# General beekeeping > Queen raising >  New Colonsay queens! - MiniPlus now, or direct introduce (hopefully) tomorrow?

## Emma

Exciting day! A week later than expected,  but still hugely welcome, I've received two Amm queens from Colonsay. (They've only been in the post since this Monday - delay was at the Colonsay end.)
With perfect comic timing, as the postie walked up the path with them, the rain started. Due to continue all day, heavily. I swithered about for a bit hoping it'd ease, but it remained cool & wet.
Preparations for the new queens had gone a little haywire due to the extra week's wait. One queen has a little queenless intro nuc ready & waiting, as planned, just two frames, ready to be reunited to its parent colony once the Colonsay queen is settled & laying. By some miracle they've kept themselves warm & fended off the wasps.
But the other intro nuc had to be rescued. I'm now hoping to directly introduce the second Colonsay queen to a strong colony which is on brood & a half, but the weather today just wasn't good enough to go through it searching for a queen. Forecast tomorrow is vaguely hopeful, but not great. 
Meanwhile I've just removed a drone layer from a quite full & very frustrated MiniPlus (RIP Aai: emerged 2013, headed lots of adventures...). Would I be better to introduce the 2nd Colonsay queen to the MP tonight, let her settle, & then introduce her to the big colony in maybe a week or so, picking a really good day for weather, or should I hang on till tomorrow & hope for a chance to de-queen the large host colony then? 
I don't whether it's bad for a queen to be swapped from colony to colony twice, in such a short time, & I don't know how much an extra day in a cage would diminish her chances with the big, confident currently queenright colony. I'm hoping for advice from people with more experience with queens! 
I'd kind of like to go for the MP option because (a) they are so desperate for a functioning queen and (b) I could do with getting some work done this week..... But I want to give both Colonsay queens the very best chance I can.

----------


## Mellifera Crofter

Considering my disastrous week, and that my experience of introducing queens is still limited, I'm not in a good position to give advice - but I think my cautious choice would be the MiniPlus.  It's probably too late for tonight, but tomorrow will do as well.  I hope others will reply soon.

Good luck with both queens, Emma.

Kitta

----------


## gavin

I'd split off a 3-4 frame nuc from your strong colony, let it settle, and put the Colonsay queen in her cage in there.

G.

----------


## Emma

> Considering my disastrous week, and that my experience of introducing queens is still limited, I'm not in a good position to give advice - but I think my cautious choice would be the MiniPlus.  It's probably too late for tonight, but tomorrow will do as well.  I hope others will reply soon.
> 
> Good luck with both queens, Emma.
> 
> Kitta


I'm so tempted re: MiniPlus. So simple, with more rain forecast... especially as the MiniPlus is inside a shed!

----------


## Emma

> I'd split off a 3-4 frame nuc from your strong colony, let it settle, and put the Colonsay queen in her cage in there.
> 
> G.


"let it settle" - e.g. till the evening, then slip her inside then? (I'd be keeping them shut in till evening, as I had a couple of queen-in-Paynes nucs earlier in the season that mostly abandoned their brood & queen.)

Alternatively - if I gave her to the MiniPlus now, then united that with the stronger colony, might that work almost as well? Not sure where the bees originally came from - it was a cast which landed in the hut porch - but they look & behave like mine, albeit with a few yellow abdomens, & they turned up when I was half expecting a cast, so they should be quite related to the strong colony. Forecast is 10% probability of rain, all through tomorrow...

----------


## The Drone Ranger

Gavin is probably right that made up nuc is safest
Anything with adult bees in it is more risky


Sent from my LIFETAB_S1034X using Tapatalk

----------


## Emma

> Gavin is probably right that made up nuc is safest
> Anything with adult bees in it is more risky


Oops. The nuc I introduced one queen to this eve was made up on 27 July, so that's got some quite old bees by now. A week makes such a difference.

As soon as I put her in the bees were completely surrounding the cage, but all of them were just licking and licking and licking. Licking the cage itself, or licking through into the cage if they could. Is that a good sign...?

----------


## prakel

> As soon as I put her in the bees were completely surrounding the cage, but all of them were just licking and licking and licking. Licking the cage itself, or licking through into the cage if they could. 
> *Is that a good sign...?*


yes!

Will help immensely to feed the receiving colony too. Also, it does no harm to leave the cage locked for a few days once in the hive before allowing the bees to release the queen -as I've said before, if they don't want to look after her in the cage they'll soon supercede her once she's released (if she gets that far).

There's a nice trick buried in the following video, and yes it is practical and does work although in your present circumstances it would be better used to determine whether to allow release by the bees rather than doing so manually:

https://youtu.be/Yg92q9hPIv8

----------


## gavin

I suppose that the ideal situations for getting queens accepted are:

- a queenless stock of young bees (can be recently queenless and still with the means to make a replacement)
- a long-queenless stock that knows it is unable to make another one
- introduction into a smaller stock rather than a large one, especially one of dubious temper

... and that the subsequent uniting with a larger stock goes better if:

- the new queen has already established a brood nest
- the new queen is surrounded by nurse bees that have accepted her
- the nuc was originally created from the stock to which it is being returned
- there isn't a big disturbance around the time the queen meets new workers, and afterwards for a while

So your MiniPlus and a newly created nuc should work but for slightly different reasons.  The uniting of the MiniPlus with the larger stock is one thing that might prove a little tricky.  If you place it over newspaper on top of the bigger colony the MP frames are quite likely to continue to be used for brood or honey.

Letting a newly created nuc settle for a while is to bleed fliers (older workers) back home and to let the stock come to terms with its newly queenless state.  You need to have enough young bees in it to start with, and I reckon an hour is about the right time to let it settle without wholesale loss of bees back home.  For the same reason I would not block in the nucleus immediately it is made up.

Murray's preference of a large introduction cage into a big colony sorts many of these issues and requires fewer visits, except, of course, the 'big colony not long queenless' issue.  Seems to work for him though.

I don't think I'm that experienced on this (though I've made most of the mistakes) and constructive criticism would be good .....

----------


## prakel

> So your MiniPlus and a newly created nuc should work but for slightly different reasons.  The uniting of the MiniPlus with the larger stock is one thing that might prove a little tricky.  If you place it over newspaper on top of the bigger colony the MP frames are quite likely to continue to be used for brood or honey.


