First year Nectar Management notes to date

[IndianaHoney]

Ok, this is my first full year of using Nectar Management. Last year I attempted this in mid May (after having read about it) with moderate results that could not be counted because I started late. This is a summery as copying my notes from each hive would be to much information.

So I'll start with the basics of last year. Again, I did this in mid May of last year. Hives did not swarm at all, however, most hives in this area did not swarm due to a cold snap, and then very little rain, killing off most of the nectar flows. Results were inconcusive because most hives had to be fed.

Now this year, I completed the initial Nectar Management in mid April. This was done by reversing the brood nest with hives that were in the top deep. Any hives that were still in the bottom deep, with full or partial honey reserves in the top deep, were checkerboarded. Checkerboarding was done using a third deep and alternating honey frames with empty drawn comb. All of these hives also received two supers, one of empty drawn comb, one of foundation only. No feeding was done with any Nectar Management hives to keep from tainting the results.

Mid April: Hive bodies reversed in 6 hives. Checkerboarding with a third deep in 8 hives.

Early May: Brood nests expanded very rapidly in the checkerboarded hives. The queen appeared to have immeadiatly started laying in the empty combs of the second deep.

In the hives that were simply reversed, brood nest expansion seems to have just expanded at a normal rate, nothing of particular interest with these hives.

Mid May: The hives that were checkerboarded are storing lots of nectar in the supers above, but very little capped in these supers. All capped honey appears to limited to the end frames of the deeps, and some capped honey at top of each brood frame. The honey frames in the second deep is no longer present, and appears to have been replaced by brood. Some brood was noted in the bottom of the third deep, but very little. More honey supers added to allow for more brood nest expansion.

Hives that were simply reversed appear to still be filling the second deep, brood has not expanded past the second deep, and very little nectar is being stored in the honey supers. But some honey being stored in the second deep above the brood.

Early June: Checkerboarded hives have expanded their brood nest into the bottom half of the third deep. Lots of bees filling even the honey supers (each hive having 3 deeps, three honey supers). Capped honey is present in the top half of each frame in the third deep, with capped brood in the bottom half of each frame. Top to bottom brood in each of the frames in the 1st and 2nd deep. Queen is now hard to find due to all the space and possibilities of where she could be. Most brood is capped. Some of the hives have honey supers that range between empty and 80% full. One more super added to checkerboarded hives with the most capped or mostly filled supers. These hives now have 3 deeps and four honey supers.

Reversed hives appear to be progressing normally. Nothing special to note. They are mostly still workind the second deep. Some hives have started storing nectar in the honey supers above. Brood nest appears to be the normal 1.5 deeps at this time.

Mid June: Checkerboarded hives are almost unmanagable due to the number of bees. Brood nest appears to have stopped expanding, but is still as large as it was in early June. Supers were not added due to a lull in flow for a couple of weeks. Netar storage does not seem to have expanded, and hives may be a little lighter.

Reversed hives seem to be at a standstill as well. No real change except the normal increase in hive strenth. I did notice that some of these hives appear to have just started to draw out a frame or two in the bottom honey super containing foundation.

Early July:I can't really get into the first and second deep to look at the brood nest of the checkerboarded hives due to the numbers! I'm now worried that these queens may burnout in the fall or winter if not replaced. Nectar storage appears to have dramaticly increased. I now have between one and two supers full of capped honey. I was able to get into the third deep on some of these hives and noticed that the brood nest has dropped back down into the 1st and 2nd deep only, but each hive still had some capped drones in the bottom of the third deep. Besides the little bit of capped drones in the third deep, the remainder of the frames are completely filled and capped. Most supers are either capped and done, or full of nectar. Two more honey supers added to each of these hives. All hives now have atleast 5 honey supers, with a couple having six. These hives are now taller than I am (6 ft.) I now suspect that each of these hives will net between 150lbs and 200lbs, depending on the main flow. Special note, one of the checkerboarded hives swarmed and took most of the bees and honey with them.

