342 



AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL 



May 30, 1901. 



fact several j'ears ago in a longer article on the history of 

 the bee. 



Great interest in bee-keeping was manifested in a later 

 age by that great king and statesman of Prussia, Freder- 

 ick, living during the 18th century. His order was, that 

 every minister of the gospel in his kingdom, every order 

 of monks, and all monasteries, must keep a certain num- 

 ber of colonies of bees. Every renter of crown lands pay- 

 ing 150 thaler rent had to keep 10 colonies ; those paying 

 higher rent 20 colonies. For every colony less than that 

 number five thaler penalty had to be paid. Each farmer 

 (bauer) had to maintain an apiary of four colonies, from 

 that number down to one colony, according to the number 

 of acres of laud he owned. Failing to meet these require- 

 ments, about 5u cents had to be paid for every colony not 

 kept. On the other hand, 50 cents premium was paid for 

 every colony kept, over and above the required number ! 

 From this it will be seen that Frederick must have been 

 convinced that bee-keeping offered many advantages, and 

 produced great benefits. In this understanding he was far 

 ahead of manj' of the leading statesmen of the present 

 day, who can often see nothing but evil resulting from the 

 keeping of bees, and desiring to rule them out and almost 

 exterminate them. Ontario Co., N. Y. 



Artificial Swarming ortDividing for Increase. 



BY C. r. D.\DANT. 



CH.\RLESDADANTi SON:— I think I have seen somewhere that 

 you practice artificial swarming, exclusively. Do you still think it 

 best? and can you secure as much comb honey ? It would certainly 

 be much more convenient if as good results could be obtained. — 1». 

 C. Roberts, Colorado. 



Yes, we practice artificial swarming exclusively, though 

 we do not call it bj- that name. We call it "division of 

 colonies," because it is not anything like swarming. True 

 artificial swarming is done by removing a swarm with the 

 queen in a forced way, either by drumming the bees out 

 from one hive to another, as formerly practiced with the 

 box-hives, or by shaking enough of the bees with the 

 queen into a new hive. 



I must say, however, that if we were practicing bee-cul- 

 ture for comb honey with the usual eight-frame hive, such 

 as is recommended by many bee-keepers, we should be far 

 from practicing artificial swarming, but would instead try 

 to devise means to prevent the natural swarming in the 

 limit of our power. From repeated acknowledgments of 

 comb-honey producers who use small hives, I have con- 

 cluded that this method of bee-keeping produced rather too 

 much increase in ordinarj- seasons, and that the desidera- 

 tum was a method by which less increase could be had. 



By our methods, we produce extracted honey almost 

 exclusively, with large hives, always supplied with a sufli- 

 cient amount of emptj- comb to prevent the desire of 

 swarming, except in extraordinary seasons. So when we 

 desire increase, usually only in sufficient amount to make 

 up for winter losses, in each apiary, we follow the artificial 

 methods. 



As to the production of as mtfch honey with a colony 

 that has been divided by any manner whatever, either nat- 

 ural or artificial, as with a colony in which all the bees 

 remain at their post, that is out of the question. The bees 

 that are taken away, or that leave with a swarm, go to mak- 

 ing that swarm prosperous, they harvest honey for its 

 brood, and for the building of its combs, and, while doing- 

 that, they surely can not be expected to produce surplus 

 hone}'. But if j-ou are in a location in which two crops 

 may be expected, some six weeks or two mouths apart, atid 

 if the second crop is a very safe probability, then what you 

 may lose in the first crop, by dividing, will perhaps be 

 more than repaid by the product of the extra colony which 

 you have brought into existence. You are exactly in the 

 position of a man who is bringing up a family. While his 

 children are small they are a strain upon his energy, for he 

 must support them, educate them, train them to the duties 

 of life; but when the)' are grown, they may prove a very 

 great help instead of a drain upon his resources. If you 

 begin the season with 25 colonies of bees and seek no 

 increase, you may have a very fair crop, but if you double 

 their numbers, though you will have no crop during the 

 early summer, the fall crop will probably be double what it 

 would have been had you depended upon the original num- 

 ber of colonies for your supplj'. 



There are man)' methods of making divisions or arti- 

 ficial swarms. Nearly every writer describes his own plan, 

 and they are all good, in a greater or less degree, if they 



follow the first principles of the trade — of leaving colonies 

 queenless the least possible time. 



