The mechanism of colonies -- QE

[ShinySideUp]

I have read several threads on here about not using a queen excluder but have been unable to ascertain exactly what happens if no QE is used and no moving of the supers takes place. Let's imagine that I have a hive that I do not touch all season, apart from adding supers on top of the last one, until I come to harvest honey, which I would normally do at the end of August. When I open the hive at the end of August, what am I likely to find? Brood all over the place? Honey nicely stored in the top supers? Brood at the top, honey at the bottom? I don't know.

I'm curious as I have a hive that consistently fails to provide quality honey (sometimes poor tasting, sometimes rock hard in the combs) which may be because it does not get as much sun as the other hives and I would like to experiment with no interference at all apart from hefting during the summer and the addition of supers as necessary. I suppose I am just wondering what a wild colony would do if it nested in a more or less box-shaped tree.

 

[jenkinsbrynmair]

What usually happens is, although at first the queen may behave like SWMBO in a shoe shop at first - zipping about, laying all over the place, as the season progresses, the honey, and the brood will move downwards so, hopefully, by the end of the season, with the brood cluster reducing, you end up with honey in the supers and the brood all down in the bottom box.
It does depend on your colony management system whether this could be seen as a problem or not, the biggest issue I ever see being discussed is people who believe they'll get sent to the pillory if they extract honey from comb that once had brood in.

 

[ShinySideUp]

What usually happens is, although at first the queen may behave like SWMBO in a shoe shop at first - zipping about, laying all over the place, as the season progresses, the honey, and the brood will move downwards so, hopefully, by the end of the season, with the brood cluster reducing, you end up with honey in the supers and the brood all down in the bottom box.
It does depend on your colony management system whether this could be seen as a problem or not, the biggest issue I ever see being discussed is people who believe they'll get sent to the pillory if they extract honey from comb that once had brood in.

I suppose that is the ideal situation but I must admit it really does appeal and I think I have to try it out next season, at least in one colony. As was mentioned in another thread, removing and replacing QEs is a bit of a PITA, perhaps it might make hives less swarmy too. It would also mean that because the queen can get around, the necessity of nadiring a super is removed as the queen can move up with the workers to the stores.

I can't see a problem with pre-brooded honey cells since the bees will probably clean them before storing honey anyway. If I were that squeamish about insects crawling all over my food I probably wouldn't eat honey in the first place!

 

[gmonag]

If you insist on using two or more different size of box in your hive, then you must use a QE. Otherwise what is the point?

I run Rose Hives (one size of box thoughout) without QEs and plenty of foundationless frames. The colony is free to build whatever comb they want, where they want and use it for any purpose they want.

Not suprisingly, they organise the hive in the same way feral clonies do (as described by Tom Seely). The brood nest expands and contracts and moves up and down the hive with the seasons. Drone comb is drawn to suit. Any brood comb that is no longer required for brood is used to store honey and pollen.

I extract from any frame that has only capped honey in it. If it contains anything else, it stays in the hive until it only has capped honey.

Bees have proven to be extremely adaptable and will happily make their home in any suitable cavity, natural or otherwise. However in 40 million years of evolution, they have never had to deal with a QE.

 

[ShinySideUp]

If you insist on using two or more different size of box in your hive, then you must use a QE. Otherwise what is the point?

I do use 14 x 12 hives as you will have seen but that is because it has been the most convenient size for me as a starter -- large frames and plenty of room for the bees to store stuff during winter. If I choose to go QE-less the size of the brood box is largely irrelevant and I won't suddenly be changing to smaller heights of box. Be aware that honey is not my prime concern with the bees so if the larger brood box contains increased amounts of honey at the end of the season that I can't get to I'm really not that bothered. For me, getting too much honey is a pain in the neck as I only sell it locally to a few people. Last year I had loads and ended up selling it cheap to the local shop because I couldn't be arsed to put that much effort into selling it. Although for the most part they hate me, I do keep bees for bees sake, for their pollination; it is my contribution to the environment (in addition to planting wild flowers, feeding late-season hedgehogs, putting up bird and bat boxes, keeping at least half my large garden in a wild state for the grass snakes and the frogs etc., and leaving my plums and apples on the trees for anything that wants them (not wasps though, little f******s)).

 

[bobba]

I ran ran a hive with no QE this year. Pulled I put 3 supers on in the spring (2 to start with another later). To start with they built a primed of brood, with just 2 frames in middle of the top super. By mid June the 2 top supers were solid honey but 3rd super still had brood in the middle.

So I took 2 supers off and put 3 more on, but the additional one had a qe (so 4 on now with qe for top 1). They did the same again building a new brood pyramid, but only up to the qe. By mid august the top 3 supers were full and 4th had 6 solid frames, 3 at each side with brood in the middle. So I took 3 supers and swapped the 6 frames for empties.