Reversed hives progressed well. Brood nest sizes normal with brood in the 1st and second deep. Most of these hives have now filled one honey super, some having completely capped one of the supers and started on the second super. Numbers are about half that of the checkerboarded hives. Judging by numbers, these hives have not swarmed at all.


Note to readers: Hives that were split, fed due to low stores, had queen problems, needed more than 2 frames replaced, and swarms were not counted in this comparison.


My conclusions to date:

Surly without the space provided, hives that end up with the population as large as these hives would have swarmed. That part is obvious.

Nectar Management seems to have helped by keeping the swarming to a minimum, but does not eliminate it.

If the hives have very little stores in the spring, they seem to progress much slower, and end up with a normal population, even with the extra space provided. I suspect this is largely due to genetics, and a lack of stored resorces.

Hives that have a full or mostly full deep of honey in mid spring, and are checkerboarded seem to convert that honey into brood when given the space for unlimited brood nest expansion. This resulted in much larger populations, and much more nectar being hauled in, which probably compounded their ability to rapidly expand the population. End result is a reduction in swarming due to the space provided, and a large crop due to the large population.

I also suspect that if I had fed the hives that had very little stores in mid spring, and given them as much space, I would have achieved the same results.

[Show-me]

Nice post, thanks.

[Ross]

Hives that have a full or mostly full deep of honey in mid spring, and are checkerboarded seem to convert that honey into brood
I think you will find the same result in any hive that has adequate stores in the early spring regardless of checkerboarding.

[sc-bee]

I've used it w/ some succes for two years. Just not enough colony count. I do believe it has helped my honey harvest.

As with anything, the naysayers are there , but so far I am a believer!!!

Thanks WALT!

[IndianaHoney]

Ross, I agree that any hive would have turned it into brood, but the difference is the space given. Checkerboarding seemed to allow them to expand the brood nest instead of hitting that wall of honey and then backfilling the brood nest. I think what mostly happened was that the queen layed in the second and third deep, this caused there to be honey in the brood nest, they then used it to feed the brood, and stored what they were bringing in up above, giving them even more space to raise brood. This is opposed to a normal hive that would not have had enough space to expand the broodnest, and store the nectar at the same time. The key was the empty space and the available stores, not the checkerboarding. Notice at the end of my post that I said "if I had fed the hives that had very little stores in mid spring, and given them as much space, I would have achieved the same results". The checkerboarding simply facilitated the space by breaking up that wall of overhead honey. Again, I suspect that if I had given the other hives as much space, and fed them, I would have seen the same large broodnest expansion.

[Marc]

Can you give us any more updates on how your checkerboarded hives compared to your others for the rest of the year? TIA.

[Michael Bush]

Walt does not reverse boxes. Also he would be doing checkerboarding in about February. I'd say where you are the end of March would be probably the right time.

[IndianaHoney]

Micheal, if I remember correctly, Walt does recommend reversing the brood nest as the first minipulation in the spring if the cluster is in the top deep. That would put the empty deep on top allowing the brood nest to expand upwards. I'll re-read for that one though, maybe I was mistaken. I do know that he does not use reversing broodnests as a method of swarm prevention.

Lets see, an update. I can tell you the hives that I managed normally each produced between 75-100 pounds of honey. The hives that I used NM, one swarmed, two produced less than 60lbs (that whole yard did not produce well because of to much morning shade), and the remainder produced between 125-175lbs each, with the average of those being around 140lbs. It was a very good year here for even the normally managed hives. I believe some of the NM hives would have produced around 200lbs or so, had I provided a pollen patty, and fed small amounts of 1:1 to stimulate more brood rearing.

One small problem with the NM hives that do swarm, is that they end up swarming late.

[sc-bee]

>Micheal, if I remember correctly, Walt does recommend reversing the brood nest as the first manipulation in the spring if the cluster is in the top deep. That would put the empty deep on top allowing the brood nest to expand upwards.

