# Bee-O-Pac system



## Boris

Recently, I created my new web page devoted to the Bee-O-Pac system:
http://www.beebehavior.com/bee-o-pac.php

Boris


----------



## Jim Fischer

Nice photos, but your first sentence is inaccurate -
they DON'T fit in a standard 6 5/8ths (medium) super.

The "top bars" are too thin, so when placed in
a super, the plastic "frame" extends below the
bottom of the super. Of course, there is not
room for this in a hive, so it jams up against
the top bars in the super directly below.

If you shim the rabbets in your Bee-O-Pac supers,
you might be able to make them actually fit.


----------



## Boris

To prove my statement I've just placed additional photo on my web-page. Maybe your supers are not standard? 

Boris

[ January 13, 2007, 02:44 PM: Message edited by: Boris ]


----------



## Jim Fischer

Have they changed the width of the "top bar" so
that it is now "thicker"? Perhaps they did, but
a set of the the first batch was assembled and 
then carried around to each and every dealer 
present at EAS 2004 (in PA) to try and find any 
supers where they would fit without protruding 
out the bottom of the super, and none of Dadant, 
Kelley, Mann Lake, Betterbee, Rossman, or
Brushy Mountain's supers were compatible with
them.

Do yours protrude? As luck would have it, your photo hides the problem I described if it still 
exists.


----------



## SGebauer

Hi Jim,

They made a few changes after the first year so the frames fit a better now.

Cheers,
Shane


----------



## Boris

New photos and comments were added here:
http://www.beebehavior.com/bee-o-pac.php

Boris


----------



## n1st

Very helpful, thanks. How does this system compare in cost to other?

[ January 18, 2007, 07:52 PM: Message edited by: n1st ]


----------



## Jim Fischer

> How does this system compare in cost to other?

Compared to Ross Rounds, they are almost as
flagrantly cost-inefficient as buying a Ross 
Round super and then throwing it away after 
one harvest! 

With Ross Rounds, one invests in the plastic
"frames", which last literally forever. I
bought my initial inventory from a retiring
beekeeper. They aren't cheap, but one can
amortize the cost over as many seasons of
production as one wishes. Only some thin 
surplus foundation and rings/lids are 
"expensed" against each year's crop.

With the Bee-O-Pac, one must expense the 
entire cost of a set of Bee-O-Pac frames 
against each years crop. This is a serious
cost difference, so serious, that Bee-O-Pac
starts to look like a wanna-be "business 
partner" rather than an equipment supplier.

Yes, the initial cost is lower with Bee-O-Pac,
but when you get your first crop, you'll find
that not all the little "Pacs" will be filled,
and you can end up with waste. When you 
break apart the things, you must throw away
the unfilled "Pacs". This makes the cost of
Bee-O-Pac even higher, as a percentage of the
filled "Pacs" that can be sold.

With Ross Rounds, all one "wastes" is about
1/4 sheet of thin surplus foundation per
unfilled section. The rings can be reused,
and the plastic covers are only used to 
cover finished rounds.

Why is "waste" an issue? Well, comb honey is
a spring thing for most beekeepers. Forget about
trying to get multiple crops of comb honey
from your bees. I've tried.







One is advised
to provision more comb honey supers than one thinks
the bees can fill, as one would hate to have a 
strong bloom, and have a limited crop limited by
available supers. So, one makes a small wager
with Ross Rounds, but makes a large wager with
the Bee-O-Pac, as re-use of Bee-O-Pac is 
impossible at any but the "entire frame" level.

Another problem with the Bee-O-Pac is that
there is no wax associated with the product,
so the bees have a harder time drawing out
comb. (The Hogg cassette also lacks wax, or
at least did in the initial product offering.)
The problem with this can be clearly illustrated
to anyone who inserts a sheet of the colored
foundation (sold to make those tacky "rolled"
candles) into a frame. The bees really do
"draw out" the wax rather than attaching wax 
to the foundation, and the colored wax of the
foundation makes this visible to the beekeeper,
showing the advantage of wax foundation or
waxed plastic foundation.

Another (minor) issue with the Bee-O-Pac is
the flimsy nature of the plastic itself. When
snapped together and placed into a super, there
are gaps between the two halves, and the bees
often spend a great deal of time propolizing
these gaps, some bees will wander into the
gaps, become trapped and die, and so on. The
end result is "messy" as compared to the 
Ross Rounds, and with comb honey, one wants
a very very very good-looking result. Some
beekeepers will use scotch tape to close the
gaps, but the bees like to chew on the tape.


----------



## honeyman46408

I have never used Bee-O-Pack but have seen it and it looks like to much work for me and what I saw was a nice super drawn out verry good with lite honey and looked much nicer than posted here but the frame that was displayed at our Fair was sticky with lots of burr comb and propolis, them there is the cost.

I do have one in front of me that the guy gave me and it is to nice looking to eat, and it is 2 years old.

I have RRs but I think the most cost efficent way to do comb honey is CUT COMB.

That is my 2 cents as I am not a BIG comb honey fan (not a good seller for me) but we do sell a lot of comb honey at the Fair every year.


----------



## Boris

[ January 19, 2007, 12:56 PM: Message edited by: Boris ]


----------



## Boris

"How does this system compare in cost to other?"

Betterbee prices and calculation:
1.BEE-O-PAC Frames With Lids (Box of 8) - $49.95;
BEE-O-PAC Frames With Lids Box of 24 - $139.95 
2. "From each completed super, you will harvest up to 128 four ounce comb honeys. Suggested retail for each comb honey is $3.00. Yes, that is almost $374 per super."


Boris


----------



## n1st

Jim,

Thank you for the for the detailed cost comparison. Can someone comment on the difficulty of set up, maintenance, and harvest? BOP looks very simple. My perspective... I have not used wax foundation, only plactic foundation.

[ January 20, 2007, 08:55 AM: Message edited by: n1st ]


----------



## Boris

"Compared to Ross Rounds, they are almost as
flagrantly cost-inefficient as buying a Ross 
Round super and then throwing it away after 
one harvest!"

Jim,
Your comparison cost is completely incorrect, because for the Ross Roud system you have to buy Ross Round Covers - one on top and one on the bottom. In your comparison covers are FREE. But they cost a lot of money.
Cost comparison without real calculation is a very bad idea...
However for the Bee-O-Pac system you do not have to buy anything else!

Boris

[ January 20, 2007, 10:25 AM: Message edited by: Boris ]


----------



## Jim Fischer

If you want "simple" the Hogg cassettes are clearly
the simplest, in that they come pre-assembled and
ready to slide into a super.

