# A Housel Find



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Solomon Parker said:


> It was just an interesting find.


And that's what it was.


----------



## Ted Kretschmann (Feb 2, 2011)

Sol ,can you tell me why the fuss over housel cell positioning???? As a commerical beekeeper, I do not worry about such things. I worry about if my comb is built straight in my frames. I have had a colony a time or two that literally was knocked over upside down. The bees just kept going. The comb they created in a space between the frames was orientated just as gravity would have them engineer it. TK


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

Nope.


----------



## Ted Kretschmann (Feb 2, 2011)

Nope???? Then why post this thread if you are unwilling to explain the Housel cell positioning theory??? There maybe some people out there in cyber land that have never heard of such and would not know what a "housel find" is. TK


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

Because you've demanded this before Ted, no reason to do it again. Let's save the explanations for people who really want to hear them.


----------



## Michael Palmer (Dec 29, 2006)

Solomon Parker said:


> Let's save the explanations for people who really want to hear them.


OK, I really want to hear them. What's the big deal with Housel positioning.


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

http://www.beesource.com/point-of-v...ning-how-i-view-its-importance-to-beekeeping/


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Barry surely you know the housel thing is a fallacy I'm surprised you are promoting this waste of time.

Your name is even mentioned in this report so you must be aware-

http://beenatural.wordpress.com/small-cell/housel-positioning/

For people to have confidence in this forum they need to feel they can trust the information given.


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

I simply gave a link to the explanation of HP. I wasn't taking a (housel) position on the matter.

Personally, I have never been able to find any correlation of the theory to my own hives and what I've seen in feral comb. That's the Birkey Position!


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

...and I use it but don't care either way. That's the Parker Position.


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

This is why I like to check in here occasionally it's like a cross between doctoral research and tailgater. Enough for one day me and bubba is goin fishing.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

And I don't use it, because I could have done something that IS useful, instead. That's the Oldtimer position!


----------



## Omie (Nov 10, 2009)

jim lyon said:


> it's like a cross between doctoral research and tailgater.


You say that like they are two different things! :banana:

When I look at the Y's on my comb, they look like they could face any old direction, depending on how you reset your brain, like an optical illusion.

I take the Omie-el position... whatever strikes my fancy on any particular day!


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

> http://www.beesource.com/point-of-vi...to-beekeeping/


I don't see that this article is signed. Who wrote it?


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Dee Lusby.

Interesting writing style employed in the article. Housel Theory is presented and explained, and questions are raised as to wether our not doing this could be the cause of various ailments of bees. By the end of the article a novice could be left thinking these questions are facts.

But by the end of the article no actual proof of the Housel Theory is offered at all. Just leading questions, and then what the author believes we should do about it.

An almost exact copy of the article could be written using the same techniques, to show the opposite.


----------



## Ramona (Apr 26, 2008)

When I'm putting frames in the hive, I find the housel position on foundation, mark frames and install them in the housel position. If using foundationless frames, I mark directions on frames and keep them oriented in that position if I move them later.

Marking and maintaining order takes very little of my time. I don't have a strong opinion on "housel positioning" as Dee explains it but I know that there are things that may not be obvious to me that have a reason beyond my immediate comprehension or understanding.

I have helped Dee do multiple cutouts from swarm traps in the desert where I observed the housel positioning in trap after trap. It may be that when the bees are uniform and/or allowed to adapt to their environment that housel positioning becomes more uniform. 

Meanwhile, it doesn't hurt anything for me to maintain a level of consciousness re: comb orientation in the hive. I like to maintain the broodnest the way the bees have set it up as much as possible and keeping track of frame orientation helps me to do that.

I'm also open to the idea that housel positioning may have other explanations for what I have observed. Many things follow this pattern: observations are made but attributed to different causes at different points in time/history. This is not the same as the observations being false.

I would never tell another person that they are wrong for not following/caring about housel positioning but I try to follow it regardless. 

Ramona


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Ramona said:


> I would never tell another person that they are wrong for not following/caring about housel positioning but I try to follow it regardless. Ramona


I would never tell another person to put time into a practice that has not been shown to reap any benefit whatsoever.

