154 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE 



Mar. 1 



were superseded in May, from the 3d to the 

 25th; three in June, from the 2d to the 18th. 



Summing up I find that, out of a dozen 

 queens received this summer, one, in evi- 

 dently poor condition, died in a few days, 

 and five were superseded by the bees in an 

 average of 34 days from the date of arrival. 

 Sometimes I am tempted to lay the blame 

 for the result on the stoppage of nectar for 

 about ten days and the entire absence of a 

 honey-flow, for such conditions must have 

 been exceedingly disheartening to the bees; 

 but, on the other hand, there is an evident 

 relationship between the time of starting to 

 lay and supersedure; for the three that start- 

 ed last of all were included in the list of miss- 

 ing. The one that began on the seventh 

 day was also superseded; but her case is 

 complicated by the addition of queenless 

 bees from another hive, so that the evidence 

 here is not direct. 



Seemingly the most vigorous queens re- 

 covered the quickest from the seven days' 

 journey; the others may have been injured 

 in the mails. 



In keeping scientific records, nothing is 

 considered too trivial for notice; and I am 

 blaming myself for omitting to jot down one 

 point. The eleven queens arrived in two 

 different sizes of cages — the only one that 

 looked poorly being in one of the ordinary 

 small size, and she was the top one at that. 

 I now wish that 1 had entered on my note- 

 book, opposite each queen, the size of cage 

 she had oeen received in, for it is possible 

 such a direct comparison might be of value 

 to queen-breeders when filling orders to a 

 customer a week's journey away. 



Victoria, B. C, Oct. 1, 1909. 



THE CONTROL OF BEE- PASTURAGE. 



Has the Bee-keeper a So-called Moral 



Right to his Territory? Bee-keeping 



in the Same <. lass v ith Many 



Other Occupations. 



BY R L. TAYLOR. 



It sepms from articles appparing in the api- 

 arian journals from time to time that there is 

 a growing uneasiness in certain quarters as 

 to the stability of the business of apiculture 

 on account of the fact, as it is asserted, that 

 the bee-keeper has no legal protection in the 

 exclusive enjoyment of nis territory, being 

 in ihat respect at a disadvantage as com- 



Eared with those engaged in other kinds of 

 usiness. So we find the assertion that 'if 

 ever bee-keeping is to siand on a firm basis 

 like other hnes of business, thtre must be 

 such ^ condition of affairs that the bee-keep- 

 er shall fet 1 just as serure against interfer- 

 ence as the stock-raiser who is assured by 

 the law that his fi- Ids shall be occupied by 

 his cattle and by his alone." And this: "No 

 bee-keeper in this land has a legal right to 

 his territorj^." 



It would indeed be a deplorable situation 

 if the law discriminates between the rights 



to bee- pasture and the rights to cow-pasture. 

 It would be not onlyalaiming but actually 

 disgraceful if, in the eye of the law, bee- 

 keeping did not "stand upon a firm basis 

 like other lines of business." And it would 

 be alike unfortunate, if it were a fact, that 

 "no bee-keeper in this land has a legal right 

 to his territory " — that is, if he has desired 

 such legal right and has been willing to 

 make the necessary sacrifice to secure that 

 right— a sacrifice similar to that which the 

 dairyman must make in order to secure a 

 legal right to his "cow-pasture." 



That we may see more clearly whether the 

 law discriminates unjustly i. gainst bee keep- 

 ing as compared with other kinds of busi- 

 ness, let me make use of a few illustrations; 

 and if I should introduce, here and there, 

 some brief arguments on side issues, I trust 

 they may not be found altogether imperti- 

 nent. 



As much dependence has heretofore been 

 placed, in this discussion, on the security 

 the law spreads over the cow-pasture, in or- 

 der to determine how much reliance can 

 safely be placed upon it, I will take a sup- 

 posed case in which that pasture largely fig- 

 ures: I collect a small herd of cows and oth- 

 er cattle, and transfer them to a pleasant 

 valley, say in Montana, containing 50 or more 

 square miles of fertile prairie, which, as yet, 

 is all government land. For a few years all 

 is prosperity; my herds increase and begin 

 to try the capacity of the valley. About that 

 time the outside world learns of the beauty 

 and fertility of the land, and begins to crowd 

 in and preempt the territory, starting herds 

 of their own, and press my herds back into 

 inadequate and unprofitable limits. Ought 

 I now to become frantic and proclaim to the 

 world the instability of the basis upon which 

 cow-pasture stands, seeking to arouse the 

 sympathy of the country to the end that the 

 legislature may be invoked to spread the 

 aegis of the law over my cow-pasture? But, 

 unfortunately, I am not a "stock-raiser who 

 is assured by the law that his fields shall be 

 occupied by his cattle and by his alone." 

 Why? Clearly because I have not been 

 willing to make the sacrifice necessary to 

 put myself unaer the protection of the law. 



It may be said that this is not a parallel 

 case because I have no moral right, while the 

 prior bee-keeper has a moral riyht. I freely 

 admit I have no moral right; and as to the 

 average bee-keeper, I am unable to perceive 

 wherein his moral right is any more in evi- 

 dence than is mine. I make bold to say he 

 has no moral right. If my neighbor on the 

 adjoining farm should decide to embark in 

 apiculture, and should start in the business 

 with one hundred colonies I could freely bid 

 him God-speed. For thirty years I nave 

 been trying "to learn how many colonies my 

 locality will bear, and I don't know yet. 

 Why, then, should I play dog in the manger? 

 There may be abunaance of room for both; 

 and besides, his right, morally and legally, 

 is as good as mine. The most I could do 

 would be to warn him that there might be 

 danger in placing so many colonies in prac- 



