacing foundation strips below, may actually throw off the overall comb placement that the bees would naturally build in feral colony's if left completely alone.
I can see many of the benefits of what Warre has promoted. I just would rather have the same benefits or promote his ideas, but perhaps in manners that would allow beekeepers to enjoy, monitor, and take action, more than a single yearly hive inspection. Between mites, SHB, and many other issues that Warre NEVER encountered, I think having beekeepers more in tune with their hive than What Warre calls for, might be best. Taking a way of keeping bees of 200 years ago, and plugging that into today's beekeeping situation, may come with some problems that Warre never even dreamed of.
Getting back to the hive swarming, etc,. as mentioned by you. The hive dimension chosen time and again by swarms, as programmed over millions of years, has been to be a tad larger than a deep standard box. Studies out of Cornell has shown this. So, for anyone to compare the swarming rate, or anything else in regards to "natural" this or that, in keeping bees in one box or another called a Warre hive, all miss badly as to what happens in nature and what bees would do themselves. By bottom supering and expanding the brood chamber, you already are not doing anything close to what would or could be called natural.
As for the genetics part, mother nature actually swarms most colonies 2 or 3 times per season in smaller feral colonies. Mother nature also culls very heavily. To catch a swarm from a hive, even if it's called a warre hive, is no guarantee of better genetics of "fitter bees". Yes, mother nature may take the weakest, but that is done in any hive, whether managed or not, based on many factors. But you do not get in my opinion any better stock by rolling the dice and assuming that better bees will come about due to the type hive you use. If one wants to distinguish differences of non-treating versus treating, and letting bees choose their own queens, than that can be points shown. But to take a colony from a Warre, one from a TBH, and one from a standard hive, and if all kept chem free, if all allowed to raise their own queens, than it could hardly be an advantage of a Warre hive unto itself. Your taking a concept about selection and genetics, and applying it to a Warre hive as an advantage. But that advantage can be given to many hives, without using Warre hives. You do not gain this one advantage by the simply fact you have a Warre hive.
Interesting discussion.
-
Interesting about the "fittest" comments. One of the points I have read that is with an endless amount of room below the brood chamber by adding a bottom box, that swarming would be suppressed. So, I am a bit confused about a rate of offsprings, etc., in relation to a Warre hive.
It has been my observation that the majority of ferals (exception being weak ones) swarm every year regardless of the space they have. Yes they will continue to build the current nest size if room permits, but by nature they will swarm first. It is the natural way of reproduction and required to offset nests that perish.
My comment about marking, was the fact that Warre had very clear ideas of hive scent. And I do not think that marking queens went into his ideas. I actually do not mark queens as I, like him, have very distinct ideas of hive smell and what constitutes "natural".
I won't get into another debate, but we each can pick our own poisons and hopefully respect the others view. My personal thoughts is a spot of dried paint is no worse than the "man made" fondant with highly-processed HFCS that may contain trace amount of pesticides that you feel does not violate your definition of "natural", but we have been through that before.
And for someone to understand what Warre was promoting, it may fly against your "No good reason for unmarked queens", as at least for me, having a queen running around with a paint spot (and yes, giving off an odor) is a bit contradictory.
Looks like you DO want a debate :-P
I admit my beekeeping methods are no more natural than Warre's, in that I do many things that are a bit different than what a hive does in the wild. But Warre, by taking off comb off the top and crushing and straining, is also not allowing the bees to achieve equilibrium as bees often times make comb based not just on need, but by time of the year and flow.
First of all, Warre is not a strict proponent of crush and strain, but does provide descriptions and methods for those with access to an extractor. With Warre's method of under-supering, the bees can build comb just as they would in nature and by whatever catalyst drives them to do so.
I can agree with the benefits of new comb. But if you study how, when and why bees build comb as they do, you may see that taking comb off the top and replacing foundation strips below, may actually throw off the overall comb placement that the bees would naturally build in feral colony's if left completely alone.
All my experience and observations of feral nest has been that if given a choice, they will start at the top and continue to build downwards. If they are obstructed from building downwards, they will then go horizontal.
I can see many of the benefits of what Warre has promoted. I just would rather have the same benefits or promote his ideas, but perhaps in manners that would allow beekeepers to enjoy, monitor, and take action, more than a single yearly hive inspection.
Once again, you are making assumptions about Warre's method. Yes you can do a once a year inspection, but that is not what Warre promotes. One can truely enjoy and monitor the bees as often as one likes WITHOUT disturbing them. Take action assumes we know better than the bees. If one want to get as close to nature as possible, you must let the bees be themselves. Yes this is not for everyone, but I think it is a much better fit for many of our members who are not into the commercialization of the bees and are just looking for that natural balance between human and bees.
There is a book "At the Hive Entrance" by Storch that explains how to evaluate the conditions inside the hive by observing the activities at the entrance. Many folks here enjoy sitting by their hives and observing and find it very peaceful and relaxing. It is entirely different than what we are conditioned to do as beekeepers. There is a certain zen-like quality to it.
Between mites, SHB, and many other issues that Warre NEVER encountered, I think having beekeepers more in tune with their hive than What Warre calls for, might be best. Taking a way of keeping bees of 200 years ago, and plugging that into today's beekeeping situation, may come with some problems that Warre never even dreamed of.
Yup, and all brought onto the bee by man. Funny thing is, it has taken us how many years to come up with small cell or natural cell size as a defense for varroa. I guess Warre was ahead of us on that. What is it so easily discounted that retaining nest conditions wouldn't fight off other issues we see in modern day beekeeping, all of which man induced? Because it is no fun for us unless we can rip inside and look whenever we need the enjoyment?
Getting back to the hive swarming, etc,. as mentioned by you. The hive dimension chosen time and again by swarms, as programmed over millions of years, has been to be a tad larger than a deep standard box. Studies out of Cornell has shown this. So, for anyone to compare the swarming rate, or anything else in regards to "natural" this or that, in keeping bees in one box or another called a Warre hive, all miss badly as to what happens in nature and what bees would do themselves.
Is that by volume or actual dimensions, I haven't seen any of these studies, but would be interested. I don't know about the size of the trees where you live, but the dimensions of the Warre hive better represent the trees in my neck of the woods. Furthermore, Warre recognized the value of a cylindrical shape, but also recognized that it would not be feasible for the average person to construct. He was very clear on this and that his hive is not the "ideal" shape.
By bottom supering and expanding the brood chamber, you already are not doing anything close to what would or could be called natural.
Interesting. My experience with ferals shows that they build from the top down and the brood nest is indeed expanded downward as nectar is stored at the top forcing the brood nest continually downward. Then in winter they consume honey from the bottom up and start the progression downward again when spring comes.
As for the genetics part, mother nature actually swarms most colonies 2 or 3 times per season in smaller feral colonies. Mother nature also culls very heavily. To catch a swarm from a hive, even if it's called a warre hive, is no guarantee of better genetics of "fitter bees". Yes, mother nature may take the weakest, but that is done in any hive, whether managed or not, based on many factors. But you do not get in my opinion any better stock by rolling the dice and assuming that better bees will come about due to the type hive you use.
I was not trying to infer better bees because of the hive used. My point was if you believe that ferals have better survival traits and your goal is to have feral-like bees, then you need to let mother nature take control. If mother nature culls heavily and takes the weakest, then over time what is left?
If one wants to distinguish differences of non-treating versus treating, and letting bees choose their own queens, than that can be points shown. But to take a colony from a Warre, one from a TBH, and one from a standard hive, and if all kept chem free, if all allowed to raise their own queens, than it could hardly be an advantage of a Warre hive unto itself.
How about not disturbing the nest and it conditions? How about framed vs. frameless? That is the main advantage of the Warre.
Your taking a concept about selection and genetics, and applying ti to a Warre hive as an advantage. But that advantage can be given to many hives, without using Warre hives. You do not gain this one advantage by the simply fact you have a Warre hive.
I apologize if I led others to infer that, that was not my intent.
Interesting discussion.
Yes, but it seems to be turning into a debate. I'm not trying to convince anyone that the Warre hive is the "answer" nor do I need/want to debate it. I have chosen to approach it with an open mind and have two Warre hives that I am learning from. People can decide for themselves what they view as important and keep bees as they choose. I'm just putting it out there as an alternate method, if one doesn't agree that is their prerogative. If anyone wants further details on Warre's protocol and my experiences, they know how to contact me.
You can now have the last word ;)
-
Why thank you Robo... :-D
I think the only points I'll add, is that I think you misunderstood my comments about comb placement. I realize bees build from the top down. (and then feed going back up through winter.) My comments were from the angle that after the first season, IF you are placing the comb back on top of the hive come spring, you are essentially just supering the Warre hive, and the advantages of under-supering (for swarm control, etc.) are essentially lost. And for those that plan on taking the top off and expand the chamber by under-supering, you are now not anything close to what the bees built in the first place, as the comb is now moved up, and supered from below.
This of course takes into account the understanding that bees build comb in regards to cell size based on several factors, including time of year, flow, and need. The point being, is for those that will take off the top supers and harvest them by crush and strain, then the comb pattern is drastically changed from what the bees originally built, as to location, etc. Of course for those placing the supers back on the hive after extracting and storing them for the season (The warre hive is to winter in a smaller configuration without supers or extra space) then the advantages under-supering in my opinion are lost to some degree.
So contracting, changing the location of comb, and expanding the hive in the spring, can hardly be called natural. I know some want to call it "more" natural, but that's just semantics at best. None of that happens in feral colonies. So for any claims of natural or simulating feral colony design, is in my opinion hyping and marketing at best.
The studies about swarms were conducted by Dr, Thomas Seeley from Cornell, in the 1970's. Ironically, from the same state you are from.
Picking a debate....not really. I am very flexible to other opinions. Your statement that there is no reason for unmarked queens, leaves no flexibility. And my point is that for a system such as the Warre hive design and what Warre promoted, then marked queens are hardly needed or justified. He had very clear ideas about hive scent and mimicking a natural hive. I Just find it ironic, thats all. Of course we all pick our poisons. I'm just glad you acknowledge it is a poison.... :-D
I'll choose another day to discuss your IMO "assumption" in regards to small cell... :shock:
And of course I will not feel badly if you go last, or continue to discuss..... (afterall, it's not about me or you...it's about others reading an ongoing discussion and learning new viewpoints and expanding their knowledge base.)