Probably too late in the far north(!) but down here where we're still deep into the most protracted main-flow i've ever known I'd be tempted to go down that route and then split the mp off and add another queen to that in the hope of overwintering it. But we've got plenty of time left here -if anything it's the first 5 or 6 months of the year that cause us issues  :Smile: 

As for the push in cages that you mention, they've surely got to be the closest thing to bombproof introduction there is.

----------


## Emma

> yes!
> 
> Will help immensely to feed the receiving colony too. Also, it does no harm to leave the cage locked for a few days once in the hive before allowing the bees to release the queen -as I've said before, if they don't want to look after her in the cage they'll soon supercede her once she's released (if she gets that far).
> 
> There's a nice trick buried in the following video, and yes it is practical and does work although in your present circumstances it would be better used to determine whether to allow release by the bees rather than doing so manually:
> 
> https://youtu.be/Yg92q9hPIv8


Matchstick trick - love it, thanks.
Love the hives, too - Langstroth framed longhives? (I would so be filling the upper section with blankets.)
Glad the licking is a good sign! Hoped it was. I'm getting reasonably good at reading bee body language, but not seen many of them in this particular situation yet, & it's kind of critical. As the video caption puts it: "shall we kill her or accept her?" (Ooo, choices, choices!)
Very nervous of feeding them - they're tiny, and the apiary is thick with wasps (and other bees!). Looks like most of the stores comb I gifted to them was robbed out before they got big enough to defend themselves. Once she's out I thought maybe a bit of syrup to encourage her to lay. Can't wait to reunite them with parent colony.

----------


## Emma

> ...So your MiniPlus and a newly created nuc should work but for slightly different reasons.  The uniting of the MiniPlus with the larger stock is one thing that might prove a little tricky.  If you place it over newspaper on top of the bigger colony the MP frames are quite likely to continue to be used for brood or honey.
> 
> Letting a newly created nuc settle for a while is to bleed fliers (older workers) back home and to let the stock come to terms with its newly queenless state.  You need to have enough young bees in it to start with, and I reckon an hour is about the right time to let it settle without wholesale loss of bees back home.  For the same reason I would not block in the nucleus immediately it is made up.


Three times this season I've made up nucs and so many bees have abandoned them that brood has died. Two queens were endangered, one of them failed, possibly because of the ordeal (as well as being 3 years old). One was a bit of an experiment with enticing bees onto MiniPlus frames, but discounting that one it was still two very distressing fails. The second one was just recent, intended as the second Colonsay host. 
Though, come to think of it, both that and the previous queen-in-Paynes fail were combs from the same queen, so it may just be something about her.
And uniting MP frames to Nationals is definitely a PITA. Did it last year, using a Paynes eke over a Paynes. They did indeed stuff all the MP frames with bulging capped stores, & I ended up feeding them fondant all winter for the sake of a simpler spring. Not greatly impressed with MPs, for my ways of working; I'm thinking of making up some National shallow nuc boxes instead.
Still swithering! I guess pretty soon I just need to get out there & do something, then watch & hope.

----------


## Emma

> Probably too late in the far north(!) but down here where we're still deep into the most protracted main-flow i've ever known I'd be tempted to go down that route and then split the mp off and add another queen to that in the hope of overwintering it. But we've got plenty of time left here -if anything it's the first 5 or 6 months of the year that cause us issues


I like that possibility. 
It is very late - flow very patchy here by now, and cold the last two nights - but as Murray always says, they'll draw comb late if you feed them enough. And I have 2-3 more queens in my apiary now than I want to have in the spring, but I'm absolutely rubbish at deciding to kill them. Much rather give them a chance & hope someone needs them next season.
"protracted main-flow"????! ....beekeeping really is a whole different world down there, isn't it?! My ideal is to never feed syrup, and only ever take surplus honey: I've been trying for 6 seasons & I'm still not sure it's actually possible here in (the cushy Central Belt hinterlands of) the north. I'm far too stubborn to stop trying yet, though  :Smile:

----------


## prakel

> Three times this season I've made up nucs and so many bees have abandoned them that brood has died.


I've always liked the method of shaking the chosen combs free of bees and then placing them over an excluder for a few hours to allow the bees to repopulate (with comparative youngsters). Not suited to large scale work, perhaps, but still a sound method. 




> And uniting MP frames to Nationals is definitely a PITA. Did it last year, using a Paynes eke over a Paynes. They did indeed stuff all the MP frames with bulging capped stores, & I ended up feeding them fondant all winter for the sake of a simpler spring. Not greatly impressed with MPs, for my ways of working; I'm thinking of making up some National shallow nuc boxes instead.


I'm a big fan of the mp's and have developed a system of working them with homemade 'back-up' boxes which fit directly on top of a standard nuc box; useful for all sorts of tricks but it's taken me a decade to get to what now appears to be quite a seamless method.

I like the idea of shallow nucs, one of my uncles used that system for years. Not as economical as deep nucs once established, but very handy in other ways.

----------


## Emma

> I've always liked the method of shaking the chosen combs free of bees and then placing them over an excluder for a few hours to allow the bees to repopulate (with comparative youngsters). Not suited to large scale work, perhaps, but still a sound method.


Doh. Of course, yes, beautiful. Let the bees figure out who belongs where, within the safety of the nest. Thank you.
I'm pretty much doomed to small scale, finnicky detailed work. There's no future in it, but I'm irresistibly drawn to it.




> I'm a big fan of the mp's and have developed a system of working them with homemade 'back-up' boxes which fit directly on top of a standard nuc box; useful for all sorts of tricks but it's taken me a decade to get to what now appears to be quite a seamless method.


OK, that's inclining me to stick with them a bit longer. I have done a bit of fiddling around with setting MP frames into standard supers, and they do fit really neatly cross-ways inside a Paynes eke, but that kind of mid-season bodging always leads to lots of bits ready to fall out of place at just the wrong time, & usually involves inexact bee-spacing & hence lots of wasted propolis & wax, and a certain amount of swearing on the part of the bees when I yank things apart.
I've a decent hope of getting a woodworking bench set up this winter, for the first time ever. Planning a bit of a kit-building fest in the quiet months, & I could try to figure something similar... do you have any pictures, please?!




> I like the idea of shallow nucs, one of my uncles used that system for years. Not as economical as deep nucs once established, but very handy in other ways.


"Not as economical" - how so?
And - any chance you could describe the kind of shallow nuc box design your uncle used?