Yes basically the super would be moved from bottom to top if it were empty (as Walt describes his pollen box method) or if bees are in top super.

But I do not believe this is a part of NM but rather a sequence in getting ready for NM. Just a diffence in the way we are all referring to the start of NM timeline.

If you read past post there is often a confusion of terms between ---- hive reversal, checker boarding, and Nectar management.
The later term being the one Walt has now coined his system of management.

I am a hobby beekeeper and used it on two colonies for the past two years with similar results both years.

One colony had queen issues and was a wash. I think the second may have thrown a small swarm late not sure but produced at least 210 lbs this year. The average in my area is about 60-90.

The timeline for me is also in the Feb. window w/ white wax usually around second week of April.

Maybe an anomaly but I will try it again.

[Dave W]

IndianaHoney . . .

Do you have a "mite drop history" for these "large" hives?
Are you planning to make lots of splits in Spring '09?

[IndianaHoney]

Dave,

I don't usually keep track of mite counts, unless I see a problem that may indicate a large mite population. Right now I'm currently working towards regressing my hives to natural cell sizes. Until I'm confortable that they are completely regressed, and won't crash, I just treat all hives. BTW...My treatment methods are natural, requeening with queen cells to break the brood pattern, using VSH queens.

A little side note, those VSH queens are great. In late summer and early fall, I've watched them drag out pupae (sp?) that they chewed the head off of to get to mites. I did do a sugar role on some hives. The mite count on those was between zero and two.

[ikeepbees]

Michael is correct in that Walt's Nectar Management principles do not include reversing hive bodies in the late Winter / Spring. Nectar Management involves breaking up OVERHEAD honey (capped honey above the brood nest) and providing empty comb above that checkerboarded honey.

Therefore, if your overwintering configuration is two deeps, and you find the cluster in the top deep in the Spring, Nectar Management as defined by Walt is not possible. The next best step, according to Walt, is to reverse, bringing the empty comb in the bottom deep above the brood nest, and placing at least one super of empty comb above that.

As IndianaHoney has reported, there is a marked difference between the two situations. The colonies with overhead honey make the decision to begin the buildup earlier than the colony with no stores, giving you, the beekeeper more bees to work the flow, make splits, etc. The colony with no overhead stores is in an emergency situtation, conserving what little it has left, trying to survive until there is forage available in the field. Meanwhile, the colony next door with overhead honey has been building brood volume for some time. Big difference.

IndianaHoney, thanks for the great post. I'm trying to contact Walt - he'll want to read about your results and comment on them. I expect he'll want to talk to you personally if you have the time.

[Walts-son-in-law]

To All
I am very pleased that someone has taken the time to compare the effects of checkerboarding versus standard management, and report the results. In this comparison, the results are not all positive, but an accurate description of the potential is reported. I applaud Indiana Honey (IH) for his effort. Seasoned beeks and PhD experts are so sure that the approach is hogwash by a crackpot that they can't be induced to try it.
Several aspects of this account support my observations reported in the "manuscript" offered for sale at essentially my cost. I'm not in the paper-peddling business and sales have been turned over to the next generation.
Reading between the lines, it seems that the bee development schedule at IH location is about six weeks later than mine at the Alabama state line in Tennessee. With bi-monthly observations, we can't get much closer than that. Do not consider the following comments as criticism of his efforts. The last thing I want to do is appear to criticize the efforts of someone who has done me an extreme favor. Consider the following comments as explanation of some entries. There is no reason to expect someone unfamiliar with the effects of CB to know all the details.
The following chart shows the colony spring internal operations versus the bi-monthly observations. Rather than quote the whole observation, a short extraction will be noted with an entry showing period when it was recorded. Taking my cue from the "lull in flow," (mid-June) for the preceding period, the observations are placed on the normal colony development spring time line. In my area, that "lull in flow" is actually the peak in forest forage availability. The old literature speaks in terms of the "early flow" and the "main flow." The period in between, if it's addressed at all, is reported to be caused by scouts not finding field forage, because they are preoccupied with searching for potential nest sites for the swarm. Not true. Colonies with no intent to swarm have this slow down in overhead storage. My interpretation is indicated on the abbreviated time line and explained more fully in the"manuscript." It is not my intent to duplicate those descriptions here, but to make the point that emerging from the lull is not the time to withhold supers - it's time to stack 'em up. When the colony emerges from that period with nectar processors, wax makers and other support troops, they are geared to store honey at peak rates. The large population of CBed colonies can apply their efforts in four or five supers at the same time. Take advantage of their capacity for honey production and give them room to apply that population in an efficient manner. Supering "as needed" deprives them of room to disperse the work force.

