Title says it all.
Title says it all.
It is not true that you cannot teach an old dog new tricks.
They can learn them, they just can't do them.
Tis true salty thought you have to admit that flyback is more descriptive. It could also almost be called the doolittle method cause for honey section production, he used it predominantly in his book a year in the out apiary with the variation that he left all the bees at the old place for even more honey production and used resource hives for the bees for the split. Nothing new under the sun.
Not really. cutdown split is take the queen and a couple frames of brood, leave the rest to raise a new queen. I've read so many variations on the 'flyback' here over the last year, I'm still not clear on it, but, general gist is the same, move the brood, leave the queen and foragers will fly back to the original stand,
However, on michael bushes site under the definition of cut down split, leaving the queen at the old site is listed as a variation and so it ends up being the same as you mention for the fly back split. I call it fly back in my mind and think of exactly the way you explain it and to talk about stuff, we have to call it something. I like the term of flyback but did not find my queen on one of the last one that I tried and so it is nice to know the variations that might go with it so that the work of setting up can be salvaged in some way with out having to start over. That comes down to knowing what do the bees need to be successful no matter what it is called. It is like the queen excluder that may give clean honey supers but is also a good way to separate the queen from some nurse bees. Or the many ways to use a snelgrove board. Some common language to start with so people have a basis to discuss a topic and any tweaks to that topic.
I disagree"Flyback split"= "cutdown split"by a better name
A fly back/ fly away is the reverse of a cut down
A FBS is used to make increase and get a hive to focus on brood rearing and comb drawing. You leave a frame or 2 of open brood and the queen, the forgers revert to nurse/house bees. If you want it to make a crop, It must be done well in a advance of the main flow to alow the hive to build up (and boy will it) ....Now look at what happens to the QL side... they have little open brood to care for, and the bulk of the hives nurce bees. That = well fed queen cells witch many will break in to nucs
A cut down is used to max the field force and the hive to focus on nectar gathering and prossing. You pull the open brood and the queen, with nothing to do many nurse/house bees become forgers. The cut down peaks its population 11 or so days after, so its done while the flow is on and will peak in the next few weeks. In the clasic use, the brood nest gets back filled, and when the new queen starts laying the bees respond by moving it all up in to the supers and drawing comb hard and fast creating great comb honey sections
Each is an extreme end of the spectrum dezined to trigger a very different behavior response. a lot of people are going 1/2 and 1/2 and making splits some were in between and or calling any split a FBS do to it being a buzz word of late, witch muddys the waters. Just this week some one posted about pulling frames from different hives and puting them over a QE on a strong hive to draw cells and called it a FBS......
As we all know.....some bees fly back to the old location if you don't take them away, just having a hive to catch them there doesn't make it a FBS. Just like pulling a the queen and a few frames of brood to out to make increase is not a cut down split.... The actions and mechanisms used are very similar, but the beekeepers intent and the bees behavioral response are very different.
I do not believe you have it correct that somebody put brood over and excluder and called it a fly back split. What really happened was that he ask about a fly back split and was given a different option of using a queen excluder to accomplish what he wanted to do. There was no mixing and matching of terms that I saw.
I did not look up the thread but am pretty sure we are talking about the same one.
ps, I am pretty sure salty was part of that thread and not talking for him but that thread might be the reason for this thread.
I see your point on the communication error, though I think the intent was just as a reference to give guidance of what the follow through was of what we were talking about based on salty's suggestion that the poster look at a different thread. You are technically right on that post but are spitting hairs. If the whole thread was read, then that sentence would be clear enough if not technical. If the sentence was taken on its own merit with out the previous part of the thread, it would be patently wrong. I knew what he meant and I believe he knew what he meant and that I would understand it and was not giving meaning to the word flyback except to show it was not a new thing he did but what we were already talking about. It is about like calling out bad spelling when someone reading knows what you are saying and meaning no matter the way you spelled it. So you are correct 100 percent (he did say that) but are splitting hairs. We both know the poster was not explaining a flyback split with his explanation of what he did. Or at least when looking at the whole thread, that is not how I took it.
When it comes to variations of the basics, things like doolittle did in pulling the brood but leaving the queen and all the bees is not that far from a simple fly back but with added objectives that accomplish what you say with out the wait for build up that you mentions. When lauri talks about them she mentions their timing and variations of methods depending on what you want to accomplish the same as michael bush does on his explanation of a cut down split. Go to dave cushmans site and you can find more variations based on what you are using it to try and accomplish. It is still a fly back split if your hive has swarmed and you have no queen to leave at the old site and have to leave a queen cell instead. The basics are that you are moving most of the hive but leaving a collection box at the old site for the flying bees to fly back to. I agree that the general understanding would be just as grozzies last sentence says.
