# The illegal TBH



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

A TBH has removable bars that, for the purpose of inspection, function just the same as removable frames do.

If there are states where TBHs are functionally not allowed, they haven't been mentioned on Beesource AFAIK.


----------



## palangi (Nov 17, 2013)

Rader Sidetrack said:


> A TBH has removable bars that, for the purpose of inspection, function just the same as removable frames do.
> 
> If there are states where TBHs are functionally not allowed, they haven't been mentioned on Beesource AFAIK.


Functionally allowed and legal are not the same thing. I do understand and agree with your sentiment, though. I do not believe this city ordinance would ever be enforced on a TBH. I'm just curious how people feel about keeping bees contrary to the law (even if functionally allowed). One other thing to consider is that these types of statutes/ordinances are only ever enforced based on complaints. Do you fear that this opens your apiary to vulnerability that a Lang apiary might not be subject to if someone just doesn't like the idea of beekeeping? In my case, it would be pretty clear that I'm violating a city ordinance.

For the record, I am totally fine doing it and I'm an advocate of the TBH. I'm just curious to hear how people feel about these laws in relation to their own TBH beekeeping.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Call your State Apiculturalist and see if they enforce such a rule. I doubt that they do.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

Note that it can be very difficult to tell without _looking inside_ a hive whether there are frames or simply bars. Certainly with a horizontal hive (vertical sides) you could even have frames intermixed with bars in the same box.


----------



## palangi (Nov 17, 2013)

Great point sqkcrk. Actually, in Texas they're not illegal, they're merely categorized as "infectious" but there's no way they would enforce that. But at the city level, I'm sure there's someone who could fill me in as to if they would ever enforce.

How do people feel about the way the law is written? Is it something worth trying to address or better to ignore and assume "movable comb" is what they meant or that a TBH is close enough to a Lang to fulfil the spirit of the law?


----------



## palangi (Nov 17, 2013)

Rader Sidetrack said:


> Note that it can be very difficult to tell without _looking inside_ a hive whether there are frames or simply bars. Certainly with a horizontal hive (vertical sides) you could even have frames intermixed with bars in the same box.


I almost prefer the covert rebellion that you are advocating. It adds a little more danger an intrigue to the hobby


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

palangi said:


> Great point sqkcrk. Actually, in Texas they're not illegal, they're merely categorized as "infectious" but there's no way they would enforce that. But at the city level, I'm sure there's someone who could fill me in as to if they would ever enforce.
> 
> How do people feel about the way the law is written? Is it something worth trying to address or better to ignore and assume "movable comb" is what they meant or that a TBH is close enough to a Lang to fulfil the spirit of the law?


Here's a little secret just between you and me. Most Apiary Laws aren't enforced, not enough Inspectors or Budget. Those that are have a grace period in which to comply. They often don't stand up in Court if they even get in front of a Judge. Judges have better, more pressing concerns to deal w/ such as traffic tickets.


----------



## cg3 (Jan 16, 2011)

Just a poorly worded law written by a non-beekeeper to differentiate between inspectable hives and skeps or gums.


----------



## Saltybee (Feb 9, 2012)

cg3 said:


> Just a poorly worded law written by a non-beekeeper to differentiate between inspectable hives and skeps or gums.


Agree. A TBH is a Langstroth-type hive. Not a skep type.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Saltybee said:


> A TBH is a Langstroth-type hive.


What?! I think Rev. LLL would argue w/ you on that. Maybe you meant a TBH is more like a Langstroth than a skep.

By the way, skeps are inspectable. You just can't easily look at the brood comb.


----------



## marshmasterpat (Jun 26, 2013)

Sounds like once again those folks in Austin were trying to do something good and used some advice, but just misunderstood it (or were given some advice by someone that doesn't know a lot or just dislikes other styles of bee hives). One way or another, again Austin has been mislead. 

You might try one of these methods: 
one contact someone that maintains TBH and can talk well (has the gift of gab) to call your city council man and point out the issue and ask for an amendment or 

two gather up good photos from the net that clearly show how both langs and TBH both have "removable frames" and both have the capacity to fit this part of the ordinance "that is maintained in sound and usable condition.". 

If you go route two, you want photos that sell your point, so don't think that photos of you or friends are the best cause they show something similar. You want photos of someone holding up frames with the hive box in the background and the slot where the bar came from is clearly visible. Maybe even doing a photo day the hive to get these photos. 

