Only 1 hive made it through Winter but was gangbusters in early Spring.
Found they had swarmed (less bee, 8 open queen cells) a couple of weeks ago. No new queen, no laying. waited...
Yesterday installed 3 new packages with success (hopefully) but found that the old hive had only laying workers but TONS of honey/pollen.
Should I try to re-queen with no local supplier (they've been queenless for weeks already) or should I try to combine them with one of the other hives?
If I combine then, is it too early to use the "shake-out" method and empty the hive a ways away to let some of them fly back to the other newly installed hive?
This is my first year installing packages and I would rather lose the one old hive then disrupt the establishment of the new packages.
i had the same problem. i would combine them. i'd use the newspaper method. it's easier and you'll save more bees.
I agree with kathyp. I tried to requeen a queenless hive. Never worked, waste of time. I shook them out and took the equipment away. They will boost your other hives up. Freeze that drone comb to kill any mites. Then you can give your new hives some of that valuable drawn comb from the shakeout.
Good Luck. If you REALLY needed it, I could be persuaded to sell you a 1 year old Queen, with bees and brood. ;)
Thanks guys. I would have forgotten to freeze the drone comb (absent minded beekeeper).
I think that I'll still shake them out. It is a pain and will loose more bees, but I 've heard tell that the laying workers or other house bees might not take too well to the queen that they're beeing combined with. The newspaper method woud probably work fine, but the three other hives that I have just got installed yesterday so I'd like to disturb them as little as possible.
Well, time to annoy som bees. See ya!
It takes a couple of weeks from when they swarmed before the new virgin is mated and laying. I would NOT assume they are queenless until three weeks have passed. Meanwhile good insurance is a frame of young brood and eggs so they can make one if they are, indeed, queenless, which I doubt.