-
Wow! It really does look like a good fight brewing. ;)
First, Warre was still experimenting with Langstroth, Layens, Dadant and other hive types during WW-1, so a claim that his hive has been around for hundreds of years is absurd. Let's keep that in mind.
Next, if we actually READ the book, we'll note that he DID experiment with "traditional" framed hives and found his to be better, particularly in terms of winter-stores consumption. (16-20kg stores, Lang; 20-24kg Dadant or Layens, if I remember the numbers correctly; 12-14kg Warre)
Warre was NOT all about "natural" beekeeping, else he would not have had hives, he would have visited the local "bee tree" for his honey. In his book, he continually espouses the benefits of SKEPS even over and above his own hive design. His hive was designed specifically to be as easy to manage (if not more so) as a skep. Its horizontal dimensions, while square instead of round, are very similar to skeps - about 30cm "diameter" with a similar number of combs.
He does state that foulbrood and other diseases - which WERE known at the time, BTW - were very rare in skeps, and more common in framed hives, which is part of why he set out to design his hive. Ease of management while maintaining profitability for the commercial beekeeper and reduction of illness. He believed he had achieved all of these aims and may well have done so - at that time. We, of course, have "new" illnesses since his death. Parasitic mites, CCD and a host of other nastiness plague our hives. Some claim that going back to small or "natural" cell size is The Answer, and this has proven to have merit, but it clearly has not proven to be The Answer as Dee Lusby and others have discovered with their massive losses in the last few years. Others claim "helping" the bees with assortment of chemical inputs is The Answer and, also, have shown us that this is not the one true way. The people's hive is probably also not the One True Way or The Answer or whatever you want, just as TBHs are not The Answer and One True Way.
Incidentally, Warre never wrote about marking queens. Also, while he did touch on it lightly in his book, preserving nest scent was not heavily commented on (see Christ for that). What WAS heavily commented on was preservation of cluster temperature, surface areas needing to be heated for various uses and the benefits of a more narrow hive-body. Remember, bees prefer to eat UP, not sideways. How many of us have found a dead cluster in the spring at the very top of the hive only centimeters away from plentiful stores off to the side? The requirement to search sideways for winter stores is eliminated with a more narrow hive. AND heat bleeds away from the cluster - sideways - INSIDE the hive more slowly.
And, yes, the size of tree boles in my area are more consistent with the Warre horizontal dimensions than any other hive type. In this regard, I do think he got it right in terms of emulation of feral nests. However, it has also been shown time and again that swarms will choose to build a nest ANYWHERE they can fit - gas tanks, gables, chimneys, tree boles, rock hollows, you name it - so that argument really is moot.
-
Incidentally, Warre never wrote about marking queens. Also, while he did touch on it lightly in his book, preserving nest scent was not heavily commented on (see Christ for that). What WAS heavily commented on was preservation of cluster temperature, surface areas needing to be heated for various uses and the benefits of a more narrow hive-body. Remember, bees prefer to eat UP, not sideways. How many of us have found a dead cluster in the spring at the very top of the hive only centimeters away from plentiful stores off to the side? The requirement to search sideways for winter stores is eliminated with a more narrow hive. AND heat bleeds away from the cluster - sideways - INSIDE the hive more slowly.
A good arguement for 8 frame verses 10 frame. I've had bees starve in exactly that senerio too often with 10 frame equipment and never with 8 frame. If they died out due to starvation in an 8 frame it was from lack of stores in relation to cluster size. The cluster size to stores ratio is critical. I've successfully overwintered small clusters in a 2 medium 5 frame nuc configuration. Volume of hive can also be a critical component as the more square the box the more likely it is to find stores at the outer edges in a starved hive.
Warre had a lot of good ideas, but in my experience the "ideal hive" would be an adaptation to 12 inch cubes and stacked 2-3 high and harvested like a TBH. Open bottomed and small vent at the top.
-
PR,
Geesh, has it come to this? Of course Warre hives have not been around hundreds of years. But the concept and the use of hives very similar to what Warre promoted has been. I guess I need to be clear that it was the concept of his hive, and not the actual hives owned by Warre himself, that goes back hundreds of years.
And I'm not debating whether Warre painted queens. Although I guess it's nice that it has been noted that he did not mention it. My comments were along the lines of attempting to keep bees as Warre did, or in some better manner, all the while slapping paint on the back of queens, is a bit contradicted.
As for bees/swarms building in about anything they can find, is not moot. It perhaps shows a lack of suitable old growth habitat. (to which has been seen from anything from bees to eastern blue birds) But like I said, studies, if you would actually read them (I'll follow your lead and assume it not read yet) has clearly shown that bees will favor a specific size hive if adequate options are presented to them.
As for Warre comments about cluster heat and retention, I have been expressing this concept for quite awhile, while having it thrown in my face for years about the cluster NOT heating the hive, etc. Trapped cluster heat, especially in late winter and early spring is used by the bees to their advantage. Oversized hives of very unnatural volumes are detrimental to a hives operation. And it was the same studying of feral hives and swarms, and the studies noted above, that led me to many of the same observations on the matter. I use many of these same concepts, with my other type of hives, even if they are not Warre hives.
Brian, I agree with your 8 frame comments.
-
My comments were from the angle that after the first season, IF you are placing the comb back on top of the hive come spring, you are essentially just supering the Warre hive, and the advantages of under-supering (for swarm control, etc.) are essentially lost. And for those that plan on taking the top off and expand the chamber by under-supering, you are now not anything close to what the bees built in the first place, as the comb is now moved up, and supered from below.
This of course takes into account the understanding that bees build comb in regards to cell size based on several factors, including time of year, flow, and need. The point being, is for those that will take off the top supers and harvest them by crush and strain, then the comb pattern is drastically changed from what the bees originally built, as to location, etc. Of course for those placing the supers back on the hive after extracting and storing them for the season (The warre hive is to winter in a smaller configuration without supers or extra space) then the advantages under-supering in my opinion are lost to some degree.
So contracting, changing the location of comb, and expanding the hive in the spring, can hardly be called natural. I know some want to call it "more" natural, but that's just semantics at best. None of that happens in feral colonies. So for any claims of natural or simulating feral colony design, is in my opinion hyping and marketing at best.
You would always under-super whether you extract or not. Actually the older feral colonies that I have dealt with all seem to abandon the comb at the top over time and move down. I can't say why, whether do to pest robbing honey or just the comb being too old for there liking, but it seems that all these older ferals had just remnants of damaged comb and lots of propolized wax moth cocoons at the top of their nest. So although the comb is not moving per se, the top of the usable comb does change.
Your statement that there is no reason for unmarked queens, leaves no flexibility.
If you had been around here longer, you might understand it and not take it so literal. So many of the "issues" that beginners/hobbyist seem to worry about could be avoided if they only had marked queens. I have no problem if someone elects not to mark their queens, my only point is that it makes the hobbyist/beginners life so much easier. I'm sure you disagree, but hey, people requeening, perceived queenless, queenright hives is good for business. Say that 5 times fast.
I'll choose another day to discuss your IMO "assumption" in regards to small cell... :shock:
You don't have to take that up with me, I'm not a small cell zealot, but there are others here who will surely "discuss" it with you. I'm not here trying to sell anything to anybody. Everyone can choose as they like.
-
>>>>> (Robo) You don't have to take that up with me, I'm not a small cell zealot, but there are others here who will surely "discuss" it with you.
But what fun would that be. :-D I'd rather have you to discuss it. You sound as if you know what your talking about... :shock:
Good for business??? I bet at least 50% of the people who contact me, I talk out of ordering queens AFTER I ask them some basic questions on the phone. It's a nice slant, but if you are suggesting my whole take in suggesting NOT marking queens, is some attempt to increase my business, your dead wrong. Since I turn down at least twice as many orders as I can fill for queens, it's a laughable proposition. But nice try. On the other site, the past two years, with an in place market that would buy any amount of queens posted, I sold two 5 queen lots the past two years. This was from a better than expected queen take and I had a few extra. And I actually had made it a point NOT to seek a market via on-line forums, as they generally are a pain in the butt to deal with, and I openly stated this as such several times. And having an open contract with two large pollination operations to buy any amount of queens I can send them, really makes worrying about some hobbyist marking a queen in some attempt to sell a queen, really laughable.
-
A good arguement for 8 frame verses 10 frame.
Unfortunately, when I ordered my langs two years ago, I got 10-frame instead of the 8-frame boxes I ordered, so I've had to live with what I have since I chose not to completely waste my investment. Freight to Alaska cost more than the woodenware, so I couldn't just send it back and ask for the right stuff. :(
And, yes, I am keeping my Langs around. I actually want to compare performance with the Warre, not switch wholesale to something essentially un-tested.
Warre had a lot of good ideas, but in my experience the "ideal hive" would be an adaptation to 12 inch cubes and stacked 2-3 high and harvested like a TBH. Open bottomed and small vent at the top.
Oddly enough, this very nearly describes the Warre. 30cm square (internal) = about 11 7/8 inches. The height thing is merely due to noticing that 40cm heights often had brood in the bottom of the combs when trying to harvest. Precisely how he decided to cut down to 20cm (+10mm for bar support), as opposed to 30cm is not really explained in his book. Maybe you should build an ideal hive or two and see how they perform as compared to your langs.
My comments were along the lines of attempting to keep bees as Warre did, or in some better manner, all the while slapping paint on the back of queens, is a bit contradicted.
Okay. Sorry for my confusion. As an aside, I never mark my queens. It just seems an awful lot of wasted effort when I can see evidence of her presence by looking for properly laid eggs in the cells or watching for incoming pollen at the entrance. I think finding the queen is stressed too much in beginner books and classes.
As for Warre comments about cluster heat and retention, I have been expressing this concept for quite awhile, while having it thrown in my face for years about the cluster NOT heating the hive, etc. Trapped cluster heat, especially in late winter and early spring is used by the bees to their advantage.
