# Cotton cord.



## BEEn Stung (May 17, 2003)

Nothing is simple . 
Yesterday I put on screen bottom boards.
Topday I am trying to figure out the FGMO 
Tommorrow I will work on COTTON CORDS. 

WHAT NEXT will I find oin this site????????


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

Natural sized cell foundation. AKA Small cell is probably what you'll find next.


----------



## BEEn Stung (May 17, 2003)

Michael; I am not ready to even look into different size cells. I don't know how , where, or why.

However somewhere I read a reference to "ventilated roof on hive".
That seems like a good idea. Both when too hot or too cold or too damp. 
That will be my next bee project when I get the FGMO all figured out correctly.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

The first step to small cell is stop buying regular foundation. If you did nothing else but use 4.9mm foundation you'll eventually end up on natural sized cell. To speed the process is much more involved.

My ventilated tops are pretty simple. Take the inner cover and cut a couple more holes about the size of the original hole. Cover all of these with #8 hardware cloth or metal screen wire. Take an old super or make a box out of a 1 x 6 the size of a Langstroth box. Drill 2 - 3/4" holes in the middle (up and down) on each side and cover them with hardware cloth (better to angle them so the water runs out). Put this on the inner cover and your lid on top of that. Viola. A ventilated hive. I did not invent this, David Eyre did, and he sells kits that are more versitile and more expensive than what I just explained. I've bought quite a few of them from him and made a number more.


----------



## Jorge (Sep 24, 2002)

Here is a question for those with enough experience with the cords:
The FGMO treatment protocol indicates to put 2 one meter long cords per brood box (or is it per box, including all the supers?). In any event, is the success of the method compromised if all the cords are placed on top of the last box? When the boxes begin to fill up with brood and supplies, they can be quite heavy and a pain to lift just o put the cords in. Plus, the bees don't like the disruption of having their little home disassembled. Can one get away with putting all the cords together at the very top? 

Also, I figured that the cords should be placed ACROSS the frames and not along them. If placed along them, that can really perturb the bees' moving from frame to frame because it forces them to go around the edges of the frame. Placed across, they don't need to take the detour at all, simply dip below the cord in the space between frames.

Thanks

Jorge


----------



## Juandefuca (Mar 16, 2000)

To all 
Good points are mentioned here 
However some of it is controversial or even questionable . Having spoken to well established beekeepers and commercial / queen breeder . 
I am aware what hot pot I will enter but I like to have the courtecy to be heard ,because one garbage is just as good or bad than another . 
Cord placement : There are quite a few ways to lead to Rome even if someone is used only to one of them. Personally I see no difference how long or short the individual lenghts of cords are as long as the total length satisfies the minimum .
The idea of laying the cords across sounds very appealing to me and I shall apply it . The placement of cords within the brood chambers is of importance as I see it . I was told that mites also congregate beneath the inner cover with the bees there . I found by test not any specific increase in count of percentages . 
But then , I have no trouble as yet with the mites . Varroa or tracheal .( Don't even think about samll hive VW's.)
It is true that for older or not so strong backs the replacement of cords does become a problem , specifically with commercial businesses. I am still discussing with others to address this "problem".

