(Continued from July Number, page 11.)
In early spring, or at any time desirable, proceed to stimulate a selected colony with liquid feed. “Warm syrup or strained honey, is the best for the purpose;” placing alternately empty combs or combs full of brood, from other hives, until your hive is full; or by the removal of one or more colonies, on each side of the selected one, the worker bees from one or more hives, can be thrown into the selected hive, and so stimulate the swarming fever or impulse. Proceed now as recommended in the July number, page 11, when the bees will commence building queen cells. The bee-keeper will thus secure from ten to sixty queen cells per week. During my experiments, each weekly robbing only stimulated the bees to greater exertions to secure a queen. Proceed thus until the desired number of queen cells are secured, or the bees swarm. If they should swarm before a sufficient numberof queen cell’s are secured, and it is desirable to still breed from the same queen, secure her and introduce her to a colony that has not swarmed, and proceed as before. Or, better still, introduce her to a colony making preparations to swarm. Before introducing her, destroy all queen cells that have eggs or larva in them; then cell building will proceed as before. A swarm under the swarming impulse will communicate it to a strange queen introduced to them; or a queen under the swarming impulse, “and not satisfied,” will communicate it to any populous colony to which she may be introduced.
John M. Price.
Buffalo Grove, Iowa.
[For the American Bee Journal.]
We are all more or less disposed to regard our own ideas as indisputable.
Mr. Quinby for example, praises his new hive, and his queen yard. I have experimented with both, and both are now in my barn, waiting to be split up for kindling wood.
Mr. John M. Price, in the July number of the Bee Journal, condemns all artificially raised queens. Butrassurez vous, friend queen-breeders, I come to prove to friend Price, that he has misconceived the reason of his bad luck in raising artificial queens.
When I commenced to introduce Italian bees in my apiary, six years ago, I received from one of our best queen-breeders a very nice looking queen. She was very yellow from the waist to the tip of the abdomen. Well, I raised a number of queens to get drones, and next season I raised some more, from the same queen, to replace the misallied queens. But lo, one-fourth of my young queens were either crippled, or drone laying, or laying non-hatching eggs. Yet these queens were as yellow as their mother, and it seemed as if the brighter they looked, the poorer they were.
Then my first imported queens came. They were not yellow, but dark. The first rings of the abdomen were leather-colored, the last were entirely black or nearly so. I wrote to Dr. Blumhof, reproaching him for having sent me so dark queens. He replied that all the healthier queens in Italy are dark, and that it was well ascertained there, that the light-colored queens were not so good as the dark. The light-colored queens, added the Doctor, seem to have the chlorosis. Prof. Mona told the same thing to Mr. A. Grimm, when he was in Italy. SeeAmerican Bee Journal, vol. III. From this we can guess that the selecting of the brightest yellow queens for breeders, is one of the causes of the failure of the queens raised. But in-and-in breeding is another, and according to my experience, a main cause of weakness.
As soon as my first imported queens were on hand, I commenced raising queens from them, and from that time forward I raised artificial queens every year from newly imported queens. Those queens mate with drones from queens of the preceding year’s importation, and so on. I do not care for the color of these queens, but not one of them is crippled or proves to be a poor layer.
My five best stocks this year, all have artificial queens. Three of these queens are with swarms of last year. I hived them in one of friend Price’s hives. These swarms are better than the three original stocks they came from, though these latter have raised natural queens in the height of the swarming season, as friend Price prefers they should. The five stocks referred to gave me from seventy to one hundred pounds each, of box honey. I suppose I should be thought veryexigeantif I were not content with such results, in so dry a season as this.
Why does friend Price imagine that artificially raised queens are not so good as natural ones? Probably, because the bees, in order to obtain queens sooner, chose grubs already several days old, instead of selecting newly laid eggs, from which to raise queens. I have watched that very closely, and could see no appreciable difference. A stock rendered queenless will raise queens maturing at different periods, some hatching in from nine to twelve or fourteen days, and sometimes not till sixteen days after. If the above theory were correct, the earlier hatching queens should be the poorer, for they come from grubs three or four days old. Yet such is not the case—those queens are as good as any.
If that theory proved to be true, it would still be an easy matter to prevent the evil results apprehended. We could destroy the two or three first-capped queen cells; or force the bees to raise queens from the egg, by a method far more easy than friend Price’s. Insert in your chosen stock a frame, containing empty worker comb, placing it between two frames containing brood. In three days, if the bees find honey in the fields, the cells of the worker comb will be supplied with eggs. Then remove the queen and all the brood combs, except the one containing the eggs. The bees will thus have eggs only from which to raise queens, andallyour young queens will necessarily be startedab ovo. I guess this method is as good as, and more simple than, that of friend Price.
I am not a queen-breeder. That business does not suit me, for it is a source of too much vexation. I have repeatedly imported queens, but I lost money and suffered so much in that business, that I think my sufferings will pay for all my sins in the other world. I am thus altogether disinterested in this matter of breeding queens.
On this topic, my advice to apiarians is—
1st. Do not look for yellow queens, for they are not as good as dark ones.
2d. Take care to avoid too close in-and-in breeding.
Let us also remark, that many bee-keepers find that the half-blood Italian bees, are better than the pure ones. Why? Simply because the in-and-in breeding the race of their queens was subject to for some generations, was broken by the alliance with black drones. But the alliance of the Italian queens with Italian drones remotely bred, would doubtless give as goodprogeny, while preserving the purity of the stock.
Let us remark also, that Nature in ordering for the queens the wedding flight, obviously had in view the avoidance of in-and-in breeding.
3d. Choose the colony having the purest queen, and the most fertile, from which to provide the queens cells, and distribute in small nuclei when sealed. No matter if the queen is dark. In good seasons the queens raised in small nuclei are as good as those raised in full stocks.
Ch. Dadant.
Hamilton, Ills., July 24, 1870.