I've watched a video of Dee working her hives and it's clear she always has housel positioning in the back of her mind and is constantly switching frames around to comply with it.

I guess I'm from an environment where there were 4,000 hives to care for and time was precious. We manipulated brood frames a lot the hives were managed intensively, getting everything right from a housel position perspective may have interfered with optimum brood comb placement, as well as being another thing to spend valuable time thinking about, time that could have been used productively.

Having said all that, for a hobbyist who wants to do it, fine with me as it does no harm, unless preventing optimum brood manipulation which is unlikely to be a concern to many of them as the effect would still be minor. But to someone with a lot of hives the cumulative loss of time and best brood nest management would show, in some small measure, in the balance books.


----------



## Ted Kretschmann (Feb 2, 2011)

In the real world, commercial beekeepers do not care about "Housel Positioning". Your time is better spent figuring out ways to maintain large healthy colonies that are productive with out the distraction of the above mentioned theory. That is the Kretschmann position.TK


----------



## BeeCurious (Aug 7, 2007)

For someone, preferably a hobbyist, who would like to read more about Housel Positioning there are plenty of postings in the archives.

This is an early thread on the topic:

http://www.beesource.com/forums/sho...oundation-for-Good-Alignment&highlight=housel


----------



## Kingfisher Apiaries (Jan 16, 2010)

jim lyon said:


> This is why I like to check in here occasionally it's like a cross between doctoral research and tailgater. Enough for one day me and bubba is goin fishing.


LOL...you and Dean catch anything? I do believe some of the stuff here...just some people look way to much into stuff....housel was probably on a USDA payroll to figure this kind of stuff....love to look at the bee magazines at all the researchers....glad I came after the 60s-70s LOL
mike


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

> Well that's very peace and love, but I would never tell another person to put time into a practice that has not been shown to reap any benefit whatsoever.


So for you it doesn't matter. There are many things that are subjective about bee keeping. If it doesn't matter to you then don't do it but if it matters to me I will do it. So far this thread has proven nothing to the effect that it isn't a benefit. To each his own.


----------



## Stonefly7 (Nov 3, 2005)

Well Oldtimer, I got to tell ya. Today we were supering a couple hundred hives. At # 68, I took the level and threw it at Ted. I told him I did not think that was funny! He spent the next twenty minutes drying the tears from his eyes. 

I think it would take three months to get through the hives, and by that time a thousand would have swarmed. Have a Housel day!


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Ha Ha! Cheers!


----------



## Omie (Nov 10, 2009)

Solomon Parker said:


> Today I was checking a hive in which I had placed a foundationless frame. I found a lobe of new comb aligned exactly as Housel Theory suggests.
> I'm not saying it's proof of anything, in fact there was another lobe on the same frame with the more typical slant.


If anything, to me these two differing lobes would tend to imply that bees don't follow Housel position.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

Omie, I'm starting to think no one noticed the wink.


----------



## Omie (Nov 10, 2009)

Solomon Parker said:


> Omie, I'm starting to think no one noticed the wink.


Oh- I didn't! Didn't see it because it was 'hiding' in the title. inch:


----------



## Ted Kretschmann (Feb 2, 2011)

Sol, I would not worry about that. Though I will admitt I had a lot of laughs picking at Stonefly who was helping me today. A three foot level whizzing by my head made me wonder what position I would have been in if he had hit me with it. It would not have been housel position. Just remember it is a manangement difference. You can worry with items like housel positioning while I with many, many colonies can not. You should have seen Tim out there trying to level beehives so the bees would draw wax out correctly, the housel way. So as Tim stated, Sol, have a Housel Day!! TK


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

Oldtimer said:


> Well that's very peace and love,


Man, you're grouchy today! Bah humbug!


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Yikes Ted, If I ever get to visit & check out your bees, please make sure Stonefly leaves his level at home!


----------



## BeeCurious (Aug 7, 2007)

Why do you commercial guys concern yourselves so much with a minor branch of hobbyist beekeeping?


