# Bee class last night. Long post. Questions on small and large cells



## Dan. NY (Apr 15, 2011)

Let me start this thread by saying I have less than a year of experience and am learning. Last night I attended a Beginners bee keeping class. Out of this class comes a few questions. The instructor was of the mindset that he was right about everything bee and everyone else (including at least one member of this forum) were either idiots or at the very minimal not as correct as he is. So... I asked a few questions and got slapped around pretty good. One question I asked was about mixing small cell plastic frames with large cell wooden frames. The response I received was not what I thought it was going to be and I wanted to get some experts opinion on some of this. First let me say I still have this question. I am thinking of buying NUCS and it has wooden large cell frames. I currently have small cell plastic and will purchase another complete hive and was going to go with small cell plastic once again until I found out my potential NUC source was large cell wood. So.. the question remains is this a good idea or should I buy large cell to match what the bees will be used to? I suspect buying large cell is correct but am not sure.

Now onto the response I received. Essentially the teacher said small cell is a solution looking for a problem and began to discuss small cell and varroa. I failed to see the relationship and commented why was he speaking about verroa when I asked about mixing small and large cell. I was then schooled in the fact that the reason small cell started being used and sold was due to varroa mites and to try and control them. I had not heard this or read this, though I do only have less than a year under my belt. I thought it was due to trying to re-create similar sized cells as the bees make in nature on their own and told the instructor this. The answer I received was No no no, this is not a correct thought on my part. Cell sizes varied. Bottom line.. If I tried to make the bees use small cell it was not smart, I would waste time, energy, money etc etc etc.

Comments on this???? I am looking forward to the responses here.


----------



## David LaFerney (Jan 14, 2009)

Of course take everything from everywhere with a grain of salt - but here is a good place for you to start M Bush on Small cell / Natural Cell.

Be aware that it* is *controversial.


----------



## Dan. NY (Apr 15, 2011)

Hmm. Methinks my memory is a bit flakey as I have read through Mr. Bushs site on this in the past and it seems to answer and touch base on this subject though I did not recall it did. 

Thanks for the reminder of his site.

dan


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

Dan. NY said:


> So... I asked a few questions and got slapped around pretty good.


Dan, first of all it is not uncommon to get slapped around if you are new and ask questions. It appears to be quite common in the bee community. Don't ever let that stop you from asking. Secondly, an instructor can only teach what he knows or thinks he knows. If you get flack from someone just asked someone else. Eventually you will get a civil answer or have it explained to you so you understand what is the better choice.

Michael Bush's site is a great resource for nearly everything related to bees. I think you will find regression is a slow process that takes generations of bees to accomplish.


----------



## Tia (Nov 19, 2003)

Dan, you need a new teacher. Superior attitudes do not play well in bee school. No one knows everything and everyone continues to learn no matter how long they've been keeping bees. We make it a point at our bee club and in school to emphasize the fact that there are no stupid questions. I'm glad you pursued an answer and that you came here to the forum to get further information. 

It's good advice to check out Michael Bush's website. He's really got great info on large/small/natural cell. Personally, I have gone foundationless and let the girls build what they think they need. Sometimes it's small cell; sometimes it's really large cell where they store lots of nectar. I don't think there's a problem combining large and small since they seem to do it themselves.


----------



## mjtracy (Jun 17, 2011)

The general idea of the small cell is that the varroa do not have as much space to occupy with the larvae, so they choose larger cells to breed in, such as drone cells.


----------



## n1rcv (Dec 8, 2010)

Hi Dan

I am a second year beekeeper. This spring I was planning on starting a couple of packages on foundationless frames. At the last minute I discovered that I had the wrong size frames.

I reordered the frames. Since I was pressed for time I ordered small cell plastic frames from Mann Lake. The bees arrived before the frames. I ended up starting them on large cell (normal brood size) wax foundation in wood frames. As they need new frames I fed in the plastic frames. 

The bees did fine. The only issue I had was the bees perferred the wood frames over the plastic. They would build an extra deep honey storage comb on the wood frames and ignore the plastic frames. Where the plastic frames were side by side they drew out very nice comb. Next spring I plan on removing as many of the wood frames as I can.

As a new beekeeper do not be afraid to try stuff and see what works for you. Also you could check our Dee Lusby writings on the point of view section on this website.

Have a good day.

William


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

That is one idea, but that is not the general idea. The general idea among small cell proponents is usually related to Dee Lusby's "Pseudo-Drone Theory." For a much more in depth perspective on that theory, please read the Lusby section in the POV. http://www.beesource.com/point-of-view/ed-dee-lusby/

As a small cell treatment-free beekeeper for eight and a half years, I recommend using small cell foundation and if you must buy large cell nucs, just work the large cells away from the center of the broodnest and eventually remove them from the hive. There are sources of small cell bees in the northeast.

