Wales with no treatments?

[domino]

Top bar hives and horizontal frame hives are two variations on the same theme. They are primarily used in third world countries where cost of the hive is paramount.

There are some advantages to horizontal hives that can't be matched by vertical stack hives such as Langstroth, British Standard, Rose, Dadant, etc. Consider that with a horizontal hive, the brood nest is always accessible with no supers to be removed. A horizontal hive exhibits a natural seasonal cycle filling the back of the hive with honey while the brood nest is at the front, then during winter, the bees eat their way to the back, then next spring repeat the cycle. Removing honey from a horizontal hive does not require disrupting the brood nest. Just pull out the frames of honey and replace with empties.

There are also some unique disadvantages. Horizontal hives require more tending over the season because frames of honey have to be removed regularly as they are filled. Unless foundation is used, the combs are difficult to extract so most honey is collected by crush and strain. Horizontal hives are fixed size, meaning that extra honey storage space can't be easily added. Putting a "super" on top of a horizontal hive defeats several of the advantages listed above.

Thanks, as I understand it the top bar hive most popular at the moment was designed in the 1960s for developing countries to use fewer parts and be cheaper to make.

I've always toyed with the idea of trying one but I don't really think I can handle yet more kit

 

[jenkinsbrynmair]

As I understand the current design of the TBH is a creation from the 1960s

Originally called the Kenyan top bar - name explains itself really.
It was a step up from the traditional horizontal hives in use in Africa such as the log hive and similar variants using other materials - all these had one thing in common in that they had no frames/bars but, like the skep had fixed comb which meant destruction or partial destruction of the nest to obtain honey; the top bar hive was an affordable, sustainable means of beekeeping for subsistence farmers.
Crush and strain is the usual method of harvest out there so that isn't a problem
It's size means there is no need for 'extra' stores space and it's convenient enough for the farmer to harvest as required by removing the last combs in the back of the hive and replacing with a fresh bar.
But embraced tightly by the hippy dippy types in this country.
Now commonly known as the African Top bar hive or 'bee box'

 

[domino]

Originally called the Kenyan top bar - name explains itself really.

Seems it was invented in Canada:

The present day top bar hive, with sloped sides (Kenyan) was developed in the early 1970’s by a Canadian, researcher, Dr. Maurice Smith. It has sloped sides, about 30 to 40 degrees, similar to Dr. Whelers Greek findings. The original top bars were of wood 1 3/8 inches wide. Vertical guides with wax were suggested to promote straight comb building. Top bar length was 15 to 24 inches. Langstroth used the same 1 3/8 spacing for his frames almost 150 years ago.

http://www.americasbeekeeper.com/History_of_Top_Bar_Hives.htm

 

[Nige.Coll]

“Professor Francis Ratnieks, head of LASI, says that beekeepers should cease using the other two methods (“trickling” and “spraying”, in which a solution of oxalic acid is used) as they are harmful to the bees and less effective at killing Varroa.”

The press release says the trickling and spraying methods “cause harm to bee colonies, resulting in reduced winter survival”. I wonder why harm is caused, how great the harm is, and whether it outweighs the harm caused by not treating for varroa at all. Emma and I have never had any colony losses following oxalic acid trickling and I cannot recall other beekeepers having experienced this either, but perhaps LASI have found colonies to be weakened by it afterwards.

 

[jenkinsbrynmair]

Seems it was invented in Canada:

I'd heard Scotland - but regardless, was designed for Africa which is how it got its 'Kenya' handle

 

[Gilberdyke John]

“Professor Francis Ratnieks, head of LASI, says that beekeepers should cease using the other two methods (“trickling” and “spraying”, in which a solution of oxalic acid is used) as they are harmful to the bees and less effective at killing Varroa.”

The press release says the trickling and spraying methods “cause harm to bee colonies, resulting in reduced winter survival”. I wonder why harm is caused, how great the harm is, and whether it outweighs the harm caused by not treating for varroa at all. Emma and I have never had any colony losses following oxalic acid trickling and I cannot recall other beekeepers having experienced this either, but perhaps LASI have found colonies to be weakened by it afterwards.

Isn't Ratnieks said to split clustered colonies through the winter? I seem to recall JBM saying something to that effect. If that's true it would surely have a significant impact on the colony's overwintering chances.

 

[Finman]

Old age doesnt come on its own.
Henaint ni ddaw ei hunan.

What does that mean? And whose old age do you mean?

.

 

[For want of a better word]

What does that mean? And whose old age do you mean?

