# Why do TBH's produce less honey?



## JensLarsen (Mar 14, 2007)

You ask several qusestions and most of them have been answered several times before, check out the search function. This forum is a goldmine, but you have to dig for yourself.

The main argument for top bar hives producing less is the need for the bees to draw their own comb. A figure of 10 kg honey per 1 kg wax is circulating in Sweden. This argument as such seems to be false. The bees have a need to build comb and will draw their own quite quick. Murrell and Bush has several years of observation to back this up. I have used frames with starter strips for years and they build those quicker than drawing the foundation (5.1 mm).

I live in a area where I have a long flow, this is the reason that I expect at least 60 % of the harvest as the langs right beside the tbh. If I lived in the south where the main flow is two-three weeks (canola) I would not consider tbh. The bees just can't keep up with the flow.

Another reason for lower production is the horizontal managment. There are several reports that the bees reduce forage after a while. Vertical managment keeps them going.

When comparing the tbh-system with the traditional langstroth-system I find it more relevant to compare effort/kg than kg/hive. I belive that when you add the effort (cost) of hauling boxes, storing boxes, nailing frames, wiring, cost of foundation, extractor, cleaning the mother and wax melting, the simpler but maybe less yeilding tbh might come out a clear winner in the production cost/ effort per kilo honey game.

Thats just my thinking on the topic.


----------



## buckbee (Dec 2, 2004)

The Dregs said:


> I have been doing a bit of research on TBH's recently and I was wondering why they produce less honey.


The main reason Langs and other framed hives produce more honey is that they are designed to maximize honey production, whereas TBHs are designed to maximize bee 'comfort'. Anyone who has worked TBHs will know how much less stressed the bees are. If you want to extract every possible drop of honey from bees, don't bother with TBHs. On the other hand, if your main aim is to have happy, healthy bees without the need for chemical treatments, then I recommend the TBH.



The Dregs said:


> Also, is there any difference in funtionality between the TBH's with sloped and the ones with straight sides?


IMO sloping sides have two strong advantages: they best accommodate the natural shape of comb (less empty space for bees to keep warm in winter) and they minimize attachments. 



The Dregs said:


> Can you just pop in regular Langstroth frames with the foundation already made instead of using slats of wood, or does this defeat the whole purpose?


If you make straight-sided boxes - yes you can and yes it does.


----------



## The Dregs (May 6, 2007)

JensLarsen said:


> You ask several qusestions and most of them have been answered several times before, check out the search function. This forum is a goldmine, but you have to dig for yourself.


Yeah, sorry about that. I thought I had read the whole TBH forum. I then saw the button that lets me read the threads posted from the beginning instead of just the last month. I have been reading like mad since.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>I have been doing a bit of research on TBH's recently and I was wondering why they produce less honey.

If they are managed properly they don't. But they require more frequent manipulations.

> I have seen this stated in a few places, but there was never much of an explanation for it.

The arguments have been stated above.


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


----------



## crowtoe (Mar 2, 2006)

Mike, if you had a couple of angle iron frame rest across a tbh & the bars linesd up lenght ways, say 3-bars long.
What you thin would happen?
Dave


----------



## Keith Benson (Feb 17, 2003)

Michael Bush said:


> If they are managed properly they don't. But they require more frequent manipulations.


I thought there was some work from S Africa that showed that they did not. I have not read the work and have no idea about it's quality, but I guess I am wondering if the above claim is actually accurate. I don't necessarily doubt it, I am just wondering if anyone has looked at it in a critical, statistical kind of way.

Keith


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

If you put bees in a top bar hive and a Langstroth hive and manage both the way you would a Langstroth hive, you will undoubtedly get less honey from the top bar hive. And, of course, that would be how you would do a scientific experiment. However, that is not what I recommend.


----------



## Keith Benson (Feb 17, 2003)

Michael Bush said:


> If you put bees in a top bar hive and a Langstroth hive and manage both the way you would a Langstroth hive, you will undoubtedly get less honey from the top bar hive. And, of course, that would be how you would do a scientific experiment. However, that is not what I recommend.


No that would not be a comparison that I would bother to make either. What I am wondering is if someone has had both types of hive in similar or identical locations and managed each as efficiently as possible given the style of hive and compared the two? I doubt it, but it would be neat to see.

Keith


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

The problem would be defining what "efficiently as possible" is for either one. If I ever get around to doing Nectar Management, I might decide I can't get that much from a top bar hive.


----------



## buckbee (Dec 2, 2004)

FWIW, I think the whole 'which hive gives the most honey' argument is based on asking the wrong question in the first place.

The question we should be asking is, "what system of management produces the best conditions in which bees can thrive and be healthy". To me, honey, wax and propolis are the by-products of keeping bees and I have no interest in squeezing every last drop out of them.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

The other question is, how much honey do I get for how much lifting.


----------



## Keith Benson (Feb 17, 2003)

Michael Bush said:


> The problem would be defining what "efficiently as possible" is for either one. If I ever get around to doing Nectar Management, I might decide I can't get that much from a top bar hive.


Yeah. One would have to look at equipment costs, hours spent per unit produced, chiropractor fees. . . in other words the whole economic enchilada.

I am not saying that langs will win, just wondering which system when managed at their most efficient in terms of honey produced, would come out ahead.

Keith


----------



## JensLarsen (Mar 14, 2007)

A comparison would only hold locally. My belief is that the characteristic of the flow (how much, how long and when) is the key, the bees has to be able to keep up.

I certainly do not see any contradiction between ordinary lang-style and tbh, good care for your ladies and a monetary outcome can be done both ways. I do, however, suspect that my pay-off (honey per cost or labor) will be greater for the tbh-part of my sideline business, regardless if they produce less per hive. Since the honey is premium stuff I am looking forward to an even greater profit.

Later this year I will report on how the tbh and the langs in the same beeyard will perform, I invite others to show their data too.


----------