----------


## Jon

This is what I do:

http://www.native-queen-bees.com/queen-introduction/

----------


## Jon

> Three times this season I've made up nucs and so many bees have abandoned them that brood has died.


Ideally you need to move the nucs to a new site a couple of miles away to avoid losing bees to the parent colony.

----------


## prakel

> I've a decent hope of getting a woodworking bench set up this winter, for the first time ever. Planning a bit of a kit-building fest in the quiet months, & I could try to figure something similar... do you have any pictures, please?!


Previously we've used the same methods with mini-plus and our own extra small mating nucs which are approx half lenth bs shallow, after much thought we've now commited to moving our mating nucs onto half length langstroth mediums and getting everything in uniform boxes but we'll use the same system. 

The following photos are of the extra small mating frames but the idea is the same. 

060 (2).jpg

1. one of the extra small frames, showing the individual mating nucs in the background. 

2. a shot of the comb drawing box sat on top of a 5 frame bs nuc, these boxes get combs drawn and filled with brood, they don't need to be used, the little boxes/mps are quite capable of getting by without them but they add a back-up component to service the mating nucs. They can also be used for taking combs from over populus mating nucs. 

If you're building them for use with the mini-plus then the base box which contains the standard combs that you use (BS?) needs to be wider than a standard 5 frame BS nuc....a 'sale' national brood box makes a very tidy nuc by simply cutting down the end pieces to the required width and then re-cutting the tenons on the rails.

3. like you I prefer not to give raw feed to mating nucs so these boxes are also a way of getting store combs drawn on the flow too, in this instance I was meant to go back the following day with a couple of extra frames but other things demanded my attention elsewhere...

019.jpg

014.jpg

005.jpg





> "Not as economical" - how so?
> And - any chance you could describe the kind of shallow nuc box design your uncle used?


I say not as economical once established because they're liable to demand slightly more management in times of both boom and bust my own observations have also suggested that the deeps do build up quicker -their height better fits their length; once again it's that magic formula of 2(height):3(length). But, I agree that that the shallows are nice boxes to use for mating nucs and they're an ideal depth frame to get populated above a box of deep frames at the start of the season.

My uncle's boxes were simply a mixture of 3 and 5 frame shallow nucs consisting of floor/brood and cover. Nothing remotely complex. I'd bet that he found the 5 frame ones easier to handle though.

----------


## The Drone Ranger

Push in cages made from epoxy coated varroa mesh (Thornes)
cut with scissors make into box takes 20 mins to make one
These are big enough to cover some sealed brood some empty cells and some honey
Queens can feed themselves when the cage breaks into stores along the edge
Attachment 2725

you have to release queen after a few days but she is safe and can lay a few eggs

----------


## fatshark

I've used the same sort of approach described by DR, but using commercial Nicot push-in cages over emerging brood. They work very well. For belt'n'braces security I usually hold them in place with an elastic band around the frame. When you go to release the queen after a few days you'll find they've often burrowed underneath the sidewall and released her themselves ...

00037.jpg

Pic from Nicot if you can't tell from the watermark ;-)

----------


## Emma

> Ideally you need to move the nucs to a new site a couple of miles away to avoid losing bees to the parent colony.


Yes - I've been really missing having an out apiary. I've started asking around, planning to have one set up for next season. Could save a lot of faffing around. Do you find a couple of miles is far enough?

----------


## Emma

> 2. a shot of the comb drawing box sat on top of a 5 frame bs nuc, these boxes get combs drawn and filled with brood, they don't need to be used, the little boxes/mps are quite capable of getting by without them but they add a back-up component to service the mating nucs. They can also be used for taking combs from over populus mating nucs.


Lovely. That's very similar to what I bodged up with a Paynes eke, but a purpose made one would be so much more viable for routine use. 




> If you're building them for use with the mini-plus then the base box which contains the standard combs that you use (BS?) needs to be wider than a standard 5 frame BS nuc....a 'sale' national brood box makes a very tidy nuc by simply cutting down the end pieces to the required width and then re-cutting the tenons on the rails.


Hmm. Nice idea. I'm wanting to make a nuc box or two, having just had the joy of uniting a Paynes box with a National deep, in the evening, in slightly iffy weather - removable floors, and compatible brood boxes, are good at times like that!
But cutting tenons isn't simple for me, just yet. My woodworking skills are pretty basic, due to a peripatetic existence for many years.




> 3. like you I prefer not to give raw feed to mating nucs so these boxes are also a way of getting store combs drawn on the flow too, in this instance I was meant to go back the following day with a couple of extra frames but other things demanded my attention elsewhere...


 :Smile:  I had a National super looking like that earlier this year. 10 frames and a dummy had been enough in previous seasons. This year, I had bigger colonies, & a lot of distractions during a big OSR flow. I have never been so grateful for a long, sharp knife and a pair of catering-sized spoons!




> once again it's that magic formula of 2(height):3(length).


?? All these years, & I've never heard of that as a magic formula. Please, say more!
I'm particularly interested, because I'm trying to figure out the best size of frame to use for a longhive in Scotland. Longhive as in: not using supers, always just getting them to expand along rather than upwards. They definitely will do that - I've been running a 24-frame National longhive since 2014 - they expand along beautifully - but it's a very good size for producing big swarms  :Smile:  So I've just, rather nervously, started running a colony onto Zest frames, as some accounts suggest that that's a good size for longhives. The Zests are double the height of National deeps (and the same as 3 National shallows, which opens up some very interesting possibilities) - very definitely not 2:3.




> But, I agree that that the shallows are nice boxes to use for mating nucs and they're an ideal depth frame to get populated above a box of deep frames at the start of the season.


Exactly what appeals to me. Especially as my colonies keep veering into brood and a half anyway. Having the same sizes of frames for different purposes just seems so much less hassle than special little mininuc frames.




> My uncle's boxes were simply a mixture of 3 and 5 frame shallow nucs consisting of floor/brood and cover. Nothing remotely complex. I'd bet that he found the 5 frame ones easier to handle though.


Simple is so good.... I made up a nuc with 5 shallow frames yesterday. Seemed a nice size, and offered a good spread of brood, stores and pollen without completely depleting the parent colony. I'm hoping they won't be in the Paynes long enough to draw comb in the space below!

