# Sticky  hobbyist queen rearing setup



## GregB

backyard smallcell said:


> What's the hives, method, and gear subset that you would have on hand and ready?


I wrote a full account of what I am doing. 
Works great for me.
GregV's Alternative way to keep (have?) bees. | Page 87 | Beesource Beekeeping Forums


----------



## RayMarler

Queen Mother Colony in single deep or with excluder with honey box on top
Drone Mother Colony
4 frame nuc, single story, as cell starter/builder
3/4" wide queen cell cup frame with cell bars and plastic cell cups
Chinese grafting tools
Sugar syrup and pollen sub if/as needed for the cell builder nuc
4 frame mating nucs


----------



## jtgoral

A hive tool is needed when doing OTS. And a nuc to put the old queen into it.


----------



## crofter

The Miller method and foundationless frames go well together for simple queen rearing. With plastic foundation the cell notching (OTS) will do for your own queen replacement.
Grafting capabilities gives you quick access to selected larvae from any frame type or size without destroying it. If you want to eliminate purchasing specialized equipment, home dipped wax cups and a grafting tool from a piece of wire or a feather, are quite workable with zero outlay.
If you want to produce many queens on standardized cell holders etc., then equipment such as Ray recommends in post #3

Creating the most supportive conditions for cell starting, finishing, emerging and mating is by far the most demanding than the actual mechanics of the process.


----------



## little_john

As Michael Palmer says, "Queen-rearing is best left to the professionals" - and *who* exactly are the professionals ? 

The* bees* are the professionals - they've been raising queens for millions of years, and are pretty good at it. *For the sort of numbers you're talking about,* all you need to do is setup the simplest possible system, and let the bees do all the work - then just come along at the appropriate moment and take advantage of their efforts.

The J-C system is good, certainly, but it's really designed for continuous queen-rearing. For 10 hives or less you can obtain all the queens you need from a single hit, using just one reasonable strength colony, two (5 to 8-frame) brood boxes, a Queen excluder and a sheet of plastic (or something similar). There's no need for foundation, learning how to graft, shaker-boxes, Nicot-Jenter kit, or any of the other queen-rearing bits and pieces.

You will, however, need a source of bees with which to stock your nuc boxes - but that's a separate issue - what follows here is my tried-and-tested 'modified Miller method' of raising a small number of Virgin Queens.

*STEP 1:* Ok - we'll start-off the year with the colony (in my case) in a 5-over-5 (or even a triple-5) stack. The first job is to inspect the colony and identify exactly where the brood nest is located - then insert an undrawn foundationless frame, with some form of starter-strip, and preferably without any form of comb support (such as monofilament fishing line or bamboo skewers) into the brood nest. A check on that frame (say) 48hrs later should reveal a white comb having already been drawn one or two inches deep. As soon as eggs are seen to be laid in that comb, we can move onto step 2.

*STEP 2:* Shake or brush-off the bees from 2 or perhaps 3 brood combs, taking care to treat the Queen gently, so that the Queen and as much of the colony as possible remain in the bottom box. Place a Queen Excluder over the bottom box, and place a 2nd brood box on top, which should contain the 2 or 3 bee-less brood combs, and a frame each of pollen and honey. I prefer to do this late in the evening, and by early next morning a large number of nurse bees will have ascended through the QX and be covering the brood frames.

*STEP 3:* If you've used 3 brood frames to pull the maximum number of nurse bees up from the bottom box, shake the bees off one of them, and swap it for your white-comb with eggs from the bottom box, ensuring that the Queen is not on the white-comb. If there is any doubt (say, if the Queen is not marked), then very carefully and gently brush the bees off back into the bottom box.

*STEP 4:* We now have a situation where eggs and young larvae are present in a queenless environment, and if left 'as is', one or two supersedure cells would undoubtedly then be drawn. To ensure a larger number of Q/Cells, it's desirable to eliminate all of the Queen's pheromones some of which will be passing across the QX.
To do this, slide a sheet of thick plastic underneath the QX, and leave this in place for at least 24 hrs, after which it should be removed. This is a similar technique to that used by a Cloake Board, and I'd recommend making one if it's
planned to use this Queen-rearing method on a regular basis.

*STEP 5:* Considering the first day eggs were laid as being Day 0, check the white-comb on Day 7, when the Q/Cells should be almost capped. Capping on Day 8 is a good marker for knowing when to cut the Q/Cells out: Day 12 +/- 1 is generally considered to be the safest time for this operation. I find that cutting out the Q/Cells with plenty of surrounding comb, and then attaching this to the Nuc's brood comb with a ****tail stick is easiest. This form of attachment would destroy accurate frame spacing - except that a completely bare frame is used to essentially 'surround' the Queen Cell until such time as the Virgin emerges, at which time that frame may be removed, along with the opened Q/Cell.

And that's about it. You'll probably get Q/Cells drawn-out on both the brood combs as well as the 'white-comb' - whether these are of use depends on whether they can be recovered or not - i.e. if attached against the woodwork. Also - if you find that one or more Q/Cells is/are far in advance of the others, it may be wiser to cull those.

This is how I used to create 'white-comb' starters (a bit unnecessary, looking back):










And a typical result (would have been better without the skewers):










'best.
LJ


----------



## ruthiesbees

I'm small scale but did purchase an inseminated Buckfast breeder queen in 2021. With that purchase, I was determined to graft into JZBZ cells and invested $70 in an incubator to make sure I didn't have cells get torn down by an early emerging virgin. I set up a continuous cell builder starter/finisher in an 8 FR deep with a division board feeder (or two) so it's only a 5-6 frame setup packed with bees that are donated from my other colonies in the form of emerging capped brood. It allows me to raise 20 jumbo cells at a time (although I could probably do more) and I put the finished cells in my double Mann Lake mating nucs (or sell the queen cells or virgins). The same cell builder box has been setup since April and I have not let a mated queen run around in there yet. Just keep adding capped brood. They are constantly supplied with pollen sub and lite syrup. During the spring flow, I did add a second 5Fr deep (with 5FR to 8FR conversion board) to move the capped syrup up there but when I add fresh cells, the bees all get shook down into the bottom box to get things started and then a day or two later, I remove the reflectex foil to give them access to the top box again. I'm just finishing my last round of Michael Palmer queen cells in Virginia for someone who will do I.I. on the virgins I ship him. I'll keep a couple to throw in my larger mating boxes to see if I get some late fall queens. Once I pull the capped cells today, that starter finisher will get a mated queen and get setup for our mild winters.

