THE BEE-KEEPERS' REVIEW 



83 



well "venom" I think that is the word 

 I want. 



To make g'ood progress in working^ 

 with bees we must have simplicity in 

 hives and fixtures, and skill in handl- 

 ing- the bees, that we do it in such a 

 way as to make the least disturbance 

 to the bees and trouble to ourselves. 



Northern Michig-an is a healthful 

 country. It has the best of water, and 

 is good for fruit. Land is from $5 00 

 to $10.00 per acre for wild land that 

 has been lumbered. Ourfarmers, even 

 the smaller ones, are making- money, 

 and are contented; in fact, it is as good 

 for farming- as it is for bees. I have 

 been here over 25 years, and the worst 

 objection, really, the only one I have, 

 is the deep snow in winter; but, to suc- 

 ceed at anj^thing it requires push. 

 Many men choose a business that they 

 are not adapted to. The}' start right, 

 but soon they beud their business to 

 meet their own ideas and inclinations; 

 this soon becomes too much of a strain 

 on the business, and the result is a 

 collapse. 



In the last 18 jears I have sold bees 

 to nine different men, giving- them the 

 best advice that I could at the time, to 

 get them started right, and, today, 

 only one owns any bees. Neglect of 

 their bees and the winter problem has 

 trimmed them up in good shape. 



Mancelona, Mich., Jan. 2?y, 1906. 



[It has been a long^ time since 1 have 

 received a communication the reading 

 of which I enjoyed as I did the reading 

 of the foregoing-. There are several 

 reasons for this. One is that it 

 opposes the views that I have ex- 

 pressed It is seldom that I can induce 

 a correspondent to do this. Of course, 

 I don't wish a man to oppose me just 

 for the sake of being- obstinate, but, if 

 he doesn't agree he is inclined to keep 

 still. Another thing that I enjoyed is 

 the way that it is told. It is so clear- 

 cut, so graphic, yes, even humorous, 

 and above all, so fair. Another thing-, 



the Review, of late has been advocat- 

 ing extensive bee-keeping, and it is 

 only fair to admit that there are two 

 sides to the question, and that the Re- 

 view-readers should hear both sides. 

 Mr. Chapman makes a good point 

 when he says that experienced men 

 mig-ht succeed where the beginner 

 would fail. I certainly would not wish 

 to be understood as encourag-ing the 

 novice to endulge in this long-range 

 bee-keeping; and Imaj-as well explain 

 right here that I fear I gave a wrong 

 impression in the December issue, al- 

 though it seems as though I made it 

 clear enough, viz., that I do not expect 

 to start in the coining year to manage 

 an apiary with only four or five visits 

 a year. What I said was that I had 

 started in to "develop a system that 

 would enable me to do that. " That is, 

 I am working in that direction — have 

 that end in view, but shall work very 

 cautiously at the outset. First, I must 

 learn my locality. It would be poor 

 policy for a bee-keeper to do much ex- 

 perimenting in a locality with which 

 he is not perfectly familiar. 



Before taking up Mr. Chapman's 

 article point by point, it may be well 

 to say that, in a general way, I have 

 been arguing for extensive bee-keep- 

 ing; for keeping bees extensively in 

 large numbers, and then putting into 

 practice all of the short-cuts possible; 

 perhaps leaving undone some things 

 that a man with fewer colonies might 

 find it profitable to do. Mr. Chapman 

 takes the opposite view, that of having 

 fewer bees, looking after them with 

 great care, and doing all things pos- 

 sible to increase the crop. Just what 

 it will pay to do with the bees, or for 

 the bees, and what it will be more pro- 

 fitable to leave undone, brings up one 

 of those fine points upon which we can 

 make no cast iron rules. What might 

 really be called neglect under certain 

 conditions, might be called, well — 

 profitable neglect, under other condi- 

 tions. Here is the point: Some things 