----------


## Emma

Thanks everyone for all the info & ideas on queen introduction. It has really helped.
In the end I answered part of my own original question, by checking my notes & realising that the MP hadn't had a viable queen since 16th July. They hadn't turned laying worker yet, but I wasn't going to risk it with a queen that I so much wanted to keep.
The Colonsay queen which went into a pre-prepared nuc on Wednesday evening is already out of her cage. I'll encourage her with some syrup once this wind dies down.
I prepared a nuc yesterday for the second queen, and slipped her inside at dead of night when I heard a moan which made me think they'd realised they were queenless. I'm still wondering whether direct intro wouldn't have been better, because there are so many wasps around, hard for young bees to defend themselves, but the die is cast now, so that's fine. Looking through the perspex this morning, I think they're accepting her. Plenty of licking, nothing that I recognised as a sign of fury. Time will tell...
I'm thinking 10 days between queen out of cage and disturbing them to look for eggs, & uniting very soon after if I do find eggs. Does that sound good? It feels like a toss-up between angering the bees inside so they turn against the queens, and leaving small colonies vulnerable for too long at a tough time of year.

----------


## Jon

> Do you find a couple of miles is far enough?


Even a mile would make a huge difference compared to making up nucs and leaving them in the apiary with the parent stock.
I have a site where I fill Apideas 1.3 miles from a site where I open them and I don't notice any loss of bees.

----------


## Jon

Make sure to check she is out of the cage 48 hours after you open the tab. The odd time I have come across a queen which has spent a week in the cage because I forgot to check she was out in a timely manner.

----------


## prakel

> But cutting tenons isn't simple for me, just yet.


Not at all complicated in this instance, you'll have the cut off ends as a template. It's just a few simple, straight cuts to reinstate the tenons on the cut-down rails.




> ?? All these years, & I've never heard of that as a magic formula. Please, say more!
> I'm particularly interested, because I'm trying to figure out the best size of frame to use for a longhive in Scotland. Longhive as in: not using supers, always just getting them to expand along rather than upwards. They definitely will do that - I've been running a 24-frame National longhive since 2014 - they expand along beautifully - but it's a very good size for producing big swarms  So I've just, rather nervously, started running a colony onto Zest frames, as some accounts suggest that that's a good size for longhives. The Zests are double the height of National deeps (and the same as 3 National shallows, which opens up some very interesting possibilities) - very definitely not 2:3.


Slight bad wording on my part  :Smile:  the comment about the height/length should have been added as a benefit to the beekeeper so, without changing what I wrote too much it should have read something like:




> ...my own observations have also suggested that the deeps do build up quicker -*also* their height better fits their length; once again it's that magic formula of 2(height):3(length).


Frames are definitely most balanced for handling when they approach 2:3. BS deep; Commercial deep; Dadant deep; Warre; mini-plus all come close. But of course it's easy enough to get used to anything (I've had quite a few tries with the so called Farrar set up using dadant shallows from top to bottom). One thing, it's simpler (for the eye) to scan lots of frames of the same size than it is to have to keep changing from one to another.

Regarding depth, I'm pretty certain that they do better on deep combs whether it's setting up the brood of filling with honey but I also have a feeling that the ultimate limit to the amount of brood in a frame is set by the height/length ratio; too deep in relation to width and I think it'll just result in the brood being 'rounded' off in a natural sphere within the available space with a commensurately large store of food above it or dry comb below. Fine for a natural nest but probably a bind when it comes to manipulation of individual combs for a few reasons. ...I've thought a lot about this recently as I'm following the observations of someone who's actually trying extra deep frames. I don't know yet whether I'm right  :Smile: .

----------


## madasafish

> Not at all complicated in this instance, you'll have the cut off ends as a template. It's just a few simple, straight cuts to reinstate the tenons on the cut-down rails.
> 
> 
> 
> Slight bad wording on my part  the comment about the height/length should have been added as a benefit to the beekeeper so, without changing what I wrote too much it should have read something like:
> 
> 
> 
> Frames are definitely most balanced for handling when they approach 2:3. BS deep; Commercial deep; Dadant deep; Warre; mini-plus all come close. But of course it's easy enough to get used to anything (I've had quite a few tries with the so called Farrar set up using dadant shallows from top to bottom). One thing, it's simpler (for the eye) to scan lots of frames of the same size than it is to have to keep changing from one to another.
> ...


I run Langstroth jumbos: 26cms deep, 43cms wide (usable measured inside frame). Ratio:0.64 (vs 2:3 of 0.66).. The bees use the entire frame. (Honey filled ones are very heavy...
I do not understand why people use double brood:an extra joint/gaps --

----------


## prakel

> I run Langstroth jumbos: 26cms deep, 43cms wide (usable measured inside frame). Ratio:0.64 (vs 2:3 of 0.66).. The bees use the entire frame. (Honey filled ones are very heavy...
> I do not understand why people use double brood:an extra joint/gaps --


The 2:3 is of course an ideal, the closer the frame is to it, the more comfortable the working unless, perhaps, your experience has a heavy bias to a different configuration such as all shallows. 

We run a lot of dadant broods and even have a few filled will droney combs (the result of using a lot of foundationless) sat above the excluders at present but that's another story which I'm not rushing to conclude  :Smile:  . With a young queen we tend to see the combs filled from top bar to bottom through the summer. Older queens are more likely, but not certain, to show a honey arc at the top. So long as there's an excluder in place it's not particularly unusual for all eleven combs including the outside faces to be in the active broodnest from some point in April through to July but this may have as much to do with our local temperatures as the bees or the box. The thing is, I don't like to see a brood nest without an integral honey/pollen arc, and infact it's one of my main concerns with the intermediate mating nucs as I feel that the larger size needs to offer a corresponding reduction in management. I mentioned earlier (almost coming back onto thread) that we've decided to standardize our mating nucs on half length lang mediums, a decision which has a lot to do with  finances, but I'm sure that a deeper frame would actually be better on many levels. 

With production colonies, although it's nice to see those full frames of brood, if the queen is filling the comb top to bottom then I have no option but to consider that _I've_ put the excluder in the wrong place and get another box, a shallow in the case of the dadants, below it.