And don't worry about getting slapped around. It happens usually only once in a while. Read a few thousand of Acebird's posts and you'll see why he gets the level of respect he does. His experience is by no means normal.


----------



## pascopol (Apr 23, 2009)

I purchased an 8 frame medium nuc locally in April, then added Mann Lake PH plastic 4.9mm cell frames, the bees were slow drawing plastic small cell frames but by October I had 2 story nest hive with majority of drawn small cells with brood in it. In spring I plan to remove gradually the rest of original Pierco frames and add more 4.9mm frames.

I did not feed them, perhaps I should have.

I did that not being aware that it takes years to regress the bees. One may say I did it out of ignorance.

So are my bees regressed now or not?

Perhaps Pierco frames with 5.25mm cells being smaller than 5.4mm cell regular foundation facilitated transition from 5.25mm to 4.9mm in one season ?


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

One clarification: Many SC users report regression and successful comb building in one step even in LC hives with Mann Lake's PF-100 and PF-120 Frames which have a cell size of approximately 4.94mm. Most believe it is due to those frames having fairly deep cell walls at the base which the bees cannot rework like they can with wax foundation. Compared to the price of wooden frames wired and with small cell wax foundation, they are much more economically reasonable especially considering possibility for failure with wax.

Unless you allow space for drone brood in either foundationless frames or wax foundation frames, the bees will build drone brood between the top and bottom bars of PF series frames, not that it is a big problem. I find the drone brood to be a good indicator of mite infestation.

Another note, black ones when left in the sun get quite hot and may not be the most suitable, your situation may vary. I don't like my comb to melt while I'm inspecting a hive.

It is unfortunate that these frames were not available to us back in the day and regression with wax foundation took several generations of comb.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Dan. NY said:


> I am thinking of buying NUCS and it has wooden large cell frames. I currently have small cell plastic and will purchase another complete hive and was going to go with small cell plastic once again until I found out my potential NUC source was large cell wood. So.. the question remains is this a good idea or should I buy large cell to match what the bees will be used to? I suspect buying large cell is correct but am not sure.


Dan if I get your meaning properly, you are asking if you buy the large cell nuc, do you have to keep buying more large cells for it?

The short answer is yes, but the longer answer is no.

The large cell bees will take more easily to more large cell combs that you buy. However, if you want them to be small cell, and since your other hive is small cell it is a good idea to keep everything standard, you can convert your large cell bees to small cell, by a process known as regression.

Regression does not happen easily, you have to "force" the bees to start using the small cells. The bees will try to enlarge the cells you give them, and it is not till you start getting the first bees hatching that have been raised in small cells, that the bees start making a better job of building the small cell comb without trying to enlarge the cells. As you already have a small cell hive, you may be able to speed the process by putting a comb or two of hatching small cell brood, into the large cell nuc.

Eventually, you should remove all the large cell comb, while you have both sizes in the brood nest things will be a bit of a mishmash.

As to your instructor, although perhaps his manner might have been better, i think what he may have been trying to say was probably correct, in one way. I'd still keep talking to the guy. But if you find his methods are incompatable with yours, then you may be better to not go that path, but this would be more about methodology, rather than who is "right".


----------



## VolunteerK9 (Aug 19, 2011)

mjtracy said:


> The general idea of the small cell is that the varroa do not have as much space to occupy with the larvae, so they choose larger cells to breed in, such as drone cells.


Never heard that one before-I thought it had to do with capping times of the cells, not space.

Ive got a little of everything in my hives, small cell, large cell and foundationless. I didnt have any problems with the mixing of the three. You will get varied and sometimes heated opinions on subject so be prepared. Do a search on it and and be prepared for quite a bit of reading.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

It's a theory that used to be touted quite a bit, but is now not followed so much, in the light of other better sounding theories.

It doesn't really stack up to me either, however bear in mind that many mites die when they get trapped under the pupal cocoon.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

there's a good thread on small cell (sc) in the treatment-free beekeeping forum.


----------



## Dan. NY (Apr 15, 2011)

Thanks everyone for the info. I have picked up quite a bit of needed information to guide me along to becoming a better bee keeper.

I am not real worried about getting slapped around much. I had a true interest in getting to the heart of the teachers stance and asked him candidly was he speaking from the heart of did he have studies against small cell he could site. He gave me extensions.org as a reference. I am not able to find much on small cell there yet, neither pro nor con. I found it a bit strange he said something to the effect of none of the anti small cell people have been invited to the small cell lectures so he dismissed the claims. Go figure.