On occasion, the cell builder has served as the queen bank while I am waiting for a customer to come pick up mated queens. This is in addition to the cells they are feeding. The extra room that the conversion board offers makes them fit nicely on the tops of the frames. (things are a bit non-standard in my apiary and I love it that way).

If you've never raised queens, I do suggest keeping it small (the number of grafts or emergency cells) so you can see how things progress. I have a bunch of videos from a longtime contributor to BeeSource who did a backyard queen rearing course via grafting for our local club back in 2019.http://www.hamptonroadsbeekeepers.org/queenrearing


----------



## NUBE

The main question are, what is your purpose for rearing your own queens? How many do you want? There are a lot of good recommendations above, but it helps if your ultimate goal is known. 

If it’s low numbers of queens needed to start a Queen breeding program early next spring in order to make increases and replace some of your existing queens, then you don’t need much. Some stock to begin the process, a grafting frame, some JZBZ cups, a grafting tool, cell protectors for introducing queen cells, and the willingness to spend many hours studying the subject to have a well laid out plan before the drones start flying next year.

If you’re wanting to start rearing lots of queens to sell, your going to need a good bit more (incubators, shipping containers, likely more than 10 hives, and a good bit of time; in addition to what was needed for the smaller operation).


----------



## jtgoral

You would need a router, a drill and two dowels for modifying a medium box when using the *Hopkins Method*. Instead of dowels you can use two long screws, so instead of a drill you will need a screwdriver.


----------



## GregB

NUBE said:


> The main question are, what is your purpose for rearing your own queens? How many do you want?


As importantly - when exactly do you want those queens ready AND how quickly can you utilize them AND what do you do with the spare queens?
What about - when and where do you mate your queens?
Not to mention - what lineage you want your queens to be propagated from?

IMO - these questions are more important than whether or not to use Miller method or Greg's method..
"Raising your own queens" implies "raising local queens" - if this is not clear, then here you go - I just said it.
This is what one should be thinking about first and foremost.

This "raising your own queen" deal is in vouge now days.
Even my grandma wants to "raise her own queens".

And yet, most people don't ask these very basic questions before they "raise their own queens" (and don't provide answers to them either).

For this reason I undertook my own queen raising mini-farm project over the summer.
To try and answer some or all of the above.


----------



## jtgoral

I like the *Roger Patterson*'s idea of raising queens:

Evaluate your hives and assign them to group A (better) and B (worse than A)
Make queens from group A to replace queens in group B
repeat the process going back to 1)
BTW: R. Patterson has over 50 years of beekeeping experience and is, I think, responsible for Dave Cushman's web site now. One can get his book about making queens ( I got one) or watch YT videos.


----------



## GregB

jtgoral said:


> I like the *Roger Patterson*'s idea of raising queens:
> 
> *Evaluate your hives and assign them to group A (better) and B (worse than A)*
> Make queens from group A to replace queens in group B
> repeat the process going back to 1)
> BTW: R. Patterson has over 50 years of beekeeping experience and is, I think, responsible for Dave Cushman's web site now. One can get his book about making queens ( I got one) or watch YT videos.


An issue with #1 - for a new beek with 2-3 hives...
How do you *evaluate *your hives?
Especially hives from newly purchased imported packages?
Is the bigger hive better?
Not necessarily (if at all).

What IS better?
Don't forget the important qualifier - "for you".

In fact - how long should you observe a line of bees to conclude that it is "better"?
I contend you should observe a line for at least 24-36 months to kind of understand what it is about and appreciate it (or discount it).

This is really an advanced topic as is - on top of the "raising queens" itself.
Just the issues look and sound trivialized too often.

Last month or so I had a new beek following me.
I showed her and explained some of the things I was doing.
She even took videos.
Then shortly some questions came up as if she *never *spent the time with me. 
Dude!....


----------



## crofter

I would recommend the small and cautious approach. Often the advice to a novice comes from someone with years of experience and much is taken for granted. Other advice from experience swings the other way and encourages much more forethought and preparation. Up to personal choice that matches your learning style. Some thrive on jumping in an learn from trial an error others want to spend more time and hopefully avoid some of the negative consequences.


----------



## GregB

backyard smallcell said:


> For those that are proficient in rearing their own queens( not counting walkaway/ flyback splits) and considering low volume.( X<10 hives)
> ............


For you, smallcell, I would recommend to:
#1 acquire some good local genetics - take a look at Lloyd Street Bees from Milwaukee 
(I don't know of your current bees - I get that - but raising own queens from some generic package queens is not the best direction of your efforts)
#2 don't discount good old splitting - simple taking away queen from a desired colony can produce up to 5-10 queens in a single batch - this is MORE than you can probably even handle or need at this time
#3 ensure you have plenty of spare equipment - at least 5-10 stand-alone colony setups - this is normal to have the head-count doubled in summer time (especially if raising queens)

Jumping onto fancy "queen raising" setup without becoming proficient in utilizing the splitting methods to get the same results is rather premature, IMO.


