# vertical vs. horizontal movement



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

It seems that one reason (among others) that many if not most beekeepers prefer vertical hives to long hives is the belief that bees do not move as readily sideways as they do up and down. Anyway, a lot of people believe this. On the other hand, a number of folks say they move as well horizontally as vertically-- and often these folks are those with extensive experience with both sorts of hives. 

Is anyone aware of any scientific studies dealing with this idea?


----------



## cerezha (Oct 11, 2011)

rhaldridge said:


> ... belief that bees do not move as readily sideways as they do up and down. ...


 I am not aware of any scientific research on this matter, but in Russia they used horizontal logs to keep bees for centuries. They do use them even now. Wax comb has some mechanical properties, which prevents bees to make taller comb. How tall comb may be in the nature? From another hand, nothing prevents bees to add additional "plate" of honeycomb - horizontal expansion. So, it seems to me that in the natural environment, horizontal move should not be a problem. In artificial environment, if bees are trained to expand vertically - they will adapt and do it. If they trained to expand horizontally - they will do it. I have one hive, which prefer vertical expansion (6 medium tall last year) and another - horizontal, they completely in denial to idea of vertical expansion. Horizontal 2x Lang with top bars is doing remarkable well this year. Last year I had a great success with vertical hive...


----------



## Jayoung21 (Jun 22, 2010)

I am by no means an expert and I don't have any experience with horizontal hives but I once read that if the bees have vertical room to move they will move vertical, if they have horizontal room they will move horizontal. If they have both then they will get "confused" and not move at all. Maybe the writer of the article was full of it but it made sense to me. People have lots of success with top bar hives (horizontal) and of course the lang or warre hive (vertical).


----------



## delber (Dec 26, 2010)

The only other thing I have read is that bees won't go up very well w/o being bated up. Going horizontal is fine as is going down, but not up. I haven't done anything but langstroth hives so far so I can't speak to how well / how poor top bar hives work. I was seriously looking into it when I was starting, but due to the hindrance of being able to move the hive I went for the lang.


----------



## Michael Palmer (Dec 29, 2006)

delber said:


> The only other thing I have read is that bees won't go up very well w/o being bated up.


When using foundation only above...I agree. Bees don't to be baited when moving up onto comb.


----------



## Michael Palmer (Dec 29, 2006)

Bees will move in any direction if they are forced to. Moving up is easiest.


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

Michael, can you elaborate on why they find it easiest to move up?


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

For colder regions I think it is thermal mass and conservation of energy. What little heat escapes the cluster will rise up and warm honey up above vs. below. If the cluster ate the honey in the downwards direction the honey would be colder and thus lower their body temperature. There would be no thermal mass above to temper the air temperature because the combs would be void. In the summer it may not be as important which way they go but moving honey for preparation for colder months would increase the work the hive has to do in fall so I think they have figured out what to do to reduce overall work to a minimum. This is all conjecture on my part.


----------



## Michael Palmer (Dec 29, 2006)

Yes, heat rises. Remember I keep bees in an area that just had it's first cleansing flight since December, low temperature of -22F, and several weeks of single digit temperatures during the day and -10 at night. 

I see it best when comparing nucs in different configurations. 8 frame nucs...either 8 frames in a one story, or 8 frames, 4 over 4. In Late winter and early spring the 4 over 4 nucs have no difficulty rising up to get the honey above. The singles sometimes get stuck on one side and don't build up as fast. Also, in the summer, the singles don't jump right on the foundation frame at the far wall, but they sure do when it's above them.


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

Very interesting!

I'm not sure I understand the "heat rises" discussion. I'm sure there's a chimney effect, causing heat to rise, but it's hard for me to see how this makes for a warmer cluster. If the cluster is low, then the chimney effect will suck in cold air to replace the warm air that rises. If the cluster is in the top of the chimney, then there's nothing below it to create heated air to rise. A home with low ceilings, all else being equal, takes less energy to heat than a home with high ceilings. But maybe this isn't a good analogy.

I do see that honey above would take less energy to consume, if it were a little warmer than honey to the side. Does anyone know to what extent the heat given off by a cluster is radiant?

I found an interesting page on Ukraine beekeeping. This is a fairly ferocious climate, but horizontal hives are traditional. 

http://outdoorplace.org/beekeeping/ukraine.htm

Apparently they were used successfully in many northern European and Asian areas. Of course, that doesn't mean they are the best solution, but it does indicate that they are feasible.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Problem with this thread so far is it's nearly all conjecture, guesswork and theory.

First up are we talking winter, summer, expanding hive, shrinking hive, what?

If we are talking an expanding hive, best way for anybody who really wants to know is set up a hive with a cluster and give it room with comb in all directions to expand any way it wants. You'll find it will primarily go up. As has been asserted by the only poster I see in the thread with experience in a good number of hives and being able to see what bees actually do, rather than some theory what they "should" do.


----------



## cerezha (Oct 11, 2011)

Oldtimer said:


> ... You'll find it will primarily go up. As has been asserted by the only poster I see in the thread with experience in a good number of hives and being able to see what bees actually do, rather than some theory what they "should" do.


 What about Warre? My understanding is that colony expands down, nadiring.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Well that's cos nadiring is French for putting the new boxes underneath. There's no room up so the bees can't go up. One of the reasons they swarm more. Can't go up.

Which is why I said give them comb in *all directions*, and see what happens.

Try it. Then you'll know.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

One thing. If we are talking foundationless, then it's hard for bees to go up into an empty box. Cos they have to hang the comb from the top. They need a comb or two to give them a "bridge" to the top after which they will start building more combs in the box. 

So if we are talking about them expanding upwards into a totally empty box, no, it's easier for them to go downwards they can just build a bit more on the bottom of the comb. They will feel more congested though.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

cerezha said:


> What about Warre? My understanding is that colony expands down, nadiring.


Down is still vertical but they can just as easily expand horizontal in a protected area like a ceiling joist of your house. I think you will find that given the choice in an unheated barn they will pick the walls to build their nest over ceiling joists.


----------



## rail (Apr 1, 2011)

I experimented with this vertical direction question last spring and summer.

Hive 1: started with a 10 frame foudationless deep (9 5/8") chamber. Once the deep was drawn and full of bees and brood, added a western (7 5/8") foudationless chamber above and a western (7 5/8") chamber with foundation below. The nest chose to move upward and "drew comb from the bottom bar upwards".

Hive 2: started with an 8 frame medium (6 5/8") chamber with foundation. Once the medium was drawn and full of bees and brood, added a medium (6 5/8") chamber with foundation above and below. The nest chose to move upwards.


----------



## rail (Apr 1, 2011)

The 10 frame double deep hive "winter cluster" was on 5 frames in the bottom chamber and 5 frames in the top chamber.

The 8 frame Jumbo hive "winter cluster" was on three frames in the center of the chamber.

My experience shows that vertical upwards is their choice, unless forced to decide other wise!


----------



## libhart (Apr 22, 2010)

rhaldridge said:


> it's hard for me to see how this makes for a warmer cluster.


Don't think it makes for a warmer cluster, but the cluster has an easier time moving into a warmer part of the hive vs a colder part of the hive, and the warmer part will be above them.


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

Oldtimer said:


> Problem with this thread so far is it's nearly all conjecture, guesswork and theory.
> 
> .


Yep. That's why, when I started the thread, I asked if anyone knew of any scientific studies of the question. So far, no luck.

I'd have to say that the only real evidence offered was Michael Palmer's observation that 4 over 4 nucs seem to get off to a better start than the same amount of bees in a single box. Everything thing else, as you say, has been conjecture and assertion. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but I was actually wondering if the question had been studied scientifically.

From a perspective of total ignorance and no experience whatever, I can see that it should be physically easier for a cluster to move up than sideways, just because of the way the combs are arranged. Sideways requires the cluster to go around the comb, vertical movement can proceed in the spaces between the comb. On the other hand, moving vertically between boxes require the cluster to cross the space between top and bottom of frames, though that strikes me as less of an impediment to movement than having to circle around the frame.

Some beekeepers with experience have asserted that the bees don't seem to have any difficulty moving sideways-- Michael Bush, for example.

The question of whether horizontal hives are less likely to survive winter is a separate question, but the evidence of high latitude beekeepers in Europe and Asia using these hives successfully makes me think that the answer may be complicated, at the least. Nothing prevents them from using vertical hives-- and in fact, I saw pictures of a beekeeping museum in Ukraine that had tall log hives on display, so it's not as if the concept of vertical hives was unknown there prior to the adoption of the long hives.

This spring I plan to start 4 hives-- two Langstroth 8 frame hives, a top bar hive, and a long Lang hive. This is too small a sample, and there are too many confounding factors for this to be a useful experiment, but I'm just doing this because it's an interesting thing to do. And I like honey.



Oldtimer said:


> If we are talking an expanding hive, best way for anybody who really wants to know is set up a hive with a cluster and give it room with comb in all directions to expand any way it wants. .


Have you actually done this? If you have, I'd love to hear details. 

I guess I could do that with my horizontal Lang hive, because it's set up so it can be supered, but my purpose in trying a horizontal hive is different. My thought was that it might be a better setup for a hobbyist like me, someone who only wants a few hives, mostly for fun. The long hive has a number of advantages in that situation, or so it seems to me. But that's a different thread.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

I think there are two issues here. The most common one that comes up is to do with overwintering. Bees will move sideways to food, just as well as up, but given a vertical hive, they tend to move up and leave food on the sides. Given a horizontal hive this does not happen. But if there are stores on both sides they will tend to work their way to one end and leave honey at the other end because they had to choose and once they get to the end, moving back is difficult. From a wintering point of view this happens in vertical hives as well, where stores get left behind and a colony might starve with food in the hive. 

The other issue is expanding the brood nest. In my experience it takes some effort to get the bees to expand the brood nest horizontally. It's not hard, but you have to put some empty frames in from time to time or they tend to stall out. Part of it is once they make a wall of capped comb at the end, they don't tend to enlarge the brood nest without you putting empty bars in the brood nest. But again, in a vertical hive I often have to put in some empty frames as well because overhead is capped honey so they won't expand up and there aren't empty boxes below to expand into...


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

Michael Bush said:


> I think there are two issues here. The most common one that comes up is to do with overwintering. Bees will move sideways to food, just as well as up, but given a vertical hive, they tend to move up and leave food on the sides. Given a horizontal hive this does not happen. But if there are stores on both sides they will tend to work their way to one end and leave honey at the other end because they had to choose and once they get to the end, moving back is difficult. From a wintering point of view this happens in vertical hives as well, where stores get left behind and a colony might starve with food in the hive.


Michael, I've read in your book and website that with long hives, top bar or Lang, it's critical to get the brood nest at one end of the hive prior to winter. This makes a lot of sense, and I wonder if some of the wintering problems people have reported with horizontal hives are due to hive designs that put the entrance in the middle of the long side-- resulting in the brood nest being in the middle.



Michael Bush said:


> The other issue is expanding the brood nest. In my experience it takes some effort to get the bees to expand the brood nest horizontally. It's not hard, but you have to put some empty frames in from time to time or they tend to stall out. Part of it is once they make a wall of capped comb at the end, they don't tend to enlarge the brood nest without you putting empty bars in the brood nest. But again, in a vertical hive I often have to put in some empty frames as well because overhead is capped honey so they won't expand up and there aren't empty boxes below to expand into...