I agree! I agree! While, at the same time, disagree ... sort of. I think the cluster does not heat the whole hive. I do think, however, that when the cluster heats the area it needs to heat, much of that heat escapes into the large amounts of air around the cluster until it reaches some insulative layer such as the wooden wall of the hive. In hives with a small cross-section (round, square, rectangular, trapezoidal, who cares?) less of this heat would be "lost" to the surrounding air which is not intended to be heated. In this sense, it is both true and false that the winter cluster does not heat the whole hive. Escaped (from the cluster) but trapped (by the hive-wall) cluster heat is certainly used by the colony to its advantage. It certainly makes it easier to heat a larger area to raise larger and larger brood patches in. It certainly allows the bees to feed less because they expend less energy maintaining the cluster temperature.
And, while I have not read, in depth, those studies you cited, I did skim them well enough to get the general gist of the papers and I cannot (nor would I) dispute the claims therein.
-
A few questions: ( I am learning and not advancing a position by rhetorical questions, so please do not take this as any challenge to a position or philosophy)
(1) As with many things in beekeeping, I am ignorant of the whole bottom supering issue. I see that a Warre hive would be supered from the bottom. That is, the entire unit is lifted and a new box with bars and strips is inserted into the assembly. To do this with a Lang set up, I would take each box off separately and then restack. I am guessing from your posts that this would be contraindicated with a Warre hive due to damaging comb. Do you recommend unstacking the boxes and restacking or trying to lift the whole assembly as a unit? The latter approach seems like it would be quite heavy.
(2)Is bottom supering with Lang equipment a good idea too? If so, why? Has the common practice of top supering simply been a matter of time and convenience?
(3) Does Brian's 8 frame method address the retained heat issue as well as the access to stores issue? I note that both Brian Bray and Michael Bush both advance natural cell with 8 frame equipment and both post good results. It would seem, at lest in their experience, that the space between the frame and the hive body is not a significant source of heat loss (or at least not a source that has proven detrimental on a widescale basis).
(4) Is there a negative effect of hive heat on the pests and diseases that plague the bees, or is the heat issue simply a matter of keeping them warm and conserving energy?
ps. I will comment on the marked queen thing just for kicks and am wide open for criticism here. I am a new beekeeper and have had an instance of queenlessness and countless occasions of opening the hive, not seeing a queen and then wondering if I am queenless. Robo's position has great merit for me. I would love to able to see that dot when I am tearing into a hive to learn ( a practice I believe Bjorn advances as a good thing to do for folks like me). Perhaps a dot on a queen is no big threat or perhaps it is, but in the end, I feel the relative threat of the paint to the queen versus the threat of me to the bees when I am concerned about not seeing a queen or not learning from my encounters with the queen is small. I hope to grow to the point that I do not need the paint ( I don't have any now, but I wish I did) and then, I will likely follow Bjorn's advice on the subject. Through his marked queen position, Rob is, I believe, simply helping to advance the craft among beginners, and Bjorn is challenging the intermediates to grow beyond the need for the paint. I appreciate you both. Thanks.
-
(1) As with many things in beekeeping, I am ignorant of the whole bottom supering issue. I see that a Warre hive would be supered from the bottom. That is, the entire unit is lifted and a new box with bars and strips is inserted into the assembly. To do this with a Lang set up, I would take each box off separately and then restack. I am guessing from your posts that this would be contraindicated with a Warre hive due to damaging comb. Do you recommend unstacking the boxes and restacking or trying to lift the whole assembly as a unit? The latter approach seems like it would be quite heavy.
[\quote]
It is not so much of damaging comb because you can use a wire to separate supers. It is the whole principle of opening up the hive and disturbing the nest. Warre advocates lifting the stack without disturbing the bees. The Warre hive is much smaller than a Langstroth so it is easier to get your hands around. Warre also recommends supering in the spring when the hive is at it's lightest. Some Warre keepers have built portable lifts to jack the hives and insert new supers underneath.
(2)Is bottom supering with Lang equipment a good idea too? If so, why? Has the common practice of top supering simply been a matter of time and convenience?
Convenience and time are probably the biggest contributors.
(3) Does Brian's 8 frame method address the retained heat issue as well as the access to stores issue? I note that both Brian Bray and Michael Bush both advance natural cell with 8 frame equipment and both post good results. It would seem, at lest in their experience, that the space between the frame and the hive body is not a significant source of heat loss (or at least not a source that has proven detrimental on a widescale basis).
Perhaps not significant, but any dead air space will be cooler than the cluster and the inside of the hive body will collect condensation and then possibly mold. Eight frame does not eliminate this because you still have the dead air space between the frame ends and hive body. This is one reason why some believe frames are detrimental.
(4) Is there a negative effect of hive heat on the pests and diseases that plague the bees, or is the heat issue simply a matter of keeping them warm and conserving energy?
You sure your not looking to stir up another hornets nest ;)
Here is some info to ponder -> http://forum.beemaster.com/index.php/topic,16851.0.html
My observation has been that I have never come across a single feral colony that wasn't sealed up tight except for an entrance. Of course I can't say it is solely for heat retention, it could be a combination of things like scent and humidity, or even something we don't even know about.
-
Good for business???
I admit that was a little pretentious on my part. Sometimes I get a little worked up in these discussions :roll:
I still maintain that a marked queen reduces a lot the stress and issues for the beginner/hobbyist and the bees.
-
Brian,
I'll address #4, as I will type a book tackling all 4 at one time...and who wants that.... :roll:
There is not a negative affect on the pests and diseases directly. But it does effect them in so many ways.
First let me say this....
I have studied many feral colonies, and what many have in common is a smaller cavity than what we keep. (If they have a choice, then they will select smaller cavities over larger ones. But I think a lack of old growth trees and a loss of habitat does effect that in that they take what they can get sometimes) They also (again, shown in studies) favor a bottom entrance. In feral colonies, (where beekeepers do not have the opportunity to break the propolis seal every week) they will have the upper part of the chamber sealed tight. Keeping in mind that the R-value in most large old growth forest trees (the ones that probably programmed the bees over millions of years, keeping mind bees came from traditional warmer climates years ago) is more than the 3/4 inch wood we build hives with, and the benefit and advantage of this trapped heat is much greater than what we provide them in our hives. (which is why in theory, I think Warre was correct about heat loss. Although I disagree about opening the hive in summer when it is 90 degrees and claims that this hurts the hive, etc, as Warre claimed or suggested)
So this heat, from an early timeframe of the year is used by the bees to save resources, maintain a larger brood area, and raise new bees faster. *And for anyone who raises nucs, it can easily be seen by taking two frames of bees and placing them into a five frame nuc, and another two frames in a ten frame box. The two frames will expand to 5 frames much faster in the five frame nuc. And it all has to do with the smaller area of the box and the benefits of that trapped heat.
That heat is also shown by the benefits and advantages in things like hive placement. Again, studies have shown that hives in full sun, and in the morning sun in particular, will be more productive, have less stress diseases such as SAC, chalk, etc. The sooner the cluster can break, the faster they can get on with their duties of the hive. Many think that is just nectar collection and foraging. But those duties also include housecleaning, grooming, pest removal, etc. Full sun hives will work early in the morning, later in the evening, earlier in the spring, and later in the fall.
Hives that can not expand fast enough in spring, and must concentrate on duties such as prolonged heating of the cluster and brood, will be less productive, have more pest issues, and have more disease issues on average.
There is a reason why nature has bees go up in the winter and not down. By looking at the natural size of the cavity that bees prefer, this allows the bees to be in a position come late winter and early spring, to best take advantage of this trapped heat, and to utilize it's benefits. That is why having extra boxes, and empty comb, above the brood chamber is not a good idea. And neither is having unnatural amounts of extra boxes of honey, while thinking you are doing them a favor. (another point that Warre was correct about, in having the bees overwinter in smaller volume hives - which is in line with feral colonies and what nature has selected.
The bees are designed or programmed to use much of what they store, be at the top of the chamber come late winter, benefit from trapped heat, and be in a position to raise unlimited amounts of brood as they expand downwards, while storing honey above. And it is the beekeeper that feeds way beyond whats needed, and uses poor manipulation management, that screws all this up. I'm not against doing manipulations, but with the knowledge of what the bees are telling you or have shown you, I think understanding this should be used to a beekeepers advantage.
Warre was correct about hive heat, trapped heat, and such. I just do not take it to the point that opening the hive is as detrimental as Warre suggested. I agree with his concepts of what he has seen in nature, just disagree with his practical approach and what he calls for.
I'm not suggesting that mites will be handled by the mere fact that you have Warre hive. But if you understand the benefits that he was stating (keep in mind - He had NO mites), and couple these IPM strategies, and add others such as Brood breaks, the benefits of young queens, having the best stock you can, and eliminating detrimental issues that many times are just beekeeper ignorance induced....together, they all add up to a beekeeping experience that is successful, and rewarding....and many times outside the box of traditional treatments and the yearly loss that many experience.
Someone once posted photos of infrared pictures of a hive. It clearly had shown the hive cluster position and the outside cluster temp. as well as the trapped heat at the top of the hive. Maybe someone knows where to find these pictures.
And why there is a need for someone to distinguish whether bees purposely heat the hive, or the heat is a byproduct of convenience, is lost on me. The fact is, bees use trapped heat to their advantage, they seek out smaller cavities if given a choice, many time seal the top shut, and are in a position dictated by selection criteria over millions of years, to take advantage of this trapped heat, giving them the best chance to fight disease, raise more brood, be more productive and maintain hive health. It seems a bit more than by chance, that this happens. And it should not be minimized by suggesting they do not do this intentionally. They can not do it because of beekeeper induced situations they can not overcome, but if they had their way, using their own created trapped heat is clearly shown to be an item they understand and use to the fullest extent.
Hope this helps.
-
Good for business???
I admit that was a little pretentious on my part. Sometimes I get a little worked up in these discussions :roll:
I still maintain that a marked queen reduces a lot the stress and issues for the beginner/hobbyist and the bees.
