American Vee Joornal 



to know where his efforts should be 

 concentrated. 



4. Perhaps the greatest weakness in 

 our present apiary inspection is due to 

 the fact that the men chosen are usually 

 uninformed as to how inspection 

 should be conducted. For example, it 

 is quite customary for an apiary inspec- 

 tor to visit a prominent bee-keeper, 

 and then have his host drive him about 

 to visit the small bee-keepers in the 

 vicinity. This is pleasant for the in- 

 spector, and usually for his host, but is 

 perhaps open to criticism. It results 

 too often in the belief that the bee- 

 keeper has sent for the inspector to 

 clean out the small bee-keepers, so he 

 can have a clear field. Other inspectors 

 have been known to take orders for 

 bee-supplies, canvass for bee-papers, 

 buy up honey, wax or slumgum, and do 

 many other things which it is perfectly 

 natural for a bee-keeper to do in his 

 private capacity. It is safe to say that 

 not one of the men who do these 

 things is dishonest, and they would re- 

 sent such a suggestion most emphatic- 

 ally. They are, however, unwise in do- 

 ing these things. An officer paid by 

 the State should go out to do his one 

 duty, and even urging bee-keepers to 

 join a bee-keepers' association may be, 

 and has been misconstrued. It is bet- 

 ter to avoid even the appearance of 

 evil. 



It is quite a common thing for bee- 

 keepers to ask the inspector whether 

 he has found any disease in certain 

 neighboring apiaries. Unfortunately, 

 most inspectors give such information, 

 which they have no right to divulge, 

 unless they should do so by establish- 

 ing quarantines, and this is not done. 



These seemingly unkind things are 

 not said for the purpose of discredit- 

 ing the good and disinterested work 

 that the present inspectors have done, 

 nor should it appear that the objections 

 are unavoidable. These points of weak- 

 ness should be admitted, and, when ad- 

 mitted, remedied. The individual in- 

 spectors would probably remedy many 

 of them if they but knew that some of 

 their actions are misconstrued. 



There is, however, a remedy, and it 

 has already proven its curative worth. 

 Perhaps it is not a panacea, but it is 

 worthy of further trial. 



Several years ago Texas passed a law 

 providing that the State entomolgist 

 shall be inspector of apiaries with 

 power to appoint deputies. This law 

 was inoperative for a time, but now 

 under the new entomologist, Mr. Wil- 

 mon Newell, the work is being taken 

 up again. Other States have more re- 

 cently adopted this plan. In Indiana, 

 Ohio, Rhode Island, and Connecticut, 

 the State entomologists are conducting 

 this work under recently enacted laws, 

 and in Massachusetts the inspection is 

 done by the Assistant Professor of 

 Bee-Keeping at the Massachusetts Ag- 

 ricultural College, Dr. B. N. Gates, who 

 is a member of the Department of En- 

 tomology. The bee-keepers of New 

 Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Michi- 

 gan, Illinois, Kansas, and Oregon, are 

 asking their legislatures to enact laws 

 of this type, and it is probable that still 

 other State associations contemplating 

 bills will make the same request. 



The State entomologist is the officer 

 under whose supervision all State 



work on insects logically falls. He is 

 provided with an office for conducting 

 correspondence and keeping records 

 in a business-like manner; he has 

 agents over the State who can keep 

 him informed, and what is perhaps 

 most important, he has had experience 

 in inspection work. 



The argument is at once raised that 

 the entomologist is not a bee-keeper, 

 and has not liad practical experience 

 with bees or with their diseases. This 

 is true, but these facts do not militate 

 in the least against the efficiency of his 

 work. It is not hard to learn to diag- 

 nose disease, and the instructions for 

 treatment are simple. Even if the en- 

 tomologist were to do this work him- 

 self, he could doubtless do as well as 

 any of our present force inside of a 

 week. The actual work would, how- 

 ever, be done by deputies who would 

 be practical bee-keepers, if suitable 

 ones were available; if not, any wide- 

 awake young man can learn to inspect 

 in a few days. At the Illinois meeting 

 one bee-keeper said that he didn't want 

 college boys coming to inspect his 

 apiary. In the first place, there is no 

 danger of any such thing happening, 

 and, second, it would be nothing 

 strange if the universally condemned 

 "college boy" could do as good work 

 as our present inspectors, after proper 

 training. 



The answering of such hypothetical 

 objections is of small value when we 

 have efficiency records to which to re- 

 fer. It is a safe assertion that in no 

 State have we had more efficient in- 

 spection than under State Entomolo- 

 gist Douglass, of Indiana, who has had 

 the assistance of Mr. Geo. S. Demuth, 

 probably as good a bee-man as there is. 