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Some law against it?

Why do hobbyists talk about what they think commercial beekeepers do?


----------



## rrussell6870 (May 14, 2009)

How did I miss this thread?! "Peace and love", "Flying Levels"... I feel left out... sigh... 

So what's the score here anyway? Housel -0, Common sense -73? Lol. ;-)


----------



## frazzledfozzle (May 26, 2010)

:pinch:[/QUOTE said:


> This is a wink? LOL I thought it was a bottom !


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

This whole conversation just reminds me that if I ever discover anything new, not to tell anybody. It's not worth it.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

> Why do commercial beekeepers concern themselves with a minor branch of hobbyist beekeeping


They don't want anybody to find a different way then theirs that works.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Although it isn't strictly 'Housel', do most beekeepers agree that removed frames should be put back in the same orientation (and order)? You know, don't flip frames.

There may not be any 'Ys' involved, but it sounds alot like Housel to me.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Some do, probably less so the commercial beekeepers.

For me, I don't try to put stuff back how it was, usually if I'm in a brood nest it's for some kind of manipulation anyway so combs are going to get moved. So for example if it's spring and the bees are planning to expand the brood nest, I might help them with that.

If using artificial comb foundation, I guess housel positioning could be done simply enough by marking the frames as Ramona described, as the housel position has been imposed on the bees by the design of the comb foundation and can be ordered as the beekeeper wishes. 

But for someone keeping bees naturally, ie on comb they have built the way they want (natural comb not comb foundation), the housel position is less well defined and in fact is fequently all over the place. It will vary across the same comb, almost random, although some ways are easier for the bees to build than others. That would make it much harder for a natural comb beekeeper to order the housel position how he thinks it should be by arranging frames one way or another, although the natural beekeeper will probably as much as he can, allow the bees to leave it the way they built it. It would have to be more the way the bees did it, and from what I've seen they don't appear to care much.

But bees are adaptable if anything. Give them artificial comb foundation with housel postion ordered how we want it rather than how they would have done it, and even different cell sizes than they would have built themselves, they will take advantage of our gift and follow what we have designed for them if they think it's the easiest way and they can live with it. Amazing little creatures!


----------



## rrussell6870 (May 14, 2009)

Solomon Parker said:


> This whole conversation just reminds me that if I ever discover anything new, not to tell anybody. It's not worth it.


Sure it is... just don't expect to be showered with praise if you try to convince us that bees are healthier when they wear scuba gear and eat skittles. ;-)


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

Once the frames are drawn out I don't think it makes any difference. As I understand the benefit of Housel positioning it is because the egg is laid into a partially drawn comb (crotch of the Y). Once the cell is fully formed it makes no difference. The egg will not fall out. If what I said is true then the only concern is when you introduce new foundation.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

Oldtimer said:


> But for someone keeping bees naturally, on comb they have built the way they want (natural comb), the housel position is less well defined and in fact is all over the place, almost random.


This statement is confusing to me. It is because of natural comb that Housel positioning was discovered. Geometrically it makes sense. The "Y's" have to be inverted on the reverse side of the comb.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Not that simple. Read that article I linked early on, it explains it well. Best of all, it's written by a natural beekeeper, on a natural beekeeping web site.


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

there are a few things to consider here:

1. What do the bees do? I've seen some evidence of housel positioning in cutouts, but I haven't done so many that I am convinced by the numbers.

2. Why do they do what they do? I dunno. I don't really buy the "shelf" explanation that Dee refers to, but that does not mean that there isn't some basis or reason. If the bees do this, they do so for a reason....perhaps one that is irrelevant from the beekeepers perspective, perhaps not.

3. WRT Dee's videos and housel positioning....one thing I've never heard anyone say about watching Dee work is, "gee, she is working so slowly...if she didn't pay attention to housel positioning she could actually work fast." With the way she is working, there is not much cost in terms of time.