I've gotten the same idea from several sources, but I've come to think of it as a feature rather than a bug. The fact that it's relatively easy to manipulate the nest on a per-frame basis in a horizontal hive might make these adjustments more accessible for someone who only has a few hives and can devote more time to each of his hives. If you have only a couple of hives, it's the work of a few minutes to move frames around. I was very interested in Les Crowder's illustrations of comb manipulation for various situations and developments. If you have the time to do that, it could make a difference in how robust the colony is, or so I imagine.

I guess it would just be silly stuff for someone with 1000 hives.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

rhaldridge said:


> Have you actually done this? If you have, I'd love to hear details.


The actual details are a little hard for me to run through, because I haven't done this once. I've seen this type of situation many times, too many to explain, having been a commercial beekeeper and worked with thousands of hives over many years. given the opportunity, bees will prefer to move up.

The argument will now be that cos there was thousands of hives I did not have time to observe them. Not true, each hive was cared for carefully. Course, you have to be more organised and streamlined than someone with 10 or 20 hives, and know a thing or two about bees, but it can be done.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

rhaldridge said:


> Yep. That's why, when I started the thread, I asked if anyone knew of any scientific studies of the question. So far, no luck.


To be honest, I doubt you are going to get a scientific study on this. The question is too simple to merit one. It would be like conducting a study to prove whether or not bees fly. The answer to whether or not bees move up becomes pretty self evident once someone has had enough bees / time, and done enough observation.

There are those who insist that bees would rather move down, sideways, or whatever, and you'll even read this in some books. But they are mostly people who are trying to push a particular hive design, that forces the bees to behave in that way, and bees will if they have to, if bees are anything, they are adaptable to the box shape they have to live in.

End of day, if someone wants to think bees prefer to move sideways, or down, over to them. I see that Rail has *actually tried it*, check out what he found.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

Bees move to space. If you add supers on top, the space is up.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Best way to see what bees prefer is give them options, and see which they take.

Michael check out where Rail added space, and see what happened.


----------



## Rusty Islander (Feb 26, 2013)

> I saw pictures of a beekeeping museum in Ukraine that had tall log hives on display, so it's not as if the concept of vertical hives was unknown there prior to the adoption of the long hives.


Touching on the stack effect (chimney effect), from a thermodynamics standpoint you would want to limit it. If a hive was fairly tall with a large opening at the top you would get a lot of cold air pushed through the hive constantly. Maybe this is why they chose horizontal hives?


----------



## AstroBee (Jan 3, 2003)

rhaldridge said:


> I'd have to say that the only real evidence offered was Michael Palmer's observation that 4 over 4 nucs seem to get off to a better start than the same amount of bees in a single box. Everything thing else, as you say, has been conjecture and assertion.


..and coming from someone who overwinters 200+ nucs in Vermont is pretty compelling. Scientific proof no, but if I were a betting man, I know where my money would land.


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

Oldtimer said:


> The actual details are a little hard for me to run through, because I haven't done this once. I've seen this type of situation many times, too many to explain, having been a commercial beekeeper and worked with thousands of hives over many years. given the opportunity, bees will prefer to move up.


I imagine you're right, but I was hoping you'd personally done the experiment you proposed. Sounds like it could have put the matter to rest, if enough hives were involved, and the bees had similar genetics. In your hives, do the bees ever have an opportunity to move sideways more than one box? Have you ever used long hives?

There's an Australian beekeeper who built a horizontal hive-- a beautiful piece of woodworking, too-- who supered both sides of the hive, which was 2 deeps across. Maybe he'll see the thread and be able to comment on his experience.


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

Oldtimer said:


> To be honest, I doubt you are going to get a scientific study on this. The question is too simple to merit one. It would be like conducting a study to prove whether or not bees fly. The answer to whether or not bees move up becomes pretty self evident once someone has had enough bees / time, and done enough observation.


You may be misunderstanding my question. It's obvious that bees move up. It's also clear that they will move sideways. What I wanted to know was whether movement limited to the side has any bad effects on the colony, and if so, what those effects are. 




Oldtimer said:


> End of day, if someone wants to think bees prefer to move sideways, or down, over to them. I see that Rail has *actually tried it*, check out what he found.


I'll look for it, thanks.

Can't find the thread. Do you have a link?


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

rhaldridge said:


> I imagine you're right, but I was hoping you'd personally done the experiment you proposed.


I have. Not so much as an experiment, but just that when working with a lot of hives I have seen many hives with space all around the cluster and been able to see which way they go. In fact, my whole spring management is based around an understanding of how, and where, and when, the bees want to go.

But if you want me to prove this somehow, I really don't know how I'm meant to do that on a chat site. Hence the suggestion for anyone who wishes to try it themselves, best way to learn.


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

Oldtimer said:


> But if you want me to prove this somehow,.


Nope, just hoping someone was aware of scientific studies on bee movement. No big deal.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

As stated, can't imagine why someone would bother doing one on something so self evident.

And yes, I do have long hives, not for honey production though.


----------



## cerezha (Oct 11, 2011)

Oldtimer said:


> ... give them comb in *all directions*, and see what happens.Try it. Then you'll know.


 EXACTLY! I did it. I offered them the option to go up, down and to the side. You may need to read an earlier post regarding this. They choose the side. They completely denied the box on top or at the bottom with some drawn comb. In fact, I made to them a bridge using deep-size frame hanging in the top medium... no luck. But they accept horizontal hive immediately and blooming now.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Well that's highly possible, just depends on the state of the bridge. The experiment I proposed assumed full & equal comb in all directions. If your bridge had been sufficient, they would have gone up.

But I'm beginning to regret even posting to this thread, I cannot really say more than I have, nor prove anything. Perhaps I should take the advice I've been given here from those with 1 hive / no hives / tried it once, who clearly know better, so I'll be able to relearn everything and will finally be able to keep bees properly.


----------



## RiodeLobo (Oct 11, 2010)

I am a rank newbie, so take it for what it is worth.

Here is my observations from this winter. I had 8 colonies going into the winter. 3 started last spring and 5 overwintered, I lost 7/8 this winter. All had good populations and plenty of honey. The ones that did not make it were all in double deeps (8 frame) and left honey in frames at both sides of the hive, they hit the top and starved there. The one that survived (so far) is a TBH, started last spring, with an entrance at one end. I am TX free, so there were other factors involved with their demise, but the only major variation on the hive was Lang vs. TBH. 

I don't know why, and it was not what I expected. I certainly don't have enough experience to weigh in on the growing colonies or make generalization from my experience, and will defer to the expertise and experience of the knowledgeable members.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

In a TBH it can work. The smaller and naturally built combs can allow the bees to move sideways easier. Also, having the entrance at one end, is the correct way, likely (you'll have to answer this Rio), the brood nest would have been down that end, so the bee cluster would have been able to start at one end and work their way along, better than trying to winter a middle cluster.

Although in a standard lang going into winter, you want a middle cluster. Or to be precise, low middle cluster. You just don't want a middle cluster in a long hive, if winters are very cold.


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

Oldtimer said:


> As stated, can't imagine why someone would bother doing one on something so self evident.
> 
> And yes, I do have long hives, not for honey production though.


Well, I did get interesting replies from Michael Palmer and Michael Bush, so, I hope I've learned something....

What do you use your long hives for? When I built mine, it struck me that it might make a great nuc battery. Do you ever put supers on your long hives?

By the way, I hope you don't think I would ever discount your experience. I have none, and my ignorance is vast. That's why I'm asking questions here. Just hoping to learn a little. If I have in some way offended you, I apologize.


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

RiodeLobo said:


> I am a rank newbie, so take it for what it is worth.
> 
> Here is my observations from this winter. I had 8 colonies going into the winter. 3 started last spring and 5 overwintered, I lost 7/8 this winter. All had good populations and plenty of honey. The ones that did not make it were all in double deeps (8 frame) and left honey in frames at both sides of the hive, they hit the top and starved there. The one that survived (so far) is a TBH, started last spring, with an entrance at one end. I am TX free, so there were other factors involved with their demise, but the only major variation on the hive was Lang vs. TBH.
> 
> I don't know why, and it was not what I expected. I certainly don't have enough experience to weigh in on the growing colonies or make generalization from my experience, and will defer to the expertise and experience of the knowledgeable members.


I remember asking you about that in the thread in which you discussed those losses. It caught my attention because it seemed to go against most of what I've heard from many traditional beekeepers. Kicks off all sorts of speculation. Michael Palmer mentioned that he saw more vigorous bees in 4 over 4 nucs, and Michael Bush has said that he thinks that 8 frame gear winters better than 10 frame, if I recall correctly. It's easy to see why folks would come to believe that bees don't like to move sideway, if their bees fail to take advantage of honey in outside frames and instead move up before using up the stores in a lower box. But thinking about that, I wonder if the size of the cluster plays a part in these observations. A nuc, as an example, would have a fairly small cluster, so maybe would more fully utilize a narrow vertical hive than a horizontally spread-out 10 frame box. I wonder if in a horizontal hive, the cluster is compressed a bit between floor and roof, and assumes a less spherical form, so spreads out more from end bar to end bar.

Interesting stuff.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

No offence at all. Some of what I said was sarcastic but if you saw my face I was grinning when writing it but probably came across pretty hard on the net. But the thread was turning into a claim / counterclaim thing, bit frustrating doing that when you know what you are talking about but are questioned / disbelieved, comes a time to call it quits.

Having said that, a person is quite right to question / disbelieve, cos there is so much crap on the net. But when you are not talking crap, can get a bit much.

My long hives are used for queen breeding cell production, just an idea I've tried & working quite well, mainly cos I'm in the cell raisers several times per week and looking for an alternative to constantly lifting heavy boxes on and off the same hives. I don't super them that's not what they are for, they are quite strictly controlled as to amount of honey, brood, and bees in the hive. I still use traditional cell raiser set ups alongside them though, not time to put all my eggs in one basket yet.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

I like building stairs so my next hive is going to be at a 45 deg angle with each frame stepping up 1 3/8 x 1 3/8 I am sure the bees will love it.


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

Oldtimer said:


> My long hives are used for queen breeding cell production, just an idea I've tried & working quite well, mainly cos I'm in the cell raisers several times per week and looking for an alternative to constantly lifting heavy boxes on and off the same hives.


Sounds like a very good idea. Do you have more than one colony per long hive? When I finished putting my first long hive together, it struck me that with division boards and a series of entrances, it would be a way to consolidate a half-dozen nucs into one place. I've got inner covers in the dimensions of my 8 frame equipment, with a sheet of tin roofing strapped over the hive for waterproofing. But it would be pretty easy to make the inner covers in the dimensions of 5 frame nucs, so then you could super them. I wonder if overwintering nucs would do any better if they were all in the same box.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Currently not doing any of that, but have used everything you've suggested at various times in the past.

Yes, if you have several nucs in the one box separated by dividers, they will winter better. You have to manage it though, they can have more brood than you wanted them to, and other issues, just need to try what you want to do and discover how best to work it. Don't put more than about 4 nucs in the one box though, you are forced to have too many entrances too close together and lose queens when they drift. Can get overly heavy also. 