[For the American Bee Journal.]
In the July No. of the Journal. Mr. John M. Price contributed an article on “Natural, Hardy and Prolific Queens,” which was no doubt his conviction of the truth of the matter at the time; but as it does not agree with my experience, I will give the other side of the question.
If I understand his theory, it is that queens reared in stocks deprived of their queen when not under the “swarming impulse,” are smaller, less prolific and shorter lived than what are termednatural queens. I am fully aware that Mr. Price does not stand alone on said theory, and yet I believe it to be an error.
For the sake of distinguishing, we will state that queens bred in full stocks from which the mother queen led forth a swarm, or queens which werestartedwhile the old queen remained in the hive, arenaturalqueens, and all othersartificial. I have both kinds in my apiary, and have had for several years, and can see no difference in their size, beauty, fertility or longevity. I have repeatedly kept artificial queens until they were three years old, and had one very prolific queen which died in March last, being then three years and nine months old. I left her as an experiment, to see what age she would attain; but my practice is to remove queens in their second or third year. Of course a few die before they are two years old, for they are not exempt from the ills that bee “flesh is heir to.” But that four or five in succession should pass off the stage of action in a single stock in one season, is something before unheard of. I do not know what effect brother P.’s revolvable, reversible, double-cased hivemighthave upon the tender life of a young queen; but it seems to have been most disastrous, for we have no such work here in the old Keystone State.
It is a matter of very great importance in the success of an apiary, that our stocks are supplied with theright kindof queens, and in order to effect this desirable result, something more is necessary to a full understanding of the subject, than simply to know that bees, when deprived of their queen, will attempt to supply her place. I find little difficulty in rearingfinequeens, with the following conditions: 1st. a suitable queen mother; 2d. fair weather and good pasturage; 3d. a full stock, in which honey and pollen are abundant (not a nucleus where starvation stares them in the face). It is a settled point with me, that the production of queens is a matter wholly under the control of the worker bees; and we lack evidence that a queeneverlays an egg in a royal cell. If the bee is guided by instinctalone, and the production of a queen depended on the depositing of apeculiaregg by the queen in a royal cell (an egg, differing from the worker or drone eggs), it would follow that, on the loss or removal of the queen when no such eggs existed in the hive, no young queens could be produced.
Small queens may be produced in nuclei where the requisite food is limited, and where from want of bees the larva is exposed to repeated changes of temperature, which is detrimental. When reared in full stocks in times of great scarcity, nearly the same results follow.
There is another important point, namely theproper agefor the mother bee. In breeding all our domestic animals, regard is always had (and wisely we think) to the age of the parents. It may be thought that the life of the bee is so short that it would allow but little latitude in this direction; but it should not be forgotten that the queen usually lives three and sometimes four years, during which time there is doubtless a period of fertility and hardiness, or power of endurance, not common to the whole of her life. Just what that period is, I am not prepared to say; but the rapid advancement of apiarian science will doubtless solve the problem. I am satisfied, however, that queens bred fromyoungqueens are not equal, in several desirable points, to those bred from mothers a year old. In experimenting with black bees, I became satisfied on this point several years ago. I have never known ayoungblack queen, after becoming fertile, to lead out a swarm, no matter how populous the stock might be; and indeed apiarians have considered it the best method of preventing swarming, in order to secure surplus honey, to remove the old queen and install one of the current year. (It is ahead of Quinby’s queen yard). We reason from this, that their instinct teaches them that they areunfitfor queen mothers. This would not, perhaps, hold good in the high temperature of southern latitudes, which tends to the earlier maturity of all animal life. With the Italian bees it is somewhat different, for young queens produce drone eggs, and they do sometimes lead out swarms, yet they are not so liable to do so as older queens.
Mr. Aaron Benedict tells us he produced six generations of queens in a single season, but does not give us the result, further than that he thought he improved his bees in color.
I am not surprised that the men who raise queens from March to October, have cheap queens and sell them by the hundred. But I am one to say that no genuine lover of our pets who duly considers consequences, would proceed thus. And now, Mr. Editor, I wish to say in conclusion, that of my 125 queens about one-fourth arenaturaland the balance artificial queens, and if Mr. Price, or “any other man” will, upon examination, decide correctly, by size or fertility (amount of brood), which are of the former and which of the latter class, he maypick out ten as large and yellow queens as heever saw, and I will make him a present of the same, and will warrant that, if artificial, they shall be as productive as he wishes them.
NB.—I have no cheap queens for sale.
Willard J. Davis.
Youngsville, Pa., Aug. 8, 1870.
[For the American Bee Journal.]
Dear Bee Journal:—That flood of honey that was driving us so, when we last wrote you, has ceased, and we are having a resting spell.
About the 18th of July the basswood failed, and we were obliged to desist, mostly on account of the neighbors’ black bees desperately attempting to rob our hives when we opened them. In fact, the upper stories of our Langstroth hives are all full now, but before we can empty two hives the black bees are so thick as to threaten demoralization to our whole apiary. Though the Italians will sometimes sting a pint of them to death around a single hive, not an Italian can be found among the slain.
In spite of all this, to which we have repeatedly called the attention of others, many are busy in accusing the Italians of driving the innocent common bees out of the land. One neighbor in particular, who cannot afford to take the Bee Journal, has been very busy in telling how our Italians have taken all his surplus honey, and had he not usedgreatcare, they would have carried off all his honey, hives, bees and all.
It was in this way. He came to us one day, quite excited, saying that our Italians were robbing his bees at a great rate—even some new swarms in movable frame hives that we had let him have, (not to mention several hours’ verbal instruction and the attempt to answer all questions pertaining to bee-culture at once).
“But that is impossible,” said we.
“Can’t you believe me when I tell you so?” inquired he, angrily.
“We will go with you and see.”
On the way the conversation was resumed, thus:
“You are sure you left no hives open, nor anything sweet around?”
