1910 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE 



345 



While this is far the most successful way 

 of building up weak colonies in spring it has 

 some objections. One is that, in dividing 

 the hives after they are both strong, the one 

 that is moved away loses its field bees al- 

 most entirely. Another is that bees strong- 

 ly object to carrying pollen through an ex- 

 cluder, and the combs of the lower hive get 

 choked with it. 



THE ALEXANDER PLAN FOR MAKING IN- 

 CREASE. 



At one time I used the Alexander plan of 

 making increase throughout almost the en- 

 tire apiary. I have largely given it up now, 

 partly because I don't want to increase, and 

 partly for other reasons. In case anybody 

 does not know this plan I may say it con- 

 sists in leaving one frame of brood and the 

 queen in the lower story, and filling up with 

 empty combs or foundation, the other 

 frames of brood being placed above an ex- 

 cluder on top. Queen-cells in the top hive 

 are destroyed in six days, and the tenth 

 day the upper story is moved to a new stand 

 and given a ripe queen-cell — better, a virgin 

 (pieen; or, best, a laying queen. To begin- 

 ners who desire to adopt this plan I would 

 offer two suggestions: Do not attempt it un- 

 less there is a fair, steady honey-flow, espe- 

 cially if you employ foundation instead of 

 combs. As a rule, the plan will work better 

 if you ha\ e two frames of brood below with 

 the queen instead of one. While I do not 

 use this method now for increasing, I do 

 employ it in a modified form for making 

 and building up nuclei and other puri^oses. 



NEVER INTRODUCE A QUEEN TO A FULIi 

 COLONY. 



There was one remark of Mr. Alexander's 

 that I do not think ever received the atten- 

 tion it deserved. It was to the effect that it 

 is always bad policy to introduce a queen to 

 a full colony, for, though she might be ac- 

 cei)ted at the time, she would very likely be 

 superseded very shortly. If this is the ease, 

 and from my own observation I think it 

 very frequently is, shoukl not queen-breed- 

 ers advise introduction to nuclei? 

 swar:m prevention. 



The questions of swarm control and the 

 successful introduction of queens are 

 brought up regularly every season in the 

 bee-journals; so, perhaps, my methods may 

 be of some interest. My swarm-prevention 

 method I disco\ ered by chance. So far it 

 has been successful; but I have not tried it 

 long enough nor on a sufficiently large scale 

 to guarantee it. Give a second story filled 

 with combs as soon as the hive is full of 

 brood, and let the queen have the run of 

 both stories, till shortly before the honey- 

 How. Then insert a queen-excluder, leaving 

 the queen above. In ten days put her be- 

 low again. If running for comb honey, re- 

 niove the top hive in a day or two, and re- 

 l)lace \vith a super (the brood in the top 

 iiive may be used to build up weak colonies) . 

 I have never found colonies treated like this 

 swarm; but take note that the (jueen must 

 be left in the top story, as this is important. 



Bees do not, in my experience, build queen- 

 cells below an excluder with a queen above, 

 but the reverse way they often will. 

 Cannington Manor, Sask., Canada. 



[It is becoming more and more apparent 

 that Mr. Alexander's teachings stand the 

 test of time when we take into considera- 

 tion his environment. For thirty years he 

 was almost unknown to the public, and yet 

 one of the most successful bee-keepers in 

 New York. ])uring his latter days he be- 

 gan to write. He had nothing to take back, 

 because his earlier experiences were not 

 down in black and white; and, however 

 much his views may have been modified 

 during his thirty years of actual work, we 

 secured what we may call the final conclu- 

 sions of his ripest and best experience. Mr. 

 Couper, our correspondent, is not the only 

 one who has been so enthusiastic over the 

 benefits derived from the late Mr. Alexan- 

 der. 



We are pleased to note that Mr. Couper's 

 method of swarm i)revention is very similar 

 to one that we used and advocated some 

 years ago. We are prepared to believe it is 

 all right, not that we were the first to give 

 it to the public, but because we had seen it 

 and tested something like it. — Ed.] 



THE LAYING WORKER A RARA AVIS. 



Are Workers that Lay as Common as Many Sup- 

 pose? is Not an Undersized Queen 

 Nearly Always to Blame? 



BY ALLEN LATHAM. 



To keep bees for twenty-five years, and 

 during that period make a most careful 

 study of their habits; to have the experience 

 which all that entails, and never see a lay- 

 ing worker — well, that raises a question. 

 Scarcely a copy of Gleanings comes to hand 

 without some reference to these pests (?), 

 and nearly every mention accompanied by 

 a cure; and the question looms up greater 

 than ever. It loomed so big that I even 

 ventured to state to a friend that I was go- 

 ing to write Gleanings and deny the exist- 

 ence of such a thing as a laying worker. 

 The friend, however, checked my enthusi- 

 asm thoroughly by stating that lie had had 

 lots of laying workers, and that he had even 

 seen the varmints back into a cell and leave 

 eggs. 



Once, some twenty years ago, I had what 

 I called a case of laying workers. I called 

 it so because all the "signs were there — only 

 drone brood or no brood at all; numerous 

 eggs in cells, and no queen to be found. 

 Since then I have many times found all 

 these symptoms excei^t one, and that one 

 has been persistently absent because a queen 

 was in each case persistently present. 



During the last twenty years every sum- 

 mer has furnished numerous cases of colo- 

 nies, full or nuclei, going queenless. These 

 cases have invariably divided themselves 