I put the brood-super in the bottom. With hind sight I should have waited and the bees would likely filed the 4th super after the brood hatched.

Looking at the stain patterns as I extracted the honey you can see how the bees like to build a primed of brood up through the hive, then move down as it fills with honey.

I did not do this out of any particular plan, it just sort of happened.

If you know Canadian bee keeper on you tube. I recently saw a video of his where he explains how he puts the first 1 or 2 supers on with no qe. Then qe before any additional ones. He moves the qe down later in the year as the supers fill up. He said by giving them the extra space helps with swarming and increases production. (a simplified version, but that's the gist).

It caught my attention because it was similar to what I did in my own bumbling way.

And just for reference I had a sister hive. Queens both open mated from same mum. Sister got a QE and 2 supers at the same time in the spring. Swarmed twice and made 0 honey. So just in case any one mistakenly thinks I am a good keeper, I am not, just had beginners luck on one of my hives.

Also a point of caution, I have found brood stained frames to be a wax moth magnet after extraction.

 

[bobba]

I do use 14 x 12 hives as you will have seen but that is because it has been the most convenient size for me as a starter -- large frames and plenty of room for the bees to store stuff during winter. If I choose to go QE-less the size of the brood box is largely irrelevant and I won't suddenly be changing to smaller heights of box. Be aware that honey is not my prime concern with the bees so if the larger brood box contains increased amounts of honey at the end of the season that I can't get to I'm really not that bothered. For me, getting too much honey is a pain in the neck as I only sell it locally to a few people. Last year I had loads and ended up selling it cheap to the local shop because I couldn't be arsed to put that much effort into selling it. Although for the most part they hate me, I do keep bees for bees sake, for their pollination; it is my contribution to the environment (in addition to planting wild flowers, feeding late-season hedgehogs, putting up bird and bat boxes, keeping at least half my large garden in a wild state for the grass snakes and the frogs etc., and leaving my plums and apples on the trees for anything that wants them (not wasps though, little f******s)).

I had hedgehogs foregoing in the derbies below my hives this year. I don't know what they were after but a mummy and 3 little ones were there a lot in the hot weather.

Like you I got my bees because I wanted bees, not honey, so I totally understand.

I keep my garden semi wild up to the edges of the veg pot. I move the wild patch around, but always keep a mini lawn clear somewhere. I am no eco-nut, I just like it that way. Always changing and so interesting. I can go in the garden with my boy (3) and we can play with dandy lions and find all kinds of bugs, pick the blackberries, dig in random places. He loves the hedge hogs too and of cause watch the bees. We have apple trees, grapes, strawberry and loads more. Garden is a fair size but not huge (20 x 8m), but is crammed full of life.

Then you look over the fence and you see a 1/3 patio, 2/3 bright green super flat stripy lawn, with one poor honey suckle at the end that looks like its slowly dying of depression.

I know where I would rather sit and relax or take my little one to play.

 

[Antipodes]

At the moment I've got an Italian queen in a hive without an excluder that has laid really well in all 5 boxes...the boxes are Ideals. The colony is huge and is eating so much food to feed everyone, I can't keep up with it. She's laid through the whole lot. It was like a brick coming into winter but now I'm feeding them honey from stored frames and also some from other colonies that have an excess. It's really an experiment to see what will happen. I'll probably donate some boxes of brood to other colonies and then try and confine her a bit. It's a pity I can't get them onto a good nectar source right now.

 

[Apple]

Our Rose Hive apiary works just fine without QX and just occasional intervention to check for disease, to add a box ( we move outer filled frames above the brood and replace with undrawn foundation as we put new boxes on)
Works just fine, but then we do have non swarmy native Cornish black bees... that do not need constant fiddling around and the regular weekly look for swarm cells and find the queen palarva, advocated by some!

Chons da

 

[jenkinsbrynmair]

If you insist on using two or more different size of box in your hive, then you must use a QE.

That doesn't follow, why?

 

[fiat500bee]

If you insist on using two or more different size of box in your hive, then you must use a QE. Otherwise what is the point?

I run Rose Hives (one size of box thoughout) without QEs and plenty of foundationless frames. The colony is free to build whatever comb they want, where they want and use it for any purpose they want.

I agree with everything else you're saying, but you can operate a modified Rose Hive Method using any range of box sizes and get all the benefits of doing so apart from being able to use any frame anywhere in the hive. Non-use of an exluder seems reasonably commonplace. The placing of additional boxes within the range of the brood-nest, rather than above it, is a more significant change from standard procedure.

 

[Madge]

... I have to try it out next season, at least in one colony. ...

Your original question was, what will happen if you leave the colony alone until August - but if you wish to manage the colony without a queen excluder, you can do that, and keep the queen in the brood box.

