# reusing frames vs trashing them



## xcugat (Mar 4, 2008)

Hello commercial beekeepers,

I currently have 10 hives (Knock on wood) so assuming they make it through this vicious winter I plan on splitting them all at least once to make 20 plus hives. I am trying to think in all things beekeeping from a business rather than hobby standpoint in terms of costs and time utilization. So my question is for all the commerical guys out there, when it is time to replace comb be it in the supers or in the brood nest, do you clean and reuse frames, or just burn them and buy new? It seems that the time to make all new frames and slap in a foundation (especially the plastic kind) is quicker than trying to clean the frames, and when you buy them in bulk they are much cheaper. What do you think?


----------



## Honey-4-All (Dec 19, 2008)

xcugat said:


> Hello commercial beekeepers,
> 
> It seems that the time to make all new frames and slap in a foundation (especially the plastic kind) is quicker than trying to clean the frames, and when you buy them in bulk they are much cheaper.


Anybody who has time to reuse frames is welcome to come to my burn pile and help themselves to anything that will help them get a major case of all the jollies he or she can gain by picking off and recycling them.

When someone talks about redoing things like frames I get bad headaches from recalling dealing with or talking to guys who built equipment on a 30's style depression era budget.

Not I said the frog..........


----------



## NewJoe (Jul 1, 2012)

deleted by newjoe


----------



## TheBuzz (Feb 8, 2012)

Nothing wrong with old comb unless its been treated. Pesticides could perhaps also build up too.

http://beeinformed.org/2012/05/national-management-survey-2010-2011-release-comb-management/

Rather then replace I think I may cycle out my older comb into nucs to sell. getting new frames services 2 purposes then.


----------



## Fusion_power (Jan 14, 2005)

I usually burn them after 30 to 40 years. But I clean and re-use them a time or two along the way.


----------



## xcugat (Mar 4, 2008)

Just to be clear I am taking about moth eaten combs that are shot and need new foundation rather than just old comb. I wanted to see if commercial beekeepers cleaned them out and put new foundation to save the price of the frames, or just burn and get all new


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

xcugat said:


> Just to be clear I am taking about moth eaten combs that are shot and need new foundation rather than just old comb. I wanted to see if commercial beekeepers cleaned them out and put new foundation to save the price of the frames, or just burn and get all new


I don't reuse them, doubt that many commercials do. New wood is around .70, about as much as the foundation that goes in it. I suppose if the frame wasn't too old and flimsy.....


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

Think about it this way, that newly drawn wax is going to be held in a 30 year old frame, which is going to break its tab off, and your going to be removing that comb and snapping it into a new frame anyway. I alway consider the biggest part of the frame investment to be the wax that is drawn on the frame. I always put new wax on new frames.
Just my thoughts


----------



## Roland (Dec 14, 2008)

Your pocket book will make that decision for you.

Crazy Roland


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

yup, re using old frames will buy you some time, if you have the time


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>when it is time to replace comb

I never put chemicals in the hive. I never replace comb.


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

We are already assuming the old comb is unusable. For the sake of this conversation I think it's a distraction to get into WHY it's unusable.


----------



## Honey-4-All (Dec 19, 2008)

Michael Bush said:


> >when it is time to replace comb
> 
> I never put chemicals in the hive. I never replace comb.


Partially OT: Think the question at large was in regard to FRAME reuse.... Fixing them up and reusing old ones VS tossing and starting over.....

Even though you are commendably treatment free I would love to see your protocol that keeps mice, wax moths, and everything else out of hives as well as your technique to never produce a broken ear or two.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

Broken ears, I fix. A wood screw in the end will do. The only ones that get throw out are when the wax moths have weakened them too much or the mice have chewed through them. Of course sometimes a frame gets thrown out, but not very often.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

xcugat said:


> Just to be clear I am taking about moth eaten combs that are shot and need new foundation rather than just old comb. I wanted to see if commercial beekeepers cleaned them out and put new foundation to save the price of the frames, or just burn and get all new


I have to admit, I have spent the time myself doing exactly that. Scraping up the old wooden frame, repair, and snap a new sheet in. Sometimes the two ends that meet, dont meet!