----------



## msl

backyard smallcell said:


> For those that are proficient in rearing their own queens( not counting walkaway/ flyback splits) and considering low volume.( X<10 hives)





backyard smallcell said:


> I'm considering the Miller method with Joseph Clemens system, K.I.S.[ Keep It Simple] I'm a newbie!
> 
> Source/breeder queen hive
> Cell builder colony,( queenless triple deep nuc packed with nurse bees and capped brood)
> Shaker box( with queen excluder)
> Fresh cut foundation( for source eggs)
> 5 frame single story nucs( to receive capped queen cells)


what your goles are matter, greatly
what sticks out to me
if your sub 10 hives, stocking 5f nucs for mating will be a large drain on resources + the drain the JC (queenless freefalling starter finisher in a nuc body ) cell builder will have



GregB said:


> #2 don't discount good old splitting - simple taking away queen from a desired colony can produce up to 5-10 queens in a single batch - this is MORE than you can probably even handle or need at this time


given your size and willing ness to use larger mateing nucs I don't see a good RIO in setting up a decated queenless cell builder unless your looking to start grafting.

the latest research is suggesting small walk away spits are effective at rearing quality queens... make up a few 5 frame nucs, let them rear queens, split when the box is full, repeat
Final report for FNE20-964 - SARE Grant Management System


----------



## jtgoral

GregB said:


> An issue with #1 - for a new beek with 2-3 hives...
> How do you *evaluate *your hives?
> ...


Roger describes how to evaluate hives. Please read or watch it.


----------



## little_john

Based on comments a few posts ago, I think it's quite important to make a clear distinction between Queen-*Rearing* and Queen-*Breeding*, as these are totally different subjects (albeit related),

Queen-Rearing is simply about the mechanics of producing Queens, whereas Queen-Breeding is about selecting which Queen(s) should be used to rear future Queens from.

FWIW - it was Brother Adam who (afaik) first suggested that hobbyists with small apiaries divide them in two, then rear Queens from the half judged as being 'better' (undefined).

The OP is talking about a relatively small number of hives (10 or less), which is insufficient for establishing genetic lines from which to produce* quality Queens suitable for sale* - if indeed that is the plan (?), as the OP doesn't actually mention such ambitions.
LJ


----------



## GregB

msl said:


> *given your size and willing ness to use larger mateing nucs I don't see a good RIO *in setting up a decated queenless cell builder unless your looking to start grafting.
> 
> I once went form 5 overwintered hives to 30+


The OP is talking about <10 scale.

This is exactly why I jumped into the cooler mini-farm - *the RIO.*
So - the RIO of the mini-farm is to kill for.
Let me tell you. 

Currently, I am at 20-30 scale and, frankly, have too many queens on hand (selling off few never hurts, of course).
Really, making queens at any significant scale has the following logistical problems to be planned for:

marketing and selling queens on a very tight schedule AND/OR
temporary parking those queens for unknown periods of time

So making too many queens for a small scale beek creates a cascade of problems that are best to be pre-planned for.

Hence, by experimentation I prefer making the queens *gradually *- on a sliding and/or flexible schedule through the entire summer (~2 months for me).
Now I know I can; easily.


----------



## GregB

little_john said:


> Based on comments a few posts ago, I think it's quite important to make a clear distinction between Queen-*Rearing* and Queen-*Breeding*, as these are totally different subjects (albeit related),
> ...............
> LJ


Good point!
Indeed.


----------



## msl

GregB said:


> The OP is talking about <10 scale.


yes, point was to show efficiently of queen production at the small scale with simple splitting, and standard equipment in a grow as you can scale(then was edited)... as you note there is a cascade of issues once you set up a cell builder

that said, the OP's goles matter to the advice given.. and we don't have them




GregB said:


> This is exactly why I jumped into the cooler mini-farm - *the RIO.*
> So - the RIO of the mini-farm is to kill for.
> Let me tell you.


If you recall I had been pushing you to try minis long before you did


----------



## GregB

msl said:


> yes, point was to show efficiently of queen production at the small scale


OK.



msl said:


> the latest research is suggesting *small walk away spits* are effective at *rearing quality queens.*


Exactly.
I am pretty happy with the results - after some experimentation and learning.


----------



## GregB

msl said:


> yes, point was to show efficiently of queen production at the small scale with simple splitting, and standard equipment in a grow as you can scale(then was edited)... as you note there is a cascade of issues once you set up a cell builder
> 
> that said, the OP's goles matter to the advice given.. and we don't have them
> 
> 
> If you recall I had been pushing you to try minis long before you did


I think the OP is just trying to wrap his head around the entire scope.... pretty sure.

Yes - you did! 
But as usually, I gave it my own spin - reusing the common trash and creating a non-standard solution (standing framelets!) - I consider I did well.
I reserve the bragging rights.


----------



## jtgoral

jtgoral said:


> I like the *Roger Patterson*'s idea of raising queens:
> 
> Evaluate your hives and assign them to group A (better) and B (worse than A)
> Make queens from group A to replace queens in group B
> repeat the process going back to 1)
> BTW: R. Patterson has over 50 years of beekeeping experience and is, I think, responsible for Dave Cushman's web site now. One can get his book about making queens ( I got one) or watch YT videos.


----------



## GregB

little_john said:


> Based on comments a few posts ago, I think it's quite important to make a clear distinction between Queen-*Rearing* and Queen-*Breeding*, as these are totally different subjects (albeit related),





GregB said:


> Good point!
> Indeed.


To be fair, Roger P. himself comingles technical sub-topics on "rearing" and "breeding" under the same bigger subject - "Small Scale Queen Rearing".


----------



## jtgoral

GregB said:


> To be fair, Roger P. himself comingles technical sub-topics on "rearing" and "breeding" under the same bigger subject - "Small Scale Queen Rearing".


As I understand *all queen breeding is rearing* and* some of queen rearing can be breeding*.


----------



## backyard smallcell

The function of rearing, my own queens is to enable me first have the ability to grow from a couple of colonies, be it swarms, packages or nucs in a productive manner to as large as I want. ( <10 for now)
I've made quite a few miss-steps this year and am hoping to be able to be more proactive in hive multiplication and avoid laying workers😐


----------



## GregB

backyard smallcell said:


> The function of rearing, my own queens is to enable me first have the ability *to grow from a couple of colonies,* .........