Been an eye opener for me.


----------



## Andrew Dewey (Aug 23, 2005)

Dan - sorry your instructor was less than open minded. While I don't want to defend your particular instructor, please keep the following in mind: Bee Schools are notorious (at least in this area) for not allowing enough time for in depth dissection of anything controversial; If the conversation digresses and the class shows interest in the digression - some other topic will not get covered; instructors are likely volunteers and not professional presenters; the knowledge of the class participants is unknown ahead of time to the instructor; there is a danger in being identified as the idealistic know-it-all who will happily interrupt the class to tell the instructor the "right" way to keep bees, with little or no experience at having done so; An instructor can quickly loose the class if he/she starts talking about topics without the appropriate background. [An example for me would be Top Bar Hives as I've never tried to keep bees in one but I have done some reading about them.]

I don't mean to imply that bee schools should stick to a script - If the teacher has some experience at teaching the class is often more worthwhile for the participants.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

Well in retrospect the class/ instructor should keep to the script or he/she will surely run out of time. What is hard for some instructors is to admit the phrase "I don't know" so you can keep to the script and just move on without insults.


----------



## beeware10 (Jul 25, 2010)

small cell beekeeping should only be done after learning good basic beekeeping. It would be compared to learning to drive a semi before learning to drive a car. while yet to be documented basic beekeeping is. more experence is needed for the small cell theory. why start out with a handicap?


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

beeware10 said:


> small cell beekeeping should only be done after learning good basic beekeeping.


I disagree with this completely. There is nothing wrong with starting out on small cell. It's a different paradigm. I started that way and I would not do it any differently.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

Yea Solomon. Pick a goal and shoot for it. You are going to make so many mistakes in life anyway the sooner you get that done the quicker you will attain your goal.


----------



## jrbbees (Apr 4, 2010)

"The instructor was of the mindset that he was right about everything bee and everyone else (including at least one member of this forum) were either idiots or at the very minimal not as correct as he is."

Small minds don't have much room so it is harder for them to consider other thoughts or idea.
The only mind that knows everything bee is bees. The rest of us are ALL still learning.


----------



## Ray4852 (May 27, 2011)

I would let the instructor have the upper hand and move on with the class. once I walk out of the class at the end of night. I'm going to do what I want to do anyway. everybody is entitled to there own opinion.


----------



## guyross (Feb 18, 2011)

If its reasonable to start with small cell. What do you think the results would come from packages started on small cell foundation?


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

I started on small cell with 20 3# packages 8 and a half years ago. I now have somewhere in the vicinity of five hives descended from one of those. With ML PF frames, I expect the regression to be pretty quick, but I did it with wax and it took several generations of comb. In my view, it takes a certain amount of losing hives and splitting the survivors before a sustainable population is established, but others don't see that as necessary. Experiences vary.

Fortunately, there are small cell packages available now as well. So much the better.


----------



## Andrew Dewey (Aug 23, 2005)

It is a given that you can do what you want when you finish a class. The bee school I am involved with teaches standard practices and techniques with the intention that the class will teach/help new students to make it through their first year with their bees alive following practices that the instructors have seen work. After that first year of experience students are expected to be able to understand better all that goes in to a controversial technique(s) like small cell / treatment free beekeeping, in part so they can decide things for themselves and separate the wheat from the chaff. (Take fogging with mineral oil as an example.) If you were ready to start with 20 3# packages it hardly seems like you would have needed or have been a good fit for our bee school.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

I wasn't ready, but I did. That's the way I do things. There's no quicker way to learn than to do. How do you build a solar wax melter? Build one, take it from there. How do you split a hive? Split them, see how it goes. Afraid of grafting? Raise queens that way first. Want to buy Lord of the Rings? Go for the the Extended Edition Bluray 15 disc set with 26 hours of special features. Don't settle for less than you can get out of life, it won't last forever.


----------



## Fusion_power (Jan 14, 2005)

> How do you build a solar wax melter? Build one, take it from there.


pretty far OT. IMO, there are ZERO good plans at present for solar wax melters.

Back on topic, Small cell is a management choice. You can run both small cell and regular cell frames in the same colony, but you will get better results if the small cell frames are in the center of the brood nest and the large cell frames are on the periphery. Otherwise, the bees should be treated the same as any other colony. Rotate the large cell frames out of the hive a few at a time until they are gone.