----------


## Emma

> With a young queen we tend to see the combs filled from top bar to bottom through the summer. Older queens are more likely, but not certain, to show a honey arc at the top. So long as there's an excluder in place it's not particularly unusual for all eleven combs including the outside faces to be in the active broodnest from some point in April through to July but this may have as much to do with our local temperatures as the bees or the box. The thing is, I don't like to see a brood nest without an integral honey/pollen arc, and infact it's one of my main concerns with the intermediate mating nucs as I feel that the larger size needs to offer a corresponding reduction in management. I mentioned earlier (almost coming back onto thread) that we've decided to standardize our mating nucs on half length lang mediums, a decision which has a lot to do with  finances, but I'm sure that a deeper frame would actually be better on many levels. 
> 
> With production colonies, although it's nice to see those full frames of brood, if the queen is filling the comb top to bottom then I have no option but to consider that _I've_ put the excluder in the wrong place and get another box, a shallow in the case of the dadants, below it.


I've given myself two massive restrictions/complications to work with: I want to avoid feeding sugar, and I don't use any foundation. (I also live in Scotland, & don't want to live anywhere else, ever again.) With wild comb, once a super is above what they think of as the brood area they tend to build a glorious hurry of curvy cross comb. This is fine if I want to harvest it, but useless for overwintering, as they'd then start the spring with brood in the curvy cross comb. 
Currently I'm thinking that I have to give up the whole idea of using supers. The nectar flows here are just too unpredictable, beekeeping is too marginal. If they're to overwinter on honey, they need to be able to design a nest, complete with stores, which I don't need to interfere with. One where I can steal a bit of honey at the edges if I'm sure they have a surplus, but not one where I have to take off most of their stores just because it's cross-combed.
The only two possibilities I can think of just now are:
(1) a longhive - with stores nickable at the end, or by taking a chunk here & there if the Zest frames work as hoped;
(2) nadiring, Warre-style - but I'd do it with National shallows, not Warre boxes because my dad made lots, and because I don't want a fixed mass of topbar combs that I can't inspect. I think nadiring may work because they'll hopefully see the new space as brood, as it's always close to the entrance. And comb in National shallows is easy to edit with a knife & a few rubber bands, anyway.
These are of course exactly the configurations that "natural beekeepers" tend to go for. The thought that I'm following a train of thought that other beekeepers have followed before me is kind of encouraging, but only kind of, given the profound lack of knowledge about bees which some people in the natural camp display.
I've had some tentatively good experiences with the longhive, apart from the volume being too small, but it has turned out to be a chalkbrood factory. This is probably because the wretched box let in water, so they spent two winters in damp woodwork... I was really slow to realise, partly because of having a hectic couple of years, but mostly because I couldn't believe that a brand-new professionally made box would do that. It's got an all-over weatherproof, insulating cover over it now: the box has dried up beautifully, & it no longer has a population of large slugs on the top runners, but the chalkbrood returned with a vengeance this summer. I'm getting the bees out of the hive & into standard deeps, ready to clean it thoroughly and try it fresh with a different colony, and I'll try making a second long deep National box myself, but I have to accept that it may just be that the proportions aren't healthy for them. Hence, in desperation, trying the very ungainly Zest frames.

----------


## Emma

> Not at all complicated in this instance, you'll have the cut off ends as a template. It's just a few simple, straight cuts to reinstate the tenons on the cut-down rails.


I guess that might seem possible, if I'm not holding the piece of wood down on a kitchen chair with my (usually bare) foot...




> Regarding depth, I'm pretty certain that they do better on deep combs whether it's setting up the brood of filling with honey but I also have a feeling that the ultimate limit to the amount of brood in a frame is set by the height/length ratio; too deep in relation to width and I think it'll just result in the brood being 'rounded' off in a natural sphere within the available space with a commensurately large store of food above it or dry comb below. Fine for a natural nest but probably a bind when it comes to manipulation of individual combs for a few reasons. ...I've thought a lot about this recently as I'm following the observations of someone who's actually trying extra deep frames. I don't know yet whether I'm right .


Allowing them to make a natural nest is exactly what I'm aiming for - whilst knowing that it's yet another experiment which may yet again just give me lots of complicated, time-consuming beekeeping and very little honey. 
I'm aware of being waaaay off the original topic of this thread, but once you have observations to share about extra deep frames, I'd love to hear them!

----------


## Emma

> I do not understand why people use double brood:an extra joint/gaps --


One very simple reason for double brood: I'm only 5'6", and not remotely strong. I can just about manage a single brood box, at some risk of damaging myself.
So committing to large, heavy single boxes (which I'm currently doing with the Zest frames) is
...umm... 
does anyone know the difference between "brave" and "just plain stupid"??!

----------


## Emma

Spent this morning looking at a potential out apiary. 3.5 miles away.
Most of those miles are along a narrow, lethal A-road, so it would mean committing to regular diesel-powered bee miles again. Really interesting to hear that the "3 feet or 3 miles" isn't as hard and fast a rule as I always thought it was, thanks.

----------


## Emma

> Make sure to check she is out of the cage 48 hours after you open the tab. The odd time I have come across a queen which has spent a week in the cage because I forgot to check she was out in a timely manner.


I'm back on topic at last! The second queen was out of the cage by yesterday morning - took 24 hours or less. Thanks for the tip - that would have been a bad mistake to make, after all this fuss.
I love the fondant that Andrew Abrahams uses. Not too sticky to start off with as the commercial invert stuff I bought (so the queen's less likely to end up stuck on her back drowning in the stuff), and doesn't set rock hard, either.
Now the queens are out, the worry is that they are in tiny, depopulated nucs that can just about keep a single deep frame warm. How long would you wait before checking for eggs, and then before uniting with the stronger host colony?

----------


## Mellifera Crofter

> ...I don't use any foundation. ... With wild comb, once a super is above what they think of as the brood area they tend to build a glorious hurry of curvy cross comb. ...


Can't you guide them to build straight combs, Emma, by using bamboo sticks or wire, for example, or alternating the frames with previously drawn frames?  
Kitta

----------


## Jon

I would wait a couple of weeks before combining so she has time to settle in and establish her own brood nest.
I would not try and combine a very small queenright colony with a very large queenless one. Might work but quite risky if it is a queen you dont want to lose.

----------


## prakel

It's raining here in the south, so, back off topic  :Smile:  .




> This is fine if I want to harvest it, but useless for overwintering, as they'd then start the spring with brood in the curvy cross comb.


If, as you suggest, you go over to just using national shallow boxes it would be relatively simple to add two boxes of straight combs above the 'curvy cross comb' early enough in the season. The queen will head to the top box before going down to the floor. 