If left without restriction and management, the queen might make a broodnest that's long and elongated, stretching over several boxes like a rugby ball standing on one of its points. With management you can move brood from the top boxes down to lower boxes, and create a queen excluder with honey frames, filled with nectar or honey, above the brood nest.

...As was mentioned in another thread, removing and replacing QEs is a bit of a PITA, perhaps it might make hives less swarmy too. It would also mean that because the queen can get around, the necessity of nadiring a super is removed as the queen can move up with the workers to the stores. ...

I can't see why handling a QX is a PITA. I'm baffled.

Beware, managing a hive without a queen excluder won't necessarily make the colony less swarmy.

There is no *necessity* to nadir a super - either with or without a queen excluder. You nadir a super if it will help with management.

 

[gmonag]

That doesn't follow, why?

If you have two specific-sized boxes, one for brood and another for honey, logically you must use a QE to keep the brood out of the the honey boxes (supers). Otherwise you end up with the logistical difficulties in manipulating brood frames/boxes of different sizes. Without a QE you are much better off using just one size of box and frames.

That is not to say that you can't employ a QE (as Ian Steppler does) but there is no need with a one-size-box system.

 

[Madge]

If you have two specific-sized boxes, one for brood and another for honey, logically you must use a QE to keep the brood out of the the honey boxes (supers). Otherwise you end up with the logistical difficulties in manipulating brood frames/boxes of different sizes. Without a QE you are much better off using just one size of box and frames.

That is not to say that you can't employ a QE (as Ian Steppler does) but there is no need with a one-size-box system.

I agree, it's probably easier to manage a colony without a queen excluder if all the boxes are the same size - but by no means is it essential.

In a one-size hive you can still end up with a brood nest stretching over several boxes that needs to be managed - just as in a two-sized hive.

 

[gmonag]

I agree with everything else you're saying, but you can operate a modified Rose Hive Method using any range of box sizes and get all the benefits of doing so apart from being able to use any frame anywhere in the hive. Non-use of an exluder seems reasonably commonplace. The placing of additional boxes within the range of the brood-nest, rather than above it, is a more significant change from standard procedure.

I'm trying to keep my posts within the scope of this thread, i.e. the use or not of QEs. The Rose Hive Method is not dependant on whether you use a QE or not. My point is that using two different box/frame sizes logically requires the use of a QE too. If you choose not to use a QE (good idea!) then use one size of box. Any size will do (as long as you can lift it).

 

[jenkinsbrynmair]

If you have two specific-sized boxes, one for brood and another for honey, logically you must use a QE to keep the brood out of the the honey boxes (supers). Otherwise you end up with the logistical difficulties in manipulating brood frames/boxes of different sizes. Without a QE you are much better off using just one size of box and frames.

You may be better off using a same size box system but there is no must - that is just as blinkered as saying you must use a QX full stop many misguided people work brood and a half - that gives the same 'logistical problem' of two sizes od brood frame, but they cope.
Same goes for the statement of you must keep the brood out of the honey boxes it's not true, just because most of us choose not to leave the queen a free rein, doesn't mean we must not.
The different sized boxes (i.e. using shallows over deeps) is just for the convenience of lifting slightly lighter boxes come harvest time, it doesn't mean that the bees are not allowed to brood in them the rest of the time.

 

[gmonag]

You may be better off using a same size box system but there is no must - that is just as blinkered as saying you must use a QX full stop many misguided people work brood and a half - that gives the same 'logistical problem' of two sizes od brood frame, but they cope.
Same goes for the statement of you must keep the brood out of the honey boxes it's not true, just because most of us choose not to leave the queen a free rein, doesn't mean we must not.
The different sized boxes (i.e. using shallows over deeps) is just for the convenience of lifting slightly lighter boxes come harvest time, it doesn't mean that the bees are not allowed to brood in them the rest of the time.

I only used the imperative must in a logical sense. It makes no logical sense to me to use QE over a brood and a half for instance. Of course we can and do make any system work, but is a QE necessary/desirable at all? It's a free choice.

 

[Apple]

Then there is also the option of brood + 1/2..... moving the "honey" frames around from the brood+1/2 box to a super above forming a brood/honey barrier can work and saves the use of a QX if you must!

 

[Murox]

I only used the imperative must in a logical sense. It makes no logical sense to me to use QE over a brood and a half for instance. Of course we can and do make any system work, but is a QE necessary/desirable at all? It's a free choice.

No but they have been around since before Langstroth patented his hive.

 

[Finman]

I have read several threads on here about not using a queen excluder but have been unable to ascertain exactly what happens if no QE is used and no moving of the supers takes place.

Let's imagine that I have a hive that I do not touch all season,

I have kept hives without excluder 55 years. Nothing such has halpened what you believe.
You should try yourself, what bees do in such hives.

:it is impossible to imagine what hapens if you do not not nurse the hive during summer. However, nothing good happens.