But we are straying from the topic.


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

Acebird said:


> I like building stairs so my next hive is going to be at a 45 deg angle with each frame stepping up 1 3/8 x 1 3/8 I am sure the bees will love it.


You laugh, but I've actually seen a picture of a hive like that. Can't find it now, but one end was on the ground and the other propped up at about shoulder height.


----------



## rail (Apr 1, 2011)

10 frame hive with empty space above and below, they moved up!










Same hive with empty and partial drawn chambers below, tried to force them down. The nest would not move out of the top deep (9 5/8") chamber!


----------



## rail (Apr 1, 2011)

This is a 13 frame queen rearing hive, "horizontal manipulation".


----------



## MattDavey (Dec 16, 2011)

Ok I'll bite. I agree, they prefer to move upwards, especially above the broodnest.

When I started my horizontal hive I had two colonies in it. They had a solid division board and only had 4 frames each when they overwintered. I made sure each broodnest was hard up against the division board and they wintered well. One side was Carniolan and the other Italian with each (top) entrance on the ends.

The Italian side started expanding the broodnest much earlier than the Carniolan. What I noticed was that the Italian side had no capped honey or nectar on the outside frame, so they quickly started building comb out sideways. 

The Carinolan side did not expand the comb until later as they still had honey and nectar on the outside frame. Once the broodnest was out to the outside frame they then started building comb outwards.

Think of the hive a bit like a watermelon shape, where the red flesh is the broodnest and the white flesh is honey and/or nectar. If you look from centre up vertically, the honey layer is thin, but if you go outwards horizontally the end frames are almost a solid barrier to expanding sideways. So upwards is more likely.

When I put on the supers I had two half width (4 frame) supers, one on each end, and a 10 frame super in the centre. The 10 frame super does not have access from underneath.

They built the most comb and quickly when it was directly above the broodnest in the 4 frame supers. They were very reluctant to build comb in the middle super. I ended up moving frames from the outside supers into the middle super.

I also found the Carionlan broodnest got quite flat and long as they put capped honey along the tops of frames, but in the Italian broodnest some frames were completely brood and it remained more spherical.

Also, as the broodnests were reduced, honey and capped pollen was also being put in the outsides frames as well as the top. Another thing, the two broodnests started as one with a queen excluder in the centre, but as they were reduced, frames around the excluder were also totally capped honey and pollen, so they became separate broodnests.

After a couple of splits and when they had filled all the combs I also placed another 10 frame super on top to the left side. They have drawn seven of these combs (mainly directly above the 4 frame super) but have not built the ones towards the middle of the hive.

With all this is mind, I'm asking people to test "Opening the sides"

They have drawn out at least 45 deep frames in total this season, without feeding.

As a side note: Just be careful with moving frames around. I moved one that I thought had no eggs away from the broodnest and ended up with a virgin queen, which then took out the Italian queen. Then it resulted in that virgin not surviving mating flights but laying at least one egg and another queen being raised. This queen then appears to have gotten into the Carniolan broodnest and killed that queen off as well. So now I have a hive with completely different temperament and gluing up everything with propolis! Will now get them to raise another queen.


----------



## DRAKOS (Oct 17, 2011)

Whenever I tried to have a two-queen hive, even the one above the other, or the one beside the other, with a QE in between, I ended up with all the bees moved to one queen's hive, and the other queen lost.


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

Matthew, very interesting info... thanks!

Have you seen Les Crowder's book on top bar hive management? He has a fairly elaborate system of comb management that involves moving bars around in response to various seasonal developments. In fact, it's so elaborate that when I first looked at the large number of color-coded illustrations in the book, my eyes kind of glazed over. But I stuck to it, and eventually came to understand what he was getting at. As an example, the first illo shows a small hive in early spring with a few combs of old honey on the outside of the broodnest. He says to move those honey bars to the entrance, where they will not hamper expansion, and open up the other, outside edge of the nest with an empty bar, which reminds me of what you're studying. The next scenario is similar to the first, except that there's an active flow, so he opens up the edge of the nest with more empty bars. These example go on for a number of pages, and cover a lot of situations. You might find it interesting to contact him.

[email protected]

So far I'm getting the impression that while bees prefer to move vertically if there is little intervention in the pattern by the beekeeper, it's also relatively easy to get them to move sideways, if the beekeeper is willing to spend the time necessary to encourage them to do so. If true, then it seems that long hives are better suited to hobbyists than to commercial operations... and reality seems to bear this out. There are few long hive beekeepers, at least in this country, who sell any appreciable amount of honey, as far as I can tell. Les Crowder has one of the larger outfits, at a couple hundred hives, which would not be enough to make a living from, if his income were not supplemented by teaching, writing, and so forth-- or so I assume from what I've read.

All that said, while the majority of bees in this country are kept by commercial beekeepers, the majority of beekeepers are not commercial. I can't help but suspect that for the backyard beekeeper with a couple of hives, the long hive might be better in some ways than the vertical hive. 

I'd really like to hear from a traditional long hive beekeeper in those countries where this is still widely practiced. Anyone have a contact?


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

OK well like they say, the truth will out. (Finally)

You got your ideas from one of those books. Which explains the last 3 pages.

From earlier in the thread :-


Oldtimer said:


> There are those who insist that bees would rather move down, sideways, or whatever, and you'll even read this in some books. But they are mostly people who are trying to push a particular hive design, that forces the bees to behave in that way, and bees will if they have to, if bees are anything, they are adaptable to the box shape they have to live in.


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

Oldtimer said:


> OK well like they say, the truth will out. (Finally)


Well, that's my reason for being here.

To sum up: Bees will move up if you encourage them by supering. Bees will move sideways if you encourage them by opening the edge of the nest. One form of encouragement is less labor-intensive, so appeals to commercial beekeepers. (And of course there are many other reasons long hives are unsuited to commercial beekeeping, especially migratory beekeeping.) Unfortunately, a lot of folks will tell newbies that bees don't *want* to move sideways.

There doesn't seem to be much evidence for that view, or if there is, I can't find it. There's plenty of evidence against it, in the form of those who've had success with long hives and top bar hives.

I'm thinking I might put a long hive and a conventional hive up in NY, side by side, since the nucs I'm getting are from the same breeder. Be interesting to see which did better, given the same conditions. Unfortunately, I won't be able to be there all summer, so the long hive could not be properly manipulated to expand the colony. At some point, I'll have to just open up the long hive and let the bees do whatever they want to do. I'm going to have to do the same with the Lang hive, but if what I've learned is correct, it should get along better than the long hive without attention for a couple of months.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Sounds like a good plan.

You don't actually have bees yet? Much will clear up once you do. I think the evidence you cannot find, might be due to where you have been looking, and then the view on what "should" happen, that the book has given you. For example, the only photographic evidence given in this thread shows bees moving vertically, I'm sure you saw it, but it didn't fit the view you got from the book. It is very important not to restrict yourself to one only book, and be open minded, let the actual bees teach you.

It cannot be argued that because X book says this, it's a fact. Because with bees, there will ALWAYS be another book, that says the opposite. Anyone can write a book.

Couple of things, it's not just TBH's that will do best with proper manipulation, Langs too will do best with a bit more care than just simply piling boxes on top. I manipulate my Langs quite a bit, although it is arguably less important than in a TBH. If your Lang will be foundationless, you will have to provide them a " bridge" when you put another box on top, or it will be hard for them. Or, you can add a box underneath so they have direct access to the top bars.


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

Oldtimer said:


> Couple of things, it's not just TBH's that will do best with proper manipulation, Langs too will do best with a bit more care than just simply piling boxes on top. I manipulate my Langs quite a bit, although it is arguably less important than in a TBH. If your Lang will be foundationless, you will have to provide them a " bridge" when you put another box on top, or it will be hard for them. Or, you can add a box underneath so they have direct access to the top bars.


Excellent tip! Thanks.

Could you elaborate on the comb manipulations that you do with Langs? 

I have a problem in that I'd like to got to all mediums, but since the nucs I'm getting are deeps, I'm starting with deep boxes. I've been advised that I may need to move comb up, but the deep frames won't fit into the medium boxes. I've actually considered a sort of spacer under the medium frames so I won't get wild comb if I put some in the bottom box, but maybe I'm overthinking this. I could just put a medium box under the deep, as you suggest.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

If there is more fussing around and timing issues with a TBH and a long hive where do the advantages come in. The only thing I have heard or read about these hives is they are simple to make but after that it gets complicated.


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

Oldtimer said:


> Sounds like a good plan.
> 
> You don't actually have bees yet? Much will clear up once you do. I think the evidence you cannot find, might be due to where you have been looking, and then the view on what "should" happen, that the book has given you. For example, the only photographic evidence given in this thread shows bees moving vertically, I'm sure you saw it, but it didn't fit the view you got from the book. It is very important not to restrict yourself to one only book, and be open minded, let the actual bees teach you.


Well, it was difficult to interpret those images, because there wasn't much explanatory text, so hard to know what was actually happening. All I could get out of it was that it was hard to get bees to move down. It didn't seem to have any info on getting bees to move sideways, but maybe I missed it.

I've actually read* literally* dozens of books, from a lot of contemporary ones like Michael Bush's big book, KIm Flottum's books, etc. to many 19th century books, Langstroth, Miller, etc. I'm currently working my way through ABC and XYZ of Bee Culture. I've read dozens of scientific studies, watched numerous videos, read a lot of web sites, and absorbed large portions of forums such as this one. But I'll bet you're right that I'll learn more from actual bees... and at least then, not everything I think will be pure speculation.

Still, you have to start somewhere. There's a vast amount of disagreement among beekeepers, which I interpret as meaning there really isn't a perfect consensus on what works and what doesn't. If there were, there wouldn't be so many problems with bees. I guess everyone has to find their own way amid the thickets of conflicting information. But that's one reason I find the subject so interesting.


----------



## cerezha (Oct 11, 2011)

rhaldridge said:


> ...I've actually read* literally* dozens of books, from a lot of contemporary ones like Michael Bush's big book, KIm Flottum's books, etc. to many 19th century books, Langstroth, Miller, etc. I'm currently working my way through ABC and XYZ of Bee Culture. I've read dozens of scientific studies, watched numerous videos, read a lot of web sites, and absorbed large portions of forums such as this one. ...


 Bravo-bravo! Knowledge is power! Experience is important but only if foundation s strong. Knowledge is a foundation. It is so strange to me to see many believe that knowledge may be replaced on experience. I guess, I am from another planet... to me, one needs to know for example a physical law first and then do experiment. Doing experiment first just does not make sense - what one could learn if you do not know the laws behind the experiment? Expertise is extremely important but only if it has a solid foundation - knowledge. Sorry - nothing personal, just observation. And I like oldtimer statement that everyone could write a book - so simple! I wish to have such easy life in which, everyone could write the book! Again,nothing personal!


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

Acebird said:


> If there is more fussing around and timing issues with a TBH and a long hive where do the advantages come in. The only thing I have heard or read about these hives is they are simple to make but after that it gets complicated.


I don't believe there are any significant advantages if you are a commercial beekeeper, especially if you are migratory.