Worked up :? Maybe I can give you a few pointers on being laid back... :-D Some say, I get worked up, but they are fools I tell you...Fools! :-P
Proper technique, finding eggs instead of the queen, and inspecting enough to know if you have queen cells, is all good things, that can lower stress regardless of whether one has a marked queen or not. I personally do not buy into the whole "Inspect once a year or your stressing your bees" ideas. I promote opening up the hive and knowing whats going on. If it helps a new beekeeper find queens, than marking is good. My point in all this is to highlight IF marking queens is good, when little is known of the products we use, grab off shelves, etc. I agree that queens are easier to find if marked, and I like that. I spend much time finding queens. But not at the expense of queen or hive health, to which I am not convince it does not harm.
-
(http://www.beebehavior.com/beeimages/hives/woodhives/infrared_hives.jpg)
http://forum.beemaster.com/index.php/topic,6699.msg39618.html#msg39618
-
Thanks Robo.
-
(1) ... the entire unit is lifted and a new box with bars and strips is inserted into the assembly. To do this with a Lang set up, I would take each box off separately and then restack. I am guessing from your posts that this would be contraindicated with a Warre hive due to damaging comb. Do you recommend unstacking the boxes and restacking or trying to lift the whole assembly as a unit?
Lift the whole thing as a unit and place empty boxes beneath. Remember, this is done in the spring before honey is laid up, so you are only lifting some boxes, wax and the early spring cluster. I do not recommend trying this in July without some sort of mechanical aide. Also remember that a Warre box is approximately 1/3 the size of a Lang deep and proportionately less heavy and the smaller cross-section makes it much easier to grasp.
(2)Is bottom supering with Lang equipment a good idea too? If so, why? Has the common practice of top supering simply been a matter of time and convenience?
Probably time and convenience. It will not hurt to bottom super. Some will tell you that the left-over cacoon from brood raising will somehow "taint" the honey - and this may be the case if you chemically treat your hives in the spring!!! - but if so, only the most discerning palates will notice.
(3) Does Brian's 8 frame method address the retained heat issue as well as the access to stores issue? I note that both Brian Bray and Michael Bush both advance natural cell with 8 frame equipment and both post good results. It would seem, at lest in their experience, that the space between the frame and the hive body is not a significant source of heat loss (or at least not a source that has proven detrimental on a widescale basis).
The eight-frame lang equipment does not PURPOSELY address the heat issue, because it is commonly thought that there is NO heat issue regarding cavity size. It does reduce the cross-sectional area of the hive considerably (approx 20%) and therefore does affect the internal heat. It should be noted that many beeks find it easier to overwinter in nucs than full-size hives, particularly in colder climates.
(4) Is there a negative effect of hive heat on the pests and diseases that plague the bees
Yes! It has been shown (sorry, can't find the paper, but I will and will post it up later) that a warmer brood chamber DOES adversely affect V. Destructor reproduction. Also, this advantageous heat condition quite likely reduces colony "stress" (however you define it) which lowers the risk of other dis-eases reaching dangerous levels of expression - DO note, however, that almost every known bee "illness" is already inside almost every hive and you only have to worry if it/they reach epidemic proportions.
-
Yes! It has been shown (sorry, can't find the paper, but I will and will post it up later) that a warmer brood chamber DOES adversely affect V. Destructor reproduction.
Found it. Harris et al, Journal of Environmental Entomology 32(6): 1305-1312 (2003) (http://www.culturaapicola.com.ar/apuntes/sanidad/varroa/495-Harris.pdf)
from the Abstract:
... residual error reflected most of the total variation in r7, which suggested possible climatic or environmental effects on mite growth. The lowest growth rates occurred in three consecutive years of substantial drought in Louisiana. Measures of ambient temperature and relative humidity correlated to growth of mite populations among different years. Reduced growth rates were probably the result of diminished reproductive rates by varroa mites during periods of hot and dry weather.
I do not believe - or at least have not been able to find - any research attempting to separate the importance of temperature or moisture on mite reproductive levels.
-
I like this thread.
Having thought about it, I've decide that my ideal hive would be a 2 ft section of 12 inch conduit with a bottom entrance. The frame bars would be made much like those in a TBH only with a wooden hoop that looked like an elongated upside down stirrup (a U with a topbar). Bee space would be maintained and harvesting would be by crush and strain on the outer frames. The comb orientation would also be more like what is found in nature.
In such a configuration I would expect to have about 6 frames (1 3/4 inches wide) with the bees cluster near the top. This as close as I can come to what one finds in a hollow tree. They would enter and pull stores from the bottom up. The open bottom would allow pests and housecleaning to be more automatic and less stressful for the bees.
If the hive were built on rocket ship legs a smaller section 1 ft high could be used for harvesting of honey. It would be attached to the bottom to insure that the bees would have enough stores before they made some for the caretaker.
Comments?
-
Comments?
Personally, I would go with shorter sections, say 8", and do away with the "U" shaped frames which reduces the complexity to build and lets the bees secure the wax to the walls.
Here is some more stuff to ponder -> http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fruche-warre.levillage.org%2FRuche%2520ronde.htm&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&sl=fr&tl=en
-
Comments?
Personally, I would go with shorter sections, say 8", and do away with the "U" shaped frames which reduces the complexity to build and lets the bees secure the wax to the walls.
Here is some more stuff to ponder -> http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fruche-warre.levillage.org%2FRuche%2520ronde.htm&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&sl=fr&tl=en
The link was much appreciated, thanks.
If it weren't for the requirement in almost every state to keep bees in hives with removeable frames I would porbably agree with you but I believe the ability (really the necessity) of being able to inspect the inter-most sanctums of the hive is too important to discard. I'm thinking of getting one of the concrete interlocking conduits that are about 3 feet long and building frames to hang in it and test out the theory a bit more. What would be really neat would be to find some large sized clear plastic cylinders and build an observation hive that could be wrapped during the winter.
-
Going beyond the report listed in PR post, you can find much information on heat, and the relationship it plays in mite reproduction.
A couple things....
Heat has been shown to effect mite reproduction. Even a slight one or two degrees increase from normal hive temps can reduce mite levels.
A hive that can not properly heat the brood area due to a number of reasons, can have a dramatic effect in increases of mite populations.
Don't confuse studies that focus on "heat" in attempts to control mites, and other research that focuses on brood temps, hot summers, and other data. They are not the same.
The report mentioned above does in fact take into account a hotter summer, but this is also coupled with drought and humidity issues. The report makes assumptions, and one should keep this in mind. Was it the drought and hotter summer that suppressed brood production from a lack of nectar, which in turn effected mite populations? Or was other internal factors at play. It is hard to say.
Warre, understood the benefits of a warm hive. It had little to do with benefits from heat above the normal hive temps maintained by bees, but perhaps more about diminishing the negative impacts of poor hive design and beekeeper management, and allowing bees to better cope with maintaining this heat.
I think many make assumptions that there is some "advantageous heat condition" that one can achieve by hive design. But bees are rather well skilled at maintaining a core brood chamber temp with little variation. And nobody has been able to show a practical way of increasing temps above what the bees normally desire. As the summer progresses, bees in any hive are moving downward, into the lower chambers where it is cooler. Heat that could really effect mites are at the top of the hive. (Anyone for top brood chambers and under-supering? :-D )
Yes, there are studies that show heat levels that can effect mite reproduction. But it's not like there is any way to increase a brood core temp above what the bees want. You will just make the bees work that much harder in cooling the hive. But if you do everything to allow the bees to maintain PR0PER hive temps, then you are ahead of the curve.
Go back to Warre's days. Or even ten years ago. Every book out there mention afternoon shade for the ease to the beekeeper in working hives. Some even mentioned working bees early morning due to "slow" bees. No consideration on the impact of location in regards to sun/shade or anything was was given, or the dangers of opening a hive in cool weather. What Warre realized, was that MAINTAINING brood temps correctly, was a huge part of having healthy bees. And keep in mind, this was BEFORE mites were even ever heard of.
Going out designing new hives may be easier for bees in the sense they can maintain proper brood temps. But I am not convinced you need too. The report above has shown in hot summer with drought and low humidity, the same benefits of lower mites can be seen in traditional hive arrangements, as they all had standard hives. It's really a message about what NOT to do, as compared to making suggestions of what TO do.
This of course will fly in the face of people who promote unlimited brood chambers, people who promote checkerboarding, those that promote upper entrances, and those that reverse hive chambers, to name a few. Sometimes it may work, and other times, especially for those that do not understand the importance of "maintained" hive heat, it can be a real negative for the bees to overcome.
What Warre was saying, is quit all the manipulations and CRAP! Bees will regulate hive temps, and be healthier if your not doing stupid things trying to always build a better mousetrap. Understanding the importance of the hive temps, how this effects hive health, and how to use this knowledge on keeping better bees, is what the message should be. The bees do their part, if you allow them too! And everyone does not need to run out and design new hives to take advantage of these points that Warre made.
-
What Warre was saying, is quit all the manipulations and CRAP! Bees will regulate hive temps, and be healthier if your not doing stupid things trying to always build a better mousetrap. Understanding the importance of the hive temps, how this effects hive health, and how to use this knowledge on keeping better bees, is what the message should be. The bees do their part, if you allow them too! And everyone does not need to run out and design new hives to take advantage of these points that Warre made.
I realize all of that and agree, but I like the idea of trying to imitate a bee tree, especially in an observational format. Not trying to prove anything, just trying to learn something new.
-
What Warre was saying, is quit all the manipulations and CRAP! Bees will regulate hive temps, and be healthier if your not doing stupid things trying to always build a better mousetrap. Understanding the importance of the hive temps, how this effects hive health, and how to use this knowledge on keeping better bees, is what the message should be. The bees do their part, if you allow them too! And everyone does not need to run out and design new hives to take advantage of these points that Warre made.
I realize all of that and agree, but I like the idea of trying to imitate a bee tree, especially in an observational format. Not trying to prove anything, just trying to learn something new.
I agree Brian. I keep as many types of hives as I can. I was trying to point out for those who think that one must have a Warre hive to take advantage of what Warre was suggesting, is not really needed. The same concepts can be applied and benefited from, in other hives. One can always argue the good, better, best points of one design or another. I'm just hoping that regardless of what type hives one has, the concepts and practical information that Warre taught, remains the same, and can be gained from.