If one is careful, the Bee-O-Pacs are simple to
assemble, but deforming the little "bumps" to
seal the two halves together can be more of 
a problem than one expects, leading to the use
of tape, staples, and foul language.

Ross Rounds are more difficult to assemble than
Bee-O-Pac or the Hogg cassettes, but the 
"difficulty" is overcome if one is shown how to
assemble them by an experienced producer of Ross 
Rounds. The good news is that they are nearly
bullet-proof, and can take a lot more banging
around, dropping to the floor, and rough handling
than either of the other two comb honey products.

> "BEE-O-PAC Frames With Lids (Box of 8) - $49.95
> From each completed super, you will harvest up
> to 128 four ounce comb honeys. Suggested retail 
> for each comb honey is $3.00. Yes, that is 
> almost $374 per super."

Yeah, *"up to"*.







But this sort of 
speculative math that assumes 100% success
rather than a more reasonable return has caused 
beekeepers to calculate comfortable profits, yet
live a hand-to-mouth existence for centuries.


----------



## Boris

Jim, 
you still did not confirm your previous statement: "Compared to Ross Rounds, they are almost as flagrantly cost-inefficient as buying a Ross Round super and then throwing it away after 
one harvest!"
Where is your real calculation?

Boris

[ January 20, 2007, 01:36 PM: Message edited by: Boris ]


----------



## Jim Fischer

Boris, you can look at the prices, add up the
larger up-front investment for Ross Rounds,
and then amortize that up-front investment 
over whatever number of seasons you wish just 
as easily as I, or anyone else.

You can also compare the costs inherent in a
more realistic situation, where multiple
supers are provisioned on a hive, and not all
sections of all supers are filled. With the
Bee-O-Pac, one cann reuse anything smaller than
a "frame", where with the Ross-Rounds, one can
reuse everything except the foundation if the
bees don't fill all the sections.

But don't argue with me, do the math!

That's why there is an international market
for Ross Round sections, and there isn't enough
of the Bee-O-Pac or Hogg cassettes to even make
up a single shipment to a distributor, as the
Bee-O-Pac and Hogg products are sold to hobby
beekeepers, who value what is sold as "ease of
use" over profitability.

As for the Ross Round covers, they are not free,
but they are never wasted, either. With the 
Bee-O-Pac, the covers are included with the 
"frames", and one cannot buy frames without
covers, so any sections not filled must be 
counted as "waste" except for the special case 
where an entire Bee-O-Pac "frame" is left 
untouched by the bees.


----------



## Boris

My calculation for the Bee-O-Pac system.

$49.95 : 8 (frames): 16 (units per frame)= 0.39 cents per unit
Label cost $27.95 : 400 = 0.07 cents per label.
Total cost per unit 0.39 + 0.07=0.46 cents

Now your turn Jim.

Boris


----------



## Jim Fischer

As I said, do the math yourself.

Every beekeeper should do his own math.

But your math assumes 100% perfection in
filling every "unit", which is a very
optimistic assumption, moreso for a 
product made of 100% plastic, not even
wax-coated.


----------



## pahvantpiper

I have to agree with you Jim, $50.00 is way way way over priced for a little bit of plastic that cannot be reused.


----------



## Nick Noyes

I tried these on 3 different flows in 3 states and couldn't make them work better than ross rounds or the hogg. We got some filled but it took a lot of labor and cost the hive some honey. I like the idea it just needed some tweaking to make it work. The ones I had did not fit in a 6 5/8 box. That was the summer of 2005 have they been changed since?


----------



## Michael Bush

> I like the idea it just needed some tweaking to make it work. The ones I had did not fit in a 6 5/8 box. That was the summer of 2005 have they been changed since?

Ditto an all of the above.


----------



## Patrick Scannell

>Now your turn

Boris, look here.

http://www.beesource.com/cgi-bin/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=12;t=001088;p=1#000005


----------



## Boris

Jim cannot prove his statement, but I can show that his statement is false.

Ross Round Conversion Kit -$5.50 
$5.50 : 8 : 4= $0.17 per Unit

Box of 8 Frames - $22.95. 
$22.95 : 8 (frames) : 4 (units) = $0.71 per Unit

Ross Round Ring Box of 64 Rings - $14.95
The Rings become part of the finished round comb package and,
therefore, need to be replaced each year. 
$14.95 : 64= $0.23 per ring or $0.46 per Unit

Ross Round Cover Box of 32 Covers - $9.95
$9.95 : 32= $0.31 per cover or $0.62 per Unit (one on top and one on the bottom.)

Foundation $7 per 28 sheets.
$7 : 28 :4 = 0.06 per Unit

Ross Round Label - $9.00 
$9.00 :100=$0.09 per Unit

Total cost: $0.17 + $0.71 + $0.46 + $0.62 + $0.06 + $0.09 = $2.11 per 8 Oz. of Comb Honey Unit

Total cost Bee-O-Pac per 4 Oz. Unit is $0.46 or
$0.92 per 8 Oz. of Comb Honey. 

So, how about your statement: "Compared to Ross Rounds, they are almost as flagrantly cost-inefficient...?" 
Even without one time investment in the RR such as RR Conversion Kit, RR Frames ("literally forever" by Jim) your statement is incorrect.

Boris

[ January 25, 2007, 07:51 AM: Message edited by: Boris ]


----------



## Jim Fischer

Boris is using prices for the very smallest
quantities one can buy, and one gets much, much
lower prices on consumables when buying them in
more reasonable quantities.

I'll not argue with the claim that the UP FRONT
cost to "get into comb honey" is lower with
the Bee-O-Pac, but it should be obvious that
if anyone thought that the Bee-O-Pacs were
an overall better "value", the serious producers
of comb honey would adopt them en masse, as 
everyone would like to lower their costs.

It isn't, so no one has.

I'm not saying that Bee-O-Pac isn't a fine
product, I'm sure it is, if the obvious 
bee space violations have been fixed as 
reported by Shane. But it is a hobby 
beekeeper product, intended to present
the appearance of "convenience". It
appears much less convenient when one 
attempts to use it due to its disposable
nature.

What's your connection to the Bee-O-Pac
stuff Boris? Have you have any success
with it when placing more than one super
of Bee-O-Pac on a hive? Have you ever
tried mixing Ross and Bee-O-Pac on the
same hive, and seeing which gets filled
first?