----------



## tommysnare (Jan 30, 2013)

Michael Bush said:


> >when it is time to replace comb
> 
> I never put chemicals in the hive. I never replace comb.



:thumbsup:


----------



## Ben Little (Apr 9, 2012)

I suppose if you had the time to clean the frame properly and the integrity of the wood was good , then it is your decision .

From a business point of view,
I plan to rotate 20-25% of my comb/frames out of my hives each year as a pest management strategy. Selling nucs will keep the frames rotated , I would never sell someone a nuc with garbage frames though . That is a recipe for disease spreading .


----------



## HarryVanderpool (Apr 11, 2005)

Last year I ramped up my comb culling program.
Since we use wooden frames with Permadent black plastic foundation, I found it really fast and easy to press out the old and snap in the new.
We got into the habit of always having a case of foundation with us wherever the trucks are, whatever we were doing.
Of course, there were frames that we decided to toss due to pethy wood or something, but most were a snap! :lpf:
Not using chemicals in the hive is a very sorry excuse for not replacing old comb.
Unless you are keeping bees on mars, your comb builds chemical residue more and more as time goes on.
This includes right down to car exhaust in the area.
Of course, there are no cars on mars.


----------



## Robbin (May 26, 2013)

Michael Bush said:


> >when it is time to replace comb
> 
> I never put chemicals in the hive. I never replace comb.


Mr. Bush, I've been to several classes that recommend replacing all brood comb from 1 to 3 years depending on the instructors opinion. Not because the beekeeper treats, but because the farmers treat their crops. I was thinking maybe 5 years. No way I'm changing comb every year. So did your statement include brood comb, or just honey supers?
Thanks


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

I don't know that it's a bad idea to change combs, but I never change combs. By far the majority of chemicals in most hives is from the beekeepers and they should be changed if you are putting chemicals in, especially lipophilic chemicals like fluvalinate, cumaphos, thymol or other oils. I'm sure some pesticides gets brought in from time to time by the bees, but it also breaks down eventually. Most of the approved pesticides (other than the neonics) have fairly short lives these days.


----------



## Jon B (Apr 24, 2013)

I your frames are moth eaten then I would recommend throwing them away. Other wise you can reuse them. When I make splits I like to put two new frames in per box. If there are two many new frames and you have a drought summer with poor nectar flows than some hives don't build up strong enough for winter.


----------



## Roland (Dec 14, 2008)

Another factor is what percentage of the wax you are able to economically recover from the old comb. At one time we had a fairly good system of melting down old comb and pressing out the wax.

If you are business that prefers to keep the beekeepers busy in the winter, it was another job to keep them out of the bars.

Crazy Roland


----------



## Honey-4-All (Dec 19, 2008)

Roland said:


> If you are business that prefers to keep the beekeepers busy in the winter,* it was another job to keep them out of the bars.
> *
> Crazy Roland


And here folks is the reason for Beesource. After 30+years of building equipment and muddling through baffling beekeeping terms no one really know from whence they came *I finally know why frames parts are not called "sticks" but bars*. Only an old German American from near Milwaukee would be able to come up with and explain the etymological reason of why beekeeping sticks are called what they are. Guess I need to name my next forklift "bouncer" to keep up the tradition. Thanks for the help Roland inch: I wasn't sure what we were gonna call her.


----------



## camero7 (Sep 21, 2009)

Robbin said:


> Mr. Bush, I've been to several classes that recommend replacing all brood comb from 1 to 3 years depending on the instructors opinion. Not because the beekeeper treats, but because the farmers treat their crops. I was thinking maybe 5 years. No way I'm changing comb every year. So did your statement include brood comb, or just honey supers?
> Thanks


I find that bees winter better on old comb. I don't rotate comb out of my hives. I continue to have good winter survival in my production hives.