I'll be putting one in this spring. Not because I'll be pushing them. But because they will be a great educational tool and others may be able to better understand the concepts, and perhaps apply the concepts to their own hives, regardless of type.
What I find amazing is that many of the same concepts have been spoken about by others and even myself for awhile. But sometimes you just feel others just think your crazy. But drag out some writings from a guy that's been dead awhile....and people actually listen..... :-D I, in no way feel one must adhere to the once a year opening of the hive that Warre promoted. And I guess some think on one hand I'm against Warre hives, as I have been outspoken about them. But it's the concepts and information that Warre gave us that I think is the true value.
-
Comments?
Personally, I would go with shorter sections, say 8", and do away with the "U" shaped frames which reduces the complexity to build and lets the bees secure the wax to the walls.
Here is some more stuff to ponder -> http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fruche-warre.levillage.org%2FRuche%2520ronde.htm&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&sl=fr&tl=en
The link was much appreciated, thanks.
If it weren't for the requirement in almost every state to keep bees in hives with removeable frames I would porbably agree with you but I believe the ability (really the necessity) of being able to inspect the inter-most sanctums of the hive is too important to discard. I'm thinking of getting one of the concrete interlocking conduits that are about 3 feet long and building frames to hang in it and test out the theory a bit more. What would be really neat would be to find some large sized clear plastic cylinders and build an observation hive that could be wrapped during the winter.
this has been posted before but it is cool
(http://www.badassbees.com/roundobs/mtdomeend.jpg) 8-) RDY-B
-
OB hive :-D
-
(1) As with many things in beekeeping, I am ignorant of the whole bottom supering issue. I see that a Warre hive would be supered from the bottom. That is, the entire unit is lifted and a new box with bars and strips is inserted into the assembly. To do this with a Lang set up, I would take each box off separately and then restack. I am guessing from your posts that this would be contraindicated with a Warre hive due to damaging comb. Do you recommend unstacking the boxes and restacking or trying to lift the whole assembly as a unit? The latter approach seems like it would be quite heavy.
Warré "supering" from the bottom, a remarkable oxymoronic phrase, might better be termed sub-extension, or maybe just "subbing" for short. The Warré-Thür school is concerned mostly with non-disruption of the internal hive environment, Nestduftwärmebindung in German, literally hive-scent-warmth-binding. Understanding the importance of this concept is 100% vital to success in all methods of beekeeping, and in providing clues about how frame-based keeping is always full of kluges and contrivances to make up for its most basic flaws. Damaging the comb would be major trauma to be sure, but allowing nest scent and heat to escape through incessant vivisection is just as bad.
(2)Is bottom supering with Lang equipment a good idea too? If so, why? Has the common practice of top supering simply been a matter of time and convenience?
The Warré hive is a good compromise between bee-suitability and beekeeper manageability. The Langstroth and all similar wide, flat hives AND the management pathologies they engender are fatally flawed in that they mostly disregard the centrality of Nestduftwärmebindung.
(3) Does Brian's 8 frame method address the retained heat issue as well as the access to stores issue? I note that both Brian Bray and Michael Bush both advance natural cell with 8 frame equipment and both post good results. It would seem, at lest in their experience, that the space between the frame and the hive body is not a significant source of heat loss (or at least not a source that has proven detrimental on a widescale basis).
The whole small-cell/natural-cell controversy disappears when the colony is permitted to build and manage its own comb. Next issue?
(4) Is there a negative effect of hive heat on the pests and diseases that plague the bees, or is the heat issue simply a matter of keeping them warm and conserving energy?
Colonies thrive on heat and maintaining the internal pheromonal milieu. Parasites and diseases flourish in the drafty framed hive.
ps. I will comment on the marked queen thing just for kicks and am wide open for criticism here. I am a new beekeeper and have had an instance of queenlessness and countless occasions of opening the hive, not seeing a queen and then wondering if I am queenless. Robo's position has great merit for me. I would love to able to see that dot when I am tearing into a hive to learn ( a practice I believe Bjorn advances as a good thing to do for folks like me). Perhaps a dot on a queen is no big threat or perhaps it is, but in the end, I feel the relative threat of the paint to the queen versus the threat of me to the bees when I am concerned about not seeing a queen or not learning from my encounters with the queen is small...
Why is there a "love" of constantly getting in the queen's face, and of the disruption of the queen-attendant-brood space? If you reread Warré you'll find that regular management of this kind is the enemy of colony health, and is wholly unnecessary if one reads the external signs of being queenright.
-
The whole quilt thing is but yet another way, that has been used over the years in moisture control, and is nothing unique unto itself. ... The whole, trapped heat concept is nothing new either. Yes, the concept is one I use, but I don't need an entire new hive design to take advantage of this.
One of the talking points about the warre hive, is that you should not open the hive but for couple times a year, etc. Which is crap to me in that beekeeping should be fun, educational, and beekeepers should be encouraged to open their hive every once in awhile. The way comb in stacked upon itself while making free hanging comb, makes inspections and opening the hive a real challenge as comb rips apart. It's no wonder you should open it as little as possible. Using under supering, while using natural comb in frames, is easily done with traditional hives with frames.
Sheesh, where to start...
1) “To avert the injurious effects of dampness or condensed moisture in common wooden hives, Christ recommends removing the top or cover in September, substituting a straw mat for it, and then laying the top or cover thereon.” (ABJ v1 n1, Jan. 1861, p.22). Dzierzon also anticipated the bufferbox by adding a straw “cap” atop the hive to mitigate the internal condensation problem.
Fine, that was 147 years ago. But I have not run across the common use of moisture-buffer / insulation cap aka "quilt" promoted for standard Lang or National hives. Maybe someone could provide references, links to pictures, or commercial web pages demonstrating just how widespread Lang quilts are.
2) Benign neglect of the Warré hive but for twice-yearly visits is not a side-effect of non-Alles-in-Ordnung comb organization or fragility. Natural comb OTOH is a consequence of non-framed, naturalistic design.
"... beekeepers should be encouraged to open their hive every once in awhile". It is unsupportable, given evidence of the negative consequences of chronic hive opening. Warré recognized this over 90 years ago without scientific evidence.
Splaying open the Bien like some vivisected animal every two weeks may qualify as "fun" for some sadists or obtuse agriculturalists, but any observant beek knows it is anything but good fun for the Bien itself.
3) It's put up or shut up time again: show us in any orthodox beek manual or reference that "under-supering" is common, advantageous, or preferred to the unnatural but commonest top-supering practice. If under-supering is practiced, exactly which problem is it supposed to solve? Why would top-supering be performed at all then?
4) You claim awareness of trapped heat, yet you think nothing of letting it and the hive scent dissipate frequently. If awareness doesn't alter behavior, what good is it?
5) As for "talking point", how about the dozen-odd diseases, parasites, and pathologies that framed beekeeping engender and encourage?
-
The whole quilt thing is but yet another way, that has been used over the years in moisture control, and is nothing unique unto itself. ... The whole, trapped heat concept is nothing new either. Yes, the concept is one I use, but I don't need an entire new hive design to take advantage of this.
One of the talking points about the warre hive, is that you should not open the hive but for couple times a year, etc. Which is crap to me in that beekeeping should be fun, educational, and beekeepers should be encouraged to open their hive every once in awhile. The way comb in stacked upon itself while making free hanging comb, makes inspections and opening the hive a real challenge as comb rips apart. It's no wonder you should open it as little as possible. Using under supering, while using natural comb in frames, is easily done with traditional hives with frames.
Sheesh, where to start...
1) “To avert the injurious effects of dampness or condensed moisture in common wooden hives, Christ recommends removing the top or cover in September, substituting a straw mat for it, and then laying the top or cover thereon.” (ABJ v1 n1, Jan. 1861, p.22). Dzierzon also anticipated the bufferbox by adding a straw “cap” atop the hive to mitigate the internal condensation problem.
Fine, that was 147 years ago. But I have not run across the common use of moisture-buffer / insulation cap aka "quilt" promoted for standard Lang or National hives. Maybe BjornBee could put up or shut up and provide references, links to pictures, or commercial web pages demonstrating just how widespread Lang quilts are.
2) Benign neglect of the Warré hive but for twice-yearly visits is not a side-effect of non-Alles-in-Ordnung comb organization or fragility. Natural comb OTOH is a consequence of non-framed, naturalistic design.
"... beekeepers should be encouraged to open their hive every once in awhile" is a cr*p statement to me and many others. It is unsupportable, given evidence of the negative consequences of chronic hive opening. Warré recognized this over 90 years ago without scientific evidence.
Splaying open the Bien like some vivisected animal every two weeks may qualify as "fun" for some sadists or obtuse agriculturalists, but any observant beek knows it is anything but good fun for the Bien itself.
3) It's put up or shut up time again: show us in any orthodox beek manual or reference that "under-supering" is common, advantageous, or preferred to the unnatural but commonest top-supering practice. If under-supering is practiced, exactly which problem is it supposed to solve? Why would top-supering be performed at all then?
4) You claim awareness of trapped heat, yet you think nothing of letting it and the hive scent dissipate frequently. If awareness doesn't alter behavior, what good is it?
5) As for "talking point", how about the dozen-odd diseases, parasites, and pathologies that framed beekeeping engender and encourage?
Now who could this be? Anyone with sore toes from a past conversation perhaps?
My days of responding "in-kind" to such posts are behind me.
I'll mention a few things, keeping it on the light side.... :-D
One, I post my website, which has my address, and everything about me, my operation, etc. I have an open house every year, hold a picnic open to the public, extend invitations for others to partake in queen evaluation days, and openly invite anyone interested, to stop by, ask questions and look at anything they want. I do not hide behind a fake name on a forum, taking shots at people. I "put up" everytime I am asked, and invite people to see everything I do, say, and experience. Every year, I have hundreds of people see what I'm talking about. Can you say the same?
Two, I have used sawdust, newspaper, obsorbent particle board and even grass, in playing around with ways to control or minmize moisture issues. Now, I have never claimed to use a "quilt", and never made a quilt as per Warre protocol. I'll see what I can do about a picture when the snow melts. But you act as if nobody has ever tried these things before, and use the excuse that since there are no commercial models being sold, you have the right to assume nobody ever did anything close to what Warre called for. Wrong.... ;)
Three, Please provide a list of the 12 parasites and diseases that the Warre hive is completely immune from? Better yet, as you mentioned, list the ones that are encouraged by the use of frames?