/---------------------------------------------------------/
/ In the chart below there is a forward slash at the /
/beginning and end of each row. This is an attempt to /
/word wrapping. It should also be viewed in Courier font /
/(NOT Courier New) so that the text will line up properly./
/After cutting and pasting the chart into this post I /
/found it didn't line up well at all. To view it properly/
/you will need to copy and paste it into a text editor. /
/Sorry about that. /
/---------------------------------------------------------/
/..........Standard.Management.Timeline............ ......./
/.................................................. ......./
/.Reproduction.motivation.......................... ......./
/.Late.winter./early.spring.............................../
/Period.:.From.mid-winter.to.reproductive.cut.off........./
/Objectives.:.Build.brood.volume.to..Prepare.parent .colony/
/.............minimum.honey.reserve....for.personne l.loss./
/.................................................. ......./
/Indications.:.Expanding.brood.nest...Backfill.uppe r.brood/
/........................................volume.... ......./
/......................................Start.swarm. cells../
/__________________________________________________ _______/
/Activity.:....Increase.brood.volume...Swarm.prepar ations./
/........................................as.above.. ......./
/............................................Swarm. issue../
/................................................------->./
/.................................................. ......./
/IH.report...........Mid..........Early.........Mid ......./
/.periods...........April..........May..........May ......./
/__________________________________________________ _______/
/..Restock.winter.honey.motivation................. ......./
/..After.repro.cut.off............................. ......./
/Period.:.....Three.weeks.+......|....Until."Flow".ends.../
/Objectives:.Rear.house.bees.....|.Restock.winterin g.honey/
/Indications:...Storage.lull.....|....New.wax.stori ng...../
/......|...Consume.honey.reserve.|................. ......./
/Repro.|_________________________|_________________ ______./
/Cutoff|.........................|................. ......./
/.................................................. ......./
/Activity....Rear.house.bees.....|Store.honey.at.ma x.rates/
/............Wax.makers.and......|................. ......./
/.............Nectar.driers......|................. ......./
/.................................................. ......./
/......|..Reproductive............................. ......./
/......|---------------->................................./
/......|...swarm.issue............................. ......./
/.................................................. ......./
/IH.report....Early.............Mid.............Ear ly...../
/.periods......June............June.............Jul y....../
/.................................................. ......./
/---------------------------------------------------------/
Notes:
a. The time line is broken at "Reproductive cut-off," to get it on a page of typed characters. Repro c/o is a radical change of internal activities that are not apparent to the beekeeper. The top block of entries, cryptic as they are, provide a guide to the colony development versus Indiana Honey's bi-monthly reports of status. Detailed descriptions of colony internal operations can be found in a series of articles (03) in Point of View (POV) this site or the "manuscript". Of the two sources, the manuscript is better organized and has more background info than the out-of-sequence articles. The editor did not publish in the order submitted.
b. The space between early build up and swarm preps (top section) has no timing reference. The variables, affecting timing include overwintered colony strength, field forage availability, flying weather, and colony genetics, to name a few. The key timing consideration is building brood volume to the amount of honey reserve that the colony considers the minimum amount necessary for starting swarm preps. Reaching that minimum reserve with brood nest expansion triggers swarm preps and starts brood nest reduction by backfilling. Figure 3 of the manuscript shows the timing scatter effects of starting swarm preps. Some colonies complete swarm preps and issue a swarm and weaker colonies do not even start swarm preps.
c. Reproductive swarm issue spans repro c/o. Those that complete swarm preps early can issue a swarm before repro c/o, but those that just started swarm cells before cut off will be later. If foul weather delays issue, they can be much later. They have techniques for delaying emergence of replacement queens.