4. Dee is too good a beekeeper to simply reject her observations that she was able to build the hives up bigger and have them swarm less after housel positioning the frames. You can call her mistaken, you can call her a liar...but Dee has a uniquely successful operation without feeding and without treating. If one were to dismiss her "useless" or "irrelevant" techniques (small cell, no treatments, no feeding, making one's own foundation, walk away splits, minimal AFB control, etc), one would end up with the kind of operation that many beekeepers have....beekeepers who's bees simply die without feeding and without treatment. Obviously _something_ is working...but according to the experts here, nothing she does works or has any bearing.


> We must believe in luck. For how else can we explain the success of those we don't like?
> ~ Jean Cocteau


5. There is NOTHING idiotic about applying observations about what bees do without bekeepers to beekeeping....this is what beekeeping IS. ...it is "misplaced arrogance" to assume that something that YOU don't pay attention to is irrelevant.

deknow


----------



## BeeCurious (Aug 7, 2007)

According to the theory the "Y's" are inverted on the side facing the center comb... if I'm not mistaken. The center comb is, well, a center comb..


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Did you two read my link?


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

I read it!!! :lookout:But that's just the kind of guy I am.

It's actually not the first time I read it. I enjoy reading that website. He's one of the good ol' boys from when I first started here. So few of them still contribute.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Well he's a Hero now!!!!

But I was more asking DeKnow, BeeCurious, and even AceBird. They may take from him, what they would never understand from me.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

> Read that article I linked early on, it explains it well. Best of all, it's written by a natural beekeeper, on a natural beekeeping web site.


I did read it and came to the conclusion he was trying to convince himself that there was no science to the Housel positioning. When I look at the photos he provided I don't see why he has a difficult time determining the orientation of the Y structure. It appears obvious to me and quite uniform for a bee constructing geometry with out the use of T-squares and triangles or global positioning aids. It is pretty hard for me to take him seriously. That being said, I am a new beek and if there is something that offers promise without any documented negative effects I am all for it. Why beat up a theory when all you have to offer in defense is sarcasm?


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Why support the theory when all that's offered in it's defense is sarcasm?

If you couldn't see what the guy in the article was pointing out, that's the reality for you. Looked obvious to me though.

It is not reasonable to propose a theory and expect people to do it, and instead of proving it, demand others disprove it.

I've decided to propose a theory bees are happier if you talk to them. Disprove it.

See why that kind of reasoning does not do it for most of us? 

AND, not being sarcastic, purely illustrating a point.


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

Oldtimer said:


> It is not reasonable to propose a theory and expect people to do it...


I'd be curious to know who you think expects you to do what, and why you would care?

deknow


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Me? In particular?

I don't think anybody expects me to follow this theory DeKnow. Why would I? One worthwhile reason?


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

> I don't think anybody expects me to follow this theory DeKnow.


...neither do I, which is why I don't understand why you seem to think they are.
deknow


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

Oldtimer said:


> It is not reasonable to propose a theory and expect people to do it...





Oldtimer said:


> I don't think anybody expects me to follow this theory


 
So it's not reasonable to do something no one is doing? What's the argument here?


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Sol you've strung two part sentences of mine together to sound like something I did not mean, and then from that, asked a question that makes no sense at all in relation to the meaning of what I actually said.

I said nothing at all that could sound like "So it's not reasonable to do something no one is doing?" Total fabrication.

"What's the argument here?" In this case, you are.

You cannot be wanting a serious answer and I will not be giving you one.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

Fair enough.


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

Acebird said:


> The "Y's" have to be inverted on the reverse side of the comb.


No they don't. That old thread that BeeCurious posted the link to has a photo I posted of feral comb that has a totally different pattern. I'll find it and post a new link to it as the old one no longer works.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

Variations of the pattern will exist in feral comb because the cells are not all the same size. That is going to shift the "Y's" around a little because that Y pattern that you see in the bottom of one cell is the walls of the cell behind it. If you look at a group of cells that are both the same size on both sides of the comb the Y will face down on one side and face up on the other. It is a geometry thing which is why it is apparent on manufactured foundation. I knew nothing of Housel positioning when we set up our first hive and didn't learn of it until after we set up our second hive. I don't know how our frames are set today because I have yet to dismantle the deeps. I suspect they are every which way. However, I see no negative reason to follow this method in the future. Someone smarter than me thinks there is an advantage.