“Nothing of the kind.”
“When did the robbing commence?”
“In the morning.”
“Have you taken off your surplus honey yet?”
“Took it off this morning.”
“Where is it,” stopping in our walk.
“In the orchard, on a table.”
“Covered up?”
“No, I left it open to let the bees go out. The boxes were full of them, and I could not get them out.”
“Are they there now?”
“Yes.”
“Now, C——, why in th—— did you not do as we were very careful to tell you, and put the honey in a large box with a white cloth spread over it, to be turned over every hour or two?”
“Well, it was too much trouble, and I did not suppose it would make much difference.”
Of course we found boxes that had held about forty pounds, empty, and oh, such music! TherewereItalians there too, but we estimated nine-tenths black bees to one-tenth yellow-banded ones. Without giving the particulars, we may say that we have since heard that our bees had robbed him of sixty, and then eighty pounds, and we don’t know what it will amount to in the end.
The whole quantity of honey taken out by us this season, is now six thousand one hundred and sixty-two (6,162) pounds. Of this we sold over two thousand (2,000) pounds, in June and July, for thirty cents per pound, jars and all. The jars do not cost us as much, in the end, as boxes.
How does that figure, in comparison with box honey?
Besides this, our forty-six (46) colonies have been increased to sixty-four (64); and as the upper frames are all full, and we have more bees than the hives will hold, we propose to raise queens this fall and make swarms of the upper stories, perhaps eighteen (18) more.
How many of our co-workers in the melextractor field have had trouble with heavy new combs breaking down in hot weather? Well, listen to our plan of putting them back. Throw away your splints, wires, strings, &c., and simply lay all the pieces of comb, full of honey or not, on a board the size of your frame; put the frame over it in place, and then set the whole in the upper part of some hive over night where the bees have access. In the morning turn the whole up in proper position, and slide your board away, and as soon as the bees have repaired that side too, it is ready for the melextractor.
Mr. Price says Novice’s feeder will not answer for thin syrup. We are afraid he has not tried one. Use new strong cloth, and there is no trouble at all in feeding maple sap or even pure water.
Why is it that we can never have any success in trying to build up a stock by feeding? For instance—We commenced putting the cappings, after being drained, strainer utensils, &c., in the top of a hive to be “licked off.” As the hive was handy, we kept them busy, and one other, most of the time. Do you suppose it built them up? Not at all! While other stocks were bringing home from six to eight pounds a day, and building comb rapidly, these two could not “lick up” half that; and, further, would build no comb at all until we stopped their “rations” and saved our “trash” until the honey season was over.
Novice.
August 9, 1870.
Colonies that are overstocked with honey in August, should have some of it removed, either by the honey extractor or by sliding off the caps and laying the combs on a dish, to allow the honey to drain out of the cells of the sides alternately. When thus partially emptied, the comb should be returned to the hive.
[For the American Bee Journal.]
Mr. Editor:—I think the time has fully come when your correspondent “Novice”—that notable personage of whom we have so often read, and whose plans and acts have so often fired our brain with new resolutions and determinations to at leasttryto “go and do likewise”—should, hereafter and evermore, drop that simple title, and sign himselfAdept,Expert, or some other name a little more suggestive of the manner in which he seems to “swing things” of late.
Five thousand(5,000) pounds of clover honey, in about one month, from forty-six (46) colonies of bees! That will do! Let’s all go west. No use in trying to raise honey here any longer!2
Why, Mr. Editor, in our locality this is simply impossible. That amount of honey is not to be had within the flight of our bees. Still, we seem to have flowers enough. Is the country overstocked? There are probably not more than 150 swarms, our own included, within a circle of one mile from our place. All of our pastures seem covered with white clover in its season; and it lasted, in many places, this season, until buckwheat came into bloom. The old raspberry is said to be an excellent honey producing plant, and its cultivation for bee pasturage is often recommended. There are hundreds of acres of it, within the flight of our bees, already covered with this plant. Basswood grows wild here, to some extent; and probably there are one hundred trees near enough to be visited by our bees. Buckwheat is also grown considerably—say fifty acres, this season, within easy reach. Aside from this, there are many scattering flowers in bloom at different times, from which honey can be extracted. And yet, of late, it is not one year in five that surplus honey is obtained from any other source than buckwheat.
I have this season increased our number of colonies from thirteen to twenty-nine, wholly by artificial swarming; but shall expect no surplus of any consequence.
While walking through a pasture field one day this season, where bees seemed to be working freely upon white clover, I undertook the job of watching a bee, in order to ascertain how many clover heads were visited by her while collecting one load of honey. Selecting a bee that looked quite empty and had no pollen on her legs, I commenced the count. How long she had already been there, I, of course, did not know, but I kept my eye upon her until she left thefive hundred and eighty-secondclover head. Then she flew over some weeds, and I lost sight of her. Whether she then left for home, or not, I do not know. The time occupied by her in making this number of visits, was just one hour. Now, I do not think that this shows a very bountiful yield of honey, even though plenty of flowers exist. This bee visited the same clover head several times, while I was watching her.
If it was not for our fall pasturage of buckwheat, as slim as it is, bee-keeping would, in this section, be “played out,” as more honey is usually obtained from this, than fromall other sources combined. It may be different in the western and southern parts of the State; but, so far as I am acquainted, I certainly think Pennsylvania is not the best place in the world for producing honey.
I. F. Tillinghast.
Factoryville, Pa., Aug. 10, 1870.
[For the American Bee Journal.]
