Welcome, Guest

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10
GREETINGS/TELL US ABOUT YOURSELF / Minnesota new bee keeper
« Last post by RogerK on May 27, 2017, 10:04:17 PM »
Hello, I'm new here and as a bee keeper. I live 20 minutes east of St. Paul. Enjoying bee keeping a lot. I'm an engineer, run my own business, but slowing down, so more time for things like this. Look forward to connecting.

Roger K
« Last post by FlexMedia.tv on May 27, 2017, 09:55:55 PM »
THE COFFEE HOUSE ((( SOCIAL - ROOM ))) / Bear Attack - Moved
« Last post by RogerK on May 27, 2017, 09:00:20 PM »
I have moved this post to the general forum.
HUMOR IS A FUNNY THING / Lost in the woods
« Last post by beecanbee on May 27, 2017, 07:50:33 PM »
Two hunters were lost in the woods when the first said to the second: "I heard that if you fire three shots in the air in rapid succession, help will come".

After the second man had quickly fired three shots in the air, they waited for an hour, but no one came.

The first man said "perhaps you are doing it wrong. Please, let me give it a try".

The second man replied "Sorry, but you can`t ... I don`t have any arrows left".
GENERAL BEEKEEPING - MAIN POSTING FORUM. / Re: Laying worker question again
« Last post by Acebird on May 27, 2017, 06:15:58 PM »
My thought is you are wasting a good queen.  Make a good split from a good hive and add your queen.  I don't think a queen with a few foragers will make it and if you replace the equipment you might just get the laying workers back.  They can fly and they can smell.
THE COFFEE HOUSE ((( SOCIAL - ROOM ))) / Re: Manchester Atrocity
« Last post by Acebird on May 27, 2017, 06:06:49 PM »
The City of New York has its own set of laws and requires permits to own any long gun or pistol.
You can't walk down Manhattan with a long gun.  I doubt if you can do it in many large cities.  When I was young rifles and shot guns were hanging in the back of the truck.  Not so much anymore.  Different world today.
GENERAL BEEKEEPING - MAIN POSTING FORUM. / Laying worker question again
« Last post by davers on May 27, 2017, 05:42:59 PM »
I know the topic has been debated before but I had a thought that maybe someone could comment on. I have two hives that are queenless that I need to take care of. Without adding brood what has
the experience been with shaking the hive out about 50 yards away, then replace the hive back in the original place and have the foragers fly back,install a new queen in a cage and have the bees chew out the candy and release the queen. I would put back in some comb without the brood for the queen to lay on.  Thanks
« Last post by jtcmedic on May 27, 2017, 04:53:32 PM »
Well the have gone........ 5 day later poof, had just switched them from a 5 frame cardboard nuc to a wooden 5 frame nuc. And there gone.   Now set up the swarm traps
Something doesn't add up here ...
Your post is headed "Demaree - on which page is the original article?"

1. I apologise for the confusion, but please understand that I can't put the entire post into the subject line.  The subject line of a post is part eye-catcher part summary.  The body of my post makes it perfectly clear what I was after -- particularly if you read the closing sentence, "Can anyone tell me in which year and on what page the one-hive swarm prevention system is described?".

If you have only read the subject line and responded only to that, then my thanks, but I actually wanted a response to the question in the body of my post.  In case you're confused with what I mean by "demareeing" in that sense, it is the method described on the Wikipedia page.

2. Although Iona Fowles in Bee Gleanings considers Demaree's subsequent posts to be "improvements" or "modifications" of his original idea (she says that his plan "underwent changes"), I don't regard it so.  The method described in 1884 is utterly different from the method described in 1892, so the 1892 method is neither an improvement nor a modification of the 1884 method, but rather an entirely different method.

For one, the 1884 method is not "swarm prevention" but "artificial swarming" (followed by a combine at the end of the flow).

For another, the principle of the 1884 method is to separate the foragers from the queen, whereas the principle of the 1892 method is to separate the nurse bees from the queen, which in my book is an entirely different approach.

One must mention, for clarity, that the 1884 article actually attempts to describe two methods, not just one.  The second method is a proposed improvement of the first method, which explains Demaree's comment at the start of his article that this he is asking for "aid in perfecting the new system".  By "new system" he simply means the improvements described second.  However, as far as I can see, the only improvements were to use cheaper materials for the second hive... so in the end, the 1884 article describes just one method. :-)

Heddon's critique addressed that original article, and pours scorn on the basic principle (a point-of-view I happen to share) - a valid criticism (imo) which has nothing to do with how many boxes are involved.

What do you consider the "basic principle" of Demaree's 1884 method (i.e the principle that Heddon had poured scorn on)?  I have read Heddon's article, but he doesn't seem to address any basic principles.  His main objection is that removing the queen from the foragers will result in less than adequate sections harvest, if sections are what the beekeeper is trying to harvest (he seems to assume that Demaree is, which may be correct -- sections were quite popular in those days).
GENERAL BEEKEEPING - MAIN POSTING FORUM. / Re: drones getting the boot
« Last post by jtcmedic on May 27, 2017, 04:47:45 PM »
I'm just south of you and our flow after som rain has just started, mine are drawing out supers in 7 days , a 3 weeks  a go I was feeding,
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10