For hobbyist backyard beekeepers, there are in my opinion a few advantages:

Granularity: It seems to be pretty well accepted that colonies should use the smallest cavity size that will accommodate the bees, until they need the expansion room. For example, if you install a 5 frame nuc, you can set the follower board to give you a 7 or 8 frame cavity. I think this is advantageous in terms of dealing with pests such as small hive beetles, which tend to make use of space unused by the colony. As the colony expands you're not limited to expansion by the box. This simple ability to control the cavity size precisely is of some value.

Easy access to the brood nest: It's all on one level, and unobscured by boxes stacked on top. This may encourage beginning beekeepers to pay more attention to what is occurring in the brood nest, and if you treat your bees with pesticides and antibiotics, this quick access is an advantage.

No storage problems: Instead of having to store supers when not in use, you have a single unit. This is an advantage when dealing with pests like wax moths.

Less lifting of heavy equipment: this makes it more acceptable to small or frail beekeepers. Also, the hive can be at waist level, which is pleasant from a stooping point of view. You have a built-in table to lay tools on.

Less intrusive: With divided inner covers, only a portion of the hive must be exposed when working the hive, so less disturbance of the colony than occurs when several boxes must be moved.

Feeders: You can install a feeder on the follower board which is then down in the hive and therefore protected against robbing. You can do this with a regular hive, but it's sometimes more complicated.

Versatility: If you want to make a split, you can do so in the opposite end of the hive, if you have an entrance there, and instead of needing a nuc box, all you need is a follower board. That nuc may winter better than a stand-alone nuc. This seems like quick and easy backup of the colony or two you might have in a suburban backyard. Or you can use nucs supered onto a long hive for various purposes such as cell-building and mating.

Less obvious: backyard beekeepers are often somewhat paranoid that their neighbors are going to object to them keeping beehives. Long hives are less recognizable as hives, and some folks consider that they can be more attractive as garden structures.

Frame by frame harvesting. Most hobbyists really don't need and can't use large amounts of honey. If they can take a frame now and then, that might be all they want. Further, frame by frame harvesting allows more precise control over varietal honey, which is a great pleasure in and of itself. 

Finally, I think there is a certain satisfaction in exploring a technology that's apart from the venerable Langstroth technology, which is now 150 years old. It may be an illusion, but I find the possibility of new discoveries to be a strong motivator.

Take all this with a spoonful of salt, because this is only from research and not from experience. Just a few thoughts...


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

rhaldridge said:


> I have a problem in that I'd like to got to all mediums, but since the nucs I'm getting are deeps, I'm starting with deep boxes. I've been advised that I may need to move comb up, but the deep frames won't fit into the medium boxes. I've actually considered a sort of spacer under the medium frames so I won't get wild comb if I put some in the bottom box, but maybe I'm overthinking this. I could just put a medium box under the deep, as you suggest.


OK, it's easy peezy!

Like most things bees there's several ways to achieve what you want, but rather than write a book I'll just give you one, if it's not suitable I'll give you another. 

Don't waste money on any deep boxes that you will not be keeping long term. Start the hive in two mediums one on top of the other, and hang your deep frames in that. There will be space at the bottom but doesn't matter the bees will climb up. Add your medium frames till the box is full and allow the hive to establish itself for perhaps a month, and start working on the other frames.
Then, remove the deep frames, shake all the bees off them, and then away from the hive, use a hand or power saw, and cut the bottom off the combs so they are now medium size. Nail a strip of wood along the bottom for a new bottom bar, put back in the hive.

The bottom bit of comb will be wasted, but if you want to go medium, no option. Also, cut the frame slightly higher than the depth of the medium frames, to allow for the depth of the bottom bar you will nail on. But if it's a plastic frame just cut to the right depth and don't have a bottom bar.



rhaldridge said:


> There's a vast amount of disagreement among beekeepers, which I interpret as meaning there really isn't a perfect consensus on what works and what doesn't.


It's more that there can be several different ways of doing things, all of which can work. But people can get hung up on one way or another. Also, sometimes, you will hear something that's just plain wrong.



rhaldridge said:


> Could you elaborate on the comb manipulations that you do with Langs?


Sorry, no.  I explain how I do my job in a post?


----------



## delber (Dec 26, 2010)

Reading this thread I am wondering if I can insert a question. . . seeing first hand my frustrations last year with one hive that I couldn't keep down. I had a overwintered deep hive that was booming in the spring so I gave them some more room using a few combs brought up as was mentioned. They drew out most of the frames so I gave them another box and they followed things up. I'm currently using upper entrances as others do here, but I had a great problem with this hive and I'm honestly not sure how to rectify it. The queen followed laying up as high as possible and they would leave the combs on the bottom alone. I may have innitially moved them into new boxes too fast, but once I tried to let them "fill out the rest" they swarmed. The queen that was reared failed and I ended up losing what was one of the best hives I had. 

What Can I do to keep them from doing this. I've read that they keep the honey on top and outside of the broodnest, but I haven't found this to be the case. For those that seek to use an unlimited broodnest how do you keep honey as honey and not enable the queen to move up into it?


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Top entrance can cause it. They don't like honey right next to the entrance, they like brood.

However they also like brood below the honey. So top entrance is not in harmony with the two. I only have entrances in the brood area, keeps things how they should be. I'm not as hot as some of you guys though so top entrance may be needed by some for ventilation. Or to make it harder for skunks, not get blocked by snow, whatever. There are reasons for top entrances just have to weigh everything up and do what's best overall, but if you have brood at the top, top entrance will be a contributor to that.

Other thing though, if you are somewhere where the bees just don't get much honey to store, there's nothing to block the broodnest from moving up so it probably will. In this case a queen excluder may be the only option. Re the swarming, only a guess cos I didn't see the hive, but could be that the brood nest got to the top, then nectar flow increased but they couldn't store it above the brood, so the bees answer to this problem is normally to swarm. Assuming that seasonal and other factors will allow that.


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

cerezha said:


> And I like oldtimer statement that everyone could write a book - so simple! I wish to have such easy life in which, everyone could write the book! Again,nothing personal!


Yeah... as someone who's written several books, I'm always a little surprised to find out how easy it should have been.


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

Oldtimer said:


> Top entrance can cause it. They don't like honey right next to the entrance, they like brood.
> 
> .


You might find this study interesting:

http://www.beesource.com/point-of-view/jerry-hayes/queen-excluder-or-honey-excluder/

Though designed to determine if queen excluders were in fact honey excluders, there was also an interesting result regarding upper entrances. In brief, the experiment showed the best results (in honey production and brood area) for a setup with the brood nest below a queen excluder, the entrance above the queen excluder, and honey supers above that entrance. This was compared against a bottom entrance with no queen excluder and a bottom entrance with a queen excluder between brood nest and honey super-- the latter configuration was the least successful.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

I said writing a book was easy?

Show me where.

The reality, is I think writing a book would be a heckuva lot of work. I wouldn't even attempt it. Which does not change the fact that anyone who wants to can, and does.

If you read the link you posted in the last post properly you would see that they allowed some of the (rather few) hives in the experiment to become honey bound. If I allowed that I would expect similarly poor results.

You've asked me a bunch of questions and I have done my best to provide useful answers. However having to then argue about everything has got old, and I see you taken nothing from what I've said. The thread is really about looking for confirmation of your pre existing ideas and I seem to be the wrong person for that.

Good luck when you get some bees.


----------



## cerezha (Oct 11, 2011)

Oldtimer said:


> I said writing a book was easy? Show me where....


 Well, post #51:


Oldtimer said:


> ....
> It cannot be argued that because X book says this, it's a fact. Because with bees, there will ALWAYS be another book, that says the opposite. *Anyone can write a book*....


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Oldtimer said:


> The reality, is *I think writing a book would be a heckuva lot of work*. I wouldn't even attempt it. *Which does not change the fact that anyone who wants to can, and does*.


Anyone can. But where did I say it was easy? You read me wrong. No offence.

And Cerezha. I've been listening to your very strong opinions on bees for a while. How many hives do you have?


----------



## cerezha (Oct 11, 2011)

Oldtimer said:


> Anyone can. But where did I say it was easy?...


 well, this is what I wrote in #55:


cerezha said:


> ... And I like oldtimer statement that everyone could write a book - so simple! ...


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

You are quoting what you said. Which is not what I said. Is this how a claimed research scientist works?

So to put it REAL SIMPLE. Where did I say it was easy? Not where did you say that I said it was easy or simple, when I didn't. Straight up, I have not used the words easy, or simple, in regards to writing a book, and nor would I cos I'm pretty sure it wouldn't be. Whatever your issue is with me, at least be honest when trying to discredit me.

Just, you've been doing this crap to me for months. I've not responded to you constantly twisting my words, I thought it was a language thing but now I think it's deliberate. This time I'm calling you on it. I've never done it to you, what's the problem?

And, I've been listening to your strong opinions on bees for a while. How many hives do you have? With the way you know everything and your constant willingness to argue, I'd assume a large number of hives for many years, with great results and large honey crops, to show you are not just talk.


----------



## cerezha (Oct 11, 2011)

Oldtimer said:


> ... And Cerezha. I've been listening to your very strong opinions on bees for a while. How many hives do you have?


 Unfortunately only two hives permitted in Santa Monica where I live. So, I have 3 (do not tell them). Property is very small and in the center of the city. Like _rhaldridge_ I started from books and Internet resources. Read/watch practically everything available. It was my foundation. Than I got two feral (?) hives from my neighbor. I am a hobbyist and of coarse newbie with my 1.5 years "experience" by beesource standards. Nevertheless, it seems to me, bees are doing great. They never saw treatment - they treated only with love. They are foundationless and quite prolific. I collected about 50-60 pounds raw whole Santa Monica honey and made 20 (?) gallons of honey-wine... plus wax. Being scientist, I am experimenting with my bees - I designed/build Lang-Warre hybrid with top bars and now I am playing with horizontal 2x-Lang hive. It is called "old European style" apparently. I absolutely agree with _rhaldridge_ (#56) observation regarding horizontal hive - my bees love this hive. Unfortunately, I am limited in my experiments by only 2 hives... I do not think, I may be qualified to be a "beekeeper"... in fact, I do not consider myself as a "beekeeper" - I just provide home for my bees. My opinions are based on my knowledge and partially on my obsession with bees. I have no agenda other than bees well-being.


----------



## cerezha (Oct 11, 2011)

Oldtimer said:


> You are quoting what you said. Which is not what I said.


 Comon, oldtimer:

Quote Originally Posted by Oldtimer 
Anyone can. But where did I say it was easy?...
well, this is what I wrote in #55:
Quote Originally Posted by cerezha 
... And I like oldtimer statement that everyone could write a book - so simple! ...

it is #65

I have no intention to do anything bad to you. I deeply respect your bee-expertise. My communication on beesourse is sort of bumpy because ESL and because I am from another planet... Arguments - it is fun! Russians stated that "truth is born in the arguments". I apologize if somehow unintentionally express disrespect to you. Except politics and attacks on science, I love your posts. Sergey


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

OK well there's a few things I would like to say, but I won't, I'm wasting my time here. You and rhaldridge can continue with your theories and methods, and less than 20 lbs per hive honey crop, and telling everybody else how it should be done. 