.

vanhuus itsessään ei tule

Yeghes da

 

[Finman]

.
I read : Top yield in Wales. 13 kg per hive.

My life is not long enough to learn that


.

 

[fatshark]

How do you explain that 80% of mites are in pupae under cappings. 20% are free in the workers.
Then half of bees leave with swarm.

"Up to" means some kind of record?

But of course it depends how much original hive has mites, 1000 or 10 000 and how big is the swarm, 1 kg or 5 kg

.
A small tree hole hives, what the research handles, may have a situation, that the nest will be filled with honey. The queen does not have much cells to lay. Mites emerge from brood but they do not have larvae where to go to propagate. So they are many to ride out.
.

I'm not explaining it, I'm just quoting what Seeley stated in the cited paper. Read the paper and he explains it based upon the other two papers I listed.

I suspect there are more phoretic mites because the queen laying rate has slowed before swarming so there's less cells for the mites to hide in.

"Up to" because swarm sizes vary (as a proportion of the size of the original colony), as you indicate.

 

[Finman]

Up to 35% according to Seeley in http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0150362#pone.0150362.ref019 citing
.

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00218839.2005.11101177?journalCode=tjar20

I looked more from google, what the issue tells about amount of mites in swarms.

Interesting is that mite amount in swarms are much more bigger than I bet,

One research has been made in Poland 10 years ealier than Seeley's , but results are same kind.

Colonies in the research were small. Bees were under 20 000 . That amount occupyes about 1-1,5 Langstroth boxes.

Then a list of used cells tells that same hives had about same amout of brood and food (pollen + honey). Variations are big. Some hives did not have much brood any more.


Mechanism seems to be such that when the hive swarms, queen has slowed laying long time . So often mentioned 20:80 rule does not work in swarming situation.

Mites with swarm / left into hive was on average 25% (16-34%) . It is very far from figure what I wrote.

In other words, it is very usefull to treat mites in swarms and in artificial swarms.. Trickling is easy way. Thymol leaves stink to combs. Formic acid is OK .


Well. Thanks Fatshark that you looked facts!
.
.

 

[REDWOOD]

I got to the bit when he mentions expense and i switched it off.

 

[Finman]

.
Seeley's research says that mites with swarm is about 35%. In feral colonies drone brood amount is huge compared to nursed, because drones produce much more mites.

Well second time. I will treat every artificial swarm with oxalic since now.

Easy to catch lots of mites.

There must be free mites much in the hive when the swarm goes. Half of bees leave and half stays.

Then we have clipped queen where primary swarm and second swarm may be together. The swarm is sometimes 5kg.

in this case a new colony gets a huge amount of mites. from parent hive.

.

 

[Swarm]

I got to the bit when he mentions expense and i switched it off.

I don't click on live links

 

[fatshark]

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00218839.2005.11101177?journalCode=tjar20

...

In other words, it is very usefull to treat mites in swarms and in artificial swarms.. Trickling is easy way. Thymol leaves stink to combs. Formic acid is OK .

And, at the right time of the season, think how effective a shook swarm is if immediately followed by treatment with oxalic acid.

 

[Nige.Coll]

I switch off when honey harvest is mentioned.

 

[masterBK]

Several years ago (when I was on the council swarm collectors list) I found that most of the 14 swarms I caught in one year carried between 80 and 120 Varroa mites ( I used oxalic acid dribble on them about 2 or 3 days after hiving them with insert under mesh floor) and counted them 7 days later. There were also three swarms with between 8 and 20 mites.

 

[Fusion_power]

I suspect there are more phoretic mites because the queen laying rate has slowed before swarming so there's less cells for the mites to hide in.

The queen lays heaviest leading up to swarming, then slows laying 3 to 5 days before the swarm leaves. Varroa enter cells just before capping on the 9th day from egg laid. This suggests there is something else behind the large number of phoretic mites just before a swarm.

 

[Finman]

]

The queen lays heaviest leading up to swarming, then slows laying 3 to 5 days before the swarm leaves. Varroa enter cells just before capping on the 9th day from egg laid. This suggests there is something else behind the large number of phoretic mites just before a swarm.

It is short of laying space in a small colony because combs will be filled with honey.

However, strange thing that phoretic mites are so much.
.

 

[user 6228]

I...
Many beekeepers will fill in surveys as treatment free due to the threat of prosecution or having their honey taken off the shelves if they admit to using generic thymol or oxalic acid treatments rather than the many times more expensive licensed products.
Not wishing to rain on anyone's parade, just adding cautionary reality.

until the VMD correlates their poison license for oxalic acid. with their professed "No treatment"