I'm glad to see this subject brought up.
 
I've been thinking a lot on this matter and corresponding with some
breeders about this off-list.  I've also been planning to bring more
on this question to the list shortly, but have been too busy to
organise a detailed post.
 
>         It all depends on how intensively you want to keep bees. Some
> people like a "natural" let alone system, while others strive to maximize
> production.
 
Good point - maximizing production doesn't necessarily mean
maximizing profit.
 
> I don't think there is any question that a young queen can
> lay more than an old one, nor is there a question as to increased honey
> production- there have been plenty of studies on this. The Israelis
> have even published a paper showing that there is a production advantage
> with very young (< 1 yr. old) queens. Our experience agrees with this
> paper but I have no data.
 
This will depend on the timing and duration of the flows.  Large
populations can be a benefit if timed right, but can eat you out of
house and home if they occur at the wrong time.
 
>         Regarding the idea of making splits and allowing the nuc to raise
> their own queen. Queens raised from emergency cells can be inferior. It
> would be better to use a nuc with q-cells produced under the swarming
> instinct. How ever even this practice is less productive than introducing
> a laying queen. Usually nucs made for increase are started prior to the
> honey flow. The advantage of an additional 2.5-3 weeks of egg production
> easily offsets the price of a laying queen.
 
Agreed as far as emergency cells is concerned.
 
However, I wonder about the advantage of a laying queen over
installing *ripe* cells on the same visit that the split is made.
 
Assuming it takes about a week to introduce and get a laying queen
going, and it takes normally 11 days for a ripe cell placed in a
freshly split colony (with a protector) to emerge, mate, and lay
some eggs (occasionally up to 21 in bad weather), there would seem
to be less difference than most people think.
 
And seeing as how in bad weather a mated queen will often stop laying
for a few days, the difference narrows even more.
 
Considering the relative cost of cells and mated queens and the
amount of time and difficulty involved in installing one compared to
the other, and also looking at the comparative success rate, I
wonder how much difference there should be?
 
>  The difference here in New
> York is that a nuc started with a q-cell will make little or no honey
> till the fall flow (sept.), a nuc (4-5 fr.) made with a laying queen
> usually makes 1-2 shallows of summer honey and a normal fall crop. We
> make hundreds of nucs each year and have consistantly observed this.
 
Observations certainly carry more weight than theory, so this is
interesting;  I wonder what accounts for these observable
differences?  I gather the cells you are using as comparison are not
ripe at time of splitting?
 
>         I am new to this list so most of you do not know me. My wife
> Carole and I keep about 700 colonies in Western New York and have been
> breeding for tracheal mite resistance since '92.
 
Glad to have you aboard, and appreciate your thoughful post.  Hope to
hear more of your thoughts here.
 
Regards
 
Allen
 
W. Allen Dick, Beekeeper                                         VE6CFK
RR#1, Swalwell, Alberta  Canada T0M 1Y0  Internet:[log in to unmask]
Honey. Bees, Art, & Futures <http://www.cuug.ab.ca:8001/~dicka>