Me, I don't go by how opinionated people are or how many books they wrote. Like most people, I judge by results.

It would be appreciated if you could stop lying about what I've said, something you do a lot. In your last post you are STILL insisting I said something I didn't. To quote you "And I like oldtimer statement that everyone could write a book - so simple!". I did not even say that. Retract it.

Yeah I really believe you got so much respect.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

cerezha said:


> Except politics and attacks on science, I love your posts. Sergey


Please show where I've said anything about politics, or attacked science.

Or retract the statement.


----------



## Michael Palmer (Dec 29, 2006)

Oldtimer said:


> Top entrance can cause it. They don't like honey right next to the entrance, they like brood.


I agree OT. Example...long hives with brood near entrance. Same with vertical hives...If you search you might find Dr. Bob Southwick's study. He showed the brood rearing cluster would move up or down within the hive depending on where the entrance is located. Using auger holes and corks, close the auger hole in the bottom box, and open one higher in the hive and the bees would re-locate the broodnest near that hole. Move it up again and the bees would re-locate again. Move ot back down the the brood nest re-locates down.

I want my entrances at the bottom board. Here in the north, the upper entrance is for wintering and should be closed in the spring.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Thank you Michael, and anybody such as yourself with reasonable experience with bees would know and have seen this.

This stuff of getting asked to provide studies to prove totally simplistic stuff is getting old. Once the false statements about me are retracted I'm going to leave these guys with their books and theories. 

But about books, I heard you will write / are writing one, which is a book I WOULD like. How's progress?


----------



## Michael Palmer (Dec 29, 2006)

Oldtimer said:


> But about books, I heard you will write / are writing one, which is a book I WOULD like. How's progress?


I'm getting there. I just wrote a section on swarming. 4540 words. Didn't know I had that many words in my head. 

And to stir up the BeeSource pot...I'm sure my old friend from TN will have a comment...

I always get asked, when I recommend not splitting honey producers as the primary swarm control method; How do I prevent them from swarming? How is it that I can maintain such powerhouse colonies and not see them fly off to the trees? To understand why I recommend what I do, we must first understand swarming triggers and preparations within the colony. 

In the spring, whether the colony is in a managed hive or a tree in the forest, the active brood rearing cluster is located near the top of the hive or cavity. They began the winter located lower in their hive, and moved upwards as the season progressed. This leaves them in the upper reaches of their combs, where the remaining food stores are located and where higher temperatures, heat rises, are more conducive to brood rearing. The cluster expands sideways, filling combs with brood, and then downward as needed. This expansion, out and down, continues until the first good nectar flow arrives. At this point, things change. Brood rearing comb space competes with nectar storage comb space, and swarm preparations begin. To better understand what is happening, we need to understand how the bees deal with incoming nectar.

When bees are working a flow, it’s the foragers who leave the hive, find the nectar source, and return the hive with their load. Upon entering the hive, they don’t go to the nectar storage area to deposit their nectar, but rather, give up their load of nectar to a receiver bee. After unloading, they return to their foraging, and the process is repeated. Foragers return to the hive, pass their nectar load to receivers, and leave the hive to continue foraging. It’s the receiver bees that carry the load to nectar storage areas within the hive. One would think that these nectar storage areas would all be located above the active brood rearing cluster, as we always find a colony’s honey combs located above or to the side of the brood combs. While this is true, I don’t believe the receiver bees always climb to the top combs to deposit their load. Their job is to receive nectar from the foragers, deposit that load, and receive another from incoming foragers. When there’s a good flow on, there isn’t time to pick and choose just where they will store that nectar, so they deposit in whatever empty comb space is handy. This empty comb can be above, to the side, or below the brood rearing cluster. Some will disagree with what I’m saying here, so allow me to explain. 

I used to keep my bees in a broodnest of three deep hive bodies, in an unlimited broodnest configuration. I never used queen excluders and the queens had full run of the large broodnest, and any supers above. This unlimited broodnest insured ample winter stores, large clusters, and reduced swarming in the spring. While all this was a good thing, I often found colonies with too much honey left come spring and a bottom hive body not being used. Upon broodnest reversal, that body of empty comb was re-located to the top of the hive. The clusters expanded their brood rearing up, storing early honey flows in this body. These early flows from Sumac, Honeysuckle and clovers are some of the best honeys of the season. If they’re stored in the broodnest, they’re not in my supers. For that reason, over a number of years, I reduced my brood nests to two deeps and a medium super. This job required removing the bottom deep, reversing the remaining two deeps, and adding a medium super of comb above. While the plan worked well, it took several seasons to accomplish. In the strongest colonies, brood rearing had already begun in the bottom box. Not wanting to remove that brood from the colony, the job of reducing hive size was put off for another year. 

While removing that bottom brood box from most hives required no extra work, occasionally I would find one where the bees had moved down. If they weren’t already raising brood in that box, it would be removed anyway. The bees were driven from the body by banging it on an upturned outer cover. The bees would fall from the combs, land in the cover, and be dumped on the ground in front of their hive. It didn’t take long to realize this method left plenty to be desired. Before the queen moved down into that bottom box, the bees would clean the combs and deposit large amounts of nectar in the empty cells. I assume this was an attempt to expand the broodnest downward and entice the queen to lay eggs in the bottom box. Banging the bees from the combs also shook the newly deposited nectar from the box, drowning the bees in the cover. So, if receiver bees only place their nectar loads above the broodnest, why so much newly gathered nectar in the bottom box? I think the only plausible explanation is that many receiver bees deposit their nectar in the most conveniently located comb space available, and not always overhead.

So, let’s take this one step further. On a strong flow, do the receiver bees only deposit their loads above and/or below the active brood rearing cluster? I doubt it. If they place nectar above and below the broodnest, is it not conceivable they would also deposit their nectar loads in the broodnest as well? If you examine brood nests, when the bees are working on a nectar flow, you will see that they do indeed place incoming nectar in and around the brood, especially when the flow is strong. If the queen hasn’t got back around to the empty comb where brood has recently emerged, the bees will certainly use those empty cells for nectar storage; at least temporarily. I say temporarily, because nectar doesn’t remain for long in the broodnest. When the flow ends for the day, the bees clear much of that nectar from the broodnest by moving it up and out. 

“As for reduced feeding of the queen as laying space is restricted, I find myself unable to see any logical argument here. When bees have ample brood combs and plenty of supers as well, they do not restrict the laying space by filling it with honey. It is true that when there is a very heavy flow of honey the bees will hastily place some of it in the unoccupied cells of the broodnest, but this is very quickly removed to the supers, so that the queen is able to lay all the eggs she likes.”
Manley, R.O.B., Honey Farming, Farber and Farber, Ltd., 1946, p. 161


What about the colony in a tree that has reached the top of its cavity, or the managed hive that has no empty supers? How will they move nectar up and out of their broodnest? Well, that’s my point. With no overhead storage space, nectar remains in the broodnest. This backfilling of the broodnest sets up competition for available comb space among bees involved with nectar handling and bees involved in brood rearing. I believe this competition is the primary stimulus, or trigger that results in swarm preparations. So, if you will consider that idea to be true, swarm prevention, at least in part, must be about maintaining empty comb space above the cluster for both nectar storage and brood rearing. 


I maintain overhead comb space in my hives, in two ways: supering and reversing of the broodnest. Two supers of extracting combs are added to strong colonies at about maple bloom, providing empty space to hold whatever flows might materialize before dandelion. The expanding cluster, located in the top brood box, can easily move up into the bottom super. This upward movement alone helps to control swarming to some degree, because it allows for overhead nectar storage and postpones backfilling of the broodnest. Once the flow strengthens at the dandelion/fruit bloom, pressure from incoming nectar forces the brood rearing cluster lower in the hive, prompting some colonies to begin their swarm preparations. This is when I reverse the broodnest.


----------



## camero7 (Sep 21, 2009)

Thanks Mike, great explanation! Very helpful.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Good stuff. Lot of people will be thinking about swarm control atm.

My own take on swarm control is based on the exact same principles. Also, when new nectar comes in it has a high water content, 80% plus, and has to be spread around to be evaporated, even if not in the eventual permanent storage area. Insufficient room for this at swarming season, and there is encouragement for the bees to begin swarm preparations.

Will be looking out for the book but don't rush it.


----------



## gmcharlie (May 9, 2009)

Actually I think we have the question wrong. I think the question is do they move "across frames" or "with frames" I have pondered if the real movement is based on moving along the face of the frame instead of to the next adjoining frame. obviously handeling them gets tricky but I have often pondered useing the Long direction in my top bar hive. If you look at wild hives every one I have noticed there are few combs, but they are long and tall......


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

Oldtimer said:


> I said writing a book was easy?
> 
> Show me where.
> 
> ...


Once again, I apologize for provoking you. That was never my intention, but I guess you've worn me down. 

I make my living by writing, and one of the more annoying things that a professional writer hears is that "anyone can write a book." While that is true on the most basic level, not everyone can write a publishable book, or a book that anyone else would want to read. Most of the people who say things like that will never write even a bad book, because they do not understand the craft and devotion required to produce a manuscript. Writing a book is a laborious act of faith that should not be trivialized even if you think the author is a fool and the book useless. 

Many of the books and other materials I've read have been written by beekeepers with even more experience than you; please don't ask me to discount their opinions just because yours is different. For example, you've just implied that Jerry Hayes' study was pointless, without apparently noticing that all the colonies with queen excluders and bottom entrances were honey bound, and that the purpose of the study was to see if queen excluders caused poor results-- as it in fact did in colonies with bottom entrances. The reason I directed your attention to the study was not this obvious outcome. It was that an entrance above the excluder prevented the colonies from becoming honey bound, a result that Mr. Hayes did not expect, and that he thought worthy of mention. 



> I was much impressed with the advantages of the Upper Entrance colonies as observed in the Queen Excluder experiment. We as beekeepers are constantly barraged with information about how beneficial ventilation and moisture removal is in over-wintered colonies. The Upper Entrance is always suggested as a method to accomplish this in winter and in very warm humid conditions during the summer. There have been many, many articles and whole sections of books written on the upper entrance theme. The Rev. Langstroth’s original book devoted a whole section to the benefits of the upper entrance and some of the most well known researchers in apiculture have also noted the benefits of the upper entrance. Perhaps we as beekeepers should be more flexible, and look more closely at the Upper Entrance as a more efficient year-round option.


Evidently I was mistaken in thinking that you might find this interesting rather than annoying; apologies again.

Furthermore, I would be grateful if you would point out a single instance in which I have said anything resembling "Oldtimer, you are wrong." Although I'm sure you must be wrong about something, because everyone is, I don't know enough about beekeeping to have any opinion about what you might be wrong about. To try to make this completely clear, if I said or implied that you were wrong about anything whatever, this was a mistake and completely unintentional on my part.

I would be even more grateful if you would stop imagining that you understand my motivation in starting and continuing this thread, and that this motivation is to confirm my incorrect opinions. No doubt my opinions are incorrect in many if not most instances, but I'm here to learn, not to promote some agenda. I have two conventional Langstroth hives (that I plan to set up using the best practices I can determine from what I've read and heard) a top bar hive, and a long Langstroth. I'm doing this because it sounds like fun.

