I have not used this since 1992 and it would require a days work to bring it up to standards. I have more wood hives stored in the Tween Space along with stamped wax. This is a Poly Type from Kellys. I no longer use poly hive bodies as it warped? BUT the tops are superior to wood so I use themfor lots of different things. This is a self draing system! This extractor is 60 plus years old. It is now lined with fiberglass and resin.
Don't forget I also noted that I have not seen much evidence to promulgate the veracity of the TBH, Perone, et al assertions. I did dig into the top bar and similar methods when deciding to get my daughter into bee keeping. TBH, Warre, et al were not remotely vogue 35-40 years ago when I set up my first apiary. I had never even heard of them until maybe a dozen years ago though I suppose they were around before that. I was curious was there really something to it. So I dug. I found lots of "philosophy" and strong opinion and but I found little beyond self-produced anecdotal data from various champions to corroborate all the claims. For example some of the new style hive proponents claim mites are not an issue. One argument claims it's because the hives are 1-2 degrees warmer since comb centers are spaced closer and the mites can't live in that environment. But as an engineer, I have a "show me the data" predisposition. I didn't find much. It would not be hard to instrument the hive for data collection. In a way it doesn't even make sense as bees regulate hive temperatures and humidity (to evaporate excess water from nectar makig honey) with forced air ventilation and natural comb vs structured foundation will somehow cause them to turn up their personal thermostats 1-2 degrees? I found plenty of "naturalists" espousing personal philosophies about what is best, right, good, and point to their personal hives to argue the point. But there seemed to be a lack of comparative data employing good Design of Experiments methodologies to prove anything. Maybe I just didn't look hard enough or in the right places. Personally, if I am going to spend much time or money on bees, then I want the ability to quickly and easily harvest wax and honey and not have to fuss with meandering comb and the time and hassle to separate the two. And I have not seen data to make me less skeptical to the myriad of claimed benefits argued for the alternative methods to make the inefficiency of the harvest seem worth while. If all you want is a few pounds of honey, go alternative, if you desire, it's no problem. But to harvest a hundred pounds, (which in good years I got that and more from each of my better hives) the alternative methods seem rather poor. If someone thinks they don't really want to mess with the hive, you can set up a Langstroth hive, get it strong and organized then leave it alone for several years and you'll still likely have a reasonably organized hive that you could start working if the SHTF and start getting honey rather quickly and easily. And if you are a true believer in alternative apiary methodologies, go for it. You are not going to hurt anything (not sure you'll really accomplish anything either but maybe you'll feel good in the process, and there does seem to be health benefits in that.) AT
I think the argument against stamped foundations is that the bees are forced to making bigger cells then they would naturally and varroa mites need a bigger cell. Letting them make their own comb lets them to revert to a smaller size, which I guess many feral bees are. The closer spacing between the bars is supposed to raise the temperature of the hive. Unfortunately, not much money is going to fund studies proving you can raise bee without chemicals. I heard of a European study of untreated hives and only 15% made it to the 3rd year. Still, they neglected to mention the percentage of treated hives that made it to the 3rd year so it's tough to compare. Treated or not, loses of 25% per year seem common so the thing to do would be to have at least 4 hives.
Stamped foundation does not force larger sized cells, quite the opposite as the size of the pattern encourages smaller cells striving to mitigate colony tendencies to form drone cells. I am forming an impression, maybe incorrectly, that replies to this discussion are tending away from a factual intellectual discussion into a religious one. I generally try and avoid those. Sorry. AT
40 years of bee keeping IS a citation. And I would trust the source without a doubt. Experience and knowledge are what I am seeking. Detailed drawing for construction would be nice, but once a firm choice is made, I should bee able to find those.
I don't know the source at all so it's not a citation for me. If it's experience your after, I'm not a good source for you. Unless you were interested in building a hive yourself that is low maintenance. Then I do have a little experience. No big deal either way.
There are experts in many fields here at the Monkey Tree. You will learn that yourself in time. The people themselves are a resource. By sharing our skills and knowledge, we all gain in strength of mind and purpose. By mining the experience of current and former bee keepers, there is much less work in the "Ripoff and Duplicate" department.
Bees 3 The citation is pretty simple. It can be found in sources that reference the facts that pressed foundation aka starter sheets, increase the output of honey and direct the bees to build an efficient comb. OTOH a bit of Black Magic or the "But He Said" routine is used to suggest if not exactly influence the style that someone else likes when they cannot use the information in front of their nose to support their case. Just open any wild hive and you will note the wasted space and build over’s that, at times, closes off a portion of wild bee made hive that is now useless and the work to build that hive is not only wasted but sets up a case for brood rot. Proven is the fact that a ratio of 6 to 1 is the honey used to make a pound of wax, if that does not matter to you now it may matter later. All of this information comes from experience and real world publications from 100 years ago. If still in doubt go to the Walter Kelly site and ask them. But ask direct questions, not ones that are tailored to support one belief over another. Actually what we are talking about is good old fashioned research, done in a simple fashion before the Internet came along. I am aghast at seeing, on line, that a PhD from a respected University would cut open a living tree, which within is a now dead hive, all to provide a self made statement that he could, if he was doing real research, have used modern measuring instrumentation and cameras to either prove or disprove a “THEROY”. What a waste and an insensitive move, comes to mind the PhDs of the Nazis. I wonderd at the start if some of the New Wave experts are into the rewilding scam.