Small cell size . Here again a commercial bk tried this conversion years ago and got nowhere . Period . The bees made a mess every time and he has stopped even to think about it . Past history . 
I have yet to see a benefit of the so called small cell size , although I am not adverse to it . 
Additionally The run of the mill accepted measure of 10 cells ect flies in the face of any logic if one looks for the inside measure wall to wall of a cell. 
I have purchsed old equipment from a farmer with drawn cells and the vast majority was below 5.1 m/m / I am still using those . Also I introduced 4.9 wax foundations and they are accepted as the ones mentioned before without a problem . But not in all cases !!. The messy ones have the same features as the one from the commercial outfit . 
I hear this business of "Natural cellsize " frequently and depending on what account you read of 150 years ago ,it does not specify uniformly what the size was in the various Housings of colonies . 
For instance the other day I came across speaking of cellsize back in 1850 ( Or around there ) What was said Off the cuff was that the bees add to the cell interior as the comb ages and the cells gets a smaller dimension ( WALL TO INSIDE WALL !!!!! NOT CENTER TO CENTER !!!)). Therefore the bees get smaller over time . The author did not elaborate further but to say that the bees get smaller . Any conclusion from that was not stated .If this observation is a fact than any attempt to reduce the beesize to "normal " would eventually happen without great adoo. Interesting reading on the subject of bigger or smaller you find in abc / xyz of Root issue 1910 on page 267 . At that time the question still was the merit and possibility of enlarging the cell size . Workers apparently have been hatched from drone cells and were indeed bigger . Also it says that combs built by bees are not exactly even in measure and as a result we have small and larger workers .
Now where does that leave the "novice" when the "experts " not even come to an agreement ?
Buy the small size of foundation and see what happens . It does no harm and may be even of benefit since more cells are created and therefor more bees per comb. But dont' blame the messenger for an eventual malformed contraption.
I KNOW that there are smaller and larger workers and I know that the smaller workers came from peripheral cells of lesser depth . Therefore the bees are shorter and consequently appear "smaller". That does not say that bees from "small " cells are even in size with than those fom larger cells . 
They all have stingers , by the way . Some have bad temper and some are pussycats one day and the next run after you as AHB are said to do . 
I gave up trying to create a math formula out of beekeepimg . The bees are always a step ahead of me . 
yours JDF


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

I didn't mean to start a discussion of small cell here in the FGMO area. I was just listing the next "new" thing he would run into.









But it is true that all brood cells get smaller up to a point because of the cocoons inside the cell building up and making the cell smaller. When it reaches a point that the bees find too small they will chew it out.

It's also true, left to themselves, bees build a large variety of cell sizes. But most of the worker brood will be in small ones. I have several swarms that are quite small to prove this. It's also true a few will be hatched in very large cells and almost be mistaken for a queen at first. It was this variet of "subcastes" that led to the original idea of using bigger cells.


----------



## Juandefuca (Mar 16, 2000)

Hi michael 
There is no harm doen looking into other avenues as long as it brings us back to the subject . It is the nature of the beast.As you metioned your "Ventilation "Thing , I make use of the Imirie frame with entries from the sides of the frame .Makes also for a top entry and ventilation ,which the bees like for a shorter way to the super . 
Fgmo . I spoke about the oddity of a now one colony ( former 2 or 3) which still drops up to 50 mites a day. sometimes less than twenty . About 40 % are still alive . Have not seen any males among them lately.
This is a colony from a split 2 years ago which was treated and had zero mite indicators . I still scratch my scalp trying to understand the dynamics of this . 
The weather here is disgustingly versatile . Yesterday and before up to 90. Today 56 F or so . Transported colonies to remote apiaries this morning and they did not like the rattle over undulating terrain . Got me up my thigh and belly. 
This is for the purpose of therapy without medical expertise . Who needs it anyway ?. 
Happy beeing and transporting / fuming
Jdf
P.S. There is a forum here on adventures in attack modes . I forgot where it was .but one of those events was when a worker went up my pantleg on the right side over the crotch and down the other side to decide to leave the premises resulting into my "AT EASE " position after posting the "Attention" Mode , i.e. Keep Cool Man .


----------



## Jorge (Sep 24, 2002)

Dr Rodriguez,

I asked this before but got no answer from you, and I am still very interested (I bet others are too):
How critical is it in your experience to place the cotton cords on EACH box (2m worth of emulsion soaked cord each)? Would the alternative of placing, say, twice as many cords on the second bood box, and similarly on top of a second deep super (or equivalent), and so on? By the time you have a skyscrapper 4 deeps high, removing everyone to reach the lower brood box to put those 2 m of cord in gets tough on your back (and on the annoyed bees). My reasoning is that the bees move around in the hive a lot and would probably move up to the second floor to chew a bit on the cords. If the total number of cords is maintained, I would think, it should not matter.
I have not yet tried this, so I have not departed from the recommended and succesfully tested regime you recommend. So, I am asking for advice on a move that would save us all time and backakes.