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

And it's not possible that somebody smarter than you (in beekeeping) could think there is no advantage? I still hope we can all think critically when it comes to things like this. Respectfully as well.


----------



## Ted Kretschmann (Feb 2, 2011)

Housel Smousel, It boils down to how many hives do you have??? How much time are you going to spend in colony?? Sol has five hives, he will spend hours learning the particulars of each one of them. As a commercial beekeeper, I might physically work up to a 150 hives a day. We manipulate brood nest. We move frames around between colonies. We make splits .We add foundation. Worrying Where the "Y" is in partially drawn comb is insanity if you are working lots of colonies. You do not have time to worry about such things. Producing boiling healthy colonies that produce honey that affects my bottom line is the last letter "Y" in the word worry for me. Housel theory, it is just a theory. Nobody has ever proven it factual enough to call it a "Law". And really a bee could not care. TK


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

Eight.


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

OK, here is that photo.










Bees will make comb all different ways. They adjust to the environment they're in. Sorry, just a tad oversize.


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

Ted Kretschmann said:


> Worrying Where the "Y" is in partially drawn comb is insanity if you are working lots of colonies. You do not have time to worry about such things.


Ted, everyone knows that you have "many" hives and you're commercial. I don't need to continually be reminded of that. It really has no bearing on these things. No one is telling you this is what you ought to do. If it doesn't apply to you, simply remain quiet. I know this, if HP happen to prove to reduce mites or disease, Ted would be spending the time doing it. You worry about things with your beekeeping that I don't. It goes both ways.

If we want to discuss the science (or lack thereof) behind HP, let's do it, but please spare us the other parts.


----------



## Ted Kretschmann (Feb 2, 2011)

Barry, like you said bees adjust to the environment they are in. In the my very first post on this thread I mentioned that bees even in colonies that had been literally knocked up side down, did fine, adjusted their comb building accordingly to the direction of gravity. Yes, if a management method were shown to reduce disease and increase the bottom line, while keeping colonies healthy and productive, I and every other commercial beek across this land and even over seas would adapt their managment accordingly. TED


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

Yes, you said that already.


----------



## BeeCurious (Aug 7, 2007)

Ted Kretschmann said:


> Housel Smousel, It boils down to how many hives do you have??? How much time are you going to spend in colony??


Why can't you leave these people alone? Hobbyists are free to spend as much time and money as they care to...

Ted, 

Even though you don't agree with the theory, don't you think members should be free to have a discussion?


----------



## Omie (Nov 10, 2009)

If Housel P. was shown to make a small improvement in bee health or productivity, it still would have to be a big enough improvement for large commercial beeks to feel it was worth the extra labor involved in doing it. They wouldn't jump right into doing it, because they must take into account the bottom line, overall commercial profit. But small beeks and hobbiests might well be happy to use HP on their smaller number of hives and reap whatever benefit it might produce. Or they might simply enjoy experimenting with it (duh, what a concept!).
Just because some method is not worthwhile to a commercial BK profit-wise doesn't mean it might not be worthwhile to someone else. A BK-ing method shouldn't be dismissed in the TF forum simply because commercial BKs may not find it practical or profitable. This issue comes up a lot here.


----------



## Stonefly7 (Nov 3, 2005)

Exactly Omni,

Let folks do as they wish. We were just having fun with each other joking around.

Barry posted some good pics. The rest of the big bad commercial folks are just watching. Already got a call from two. I hope those who try it get the results they hope for.

Kind regards


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

That's a good pic Barry. I think it's a good illustration that housel position manipulation can be done by a beekeeper if using foundation, but very difficult if using natural comb, as across an entire frame the housel positioning will often be all over the place.

I tried to explain it earlier but my explanation was confusing if the person has not seen much natural comb. A pic is worth a thousand words.

