118 JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC ENTOMOLOGY [Vol. 2 



report for 1900^ distinctly states that "the statistics of agriculture 

 do not include any data . . . relating to animal products or crops 

 raised by persons who pursue some calling other than agriculture, but 

 incidentally care for a tract of land too small to be called a farm." 

 Any one who is acquainted \fith bee keeping, in the East particularly, 

 readily sees that this one fact could vitiate the significance of the 

 statistics. 



The plan to be presented was first tried on a small scale on Worces- 

 ter County, Massachusetts.- Since then it has been perfected and 

 tested on the state as a whole by the Bureau of Entomology.^ As evi- 

 dence of the extent to which the work has already benefited bee keep- 

 ers, it may be stated that whereas a year or more ago the majority of 

 apiarists laughed at the possibility of bee diseases existing in Massa- 

 chusetts, today they are united in an effort to procure legislative pro- 

 tection and the appointment of a bee disease inspector. Furthermore, 

 there is news of two new bee keepers' organizations in western INIas- 

 sachusetts. 



It should be emphasized that the method to be presented is not lim- 

 ited to apicultural investigations, but may be adapted and extended to 

 the study of the status of any agricultural industry, crop or pest. 



The statistics were gathered by a questionary method, operated 

 under frank through the mails. The frank proved to be an exceed- 

 ingly important factor in securing a high percentage of replies. Be- 

 sides relieving the expense of postage, experience shows that there is 

 an element of authority or charm in the franked envelope, which 

 doubtless brought replies from many who otherwise would not have 

 responded. However, even without the frank, it has been demon- 

 strated possible to secure much valuable information. 



In beginning the work, it was first necessary to locate the bee keep- 

 ers. A printed letter was mailed to every town clerk and to each 

 Grange secretary in the state. The letter stated briefly the project 

 and requested names and addresses of bee keepers. Replies from the 

 town clerks were more prompt and complete than those from the sec- 

 retaries. But even more satisfactory were the returns from a few 

 postmasters who were written to because of a failure otherwise to lo- 

 cate bee keepers in their vicinity. Were it possible to work exclusively 



'12th Census, Vol. V, Parts 1 and 2, pp. xiii-xiv. 



^Gates, Burton N., 1906. Status of Bee Keeping in Massachusetts in 1906. 

 American Bee Keeper, Vol. XVII, pp. 79-81. 



^Gates, Burton N., 1909. Bee Keeping in Massachusetts. Bulletin No. 75, 

 Part VII, Bureau of Entomology. U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. 