If you go route one, beware of someone that sells TBHs as the nature and healthy way to keep bee being much better than Langs,. You never know how the council person knows or who is their family member. If they have associates that have Langs, well you might just bee peeing in their coffee and the door is closed before it is opened. I know the man who helped me the most has serious dislikes of most TBH people because he has heard the above sell so many times, yet has been working bees for 40 years and helped a lot with some of the USDA work in LA. 

Get an appointment and go make the sell, let your council person hear the truth they made a mistake that unfairly discriminates against small time backyard bee keepers, and then sell the point that bee numbers are down and Austin needs to be willing to help more people keep bees in their backyard so that nature benefits. 

Good Luck


----------



## merince (Jul 19, 2011)

palangi said:


> I'm in Austin, Texas which is subject to the following laws:
> 
> A beehive is "infectious if the bees are not hived with movable frames" and therefore "the chief apiary inspector may seize and order the destruction, treatment, or sale of a colony of bees, equipment, pollen, or honey, etc."
> -Texas State Agriculture Code; Title 6; Subtitle A; Chapter 131; Subchapter B; Sec. 131.021
> ...


I think "Langstroth-type" is meant to be a hive with moveable frames, not a square box. So, your TBH would be legal as long as you can take the frames out for inspections.


----------



## Saltybee (Feb 9, 2012)

"Langstroth-type". 

If not defined in the ordinance, the next question is intent. When was it written and what was the intent. My guess is before TBH was a commonly known term. Intent was to outlaw non removable frame types. If you really want to find intent you could search the records as it was being drafted and debated, or we could do a Beesource and debate it for 4 pages. 

Not trying to debate skeps, commonly believed to be non removable frames.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

They are almost equally inspectable. All you might need to do is educate the Inspectors of that.


----------



## scorpionmain (Apr 17, 2012)

Sometimes we need a little Civil Disobedience.
The average American commits 3 felonies a day without realizing it.
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052748704471504574438900830760842
http://www.threefeloniesaday.com/Youtoo/tabid/86/Default.aspx

Ayn Rand — 'There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. ... One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.”.


----------



## palangi (Nov 17, 2013)

Awesome points. I especially like the idea that Langstroth-type could be interpreted as TBH and assume that "movable frame" means movable comb. Or even interpret the law in a way that fits the language like that the bees build a "frame" around their comb and the top-bar and "frame" are movable.

I also love the civil disobedience approach. That was a fun video.

I'm not sure if it would be worth trying to change wording in the laws/ordinances, but that might be an opportunity to educate people about movable comb hives that you can make in your garage.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

Every inspector I've asked the question of in every state I've had the opportunity has said they only care that it has movable combs and is inspectable. They don't care if it's a top bar hive, or a British Standard hive, even if the law specifies "Langstroth" (and several do).

>The average American commits 3 felonies a day without realizing it.

That really come home to me when I was on a city bus and stepped up to the front anticipating exiting the bus and the driver said I was in violation of Federal law because I was in front of the line on the floor at the front of the bus... that, apparently, is a Federal crime... and I had always thought of myself as a law abiding citizen...


----------



## merince (Jul 19, 2011)

Michael Bush said:


> Every inspector I've asked the question of in every state I've had the opportunity has said they only care that it has movable combs and is inspectable. They don't care if it's a top bar hive, or a British Standard hive, even if the law specifies "Langstroth" (and several do).


Same experience here, although mine complains a bit about the brand new foundationless frames when he happens upon them. They are fragile in the heat.


----------



## jadebees (May 9, 2013)

A top bar with a starter strip generally remains removable for it's useful life. I can always remove them, and if your "Apiary Inspector" is too incompetent to do so you may have a job available! And, definitely grounds for a complaint.
This law is a case of (now-adays) someone picking fly specks from pepper. Outside of a commercial beeyard I can't imagine some incredibly bored and underworked inspector would even harrass anyone in a home/hobby situation. Just no fines/taxes in it to confiscate. So called infected bees are destroyed. So why would they?


----------



## Dominic (Jul 12, 2013)

merince said:


> I think "Langstroth-type" is meant to be a hive with moveable frames, not a square box. So, your TBH would be legal as long as you can take the frames out for inspections.


Indeed. Would having a 10 frame foundationless deep not be considered langstroth-type? I doubt it. What about a 8-frame one? 4-frame one? 20-frame one? Of course, I'm no lawyer and I can't speak on behalf on the city, but it would seem to me that langstroth-style would probably be more of a reference to the fact that you can easily open up the brood nest and inspect individual frames as opposed to hives that need to be destroyed when opened up. I doubt they care if the bar has wood on the sides or not.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

The Law may have been written when "Langstroth type" was used to differentiate a removable frame hive from a Log Gum or Box Hive (a box of four sides, a floor and a pitched roof which a swarm was gathered into). Gums and Box Hives were quite common on into the 20th century in many parts of the country. But, of course, Gums and Box Hives don't have removable frames making them uninspectable. Maybe that is what the Law was written for, not TBHs. Since TBHs haven't been around all that long. Writers of Apiary Laws may not even know what Top Bar Hives are.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>Would having a 10 frame foundationless deep not be considered langstroth-type? I doubt it. 