Regardless of strength of hive, I've yet
to see any hive completely finish more than
3 supers of comb honey in one spring.
I keep waiting for an "exceptional" spring,
and waiting, and waiting...


----------



## Boris

"Boris is using prices for the very smallest
quantities one can buy, and one gets much, much
lower prices on consumables when buying them in
more reasonable quantities."

Jim, your statement is incorrect again. 
From one hand, the difference is not so big:
Ross Round Ring Box of 400 Rings - $52.95 or $0.13 per ring or $0.26 per Unit...or
$1.91 per 8 Oz. of Comb Honey Unit.
From other hand  you will get also a better price for Bee-O-Pac system when you will buy Box of 24 frames:
$139.95 : 24(frames) : 16 (units) = 0.36 per 4 Oz. Unit or $0.72 per 8 Oz Comb Honey.

Boris

[ January 25, 2007, 08:23 AM: Message edited by: Boris ]


----------



## honeyman46408

Is it just me or is sombody FLOGING a dead horse?


----------



## Jim Fischer

> Ross Round Ring Box of 400 Rings - $52.95 or 
> $0.13 per ring or $0.26 per Unit

OK, I see your math: $52.95/400 = 0.13, and yes
it takes 2 rings for each Round, so $0.26 for 
rings when bought in quantity 400 

But 400 rings is only enough rings to make up 
6.25 Ross Round supers, again, a hobbyist 
quantity. Can you possibly fathom the idea
that a serious producer of comb honey would buy 
in serious quantities, certainly more than would
provision a mere 6 supers per season?

I have no idea what you meant by the following:

_...or $1.91 per 8 Oz. of Comb Honey Unit._

No, it would be $0.26 per 8oz Ross Round comb
honey "unit" (section). Where did you pull out
$1.91? (Two rings per section, and if the bees
don't fill the section, the rings can be reused
next time.)

This is getting too tedious for me.
Have fun, use Bee-O-Pac, use whatever you'd like.


----------



## BULLSEYE BILL

Ladies and Gentelmen, we have a winner!


----------



## Boris

1. "I have no idea what you meant by the following:
...or $1.91 per 8 Oz. of Comb Honey Unit."

Jim, this is my last calculation for you. Boris

Ross Round Conversion Kit -$5.50 
$5.50 : 8 (frames): 4 (units) = $0.17 per Unit

Box of 8 Frames - $22.95. 
$22.95 : 8 (frames) : 4 (units) = $0.71 per Unit

Ross Round Ring Box of 400 Rings - $52.95 or $0.13 per ring or $0.26 per Unit
The Rings become part of the finished round comb package and,therefore, need to be replaced each year. 

Ross Round Cover Box of 32 Covers - $9.95
$9.95 : 32= $0.31 per cover or $0.62 per Unit (one on top and one on the bottom.)
Jim, these is my last calculatiom for you:

Foundation $7 per 28 sheets.
$7 : 28 :4 = 0.06 per Unit

Ross Round Label - $9.00 
$9.00 :100=$0.09 per Unit

Total cost: $0.17 + $0.71 + $0.26 + $0.62 + $0.06 + $0.09 = $1.91 per 8 Oz. of Comb Honey Unit


2. "Can you possibly fathom the idea
that a serious producer of comb honey would buy 
in serious quantities, certainly more than would
provision a mere 6 supers per season?"

Ross Round Rings Box of 700 Rings - $84.95 or $0.12 per ring or $0.24 per Unit.
More than 1000 rings - apr. $0.11 per ring or $0.22 per Unit.
The difference is not so big.

[ January 25, 2007, 02:26 PM: Message edited by: Boris ]


----------



## Jim Fischer

I think I understand - Boris has never used
Ross Rounds, and therefore thinks that the
"conversion kit" is required, and is unaware
of the massive discounts offered on "complete
Ross Round supers".

But, have fun, and be sure to update your math
after a few harvests, then you'll have a better
handle on your actual costs.


----------



## n1st

Someone please explain why spend the extra $$ on RR or bee-o-pac instead of just using foundation and cutting the comb into the desired sizes? 

Do the bees buid the comb faster in RR, etc.? 

Is the comb from RR, etc. higher quality?

...more eye appeal?

Is RR, etc. less effort, why?


----------



## Jim Fischer

Cutting comb is fine, as long as the comb honey 
is sold with minimal handling after being cut, 
and is going to be consumed "at once".

It is, in a word, "perishable". It will ooze,
it can slide around in the calmshell container,
it can become very unattractive if handled with
less than "great care".

Ross Rounds, Bee-O-Pac, and Hogg Cassettes all
result in a comb that is attached to the walls
of the container, so there is no ooze, no
sliding, no mess. They can be stacked, packed,
shipped, handled somewhat roughly (this may be
less true of Bee-O-Pac than Ross Rounds or
Hogg Cassettes, as the Bee-O-Pac uses very thin
plastic, where the other two use very heavy
duty stuff that one could make a drinking 
cup from), and still "survive" without being
degraded.

> ...more eye appeal?

At point of sale, yes, in general.

> Is RR, etc. less effort

Less mess, certainly. Less effort in all the
steps that come AFTER the beekeeping is done,
and one is now handling food. Certainly much
more sanitary, in that one can honestly state
that human hands have not touched the honey
or comb itself.

There is a popular option called "chunk" honey,
where cut comb is sliced into hunks slightly
narrower than the mouth of a ball jar, slid
into the ball jar, and then the jar is filled
with liquid honey. This may sound disgusting,
but there is a big market for it in some areas.

Clearly, this would require "cut comb".


----------



## Garry Forsythe

I can sell all the chunk honey that I can produce or buy from others. It has always been popular in the south, but getting harder to find.


----------



## NW IN Beekeeper

[Is it just me or is sombody FLOGING a dead horse?]

I think its become a horse's skeleton, and soon to be a pile of calcium powder. 

I'm with Ed, dollar for dollar, even when considering the labor, I think cut comb honey is most superior to any packaged comb honey system. Its the only sure way to assure complete cells in the entire package with minimal packing costs. Any incomplete areas can be crushed and strained/spun and recovered (along with the wax). 

And I agree with Ed a second time, it doesn't matter what system is best, if you don't have a sales market you're wasting your time regardless what system you use. 

When you can set it and forget it like every other honey super and you don't have maintenance it like you do for Ross/Hogg/BOP, its a common sense choice to me. Keep it simple stupid. 

