QE or not QE, that is the Question

[Beedogg]

So, when putting a colony to bed for the winter with a super of stores above the BB, should the QE be left in place between them, or taken out. I can see logic for both answers but would appreciate if someone could point me to the right one.

 

[Erichalfbee]

Remove it.

 

[PeaBee]

Yep take it out for winter.

 

[enrico]

I can't think of one reason to leave it in, enlighten me!

 

[Erichalfbee]

I can't think of one reason to leave it in, enlighten me!

I don’t think a beginner would know even if there was one

 

[Sutty]

The only reason to keep it in would to stop brooding in the super.  BUT if they need to move up to those stores and there is a QE in place they will either move and leave the Q behind (and she'll die), or they will stay below the QE with her and starve.
Not a great choice. I left a QE in place by mistake last year but was lucky they had so much stores in the BC they never tried to move up.
Remove it.

 

[Erichalfbee]

The best way to avoid the queen laying in the super is to put it underneath

 

[Sutty]

The best way to avoid the queen laying in the super is to put it underneath

Unless it's too late for them to move it up (which is inefficient) and you want them to have it as winter stores.
I have a colony that will go into winter with double brood and a super, as I don't want to fire up the extractor for one super. Top BC is full of stores.

 

[pargyle]

The only reason to keep it in would to stop brooding in the super.  BUT if they need to move up to those stores and there is a QE in place they will either move and leave the Q behind (and she'll die), or they will stay below the QE with her and starve.
Not a great choice. I left a QE in place by mistake last year but was lucky they had so much stores in the BC they never tried to move up.
Remove it.

They won't leave the queen... they will starve below the queen excluder ...you will find they just won't move up without her and she can't get through the excluder and they won't cross the gap to the stores in the super above...certainly when it gets cold you have no hope.

 

[Erichalfbee]

Unless it's too late for them to move it up (which is inefficient) and you want them to have it as winter stores.
I have a colony that will go into winter with double brood and a super, as I don't want to fire up the extractor for one super. Top BC is full of stores.

Yes I meant that if you intend to overwinter with a super you might as well run brood and a half and keep the shallow on the bottom.

 

[jenkinsbrynmair]

I can see logic for both answers

please enlighten us - I can only see one logical action

 

[Beedogg]

Well, as stated by someone else: to prevent laying-up of the super.

But I hear the consensus of opinion which is: take it out.

Thank you all.

 

[jenkinsbrynmair]

Well, as stated by someone else: to prevent laying-up of the super.

but at the risk of killing the whole colony, doesn't seem very logical to me

 

[Erichalfbee]

but at the risk of killing the whole colony, doesn't seem very logical to me

Depends whose logic.
Beginners have to learn from somewhere and this is a good place. At least he now has the right answer not somebody else's logical one

 

[Cuckmere couple]

but at the risk of killing the whole colony, doesn't seem very logical to me

colony dying would achieve the objective of preventing laying in the super