d. At repro c/o the colony motivation shifts from reproduction to resupplying winter stores for the existing colony. Coming up on peak native forage availability, regardless of whether or not they committed to reproductive swarming, they turn their attention to rearing the house bees needed for resupplying honey stores. Colonies that have not started swarm cells abandon swarm ambition in favor of existing colony survival. At that time, the following brood cycle (24 days) is dedicated to rearing the bees necessary for honey storage at efficient rates. The lull in over head storage spans the period of that brood cycle. Up to this point on their development the colony population has been comprised primarily of nurse bees and foragers. Now after repro cut off they devote a full brood cycle to rearing the mix of the house bees needed for rapid storing of honey. Foragers were accumulated prior to Repro c/o and they are content to mark time awaiting the completion of staffing house bees. Although the landing board can look quite busy, very little nectar is added at the top. Incoming forage is applied to feeding the colony. Filling the tanks of wax makers in development also takes its toll on incoming nectar. Second year colonies will often store overhead during this period. Don't ask me why - I don't know and I don't lie. During this lull in overhead nectar storage the foragers of established colonies are only going to the field on as-needed basis, but when the support troops are in place the rest of the foragers go to work - big time.
e. Coming out of the lull is called the "main flow" in the literature. In the manuscript, we call it the "white wax" period of spring colony development. Since the manuscript was written (02) one season where blooming of redbud was delayed caused new wax to be more yellow than white. The wax makers, tanking up on the dark nectar of redbud, produced new wax that was off-colored. An update of the manuscript will include a correction to that effect. We think it important that beekeepers understand that the appearance of new wax is a function of colony internal operations and not a function of field forage availability. "Main flow" is a misnomer. Field nectar peaked during the "lull" in my area.
f. The standard management time line does not reflect the effects of checkerboarding. CB disrupts the natural sequencing of these colony internal activities. When Cbed, the colony, no matter how strong emerging from winter, continues to increase brood volume all the way to repro c/o. That makes me think CB taps some unknown survival trait that shifts the colony to a special and obscure mode of operations.
g. I find it interesting that European experts have validated the concepts while our U.S. Experts scoff, and the Europeans have been exposed for fewer years. It's a sad indictment of our experts that they will learn from their counterparts "across the pond" when the concepts originated and were reported in their midst.
I assume that IH did not have sufficient drawn comb supers to maintain two empties at the top as recommended during the build up. At CB, he used one drawn comb and a box of foundation above. The foundation is perceived by the colony that hasn't developed wax making capability as a barrier. The wild brood nest has no empty space at the top - comb is built from the top downward. The top is always filled with honey or being recycled with this seasons fresh nectar. (During the "lull" the colony consumes their honey reserve to recycle those cells with fresh honey.)
One swarming CBed colony in eight is one too many. It is possible that they filled their 3 ½ stories in time to fulfill the other requirements for swarm prep in time to beat the repro c/o deadline. But it is more likely that the swarm was an overcrowded swarm. IH notes (10-24 update) that the CB swarm was late. Overcrowding swarms are typically later than the seasonal reproductive swarms and are motivated by different causes. If that colony was the strongest of the lot and only had foundation above, they may have generated a swarm to thin their ranks. (Colony survival motivation.)
IH expresses concern about "queen burnout" (early July) as a result of the intense populations. He need not worry. Unseen, because of his reluctance to penetrate to the lower parts of the brood nest, those colonies were quietly superseding. Although supersedure gets bad press in the literature, I consider SS a beneficial side effect of CB. A supersedure queen from a strong colony is the best you can get, and the queen breeders, with their best efforts, can't duplicate it. Queen characteristics are handed down through several generations. Unless you wish to upgrade genetics, there is no need to requeen - ever. However, we do recommend you check about 6 weeks after new wax for brood presence. Occasionally, (less than 5%) a colony will flunk supersedure 101, and go queenless.