-Jeff


----------



## Boris

Jim,

1. Ross Round Frames are shorter than wooden extracting frames so you must install a Conversion Kit in every standard Super. This kit contains 4 Adapter Boards, Nails and 2 Super Springs.

2. I will buy Ross Round Complete Comb Super Kit with Foundation, if I will find "the massive discounts offered on complete Ross Round supers"...
How big must be "massive" quantity? 
What is the real price in such situation? 

Boris

[ January 27, 2007, 09:31 AM: Message edited by: Boris ]


----------



## Joel

{Someone please explain why spend the extra $$ on RR or bee-o-pac instead of just using foundation and cutting the comb into the desired sizes?}

Having produced both in reasonably large quantities I see no reason to run any type of section comb honey. It is time consuming and costly to assemble, Bees do not like working in the space provided and don't give you the total comb honey view you get with well drained cut comb in clear plastic containers.


----------



## Jim Fischer

> 1. Ross Round Frames are shorter than wooden 
> extracting frames so you must install a 
> Conversion Kit....

Naw, you can just cut the super down. It is
a great way to find a productive use for those
supers that have started to suffer from
"corner rot". One needs a table saw, but a
careful person could use a circular saw.

> 2 Super Springs

Shucks, I don't know anyone who pays bee
supply house prices for springs that can
be bought at any craft supply store in
the picture framing section for about $0.02
each in quantity 10.

> I will buy Ross Round Complete Comb Super Kit 
> with Foundation, if I will find "the massive 
> discounts offered on complete Ross Round 
> supers"...

Contact Lloyd Spear. He can tell you when his
next sale will be. Lloyd often sets up a table
at various bee meetings, and offers the same
deal himself. He has attended the Tri-County
meeting in Wooster OH on the 1st Saturday in
March, perhaps he will again.

> How big must be "massive" quantity?

Quantity 1. The discount is massive, the
quantity need not be.


----------



## Boris

"Can you possibly fathom the idea
that a serious producer of comb honey would buy 
in serious quantities..."
"The discount is massive, the quantity need not be." ... It is not funny any more.

Jim, because you again did not answer for my direct question (What is the real price in such situation?) - the price discussion with you is over. 
Next time please do not disinform forum members with your statements like this: "Compared to Ross Rounds, they are almost as flagrantly cost-inefficient..."

Boris

[ January 28, 2007, 11:13 AM: Message edited by: Boris ]


----------



## Jim Fischer

I'll try one last time Boris, and then I have
to go lay on a beach in the Bahamas for a while,
and will not be able to toy with you further.

Read this:
http://www.beesource.com/cgi-bin/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=12;t=001088;p=1#000007
And call Shane at Betterbee, as Lloyd suggests,
and ask HIM what sort of waste you are going to
have with Bee-O-Pac. If a guy who SELLS Bee-O-Pac
says "65%" saleable sections, then I will continue
to take the position that it is your lack of
experience that is causing you to unwittingly
misinform the forum members.

So, go re-do your math, and don't argue with
me, argue with a guy who sells the Bee-O-Pac
stuff.


----------



## Boris

Jim, 

Betterbee did not confirm your statement.

Boris


----------



## inga

The Bee-O-Pacs are appealing because it looks very little handling once the individual containers are filled.

From my POV, they are also cost-effective, considering the labor involved in other systems and the local selling price of the 4-oz packages. (They sell for nearly the same price as other 8-oz packages.) 

The main problem I can see is the possibility of the bees not filling all the containers in the corners, ends, etc., and those containers would be wasted.

I'd really like to hear from more folks who have actually used the system. How did it work for you?


----------



## [email protected]

*bee-o-pac*

Jim Fischer pointed out that Shane, at Betterbee, tells customers to expect a 65% yield (saleable items) from a set of Bee-O-Pac frames and challenged "Boris" to compare the cost of a Ross Round section with a Bee-O-Pac after considering that yield.

"Boris" replied that Betterbee did not confirm Jim's statement concerning the yield.

Something is wrong here. Shane has also made that statement to me. He said they (Betterbee) do not offer that information if questions are not asked, but that if a customer asks about yield that is what they tell them. My guess is that "Boris" either did not talk to Shane (there are several new people there just now), or Shane said something close to 65% but not exactly and "Boris" figured that somehow justified him replying that "Betterbee did not confirm...".

I have also noted that "Boris" seems to have never posted a note to Beesource, except on the topic of Bee-O-Pac. Wonder why? Is he not a curious or experienced beekeeper?

A further indication of something being wrong is that it seems it is difficult to determine just who "Boris" is. I know several members of the Catskill Bee Club and none that I have asked know who it might be. The Catskill Club is quite active, and a good one. I have also been at their meetings more than once, and have been a guest speaker, and have no recollection of any "Boris". While it is entirely possible there is an accomplished beekeeper in or near Catskill NY who is not a member of the club and also otherwise unknown to beekeepers in the area, is that likely? http://catskillbees.org. 

Why would "Boris" use a psudeonym if his only agenda was to help other beekeepers? Could it be he has other motives?


----------



## Ross

Lloyd, did you check his website in his profile? http://www.beebehavior.com/


----------



## inga

[email protected] said:


> Why would "Boris" use a psudeonym if his only agenda was to help other beekeepers? Could it be he has other motives?


Lloyd, I do appreciate that you are clear about your bias, as owner of Ross Rounds but I've visited Boris's web site and appreciate it. He does not appear to be using a pseudonym. He also seems to be evaluating various systems of comb honey production and probably searched on the various systems discussed on bee forums. I find his information helpful and not particularly biased. 

I would still like feedback from those who have actually used the Bee-O-Pac system, rather than from those who have used other systems and/or want to promote competing systems.


----------



## inga

[email protected] said:


> Jim Fischer pointed out that Shane, at Betterbee, tells customers to expect a 65% yield (saleable items) from a set of Bee-O-Pac frames and challenged "Boris" to compare the cost of a Ross Round section with a Bee-O-Pac after considering that yield.
> 
> "Boris" replied that Betterbee did not confirm Jim's statement concerning the yield.


For the sake of argument, let's assume that Shane said just that and that he might be correct.

Would the same not be true for any other system, seeing that the bees have a tendency to fill the centers, rather than the edges of any frame?

Then the cost comparison would still hold, and I think the one given on Boris's site is a fair comparison, because he includes a comparison of the cost of "refills." (See http://www.beebehavior.com/comb_honey_cost_comparison.php)

What Boris didn't include was a cost/benefit comparison per salable unit. For Ross Rounds, for instance, the refill cost appears to be $2.43 per one 16 Oz. conditional unit - or for 2 salable 8-oz units. ($1.22 each) (Note that's the refill cost, not the initial acquisition cost, which is much higher.)