Two would be needed simply because one shallow on it's own doesn't have the depth to get the nest out of the cross comb box. I've used a similar idea with mating nucs, adding an empty box underneath them at the start of September, allowing them to build wild comb for brood rearing from the bottom bars of their frames while filling the mating nuc combs with feed, then in March/early April it's a simple task to go around and scrape all the wild comb off and return them to their correct single box configuration because they've always moved into the top box by that stage. I aquired the idea from an American who claims to use the method on full size langstroth colonies with good success. He suggests that the wild comb built to their own design may actually aid wintering by means of air flow regulation etc .....but we're now getting a little too close to the territory of certain math mad insulation experts for my liking  :Smile:  .




> (2) nadiring, Warre-style - but I'd do it with National shallows, not Warre boxes because my dad made lots, and because I don't want a fixed mass of topbar combs that I can't inspect. I think nadiring may work because they'll hopefully see the new space as brood, as it's always close to the entrance. And comb in National shallows is easy to edit with a knife & a few rubber bands, anyway.


Nadiring seems to slow bees down no end, I suppose the natural beekeeper's might say that it brings them back to their natural rythm..... personally I think that it's possibly going to be expensive (for the bees) in the kind of marginal locality that you describe, presumably they have a short enough season already. There's a lot that I like about the warre hive but I think that the standard management practices leave plenty to be desired. In your situation I think that I'd be tempted to off-load the masses of national gear (as long as it's not sentiment which is governing your decision) and use the money to buy some tidy warre boxes from icko (or other continental supplier) complete with frames for the brood bodies and topbars for the supers -that's how I'd run them, with an excluder. But remember that you need ladder comb for them to get to the top of their super; presumambly the true reason that Warre adopted the nadiring method. If you have the time to track it down there's some usable nineteenth century literature by British and American writers that deals with keeping bees in boxes of approx same internal footprint as the warre, but without all the faff. 

No real need for them to be a fixed mass of comb if you choose not to use the frames.  melliferac's suggestions are excellent but if you prefer (and you're using removable topbars) it's usually easy enough to 'correct' comb by gently pushing it over to where you'd like it to be. 

A lot of natural beekeepers set themselves up for an unmanageable mess by simply not managing. It's all quite simple really:

4899868_orig.jpg

010.jpg[/QUOTE]

----------


## Emma

I'd like to try fishing line, that's a very good thought, Kitta. I've been meaning to for ages, but it's never quite got onto the urgent list. Probably not the bamboo sticks, as the curves and waves I get often start at the edge of the comb, so a vertical guide nearer the centre wouldn't help. 

If it's a brood comb, the top corners are their main place for storing honey, and they'll bulge those areas wide, which often starts to interfere with the line of the next comb... and the next and the next... A wave starts to form across the box. If it's a stores comb, they'll bulge anywhere and everywhere. That's why alternating the frames doesn't work.

So in the brood nest, alternating full and empty frames can lead to lovely straight comb - but sometimes with a gap in the corners as they've bulged the neighbouring stores faster than they've drawn the new comb. Or with a bulge in the corners, if the neighbouring comb is slower to develop.

In a stores area, if I alternate drawn combs with empty they will happily fill the entire space by widening the existing combs on either side of the gap. Sometimes they'll do it even if those combs had been capped. I have an example in the hut, I'll try to remember to take a photo! I've seen cells 2 inches long, I think - I'll try to remember to measure some of them. They're quite impressive, little long bee tunnels. And the bees will make some wonderful 3-D jigsaw puzzles, if you take just a piece out of a neighbouring comb.

Fascinating, but only as an experiment. It gets a bit wearing for every day.

----------


## Emma

> I would wait a couple of weeks before combining so she has time to settle in and establish her own brood nest.
> I would not try and combine a very small queenright colony with a very large queenless one. Might work but quite risky if it is a queen you dont want to lose.


Thanks. Worry was making me impatient. I'm waiting a little longer. The nests are being well defended, and at least one is warm.
I found your post here helpful, as well: http://www.sbai.org.uk/sbai_forum/sh...67-Re-queening

----------


## gavin

> Thanks. Worry was making me impatient. I'm waiting a little longer. The nests are being well defended, and at least one is warm.
> I found your post here helpful, as well: http://www.sbai.org.uk/sbai_forum/sh...67-Re-queening


Great info in there - which would be enhanced if the photo links were to work.  I found a stash (a very large one) of images on the server at the last upgrade and hope to devote some time this quiet season to get them visible again.  I think it will be only possible one picture at a time so I may be selective.

----------


## Emma

> It's raining here in the south, so, back off topic  .
> If, as you suggest, you go over to just using national shallow boxes it would be relatively simple to add two boxes of straight combs above the 'curvy cross comb' early enough in the season. The queen will head to the top box before going down to the floor. 
> Two would be needed simply because one shallow on it's own doesn't have the depth to get the nest out of the cross comb box. I've used a similar idea with mating nucs, adding an empty box underneath them at the start of September, allowing them to build wild comb for brood rearing from the bottom bars of their frames while filling the mating nuc combs with feed, then in March/early April it's a simple task to go around and scrape all the wild comb off and return them to their correct single box configuration because they've always moved into the top box by that stage. I aquired the idea from an American who claims to use the method on full size langstroth colonies with good success.


I love the idea. It's so clever.
But I do keep coming a cropper with clever ideas, particularly when they rely on exact timing.
This year, the spring was so cold that I couldn't get into the hives. Meanwhile, the bees were busy inside. By the time I could make my first inspection, they were already making swarm preps. Any plan I make has to be robust enough to cope with that kind of spring.




> Nadiring seems to slow bees down no end


Yes... even Heidi Hermann admitted that the bees are reluctant to move down across the next bar in a Warre.
And I was lying awake the other night imagining what bees might do in a nadir in an OSR flow. I think the word "frantic" probably has to be in there somewhere... (Followed by "swarm"!)
But I love the idea of letting them build continuously into fresh brood comb, and letting them keep all the honey, until I'm sure the brood nest has moved far enough away, with enough honey around it, that I can take what really is a surplus, & take away some of the oldest, mankiest brood comb at the same time. That's the theory. I have no idea what would happen in practice. I might try it with one or two colonies, see what happens.