I object to a low and flat shape of hive, for reasons which I shall assign. I will first state, however, that a hive of bees without provision for the retention of animal heat, is as helpless as a new born babe without raiment. Take, as an example, a hive twelve inches square, containing an oblong square perpendicular, and the frames to suit in size and shape. Your combs say eighteen inches in depth perpendicular, and twelve inches wide. The bees, in order to hatch brood, as the weather becomes warm in the spring, will cluster at the larva end of said combs, and keep up the temperature from bottom to top, because of two combined reasons, the combs being the long way perpendicular, and the natural tendency of heat being to rise, it ascends throughout the entire length of the combs, and thus the proper temperature is attained throughout the hive. It is a settled principle too, that a given quantity or number of bees can produce animal heat only sufficient in amount to rarify the air in a given space to a given temperature. Take, for example, a low flat hive, with combs say eighteen inches long horizontal, and nine inches deep, the hive being twelve inches wide, the same as the other. Now remember the principle just before stated. The bees will collect at the front end of the comb, and the animal heat, as generated, will ascend the same as along the combs in the other hive, which are eighteen inches deep; whereas these are only twelve inches deep. Is it not obvious that here one-third of every comb towards its rear end is entirely lost to the bees, so far as the early production of brood is concerned, because of the shape of thecombs and the natural tendency of the heat generated to ascend? If the bees (being the same in number in both hives,) were spread out at the bottom of the combs in the last mentioned hive, the full size of the hive, the cluster would be twelve inches wide and eighteen inches horizontal. Then, on the principle that a given number of bees can generate only a certain degree of heat in a given space, they would fail to bring about the proper temperature in any part of the hive; and the result would be that they could not produce any brood. But allow them (as they will) to contract the size of their cluster, and you find that there is nearly one-third of each comb not used by them in the production of brood. Hence we find in the communications of bee-keepers such remarks as these—“My bees swarmed out of my common box and log gums earlier than they did out of my patent hives.” But universally we find in such cases that their patent hives are low and flat in shape. We have used such hives, and know by experience the truth whereof we speak; and, fearless of successful contradiction, we proclaim that the time is not far distant when the practical bee-keepers will adopt the shape of from a square to an oblong perpendicular, the oblong being preferable. We once were of those who thought there could be no difference in the mere shape of a hive, but justice to the true principles of bee-keeping compelled a change of opinion.
There is still another reason why bees should have a hive long up and down. In cases of long continued extreme cold weather, the bees cannot move in a lateral direction to obtain food. But the warmth of the bees will aid them in obtaining it from above, from the fact that their warmth will ascend and keep the frost melted at a greater distance from the bees above them, than on the sides. And, further, when spring came, or in the month of April, my bees almost always became nearly extinct in the low flat form of hive.
Now, in conclusion, let me add some remarks onfeeding. There is a principle in the feeding of bees that is truly astonishing in its effects. They may be fed in sufficient quantity to cause them to fill all the empty cells and thereby work a complete destruction of the colony, if the owner fails to remove some of the honey out of their way. Or they may be fed in such proportions that the prosperity and increase of the hive will be somewhat like the rolling of a snow-ball—the longer and further it rolls, the greater its magnitude becomes. The queen has the ability to deposit from 2,000 to 3,000 eggs every day in the height of the breeding season; and if bees are then excited by finding liberal supplies of honey in the flowers, yet not in such abundance as to cause them to fill the hive to overflowing, brooding and rearing young bees will proceed most rapidly. But if there is little honey or none yielded by the flowers, and the bees remain idle for some length of time, the queen will cease depositing eggs; while on the other hand, if the bees rapidly fill nearly all the cells with honey, the queen must necessarily cease laying, for want of room to deposit eggs.
Bees seem to have three periods of probation. The first twenty-one days of their existence are passed in the cell; the next eighteen or twenty one days they spend in the hive mainly, nursing brood exclusively, except when engaged at times in building or repairing comb; the next period is devoted to assiduous outdoor labor, and varies from forty to fifty days, in the busy season of the year.
Early and continued stimulation to activity, by feeding the bees, causes the colony to become strong in numbers. If therefore we wish for handsome profits from the labors of the bees, we must have them in great numbers, at all times in the hive. If we expect great quantities of honey from weak colonies, we are doomed to disappointment. In almost every locality there is a time, during the spring or summer, when bees cannot gather nectar from the flowers. Such spells are sometimes prolonged for months; and in some years, in Iowa, in the month of June, the writer has known colonies to starve to death. In such times of scarcity, the bee-keeper should always be on the alert, and begin feeding only in sufficient quantity to produce activity in the hive. It frequently occurs that bees use up all the unsealed honey in the hive, and almost stop brooding. They appear to be reluctant to open their sealed honey. It seems that there is a principle at this point which we have not been able to grasp yet. I think that as a rule, if bees run out of unsealed honey in the spring months, the keeper should, from time to time, shave off the capping of some of the full cells. This, I think, would answer the same purpose as feeding, by exciting the bees to activity. It should be practiced in all cases where there is plenty of sealed honey in the hive, in the forepart of the season; and feeding only to a limited and small extent, when the bees have used up their unsealed supply. In fact, feeding should never be resorted to, while the hive contains plenty of sealed honey. Better uncap some of it.
It is not by any means desirable to have a hive in the height of the breeding season, with the cells so stored with honey that the queen is unable to deposit eggs to the full extent of her powers. Better extract some honey, even if you have to return it again by feeding as the season advances, thus keeping up the activity of the colony.
There are many attempts to systematize bee-keeping. Some ideas communicated through the Journal prove highly serviceable. Others drop without effect, perhaps, except that they set bee-keepers to thinking, and sometimes to experimenting, which is useful, too, if it be not indulged in at too great cost.
J. W. Seay
Monroe, Iowa.
Practical gardeners may find the management of bees, for their employers, quite a lucrative part of their profession.
When a colony of bees has become hopelessly queenless, then, moth or no moth, its destruction is certain.—Langstroth.
“Bees work for man, and yet they never bruiseTheir master’s flower, but leave it, having done,As fair as ever and as fit for use.”—Herbert.
“Bees work for man, and yet they never bruiseTheir master’s flower, but leave it, having done,As fair as ever and as fit for use.”—Herbert.