Well, so then you understand - rearing queens will not grow your apiary.
Making the splits will.
You can quickly generate 10-20 queens.
But you can not generate 10-20 new, viable colonies just the same.


----------



## backyard smallcell

I greatly appreciate your comments GregB, it's true I'm trying to wrap my head around, making viable colonies, that have their own queen, considering that I've already experienced two swarms this year and because of ignorance: and gained a LW. I'd like to be ready with queens before I need them, ( that is to have nucs on hand with desirable queens that can be developed into or combined with production colonies) . 

The direction for the thread was and is :hearing out the details and resources that make the methods tick for people...
The feedback has been just what I've been looking forward to... Thanks everyone!


----------



## jtgoral




----------



## squarepeg

good thread, deserves sticky status.


----------



## msl

ok so given your goles... I would suggest you deal in making nucs that raise there own queens and let them grow, when you take a queen/nuc out for use, they will make another queen
2f nucs did poorly in my area... poor thermal dynamitic and can't be overwintered
I have been using my 6/3 nuc system this year and realy like it for expanstion beekeeping as at 3 for $20 (six 3f nucs) they are cheap as chips and use standard frames Easy build OSB n 6/3 nuc
her is the progression on one, a flyback split to prune off some extra bees from my cell builder, I am using virgins, rearing there own will add 15 days or so to the shown time line (around 45 days from split to resplit)

















here is two 2 frame splits left to rear queens, only one took so they were combined, then split 3 ways


----------



## little_john

jtgoral said:


> As I understand *all queen breeding is rearing* and* some of queen rearing can be breeding*.


Yes, that's reasonable ...

If breeding Queens, then they have to be reared at some point in order to 'produce the goods'. But someone with a single hive who knocks out a few queens, or someone with more than one hive but who simply picks one at random for queen-rearing is engaged in rearing, not breeding - as in both of these cases selection of characteristics has not taken place. Indeed,* it is whether or not 'selection' takes place which distinguishes breeding from rearing.*

However, the manner in which this 'selection' is made warrants further analysis. 
In the case of Brother Adam and Patterson, dividing the apiary into two does indeed involve a modest degree of selection, and so could be classified as being a form of elementary 'breeding' - but, *as with any type of 'selecting from the best', selection is then being made retrospectively (with regard to mating), and thus could be described as 'selection by phenotype'.*

In contrast, commercial breeders or breeding organisations maintain huge stocks of colonies in order to distil from these - by comparisons and selections made over many years - a number of breeding lines which, together with controlled drone populations and in many cases closed mating systems, enable the breeder to *make selections prior to mating taking place - this could then be described as being 'selection by genotype'*. And it is when making a comparison between such elaborate and sophisticated professional breeding operations and an amateur who knocks out a few Queens from a colony chosen at random, that the difference between rearing and breeding becomes most obvious. 
'best
LJ


----------



## little_john

GregB said:


> Well, so then you understand - *rearing queens will not grow your apiary.
> Making the splits will.*
> You can quickly generate 10-20 queens.
> But you can not generate 10-20 new, viable colonies just the same.


Very much agree with the above - queens without the colonies to support them are not a solution for apiary expansion when starting out. Splits are indeed the answer, at least initially. Once you're up to 4 or more stable colonies, then other options begin to present themselves.
I always feel for those who start-off with just the one colony - it can be a tough place to start if anything should go wrong. Having at least one extra colony can (at the right time of the year) provide an opportunity to donate a so-called 'test frame' which can be used to detect and then bail-out a queenless colony. So I'd always suggest starting-off with two colonies, if at all possible - which also provides a facility to make comparisons between them, which can then help identify possible problems.
LJ


----------



## jtgoral

msl said:


> ok so given your goles... I would suggest you deal in making nucs that raise there own queens and let them grow, when you take a queen/nuc out for use, they will make another queen
> 2f nucs did poorly in my area... poor thermal dynamitic and can't be overwintered
> I have been using my 6/3 nuc system this year and realy like it for expanstion beekeeping as at 3 for $20 (six 3f nucs) they are cheap as chips and use standard frames Easy build OSB n 6/3 nuc
> her is the progression on one, a flyback split to prune off some extra bees from my cell builder, I am using virgins, rearing there own will add 15 days or so to the shown time line (around 45 days from split to resplit)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> here is two 2 frame splits left to rear queens, only one took so they were combined, then split 3 ways


R. Patterson's 2 FR nuc is made of 1 FR of food, 1 FR of capped brood, 3 FR of empty drawn comb. Minimum box is 5 FR but 10 FR box is ok, too  If you have no drawn comb then fundation is still OK.



Two Frame Nucleus


----------



## NUBE

Backyard smallcell, if you make your general location public in your profile it will help respondents give better info.

A lot of what will and won’t work for small splits, whether the bees are expected to requeen themselves or you are supplying queens, will change depending on your location. If you’re in the Deep South, you might get away with two frame nucs over modified double screen boards as early as the beginning of March. If you’re up near Canada, it could be May before you’re seeing drones regularly and can start fewer, larger nucs.

As per usual, what is possible in your beekeeping operation is largely dependent on your location.


----------



## RayMarler

In response to @little_john statements concerning the numbers of hives in post #33 above, I'll take it one step further and say that the best minimum number of hives to have is 3 hives. I know that cost of getting started comes into play for anyone just starting out, and with no experience it can be over-whelming, but 3 hives give much more room to maneuver when or if problems may arise in the bee yard. It also gives enough resources to do more beneficial queen rearing and can even be enough for queen breeding as well. Besides, 3 is also a prime number and that's gotta count for something, right?  I myself like to have 3 hives, and no more than 5. Those numbers are plenty enough for me to do selective breeding and have the resources to make up a few nucs several times in the season. Granted, my season is longer than some or many others here. And besides, both the numbers 3 and 5 are prime numbers!