For Bee-O-Pacs the cost appears to be $1.84 per one 16 Oz. conditional unit - or for 4 salable 4-oz units ($.46 each) If only 65% of the pacs are salable, that would amount to an effective cost of $.71 per salable unit, retailing @ $3.00. 

In our area, Bee-O-Pacs sell for close to the price of 8-oz units. In the US, I understand they sell for an average of $3.00 each. According to your web site the average retail price for Ross Rounds is $3.83. (Let's round that up to $3.90, for the sake of comparison.)

Or, in other words, Bee-O-Pacs would sell for $12.00/lb, leaving a gross best-scenario gross profit of $10.16. Ross Rounds could sell for roughly $7.80/lb, leaving a gross best-scenario profit of $5.37/lb. 
Even if the Ross Rounds were always 100% filled and the Bee-O-Pacs were never over 65% filled, we would have a potential gross profit on Bee-O-Pacs of $9.20/lb against $5.37/lb on Ross Rounds.

It is surely unrealistic to expect Ross Rounds to be 100% filled and salable. Thus there would be a percentage loss on Ross Rounds refills as well, with a corresponding loss of profit margin.

I admit I haven't checked Boris's math, but I did my own math earlier and found Bee-O-Pacs to be by far the most economical system -- both in cash outlay and in labor outlay. (Lost my notes.)

The argument that Ross Rounds are cheaper in large quantities doesn't help much, because the same is true for Bee-O-Pacs and any other packaging system. 

So now I would like some feedback on how well the bees normally fill Ross Rounds, compared to Bee-O-Pacs. (I personally can't see reasons for a great deal of difference, but then I have no experience yet. )


----------



## inga

Jim Fischer said:


> Read this:
> http://www.beesource.com/cgi-bin/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=12;t=001088;p=1#000007
> And call Shane at Betterbee, as Lloyd suggests,
> and ask HIM what sort of waste you are going to
> have with Bee-O-Pac. If a guy who SELLS Bee-O-Pac
> says "65%" saleable sections, then I will continue
> to take the position that it is your lack of
> experience that is causing you to unwittingly
> misinform the forum members.


Jim, are you saying that Shane at Betterbee sells only Bee-O-Pacs, not Ross Rounds?

If he sells both, there may be less-than-obvious reasons why he is biased in favor of Ross Rounds. Does he also tell folks what percentage salable rounds a super of Ross Rounds produces? (Surely it is not 100%!)


----------



## Patrick Scannell

>So now I would like some feedback on how well the bees normally fill Ross >Rounds, compared to Bee-O-Pacs. (I personally can't see reasons for a great >deal of difference, but then I have no experience yet)

Bees fill RR better than BOP because RR supers have a perimeter beespace on all sides. Much more importantly, incompletely filled individual RRs can be returned to the bees to fill, whereas incomplete BOP are trash.

I like both products, but RR has a better system. I won't use BOP again because I don't like the waste.


----------



## Jim Fischer

> Jim, are you saying that Shane at Betterbee sells only Bee-O-Pacs, 
> not Ross Rounds?

Shane sells both, which makes him "impartial". 
He makes money either way.
But Shane is not about to misrepresent his wares, as he has 
more at stake than a single sale. Bad advice could cost him
a "lifetime customer".

> there may be less-than-obvious reasons why he is biased in favor of 
> Ross Rounds. 

I would not accuse Shane of "bias". 

> Does he also tell folks what percentage salable rounds a super 
> of Ross Rounds produces? (Surely it is not 100%!)

Certainly not - if you end up with 100% of Ross Round supers filled,
you clearly did not provision enough supers, and could have had a
larger crop!

> I would still like feedback from those who have actually used the 
> Bee-O-Pac system, rather than from those who have used other 
> systems and/or want to promote competing systems.

I bought a dozen supers of Bee-O-Pac when it first came out.
I depolyed the supers randomly, putting Bee-O-Pacs on some
hives, Ross Rounds on others, and even mixing the two on 
other hives.

When it was time to pull the comb honey, I have almost no Bee-O-Pac
sections filled, yet the Ross Round supers were full. You can figure out
what my loss was on this little test, but after years of making comb
honey, I don't think it was due to any failing on my part.

To each his own, but Bee-O-Pac simply does not appear to have a following
among those who are experienced comb honey producers.


----------



## inga

Patrick Scannell said:


> >So now I would like some feedback on how well the bees normally fill Ross >Rounds, compared to Bee-O-Pacs. (I personally can't see reasons for a great >deal of difference, but then I have no experience yet)
> 
> Bees fill RR better than BOP because RR supers have a perimeter beespace on all sides. Much more importantly, incompletely filled individual RRs can be returned to the bees to fill, whereas incomplete BOP are trash.


Environmentally speaking, it may be "more important," but, as I pointed out, financially, the BOP's are still a better buy, even with 35% loss and no loss on the RR's.


----------



## inga

Jim, I appreciate this reply.



Jim Fischer said:


> > Jim, are you saying that Shane at Betterbee sells only Bee-O-Pacs,
> > not Ross Rounds?
> 
> Shane sells both, which makes him "impartial".
> He makes money either way.
> But Shane is not about to misrepresent his wares, as he has
> more at stake than a single sale. Bad advice could cost him
> a "lifetime customer".
> 
> > there may be less-than-obvious reasons why he is biased in favor of
> > Ross Rounds.
> 
> I would not accuse Shane of "bias".


No one is asking you to.  Fact remains that there is more to it than simply having both products for sale. If he has no bias whatsoever, he's not human. 


> > Does he also tell folks what percentage salable rounds a super
> > of Ross Rounds produces? (Surely it is not 100%!)
> 
> Certainly not - if you end up with 100% of Ross Round supers filled,
> you clearly did not provision enough supers, and could have had a
> larger crop!


So the 65% figure is not really helpful, as a comparison, is it?


> > I would still like feedback from those who have actually used the
> > Bee-O-Pac system, rather than from those who have used other
> > systems and/or want to promote competing systems.
> 
> I bought a dozen supers of Bee-O-Pac when it first came out.
> I depolyed the supers randomly, putting Bee-O-Pacs on some
> hives, Ross Rounds on others, and even mixing the two on
> other hives.
> 
> When it was time to pull the comb honey, I have almost no Bee-O-Pac
> sections filled, yet the Ross Round supers were full. You can figure out
> what my loss was on this little test, but after years of making comb
> honey, I don't think it was due to any failing on my part.