[For the American Bee Journal.]
Some weeks since, in company with a friend, armed with a pint of strained honey and a bee-box, we started for the edge of the cedars, distant from my apiary, in a direct line, not less than 2½ miles, where we found bees foraging. We boxed and coursed many, but found none that did not belong to my apiary. It was a very warm day, and being wearied, without pushing out a mile or two further, we returned home, to renew our hunt in the fall.
All the trees I ever saw, having bees in them (and I have seen many) had the entrance hole or crack on the south or southeast side.
Native queens of colonies five miles distant from Italian stocks, in two instances that I know of, mated with Italian drones. And in this connection, speaking of distances, I will mention the reception through the mail of two Italian queens, accompanied by about one dozen workers each, from Wenham, Massachusetts. Look on the map, and you will see it is a long distance from here.
Very little surplus honey has been stored here this season, on account of continuous rains during the spring and summer. Late swarms, not fed, havegone up. I have endeavored to keep my bees breeding, giving them repeated small quantities of honey, and have succeeded in doing so; and buckwheat being now in bloom, I hope to obtain a dividend for my outlay and trouble, leaving enough for the worthy laborers when nature shrouds herself in snow.
This is a great country to raise bees in, and I would think more of them if they would swarm less and store more honey. But swarm they will, and they cannot be kept from it. Breaking up an old hen from sitting when she has fairly made up her mind to sit, is an easy job compared to keeping bees from swarming in this section. Swarming commences in Middle Tennessee about the 20th of April, and becomes general about the 5th of May. These new swarms often cast a swarm in thirty days. Swarming is also frequent in August if the season be a good one. Our honey harvest is divided in two seasons—the spring, embracing April and May; and the fall, embracing August and September. Very little honey is stored outside those two dates, except perhaps in the month of March, if the spring is forward and fruit trees come in bloom; and in the month of October, if we have a favorable fall and frost is delayed. There has been no fall of honey dew this year.
Friend Novice’s allusion to air castles in his communication in the Bee Journal for August,struck our flint. We read his communication to our better half. “Don’t believe a word of it! Do you think that’s so?” Exclaimed she. “I do. I have been following that Novice in print some time, and always found him truthful.” Here’s what’s the matter. A spruce old aunt was at our house a few days since, and something was said about new dresses and the fall styles, when our better half broke loose with—“Don’t expect to have anything new this year. Everything we’ve made this year has been spent for bee-gums and paints; and now the upstairs is stored so full, there’s no place for old carpets and lumber. There’s never been any money in that here, yet, and I don’t believe there ever will be,” &c., &c.
H.
Murfreesboro, Tenn., Aug. 8, 1870.
[For the American Bee Journal.]
Mr. Editor:—I see in the July number of the Bee Journal, page 9, that Mr. C. Rogers is out on “the shallow Langstroth Hive.” Mr. R. andmy old friendGallup are the only persons that I now recollect of, who complain of the shallow form of hive, when wintered in a house or cellar. Mr. Rogers says it is not a “good” hive “for the six or eight weeks between the winter and warm weather,” and leaves it thus, without telling us why it is not. For my part, I cannot see what the shape of the hive has to do with the loss of bees in early spring. All bee-keepers say that the bleak winds at that season destroy a great many bees, regardless of the kind of hive they may have been in. All the proof Mr. Rogers gives that this form of hive is bad in early spring is, that “he has sometimesthoughtthat his hives containedlessbees after being out a month or two, than when first put out.” Well, suppose it is so, is that the fault of the hive? Every experienced bee-keeper knows that when bees in any form of hive are taken from their winter quarters, there is a sudden decrease in numbers, from the simple fact that many of them are old and ready to die at any hour from sheer old age; but having been shut up all winter they live longer than they would in the working season. Then, when taken from their winter quarters and allowed to issue in the open air, many of them never return. But is this the fault of the hive? My experience is that any form of hive, when wintered in a cellar, will lose bees very rapidly when first set out; much more so than a colony that has been wintered on its summer stand. I can account for this in no other way, than that many of the bees have lived to a good old age, and are ready to die soon; and a sudden change in the weather being hard on them any how, weakens them in numbers very fast.
The Langstroth hive could be made deeper very easily without Mr. R.’s patchwork; but would it answer the purpose as well? I have found no other hive from which I can get the same results, in surplus honey, as from the “shallow” Langstroth. Last summer I tried the experiment with a hive with only six inches depth of comb, adding one more frame (eleveninstead often.) The result was that I got some six pounds more honey from that hive, than I did from the common Langstroth hive, sitting within four feet of it and the two colonies as near alike in numbers as I could get them. Without doubt the shallow form of hive is best for surplus honey.
Now a few words about wintering bees in the Langstroth hive. Everything considered, I think bees do somewhat better when wintered in acellar, provided they be arranged just right. But I have wintered bees very successfully in the Langstroth hive, on their summer stands, in northern Illinois and eastern Indiana. But young colonies that have new comb, should be protected, if wintered on their summer stands.
I hope Mr. Rogers will explain the whys and wherefores, and tell us wherein the Langstroth hive is lacking.
B. Puckett.
Winchester, Ind., July 20, 1870.
[For the American Bee Journal.]
Mr. Editor:—I send you a sample of something that seems to be troubling my bees very much. It is in small scales resembling the wing of some insect.3The bees come in with from three to five sticking to their mouths. It seems to trouble them greatly. I think I could pick up or rather scrape up a pint of it, on the bottom board of some hives.
This section of country is too much subject to extremes for bees. Last year it rained all through May and June, so that the bees could not get out to work; and they did nothing but swarm after that until September. Pollen was plenty, but honey scarce. This spring commenced well, but most of May and up to the 15th of June the weather was too cold for bees to work. Nearly all the fruit blossoms were killed by cold. Wild plums and crab apples did not bloom. We have had no rain for several weeks, and very little since last fall. Everything is parched up, leaving nothing for the bees. I am feeding nearly fifty colonies, and will have to continue doing so until we have rain and flowers begin to bloom again.