With the new methods of queen-rearing, among which 

 the Doolittle method stands conspicuous, it is not very diffi- 

 cult to rear queens from the very best mothers to supply all 

 swarms made. Or, if this be thought too difficult, queens 

 may be bought from reliable breeders, especially in the 

 South, for a small price. Thus swarms may easily be sup- 

 plied with very good, choice queens, and little time is lost. 



The plan which we follow, and which proves the most 

 economical, is to make our swarms, or take our increase, 

 from the colonies which are not likely to give any surplus. 

 This, of course, applies only to an apiary in which the colo- 

 nies are not all intended for forced increase. If we must 

 have increase at the exclusion of everything else, then let 

 us use every colony of sufficient strength to further our 

 purpose. But if we want an increase of say only one-third, 

 we will aim to leave the most populous colonies intact, tak- 

 ing the brood and bees from colonies which have bred up 

 too late to make a crop. This must not be understood to 

 mean that every weak colony may be divided, for there are 

 sometimes colonies of bees which fail to breed up, from 

 divers causes, and which remain weak till after the honey 

 harvest. These are of no value, and must be completely 

 taken out of our reckoning. 



But we have colonies of bees that breed up promptly 

 and plentifully at the opening of spring, and begin the 

 harvest with as full a force of field-workers as it is possible 

 for them to have at any time. On the other hand, there 

 are colonies which having been delayed in their breeding 

 by different circumstances, are still quite prolific, and find 

 themselves with a large amount of brood, but with less 

 field-workers ready for the harvest. These, in other words, 

 are behind-time for the harvest, and it is to them that we 

 look for the supply of brood for our divisions. There is 

 nothing lost in the way of a crop by dividing them, for 

 they would only just begin to build in the boxes by the end 

 of a harvest, and the brood and bees that they can furnish 

 will give us quite a good many " swarms " that will have 

 enough to make preparations for the second crop. Thus, if 

 there is any chance for honey, our best colonies will har- 

 vest it, and the secondary ones will give us the increase. 



But if we breed our own queens, no other consider- 

 ations should deter us from using the very best colony for 

 breeding the young queens. Prolificness and hardiness 

 first, color and breed next, should be our standard. Gentle- 

 ness is also a consideration. But if we breed mainly from 

 pure Italians this quality will be a matter of course with 

 every one of our best colonies. 



A vigilant eye must be kept on the divisions. Until 

 they show a good queen laying plentifully, and the combs 

 are'all built, they should not be left to their own devices 

 more than a week at a time. 



In this way only can we expect to succeed. 



Hancock Co., 111. 



" Long-Tongued Bees 



Fad or Fallacy, Wliicli?" 



R. ROOT. 



ON page 293, I find an article by Mr. G. M. Doolittle under 

 the above heading. " Of late years." says Mr. D., 

 "some of our bee-papers start off with some new idea, 

 or some old one revived, and in a little while the heads in 

 all beedom seem to get twisted. . . .which, a few years later, 

 is dropped, with hundreds and thousands of hard-earned 

 dollars wasted over the hobby or fad." 



A thousand dollars — that's a big sum ; and thousands 

 of dollars — that's bigger yet. I do not recall any fads that 

 have been dropped that have cost anywhere near such sums. 

 Reversible frames? We sold, perhaps, more than any one 

 else; and yet we did not sell, all told, $300 worth of them. 

 Self-hivers ? We sold about 510 worth. But we must have 

 some failure fads in order to get those that are a success. 



Did Mr. Doolittle never ride a hobby, or push a fad ? 

 Well, let's see. Did he not champion wide frames for sec- 

 tions about 17 years ago ? And now they are used by very 

 few, including Doolittle. Was he not one of the very first 

 who started the fad for tall sections ? Did any one waste 

 thousands of hard-earned dollars on them ? I can not recall 

 one. He started the fad for rearing queen-cups, and a very 

 good fad it was. Did any one waste any hard-earned dol- 

 lars over that? But the fad maybe dropped for drone- 

 comb queen-cups. He helped boom, years ago, in his 

 pamphlet, " The Hive I Use," the Gallup hive ; and some of 

 his followers, as I happen to know, wished afterward 

 they had not followed him, because they had on their hands 