DarJones


----------



## REN (May 7, 2011)

I'm a new beekeeper, so I'm just learning. I have no experience using small cell foundation. It seems that most of these posts favor small cell foundation. I enjoy reading and learning about both sides of the issue. If you're like me and you want to find out more about the this, you can read a good summary of the history and theory behind SC at the following link.

http://www.honeybeesuite.com/monday-morning-myth-small-cell-foundation-discourages-varroa-mites/

I appreciate everyone's position, but since I'm a scientist, I also like to see the data if it is available. 
The research seems to indicate that SC has limited, if any, benefit in the long run. See the attached journal article below. As for me, I started with large cell foundation. I'd love to see research that supports SC, if anyone has that. I only have 3 hives currently, so it would still be easy enough to switch. Thanks,

Bob

http://www.ent.uga.edu/bees/documents/m08138.pdf


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

Bob, I think you might be interested in the discussion we've been having in the treatment free forum about the small cell studies. They aren't as well done as you might think.


----------



## REN (May 7, 2011)

Thanks, Solomon. I'll certainly read those posts. I would generally agree that more natural is better. Bees started with smaller cells. However, as these posts suggest, it seems that converting to SC requires time and expense, since most beekeepers and suppliers use large cell. I'd just like to see that there is a benefit to switching. I need to read more!


----------



## Daniel Y (Sep 12, 2011)

I am also aware after even a short time of the small cell and Mite control conversation. I am actually surprised that an instructor of even beginners is not aware of that issue with small cell. Not that your instructor is useless, but it is an indication of just how much weight to give the information he shares. Good for you that you are not limited to just him as a source. Every person has their limits. Knowing just where they are is an advantage.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>The instructor was of the mindset that he was right about everything bee and everyone else (including at least one member of this forum) were either idiots or at the very minimal not as correct as he is. 

Of course.

>So... I asked a few questions and got slapped around pretty good. One question I asked was about mixing small cell plastic frames with large cell wooden frames. The response I received was not what I thought it was going to be and I wanted to get some experts opinion on some of this. First let me say I still have this question. I am thinking of buying NUCS and it has wooden large cell frames. I currently have small cell plastic and will purchase another complete hive and was going to go with small cell plastic once again until I found out my potential NUC source was large cell wood. So.. the question remains is this a good idea or should I buy large cell to match what the bees will be used to? I suspect buying large cell is correct but am not sure.

If you want to regress to small cell, think of large cell as the evil you are trying to REMOVE from the hive, not something you want to add to it. Take them out every chance you can as long as they aren't full of brood.

http://www.bushfarms.com/beesnaturalcell.htm#whatisregression

>Now onto the response I received. Essentially the teacher said small cell is a solution looking for a problem and began to discuss small cell and varroa. I failed to see the relationship and commented why was he speaking about verroa when I asked about mixing small and large cell. I was then schooled in the fact that the reason small cell started being used and sold was due to varroa mites and to try and control them. I had not heard this or read this, though I do only have less than a year under my belt. I thought it was due to trying to re-create similar sized cells as the bees make in nature on their own and told the instructor this.

Well, it's both. The idea is that by going to natural sized (smaller) cells you let the bees be healthier and you solve the Varroa issue. Actually Dee Lusby went to small cell a decade BEFORE Varroa hit.

> The answer I received was No no no, this is not a correct thought on my part. Cell sizes varied. Bottom line.

True. Cell sizes do vary. And the only way to actually have natural sized cells is to regress them first and then let them build what they want.

> If I tried to make the bees use small cell it was not smart, I would waste time, energy, money etc etc etc.
>Comments on this???? I am looking forward to the responses here. 

http://www.bushfarms.com/beesnaturalcell.htm
http://www.bushfarms.com/beesfoursimplesteps.htm


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

REN said:


> I also like to see the data if it is available.
> [snip]
> As for me, I started with large cell foundation.


I'm curious, have you found data to support LC foundation? Research seems to indicate that LC has limited, if any, benefit in the long run as well. I think you're going to have to look beyond what research says in deciding how you want to manage your bees and what your goals are. Research is very limited in answering these types of questions/ideas.


----------



## Ted Kretschmann (Feb 2, 2011)

In nature, cell size is determined where in the world the colony is located at. The further north in latitude, the larger the cell. Tropical acclimated bees naturally have small cell. There are plenty of graphs and studies that I have seen over the years to back this statement up. Dee has the advantage of using a AHB derived lineage, which is naturally a small cell bee.That is something nobody ever mentions from the small cell camp. As for the instructor: Opinions are like certain parts of human anatomy. So take the best of what everybody has to offer for advice and you will develop your own consensus and management style. It may take years of trial and error. This is some advice from a 'traditionalist' LC beekeeper. TED


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

Ted keeps making this claim, but Dee was on small cell before the Africanized bees showed up.