I could exchange one little farm here for fifteen hundred acres of mountain land in Pocahontas county, Virginia. Is that a good bee section?4
Too much wind here, even if the pasturage were good. My Italians are doing much better than the native bees.
I sowed the strap-leaved turnip last fall for early pasturage, but none came up this spring. Cold killed them. What kind is best to sow, or what is better? Would it do to sow ten acres in turnips, and mix Alsike clover seed with it?
I have watched nearly every movement a bee can make for the last three years, and read all the bee books I could get.
J. K. Metcalfe.
Freedom, Mo., July 5, 1870.
[For the American Bee Journal.]
Some of our readers will perhaps remember the trouble which we had last season in uncapping cells preparatory to the use of the Honey Extractor. In justice to Mr. Baldridge we will say that the knife which we received from him was found, upon trial, to work very well—much better, in fact, than we expected. Our only trouble with it, was to keep it in cutting order. Still, we find that a knife for this business does not need to be kept so extremely sharp, if it be kepthotwhile in use, by occasionally dipping it in hot water. Inshapewe think this knife about what is wanted.
Astwoknives are found very convenient, one to be heating in the water while the other is in use, we concluded to try our hand at making one and succeeded so admirably that we will give a description of it, and the manner in which it was made.
We first took an oldscythe—an article which can usually be found on every farm—and, with a cold chisel, cut a piece out of the straightest part, of such length as we wished the knife to be. This was then laid upon a block and cut lengthwise about three-fourths of an inch from the cutting edge. It was now taken and ground down smooth upon the back and ends, and the edge ground off at the ends a little in order to straighten it. It is then fitted into a suitable handle. You thus have a knife of whatever length you choose to make it, which may be ground very thin and will yet hold an edge well. The whole time occupied in making it, need not exceed an hour, provided the assistance of a second person can be had in cutting out and grinding. It will present a much neater appearance than one would think possible when commencing the job, and will I think give perfect satisfaction.
Of course the style will be governed much by the ingenuity of the maker.
Since writing, the above, we have received the August number of the Bee Journal, and in it notice the advertisement of the National Bee Hive Company, of which Mr. Baldridge is Secretary. It says—“nowrought ironknives for sale, in fact neverkeptthem, norsoldthem.Liarswill please to take the hint.” Indeed! I sincerely hope they will. Now, in justice tomyself, I must say a few more words in regard to that knife, which we have already spoken about in this communication. When we received the knife last fall, it was shown to a person whom we thought a competent judge of metal, and was unhesitatingly pronounced—well, anything butspring-steel, as it could readily be bent into almost any shape, and wouldso remain. However as its quality was not mentioned before the purchase; and as it has been found, on trial, to work well enough for all practical purposes, when rightly used, I suppose we ought not to have said anything about that part of the transaction. The difference between the “best quality of wrought iron” and the lower classes of steel is so slight that, to separate them, would be like naming the hour that sweet cider becomessour. Iron is used in three states; as crude or cast iron, assteel, and as wrought iron, the difference only depending on the relative amount of carbon with which the metal is combined—cast iron containing a larger proportion of carbon than steel, and steel more than wrought or malleable iron.
I have nothing whatever against Mr. Baldridge, this being my first dealing with him; and my only excuse for writing as I did (A. B. J., vol V., page 18,) is that, after waiting, and watching the post office, so long as I did, and finally receiving a knife—too late for use—which did not then come up to my expectations, I felt considerably out of humor, and told the whole story, when perhaps I should have keptmumand “swallowed” it all, as he had not advertised knives for sale, his reason for not being more prompt, may be that he was obliged to invent and manufacture it, after it was ordered. I have no doubt that parties ordering of him now, will receive knives that will give perfect satisfaction.
I. F. Tillinghast.
Factoryville, Pa., Aug. 5, 1870.
[For the American Bee Journal.]
On pages 34-5, Vol. VI., of the American Bee Journal, H. Nesbit states that he has tried the looking-glass theory to his satisfaction inoneinstance.
Now, Mr. Editor, I wish to say, in reply, that the glass has been tried three times, this year, to my knowledge, and three swarms of bees secured. The particulars ofonecase will be sufficient to cause most of the Journal’s readers to try the experiment, when opportunity offers, whether one that has “played” the theory “out” will try any more, or not.
An old lady was in her garden, about four o’clock one afternoon, when her attention was arrested by the hum of a swarm of bees, leaving the top of an apple-tree that stood in the garden. The superstitious notion of stopping bees by the music of the cow-bell (peculiar to a certain class) was soon put in practice, but the bees moved on tillsomebodyflashed the sun’s rays among them, by the aid of a looking-glass. Then, almost instantly, from some cause or another, the bees scattered and some even fell to the ground; but in a few minutes more, all were snugly clustered on another apple-tree, in sight of the one on which a portion of them were first discovered.
Did the queen stop to rest in this case? Perhaps Mr. Nesbit will think she was defective; or would his reply to this be as ambiguous as his language, when he says in one place that there is “no use of your trying to go away, for I will stop you with the looking-glass;” and in another breath, after he had tried and failed, says—“I was rather a sceptic before.”
Mr. Editor, he makes me think of an old Dutch lady, with whom I used to be acquainted, that knew how to bake bread and fry meat. You might read her a recipe from some agricultural or other Journal, for making something new and rich, and she would at once go about trying it, “to see if it was good.” But, in place of following the directions to the letter, she would use the ingredients in quantities that seemed handiest; and the consequence was that she would make compounds to disagree with the gustatory organs of all hands. The fault was never with the old lady, and she could always tell that it was in the recipe; but in no instance could she be induced to try her hand a second time on the same thing. Perhaps, if Mr. Nesbit will take his looking-glass to the well and invert it, and instead of looking down the well, will look into the glass, he will see differently from the way he did on the other occasion. If he will take a glass large enough (apiecewill answer the purpose; but it will depend upon how bright the sun shines, and the distance of the bees from the ground, what must be the size of the glass required,) I think he can stop a swarm in every instance.