Four, I withhold further comments since I think asking questions or replying to members who feel that references to sadists and obtuse agriculturalists is called for, against those that open their hives twice a week.
Like many things, whether beekeeping, environmental issues, PETA, or anything else...there are a few that take it so far to the extreme, that common sense, respect for others, and descent conversation is lost on any attempt at dialog. And it turns otherwise interested people off. I do not feel anyone is a sadist if they open a hive beyond what Warre called for. I would not even call a fellow beekeeper a sadist for those that use chemicals that I so adamantly comment on. But I guess that's where common sense and ignorance collide. A real shame.
I need to keep reading #3 again. I think you lost me.
Have a wonderful day.
-
>3) It's put up or shut up time again: show us in any orthodox beek manual or reference that "under-supering" is common, advantageous, or preferred to the unnatural but commonest top-supering practice. If under-supering is practiced, exactly which problem is it supposed to solve? Why would top-supering be performed at all then?
The fact that under supering and top supering exist as terms should be a clue. The concept is discussed often on beekeeping forums and in beekeeping magazines since the 1800's and up to today. I heard several people discussing it at the Utah Beekeepers Association meeting and was just reading "Mastering the Art of Beekeeping" by Oromond Abei and he was a big proponent of under supering. He also holds the Guiness book of world records for the most honey from a one queen hive.
Those who are in favor of over supering believe it doesn't make enough difference to be worth lifting all those boxes.
Those who are in favor of under supering believe it does a better job of keeping them from swarming and incites them to work harder.
I'm sure the location of the entrance has an effect on the results as does the use or lack of a queen excluder.
-
One, I post my website, which has my address,... I have an open house every year, hold a picnic open to the public, extend invitations for others to partake in queen evaluation days, and openly invite anyone interested, to stop by,... I do not hide behind a fake name on a forum, taking shots at people. I "put up" everytime I am asked, and invite people to see everything I do, say, and experience. Every year, I have hundreds of people see what I'm talking about. Can you say the same?
I was of course taken to task by this forum's omniscient Moderator about my apparently injudicious comments. I hereby apologize to any and all who were offended.
I do not hide or spoof my identity, BTW; I consider the facts, evidence and ideas I present relevant here, not my personal bio. As for taking shots, seems to me that opening salvo was that of calling unorthodox (for now) hives and management styles /excrement/.
...I have used sawdust, newspaper, obsorbent particle board and even grass, in playing around with ways to control or minmize moisture issues. Now, I have never claimed to use a "quilt", and never made a quilt as per Warre protocol. I'll see what I can do about a picture when the snow melts. But you act as if nobody has ever tried these things before, and use the excuse that since there are no commercial models being sold, you have the right to assume nobody ever did anything close to what Warre called for. Wrong....
Yes, but I rely on evidence, the more recent and scientifically obtained, reviewed, and reproducible, the better, to inform my views and actions. Commercial mags like ABJ provide up-to-date ads and articles/tutorials about standard equipment and practice; those, and latest the ABC & XYZ edition do not mention quilts or vTBHs like Warrés despite their long use... just not in the USA I guess, but that is changing rapidly lately (I have four 3-box Warrés waiting for the spring).
I've found no evidence, and I've looked far & wide, that "quilts" have ever made it into long-term usage in the framed-hive milieu, hence my incredulity at the initial claim that "The whole quilt thing is but yet another way, that has been used over the years..." I just can't find the evidence -- please provide if I've overlooked something.
And I'll restate that a solution to the moisture problem was presented a century and a half ago, yet was evidently never widely adopted; was it incompatible with framed equipment, Langstroth-style management philosophy, or both? Dunno...
Three, Please provide a list of the 12 parasites and diseases that the Warre hive is completely immune from? Better yet, as you mentioned, list the ones that are encouraged by the use of frames?
Anecdotal evidence from regions where unframed hives, more specifically Warré types, are deployed suggests a 90% lower varroa loading in Warrés compared to Nationals or Langstroth hives, all else equal. The no-URL restriction on this forum for newbees prohibits me from posting links or even trying to get around the ban. Many of the sites are in German and French, and foreign-language forums don't necessarily show up in standard searches.
Again, I look for evidence that is suggestive and consistent. Demands for "proof" and completely incontrovertible evidence fall into the straw man fallacy and are naturally unanswerable.
...I do not feel anyone is a sadist if they open a hive beyond what Warre called for. I would not even call a fellow beekeeper a sadist for those that use chemicals that I so adamantly comment on...
Okay, so I regretfully chose the wrong word; my bad. Sadists are aware they cause pain and trauma & obtain pleasure from it. Conventional beeks OTOH may merely be unaware that frequent hive opening is quite stressful and has long-lasting negative impacts on the colony.
Then again they might even be somewhat aware, and I'll own that many orthodox beeks do try to minimize chilling & outgassing damage by choosing the best time of day & weather. Warrés are superior in this respect, with no special care having to be taken by the beek due to the construction of the hive itself, and to the different management protocol it demands.
But if there be another means of obtaining intelligence, like being queenright, such a low-impact method that does not rely on total hive opening can find a place in an updated managament style. A Warré beek in principle may never see the queen, nor care to. Langstroth-epoch frames and management facilitate, no, demand or make inevitable regular hive opening, comb-swapping, and all the rest.
In keeping bees, there are obviously other ways (i.e., they exist); perhaps they are better, have something to learn from, and are deserving of attention, not summary dismissal, is all I'm saying.
I'll ask readers and the Moderator to please note that I have presented my arguments and mild defenses in non-accusatory, non-confrontational phraseology. If, despite my contrition and toned-down presentation of ideas and challenges, what I write still be somehow inconsistent with the Forum bylaws, or worse, unpalatable to those of greater standing who hold more conventional views, then fine, I'll accept banishment and bow out.
-
atemp2,
Ok, first it was stated as clear as cast in concrete that 12 disease, parasites and/or disease are seen with using framed hives. That apparently Warre hives were immune to them.
Now the conversation takes a quick "stage left" when asked to list them. I figured as much. You didn't need to use the excuse that it was "anecdotal" or that some list is magically hidden and unobtainable since there is some language barrier or the fact that you can not post a link.
I figured as much. This is where it normally goes. Just thought I would play along.
Figuring you have ample time to post lengthy posts, I see no reason that typing out 12 tiny disease and parasites that you now have mentioned, is too much to ask.
When you can not list a few disease and parasites, then it also throws into question about everything else you say. But that's just my opinion.
So your telling me, just to be clear....that there is no way you can list the 12 parasite/disease issues you reference? Unbelievable.
____________________________________________
MB, I hear what your saying. And we can always discuss the benefits or advantages of one or the other way of supering. I actually agree and understand many of the points that Warre made. I think they are great items to discuss. But it's this same old "do this" and "every bee problem known to exist will be eliminated" that seems to never end. And it further irritates me when asking for some basic information, from the people who are so quick to condemn others, and those questions are not clearly answered, beyond excuses.
I am more interesting in discussing these fantastic claims of no disease or parasites, based on a colony occupying a Warre hive. Or better yet, that frames encourage at least 12 disease and parasites that are not seen with a Warre hive.
-
Inner covers are still called "quilt boards" many places and cloth quilts were in common usage as inner covers from at least the 1800's that I can find. Try looking at those books on Cornell's web site:
http://bees.library.cornell.edu/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=bees;idno=5017286
I'm sure there is a mention in some of them of quilts. I know it's in some of the old books I have around here. I've seen pictures of them posted on some of the forums in the past by people still using them in Langstroth hives. I've been using cloth inner covers on mating nucs for several years. Michael Palmer uses them as well.
-
3) It's put up or shut up time again: show us in any orthodox beek manual or reference that "under-supering" is common, advantageous, or preferred to the unnatural but commonest top-supering practice. If under-supering is practiced, exactly which problem is it supposed to solve? Why would top-supering be performed at all then?
This practice has served me well in the production of Comb Honey-there are other techniques that involve a rotation of suppers -but it is just a variation of bottom supering-(source HONEY IN THE COMB by EUGENE E KILLION)-I dont know much about warre hives-but it sounds like keeping bees in a gum log - ;) 8-) RDY-B
-
What a thread. Cindi
-
I used to know several beekeepers who had recycled old used comforters from the bedroom into inner quilts for the tops of their hives back in the 50's & 60's. I can name three off the top of my head, Albert Girsch, Clayton Turnipseed, and Harold Lange. I earned a bit from all three of those men, they were the respected experts in Western Washington back then, 2 served as my mentors (Girsch and Turnipseed) and the term inner cover and quilt is still used interchangabley by some beekeepers, like myself. I might mention that all three started beekeeping prior or just after the turn of the 19th into the 20th century, as each had over 50 years of beekeeping experience, individually, when I met them in the 50's.
IMO, someone is trying to be contenious over terms and systems they themselves don't fully understand.
Let's try to be a bit more civilized.
Many a self-proclaimed expert as lots of book learning but insufficient field experience.
-
Beesource Boil over :-x
-
Beesource Boil over :-x
Nah,...just winter bee fever. Nothing wrong with a good debate. :-D
BTW, What's "beesource" anyway?? :roll:
-
I actually enjoy opening up my hives. I enjoy pulling a big ol' frame of bar-to-bar brood, I enjoy finding the queen, the big fat honey dripping combs.
I am also aware that every time I open the hive this causes them some "distress", and while that may bother me a bit, quite frankly my enjoyment of the experience trumps their bit of "distress". If that makes me a sadist, then just call me "Sadie"!!
With a little bit of pampering they all made it through last winter and gave me a nice surplus, and I consider that a success (unlike the all natural bees in the log that we cut down in the hopes that they'd make it). If you disapprove of my management style, that is nice, since I don't care.
If all these other types of hives are so wonderful, and the answer to all our problems and diseases, then I can't but wonder why the Langstroth hive is so popular and widely used? Perhaps because it is the best overall hive for the most situations? No....that can't be it!!! But does that mean all the other hive types are bad?