----------



## Ted Kretschmann (Feb 2, 2011)

I will keep stating this till the cows come home. OK-I know the time frame of when the bees hit her area. I also know when she started small cell, which was way before you got bees.....


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

I don't enter into it. The facts are the facts.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Facts? What facts?

Ted has correctly stated the facts. What is the point of your post?


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

Take it up with Dee.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Why?

Already read Dee, I know what the time frame was, it was as Ted correctly stated. 

What was the point of your post?


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

Solomon Parker said:


> Take it up with Dee.


Back peddling Solomon?


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

When someone has experience in a subject, I defer to them. I prefer to let people speak for themselves and uphold what they say over what others say about them. Dee is the grandmother of small cell beekeeping. You're a newbee in New York. Ted is in Alabama. Alastair is in New Zealand. Dee is in Arizona. Dee can speak for herself, and she would have done had she not been run off by the opposition to small cell on this forum.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

I have seen videos of Dee and heard her voice in video seminars. She does not seem to me to be a person who could be run off by anyone. I am not saying she needs to be hear but the woman is not frail by any stretch of the imagination.
Solomon, I will always be a newbie in New York even if I live another 30 years. It's the group I feel comfortable with.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

With you on that Ace, one thing that did impress me watching a video of Dee working her bees is the obvious physical fitness of the woman.

I wouldn't want to cross her in a dark alley LOL! 

Anyhow, one of my New Zealand friends is going to one of her Seminars in March. I'll be very interested in his impressions when he gets back.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

She told me, so that's who I believe.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

Dee and Ed regressed their bees back to 4.9mm in the early 80s. Here is a video of Erikson talking about Dee and ed and their cell size observations several years after in 1989, 3 years before they announced AHB were in Arizona.

http://vimeo.com/19816966


----------



## Fusion_power (Jan 14, 2005)

Ted is technically correct re larger cells are built by bees the further they are away from the equator, but there is one huge exception. Apis Mellifera Major Nova is the largest known honeybee yet it is from the Rif mountains in Morocco, North West Africa. They are a LONG way from Norway or anywhere else above the 45th parallel. They represent a real anachronism since they are the largest known Apis Mellifera yet they are in an area surrounded by smaller bees.

And they says Size Doesn't Matter.

re africanized bees, they crossed the border from Mexico in 1990 and spread through the southwest over the next 3 years. They were widespread in Arizona by 1993.

As for natural size bees, it is very easy to find stock that is adapted to small cell just by doing a little selection work. It is easiest if you start with feral stock instead of commercial.

DarJones


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

Michael Bush said:


> Dee and Ed regressed their bees back to 4.9mm in the early 80s.


Michael, are you saying that the Lusby’s were already on small cell when varroa first arrived? I’d swear that I’d read that they suffered large losses to varroa…..has my old brain snapped a synapse?


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

Solomon Parker said:


> she would have done had she not been run off


I think that the vehemence often expressed by members of both camps has chased many away, regardless of their point of view.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

You are correct, the opposition to small cell is considerable.

But don't let it get you down. Plenty of people have made the switch and have been successful. I believe that genetics is important and maintaining your own locally adapted stock. For me, the most important aspect is clean wax. We can only rejoice that newer chemicals are better, but they still lead to dependent bees which I try to avoid.


----------



## Andrew Dewey (Aug 23, 2005)

beemandan said:


> I think that the vehemence often expressed by members of both camps has chased many away, regardless of their point of view.


Just this weekend I pondered walking away from BeeSource for just this reason. But I couldn't. My post in Natural Beekeeping better explains my reasoning.


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

Andrew Dewey said:


> Just this weekend I pondered walking away from BeeSource for just this reason.


And is part of the reason I no longer post on the treatment free forum.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

I feel your pain. I also find the opposition to treatment-free beekeeping in the Treatment-Free Beekeeping forum to be stifling. But I'm working to make it better and I appreciate everyone's efforts to do the same.


----------



## Adam Foster Collins (Nov 4, 2009)

It is unfortunate that so many people have a difficult time sharing opposing views without that opposition becoming a personal slight, or an offense.

The reason I have stayed on this forum more than any other is the number of active members, and the fact that opposing views continue to be represented. However, in every forum I have participated in, I have at one time or another been met with what I would call unreasonably aggressive responses, and disrespectful accusations and comments.

It's sad that we get into that. Because there are a lot of people who are not able to deal with the confrontation, and who quickly withdraw from participation. 

We are all weaker for their departure. 

And too many forums descend into becoming a "clubhouse" with one, dominant philosophy that everyone keeps repeating to themselves. No one learns anything if they're right all the time.