 Now *that's* the most helpful thing you've written on the subject. If you put the competing products on comparable hives at the same season of the year, that's a valid comparison.

You actually initiated the idea of financial comparison by implying they were a poorer value than RR's, and after I did the comparison, BOP's looked better than before. But if it's harder to get bees to fill them than RR's, that point is moot.

I'll be interested to see what others have to say. (In the meantime, I'll have to stick with cut comb, I suppose. I like the idea of the bees building comb in the containers because the finished comb doesn't have to be handled.)


----------



## SGebauer

*clarification(?)*

Hi All,

My name has been thrown around enough that I thought I would add my 2 cents. I am not going to say one system is better than the other. I sell both because I think each has value and one over the other may be better suited for any given beekeeper. 

In my experience, I get about 65% of Grade A sections; however, I have had customers report 75%. I freely share this information when asked about BOP. I don't have to asked specifically about the yield for me to mention this. I also mention that (depending on the market) you can sell the "seconds" at a discount and still make money on them. 

With that said, I'll fade back to lurking. 

Cheers,
Shane


----------



## Albert

*"and this Round goes to..."*

Hey fellows,

What's the concensus? Ross Rounds or Bee o Pac.

From my perspective, having read each post, it seems that RRs have a clear advantage in the long run. Perhaps the base economics favor BoP but the end result is what is sold, and RRs have the edge and then some, if I read it all correctly. 

Nothing against salesmanship and trying to make a living, but I come here to learn and watch Jim Fischer trade jabs with others. LOL.


Regards,
Albert


----------



## Jim Fischer

> I don't like the feeling that "Boris" may or may not be a Beek and only 
> posts commercially... I come here to learn and watch Jim Fischer trade 
> jabs with others. LOL.

Well, here's a real surprise then - I am going to "jab" in an unexpected 
direction, directly at your nose!

_*I will defend Boris in this post.*_

> If in fact "Boris" is a "Nom de Plume", it smacks of deception. 
> Which is rather distasteful imo. We Beeks are cut from a better cloth.

We may be cut from "better cloth", but the stuffing inserted into that
cloth seems to lack something akin to "brains". Here is what a grand 
total of 10 minutes of very, very easy work revealed:

1) Boris seems to be exactly who he says he is, and he lives exactly
where he says he does. Anyone who wishes can enter his website
domain-name into the "whois" facility at any of the domain registrars,
and see his full name, address, and telephone number. This is "public"
information, but I'll not post it here, as to do so would be in poor taste.

2) Further, comparing the "whois" information with public data on 
telephones/names/addresses and such yields a 100% match, 
proving that nothing has been made up, and that Boris really 
does live there. 

3) Boris has had his camera and hive temperature monitor up on the
internet for a while, as I recall seeing it when it was first announced.
One can thereby conclude that he has had at least that one hive
since 2005 or so. Photos on his website show at least 3 other
hives circa 2005, and other bee-related photos circa 2004.
We can conclude from this that he is a beekeeper, and has been
one for several years.

4) He has posted on subjects other than Bee-O-Pac, and I, for one,
welcome his views. I may not agree with some/many/any of them,
but contrasting views are exactly what one wants in a discussion
forum!!! Without contrast, there is not much to "discuss", now is
there?

5) He may not belong to the local bee club. So what? Most of
the folks who participate in the online groups can't be bothered
to attend their local bee association meetings, which is their loss.


Boris, let me *deeply apologize* for the questions posed in regard 
to your legitimacy as a beekeeper and the questions as to your
existence as an actual human being.

Please understand that anything even slightly interesting or useful 
that gets posted to BeeSource is quick to be ripped to shreds by 
what has become the internet's most vicious and petty bunch of
self-appointed instant experts in all areas, not because they have 
any actual honest disagreement, but more often, merely because 
they are bored, see a post that "looks fun", and smell blood.

I try to distance myself from such nonsense, so if I seem vicious,
please note that I at least offer some tangible point(s) of contention,
maybe a controlled study or three, or perhaps even a reference to 
basic bee biology or bee behavior as supported by prior controlled studies.
(In other words, there's a big difference between being hard on the
facts versus being hard on people.)

But it is just unfair to attempt to dismiss someone as posting on only one
topic or subject, when it is so freakin' EASY to see that you have started
17 different threads, not all of them about comb honey, and have
contributed 102 total posts on various subjects.

So, I'm sorry that we have lazy folks who can't be bothered to check
their facts before they make personal accusations.

While there may be latent concern on the part of some that you may 
be trying your hardest to promote your website in the hope that it can
generate some ad revenue, at the rates paid by Google AdWords, you'd
make more money with a newspaper route or a lemonade stand! So I 
don't "buy" any claim that money is your motivation here.

Maybe you honestly want to contribute, and think that you have something
to contribute. _*Just like everyone else here.

*_I think a number of people now owe you a beer.
Several beers.
An entire party.

So, where do we all meet up to make it up to you?


----------



## Boris

"He also seems to be evaluating various systems of comb honey production and probably searched on the various systems discussed on bee forums. I find his information helpful and not particularly biased."

Inga,

Thank you for your post. 

My main goal is to compare honestly all systems for comb honey production under the same conditions. I am not representating ANY of the producers of comb honey equipment. 

Boris


----------



## inga

*Clarification ?*

Hey, Shane, thanks for popping in and clarifying that the 65% figure for BOP's referred to *Grade A* Pacs and that a portion of the lesser grades would still be salable at a profit. 

My figures seemed to indicate that the BOP's would generate a larger profit per pound of honey even *if* the 65% were a total loss. But I dislike the idea of a lot of plastic waste, so recognizing that there is not necessarily a 35% loss is helpful. 

Now I'd like to hear from others about how many "Grade A" rounds they get from RR's. The scraping out of imperfect rounds and reinsertion into the hive would present a significant labor investment which could, in fact, be more costly than wasting a few pacs in the BOP system.

(Just musing .... )

Inga



SGebauer said:


> Hi All,
> 
> My name has been thrown around enough that I thought I would add my 2 cents. I am not going to say one system is better than the other. I sell both because I think each has value and one over the other may be better suited for any given beekeeper.
> 
> In my experience, I get about 65% of Grade A sections; however, I have had customers report 75%. I freely share this information when asked about BOP. I don't have to asked specifically about the yield for me to mention this. I also mention that (depending on the market) you can sell the "seconds" at a discount and still make money on them.
> 
> With that said, I'll fade back to lurking.
> 
> Cheers,
> Shane


----------



## inga

*Guts online *

Hey, Jim, I really appreciate this post. It takes more guts to apologize than to tear someone down.  