PHDs often do and say crazy things but... Seely is one of the top bee researchers in the world and many, many citations are going to lead back to him. He has used modern devices for tracking bees, showing how they explore a possible new hive site. I think the youtube I linked to showed that. I will add that I'm not convinced that managing a hive for maximum honey production yields the healthiest hive. I tend to take that approach with all of my animals & plants. I just put a bull in the freezer who was never weaned or castrated. He's still tasty due to my choice of breed (belted galloway). The only cut this seems to have a detrimental effect on is the T-bones, but I can live with that.
The bees' many dance routines for pollen, nectar and many other things that Seeley touts as his ideas/research has been known for decades.
Bees 4 "cjsloane I will add that I'm not convinced that managing a hive for maximum honey production yields the healthiest hive. I tend to take that approach with all of my animals & plants. I just put a bull in the freezer who was never weaned or castrated. He's still tasty due to my choice of breed (belted galloway). The only cut this seems to have a detrimental effect on is the T-bones, but I can live with that." As to the bees: What the moveable frame hives do is to allow the Beekeeper to harvest honey in an efficient manner. Note I said about the Beekeeper is only part of this story. The beekeeper's first interest is and should be the health of the hive. In this honey is primary as a way to keep bees and afford the considerable expense and time for this expensive hobby that can go bust in a few minutes or a few months depending on what befalls the hive/hives. When a Beekeeper harvests (only thieves rob) honey or brood or queen cells he is active in protecting the hives. When a hive is opened a general examination is taken at that time and the general health of the hive can be determined. I always check the brood chambers, look for queen peanut cells, search out the queen or queens, evaluate the pollen harvest and check for vermin. So in fact I have a reason not to Rob the hive, but to become as one with the hive and its residents. OTOH the way of some with the Perone Hive is to basically reach in, grab a hand full of comb. This microcosm of the Bee’s world contains, now dead bees, honey mixed with bee parts, maybe some brood-now dead, in most cases stored pollen-used for feeding the new brood and of course the hunk of wax. All of this is damage to the hive, and I mean the microcosm in someone’s gloved hand, in total is damaged/destroyed. No where have I seen this fact presented by the new wave group, and yes I understand the “other frame design” hives can and do prevent this. So as a wrap-up; Care of the hive is number 1. OTOH, if someone wants to come along and provide me with a Perone as a way to pollinate the world then that is fine, I will provide a remote shaded area for them to thrive, but the two methods are just that. As to cattle, mine are of a Mountain Breed and do not have stupid breed into them.
Hmmm. I've never seen it described that way. The bottom 3/5 of the hive is the brood box, the bee keeper is supposed to keep out. There are 3 honey supers that you harvest by cutting it with a knife or a wire. This image show the 2 parts: BTW, I can observe what's going on, to some extent by looking in the window.
I realize there will be bits of things in the comb when I harvest. It just seemed like you were implying something about the way a Perone hive, different from others, gets harvested that threw me off. If that is what you meant, you could give me a link as to where you found that info? Thanks.
Bees5 Shown is a failed Perone hive. This picture alone is the best example of what is wrong about a Perone hive. Note the varied distance between each comb, curve backs, dead ends and general disarray which in the winter requires more heat than the bees would need in a moveable frame hive. This hive indicates all that is bad in a hive that someone might need to be self sufficient with, plus the fact that the hive cannot be inspected for its health, brood content, pollen storage or honey available for food of either the beekeeper or of the hive to enable it to survive in a winter over. Not to mention a general bee count. If you attempted to harvest from this type of hive then you would do more damage than in other others I know of save a wild hive in a live tree. In short, to cut into and take out a section you have no clear way to know what has been taken until you have it in your gloved hand. The Perone is a 3rd world hive design just a step up from the straw hives of old. Wait! I think I already said that in this discussion.
I'm quite well acquainted with the 7 liberal arts aka the trivium & quadrivium. Did you want to be a little more specific?
But this is not the part of the hive you harvest honey from so you wouldn't damage anything! This is the brood box. Nicole never got to the stage where she could harvest honey. I'm quite familiar with this hive. The beekeeper who it belongs to is going to try again, this time with a swarm. She has not given up on the Perone design, which although it is of Latin American origin, it's a fairly new design.