Frankly, I can't understand why you feel that it is acceptable to impugn the motives of someone you don't even know, simply for asking you questions. I thought that asking questions was one of the purposes of this forum.

In any case, I won't be asking you any more questions. I've learned some interesting things from you, but all things considered, I'd rather learn from folks who don't insult their students.

Ray


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

Michael Palmer said:


> I'm getting there. I just wrote a section on swarming. 4540 words. Didn't know I had that many words in my head.
> 
> And to stir up the BeeSource pot...I'm sure my old friend from TN will have a comment...


Thanks! Very interesting stuff and very thought-provoking. I have to admit, I pay a lot of attention to everything you say, and to the videos of your speaking engagements. And to Kirk Webster's as well. Your climate is pretty similar to what we have up in St. Lawrence County, NY. (Mark Berninghausen is just up the road from us, and he's been very generous with his advice as well.)

Anyway, just saying, I'll buy your book the day it comes out.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

rhaldridge said:


> I make my living by writing, and one of the more annoying things that a professional writer hears is that "anyone can write a book." While that is true on the most basic level, not everyone can write a publishable book, or a book that anyone else would want to read. Most of the people who say things like that will never write even a bad book, because they do not understand the craft and devotion required to produce a manuscript. Writing a book is a laborious act of faith that should not be trivialized even if you think the author is a fool and the book useless. Ray


Fair enough, and I can see my statement, made to somebody who is a professional book writer, would have definitely hit a nerve, so my apologies for that.

To clarify my meaning better, I have been a professional beekeeper. And some of the stuff I read in books, is frankly, garbage, and in fact there should be a law against being able to take peoples money, for the book. This would mainly apply to the latest crop of "new agey" type books, pretty much anything pre dating that tends to be sound. My statement "anyone can write a book", would have been better said "people of any opinion can write a book". Which taking my original statement in it's context should have been clear. However if I'm ever in a similar discussion again, I'll try to go with "people of all opinions", out of respect for any professional writers out there. I did not say it was easy, nor would I. Other twisted my words to their own agenda.

As to the study you referenced, yes I agree with what you said on it, don't really see there's an issue. Just, the point I tried to make but not very well, is there is an implication that any hive with a queen excluder and bottom entrance will do poorly. If that was the case I would not have survived in this business. I have known, and even worked with, beekeepers who do not use queen excluders. They were not able to get better results than mine. Calling a queen excluder a honey excluder is just a catchy phrase. It can be true if also accompanied by poor beekeeping, everything has to be done appropriately. 

And as to my experience, I am quite accustomed to having it discounted by people who have never opened a real beehive, that is the nature of internet chat sites. So no major worries there.


----------



## squarepeg (Jul 9, 2010)

hey ot, almost fall down under, how was your season?


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

cerezha said:


> Expertise is extremely important but only if it has a solid foundation!


 How hard it is to get that point across. How can we make that a required course in high school?


----------



## Kieck (Dec 2, 2005)

I think in the same post the recommendation was made that knowledge should come before experience. Where does knowledge come from if not from experience?


----------



## Kieck (Dec 2, 2005)

In all seriousness, bees seem eager enough to move up in my experience that they will move up and forego drawing out and filling the comb in the outermost frames of a box to start drawing comb above that instead.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

Kieck said:


> Where does knowledge come from if not from experience?


Some knowledge comes from experience. It is the easiest to remember. Some knowledge comes from the experiences of others. Great knowledge comes from logical thinking otherwise the world would be at a stand still.


----------



## Michael Palmer (Dec 29, 2006)

Acebird said:


> I am scratching my head here, isn’t the long hive and TBH older?


Isn't the tree older yet?


----------



## JD's Bees (Nov 25, 2011)

I just read this today. Seems Doolittle wasn't a big fan of long hives.

http://bees.library.cornell.edu/cgi...366245_6491_031:2.5;size=l;frm=frameset;seq=4


----------



## Kieck (Dec 2, 2005)

But logical thinking progresses from experience. If not the direct experience of the thinker, indirect experience imparted by others.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

Michael Palmer said:


> Isn't the tree older yet?


you bet.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

Kieck said:


> But logical thinking progresses from experience.


Logical thinkers have a lot of experience because they naturally have a thirst for knowledge. They can't help themselves. Don't get me wrong, I am all about experience but that in itself will not get you advancement. It is stationary, contrary to change.


----------



## cerezha (Oct 11, 2011)

Kieck said:


> I think in the same post the recommendation was made that knowledge should come before experience. Where does knowledge come from if not from experience?


 Math for instance - what kind of "experience" could teach you how to solve differentials? You learn first how to do it (knowledge) and than ... well, solve them. Similarly it works in many areas of science - lifespan is not enough to learn everything from personal experience - many realized that and learn from the previous experience, which commonly called a knowledge (or wisdom?)... instead making mistakes with my own bees - I observe beesource and learn from somebody's mistakes...


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

squarepeg said:


> hey ot, almost fall down under, how was your season?


Yes it's fall, most hives have had honey removed now. It's been a mixed season. Honey production in hives devoted to that has been excellent, doing well over 200 lbs each, and a native plant here called Kanuka (not Manuka) flowered profusely in my areas, it makes one of the nicest honeys I've tasted. Queen raising wise, had some lousy weather spring which messed up mating, I've had a disappointing season in terms of queen sales. At this time I've got more hives than I'd planned, and in excellent health. Plenty winter stores in the hives, and plenty honey stored in the shed to use as spring feed for making splits, it's going to be a good year next year in terms of the potential to make money, weather permitting.
How's your hives Squarepeg, all set and ready to go?


----------



## cerezha (Oct 11, 2011)

Kieck said:


> But logical thinking progresses from experience. If not the direct experience of the thinker, indirect experience imparted by others.


 I do not think so. Logic is much higher order than experience. Logical thinking is essential to organize existing knowledge and make connections between pieces of information, which are not obvious (conclusion). Experience itself just provides a raw material, which eventually through thinking and logical judgment may become a piece of knowledge. Than, this piece may be consumed by others without the hassle to go through "experience"... beesource is all about creating tiny bits of knowledge through "collective experience"... it is just my personal opinion (experience).


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

JD's Bees said:


> I just read this today. Seems Doolittle wasn't a big fan of long hives.
> 
> http://bees.library.cornell.edu/cgi...366245_6491_031:2.5;size=l;frm=frameset;seq=4


Very interesting!

I wish I could get in contact with beekeepers from countries where the long hive is the standard. I'd like to hear why they haven't all changed over to vertical hives. I'm sure they must have their reasons.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Money, and tradition.

Cerezha has described a long hive he has built, and says it is called an "old European style" hive. Coincidentally my own long hives which I designed some time back, are exactly the same, best I can read his description. I don't use them for honey production though, they are certainly not honey making machines.


----------



## cerezha (Oct 11, 2011)

Oldtimer said:


> ... it is called an "old European style" hive. ..


 Somebody from Europe corrected me on that. Before, I called it "horizontal hive", but apparently, it has a name: old European style hive. I do not mind. In Russia, we called it *лежак*, which means "laying log". They used to be popular in Russia and they are quite popular in Siberia even now. They do not have frames.


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

cerezha said:


> Somebody from Europe corrected me on that. Before, I called it "horizontal hive", but apparently, it has a name: old European style hive. I do not mind. In Russia, we called it *лежак*, which means "laying log". They used to be popular in Russia and they are quite popular in Siberia even now. They do not have frames.


Do they have bars, or are they basically like gums laid on their side? I wonder why the Siberians chose to go horizontal rather than vertical. I know that the Japanese have a form of frameless and barless vertical hive; honey is harvested by cutting loose a box from the stack, using a cutting wire. Do you know how the Siberian hives are harvested?


----------



## cerezha (Oct 11, 2011)

rhaldridge said:


> Do they have bars, or are they basically like gums laid on their side? I wonder why the Siberians chose to go horizontal rather than vertical. I know that the Japanese vertical hive; honey is harvested by cutting loose a box from the stack, using a cutting wire. Do you know how the Siberian hives are harvested?


 Yes I know about Japanese National hive. As for "Siberian" - I have to admit that I never saw it live, I just read and saw video on the Internet. As far as I understand,it is basically a real log with cavity, natural or machined. It has a slit at ~ 1/3 from the bottom, which is a bee entrance. Top part is cut away (parallel to long axis) and used as a "lid". Ends of the log are plugged, one is removable. Log is positioned at 30o on some support. Nest is in upper part, honeycomb is periodically removed from the "bottom entrance" - they just cut comb away. No frames - comb attached to the lid from inside. It's massive. Walls are at lest 6 cm - no problem with wintering... I believe, similar design one could find in many "slavic" countries. Now, they made it from 6 cm thick boards. Also - vertical design is popular. Note that dimensions in the drawings are in mm.


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

Wow. I've never seen anything like that.

The world is large, isn't it?


----------



## cerezha (Oct 11, 2011)

rhaldridge said:


> Wow. I've never seen anything like that.
> 
> The world is large, isn't it?


 you may search "улей колода" to see more pictures. Sometime, vertical log is called the same way, which is not exactly proper - we have a different name for vertical log with cavity. Улей колода - become popular between rich russians - they use them to beatify (and impress) their "dachas" (дача).


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

Following advice given by Серёжа above to use the search term "улей колода", I came across the site linked below with some interesting photos:










Those are vertical hives made from oak trees!










Here is the link:
http://www.euro-honey.com/modules.php?name=News&file=print&sid=59
The site is written in Russian, but I used Google to translate it to English.


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

Fascinating stuff, Sergey. So far, this is my favorite:









I showed these to my half-Russian wife, and she was charmed. Said that looked like a Czarist hive.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Radar your links wouldn't work for me?


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

> Radar your links wouldn't work for me?

Assuming you are referring to the log hives in post #100, I posted two linked photos and one URL that is the source of the photos and the Russian text. I generally use the Chrome browser, and that still shows my post properly. Just now I also checked using Firefox and it also shows the post properly. So I don't have enough information to suggest a solution.

If you want you can post or PM me a better description of what you see or don't see, and I will attempt to resolve the issue.:lookout:

EDIT: I just tried an old copy Internet Explorer (ugh!) and it worked OK on my post, but I saw that on some other posts images would not display until I logged into Beesource with Internet Explorer. Perhaps that relates to your situation. If you are using IE, there are a variety of better alternatives.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

OK well I googled using Cerezha's Russian language link, got a lot of interesting hives. One thing that stands out is even way back in time, the biggest portion of hives were built in sympathy with the way bees prefer to nest, people obviously got it just by observation of what bees do.


----------



## cerezha (Oct 11, 2011)

Oldtimer said:


> OK well I googled using Cerezha's Russian language link, got a lot of interesting hives. One thing that stands out is even way back in time, the biggest portion of hives were built in sympathy with the way bees prefer to nest, people obviously got it just by observation of what bees do.