----------



## backyard smallcell

RayMarler said:


> In response to @little_john statements concerning the numbers of hives in post #33 above, I'll take it one step further and say that the best minimum number of hives to have is 3 hives. I know that cost of getting started comes into play for anyone just starting out, and with no experience it can be over-whelming, but 3 hives give much more room to maneuver when or if problems may arise in the bee yard. It also gives enough resources to do more beneficial queen rearing and can even be enough for queen breeding as well. Besides, 3 is also a prime number and that's gotta count for something, right?  I myself like to have 3 hives, and no more than 5. Those numbers are plenty enough for me to do selective breeding and have the resources to make up a few nucs several times in the season. Granted, my season is longer than some or many others here. And besides, both the numbers 3 and 5 are prime numbers!


I'm getting the feeling that next spring I'm starting with two nucleus colonies and whatever overwinters (probably nothing) and Lord willing go into the next winter with five!


----------



## little_john

jtgoral said:


> R. Patterson's 2 FR nuc is made of 1 FR of food, 1 FR of capped brood, 3 FR of empty drawn comb. Minimum box is 5 FR but 10 FR box is ok, too  If you have no drawn comb then fundation is still OK.


I think reference to Patterson's method could be somewhat misleading within the present context, because in the above listing what must be the most important component - the Queen Cell - is not mentioned, and highlighting it's inclusion is (imo) important in order to emphasise that these are nucleus colonies built from individual component parts, and *not *splits.

I cannot agree that a 10-frame box would be 'ok' - that is, unless it was dummied-down in some way to the volume of a much smaller box. There are sound reasons why nucs are housed in small volume boxes. Likewise, the use of foundation in such a small nuc is ill-advised - I seem to remember Patterson making this point himself.




> *NUBE*: A lot of what will and won’t work for small splits, whether the bees are expected to requeen themselves or you are supplying queens, will change depending on your location.


Indeed - not only does Patterson's 'two-frame' idea require a Q/Cell, but he lives on England's south coast, which is an area with a mild, gentle climate, as well as being the warmest region of England.

Patterson overlooks two important points: the first being that not everyone lives in such an environmentally-privileged area. There are good reasons why a minimum of three frames and a generous helping of bees along with a Q/C are required for success in other parts of the country. 
Indeed, when considering a split in which the colony is required to raise their own Queen, I wouldn't use less than five frames, of which three should be well covered with bees in order to survive the chilly nights in Spring which we often get within this locale. Higher North, conditions are even more demanding.
Secondly, Patterson stresses that the single brood frame of his 'two-frame nuc' should be of "largely" capped brood, whereas in practice obtaining such frames is not always possible. In the world which I inhabit, brood frames are very often 50/50-ish part-capped, part-uncapped - the uncapped portion of which will demand a larger work-force if those larval-stage bees are not to be lost.
'best,
LJ


----------



## jtgoral

little_john said:


> I think reference to Patterson's method could be somewhat misleading within the present context, because in the above listing what must be the most important component - the Queen Cell - is not mentioned, and highlighting it's inclusion is (imo) important in order to emphasise that these are nucleus colonies built from individual component parts, and *not *splits.


I think he R.P. says that he preferes a Q/C but it can be a Q (virgin, mated, raised, bought) Thread subject (queen rearing setup) does not require splits.


little_john said:


> I cannot agree that a 10-frame box would be 'ok' - that is, unless it was dummied-down in some way to the volume of a much smaller box. There are sound reasons why nucs are housed in small volume boxes. Likewise, the use of foundation in such a small nuc is ill-advised - I seem to remember Patterson making this point himself.


He explains that when lack of drawn empty comb, foundation is not as good but still can be used  There is nothing wrong with follower boards. Blinov Method shows how to use them when expanding 3-4 frames colony in a full box.


little_john said:


> Indeed - not only does Patterson's 'two-frame' idea require a Q/Cell, but he lives on England's south coast, which is an area with a mild, gentle climate, as well as being the warmest region of England.
> 
> Patterson overlooks two important points: the first being that not everyone lives in such an environmentally-privileged area. There are good reasons why a minimum of three frames and a generous helping of bees along with a Q/C are required for success in other parts of the country.
> Indeed, when considering a split in which the colony is required to raise their own Queen, I wouldn't use less than five frames, of which three should be well covered with bees in order to survive the chilly nights in Spring which we often get within this locale. Higher North, conditions are even more demanding.
> Secondly, Patterson stresses that the single brood frame of his 'two-frame nuc' should be of "largely" capped brood, whereas in practice obtaining such frames is not always possible. In the world which I inhabit, brood frames are very often 50/50-ish part-capped, part-uncapped - the uncapped portion of which will demand a larger work-force if those larval-stage bees are not to be lost.
> 'best,
> LJ


It is warm enough in Chicagoland, where I keep bees, during the season to use R.P's idea.
I think Patterson's method is an option to consider. And like an option in financial markets it is the right but not an obligation to do something.


----------



## Amibusiness

For just a few I would split swarm cells out and make 2 (deep) frame splits 1 food 1 capped brood with the swarm cell on it, and an extra shake if the bees are old or it is chilly for your location or the brood is not capped. These go in a three frame nuc. By the time the queen is laying the 3rd frame should be drawn out worker. If it is not and there is no issue with the queen, either too little nectar or too few bees. They can then be moved into bigger equipment. 
This does not in itself select for swarminess. Don't choose cells from colonies you don't like and are over swarmy. But if you keep some of you good colonies a bit tighter going into swarm season they will respond in their natural way. Then keep an eye on them and make splits as they allow. Of course this costs time and production and a commercial would not want to do this. But for a backyarder or small sideliner it is fine.


----------



## NUBE

backyard smallcell said:


> I'm getting the feeling that next spring I'm starting with two nucleus colonies and whatever overwinters (probably nothing) and Lord willing go into the next winter with five!


How many colonies do you currently have, and why do you think they won’t overwinter?


----------



## crofter

NUBE said:


> How many colonies do you currently have, and why do you think they won’t overwinter?