Also, this is a theory, I'm thinking bees build the comb whatever way is easiest for them. There is not an exact plan. That pic shows they are not concerned with exact housel positioning, or having them exactly opposite or whatever.
Any pattern that SEEMS to be present, may have more to do with the way it was easiest for the bees to build it, rather then some mysterious purpose in terms of what brood needs to be healthy.

Here's another pic. A typical year or so old brood comb. Is housel positioning, as per artificially exact comb foundation human imposed housel positon, really going to matter?


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

I'm always a bit baffled by the animosity that Housel seems to bring out in people. 

I started experimenting at the same time that Dennis (see the link posted by Oldtimer) did (Dee had just written her article that Barry had posted). 9 times out of 10 they would build the center comb as predicted by Dee/Michael Housel:
http://www.bushfarms.com/images/PrimaryCombOnBlankStarterStrip.JPG
http://www.bushfarms.com/images/TypicalPrimaryComb.JPG

One out of ten I would see this:
http://www.bushfarms.com/images/ConfusedPrimaryComb.JPG
http://www.bushfarms.com/images/ConfusedPrimaryCombCloseup.JPG

This is consistent with another study (quoted by Jim Fischer at the time) that was done on orientation where they only let them build one comb in an observation hive and concluded that the cells ran vertically (or to put it another way the cells had the flats at the top) which is the same result stated in a different way. Except that he never did anything but a center comb. However, I (and Dennis) could find no real pattern on the remaining combs. I keep meaning to get back to that experiment and see if I can find some kind of pattern, but I could not discern one other than the primary (first) comb being fairly consistent and the rest not.

If Housel theory is true, it would explain why sometimes you pull a comb out that the bees are ignoring or misdrawing and flip it around and they start drawing it correctly.

I noticed a few years ago that Pierco started shipping with a sheet that says you line the "Y"s all up the same way to get them to draw it better. Which sounds like a lopsided Housel poisitioning... so apparently Dee is not the only one who thinks it matters...


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Lot's of people think it matters. Nobody can explain why though. A strange quirk of the human condition, to say the least.









The Oldtimer position, is that if the bees build it that way more often than they don't, that's because it's easiest for them to build it that way. Nothing more.

They have to build it some way.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Michael Bush said:


> If Housel theory is true, it would explain why sometimes you pull a comb out that the bees are ignoring or misdrawing and flip it around and they start drawing it correctly....


So just so I'm getting this, you believe the bees will be drawing the combs normally, but in the middle of them one will be getting ignored? Then, you turn it round, and they start drawing it?

I've never had that experience.

The experience I've had is kind of opposite. I don't worry about housel positioning at all. So presumably, when I put a box of foundation on a hive, from a housel perspective it's likely to be all messed up.
The bees start at some point in the box, often the middle, and draw the combs out progressively from that point, NEVER ignoring one and drawing all the ones around it. So my experience, would be that for comb drawing, housel positioning matters not. If it did I would surely have seen an effect.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

> And it's not possible that somebody smarter than you (in beekeeping) could think there is no advantage?


Yes, of course. But that won't hurt me. Adhering to the Housel positioning has an outside chance that it will help me.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

> If Housel P. was shown to make a small improvement in bee health or productivity, it still would have to be a big enough improvement for large commercial beeks to feel it was worth the extra labor involved in doing it.


Bingo Omie.

Barry, even in the photo that you provided I can clearly see that most of the cells are oriented in the same direction. If the bees start building varying size cells for drones for instance then that pattern will get messed up. It's geometry. What I find interesting is that away from the larger cells they go right back to the same pattern again. So for some reason it matters to the bees. Someone who cares about the bees is more likely to take note and provide to them what makes them happy.


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

"So for some reason it matters to the bees." - Acebird

In my observation, I haven't been able to come to this conclusion. Bees operate under instinct, so they do things a certain way because that's the way they were made to do it. They also have an ability to cope/adjust when things are not 'usual.' They adapt their comb to fit a particular spot. Only in our nice neat white boxes are things precise. Hollow trees and building cavities Are very irregular. When I study feral comb, I haven't been able to come to any conclusive evidence that comb/cell orientation plays a significant role in colony health and well being.