> There's a lot that I like about the warre hive but I think that the standard management practices leave plenty to be desired. In your situation I think that I'd be tempted to off-load the masses of national gear (as long as it's not sentiment which is governing your decision) and use the money to buy some tidy warre boxes from icko (or other continental supplier) complete with frames for the brood bodies and topbars for the supers -that's how I'd run them, with an excluder. But remember that you need ladder comb for them to get to the top of their super; presumambly the true reason that Warre adopted the nadiring method. If you have the time to track it down there's some usable nineteenth century literature by British and American writers that deals with keeping bees in boxes of approx same internal footprint as the warre, but without all the faff.


Ouch! No way! I went with my dad's boxes partly out of sentiment, but also because it makes me compatible with most of the beekeepers in Scotland. And I'm not attracted to Warre boxes, I just hate supering.

That literature sounds interesting, though - do you have any links or references, or names I could track down?

Also... why is Warreing a faff? I haven't read in detail, but thought the idea was to simply add boxes underneath, & eventually take one off the top, catching what swarms you could along the way. Not so much a faff as an enormous lifting challenge - if you obey the instruction never, ever to separate brood boxes.




> No real need for them to be a fixed mass of comb if you choose not to use the frames.  melliferac's suggestions are excellent but if you prefer (and you're using removable topbars) it's usually easy enough to 'correct' comb by gently pushing it over to where you'd like it to be.
> A lot of natural beekeepers set themselves up for an unmanageable mess by simply not managing. It's all quite simple really:


Those are lovely pics. Of brood combs. 
I don't have a problem with wild brood comb. I've run nothing else since 2014. They bulge & wave a bit at the corners, but there's usually time to go in & straighten them before any actual crosscombing happens. I've had wild comb nests up to 22 frames long, and hope to have longer once I've built a longer box. Some of the deep combs are on bottomless shallow frames, because I ran out of deeps last year, & just took the bottom bars off drawn shallow combs. They're fine, too - some of them are just gorgeous, I was admiring them a few days ago.
It's the supers that get me... Bees have no reason at all to produce parallel 35mm combs in a super, so they don't.
Well, mine don't, anyway - what do yours do?
Do you use more widely-spaced bars in supers?

----------


## prakel

> Also... why is Warreing a faff?


It probably isn't for most! I suppose we all see things in different ways. One example of faff from my point of view is the box juggling/splitting the brood when putting sections on (the top).




> I don't have a problem with wild brood comb. I've run nothing else since 2014. They bulge & wave a bit at the corners, but there's usually time to go in & straighten them before any actual crosscombing happens. I've had wild comb nests up to 22 frames long, and hope to have longer once I've built a longer box. Some of the deep combs are on bottomless shallow frames, because I ran out of deeps last year, & just took the bottom bars off drawn shallow combs. They're fine, too - some of them are just gorgeous, I was admiring them a few days ago.
> It's the supers that get me... Bees have no reason at all to produce parallel 35mm combs in a super, so they don't.
> Well, mine don't, anyway - what do yours do?
> Do you use more widely-spaced bars in supers?


If you're using the shallow boxes in the nadir fashion I simply don't see why the whole issue of wider store combs can't be solved without any further effort. Surely the bees will be moving from one box of brood comb, down, to another box in which they'll be building brood comb?

In the days when we were literally too broke to buy foundation I often used the the simple approach in supers and broods of putting new frames between drawn combs, which as others have said works very well. If short of those combs to begin with then it would make sense to me to use decent starter strips, they may not fit the ideal you're aiming for but they'll certainly ease the transition.

Boxes full of wild comb. Yes, been there too when time and circumstances have been against me (in the past I've also spent a lot of time away during the season while, in the push for numbers, keeping more colonies than I probably should have). But, those boxes have always been above an excluder so they're no problem to deal with.

----------


## Emma

> If you're using the shallow boxes in the nadir fashion I simply don't see why the whole issue of wider store combs can't be solved without any further effort. Surely the bees will be moving from one box of brood comb, down, to another box in which they'll be building brood comb?


That's exactly what I was trying to get at, thank you. Very neatly put. I had a feeling I wasn't being very clear! 
I'm not sure they'll do that at all times, but I think that, for my purposes, it's worth a try, at least in a hive or two.




> In the days when we were literally too broke to buy foundation I often used the the simple approach in supers and broods of putting new frames between drawn combs, which as others have said works very well.


Either my bees are different (which I suppose is just possible), or there's some difference in the rest of what we're doing which leads to a different effect.

Here's an example from earlier this year. I started with 2 drawn combs - I think they may already have had stores in, I can't remember. I put a foundationless frame between them. This is what happened:

Top view - set of 3 frames, with the newer, paler top bar in the  centre
P8200210.jpg

Side views - the side that was by the dummy is very flat, the other one less so. Some of the stores have been eaten into during the post-OSR dearth.
P8200211.jpgP8200212.jpg

Bottom view: P8200213.jpg The bees' frugal engineering design in response to the situation I set up. Rather than draw a whole new comb, the cells to either side of the gap have simply been extended to meet in the middle. (Some of the cells are over 1.5 inches long.) The spines of each comb, as far as I can see, remain centred on the original outer frames, so I don't think it's a response to the starter edges that I use.




> Boxes full of wild comb. Yes, been there too when time and circumstances have been against me (in the past I've also spent a lot of time away during the season while, in the push for numbers, keeping more colonies than I probably should have). But, those boxes have always been above an excluder so they're no problem to deal with.


That is of course the obvious solution. Use supers & excluders, take the stores in whatever configuration, and return sugar syrup. I can really see why beekeepers came up with that idea!

----------


## Emma

Back on topic!

I looked inside the first Colonsay introduction nuc today. Just two frames. One has a decent amount of stores & pollen, the other, on each side, a big area of unsealed brood. The bees (comfortably enough of them to cover the brood & guard the stores) were very calm, unlike the parent colony.

I think she's in  :Smile:   :Smile:   :Smile:

----------


## prakel

> Either my bees are different (which I suppose is just possible), or there's some difference in the rest of what we're doing which leads to a different effect.
> 
> Here's an example from earlier this year. I started with 2 drawn combs - I think they may already have had stores in, I can't remember. I put a foundationless frame between them. This is what happened:
> 
> Top view - set of 3 frames, with the newer, paler top bar in the  centre
> P8200210.jpg
> 
> Side views - the side that was by the dummy is very flat, the other one less so. Some of the stores have been eaten into during the post-OSR dearth.
> P8200211.jpgP8200212.jpg
> ...