Adam


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

Solomon Parker said:


> I also find the opposition to treatment-free beekeeping


It isn’t opposition to treatment free beekeeping…I don’t believe I’ve ever read a post where anyone stated that they were opposed to folks being treatment free…but I am impressed with your insistence on misstating it. In my opinion, it is often those who advocate small cell as an essential part of being treatment free and those who disagree.


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

So does there ever come a time when we can be OK with that and not have to keep trying to "correct" the other side with what we feel are the facts? I mean after it's been tried so many times without a change, can't we simply move on in some areas?


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

well said adam. the irony is that it's the very passion for this pursuit that not only drives us to be the best we can, but also makes it very personal. pride can be a two edged sword.

it's also interesting how much power the written word has. often times human nature leads us to take great offense when we are challanged in a printed post. i think it's because it lacks the same dynamic that would be there if face to face with the other person. take mark's recent visit with ace for example.

it's true that some posts get out of bounds at times, and the moderators deserve a lot of credit for filtering those.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

yes barry, moving on seems to be the eventual outcome. hopefully without anyone getting seriously offended, but in the meantime there is a certain degree of entertainment value.....


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

Barry said:


> So does there ever come a time when we can be OK with that and not have to keep trying to "correct" the other side with what we feel are the facts?


Yes Barry, I agree. My apologies for reentering this fray. I actually started out with a genuine question for Michael Bush and then responded to Solomon’s statement. I should have left it with the question for Michael. 
I am honestly intending to stay out of the sc stuff. It is clear that no ones’ minds get changed and in the end absolutely nothing positive comes out of it. 
I would still like clarification from MB….honest, just for clarification.


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

beemandan said:


> I don’t believe I’ve ever read a post where anyone stated that they were opposed to folks being treatment free…but I am impressed with your insistence on misstating it.


Was I being too obvious?

I believe the disconnect comes in when experienced conventional beekeepers think that newbees are misled into believing everything will be okay if they just don't treat and use small cell and everything will be okay. They have a valid concern. The trouble is, it's often other newbees reading these conclusions into the existing arguments. I've done my level best to assure that everyone knows that small cell is not a panacea and that there arent no speedbumps in this road. And for my part, I have done my best to discourage those inexperienced expert newbees from offering that kind of advice. Still for my troubles, my ideologies have been labelled as lies and poison. Maybe you haven't read such posts because they get moderated. Let me make this clear from my experience. Small cell does not fix everything and you don't have to be small cell to be treatment free. Also, if you are treatment free, you should not expect fewer losses than with treatments.


----------



## Adam Foster Collins (Nov 4, 2009)

I think the most difficult areas of discussion - and the ones that cause the most harm - are the ones that are not overt enough to be moderated. The ones that are just edgy enough to make some of the less "seasoned" posters feel uncomfortable or embarrassed. 

It's part of the territory to some extent, but if we see the value in diversity, we can work to create a culture of inclusion. And I think a lot of people do. 

Adam


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

Adam -

This is a key point you raise. It's often difficult to strike the perfect balance between too much moderation and too little. I try to err on the side of too little. My hope is that we all have a little bit thicker skin when participating in a discussion forum. It goes a long way! Blatant insults and remarks get removed without question, but there are still a lot of "on the edge" remarks that may remain as I have no interest in micro managing discussions.


----------



## Barry (Dec 28, 1999)

Dan, no problem. I was not addressing you per se, but everyone. Let's see what MB has to say.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

beemandan said:


> I am honestly intending to stay out of the sc stuff. It is clear that no ones’ minds get changed and in the end absolutely nothing positive comes out of it.


Disagree Beemandan! 

In my opinion, any serious beekeeper should be here and participating. Reason being, if this small cell stuff turned out to be as good as claimed, we'd all want to be doing it, right? Also, some of the "naysayers", do bring up good points, which challenge the "yesayers", to validate what they say. A good way to draw out all information, plus maintain honesty in any claims being made. I notice we don't hear the wilder claims so much lately, and that's as it should be.

Anyhow back to topic, so far we've got Dee, who seems able to make her living from treatment free bees, rather than from books, teaching about treatment free, etc. 

Are there any others? Even one?


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

How is that the topic?


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Solomon Parker said:


> Ted keeps making this claim, but Dee was on small cell before the Africanized bees showed up.


How is that on topic?

But anyhow, you are correct, I forgot which thread I'm in. I'll go and ask the same question in the other thread. Looks like one of us is required to stay on topic anyway.


----------



## REN (May 7, 2011)

Barry said:


> I'm curious, have you found data to support LC foundation? Research seems to indicate that LC has limited, if any, benefit in the long run as well. I think you're going to have to look beyond what research says in deciding how you want to manage your bees and what your goals are. Research is very limited in answering these types of questions/ideas.