I have always been more interested in the concept of comb order, which is part of HP. If bees build their nest a certain way (order of comb), do we in anyway do harm or set back by changing/moving the combs around? Comb position, not comb orientation. Hard to say. Common sense tells me I ought to respect the order of the comb that bees construct as that's the way they want it, yet comb has been manipulated for many, many years and bees have thrived. Could be it matters, but at such a minuscule level that renders it moot. Is HP another weapon in the TF arsenal that beekeepers can use with repeatable results? I just haven't seen it. I want more than '[doing it] has an outside chance that it will help me.'


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

> I want more than '[doing it] has an outside chance that it will help me.'


We are all wanting a proven method that you can count on but the brightest minds in the world are stumped.
You don't want to upset the order of the bees and you don't see orientation as a form of order?:s


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

Acebird said:


> We are all wanting a proven method that you can count on but the brightest minds in the world are stumped.


Who?


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

The arguments you have raised in the last few posts, AceBird, appear based on what you can see in the pic Barry posted.

While that pic does show variations in housel positioning, it does not show all possible variations, there are many.

If you had seen as much natural comb as Barry has, or even just a wider range of natural comb, I believe you would be better placed to make an informed judgement, some of your conclusions and assumptions are overly simplistic.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

> some of your conclusions and assumptions are overly simplistic.


I find you have a better chance of success no matter what you try to solve by keeping it simple. Some people don't take that approach.


----------



## kennedy (Jul 31, 2009)

acebird study soap bubble theory.its good background in natural comb development. the bottom of the cell of course is where people like to find contention and soap bubble dont cover that. Dee A Lusby is ahead of her time in some ways regards kennedy


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

> acebird study soap bubble theory


There appears to be many topics on this so I don't know where you are going with this or even if you are joking.:s


----------



## BeeCurious (Aug 7, 2007)

It's not a joke. 

Knowledge is not always easy to give...


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

BeeCurious said:


> Knowledge is not always easy to give...


...nor receive, especially when given in 'go read such and such' nebulous statements.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

Acebird said:


> Some people don't take that approach.


Who?


----------



## kennedy (Jul 31, 2009)

with out a little classical mechnics its hard to understand honeybees relationship to wax and combbuilding as you dont like soap bubbles ill try hotdogs. meat packer have a problem when the dog come out of the casing machine thay are round when thay put the dogs in a square box thay go flat on 2 sides or 4 sides same physics principle effects hot dogs effects wax effects soap bubbles with respect for people on this forum kennedy


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Acebird said:


> Some people don't take that approach.





Solomon Parker said:


> Who?


Well he was replying to me, in the context, he's obviously referring to me.

But he misunderstands what I meant by overly simplistic. Probably intentionally. As he said, keeping things simple can be a good thing. By overly simplistic though, I meant leaping to the first obvious conclusion while not having considered all the facts, or to be more precise in this case, having seen enough types natural comb (if he's seen any) to be able to draw a factual based conclusion. Instead just arriving at the first "obvious' one, based on a small and incomplete dataset.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

Using weasel words is just a bad way to communicate. It's not helpful to the discussion at all. Let's not communicate like children. 

Well...*some people* _don't like_ to eat boogers!


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Some people is out? Heck another thing I have to remember. Surely it depends on context it may not be weasel words (whatever that is).

eg, some people graft larvae, some people use a graftless system. No issues in that context surely.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

Of course, context is king.

If you were to say "some people in this forum don't know what a drone is" you might not get away with out a challenge.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

Whew, I think I am going to sit back.opcorn:

I have completely lost the direction of this thread. weasel words, soap bubbles, hot dogs, drones, Solomon asking me who, who, who like its a mating call from some owl.

You guys win, have at it.t:


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Well dude, you really know how to make friends and influence people!


----------



## Omie (Nov 10, 2009)

I still say the trouble with looking at a "Y" shape with all its angles being equal is that depending on how your brain is set that day it can look like it's oriented in various ways. Not so with hot dogs- you kind of _know_ when they are upright or lying on their side!  :shhhh:


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

t:

Back to Housel Positioning. How many have actual experience using it?