 Yes, Russians love traditions. Vertical logs in particular, which are basically imitation natural beehive is still in business for, what, how many? Thousand years?! Interestingly, horizontal logs are more common in Russia than vertical - in the forest (at least russian), hollow logs are usually come from the fallen trees, so they are more or less horizontal. And, it is easier to manipulate them on the ground. Russians never destroy wild hives. They just visit wild (and then hand-made) hives from time to time to get some honey. Most characteristic part of the horizontal log/hive is a bee entrance - it is always a slit, which continues across the whole log (parallel to the long axis). It is ended 30 cm before stopper at the end of the log.


----------



## Michael Palmer (Dec 29, 2006)

cerezha said:


> Russians never destroy wild hives. They just visit wild (and then hand-made) hives from time to time to get some honey.


Wasn't in Nikita who threatened to bury us?
If they ever get their act together and use a hive that is more productive, they WILL bury us. This time is honey.


----------



## BayHighlandBees (Feb 13, 2012)

along the line's of anyone can write a book. I find that (with some exeptions) the "new-age" techniques espoused in the new books soon become the old fads of yesterday and are replaced by the new fads espoused in yet newer books. It sells paper but is there really much substance?

Rhaldridge, the book you refer to that has the many confusing illustrations of necessary TBH bar shuffling seems like evidence that vertical movement by bees requires a lot of human intervention to make it work.

Personally, in my brief experience I've aways evidenced the 'chimney effect'. If you add a second second super on before the bottom has been completely built out, the bees will start on the upper super and will never touch the remaining outer frames in the lower super. 

In Northern California many beekeepers embrace this tendancy. Serge Labesque even sugests omitting the #1 and #10 frames (#1 and #8 for 8 frame supers) altogether and then putting in follower boards in their place. It allows for better air circulation in the hive (so that hot air goes up in the middle where the brood / cluster is and cold air and condensation goes down on the sides). The bees have an innate behavior to backfill the brood nest with honey and that is how they prep for winter. In the winter the former brood area is the cluster area for the bees. They want the honey in the warm area of the hive or they won't be able to reach it. In the winter they will consume the backstored honey starting from the bottom up again creating new areas for brood to be laid. 

I had a hive die due to starvation during a 3 week cold snap and yet after the starvation of the hive I still managed to extract 2 gallons of capped honey from the outer frames! As a result this year I'm definitely looking into the follower board approach to keep the honey more central and vertical.

Whoops, did I just talk about a new age technique? :shhhh:


----------



## BayHighlandBees (Feb 13, 2012)

and for that matter, I've never heard of any ancient horizontal-style skeps. 



Michael Palmer said:


> Isn't the tree older yet?


----------



## BayHighlandBees (Feb 13, 2012)

I would say 'Solving' (aka applying learned information) = experience. What you read or have been taught is 'information' not 'knowledge'. It doesn't becomes knowledge until you've applied it in someway.



cerezha said:


> Math for instance - what kind of "experience" could teach you how to solve differentials? You learn first how to do it (knowledge) and than ... well, solve them..


----------



## BayHighlandBees (Feb 13, 2012)

cerezha said:


> As for "Siberian" - ... Log is positioned at 30o on some support. Nest is in upper part, honeycomb is periodically removed from the "bottom entrance"


not to state the obvious, but if the siberian hive is designed to be at a 30% slant then it's not completely a horizontal system but is a hybrid approach (i.e. a horizontal buildout up a vertical slope)


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

BayHighlandBees said:


> In Northern California many beekeepers embrace this tendancy. Serge Labesque even sugests omitting the #1 and #10 frames (#1 and #8 for 8 frame supers) altogether and then putting in follower boards in their place. It allows for better air circulation in the hive (so that hot air goes up in the middle where the brood / cluster is and cold air and condensation goes down on the sides).


Hmm That's an interesting one, never heard the idea before but it has logic. Where I am, the hives get good and strong and want all the room they can get, ie, all of a 10 frame box. But some sort downwards vent could have it's uses, if I could think of a design without restricting the box size. A straight top entrance, which is designed to achieve the same thing, is problematic in other ways, where I am and with the methods I use.

Re the comments on the "new age" techniques from books becoming old and being replaced by even newer ones, yes, I have noticed exactly that myself. I would actually call it a bit different, ie, dumb ideas that should never have been published, being found out, and dropped. Which is not to say that some of these authors are not very persuasive, in fact they are often excellent writers.


----------



## BayHighlandBees (Feb 13, 2012)

Serge doesn't have an official site, but here's a couple links on how he sets up hives. He also does a spin on a warre-esque approach where he places an empty top feeder on top of the supers and fills it with dried lavender branches (as an additional aid for ambient moisture absorption).

http://urbanfarmandbeehives.com/?p=65

http://urbanfarmandbeehives.com/?p=297
http://urbanfarmandbeehives.com/?p=300
http://urbanfarmandbeehives.com/?p=164


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

BayHighlandBees said:


> Whoops, did I just talk about a new age technique? :shhhh:


Indeed you did. (even though Warre based ideas are now "old", to many, they are "new".)But here's the thing. Nothing wrong with new age stuff IF the idea works. I more have a problem with people being set up for failure, or mediocre performance, cos they were led astray during their early learning phase. Often before they even got bees, and were therefore without any point of reference to test the validity of what they are reading against. These people are also the most ardent supporters of their particular doctrine, particularly in the first year or two of their beekeeping journey as they have no means to know otherwise. Then they get to a certain point in real life experience and if they have been observing their bees properly, start questioning a few things.



BayHighlandBees said:


> along the line's of anyone can write a book. I find that (with some exeptions) the "new-age" techniques espoused in the new books soon become the old fads of yesterday and are replaced by the new fads espoused in yet newer books. It sells paper but is there really much substance?


I would have liked to have given some great examples of that, but cannot, without potting the particular book involved. So I won't, already in enough trouble with professional book writers.

But there is one I can mention because it doesn't "out" any particular author as it's been the subject of huge numbers of posts right here on Beesource. You don't have to go back too far in time reading Beesource posts in the treatment free forum, everything was about small cell. In fact the TF forum could have almost been renamed the small cell forum. To suggest small cell did not work, was heresy, and would invite crushing counter arguments. Even scientific studies that found small cell did not work, were picked apart till some reason was found to debunk them.

Then, almost overnight, it's not small cell any more. Natural comb is now in. It has even become acceptable in the TF forum to express doubts as to wether small cell works, people do that now without getting flamed. So. How long will the natural comb thing last? History with these things would suggest that at some future time, and some charismatic writer on the subject, we'll all be flooding back to comb foundation. 

But hey, before I get the hate mail LOL! I do have small cell hives myself. So nothing personal to anyone!


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

I'm currently reading an interesting little book by Gene Kritsky: _The Quest for the Perfect Hive_, subtitled A History of Innovation in Bee Culture.

He talks about a lot of stuff, but at the end, he talks about keeping bees in hives that haven't changed much in 150 years, and he has this to say: 



> In spite of high-tech biology,
> we are keeping our bees in “old” hives. Are we really using
> “perfect” hives? Because we have stopped inventing hives, we
> really do not know. We have nearly forgotten about the old hives
> ...


Good luck with that. Commercial beekeepers, like most farmers, have a lot of incentives for doing things the safe and familiar way, and who can blame them?

When I was going a little Googling about Russian beekeeping, I came across a film in Russian about the subject, so I couldn't follow the narration. It had that Soviet earnestness, and was probably 50 years old or more. But one image struck me in particular. It was a hillside filled with what appeared to be hundreds of long hives. These were the kind with deep frames. I couldn't help but wonder why they didn't just cut them and stack them into vertical hives. What were the advantages they saw in these hives?


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

I'd question the part where he says we have stopped inventing hives. Check it out, there is a flood of new hive designs being promoted, just about anything you could imagine, all supposed to be better. Right up to dome shaped plastic ones you hang in your living room. Ones with electric motors to slowly rotate the brood nest, you name it.

The "molecular age" . What is that? Sounds like a buzzword. A common ploy used by new age authors with an agenda, use pseudo scientific sounding jargon to bamboozle people. Haven't things always been made out of molecules?

Again, I don't know why some Russian beekeepers use long hives. Most likely money and tradition, like ox carts. Many Russian hives though have more in common with langstroth hives. It's also possible that long hives might suite some local environments and bee strain, along with their methods and desired productivity. The varroa resistant "Russian" bees imported to the US, in their pure form, have a tendency to pack honey in around the brood nest and not store it too far away, not storing much. If someone there is using bees like this, a long hive and harvesting honey one comb at a time may work for them. But hey, who knows? Just some thoughts.

Commercial beekeepers do tend to be "safe". They are very innovative though. If a better hive came along they will use it. And it would probably have been invented by a commercial beekeeper.


----------



## BayHighlandBees (Feb 13, 2012)

I always get a laugh when I see this design:









In terms of old 'new age' solutions, I hear a lot less passion about screened botom boards these days, with a number of former SBB users going back to using solid boards


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Yup, been there done that, my screened boards now sit in the shed.

It now takes me a bit longer (like a few years), before I jump on the latest fad.


----------



## delber (Dec 26, 2010)

The problem that I had with the screened bottom boards is that the 1/8" hardware cloth is too large. The SHB can get in and the bees dont' guard the whole entrance. I now use solid bottoms w/ a 2" or so diameter hole drilled center and back with metal window screening stapled over the hole. I need this because I'm using upper entrances.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

Oldtimer said:


> If a better hive came along they will use it. And it would probably have been invented by a commercial beekeeper.


kind of like farm equipment we have today.

"Invented" is the wrong word, "designed" is really what you are talking about. The design will not change until or unless the beekeeping practices of the commercial beekeeper change. Analyze farming over the last fifty years to understand what I am talking about.


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

Funny thing is, a lot of the beekeepers of the 19th century, who invented the technology in use today, would be considered sideliners by the commercial beekeepers of today.

I wouldn't be surprised if the same is true of any future advances. Sideliners who do not depend on consistent results to make a living may be more willing to experiment.

This is often the case in areas where advanced industrial technology is not a pre-requisite for meaningful advances. One area I'm familiar with is multihull design. 60 years ago, these sailboats were virtually unknown in Western countries. Then a pack of rabid amateurs, coupled with the wide availability of plywood after WWII, invented a genre of sailboat that today is the only segment of the yachting industry that is still healthy. As an amateur designer, I came up with a new variation on the idea, and sold a lot of plans. It was possible largely because I had no reputation to defend, and could make what I wanted without much in the way of financial repercussions, and I'd have only lost a few thousand bucks and a couple years work if it hadn't turned out well.

Anyway, I like to think there's room for improvement in beehive technology too.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

rhaldridge said:


> Sideliners who do not depend on consistent results to make a living may be more willing to experiment.


Sidliners do not have the capital or the need to create high volume parts. Parts that might require injection molding or blow molding technologies, 3D printing, etc.


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

I expect 3-D printing to be available to almost anyone pretty soon.

Most of the plastic stuff I've seen, and I'm a complete beginner, so I'm sure I haven't seen much, have been versions of stuff that was first designed in wood.

I like wood better, but maybe that's because I'm more comfortable with that technology. I wonder if plastic is really as suitable for bees as wood, but I guess that's another thread.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

If you grind up wood and mix it with wax and resin you have a form of plastic that can be injection molded. Check out the latest building materials. I can't believe bees would object to a mixture of wax and wood to draw their comb on.