But if modified, it would not change what you are doing and would just be modified for a different outcome using the general mechanize with a tweak.but, general gist is the same, move the brood, leave the queen and foragers will fly back to the original stand,
The principal purpose of words is to communicate. I occasionally wax poetic, making words for their sounds and sometimes hidden or double meanings, as entertainment. But no matter how poetic "fly-back" and "cut-down" may be, the words are intended to communicate meaning. I come down on msl's side here and must fully disagree with Saltybee's title. The two splits are quite different in purpose and result. One results in drawn wax and brood from reverted foragers in the home-located piece, and in multiple well-fed queen cells in the other, perfect material for multiple subsequent splits. This is the fly-back version. The cut-down version (as I understand it) moves the queen and most open brood away, leaving the foragers with the resource-heavy original hive in the original location, and is targeted at a strong foraging force. With little open brood to start queens, they are dominantly a nectar gathering force.
As msl writes, the purpose and result are very different. The fly-back as I understand it does nothing to enhance short-term honey production, and the cut-down does not produce much in the way of newly drawn brood comb. I am expecting to do some fly-back splits very soon, in an effort to get more late-season comb drawn and make some queen cells for mid-summer increase.
"I thought I made a mistake once, but I was wrong." (heard often from the late David Sebree) Still making them, myself
A quote from michael bush's web site.
I agree that a fly-back split is different then a cut-down split but leave open that the variation of difference is still based on what you want to accomplish.Concepts of a cut down: The concepts of a cut down are that you free up bees to forage because they have no brood to care for, and you crowd the bees up into the supers to maximize them drawing comb and foraging. This is especially useful for comb honey production and more so for cassette comb honey production, but will produce more honey regardless of the kind of honey you wish to produce.
This is very timing critical. It should be done shortly before the main honey flow. The purpose is to maximize the foraging population while minimizing swarming and crowding the bees into the supers.. There are variations on this, but basically the idea is to put almost all the open brood, honey and pollen and the queen in a new hive while leaving all the capped brood, some of the honey and a frame of eggs with the old hive with less brood boxes and more supers. The new hive won't swarm because it doesn't have a workforce (which all returns to the old hive). The old hive won't swarm because it doesn't have a queen or any open brood. It will take at least six weeks or more for them to raise a queen and get a decent brood nest going. Meantime, you still get a lot of production (probably a lot MORE production) from the old hive because they are not busy caring for brood. You get the old hive requeened and you get a split. Another variation is to leave the queen with the old hive and take ALL the open brood out. They won't swarm right away because the open brood is gone.
Is it a variation of a cut down split to leave the queen and remove all open brood? It is said here that a flyback is done to draw comb and not produce honey. It is a variation if in the make up of the fly back split to give them drawn comb and more capped brood then two frames and put a super of drawn comb on. Will the foragers not forage and store honey and make excess and it still be a flyback split? Or if you put two empty nucs in the old hive spot and let the bees flying back to those nucs divide up like on cusmans site, does that make it not a flyback split. The concept is the same and you are changing the resources of the make up to accomplish a different out come. You are still separating the bees by age and job. When was the rule made that it had to be two frames of brood and a queen left in an empty box to be called a flyback split.
If I was explaining a flyback split to some one, I would start there but then would add what is needed to accomplish what was wanting to be done with it.
What if you wanted to have a cell builder for queen cells and you moved the hive but left most of the open brood and the queen and used the part of the moved hive as a cell builder for grafting, would not the concept be the same that the old bees would fly back to the old location and still be a split different then before you touched it. I would still call that a flyback that you are using the part you moved for a wanted outcome.
Is it the concept of moving some young but keeping the old bees where they were and you not having to physically move them cause they fly back on their own the thing that makes it a flyback ? That and the fact that you are left with a viable hive in the old location?
What do we call these other things we want to accomplish if they have to have a separate name?
I do agree that a cut down split is enough different that it may not be a flyback split but don't agree that the purpose of a flyback split has to be to get drawn comb or make queen cells with the other part. You may just want to add a queen to the other part and feed. The flyback does not have to be pigeon holed to it is only a flyback if you leave the exact resources that are arbitrary to only accomplish one outcome.
If you do one and want to leave three combs and give them drawn comb. That would be ok too.
Well I'm glad I did not use the words nuc or mini-nuc.
Will stick with my meaning, well, because it is mine. I do not think a name for a method needs to include the goal. Setting variations aside, a flyback is simply using the traits of the bee to assist your goal rather than fighting the natural. That and I personally do not like the name "cut-down". Plus, a little joke of nothing new under the sun.
Understanding the goal and the method that best serves that goal in a particular situation is a necessity when addressing a particular post. I feel no need here, have no quarrel with those that are more specific in their nomenclature and provided their detailed views and reasons.
It is not true that you cannot teach an old dog new tricks.
They can learn them, they just can't do them.
"fly back" as a concept is part of what a "cutdown" does, but it is not the only concept. The primary concept is the "cutdown". In other words you make the original hive much smaller, forcing the bees up into the supers. The "fly back" part maximizes the population at the old location, which is helpful to a cutdown. But a true cutdown is more complex.
I am not sure what the method I used is called, but all I did was put the queen in a new hive with empty frames and left it in the original spot and fed them. Alsl the field workers came back, they quickly built up comb and the old queen began laying like crazy. I relocated the original hive. This seemed to have stave off swarming, got a new queen and two strong colonies.