Before quitting, I will also say that if Mr. Nesbit, or any one else will obtain the “blackest” and “knottiest” piece of wood, near the size of a quart pot, and secure it by means of a pole or otherwise, surrounded by foliage, in front of the apiary, before natural swarms issue, that by the time the fifth natural swarm is hived, the experiment will have very well paid him for his trouble with the knot.
Ignoramus.
Sawyersville, N. C., Aug. 12, 1870.
[For the American Bee Journal.]
Since the introduction of movable comb hives, numerous attempts have been made to palm off on bee-keepers worthless hives and sundry humbugs.
As with other branches of business, so with bee-culture; it has its proficients, amateurs, novices, and pretenders. Generally, it is with the two last-mentioned classes that worthless hives and various humbugs originate. The novice is often suddenly attacked with that disease known as “bee on the brain,” and ignorantly but innocently fancies he has mastered the whole science of bee-culture, and is therefore prepared to astonish the world by producing a bee hive that will supplant all its predecessors. Now, with many, to think is to act. Hence, yearly, there are introduced to the public several “best hives in the world,” which, however, prove to be either bungling attempts at an imitation of some good hive, or a worthless throwing together of timber, embracing in its construction not one scientific principle, but often many features directly opposed to the nature and wants of the bees. Their fanciful shape, novel construction, and the many advantages they are said to possess, often cause a number of them to be sold to unsuspecting bee-keepers, who are not educated in the science of bee-culture. The country is full of such worthless trash, and parties often pay more than they would require to do for really good hives, the reputation of which has been established for years—hives constructed by those well acquainted with bee-culture, and who are hence qualified to construct a hive adapted in every feature to the wants of the bee.
The other class, whom I have styled pretenders, are generally unscrupulous persons, who do not hesitate at anything by which they can bring the “dimes” to their pockets. It is with this class that “bee humbugs” generally originate. Having a slight smattering of knowledge, they make great pretensions, and tell wonderful stories about bees—what strange things they have known bees to do; how one swarm went away, because the owner quarrelled with his wife; another because a child was buried, and the owner failed to whisper it in the hive; while a third was so particular, that it would not stay in the hive, because there was a rusty nail in sight! In this way they arouse the curiosity of the uneducated bee-keeper, who is soon ready to swallow all they have to say. They then come forward with their pretensions to superior knowledge. They can do this or that with bees. They have some wonderful secrets, and for a “V” (five dollars) they can tell you how to take the bees out of a box-hive, take their honey, put them back again, and they shall be all right “in the spring.” They have also got a curious compound, a peculiar drug, with which they can charm the bees so that they will not sting, price “only fifty cents a bottle;” and the recipe to make it only another “V.” Thus the honest and unsuspecting bee-keeper is victimized, while the swindling pretender “feathers his nest.”
The following extract from a letter of inquiry, has called forth these remarks:
“During the past season, the management of bees has been taught in a secret school, and one of the things taught is the art of drawing bees from a tree a distance of two miles, even though it may not be known where they are located. As one of the students is preparing to sally out on the public, I thought I would write to you, for your opinion.”
A person possessed of such power as this would be likely to surround himself with a large number of swarms in a very short time, if he performed his operations in some neighborhoods where hundreds of swarms are kept within a circle of two miles. He would certainly be an exceedingly dangerous person to have about, unless strictly honest, as he might draw off and steal all the bees. Perhaps his secret incantations have no attractions for bees that live in a hive; and, I may say and, for bees that live in a tree! Allow me to say to my bee-keeping friends that all the bee drugs or bee charms are bee humbugs. If any person is pretending to teach or to do what is stated above, he is either a knave or a fool, perhaps both.
To say the least, all such persons should be arrested, for obtaining money under false pretences. If bee-keepers would be safe, let them take a reliable Bee Journal or agricultural paper, where they will find such impositions exposed; and in purchasing hives let them select such as the experience of years has proved to be good.
J. H. Thomas.
Brooklin, Ontario.
I never use a hive, the main apartment of which holds less than a bushel.—Langstroth.
[For the American Bee Journal.]
Mr. Editor:—There seems to be no subject connected with bee-culture so badly mixed up, as the above. One approves of a low and long form of hive and frames, and another of a short and deep form. Now I have seen and used nearly all styles in use, but never saw a frame hive but what was too deep for summer use, or too shallow for winter.
It seems to me we have been straining at a gnat and trying to swallow a camel. I think a frame in the clear, six or seven inches deep and eleven or twelve inches long is what the practical bee-keeper needs. But for the careless and indifferent, fixed top bars are too good.
Perhaps few if any have experimented with and used more different styles of hive than we have. Being a mechanic, and always having lumber and tools at hand, we have experimented too much for our own benefit. We have patented (like many others) one hive costing us $100; and have never realized a dime in return. But all right; I suppose the greenbacks are moving.
Now, Mr. Editor, I believe that the one thousand and one who are pocketing money for improvements in hives, would be just as honest and make more money, by picking up the farmer’s box-hive, putting the Langstroth frames in, and teaching people how to use them properly—selling the same on commission for Mr. Langstroth or his agents.
But we must return to the sectional hive. Has any one ever used such a hive? If so we have never heard of it. We use two sections deep in winter, and from one to four in summer. We make our case twelve inches wide, using eight frames in the brood sections, and seven in the third and fourth sections, in which we get the greatest possible amount stored, in good shape for the table or market. Mr. Thomas, or any one else who thinks he has a hive that will offer so many advantages, as the simple sectional box, with Langstroth’s frames in them, had best bring such hive out this way; and I will agree to sell them as fast as forty men can turn them out.