----------



## guatebee (Nov 15, 2004)

Michael, I agree with your view. Let me ask how large your horizontal hives have grown, provided that you do insert empty bars to allow nest growth? Can one harvest as much honey from a horizontal hive as from a vertical one?


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

Not to answer for Michael, but this is what he says on his site:



> Question: Which makes more honey? A top bar hive or a Langstroth hive?
> 
> Answer: It comes down to management differences. If you have the TBH where you can get to it easily and you check it weekly during a heavy flow and manage their space by harvesting frequently, I think it's about even. If the TBH is in an outyard and you don't get there often or even if it's in your backyard and you don't get there often, the Langstroth will probably make more honey.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Where I am here in the suburbs, even with poor management the hobby owned langs will get around 80 lbs, to around 170 lbs or so if the owner got everything right, although that would only be a small % of the hives. Although there are some cases where the owner did every imaginable thing wrong and got no honey. The TBH's will get up to around 20 lbs max.

Out of curiosity I once asked the US beekeepers how much honey they got from their TBH's. A number of people answered and from memory the biggest claimed crop was something around 40 lbs, which was quite a bit higher than everybody else's numbers.

The hobby bee club I'm in keep 7 hives, one of them a TBH. The langs are split repeatedly to provide nucs for new members, so only produce maybe 100 lbs per hive, the TBH which does not have bees removed makes around 20 lbs.

I have to remove honey from my long langs during the season, probably 60 or 70 lbs. Perhaps they could do more if I ran them for honey production.

That's my real world experience on the matter.


----------



## TNTBEES (Apr 14, 2012)

I started two TBH last year with 4# carniolan pkg's on April 15th. Brand new hives, so no comb whatsoever. September 1st i had 13 full bars in one hive and 11 full bars in the other. At about 5#/bar that was 65# in one and 55# in the other. I didn't pull any and will see whats left this spring. I know by the cluster location they didn't use anywhere near half.


----------



## gmcharlie (May 9, 2009)

Wax and plastic mixed is patented so be careful.....


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Should add to that, the top bar thing has hit my country with a lot of brand new beeks reading about it and wanting to start by this method. I know a lot of them cos I sell them the bees. 

I try to maintain a neutral stance on what type of hive they should have, and most people who go TBH have their mind firmly made up before they get their hive anyway. However a lot of TBH keepers after a year or two are disappointed and are switching over to langs. I have even been criticized by one person for not "warning" them about the issues around TBH's. 

So for me it's been a catch 22. If I do mention any issues around TBH's I get knowing glances, and I can see them thinking "oh yeah, he's one of them old stick in the mud TBH bashers". But later I get flack for NOT having said enough to save them a wasted year or two, plus money.

So what I do now, is tell them the pros & cons straight up. If they've read something like "The Barefoot Beekeeper" they will not believe me if I mention any of the cons of TBH's, which no longer bothers me, but the majority come back in a year or two wanting help to switch to a lang.

For some but not all women, I'm recommending TBH's if I can see they will never be able to harvest the honey from a lang.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

TNTBEES said:


> I didn't pull any and will see whats left this spring.


Yes I should have been clearer. when I'm talking about honey crop I mean what's harvested, over and above what they need for the winter. IE, what's removed from the hive, rather than estimated total.

You were wise Tntbees to leave it all there for them, till you know what they will need for the winter. Most honey is consumed not through winter, but when brood raising starts in spring. Would be interested if you could get back and report what you were able to harvest.

BTW it varies regionally, but a rule of thumb if no local information is available, is to leave a hive with 40 lbs for the winter. Carniolans can go with less, even 1/2 that, depending how pure they are.


----------



## cerezha (Oct 11, 2011)

Michael Palmer said:


> Wasn't in Nikita who threatened to bury us?
> If they ever get their act together and use a hive that is more productive, they WILL bury us. This time is honey.


 Well, I checked the literature - it looks like the productivity of the horizontal 24 frames hives in USSR was 75-100 kilos/hive/year. It is not clear how much total honey was produced.
http://www.medovik.info/metody/dr/spul.php

Another number I gather - in 2009 Russia produced 100000 metric tones of honey. I do not know how it is comparable with US (local production, not export). Some sources mentioned 30-40 kilos average per hive/year for small business - it does not discriminate vertical and horizontal designs.

As for Khryshev - he was hoping to bury US using corn (he was big with corn!), thus - pathetically failed because had no Monsanto...


----------



## JRG13 (May 11, 2012)

Oldtimer, do you attribute the low yields to the fact the bees have to draw all that new comb constantly? I know a lot of people here say they split their tbh like crazy cuz they run out of room but I never see much on big yields of honey either. I'm not a fan of TBH's but I try not to criticize them too much. Lang's aren't perfect either, but a lot more adaptable and efficient in my opinion.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Well it's partly cos they have to draw the comb but bees on a flow will have little trouble with that, what I see from working with long hives & other peoples TBH's is more about the bees not being as ready to go sideways but preferring to swarm instead, even when the hive is not full.

For the 24 frame Russian long hives to produce 100 kgs annually they would have to be getting worked constantly. My own 22 frame long hives produce honey but the problem is the hive is only 22 frames total, I have to constantly remove honey or they get totally jammed, so they do not have time to fully process the honey much of it is not capped when I remove it. I actually put it on langs to get finished. 

I checked out the article but don't speak Russian and can't be bothered messing with a translator. I am interested in the claimed 75 - 100 kg average crop from the Russian 24 frame long hives, especially when the claimed average for langs is 30 - 40 kgs. Guess I would have to go there, seeing would be believing. What I can say, is I run longs, and langs, alongside each other in the same yard. So I do have an idea how they perform relative to each other and it is not the Russian experience.


----------



## cerezha (Oct 11, 2011)

Oldtimer said:


> ....
> I checked out the article but don't speak Russian and can't be bothered messing with a translator. I am interested in the claimed 75 - 100 kg average crop from the Russian 24 frame long hives, especially when the claimed average for langs is 30 - 40 kgs. Guess I would have to go there, seeing would be believing. What I can say, is I run longs, and langs, alongside each other in the same yard. So I do have an idea how they perform relative to each other and it is not the Russian experience.


 70-100 and 30-40 kilos come from different sources and time. I do not think it is proper to compare those numbers. It is my understanding that 30-40 kilos come from averaging between all hives in more like hobbyist environment ("small business" - was not good translation). In long hives, they use very large frames, it is not Lang standard - the hive is just bigger. The whole article is about how long-hives better than "normal". Also, keep in mind - "normal" hive in Russia IS NOT a Lang!


----------



## cerezha (Oct 11, 2011)

Oldtimer said:


> ...For the 24 frame Russian long hives to produce 100 kgs annually they would have to be getting worked constantly. My own 22 frame long hives produce honey but the problem is the hive is only 22 frames total, I have to constantly remove honey or they get totally jammed, so they do not have time to fully process the honey much of it is not capped when I remove it. I actually put it on langs to get finished. ....


 there is detailed instruction how to produce 174 kilos in long-hive with super. It requires a lot of frames manipulation:
http://www.medovik.info/metody/dr/Odinnadcat_pudov_meda_s_pchelosemi.php


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

cerezha said:


> there is detailed instruction how to produce 174 kilos in long-hive *with super*. It requires a lot of frames manipulation:
> http://www.medovik.info/metody/dr/Odinnadcat_pudov_meda_s_pchelosemi.php


Oh, with super. That would be vertical, right? Thought you and the OP are all about the bees would rather go sideways LOL. 

I mean, based on the information I've been getting in this thread, surely you'd be better to go longer, rather than add a super! 

And since I don't read Russian, this plan to get 174 kg's of honey, how many supers do they add? A lang super will get you around 30 kg's or so.


----------



## rhaldridge (Dec 17, 2012)

Sergey, very interesting website. I find that Google's translation software is much improved over what it was just a couple years ago, and makes for a much more understandable visit to translated websites.









I like this picture.

What I find less understandable is the attitude that folks in other parts of the world must not know what they are doing, if they are doing something different from what we are doing. I just don't get that.


----------



## cerezha (Oct 11, 2011)

Oldtimer said:


> Oh, with super. That would be vertical, right? Thought you and the OP are all about the bees would rather go sideways...


 Not necessary because we are talking about the direction of the nest expansion. In Russian 174-kilos long-hive, the nest is never moved vertically. The "super" (probably bad analogy), if I understand correctly, is a part of complicated frames re-arrangement to increase the productivity, but, again - "super" do not host the nest Also, they used only one "super". Russian "super" is not Lang's super. I really could not understand, how Russians survived all these thousand years without proper Lang beehive management? Amusing!


----------



## cerezha (Oct 11, 2011)

rhaldridge said:


> Sergey, very interesting website. I find that Google's translation software is much improved over what it was just a couple years ago, and makes for a much more understandable visit to translated websites...


 It is great! Please, let me know if you need some clarification or translation - I would be more than happy to help.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Yes a translation would be appreciated. I did the google translation but really it didn't make sense to me. Also, I didn't see that pic that RHAldridge linked so maybe I'm not looking in the right place. Only pics I saw was Russian vertical hives.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

cerezha said:


> Not necessary because we are talking about the direction of the nest expansion.


We are? I thought the thread was about which direction bees prefer to move. Nothing has been said so far that it's only about the "nest". Whatever you mean by nest I'm not sure either.

Anything I've said so far, has been about the colony generally.



cerezha said:


> The "super" (probably bad analogy), if I understand correctly, is a part of complicated frames re-arrangement to increase the productivity!


The super, would go on top right? It's vertical. 

IE. To increase productivity, they are going vertical. Very amusing.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Found this page which has a montage of Russian beekeeping pics. Also has one on Romanian beekeeping, US beekeeping, and New Zealand beekeeping (by indigenous people)

http://www.thehoneygatherers.com/html/ataglance_6.html


----------



## cerezha (Oct 11, 2011)

Oldtimer said:


> Found this page which has a montage of Russian beekeeping pics. Also has one on Romanian beekeeping, US beekeeping, and New Zealand beekeeping (by indigenous people)
> 
> http://www.thehoneygatherers.com/html/ataglance_6.html


 Amusing pictures. I like Cameroon - looks like extreme business. Also, did you notice in Mexican series - they used 30o tilted bee-logs very similar to Russian, just much smaller - I am wondering what is the connection? It looks like, bees could live in many different shapes, conditions! Amusing creatures! Many thanks for sharing.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Yes I think the Mexicans are using hives like that because they suit the type of bee they are using, a native South American bee.


----------



## cerezha (Oct 11, 2011)

Oldtimer said:


> Yes I think the Mexicans are using hives like that because they suit the type of bee they are using, a native South American bee.


 and Russian perhaps because they are using russian bees?


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

Well maybe, although most of the Russian hives in those pics were vertical hives that would have supers added. Even the "long" ones were not very long, not like what an American would typically call long, and they also looked like they may well have supers added if required. However if using strains similar to the "Russian" bees imported to the US, a small hive may work well although I doubt all the bees would be like that.


----------



## Oldtimer (Jul 4, 2010)

cerezha said:


> It is great! Please, let me know if you need some clarification or translation - I would be more than happy to help.


Yes please, I am still pretty keen to see a translation.


----------