Bit of a late response but I've only just seen this post. A couple of thoughts come to mind, firstly I'd question whether the 'dummy' board is properly spaced. If it's a truly flat board (as it should be) and the frames are pushed tight to it I can't see how the comb can be built out further than it should be (from a beekeeper's hive management/interchangable comb perspective). Secondly, the extension of the combs into the middle frame does happen so your bees aren't too different from ours but I never found it to be a major issue, more times than not the combs are drawn very cleanly; flow and the state of the existing comb may well play a part, as an example I can well visualise how a combination of a heavy flow and open storage cells on one or both flank combs would result in those cells being extended rather than wasting time trying to build an entirely new comb in  the middle. 




> That is of course the obvious solution. Use supers & excluders, take the stores in whatever configuration, and return sugar syrup. I can really see why beekeepers came up with that idea!


lol, the proper use of an excluder is just another tool, nothing to do with 'taking the stores' which, by the autumn, are usually below the excluder anyway -at least, in our hives they are).

----------


## Kate Atchley

> ....
> 
> There's a nice trick buried in the following video, and yes it is practical and does work although in your present circumstances it would be better used to determine whether to allow release by the bees rather than doing so manually:
> 
> https://youtu.be/Yg92q9hPIv8


Interesting "trick" to test whether Q will be accepted. Thanks Prakel. Will try that next time I'm introducing.

I tend to do as Gavin suggests and make up nucs on full-sized frames. 

This year I must have missed an incipient queen cell when I introduced a queen. They seemed to like her so I opened the cage but the queen I found laying, a while later, was unmarked ...  home-grown royalty it seemed.

----------


## Kate Atchley

> .... So your MiniPlus and a newly created nuc should work but for slightly different reasons.  The uniting of the MiniPlus with the larger stock is one thing that might prove a little tricky.  If you place it over newspaper on top of the bigger colony the MP frames are quite likely to continue to be used for brood or honey. .....


Agree wholeheartedly with your list of ideal conditions for queen acceptance Gavin.

Re MPs, I needed to requeen a colony with a DLQ, in August. I untited them with frames from double MP box, with bees and laying queen. Using fat dummies at either end of an upper brood box, above newspaper **, the MP frames fitted across the box, at right angles to the dummies, supporting one another and still with the correct spacing.  I think I had to leave out one or maybe two end ones ... can't remember which. 

Once the queen was accepted I made sure she was in the lower brood nest before adding a QX. So now the brood has emerged from the MP frames in the top box and the frames are packed with stores. So these frames will be ready to use in MPs next Spring, when the queen rearing starts again, with or without the stores depending on the needs of the present colony. 

**This was before I learned from Murray about using a room-freshener spray for uniting. Have now used it several times and it works superbly, just as he said!

----------


## Jon

I requeened 3 nucs at the start of the Month. In each case I removed the queen from the nuc and introduced a new one from an Apidea in an introduction cage. The nucs would have been queenless for about 5 minutes so probably did not even notice the lack of a queen. All were accepted and laying within a few days.

The other thing which works well when introducing queens is mixing a load of bees together and introducing a new queen.
I have been combining apideas to make bigger units and it is dead easy to introduce a queen to these.
I just put the frames from 4 or 5 apideas together and you dont get any fighting.

The last of my grafted queens which emerged on 31st August have started to lay this week.

----------


## The Drone Ranger

Regards the comb building not going to plan I noticed using the rainbow minis for the first time some bees ignored the plastic built in starter strips  and built across the frames from one to the other instead
Anyway I think that had something to do with the direction the hives were facing possibly bees prefer to build comb running North to South 
Because I pointed the mininucs entrance North (just the way the shelf faced)
They, not knowing the frames should be removable, ungratefully ignored my preference and built comb from the front to the rear of the nuc spanning all the frames

Sent from my LIFETAB_S1034X using Tapatalk

----------


## prakel

> ....I think that had something to do with the direction the hives were facing possibly bees prefer to build comb running North to South 
> Because I pointed the mininucs entrance North (just the way the shelf faced)
> They, not knowing the frames should be removable, ungratefully ignored my preference and built comb from the front to the rear of the nuc spanning all the frames


Just out of interest, and in no way dismissing your hypothesis, Allen Latham carried out some experiments along these lines (using 40 mating nucs) in the 1930s but found no evidence to suggest that there was any basis to the idea:




> I myself have felt that there was a possibility that the bee with her peculiar senses, able to do all her work in what is darkness to us, might respond to the magnetic lines which run around the earth, and that she might build her combs either across these lines or with them..........
> 
> .........A survey of the tables will show no preponderance in favour of any particular point of the compass. In regard to the entrance there is a preponderance in favour of the angle 45 degrees, yet not so large as to preclude chance.
> 
> *Gleanings in Bee Culture Feb 1937*

----------


## The Drone Ranger

Hi prakel 
Just a thought
When you see comb being built in jars or empty supers etc I thought they might have a preference to line up midway with the sun as it goes from east to West 
I have 5 double keilers with good queens hoping to overwinter them if I don't need them in the next week that is  :Smile: 



Sent from my LIFETAB_S1034X using Tapatalk

----------


## prakel

> When you see comb being built in jars or empty supers etc I thought they might have a preference to line up midway with the sun as it goes from east to West


I must admit that it really wouldn't surprise me _too_ much if it's eventually proven that there is some such mechanism. Doesn't stretch the imagination too far.

----------


## gavin

Didn't Ian Rumsey (RIP) with his 'Pure and Simple' system find that the bees tended to align combs (given a free choice in a blank box) more according the orientation in their last home rather than anything else?  DR, does your Apidea shelf face away from the main direction of your hives by 90 degrees?

----------


## The Drone Ranger

> Didn't Ian Rumsey (RIP) with his 'Pure and Simple' system find that the bees tended to align combs (given a free choice in a blank box) more according the orientation in their last home rather than anything else?  DR, does your Apidea shelf face away from the main direction of your hives by 90 degrees?


Actually you might be right about that Gavin because the hive I stocked those mininucs from faced South
The offending mininucs were on a shelf in light shade facing North
Smith hives are not square and the entrance is (normally) on the long side 
So those combs would be running North to South 
The mininuc frames would be running East West 
You might have solved that puzzle  :Smile: 


Sent from my LIFETAB_S1034X using Tapatalk

----------