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

camero7 said:


> I find that bees winter better on old comb. I don't rotate comb out of my hives. I continue to have good winter survival in my production hives.


I generally agree with you Cam. I harshly cull older frames if they have more than about 10% surface area that has been rebuilt as drone comb or if there are any structural problems at all. I cant stand trying to pull out a brood comb and end up pulling out nothing more than a top bar. Replacing on some set schedule? Sorry, but I just have a problem with throwing away fully functional comb. 
Been trying to hold my tongue on Robbin's post, but there are "instructors" out there advocating 1 to 3 year comb replacement? Really? All I can say is wow.


----------



## camero7 (Sep 21, 2009)

I put one foundationless frame in my hives and then cut the drone brood out periodically. I believe this helps with mites and solves the building of drone comb on my brood frames.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

xcugat said:


> Just to be clear I am taking about moth eaten combs that are shot and need new foundation rather than just old comb. I wanted to see if commercial beekeepers cleaned them out and put new foundation to save the price of the frames, or just burn and get all new


Like someone I talked to about sinking more money into my truck said, it's still an old truck.

Maybe some outfits like to reuse old frames, but I suspect that most tend to toss and burn. Then buy new frames. It helps stimulate the economy and new frames are so nice to work with.


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

As the thread seems to keep returning to the 'why' cull....
I'm sure this will stir some debate....but I'm simply repeating what a couple of serious entomologists stated.
It was my understanding that one reason brood comb gets dark is from the waste produced by larvae and pupae. The wax absorbs those wastes until it no longer can....then the brood gets to develop in their own excrement. So even without the consideration of other compounds, whether introduced directly by beekeepers or brought in by the bees themselves, brood comb will eventually become toxic.....to some degree. 
As to the op....I don't reuse any part of mine. There just aren't enough hours in the day.....or I'd have to forego reading and posting on Beesource. Perish the thought.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Michael Bush said:


> I don't know that it's a bad idea to change combs, but I never change combs. By far the majority of chemicals in most hives is from the beekeepers and they should be changed if you are putting chemicals in, especially lipophilic chemicals like fluvalinate, cumaphos, thymol or other oils. I'm sure some pesticides gets brought in from time to time by the bees, but it also breaks down eventually. Most of the approved pesticides (other than the neonics) have fairly short lives these days.


Yes, but do these things show up in the honey? How many combs would one have to change out how often to keep pesticide residues out of the honey?


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

beemandan said:


> As the thread seems to keep returning to the 'why' cull....
> I'm sure this will stir some debate....but I'm simply repeating what a couple of serious entomologists stated.
> It was my understanding that one reason brood comb gets dark is from the waste produced by larvae and pupae. The wax absorbs those wastes until it no longer can....then the brood gets to develop in their own excrement. So even without the consideration of other compounds, whether introduced directly by beekeepers or brought in by the bees themselves, brood comb will eventually become toxic.....to some degree.
> As to the op....I don't reuse any part of mine. There just aren't enough hours in the day.....or I'd have to forego reading and posting on Beesource. Perish the thought.


Seems like someone is assuming that developing bees deficate in their cells. I don't think this is so. Comb becomes dark because the bees don't wash their feet when coming home. They also polish and propolize the cells which adds to their stiffness and darkness, resulting in a small amount of wax rendered from brood combs.


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

sqkcrk said:


> Comb becomes dark because the bees don't wash their feet when coming home.


I guess I'm pretty lucky....my bees evidently wipe their feet before stepping on to my honey comb as it stays nice and white.


----------



## heaflaw (Feb 26, 2007)

As long as the structure is sound and it's still square, I reuse them. Frames don't need to be cleaned up very well to be reused. If there is some good comb along the top, let them draw it out like it is as foundationless. Or, scrape just enough old comb and propolis to put new foundation in. To me, it's quicker than putting a new one together. Or use it for bait hives.


----------



## Specialkayme (Sep 4, 2005)

sqkcrk said:


> Seems like someone is assuming that developing bees deficate in their cells. I don't think this is so.