 Ohio has a short record, but one of 

 which the bee-keepers of Ohio may be 

 proud. With no funds and no extra 

 men, Mr. Shaw has the western half of 

 the State inspected, and now knows the 

 disease situation in the State as it has 

 never been known before. In Ohio all 

 of the work, and in Indiana part of the 

 work, is done by the regular nursery 

 inpsectors, and those familiar with this 

 work are authority for the statement 

 it is eminently satisfactory. Connecti- 

 cut has an excellent record. The State 

 entomologist. Dr. W. E. Britton, has 

 been assisted by two of the most promi- 

 nent bee-keepers of the State, Messrs. 

 H. \V. Coley and A. 'W. Yates. 



It is probable that the greatest effi- 

 ciency is to be realized if bee-keepers 

 are not employed, unless they sell their 

 apiaries or lease them. An inspector 

 should be in the field every day in or- 

 der to carry on the work with economy 

 and efficiency, and to stop to care for 

 his private apiary is not doing his full 

 duty. If the apiary inspection be com- 

 bined with the nursery inspection, the 

 men will be thoroughly trained in in- 

 spection methods, and, by being em- 

 ployed for the entire year, they will not 

 be tempted to neglect the apiary work 

 when it is most needed. 



The Bureau of Entomology in the 

 Department of Agriculture at Wash- 

 inton, D. C, has recognized the advan- 

 tage of the plan here proposed, and 

 when information on the subject is re- 

 quested, it has advised that the State 

 entomologist's services be enlisted. 

 The movement is gaining daily in 



strength, and we may hope for a 

 speedy uniformity in our apiary in- 

 spection laws, and the increased effi- 

 ciency which results from systematic 

 work. We need men in this fight 

 whose first thought is the absolute en- 

 forcement of the law, who will not be 

 turned aside through sympatliy or 

 private interests, and who know how 

 to handle men as well as handle bees. 

 We recommend the foregoing pro- 

 cedure in apiary inspection work most 

 heartily to the earnest and favorable 

 consideration of bee-keepers in every 

 part of the United States. 



Nucleus or Nuclei 



D. M. Macdonald says in the British 

 Bee Journal, under the above heading : 



Mr. York (?) lectures on this topic, and 

 does it well. Frequently there is an abuse 

 of words in connection with the use of these 

 adjectives. But my Chicago friend is out 

 when he holds me up as a sample transgres- 

 sor. I spoke of "nuclei-forming"—/, e.. 

 forming nuclei. Where does the use of the 

 word as an adjective come in here ? 1 know- 

 the proof-reader of this journal was wide- 

 awake when he passed the term without 

 amendment. Nucleus plan or nucleus plans 

 would be all right; so would nucleus hives 

 or nucleus hive, but I will stick to " nuclei- 

 forming." 



It will hardly do to admit that a 

 Scotchman knows more about the 

 English language than an American, 

 for the American from his childhood 

 talks in that language, and doesn't the 

 Scotchman talk Scotch ? So the best 

 effort possible must be made to uphold 

 the position already taken. It must be 

 confessed, however, that he seems to 

 have a good argument when he claims 

 that forming nuclei must be " nuclei- 

 forming." Yet, even though hard 

 pressed by his question, " Where does 

 the use of the word as an adjective 

 come in here ?" one may reply that the 

 word "nucleus" tells the kind of form- 

 ing that is done. Mr. Macdonald, how- 

 ever, may stand upon his right to in- 

 sist that'this is not very reasonable, 

 and that he had in mind nuclei as 

 things that were being formed. 



Well, then, there is still left the 

 chance to appeal to precedent and 

 analogy. Rather let us take " nuclei- 

 forming" as a precedent, and see how 

 it will work out. If one who is form- 

 ing nuclei is engaged in nuclei-form- 

 ing, then one who is building houses 

 must be engaged in houses-building. 

 In the same way, hunting ducks war- 

 rants ducks-hunting ; and we would also 

 have many other combinations of two 

 words with the first word in the plural. 

 But when two words are thus com- 

 bined, the first word being a noun, is 

 not that noun always in the singular .•" 

 Possibly, however, bee-keeping is to 

 be a law unto itself in the matter of 

 language, and if we allow that a swarm 

 is " shook," we certainly ought not to 

 object to "nuclei-forming." 



Profitableness of Bee-Keepiug 



In speaking of the profitableness of 

 bee-keeping, it is not well to overdo 

 the matter. Lately a writer said : 



" There is no business today that pro- 

 duces quicker returns than bees, or a 

 greater percentage of profit for the money 

 invested." 



And that is only a fair sample of 

 what is frequently seen in print. 