We have omitted to mention many little points, in the arrangement of the case and frames, such as beveling to prevent propolis, securing straight combs, &c., but will do so in a future article, if requested.
Charles Hastings.
Dowagiac, Mich.
All necessary arrangements and preparations for properly wintering bees, in any kind of hive, should be fully completed in the month of October.
Let me strongly advise the incorrigibly careless to have nothing to do with bees, either on my plan of management,or any other; for they will find both time and money almost certainly thrown away.—Langstroth.
Washington, Sept., 1870.
The remarks on queen raising, by the Rev. Mr. Briggs, in our last issue, appear to be considered by some as aimed personally at Mr. Alley, of Wenham, Mass. We did not so regard them. Mr. Briggs’ object seemed to us to be very different, and one in which queen breeders in general have quite as much interest as queen purchasers. Bee breeding, as a science, is yet in its infancy—not less so in Europe than here; but is evidently engaging the attention of the best and most experienced apiarians, and has already led to some highly interesting discussions in the German Journals and Conventions. Of these we shall, in due season, take proper notice—we give, in this number of the Journal, several communications referring to Mr. Briggs’ article, and shall probably have one from him in explanation.
👉 The March number of the American Bee Journal contained a call for a meeting of the Michigan Bee-keepers’ Association, to be held at Lansing, on the 23d and 24th of that month.—Bee-keepers from other States and the British Provinces were invited to attend that meeting, as it wasproposed then to make arrangements for holding aNational Bee-keepers’ Convention. The Association met accordingly, and it was resolved to hold aNational Conventionat Indianapolis, (Ind.) on the 11th and 12th instant, but the time was subsequently changed to the 21st and 22d of December next, as better suiting the convenience of bee-keepers. Theplacedesignated seems now, however, for some reason, to have become objectionable to certain parties who probably have “axes to grind.” They are now laboring hard to effect a change; but we presume the effort will fail, as we are assured from various quarters that the Convention will be held at Indianapolis.
A patent has recently been granted for a method of excluding bee-moths from hives by means of a long lever operated by a hen-roost. The inventor claims “a combination of a vibrating roost or perch for fowls with the slides or doors of one or more bee hives, when so constructed and arranged that the weight of the fowls upon the roost shall close the hives, and their removal from the roost shall open the doors.” How this ingenious contrivance came to be patented at this late day, we do not know; but certainly it is neither, “new” nor “useful.” The same thing was tried and abandoned many years ago, as will be seen by reference to Langstroth’s “Hive and Honey Bee,” page 263, first edition. Possibly there is some new “modification” or some novel “combination” of material (chickens included), on which the claim to a patent is based; but unfortunately, no modification or combination can ever enable him who employs this contrivance to circumvent the moths thereby.
When a colony in an apiary is found to be queenless, and has been so till all the brood has matured, it will generally be found difficult to get the bees to raise a queen from brood inserted, or even to accept and cherish a sealed queen cell. Repeated trials are usually necessary, and when successful the population has generally so dwindled, before the new generation attains the working age, that the colony is of little value, especially late in the season. The better mode is to introduce at once a fertile prolific queen from some populous colony, and let the latter do the queen raising; unless we have fertile queens in reserve in nuclei. With the transferred queen, several combs of brood taken from other strong colonies, should, if possible, be given to the one that has been queenless. The desired object will thus be more speedily attained, and frequently with benefit to the colonies drawn on.
“A large number of German sparrows, have been imported and placed in the vineyards in the vicinity of Davenport, Iowa.” So the newspapers inform us—the object, we presume, being the destruction of caterpillars. We fear, however, that the grape growers there have made a capital mistake, and are likely to have an easy time annually hereafter, when gathering the vintage.
It has been customary to charge the bees with damaging the grape crop, but it appears that in Germany this sparrow is the real offender. The Rev. Mr. Stern, an aged and well known bee-keeper, residing at Wessenburg in Lower Austria, writing to the Bienenzeitung about this alleged malfeasance of the bees, says—“I have lived more than thirty years in a village of three thousand inhabitants, most of whom derive their support from grape culture. Besides their vineyards, they have numerous trellises of vines at their houses, and there are several apiaries in the village. I have myself an arbor of vines, 180 feet in length, within twenty-five feet of my apiary. Now it has happened for many years that I did not get a single bunch of grapes, undamaged, from any vine in this arbor, and the other grape-growers in my neighborhood fared no better. Berries torn open were annually to be seen, and I have seen bees onsuchberries often—not indeed by ‘myriads’ nor yet by thousands, or hundreds, nor even by fifties, but only here and there a solitary one quietly sipping of the extruding juice. I have killed hundreds ofhornetsin the act of tearing open the berries, and thousands of wasps busy at the same work; butI have never seen a bee so engaged. But, what flies and bees are wholly incapable of doing, and what wasps andhornets do only in part and occasionally,is really the work of theSparrow, which, because its habits have been little observed or studied, continues to be held in high estimation in some districts. Even a small number of these birds can, in a few days, do exceedingly great injury in a vineyard, at the time when the ripening grapes are becoming mellow. They then peck open berry after berry, as though in sport, sip a little of the juice occasionally, and flitting away to some other cluster incessantly repeat the damaging process. I have witnessed this hundreds of times; and seen them do the work so effectually that, year after year, I have not obtained one undamaged cluster from my arbor.—This cunning sparrow knows, too, how to avoid traps and springes, and soon familiarizes himself with the most elaborate fantastic scarecrow set upin terrorem, acting apparently in derision and contempt of the baffled and mortified grape-grower.”
Forty years ago, an American ornithologist, speaking of this species of sparrow and the injury done by it to grain fields in Europe, said—“Fortunately we are free from this pest on this side of the Atlantic.” Now we import them, and boast of it!