Really? You don't think a bee voids its bowels at any time before it leaves it's cell?

Honeybee larvae have a rectum. I would imagine it has one to use it, although I can't say I've seen it for myself. Although ABC & XYZ of Bee Culture states that a larvae will void it's bowels right before entering the pre-pupae stage and spinning a cocoon.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Is that stuff absorbed by the cell wall or cleaned up by the cell cleaners?


----------



## Specialkayme (Sep 4, 2005)

Most is cleaned out. I can't say all of it is. Ever take an old brood comb frame and cut it in half? You see some pretty nasty stuff in there. Page 164 of ABC has a good photo (the 41st Edition), if you haven't seen it.


----------



## The Honey Householder (Nov 14, 2008)

sqkcrk said:


> Like someone I talked to about sinking more money into my truck said, it's still an old truck.
> 
> Maybe some outfits like to reuse old frames, but I suspect that most tend to toss and burn. Then buy new frames. It helps stimulate the economy and new frames are so nice to work with.


Right now we are scraping all our brood comb and doing the sort and cut outs. Most of which has been not only in my operation but in many others operations.

Mark, I did my part and bought 5000 new brood frame this year to try and keep the economy going.:thumbsup: With all this cold weather those frames makes a hot fire in the shop too.opcorn:


----------



## johng (Nov 24, 2009)

I'm by no means a commercial beek but, I clean them up and put new wax in them. Some how I forgot to put moth crystals on one stack of supers so needless to say they were trashed. It was about 10 boxes worth of comb. Me and my son cleaned them up in about an hour. At $1 a piece that saved me $100. I can't make that kind of money per hour so I figured it was worth the trouble.


----------



## xcugat (Mar 4, 2008)

Thanks for all the replies. 

I wasn't going to get into the idea as to why to replace comb in this thread but being as the conversation has shifted to that point I would say that eventually ALL comb will become contaminated with outside chemicals regardless of if the beekeeper is treatment free or not. I recently attended a lecture from Jennifer Barry and she pointed out the difficulty of getting wax that had zero contaminants in it even from treatment free beekeepers just because the chemicals are unfortunately inherent in environment.


----------



## HarryVanderpool (Apr 11, 2005)

Here is a report just as an example:
I finished scraping down 32 deadouts today.
From those hives exactly 50 frames had old plastic foundation w/comb that I didn't like for one reason or another snapped out, the frame briefly scraped and new Permadent plastic black foundation snapped back in.
Also 17 wooden frames w/plastic foundation tossed and replaced with new.
Thought I would post this if inquiring minds would be interested.


----------



## Honey-4-All (Dec 19, 2008)

HarryVanderpool said:


> I finished scraping down 32 deadouts today.


Was that it for the year? WOW!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

HarryVanderpool said:


> From those hives exactly 50 frames had old plastic foundation w/comb that I didn't like for one reason or another snapped out, the frame briefly scraped and new Permadent plastic black foundation snapped back in.


Well there you go, perfect example of a situation where the frame is still worthy of use, and a very simple replacement of the foundation renews the frames life.

When I think of culled out frames, I think of the 30 or 40 year old wired frames, because those are the ones I'm culling out. In this case trying to re use the frame is not worth the time and effort


----------



## Chip Euliss (Sep 2, 2010)

I cull old frames that are more than 10% drone comb but sell them to an outfit in South Dakota rather than recycle. I just stack them on an old pallet and store them till I get 4 pallets or so. The place I sell to has a truck that comes here from time-to-time so I just coordinate with them and load them up when they're in town. There is a fellow in Minnesota that will also buy them and I believe he hauls them somewhere in Manitoba but he doesn't pick up here. I think the last time I had a half dozen pellets and several barrels of scrapings, I got a couple thousand bucks if memory serves me.