Barry, When I first read about SC foundation, there was a lot of debate about it, and there still is. I thought that a more natural cell size made sense and I was considering going that route. Since there didn't seem to be consensus, I searched for journal articles on the subject to see if there was any science that suggested a benefit to SC. I didn't find any, but you're right, I didn't find anything to suggest that LC was better either. I must say, that I didn't do an exaustive literature review. I just took a cursory look at the available information. I'm not an advocate for or against SC, as I don't know enough to prefer one or the other. For me, the benefit of LC was availability and ease. There are a lot of suppliers near my location that sold bees on LC foundation. I wanted to purchase locally-adapted bees, and since there weren't apparent benefits to SC, I purchased the bees that were available locally. As I previously mentioned, I'm still open to the idea of switching to SC. I just need to be more informed by learning more before I make that decision. Going foundationless makes sense to me, also, but for simplicity as I'm starting out and learning, I chose to go with the standard equipment. 

Ted's point about cell size being smaller in more southern locations and larger in more northern locations makes sense to me from a biological perspective. That sounds like adaptation to a local environment. 

Thanks to everyone for sharing information and points of view. Without differing views and debate, the likelihood for improvent in methodologies is severly limited.
Bob


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>Michael, are you saying that the Lusby’s were already on small cell when varroa first arrived?

Yes.

> I’d swear that I’d read that they suffered large losses to varroa…..has my old brain snapped a synapse? 

They suffered losses from the stress of regressing (two complete shakedowns, one to 5.0mm and one to 4.9mm) and from what Dee describes as "secondary diseases". If you press it seems to be AFB and chalkbrood mostly. From the stress of two complete shakedowns, IMO. I am not aware of their having losses from Varroa but losses from Tracheal mites is what drove them to small cell. They were working with the USDA on small cell studies in the 1980s.


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

Thank you for the reply Michael Bush.


----------



## Ted Kretschmann (Feb 2, 2011)

Tracheal mite losses drove Dee and Ed to small cell.......I am glad Micheal Bush finally has brought this key point up....It was not varroa mite control that was the reason they went to small cell. And Micheal is correct. They lost from over a thousand hives down to around 100 active hives trying to regress bees to small cell. Something else that Micheal may not realize. During the time frame they were doing this, the desert had not really bloomed for three years straight. It remained what it is--a desert. With all the losses and lack of honey crops, most commercial beekeepers would have gone bankrupt and they almost did!! Economically, was swapping to sc worth it?? That is in the eye of the beeholder. TED


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>Economically, was swapping to sc worth it??

My problem is, I don't think the shake downs and the losses are at all required to regress. I tried shakedowns once and it was way to stressful on the bees. So I just fed in small cell to regress them and that had no associated losses. Were the shakedowns worth it to Dee? She seems to think so. I wouldn't think so, especially since I think there were less stressful ways to accomplish it.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Thing is, it's probably location dependant. I've heard bees will build cells at 4.9 naturally, where you are. So that would make the transition easier.


----------



## beemandan (Dec 5, 2005)

Michael Bush said:


> Were the shakedowns worth it to Dee?


Michael, do you know if Dee continues to recommend shake downs as part of the conversion?


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>Michael, do you know if Dee continues to recommend shake downs as part of the conversion? 

I guess I hadn't thought about what she recommends since that's the way it's laid out in the POV here, but I guess I don't hear her recommend it much, especially since we now have HSC and PF100s and PF120s. The whole process is much simpler now than when she was doing it. You can pretty much just buy PF100s (or PF120s) and use them and by the time you've swapped out the old comb once, you're done.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

Michael Bush said:


> You can pretty much just buy PF100s (or PF120s) and use them and by the time you've swapped out the old comb once, you're done.


By "done" does that mean if you then let the bees draw their own comb they will construct sc as if they were regressed the old fashion way?


----------



## Solomon Parker (Dec 21, 2002)

Beekeeping doesn't work that way Brian. There are no guarantees.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>By "done" does that mean if you then let the bees draw their own comb they will construct sc as if they were regressed the old fashion way? 

By "done" I mean once you have replaced the comb (a recommended thing to do anyway to get the chemicals out of the hive) with the PF100s (or PF120s) you now have small cell comb and small cell bees and can do what you like as far as using foundationless or 4.9mm foundation. Doing the same with 4.9mm wax would take two more turnovers minimum and maybe more.