Thanks very much in advance

jorge


----------



## BEEn Stung (May 17, 2003)

I been reading that the cords should be on each box. I am 3 deeps and 4 shallows hi now and would not like to take all that apart. I don't know if just putting cords on the top few will be OK. Has anyone out there tried this?
My weekly "bee" day is today so I wll have to decide soon. 
I suppose, if I don't replace the cords in the lower boxes, I will have to at least remove the "spent" cords.??
I been told "don't reinvent the wheel". Dr Rodrigus says to replace cords on ALL boxes. I suppose that is what is best.
Any and all comments welcome.

------------------
Erwin


----------



## Dr. Pedro Rodriguez (Feb 5, 2002)

Hello Folks.
Just a couple of sentences before I dig into the nitty-gritty. 
I say this because I do not wish people to think that I am avoiding the issues or anyone in paticular. 
Like all of you, I am extremenly busy, especfially having to travel as much as I do. 
Time and again, I have asked for visitors to this forum to read the archives. Just about every question that is asked has been answered previously. I can not possibly keep on replyig to the same question over and over again. Then, you may say: You could have replied to my question in the time that you have spent writing all this explanations. Yes, but multiply yourself by the number of people who continue to ask the same qauestions and you,ll know what I mean. 
The answers continue to be the same. There are some changes in the making and they are about to be published. Also, there are beekeepers around the world who are testing variations to the established protocol, example: Bob Russell in New Zealand who will contribute quite interesting modifications. I guess that he will publish his innovations as soon as he has put them to work in his apiary and found out if they are satisfactory. 
Answer: The reason for placing (repeated for the umpteenth time, over the brood frames is to place the emulsion at a place where the nurse bees, those carrying the biggest load of fertile female varroa mites, will come in contact with the emulsion, making the use of the emulsion most effective. I agree that if you have high build up of supers, you may not want to lift all of them to place the cords on the brood frames. In plain street language: "you gota do what you gota do." 
I never told or gave the slightest idea of placing the cords along the length of the frames. It would not be practical. Please look at the pictures that I have published and read the explanations that I have given. The cords should be placed ACROSS the frames. 
Have a wonderful summer and enjoy your bees.
Best regards.
Dr. Rodriguez


----------



## Dave W (Aug 3, 2002)

Greetings . . . BEEn Stung

Check out the FGMO summary at: http://www.beesource.com/ubb/Forum11/HTML/000041.html 

Read carefully, "Treatment with the emulsion". It says EACH brood chamber AND also EACH honey super.

Most of what Dr Rodriguez has aready said about FGMO can be found at: http://www.beesource.com/ubb/Forum11/HTML/000099.html 

The outline quotes Dr R and gives the topic number (exapmle: 000099) where the information was found.

Good Luck!
Dave W


----------



## Jorge (Sep 24, 2002)

With all due respect, why is it so hard to get a clear answer to such a simple question. I still did not get an answer to my question: can I put all the cords together instead of on each box (on top of the highest brood box in this case).

I know you are not obliged to answer, so thank you anyway.

Jorge


----------



## Dr. Pedro Rodriguez (Feb 5, 2002)

Good morning folks.
It is a cool and much wanted rainy Sunday morning here in central Spain. Beekeeping is having a terrible season here this year due to drought conditions. God is merciful and life goes on. If the weather continues to stay cool
(doubtful because July/August is terribly hot around these parts) and it continues to rain, I might report back telling you how wonderful our bees are doing. Such are the delights of beekeeping.
Dear friends:
Dave W:
Kudos to you. 
Jorge:
You are quite welcome.
Helmut:
I will write to you later today.
To all participants in this forum:
The Lord be with you.
Best regards.
Dr. Rodriguez


----------