With so many personality types and successful management styles out there and different types of hives that work for different people, to say that there is only one way to do things or that the other ways are wrong is more than a little bit arrogant.
Rick
-
I'll ask readers and the Moderator to please note that I have presented my arguments and mild defenses in non-accusatory, non-confrontational phraseology. If, despite my contrition and toned-down presentation of ideas and challenges, what I write still be somehow inconsistent with the Forum bylaws, or worse, unpalatable to those of greater standing who hold more conventional views, then fine, I'll accept banishment and bow out.
As you where told via PM, you are more than welcome to express your opinions and thoughts. There is no hidden agenda here at Beemaster. Freely sharing of information is a great thing and makes us think. Personal attacks and calling others opinions crap will not be tolerated. We run a family-friendly forum and don't expect everyone to agree. We do expect members to respect others right to their opinion so that members feel free to express them. If members don't express their opinions for fear of being attacked, we all loose.
Nobody's message or views are important enough to be above our rules. If you can continue expressing your views without personally attacking others and respect others right to different views, you will not be banned. If you can not stay within the rules, you will end up getting banned, and it will not be because of your unconventional views although we have had others claim that before who thought their message was above our rules. I think most here believe there is a lot of merit to some of the less conventional methods of beekeeping, unfortunately it seems that a lot of the people promoting them have taken on a militant approach and are doing more harm than good. I'm hoping you are not one of them. We really do appreciate the debate, but it needs to be kept civil.
I was of course taken to task by this forum's omniscient Moderator about my apparently injudicious comments.
Sarcasm is not going to get you anywhere. Yes, perhaps we do run a tighter forum than others, but our members truly appreciate it. Constant fighting and bickering gets old rather quickly and members move on. We attribute our low turnover rate and family environment to the enforcement of our bi-laws.
-
I was of course taken to task by this forum's omniscient Moderator about my apparently injudicious comments.
I didn't see any need for this sarcasm either, sorry, no offence, but sarcasm is so unnecessary, and spreads ugly feelings. No place for ugly feelings, not needed, not wanted. Our forum is a place of peace, that is one of the reasons that I have this love of this place in time, our forum......sometimes, I must put in my two cents. Have a wonderful and great day and life, health. Cindi
-
I wanted to chime in here too - Atemp2 likes to say how he bends over backward to CALM HIS JETS to appease the moderators here, I like a member with passion, but if you can't keep your opions to STATEMENTS to prove your views, and choose to tear down other's opinions instead, well then you aren't doing a good job of calming anything here.
I like the influx we have had from other forums lately, it is a great thing to see happen, but I'm rewriting the bylaws in simpler commentary to cover all issues. I'll just say the one thing about your "Passion" and that is sharing it does not mean discounting or condeming other member opinions. And if you feel the need to CALM YOUR JETS, then you have been away from civilization too long and maybe need a half-way house forum before posting here.
If you can find the time to post long posts, and still can't find the time to add your location to your profile, it just tells me much of what you do is wait in the corners looking for confrontation - I hope I am wrong, but I usually see through people who come here with an agenda (which often is to provoke another members who moved from other forums) so they act up here.
Luckily, no one is taking your bait and if this is your good behaviour - then I guess the mods will just have to keep their eyes on you longer than most new members. Don't post jabs and zingers at the mod staff or members here, you surely will be booted - just play nice, get your head out of the jungle and rejoin civilization, we have cars now, airplanes, atomic clocks - all kinds of neat stuff here in the 21st century - being nice should come a lot easier for all of us, since the only hunting you REALLY need to do is shop for bargains at different store's meat departments, not hunt fellow members for food.
Yeah, I'm the guy who takes NO CRAP, you want to point a finger here, point it at me!
-
Atemp2 the mods here have a hard job keeping the Beemaster form a FRIENDLY place. And I thank them for that. They keep it safe for every one here even for you so a little respect for other's will go a long way.
-
Beesource Boil over :-x
Beesource Boil over :-x
Nah,...just winter bee fever. Nothing wrong with a good debate. :-D
BTW, What's "beesource" anyway?? :roll:
I agree with all of what Irwin says, and part of what Bjorn says. I'll further qualify it by saying that I'm extremely pleased that we have Bjorn over here.
-
Wow! It really does look like a good fight brewing. ;)
WOW! Bjorne, You started out innocent like you needed advice about Warre hives and then you steadily condemmed them.
Bernard Huevel from Germany runs Abbe Warre hives with mites for years with no treatments at all. Everything you said on this thread can't be opinion you have no basis to form one as you said you were only thinking of building one. You painfully obviously did NO research at all Bernard Huevel and David Heaf are experienced experts and have been running Abbe Warre hives with mites and NO treatments for many years. You can google Bernard and talk to him he speaks fluent English and is a personal friend of mine. I suggest you speak with him and put out educated information instead of guesses for the sake of all the new beeks that read this and look to you as an experienced beekeeper, you are not doing them any justice!
For the record, i would like to correct the misinformation put out by Bjorne.
There are advantages and downfalls to every hive design you have to pick the design that you are comfortable with in your life style. Please do not take the advice of one person I encourage you all to try everything especially in this day and age wherer building these interesting hives is so easy for even thoes with minimal carpentry skills.
try a warre for yourself you may be pleasently suprised!
Thanks everyone
God Bless
-
Hopelessly loss Larry bought himself a bannishment, I don't understadn people migrating from elsewhere with grudges that they think they will "finish" on our forum. It will not happen.
For what it is worth, if you wish to play the game of trashing a member you fought with elsewhere, don't start out by telling us how that person is wrong - try telling you you believe your version or preception of something is better, even more correct. You could in theory hide here quite well, debating posts and not attacking others and likely we'd never know your intention - but generally speaking, those who come here for battle do not have the patience or intellegence to wait and play their game like chess, the choose to come riding full gallop with weapon drawn.
Don't sit there in the HOPELESSLY LOST category either, that doesn't fly past 5 or 6 posts with me, unless you have no obvious agenda and haven't been asked to add your location to the profile.
We have said this many times: members here are judged on how they behave here. Don't hunt down someone (especially in waves to appear that you are unique in your prejudgement of someone you've had dealings with) that is as obvious as a band of attackers entering the forum entering the forum one at a time, trying to give the effect that they are not a gang of thugs - sorry thugs, you fool no one.
Anyone coming in here with the single purpose to discredit any member here, has an agenda and will be banned immediately. If you wish to debate someones methods you have dealth with in harsher tones elsewhere, then debate them - don't condemn anyone here for the way they keep bees, what they believe in or how the represent themselve.
If you don't like the way someone posts something, complain using the REPORT TO THE MODERATORS button available on EVERY post and reply. Standing your ground and drawing a line in the sand to try and degrade another member is your quickest way out the door.
I'm very surprised at the members from one particular forum, they in no way represent the other forum UNLESS they are mods or admins themselves coming here, which I hope is NEVER the case. But members running into battle with swords held high trying to strike at a member here is FUTILE - stay where you are and don't waste your time or energy. Gong home with a failed attack, seems to bring others up to bat who think they can do a better job - save your energy, your games do not work here.
EVERY MEMBER in good standing here expects an enjoyable place to post, and never should fear abrasive replies to their post. I hope those who join for the sake of starting trouble here take back "Home with them" that they accomplished nothing, nor will they - the only one who can hurt a member's reputation here is the member him/herself.
We have the abilty to search by IP address the people who wish to join our forum, rather than have an open door policy, we choose to not use it. For the simple fact, who you are elsewhere doesn't mean who you can be here. We choose to not prejudge anyone. But if need be, I'll shut down the open door, track IPs, find out who is who and where (if anywhere) they belonged before and what (if any agenda) they may have is and reject them before they even get in the door.
Just as easily, we can redirect any members post to a safe place where it can be read BEFORE posting in the targetted forum - none of this wasted time do we choose to use, we have dozens of features that are nearly mind numbing from a member's prospective which we could use - instead, we give everyone the benefit to be a responcible social member and allow them to find a friendly place, getting out of the mud and snake pits they currently abide in.
I'd rather let the members see first hand what a WILD WEST forum creates, then when they have issues with our censorship, they see our way is by far the lesser of two options.
I always like to let members know stuff a taste at a time of what is happening and why. Often for security reasons, the neater features - the real power horses of the forum software are kept secret and must remain so - but letting you know that angry people with grudges aren't usually that smart to start with is NOT a secret, they expose themselves like a homeless man peeing on the sidewalk, every time.
-
Thank you john.
In the interest of everyone here, and the reality that many read the last few posts, to see what caused one post or another, let me comment on what I have previously stated in this thread....
True...I do not have a Warre hive.
True...I have observed a Warre and have talked in depth about them.
True...I agree with Warre views on hive scent (Only need to discuss painting queens to figure that out)
True...I agree with warre on trapped heat (I have stated many times my views on trapped heat, and why I think top entrances are bad)
True...I agree with his views on limited hive volume for winter. (and have been beat up many times for expressing my opinion that bees do in fact heat up a hive and seek these benefits in looking for a swarm site, etc.)
True...I think Warre had many positive techniques and observations I agree with. And I think that many could benefit from understanding what Warre was saying. Many of these same points can be used or assimulated into other hive types.
But.... It is also true....
I do not agree that this is the one "true" "natural" way of keeping bees that some aggressively promote. There are many successful beekeepers out there.
I do not agree that opening a hive is as detrimental when it's 90 degrees outside, and one must cringe in fear as you open a hive, thinking great damage is being done.
I do not agree that constant undersupering, although valid in that it should suppress swarming, also can be called natural for this fact alone in defining a warre hive. Feral colonies do not have beekeepers supering ANYTIME, and by doing so, you already are not allowing the bees to supercede the queen as often as they perhaps would, thus not benefitting fully to what nature has shown us.
I do not need to have ten years experience to talk about the principles and observations Warre wrote about. As I said, Warre had many observations I clearly agree with. But he was still a beekeeper, viewing techniques and strategies without SHB, v-mites, and many of todays problems. And this idea of opening the hive one time per year, or damage will happen, is something I will not promote. Warre was a beekeeper, and probably made faults just as many other beekeepers did, and proven years later to be wrong. He was not a God!