----------



## Robbin (May 26, 2013)

jim lyon said:


> I generally agree with you Cam. I harshly cull older frames if they have more than about 10% surface area that has been rebuilt as drone comb or if there are any structural problems at all. I cant stand trying to pull out a brood comb and end up pulling out nothing more than a top bar. Replacing on some set schedule? Sorry, but I just have a problem with throwing away fully functional comb.
> Been trying to hold my tongue on Robbin's post, but there are "instructors" out there advocating 1 to 3 year comb replacement? Really? All I can say is wow.


Two of those instructors are State Bee inspectors.... I've been looking for an excuse not to follow that advice. I found it on this thread. :shhhh:


----------



## jean-marc (Jan 13, 2005)

Robbin said:


> Two of those instructors are State Bee inspectors.... I've been looking for an excuse not to follow that advice. I found it on this thread. :shhhh:


With comb being the biggest asset of beekeepers next to the bees themselves, I can understand why these "instructors" are instructing. They would not be able to make it commercially. It is expensive at so many levels for bees to draw frames out. They build up slower and store less honey when they have to build more frames.

We cull pretty hard. We do not have a lot of junk. More than 10% drone comb we cull. Old frames we would cull rather than fool around trying to fix them. If the wood is solid we take the time to snap back in some plastic foundation.

Jean-Marc


----------



## MikeTheBeekeeper (May 18, 2011)

Ben Little said:


> From a business point of view,
> I plan to rotate 20-25% of my comb/frames out of my hives each year as a pest management strategy. Selling nucs will keep the frames rotated


Ben that's a very good way of renewing the wax in your hives.


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

Keith Delaplane's has an interesting column on this vey subject in the March 2014 ABJ thats worth a read. 
The highlights:
According to the Bee Informed Partnership survey, beekeepers who replaced 50% or more of their brood combs with new combs had 31% colony losses in 2011-12 while those that replaced 10% or less had losses about 10% less 

To confuse the issue he reminds us of Jennifer Berry's research showing that new comb produces more brood and heavier bee weight but old comb produced larvae that survived better.

Whats the deal? In a nutshell Keith's theory is that because its much less work for a hive to reuse older comb and that new comb building places significant energy demands on a hive he concludes that (and you really need to read the article to get the full picture) "Apparently the energy conserving benefits of using old combs exceeds the brood-maximizing benefits of using new combs."


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>Whats the deal? 

Maybe it's the thermodynamics of comb with a lot of cocoons vs comb with little or few cocoons...


----------



## rweaver7777 (Oct 17, 2012)

Michael Bush said:


> >Whats the deal?
> 
> Maybe it's the thermodynamics of comb with a lot of cocoons vs comb with little or few cocoons...


Or the resulting smaller bees are less attractive to varroa?


----------



## Fusion_power (Jan 14, 2005)

The sample size may not be large enough to yield relevant results, or the beekeepers who are using older comb are simply more experienced beekeepers who are better at keeping their bees alive. In other words, question the assumptions underlying this very broad generalization.


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

Michael Bush said:


> >Whats the deal?
> 
> Maybe it's the thermodynamics of comb with a lot of cocoons vs comb with little or few cocoons...


Could be a lot of things. I have a hunch that those using a lot of new comb are more "start up" types of bee keepers with little beekeeping experience asking their bees to start from scratch with all new foundation. A challenge for any hive and beekeeper that isn't blessed with an excellent honey flow. Could be sample size doesn't give us a definitive answer. Could be the larger cell size of the new comb together with the additional brood rearing that accompanies it, gives varroa a significant advantage. 
If I might take this last point a step further it might well explain why commercial beekeepers (like Harry and Keith to name two notables) that exchange a lot of comb, and are doing a good job of mite control can consistently come up with strong hives and it might also explain why folks like Michael Bush who don't treat and do little comb replacement (think small......er cell) are able to get by with no treatments. 
One other interesting tidbit from the column. Mr. Dellaplane suggests a 6 year comb replacement might well be in tune with the average age a hive (one that makes it through its first winter) would typically live in the wild based on some of Tom Seeley's past research.