Also, how do you pronounce it, Housel as in House-el or Hou-sel like You-sel.


----------



## kennedy (Jul 31, 2009)

housel is ok with me its a presons sur name there are 1000son of people i guess use it


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

> I still say the trouble with looking at a "Y" shape with all its angles being equal is that depending on how your brain is set that day it can look like it's oriented in various ways.


That can vary from person to person. Some people have a hard time with spacial relationships yet they can speak 6 languages. I can barely speak one but I have a keen eye for geometry.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

Acebird said:


> Some people have a hard time with spacial relationships yet they can speak 6 languages.


Who are these people?


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Solomon Parker said:


> t:
> 
> How many have actual experience using it?.


Me! Can you believe, but I did try it in a small way.

I have not tried it in a hive proper, but back when I was using baby nucs we used to put little bits of foundation in the combs. or bars. Then, after years, I first heard of housel position theory, and, horror of horrors, the way we cut the foundation, the housel position was "wrong", instead of an upright, or upside down Y, we were giving the bees a kind of sideways one. Previously we had not considered this mattered much.

As it's a struggle for baby nucs anyway, we decided to use a different cut, of the foundation, to get the housel position right, "just incase"! We still didn't worry about which way round the comb went though, in that situation there REALLY isn't time.

Did it make any difference? I don't think so but did not do actual statistics to find out.

Pro houselists may be surprised how many other queenbreeders have been down the same journey also.


----------



## BeeCurious (Aug 7, 2007)

"You-sel"?

Silent "H"? Wouldn't that be more like "ough-sel"?

I think we should open a new thread, take a poll, and settle on one pronunciation.

Even if we're all wrong, at least we will be in agreement.


On the serious side, now that about 85% of my "hobbyist" frames are trimmed down to 1 1/4" width I might play with positioning the frames. The idea of having a center comb in an even numbered box of frames seemed a little odd to me.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

Like HOUSE-el or HOO-sel. Hou like who, or Hou like how.

In a video of Dean's, I heard it pronounced like who.


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

Perhaps someone could just call the guy and get this settled.


----------



## kennedy (Jul 31, 2009)

i enjoy studying it my self bee curious do you know if sub families associate in there own group in the nest ive ben told you can select swarm cell that way. its an old way regards kennedy


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Barry said:


> Perhaps someone could just call the guy and get this settled.


Yes, it would go

"Hello, Housell"

"Who, Whosel"

"Whosel"

"How"

"Howsel"

"You mean like a mating owl"

"go Hoosel yourself"


----------



## BeeCurious (Aug 7, 2007)

You didn't think Dean would be pronouncing it correctly?

"Whosel's on first"?


----------



## kennedy (Jul 31, 2009)

soap bubbles will always find the smallest surface between points or edges. bees dont do it for bubbles , there is an invisible force of nature at work in your honey bee hive. how can there be varience at the bottom unless some other force is at play


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Since we all hear words in our own head in our own voice, what does it matter how Housel is pronounced, unless we are actually talking to Mr. Housel. Having "housen" in my name, I imagine it's pronounced hows-L w/out emphasis.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

I'd imagine the guy would like his name to be pronounced correctly. I doubt you'd appreciate being called Mork all the time.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

How someone hears it in their own head doesn't bother me. There are more important things to worry about. And you should hear and see all of the different ways Berninghausen is pronounced and spelled.  Just my 2 cents. Go for it.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

Anyone else who has tried it?


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>do most beekeepers agree that removed frames should be put back in the same orientation (and order)? You know, don't flip frames.

That's more because combs are always uneven and not perfect, but the face of one always fits the face opposite and the organization of the nest is what they want. So yes, I try to put it back like it was unless I'm opening the brood nest, in which case I have to rearrange things...


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

I posted a picture of the comb in the OP on my blog in case anyone is interested.


----------



## cforbes (Feb 6, 2011)

I agree with Mike! Sounds like a petty spat between old timers . . .


----------