Jim Fischer said:


> _*I will defend Boris in this post.*_
> 
> 1) Boris seems to be exactly who he says he is, and he lives exactly
> where he says he does. Anyone who wishes can enter his website
> domain-name into the "whois" facility at any of the domain registrars,
> and see his full name, address, and telephone number. This is "public"
> information, but I'll not post it here, as to do so would be in poor taste.
> 
> Boris, let me *deeply apologize* for the questions posed in regard
> to your legitimacy as a beekeeper and the questions as to your
> existence as an actual human being.


By the way, I've seldom seen sites with Google Ad words so unobtrusively and tastefully displayed as those on Boris's site. If he makes enough money to pay for his hosting fees, I suspect he's lucky.  

As far as I'm concerned http://www.beebehavior.com/ is a very worthwhile site that deserves more exposure.

Inga

Inga


----------



## Albert

Boris,

I edited my post within minutes of posting it.

When I realized I hadn't confirmed the info posted by others and had taken it at face value, I checked it and then corrected my post. You will see in the edit comment area that it states "factual errors".

When I'm up in y'alls neck of the woods, the drinks are on me.

Jim,

It did take about ten minutes to double check, and granted, I should have checked first but I didn't. Mea Culpa. But I noticed your post was about an hour (I think) after my edit, what gives?

Albert


----------



## Dee

I thought I would post my pics of my Bee-O-Pacs from year 2004. I purchased one set.

Now granted I've never done any comb honey of any kind and the BOP seemed simple and NEW (and at the time cheaper). There was no instructions as to when or where to put the BOPs on the hive (no doubt I shouldve done research). Putting the BOP's together was very time consuming and I had to use duct tape; also i recall a couple of the tabs didn't hook together at all which made the frame even weaker; some of the units even came loose and had to duct tape them in as well; and as previously stated they didnt fit in medium supers properly - if they have been redesigned since - these problems may be fixed, I do not know one way or the other??.

Last year I decided to try the Ross Rounds but wasnt able put it to use - this year I will. I bought the "ready to use" super along with the extra needed items (foundation, clear covers and labels). Looking at this years Dadant prices I'm glad that I did buy them last year!! - I even sent away for my $8.00 rebate (which strangely I didnt get back until January of this year??).

So I wont be able to give any info about my usage with the RR but I can tell you that I've lost money on the BOP for sure (of course because of my ignorance). Now look at the pictures so these next comments of mine will make more sense to you...

http://pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/dee_0216/slideshow?.dir=/9674&.src=ph

**I was able to sell about 5 out of 10 BOP units, the other 5 were only half filled or not completely capped, I gave these away as samples.
**I do have 2 "frames" and 3 "half frames" (yes I know that makes 3 1/2 frames but SOMEHOW i will have to connect the two halves since the tabs are now smashed) that still need finished filling or completely filled.
**All of the other frames and units were thrown away.
**So lets see... out of the 8 frames I will only be able to sell 4 frames - that is if the bees fill the other ones completely. I have lots of extra lids for the BOPs if anyone is in need of them - I havent thrown them out yet.

My opinion... I dont wish to try the BOPs again. Reasons are: faulty frames and "cheap" feeling plastic, lids dont stay on without a label (it is stated that they would by way of a snap-on lid), my bees propolized all over (with sticky red stuff no less) along with burr combing making it very hard to remove the frames - causing the units to pop loose, nothing is reusable if not completely filled up, and the obvious one for me - the queen likes to lay drone brood in them!

Now that being said... something similar could happen to the RRs but i would only be out the foundation - everything else would be reusable with some "elbow grease" (and of course I wont be throwing away the lids).

I hope my post helps some of those people decided which one to purchase or at least makes one realize the mess that the queen can make when the keeper doesnt know what theyre doing.


----------



## Fernhill

Dee,

Saw the photos of your BOP frames filled with drone brood. I tried BOP for the first time last year and had great success with it. I have to admit, though, that when you put BOP and RR together at the table folks always go for the RR until it's gone. 

If you're going to try BOP again in the future I'd suggest putting an excluder between the brood boxes and your comb super. One big plus though of your situation is the fantastic photos you got of developing drone brood inside the clear cells. 

I'm not going to do BOP again this year since sales were pretty slow last year and the large amount of plastic waste it generates. 

Mike


----------



## tarheit

I pretty much agree on the comments about the BOP system. I've given it, i think, a fair try in 6 supers over 2 years. It does work, and probably would have worked better if my timing was perfect, etc. But I won't by trying them again. The problems I had:

They can be time consuming to assemble, much more than attaching cut comb foundation in a frame. I found it usefull to have a set of pliers to mash town the buttons, but even then they could be fairly fragile.
They are a bit taller than a 6 5/8" medium super. Not a huge problem, but odd sicne 6 5/8" has been a standard for quite some time. (Did they intend for a 7" medium?)
Incomplete sections are wasted. I've got a lot of extra lids. Might help if you could buy the lids separately to minimize the waste.
When full the frames are very flimsy. Found out to always work with the super on a table (not a stand or empty stack of boxes), or you'll quickly have a frame falling face down on the floor.
As flimsy as the sections are, removing them from the frame isn't very easy. They tend to be hard to break apart, and if you don't resort to cutting them with a knife, you'll break many cappings open. Even cutting the sections out may end up breaking the comb/cappins as the plastic is thin and flexible. It can be very labor intensive.
The lid doesn't stay on without a label. Not a big deal, but it's far from leak tight, which presents a problem when the cappings are broken and if the section isn't laying flat. Unfortunately this makes it not suitable for shipping at all.
It may have some merits, but I just don't have the time or patience for them and they don't fit my customers needs (shipping, size, etc.) Unfortunately with the leaking and waste issue, I find simple cut comb easier and more profitable. Of course this can depend on your market. I simply didn't find much of one locally for the small BOP vs. the larger cut comb or ross rounds.

-Tim


----------



## Dee

*more questions*



Fernhill said:


> Dee,
> If you're going to try BOP again in the future I'd suggest putting an excluder between the brood boxes and your comb super. One big plus though of your situation is the fantastic photos you got of developing drone brood inside the clear cells.