If you have tight control of mites from mid August on, stores levels adequate and do appropriate winterizing for your climate, you should expect not much worse that 15% losses.


----------



## GregB

NUBE said:


> How many colonies do you currently have, and *why do you think they won’t overwinter?*


I have a feel that the OP maybe getting into the TF rut (while being a nube).
IF I am getting this right - the bees indeed won't overwinter most likely.
Could be wrong.
But I know few things about TF beekeeping in WI. 

Based on this:


> Large entrance hole,
> Insulated top, and sides
> Dead air underneath
> small cell wax foundation.
> Continuous brood chamber comb,
> Turned and spaced hive orientation.
> what the next lesson?


Regenerative Beekeeping | Beesource Beekeeping Forums


----------



## msl

little_john said:


> Patterson overlooks two important points: the first being that not everyone lives in such an environmentally-privileged area.





little_john said:


> three should be well covered with bees in order to survive the chilly nights in Spring which we often get within this locale


Its worth noteing that this is what crushed Solomon Parker when he moved to Denver, he broke his hives in to 2 frame spits left to raise queens and what worked well in Arkansas failed spectacularly in our spring climate.



jtgoral said:


> R. Patterson's 2 FR nuc is made


There are a lot of good reasons why I suggested the 6/3 in a fly back configuration to the OP, its effectives in leavening the bees to rear queens, shared heat thew the division board, use of open brood and foragers means it starts with very few mites, it can be split its self if combined etc.


----------



## jtgoral

msl said:


> Its worth noteing that this is what crushed Solomon Parker when he moved to Denver, he broke his hives in to 2 frame spits left to raise queens and what worked well in Arkansas failed spectacularly in our spring climate.
> 
> 
> 
> There are a lot of good reasons why I suggested the 6/3 in a fly back configuration to the OP, its effectives in leavening the bees to rear queens, shared heat thew the division board, use of open brood and foragers means it starts with very few mites, it can be split its self, etc


Patterson does not rise queens in his 2 FR nuc version. He provides a capped QC. There is nothing to rise anymore. Just take care of newly hatched queen. There is enough bees to keep capped QC and capped brood warm, no need to feed any of them until they hatch and enough food on the frame of honey for them to survive first 2-3 weeks.


----------



## msl

correct, and that is far beyond the scope of the OP,'s skills and resources, and that of most of hobbyist beekeepers

I would guess less then 2-3% of hobiests make portable queen cells.
I spent a lot of effort trying to change that locally(chair of the CSBA Local Sustainability Committee) , and despite out reach and workshops, acrost the board it seems anything but splitting and letting them raise a queen, or buying a mated queen for the split led to failure. So I focused on improved splitting


----------



## GregB

msl said:


> ....... I focused on improved splitting


Mini-hive based splitting is likely the best practical direction for the small scale queen rearing.
My current opinion.


----------



## jtgoral

https://www.mdasplitter.com/docs/OTS.pdf


A hive tool and some boxes needed.....


----------



## GregB

jtgoral said:


> https://www.mdasplitter.com/docs/OTS.pdf
> 
> 
> A hive tool and some boxes needed.....


Nothing wrong with the OTS, except one thing - just adds another confusing term (the "OTS") as if this is some revolutionary methodology, what not.

Then people start looking into it as if something special.
Nothing is special with the OTS, outside of yet another made-up term.

It is just a variation of* "mini-hive based splitting".*
NOTE: the mini-hive is a flexible term - a 2F standard nuc or a foam mini - both variants generally fit the term

Fundamentally - you want to be raising queens WITHOUT diverting too many resources to it (because this is diverting resources from the honey harvest - unnecessarily).
That is the gist of the OTS (or Sam C's methods or whatever).


----------



## jtgoral

GregB said:


> Nothing wrong with the OTS, except one thing - just adds another confusing term (the "OTS") as if this is some revolutionary methodology, what not.
> 
> Then people start looking into it as if something special.
> Nothing is special with the OTS, outside of yet another made-up term.
> 
> It is just an variation of* "mini-hive based splitting".*
> NOTE: the mini-hive is a flexible term - a 2F standard nuc or a foam mini - both variants fit the term
> 
> Fundamentally - you want to be raising queens WITHOUT diverting too many resources to it (because this is diverting resources from the honey harvest - unnecessarily).
> That is the gist of the OTS (or Sam C's methods or whatever).


Did you read the text about honey in the lower right part of the PDF? From your comment I would guess that not.


----------



## GregB

jtgoral said:


> Did you read the text about honey in the lower right part of the PDF? From your comment I would guess that not.


I studied his PDFs left and right 5 years ago yet. 
Even printed them out - so I could read them in bed.

Like I said - he creates two streams of the resources - the honey producing stream and the queen producing/apiary renewal stream.
That is the gist of it.


----------



## msl

GregB said:


> Mini-hive based splitting is likely the best practical direction for the small scale queen rearing.
> My current opinion.


perhaps, but as your aware, non standard equipment can be a hard sell... I flooded the area with mini nucs (over 100), very few got used, of those that did success seem very dependent on the beekeepers skill level.. granted smaller then yours ....this is why the 2022-23 focused was on standard frames




jtgoral said:


> https://www.mdasplitter.com/docs/OTS.pdf


well, there are a lot of very good reasons why OTS has failed to catch on, aside from knotcing having very little effect its breaking up hives post cell construction, this stops the bees from culling the poorer quality cells leaving you with some sub par queens, better queens are produced by splitting and letting them draw cells as they then draw more cells per frame of bees and have more to chose from.
My expeance with this type of splitting has been 75% mate out, of those 1/3 are poor quality.. so only about 1/2 the splits end up with a good queen, 25% suck, 25% don't mate out...