----------



## Ted Kretschmann (Feb 2, 2011)

There is only one way to answer the debate on SC. That is to set up a couple of small cell yards and prove it to naysayers like myself! You will have to include naysayers in the oversite group that will moniter the project. And the yards will have to have a commercial number of hives in them. You will have to have an impartial university related PHD involved. And from what deknow grips about, have the study peer reviewed. Just to always state on an anecdotal claim that small cell works with out proof is as bad as not having the study peer reviewed. Otherwise you will never convince any commercial beekeeper to swap any part, or whole of their outfits over. And right now, I would put more claim to the evidence of the three university studies even without peer review over the anecdotal evidence. It is economically nonviable for me as a commercial beekeeper to spend a fortune on anecdotal evidence......GIVE ME THE PROOF< SET UP THE STUDY WITH UNIVERSITY HELP! TED


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

Ted, why would it be in my interest to "convince commercial beekeepers" of anything? If your goal is commercial, migratory, treatment free beekeeping, then I suggest you talk to Chris Baldwin (he is not completley treatment free...he felt the need to use some antibiotics on some bad EFB some years...but he has been without mite treatments for several years now). ...or you can ignore this and keep on your merry way.

I will also point out (given your sig line and the many opinions you have expressed here) that if I were trying to compete with Sue Bee honey, I would point out that even their domestic producers rely on antibiotics so much that they don't even consider them a treatment anymore....and I could document it.

If you do not think SC will help your operation, then don't consider it...keep doing what you are doing.

The study you have proposed isn't bad...but it's worth noting how the published studies from professional researchers fail to meet most of your provisions. A good study has not been done. I don't have the funding to do one.

deknow


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

Ted Kretschmann said:


> It is economically nonviable for me as a commercial beekeeper to spend a fortune on anecdotal evidence......GIVE ME THE PROOF< SET UP THE STUDY WITH UNIVERSITY HELP! TED


I think first you have to answer the question is it economically viable for you to switch if there was proof. There has to be a certain amount of proof available if this has been going on for 10 years or better. A simple accounting report would show positives or negatives to both trains of thoughts. It would be different if this was just an idea that no one has done before. I wouldn't call 10 years of opperation anecdotal. The only thing in my mind that could be suspect would be how good are the records on what was done.


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

Ted Kretschmann said:


> You will have to have an impartial university related PHD involved.


...the most recent study was done by a university related PHD....he calculated the mean cell size of both sides of a frame by measuring 10 cells in the middle of one side of a frame (where the cells tend to be smaller than the mean). He also spent 2 years of time and funding attempting to draw out SC comb in a manner that no one has ever claimed would work (when the focus of the study is to _have_ SC comb, not how to draw it). These are not mistakes I'd expect most beekeepers with a highschool education to make. I'm not sure the worth of a PHD per say.

deknow


----------



## ldaxon (Apr 14, 2010)

I am in the middle of teaching the Beekeeping 101 class here in OKC. I started with the following disclaimers:

1) Ask 10 beekeepers how to do something and you will get 10 different answers.
2) All beekeeping is local so take what you read in books, magazines and on line with a grain of salt as what may have worked for someone in Georgia or Oregon may not work here, and 3)
3) The bees don't read the same material I do so if they don't behave the way I say they will, it is not my fault but theirs for not being "educated."

Actually, we have two insturctors do the teaching and we told the class up front that the other instructor and
I hardly agree on anything. He is a sideliner with 80 hives and I am a 10 year hobbyist with 3 hives. We show them the different ways to do things and let them decide for themselves how they want to manage their bees.

Sorry you are getting slapped around. Hope I haven't left anyone in my class with that feeling.

LD


----------



## Riskybizz (Mar 12, 2010)

Ask 10 different beekeepers the same question and you'll usually get 12 different responses..the rest I agree with


----------



## frazzledfozzle (May 26, 2010)

And that Idaxon is the real truth of it !
Thats why we have such debate asbout things like excluders, under supering, requeening, treatment free, landing boards, hive mats, painting hives, shifting hives, commercial beekeeping, hobby beekeeping, swarm control, etc etc etc

to each their own it's great to have discussion and learn what others are doing but until you try something yourself you wont know if it will work in your yard or not.
There are some well respected beekeepers here and sometimes their word is taken for gospel when in fact on most subjects it's just an opinion based on what works for them rather than a rule that works for all beekeepers.

Try different things it's how we learn but in the end you have to go with what works for you


----------



## Dan. NY (Apr 15, 2011)

WOW.. wow wow wow. Thanks for the rather interesting and educational thread. I would like to close this thread by thanking everyone for comments. I am throwing in the towel sort of speak here and hope everyone will retreat to their respective corners. done. kaput. over.


----------



## Fusion_power (Jan 14, 2005)

Hey Dan, you ask to go fishing around here, we want you to catch at least a 1000 pound marlin.



DarJones


----------