Ya I realized that I needed a full super barrier or an excluder after the "mess" - but the photos are "almost" worth the mess-up


----------



## memcnult

This seems to be the thread with the most updated responses. I'm looking for some feedback on my attemps to make BOP work for me --

I painted the plastic with wax and also put a drawn out, mostly capped, frame in the center of the super. Between these efforts the bees have accepted the BOP and seem to be drawing it out.

The problem is that it's difficult / impossible to see inside to get a feel for how much of it is capped. My understanding is that once it's off, it's off, and the chances of you getting it back on to let them finish are slim to none given the delicate nature of these things.

I'm wondering if I should put another super on under the BOP super? Would it then be true that if/when they start filling the middle super I could be pretty sure that the BOP super was full & capped? Any other ideas/tips for how long to leave the BOP on. I'm hoping to have it by the end of June, which gives them two full months to work it (been on for about two weeks now), but I'd also like to avoid the trackings of little bee feet. Thoughts?


----------



## danno1800

*thanks, Boris!*

Mine fit just fine into a super. I appreciate the wonderful photos & thoughts on your website. Thanks again! -Danno


----------



## Boris

New pictures were added here:
http://www.beebehavior.com/bee-o-pac.php

Boris


----------



## danno1800

*thanks, Boris!*

I got so interested in all this discussion, I bought a couple of them to try & see for myself. I put them in two random hives during the second half of the honeyflow this Spring [right after I pulled off the first filled honey supers]. Here are my results so far:
1) my B-O-P's were easy to assemble and dropped right into the supers. 
2) I had not noticed Boris' picture of painting wax into the bottoms to get them drawn out faster, so I just put them in as they arrived
3) I peeked in the other day and the bees had drawn out many sections fully and some partly and some not at all. I didn't try and calcultae an actual percentage sine they were not doen working them. 
4) I will try and remember to update this post after I pull them off in a few weeks...I have several customers at the Farmer's Market who have purchsed comb honey from me. I have usually cut out sections or whole frames and sold them in wax paper...very messy. I can see where these would be easier and less messy.
I will look out for someone selling the Ross Rounds at Wooster next year and try those. I am probably what Jim would designate as a hobbyist since I run between 60-65 hives. 
But I had fun doing these and learned a thing or two from these discussions and my experiences.
Thanks to all who have posted here! -Danno


----------



## HVH

My two cents.

My wife and I sell products at a Farmer's Market from about 50 hives. Ross Rounds and BOP's both sell fairly well (probably an extra $1000.00 over 10 weeks between the two types). We also sell at a Food-Cooperative and they move both comb types as well. One thing I have learned at Farmer's Markets is that a booth needs to be well provisioned to draw customers. It's kind of like garage sales - you normally don't bother getting out of your car if there is only one small table in the driveway and no other customers. With that said, having lip balm, moisturizing cream, candles, RR's, BOP's, extracted honeys dark and light in 1lb, 2lb, and 3lb, creamed honey, chunk honey, and an observsation hive really adds to the overall draw of the crowd. So for our little business, the more variety the better, which includes both RR and BOP. As stated by others, the BOP's are more difficult to work with by both bee and beek. Bees generally don't like plastic and will draw out RR more readily. I have overcome much of this problem by running some two queen colonies, identifying the strongest with standard supers, then swapping out standard supers for comb sections midseason during a major flow. Every single square inch of RR sections were filled on every round section last summer while I had waist issues with the BOP's. The BOP waist was reduced by using very strong 2 queen colonies, but there was still waist (not sure what percent, but I would guess less than 20%). My wife is invited to schools and libraries to talk about bees, and the partially finished BOP's are great for the kids.
Since we are getting $5.00 for BOP's and $8.00 for RR's I plan on continuing with both.


----------



## Boris

HVH said:


> ...Bees generally don't like plastic and will draw out RR more readily... (I can confirm this part of your statement - Boris).
> 
> ...The BOP waist was reduced by using very strong 2 queen colonies, but there was still waist (not sure what percent, but I would guess less than 20%)...



HVH, 

Did you apply the sugar syrup or wax for your BOP's?

Boris


----------



## HVH

I sprayed on the sugar syrup.


----------



## honeyshack

*Bop Vs Rr*

Last year was my first year using the Bee o pac system. I did not like them.
Why?
Because the supers did not fit the bop frame. The bees spent more time building up to the bop than filling them.
The bees filled some on a frame and not others. Some were completely full, others were not. The frames couldnto be reuses the next year so, they were wasted.
Now on to the lids
the lids fit ok but not a great seal. It pops open easily, leaks and is generally messy. The lids stay on well if a wrap label is used, but they are not cheap either.
Would i use them again? No...but if the Ross Rounds fail me this year, could change my mind

The ross rounds
This is my first year. I bought them from a bee auction and paid about 3 bucks for 2 complete supers.
I bought the rings and covers. I have to admit that being totally clueless, I did not by the foundation and the bee supply store, who knew i was a novice did not mention the foundation. I had to pull the supers and get the foundation and put them back in. I hope i am not to late.

Putting the rings in proved to be a challenge, being a novice and all, but got it figured out. I hope i can figure out how to get the rings out an make it look presentable. 
As for cost and waste, I'll get back to you on that.


----------



## Wild Honey

*Re: Bop Vs Rr*

I've enjoyed reading every page of this thread. There has been a lot of good conversations. Even though this thread is old, I believe it should be resurrected. I have two bee-o-pac frames in each super. I'll post up the results when we harvest at the end of September. I like the bee-o-pac method for it's cleanliness. I did not brush the plastic with wax or sugar water.


----------



## Riverbottom

*Re: Bop Vs Rr*

I am interested in your results. I purchased a BOP system this year but will wait till next year to put in on during heavier flows.


----------



## Wild Honey

*Re: Bop Vs Rr*



Riverbottom said:


> I am interested in your results. I purchased a BOP system this year but will wait till next year to put in on during heavier flows.


As of today, I noticed that the bees have started to build in the super on two of the three hives that contain the bee-o-pacs. It appears that they are building comb in one sectional box before they start in another box. It's much too early to know what the success rate will be, but at least they are accepting the plastic thus far. I placed two - three bee-o-pac frames in the middle of each super. I then placed regular frames around the bee-o-pacs. I'm hoping that this arrangement will encourage the bees to fill as much of the bee-o-pac as possible. I don't know how long our honey flow is going to last here at 7,000 feet. We've already dipped into the 40's for nighttime lows.


----------

