small cell questions

[FRAMEshift]

Cell size makes sense to worry about for me because when building up, it seems that the cluster will cover more cells.

Why would the cluster cover more cells?  The cells are smaller but so are the bees.

[Vance G]

Any diagram or explanation i could make wouldn't matter would it?  There would be another question.  Have fun, but not with me.

[FRAMEshift]

Any diagram or explanation i could make wouldn't matter would it?  There would be another question.  Have fun, but not with me.

Of course it would matter if it made sense.  Yes there will always be more questions.  If you have an idea about advantages of smaller cells, I want to know.  If not, I'll let it drop.  This is not personal.

[Michael Bush]

>it's a money making gimmick at this point.

I don't know anyone who is making any money off of it.  Maybe Dadant selling the foundation for twice the price, but then they are putting some effort into making it.  Dee has given away all of her information on another forum and the Yahoo group.  She has no book to sell, no bees to sell and it costs her to go speak as she need to be beekeeping.  Very few of my presentations are on small cell and even those I'm usually pushing natural cell which is free.  It costs me to go speak.  I miss a round of queens every trip, that I could have sold for more than I get for speaking, not to mention I use up vacation that I could have been working at computers for a lot more money, if I get ANYTHING for speaking, and I usually don't.  I make a lot more money programming computers.  A LOT more.  The information has been available for free since Dee had it posted on another forum and since she started her yahoo group and all my information is free as well on my web site.  I don't think anyone is "selling" small cell for a profit.

Who is making money on small cell?  I don't know of anyone.

[BjornBee]

MB,
Since you mentioned so much on Dee as an example, lets focus on her a bit.

Can you tell me what she does for a living?

[BjornBee]

MB
Also....why are you not pushing smallcell 100% in your presentations? You clearly have stated many times that since you went to smallcell, you have never lost a hive due to mites. Sounds like promoting anything else would be questionable.

I know there was a few years when smallcell and "natural" cell was stated as being the same in no certain terms, and even today many get it confused. While there is no doubt that many see you as the pusher/promoter/defender of smallcell, why the step back from something you believe so strongly about and seems to be far superior as illustrated by you?

[BjornBee]

Sorry for any who thought the above questions were out of line or a personal attack on MB and in particular,......smallcell.

Have a good day!

[T Beek]

Wow, we don't see too many apologise  8-)  around here.  Gotta love it.

thomas

[D Semple]

T.J. - great thread thanks

You've been given great advice by FrameShift, Kathy, Bud, and Michael.

So it's not hard, take all their advice.

- Get yourself good bees

- Use a combination of foundation and foundationless. 4.9 may not help, but it won't hurt anything either.

- monitor for mites closely and take some kind of action if needed

- Have an overall plan that matches your phylosophy, and execute that plan


The very best part I've found of foundationless, SC, and being chemically treatment free isn't what it done for the bees, it's what it has done for me, which is to make me be more committed.


Don
  



-

[Michael Bush]

>Since you mentioned so much on Dee as an example, lets focus on her a bit.
>Can you tell me what she does for a living?

She sells honey.  I don't know of anyone who pays a premium because it's "small cell honey" nor is it advertised as such.

>Also....why are you not pushing smallcell 100% in your presentations? You clearly have stated many times that since you went to smallcell, you have never lost a hive due to mites.

I have said since I went to small cell and natural cell.  A lot of presentations are what people want to have presented.

>I know there was a few years when smallcell and "natural" cell was stated as being the same in no certain terms, and even today many get it confused. While there is no doubt that many see you as the pusher/promoter/defender of smallcell, why the step back from something you believe so strongly about and seems to be far superior as illustrated by you?

We've had this discussion.  Certainly I see nothing wrong with people changing their mind, I've changed my mind on many things over the years, however, as I've stated before, in this case I have not.  There was no step back.  Small cell and natural cell succeed for the same reason, cell size.  I have been a proponent of natural cell from the start.  My first article on the subject and my main chapter on the subject talks about small cell only as one way to get smaller cells but focuses on natural cell size:

http://www.bushfarms.com/beesnaturalcell.htm

[Country Heart]

Thanks for asking the question, T.J.  I have learned a lot from the discussion.