----------



## Bee_Not_Afraid (Feb 24, 2014)

OK. How's this for a crazy theory. If you are using frame with a plastic foundation then the comb size is probably larger than the bees prefer. With each successive use the comb gets slightly smaller. As this progresses the bees are able to cap faster, using less wax because there's less surface area. (faster with less sounds like bee win-win). This would support the "energy conserving benefits" idea. This year I'm beginning the move to all medium deeps with open frames.


----------



## HarryVanderpool (Apr 11, 2005)

jim lyon said:


> Could be the larger cell size of the new comb together with the additional brood rearing that accompanies it, gives varroa a significant advantage.


In the example of the 32 dead-outs that I scraped down and did some replacing in, there were a few hives with bottom boxes that I could tell had not been inspected in some time.
2 or 3 frames in the bottom with large patches of drone comb.
There is no way that the new comb could ever be the varroa generator, of such combs.
Those are the combs that I mainly target.
But of course, there were frames that were dissolving, moldy-oldy junk to the lower outside, frames with patches of entombed pollen, etc....
There is a level of junk frames that new comb will make a certain improvement over.
As an aside, our total losses from the peak number of 2013 is 10.78947%
A little higher than usual but, oh well. We'll do better this year.


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

HarryVanderpool said:


> In the example of the 32 dead-outs that I scraped down and did some replacing in, there were a few hives with bottom boxes that I could tell had not been inspected in some time.
> 2 or 3 frames in the bottom with large patches of drone comb.
> There is no way that the new comb could ever be the varroa generator, of such combs.
> Those are the combs that I mainly target.
> ...


I may have misunderstood your program a bit as this sounds a lot like what we do as well. So, to clarify, are you saying that you dont cull structurally sound frames that have no drone or other issues, simply because of age?


----------



## HarryVanderpool (Apr 11, 2005)

jim lyon said:


> ... are you saying that you dont cull structurally sound frames that have no drone or other issues, simply because of age?












All of our frames are dated. I do take age into consideration when something bugs me about a frame.
Otherwise, no strictly culling by date.
We're on a culling kick again this year, so we will be looking things over as best as we can manage.


----------



## BernhardHeuvel (Mar 13, 2013)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q1EVSALw78k 

Old comb holds much more water than fresh comb does. Old comb (because of the cocoons) can hold 11% of its own weight in water. Fresh comb just 3%. So might be a humidity or water thing.

http://upetd.up.ac.za/thesis/submitted/etd-10022009-135223/unrestricted/dissertation.pdf


----------



## challenger (May 27, 2009)

I know this is an old thread but it seems to fit the bill. I'm scraping frames now because I am waiting for new to come in. This is a despicable job so I'm wondering if others do this regularly? 
No need to rehash the why's etc. I'm just curious about how many folks reuse frames that are perfectly serviceable? 
I've found that putting the frames in my solar melter makes the process much easier as there is much less wax sticking to the wood. Any other tips for scraping other than, "don't bother". 
I can fully understand the lack of economic sense it makes for scraping BUT I feel the need to say that throwing perfectly good wood frames away will stick in the craw of those that feel it wastes tree. This isn't necessarily my opinion but at least it gets the viewpoint in the rear view mirror. For the record (is there a record?) I personally feel it is wasteful to trash good frames. This won't prevent me from doing so if I'm forced to scrape another 100 or so. 
Another point that may be worth mentioning is that it takes time to assemble new frames. Obviously now as much time as scraping but it's still time. 
BTW, I use a painters 5 in 1 tool when I can find mine which I can't right now . I'm stuck with a flimsy putty knife or a hive tool. 
BTW II-FWIW I'm referring to recharging the frames with wax strips or foundation, not plastic. 
AHHHHH! THERE HAS TO BE A BETTER WAY! 
Maybe paying a kid .25/frame? Scratch that. Then I'll have to have some kid hanging around here.


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

challenger said:


> This is a despicable job so I'm wondering if others do this regularly?
> No need to rehash the why's etc.


I do not.


----------