When you run 2queen hives like my profile pic, the difference is apparent. they have the same resources and the brood nests look different!
this was a fly back split with queen went on to make a crop, the dubble deep was split 4 ways resulting in 3 queens.. 2 nucs were supered in common, one queen was doing poorly mid season and then disappeared (in a 2 queen hive they often don't replace them) , 3rd nuc was dropped in her place...
one hive became 1 and 2 nucs to over winter, and made a lot of honey..

one year I took 3 overwintered nucs and made them in to 23 going in to winter with fly back splits It works ( I went a split to far as shown by the late season failures), but not the best way to make queens!


msl said:


> at this yard I came threw winter with 5 topbar nucs
> 1 and 2 were alowed to grow for honey production, 3,4 were flyaway split, the queen right side of 3 was allowed to grow to full sized, QR4 was used resorce hives for nuc building, the QL 3 and 4 drew cells and were broken in to 6 nucs and grown as resorce hives
> nuc 5 was used as a resorce hive till it swarmed and was broken up 3 ways
> 2 swarmed and had a nuc with a qc pulled out of it
> 3 filled up with brood and on the verge of swarming, as a top bar I coun't add space so queen right nuc was pulled out at the start of the main flow
> 2 swarms were added, at peak the yard hit 38, with the efb (burned 2), a few dead outs/robbing, and recombining the queen failure of the late nucs its down to 28.


----------



## GregB

msl said:


> perhaps, but as your aware, non standard equipment can be a hard sell...


2F framers do qualify as "mini-equipment" also.
But there are nuances, as we know. 

Yes - the hang up on the so-called standard equipment is a large road block.
People demonstrate the highest possible workmanship and sophisticated tools around their beloved "standard hives" while refusing to devote very little time/effort to even try out dirt cheap mini-hives. That is a mental hang-up and nothing more, IMO.

Still, the 2F approach works for many.


----------



## jtgoral

GregB said:


> 2F framers do qualify as "mini-equipment" also.
> But there are nuances, as we know.
> 
> Yes - the hang up on the so-called standard equipment is a large road block.
> People demonstrate the highest possible workmanship and sophisticated tools around their beloved "standard hives" while refusing to devote very little time/effort to even try out dirt cheap mini-hives. That is a mental hang-up and nothing more, IMO.
> 
> Still, the 2F approach works for many.


Staying away from the subject continues:

as a mechanical engineer by trade I love standards: technical drawing sizes, paper sizes (loke A4, A3,...), screw and nut sizes, standardized tire sizes as an example
as a homebrewer I do all beer batches 5 gallon because the keg size is 5 gallon, fermenter sizes were originally using 5 gallon glass water bottles
as a software engineer in my second professional life I like standards for C++, HTML, XML, Unix directory layout, default port assigments for different services, ....
as a driver I like people driving on the same side of the road when driving in the same direction and on the other side of the road when they drive in opposite direction, stopping on the red light or the stop sign,...
*As a beekeeper* finally I have couple standards, too: 

*standard Langstroth frame* and fundation size is #1 because I do beekeeping in the US.
interchangeable stacking of wooden boxes for above frames: One 21 frame Long Lang can be stacked with 2x 10 frame commercial Lang box or 3x 6 frame of my design Lang boxes. Three 6FR boxes can be stacked with 2x 10FR boxes or the other way around.
for poly hives: just a standard Lang frame


----------



## tbishop

backyard smallcell said:


> For those that are proficient in rearing their own queens( not counting walkaway/ flyback splits) and considering low volume.( X<10 hives)
> What's the hives, method, and gear subset that you would have on hand and ready?
> I'm considering the Miller method with Joseph Clemens system, K.I.S.[ Keep It Simple] I'm a newbie!
> 
> Source/breeder queen hive
> Cell builder colony,( queenless triple deep nuc packed with nurse bees and capped brood)
> Shaker box( with queen excluder)
> Fresh cut foundation( for source eggs)
> 5 frame single story nucs( to receive capped queen cells)


Over the last 6 years I have been utilizing 3 frame nucs to raise replacement hives for my operation. I basically gather 1 frame of resources(honey/pollen) with attending bees. 1 frame of mature sealed worker brood with attending bees. 1 frame of open brood with eggs present plus attending bees. I than move the new nuc to a different yard(over 3 miles if possible). My nucs are tight with only a 1 inch hole for a entrance. The lid is a telescoping lid that keeps drafts out. I allow the bees to do their thing, I only do a cursory check to make sure they don't get over crowded later. Generally around day 30 we transfer to a 5 frame nuc. The last 4 years my success rate is over 90%. We add a second story to the nuc and sometimes we add a 3rd for a crop. My success rate for over wintering is over 85% so far. I start making nucs around the 3rd week of April. I only use the strongest and best hives to make nucs. So far, we have been blessed.


----------



## msl

jtgoral said:


> I love standards


I am not sure were your going
Mini nucs are the standard way to rear queens in the US( and most places), its the most popular system by far, Laidlaw (1979)




tbishop said:


> So far, we have been blessed.


your correct as those are out standing numbers!! Sold system for increase and your success reflects that
The only time I see 90% is hand select virgns in 1st round minis and thats rair

out of curisosty, why transfer to 5f at day 30?


----------



## GregB

jtgoral said:


> Staying away from the subject continues:
> 
> as a mechanical engineer by trade I love standards: technical drawing sizes, paper sizes (loke A4, A3,...), screw and nut sizes, standardized tire sizes as an example
> as a homebrewer I do all beer batches 5 gallon because the keg size is 5 gallon, fermenter sizes were originally using 5 gallon glass water bottles
> as a software engineer in my second professional life I like standards for C++, HTML, XML, Unix directory layout, default port assigments for different services, ....
> as a driver I like people driving on the same side of the road when driving in the same direction and on the other side of the road when they drive in opposite direction, stopping on the red light or the stop sign,...
> *As a beekeeper* finally I have couple standards, too:
> 
> *standard Langstroth frame* and fundation size is #1 because I do beekeeping in the US.
> interchangeable stacking of wooden boxes for above frames: One 21 frame Long Lang can be stacked with 2x 10 frame commercial Lang box or 3x 6 frame of my design Lang boxes. Three 6FR boxes can be stacked with 2x 10FR boxes or the other way around.
> for poly hives: just a standard Lang frame


I mean, why get into the general standards' discussion?
Clearly standard ways of measuring things in lengths are 1)metric system and 2)US standard system.
Both work.