I think you will find the same result in any hive that has adequate stores in the early spring regardless of checkerboarding.


Indiana Honey (IH) is correct. Checkerboarding (CB) DOES accelerate brood nest expansion. It is not so much a factor of space available, as it is honey consumption rates. When the colony is expanding into solid overhead honey that honey must be consumed by the brood and total adult population. They are not going to throw honey overboard to free up space for brood nest expansion. When I CB, the peak of the expansion dome gets an empty frame of comb and the two slots of honey on either side are left in place. In my 9 frame brood nest, with the brood typically in the center five frames, they only have to consume two frames of honey to fill five frames with brood. However, the speed-up factor is not 5 to 2. Prior to placing brood in the empties, the cells are filled with raw nectar or diluted honey. But consumption of either is faster than capped honey. Less food value per unit volume, and capped honey cells are extended beyond brood rearing depth. Major difference in consumption rates to feed the colony, and that translates to faster expansion of the brood nest.

[Walts-son-in-law]

This is Roy, for me.

Wow, now that I look at the actual post I see that the chart is REALLY messed up. I thought that if I wrote it in Courier it would post in Courier. Apparently not.

Most of our charts have been created with COREL. I am not very experienced with posting on these forums. Can anyone tell me how to include graphics?

Roy

[IndianaHoney]

Walt is correct in his assumption that I had a shortage of drawn comb. In those cases I either pulled a super or two and extracted, then put the supers back on, or if time was short, I put CC foundation, or a medium of foundation on. If it was CC, they had 8 frames of foundation, and one frame of drawn comb on each end. I simply did my best with the resorces I had, and even though I messed up a few things, the results of the CBing gave me very strong hives that produced a larger than average crop.

I have a little more comb resorces for next year, and plan to duplicate this comparison next year, unless I decide to change all my hives over to small cell.

I can't tell you all the variables and mechanics as Walt can, but I do know that I checkerboarded the hives, and they produced very large brood nests, large populations, and large crops.

And for those who scoff at what Walt has to say. I have nothing to gain or lose. I have a progressive personality. If something doesn't work, I leave it behind. So far, I can tell you that I haven't left Nectar Management behind.

Hope this helps.

[Michael Palmer]

The key was the empty space and the available stores, not the checkerboarding. Notice at the end of my post that I said "if I had fed the hives that had very little stores in mid spring, and given them as much space, I would have achieved the same results". The checkerboarding simply facilitated the space by breaking up that wall of overhead honey. Again, I suspect that if I had given the other hives as much space, and fed them, I would have seen the same large broodnest expansion.

Good post, Indianahoney...

I think I agree with you here. I've never CB my hives, but achieve the same results in a different way. It seems to be more about upward expansion, and honey flows.

I add supers early, directly over the broodnest. Nothing reversed yet. The bees feel like they can move up. The queen often moves up into the first super. The hives are reversed on the Dandelion flow. Again, the bees feel like they can move up, and the queen lays in the empty reversed up combs. After this, proper supering keeps the incoming nectar out of the broodnest, and a cluster that doesn't feel the need to swarm.

I think the results are the same, and with all the colonies that I manage, and all the time involved with CB, I think my version works better for me.

[Walts-son-in-law]

This is Roy

For any of you that tried to copy and paste the chart, I now know that wouldn't have worked. Apparently the forum deletes multiple spaces. I have editted the post to replace all of the spaces with periods and changed the font to Courier New in advanced mode (just found out I could do that). Don't know how the column of spaces down the right side got there, I didn't do it. Try to ignore it.

At least everything seems to line up right, now.

Roy