That's what Langstroth had. There was no foundation then. The frames were not self spacing either (that was invented by Hoffman later).

>What about a 8-frame one?

Those were around in Langstroth's time as were 12 frame ones. 8 frame hives have been around continuously since the late 1800s.

> 4-frame one?

Nucs were around in Langstroth's time.

> 20-frame one?

Don't remember seeing one of those from his time, but I think the same principle applies as with 8 or 12 frame ones...


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

palangi said:


> Many cities/counties/states have similar laws on the books. What are your thoughts on keeping bees in a TBH as a hobbyist when it is contrary to the law but where Langstroth hives are allowed?


Is it the words "Langstroth-type" and "frames" that cause you concern? Because, even though a TBH doesn't usually have frames, the combs are removable and inspectable. I think you should take it easy and not worry about keeping bees in a TBH. Any Apiary Inspector today should be familiar w/ the idea of a TBH even if they haven't seen one first hand. And they also shouldn't have a problem w/ a TBH, especially once you have shown him how easy the TBH is to inspect.


----------



## scorpionmain (Apr 17, 2012)

sqkcrk said:


> Any Apiary Inspector today should be familiar w/ the idea of a TBH even if they haven't seen one first hand.


Not always...I did a quick Google search and found this from another forum:

Danielle- I live in Alabama, U.S. I have been keeping bees in Langstroth hives for 3 years. I have become interested in tbh, lately. Here's the issue: I called our state apiary inspector and asked if tbh were legal (at the insistence of members of our beekeepers association), and was surprised when I was told that they most definitely are not! The inspector, who I completely respect and who really knows his facts, says that tbh are not able to be inspected b/c the bees attach the comb to the sides of the hive. Therefore, he cannot inspect them, they do not have movable frames, and are illegal. 

http://www.biobees.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4957


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Should I have underlined the word "should"? I guess someone needs some more educating.

Maybe this beekeepers association should invite the State Apiary Inspector to see a TBH and to see that it is inspectable.

One thing I do know, something which has been enforced in NY, is that a Langstroth type hive w/ frames in it wherein the bees crossed combed their brood nest was not allowed to remain in that condition because even though the hive had frames in a Langstroth type hive the brood combs were not inspectable, the frames were not removable. It's the removability that is most important.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

Bees propolize boxes together in a Lang style hive. If the criteria for a hive to be "inspectable" means without using an _appropriate tool_ to separate boxes, then Langs with more than one box are not legal either! :no:

TBHs are easily inspectable even if combs are attached to the sidewalls in places if you use an _appropriate tool_. A bread knife works well to detach the combs from the sidewalls.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

More education is what is needed.


----------



## Saltybee (Feb 9, 2012)

I once had a warden begin to arrest me for possession of 2 inch quahogs.( I had a couple of bushels.) Trouble was 2 inch was the legal size. Sometimes they are just plain wrong.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>The inspector, who I completely respect and who really knows his facts, says that tbh are not able to be inspected b/c the bees attach the comb to the sides of the hive.

I inspect them all the time. As Radar said, you just have to use the right tools in the right way, but usually after I've inspected them, they don't reattach the sides anyway, so it's very easy to inspect. If you let the bees go wild and don't correct messed up comb, however, it may not be inspectable, but I've seen Langstroths that were not either for the same reasons...


----------



## beeman2009 (Aug 23, 2012)

Can't really say about other states but I have spoken to our State Apiary Inspector here in TN and he's just fine with TBH's. He likes them. He makes plain that if you don't keep attachment to a minimum, he will still remove the bars for inspection & you have to deal with any mess. I have no problem with that.:banana:


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

This argument raged here for several years. Our law states hives must be kept in hives with removable frames.

Eventually a policy statement was released which said the top bar can be legally regarded as the "frame" on which the comb is built. IE, the frame did not have to be all encompassing. Examples of legal definitions of other frames from non beekeeping applications were cited were the frame had something built on it or supported by it, but was not necessarily all encompassing.

This seems to have ended the arguments.

I do part time inspecting and TBH's are easily inspectable provided they are not cross combed. If combs are joined to the box it is totally simple to run the hive tool up each side first so the comb can be lifted out.


----------