I think, @jtgoral, you look for unnecessary problems where they don't exist.
Did I ever argue against ANSI standard definitions of the SQL syntax? LOL
I do not recall that I did.

Again - we are (STILL!) discussing the *beekeeping subjects *here.
Show me where we are not.
Are we talking about physics or engineering now?
I am lost if so.

Back to the beekeeping.
Let me contend - the "standards" in the beekeeping are very much in the process *development *still.
Even though some standards already pre-exist - the pre-existence does not make them optimal.
Just the current interest in alternative equipment designs (justifiably so!) provides good support for the new needs.

Just the same - pre-existence of Imperial measurements system did not stop the development of the International Metric system (because there were valid justifications to do it). In general, the new discoveries and new knowledge made it more obvious that the new standards were needed.


----------



## little_john

GregB said:


> Even though some standards already pre-exist - the *pre-existence does not make them optimal.*
> Just the current interest in alternative equipment designs (justifiably so!) provides good support for the new needs.
> 
> Just the same - *pre-existence of Imperial measurements system did not stop the development of the International Metric system* (because there were valid justifications to do it). In general, the* new discoveries and new knowledge made it more obvious that the new standards were needed*.


Indeed - standards often change over time - this was the case with the adoption of ISO_216 paper sizes and of metric machine-screw threads - both of these examples had previous Standards.

With regard to the 'Langstroth' brood frame dimensions it might be worth remembering that later in his life Langstroth realised that the size and shape of that frame was no longer optimal in view of developments which had taken place since his initial invention, and so he planned to adopt a narrower and squarer frame, but by that time - by flooding the market with his mass-produced version of the Langstroth Hive - Amos Root had effectively created* the* standard beehive frame which then became - for-all-intents-and-purposes - unchangeable, and has so remained up until the present day.
LJ


----------



## jtgoral

GregB said:


> I mean, why get into the general standards' discussion?
> Clearly standard ways of measuring things in lengths are 1)metric system and 2)US standard system.
> Both work.
> 
> I think, @jtgoral, you look for unnecessary problems where they don't exist.
> Did I ever argue against ANSI standard definitions of the SQL syntax? LOL
> I do not recall that I did.
> 
> Again - we are (STILL!) discussing the *beekeeping subjects *here.
> Show me where we are not.
> Are we talking about physics or engineering now?
> I am lost if so.
> 
> Back to the beekeeping.
> Let me contend - the "standards" in the beekeeping are very much in the process *development *still.
> Even though some standards already pre-exist - the pre-existence does not make them optimal.
> Just the current interest in alternative equipment designs (justifiably so!) provides good support for the new needs.
> 
> Just the same - pre-existence of Imperial measurements system did not stop the development of the International Metric system (because there were valid justifications to do it). In general, the new discoveries and new knowledge made it more obvious that the new standards were needed.


I gave may take on your:

_*Yes - the hang up on the so-called standard equipment is a large road block.*_

I said that standard equipment is not a large road block and standards in broader sense are not either..


----------



## drummerboy

Excellent discussion  . Yes, please consider this thread as a 'sticky'


----------



## crofter

The present uniformity of the Langstroth equipment is such a value to commercial beekeeping as practiced on this continent, that any minor areas less than optimal, would not warrant the cost and confusion of changing them. 

Some people do find much joy in pointing out the shortfalls and are happy to create non standard equipment they feel corrects the issues.

It is going to be a hard sell.


----------



## GregB

crofter said:


> Some people do find much joy in pointing out the shortfalls and are happy to create non standard equipment they feel corrects the issues.
> 
> It is going to be a hard sell.


Better for me, personally. 
Less local competition.


----------



## minister man

GregB said:


> For you, smallcell, I would recommend to:
> #1 acquire some good local genetics - take a look at Lloyd Street Bees from Milwaukee
> (I don't know of your current bees - I get that - but raising own queens from some generic package queens is not the best direction of your efforts)
> #2 don't discount good old splitting - simple taking away queen from a desired colony can produce up to 5-10 queens in a single batch - this is MORE than you can probably even handle or need at this time
> #3 ensure you have plenty of spare equipment - at least 5-10 stand-alone colony setups - this is normal to have the head-count doubled in summer time (especially if raising queens)
> 
> Jumping onto fancy "queen raising" setup without becoming proficient in utilizing the splitting methods to get the same results is rather premature, IMO.


I too would like to have a bout 6 hives but I am looking for more information on about how to do “ good old splitting” ? I don’t want cell colonies and all that too look after


----------



## crofter

minister man said:


> I too would like to have a bout 6 hives but I am looking for more information on about how to do “ good old splitting” ? I don’t want cell colonies and all that too look after


You could spend years before you exhausted all the "good old splitting methods" that a simple search would produce. "Seek and ye shall find" 
New beekeepers commonly do a lot of agonizing about how to prevent swarming. A good method that also takes care of the queen and split making while effecting swarm control is covered in Leonard Snelgroves old book "Swarming, its control and Prevention". Simple forms of the double screen division board can be made up or purchased. It is available as a PDF and is about 36 pages.


----------



## GregB

minister man said:


> I too would like to have a bout 6 hives but *I am looking for more information on about how to do “ good old splitting” ?* I don’t want cell colonies and all that too look after


You see, you quoted me and right there I stated:


> simple taking away queen from a desired colony can produce up to 5-10 queens in a single batch


You need not to be looking for "more information on about how to do “ good old splitting” ?
Just implement that one line and that is sufficient for your needs.
This is what I have been doing and I don't know what to do with all the queens (I did sell few).

No need for analysis-paralysis.


----------