I did not want to fight over, or debate about a Warre hive. If I wanted that, I could of gone to another site. I asked here, to get a viewpoint, some input, and some feedback from perhaps those that have warre hives, and are not radical beekeepers who promote one style of beekeeping. If that also involves discussing my view, compared to your view, and debating the points involved, that's what a discussion is all about many times.
I love TBH's. And yet, just yesterday I had a phone discussion with another about the pitfalls and negative aspects of TBH keeping. And that is what I will do with Warre hives also. There are good concepts, and bad, about warre hives. To only promote only the positive, without question, with blinders on, is not what we need. We need honest input across the board. The problem, whether about Warre, smallcell, or anything else, if you talk about both positive and negative aspects of any type beekeeping, your seen as an attacker, not really on a practical side of things, but from a personal standpoint, from those that can only agree with keeping bees one way, without respect or wiggle room to not just acknowledge faults of beekeeping in general, but their favored way of self-annoited and biased ways. (how long was that sentence anyways :-D )
Not sure what misinformation Larry was talking about. He only goes on to mention about keeping different hives, and that with all types of hives and styles of beekeeping, there are pro and cons. Something I have said many times over. So I agree with Larry afterall. But I bet I could not talk about both pro and con issues about Warre hives at a few other sites... maybe when :flyingpig: That's why I love it here. :-D
Anyways, sorry for any ruffled feathers.
-
In the LARRY incident Bjorn, you are actually NOT the issue - he is a banned member from some time ago here, making his way back here and trying to throw us off his tracks, appearing to start a tussle with you, appearing to come from somewhere he did not.
If the truth is out there, our Mods will find it - you must have been a popular fellow in your day, as to be used as a target by a guy who likely had little previous dealings with you, but felt you a good target to go after, thus covering his tracks and not exposing his real intentions - lol.
I am so glad you found a home here, many of your previous run-ins elsewhere find it "doing battle with the Black Knight" and they come across great lands carrying their lances into battle. This silly parody has some truth to it, but Larry just changed enough info to set himself up, his banning had little to do with you, and although it is nice you explain your thoughts on the topic here - fear not, this vile creature had been banned long ago, only to slither back in here from some other rock. You were just an excuse for him to distract us from his real intentions.
The saying a bad penny that keeps turning up is often true, the funny thing is LINCOLN'S FACE is always still on the penny and we recognise them every time, although sometimes it take a bit to sort through the pennies :)
You can count on level headed and non combative discussions on Warre and Mason, etc. Speaking of which, not sure if you noticed, I midified the TOPBAR FORUM to add these other hiving systems. Hoping to expand as always and it seems interesting to me, honestly I have no experience with either, so having their own forum MAY make for lively, fun and enlightening conversation - anything rough and tumble knows what happens - and it isn't the members here missing the be friendly and agree to disagree ideals, it is the HOPELESSLY LOST people who are heart to try and drop a smart bomb, only problem of course - they tend to lack the smarts and poorly blend in long enough to surprise anyone when all of a sudden they disappear.
Off to bed here, jet lag from odd work hours is getting to me, it's nappy time - peace.
-
Well, as Freud once quipped, "Sometimes a cigar is only a cigar."
When I wrote "omniscient Moderator" I was not being (intentionally) sarcastic, or even facetious. It was a compliment, a tip of the hat to acknowledge the time and effort of a patient guy who has enough on his plate moderating this forum.
If I made comments objectionable to others here and to the OM, this is the last time I'll apologise: Sorry. I'll strive to keep it to a low simmer at most in future.
Moving on, my quartet of 3-box Warré hives is almost complete; just a few more screws to turn, another coat of finish, and some distinctive art to paint. Let 'em outgas for a few months before loading them up out in the orchard. Pictures will be uploaded somewhere when they're presentable.
-
Only thing this Omniscient Moderator wants is you to take your enthusiasm level down from a 8 to a 4, just post twice as much and it burns as many calories.
Don't make issues out of anything, ONCE you have fully explained YOUR VERSION - once you've ran out of material, let a post die. IF you need to express "Picaso Like" Excitement, go paint a picture while your posting, it may help take the edge off - no to forget caffiene for a while, nasty headaches when detoxing lasts about 4 days.
But BOILING VESSELS need to VENT - we do it respectfully and NOT while trying to bait a subject and see who bites, either.
His Exellence Humble Bows to the Masses as he exits the tall marble pillers into the Great Beemaster Dynasty Palace.
-
Hello All.
I have not been able to start beekeeping...yet. But I have been getting very interested, have read several books, lots of info online, have taken an intro class, and am close to diving in. I am also a public school teacher here in Chicago. Not sure if I'd be allowed to do this at school, but I'd love to. (I'd LOVE an observation hive in my classroom, though a local professional beekeeper said that these often result in swarms since they are soon outgrown; instead, he recommended a regular hive with a portable observation case to tote around a couple of frames into classrooms from time-to-time.) But that is another thread, and I'll start that elsewhere.
I've just discovered the Warre hive, and some of its aspects appeal to me. One is that finding a place to set up a hive might be difficult for me (if I can't do it on a rooftop at school) here in my tiny city backyard. It was a stretch to get my wife on board with city chickens, but bees are even harder, given our 25 x 35' backyard and three kids. My parents have a place in Wisconsin with lots of acres, and the less-frequent need to open them up would allow me to set up a few up there.
Anyway, this is a very interesting (and spirited!) thread, but I have two questions:
1) How does honey production compare between Warre and standard designs?
2) One of the controversies seems to be about folks enjoying opening the hive to observe, but this not being such a good thing in a Warre hive. Does anyone have knowledge or experience with the modified Warre hive that includes viewing windows in each super? Would this satisfy some of the curiosity factor? Is there a downside to these windows? I found a site with plans for this (I tried to paste in a link, but it was blocked since I am a new user), and it seems like it might provide a greater chance to get a look inside without having to open it up.
Thanks very much for any further info on this topic. I'm hoping to begin this year if possible.
Steven Slaughter
Chicago, IL
-
Does anyone have knowledge or experience with the modified Warre hive that includes viewing windows in each super? Would this satisfy some of the curiosity factor? Is there a downside to these windows? I found a site with plans for this (I tried to paste in a link, but it was blocked since I am a new user), and it seems like it might provide a greater chance to get a look inside without having to open it up.
I don't have any experience with it, but it won't give you the same satisfaction as opening the hive. First of all, depending on which side the widow is put, you will either see the ends of the comb or the face of the outside comb. Looking down the ends of the comb is not very informative, you can see the size of the cluster and perhaps honey stores, but you will not be able to see into the cells for eggs, pollen, etc. Not to mention it will be dark in there as well. Looking at the outside comb is even less informative. You will never find the queen laying in the outside comb, so at best you will see honey. I think it would be as interesting as a two frame observation hive with the frames side by side. All the interesting activity will be out of sight.
As far as draw backs, I could see an issue with condensation on the inside if yu dorr is not sealed tightly. Honeybee give off a lot of moisture in the winter and the cold glass would be a perfect place for condensation.
-
Hi All
Yet another newbee doing all the usual stuff a newbee does. Im verry interested in the Warre hive for my location in far north Queensland Australia , i go into a bit more detail in the introduction section , but basically day temps nevergo below 24-25 degrees celcius and never much over 35-36 degc all year and night temps even in winter never below 18 degc. So imguessing there could be issues regarding having the comb slump in really hot weather if im not carefull. I though about having really well insulated hives , but at the end of the day believe that rather than have this id be better making sure the hive is well shaded and well ventilated and let the bees do the fine tuning as i cant imagine there would be a large expenditure of energy maintaining the optimum hive temp in these conditions.
Not that im lazy or anything but the "low" maintenance ,low interference" aspect of the design appeals as i live in a remote area and have a vague idea of a low maintenance , low interference lifestyle built around low-medium production of premium honey. As we will shortly be living on a boat(3-4 months) and retiring in the next couple of years we can live very cheaply compared to most(10,000 - 12,000 USD a year) so i dont want to get rich just want to get off the merrygo round, and live my life and show my boys a "skill" that in the future will be much in demand i believe.
Im waiting on information from my local department of primary industries about keeping bees in this state but would welcome any and all information on beekeeping in the tropics ,as all the information im finding on the net relates to places that have winters as such.
Cheers
-
I have a question about transferring two Langstroth hives (just the bees) to two Warre hives. What is the best way (by experience) to do this. Incidently, the Langstroth hives are coming from a commercial gentleman who pollinates the almond groves in California. Probably quite stressed.
First, I've read where a gentleman built an adapter atop the Warre hive to fit the Langstroth on top. Preliminary results seemed slow but the brood was saved.
I am wondering if the brood contains Varroa mites, would I want the brood in the Warre hive? I'm leaning towards the shakedown, as others have advised. Also, should the transfer take place immediately after bringing them home, or allow the bees to settle down a day or a few days before transferring?
What say you folks?
-
Just speaking from my experience, I did the adapter board method. Yes it is slower, but less stressful on the bees and you don't have that month of decline you get with the shake.
-
I just finished reading this entire thread, and really enjoyed it. I started beekeeping this year, and I bought a Langstroth (8 frame) and a Warre. I bought just one package of bees, and they went into the Langstroth by default (hadn't assembled the Warre yet, because it showed up late). After reading through this thread, I am thinking I might assemble the Warre and put it out this fall or next year, depending on whether I can catch a swarm or have to buy another package. I really like the Langstroth, more than I thought I would, but I also really like the idea of having a hive that can develop on its own, with minimal intervention from me. Kind of like putting out nest boxes for the wild birds. :)
-
I still have one Warre hive and enjoy watching them survive on their own. Trying to take honey, or do any type on manipulation is a royal pain in the butt. So if you just want a hive that "is there" they are great, if you plan on harvesting honey, stick with the Langstroth.....
-
Thanks, Robo. That is exactly why I was thinking of sticking with one of each. I like the idea of just setting it up and letting it run itself, but I also kind of get a kick out of watching my girls working in their Langstroth. I am not necessarily in it for the honey, although I'll take it if they have enough to spare, but I don't want to exclude the possibility entirely. :)