800 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE. 



Nov. 1. 



was bad enough; but when Rambler talks 

 about pulling the bottom out of a well, that's 

 "lying around" too much. Why, you can't 

 pull the bottom out of a well, and bees never 

 get cross-eyed. Stop my paper! 



My prejudice is decidedly in favor of five- 

 banders on account of rheir beauty, and I wish 

 with all my heart that we could rely upon 

 profit in exact proportion to beauty; but facts 

 can not be ignored, and I suppose we must give 

 up that many of the five-banders are inferior. 

 The charge as to poor wintering seems pretty 

 fully established. 



Somehow that straw at the head of the sec- 

 ond column, Oct. 15, seems to have had its head 

 knocked off. But the heads of straws have no 

 grain in them anyway. [We plead not guilty 

 here. I don't agree. The " straws " very often 

 — yes, generally — have bigger heads with ker- 

 nels in them than the Heads of Grain. In real- 

 ity this department should be christened Heads 

 of Grain, and the other now bearing that cog- 

 nomen, "Bundles of Straw," but you know I 

 don't believe in changing names. — Ed.] 



Let up, Mr. Editor, on calling my language 

 slang. If you will look in the dictionary you 

 will find that "let up" is nut slang but col- 

 loquial. I am surprised to find that "catch 

 on " is also colloquial. But I like apprehend 

 or " understand " better. I'm rather in favor 

 of using slang when it expresses what can not 

 be expressed by straight English. [So am I; 

 but it strikes me that much that has come to 

 be regarded as colloquial is really slang. As to 

 "catch on," it expresses more to me than " un- 

 derstand." The latter is too tame. — Ed.] 



My conclusions don't entirely agree with 

 those of J. P. Israel, p. 771. I think foundation 

 in sections will keep a long time without losing 

 any of its " internal arrangements," if kept 

 from the bees; but if left too long in the hive 

 when no honey is gathered, especially late in 

 the season, its " external arrangements " are so 

 disarranged by the bees that they'll not use it. 

 I have thousands of sections filled with founda- 

 tion. [How is this, friends? Let us have tes- 

 timony from a good many others. The proper 

 answer to this may mean a good deal to some. 

 -Ed.] 



"He'll reduce his weight till he reduces 

 himself into the grave," is the remark one of 

 my auditors made when I read the first sen- 

 tence on p. 782. {No, he won't. He is gaining 

 now, and your humble servant on the same 

 treatment is now gaining three pounds a week, 

 and I shall soon be in full flesh again. My 

 normal weight in health is 140 lbs. After being 

 on the diet for a few weeks it got down to 117. 

 " Alarming," you say; but Dr. Lewis told me 

 I must expect to lose weight; that I must, as it 

 were, throw away useless waste material and 

 build anew. Am I doing it yet? Yes, sir. — Ed.] 



NUMBER OF BEES TO THE POUND. 



do bees prefer new or old combs' 



By Pliilip J. Baldensperoer. 



Mr. Root: — The question seems to agitate bee- 

 keepers to some extent as to how many bees 

 there are to the pound; how many pounds to 

 the swarm; how many eggs a queen lays a day; 

 bees carrying eggs; and old or new foundation, 

 which preferred? We all know by experience, 

 and by having read in divers periodicals and 

 books, that the number of bees per pound dif- 

 fers according to race, and more especially their 

 condition when weighed, whether lull or'empty, 

 or, I may say, very empty, and perhaps an infin- 

 ity of conditions — very full, half full, and so on. 

 Mr. A. I. Root, if I remember well, some years 

 ago said in Gleanings that 2,5,000 bees in a col- 

 ony was what he deemed about right. In your 

 footnote, p. .585, Aug. 1, 1895, you give two con- 

 ditions — 4.500 to .5000 per pound before swarm- 

 ing, and 3000 to 3.500 when filled with honey. 

 This last number is about what Simmins and 

 Cheshire find in a pound, while your first num- 

 ber, 5000, is given by the Abbe Voirnot — perhaps 

 one of the most eminent French bee-keepers. 

 Cheshire, Vol. II., p. 263, put 10,200 bees to the 

 pound; and he found that 3000 d«rfc bees filled 

 with honey make a pound, and 4500 to .5000 yel- 

 low bees per pound, filled. Of course, colonies 

 may vary greatly, from 4 to 10 lbs., while 1 think 

 an average good colony, swarmed out in fair 

 condition in spring, when flowers are abundant, 

 would weigh 7 or 8 lbs. Here, again, opinions 

 differ very widely, I may say; for Mr. Hyde, on 

 p. 585, says 8 lbs. of 3000 bees each equals'24,(XM) 

 bees; and you indorse his opinion, which, I am 

 glad to say, I suppose is nearer the truth than 

 any other figures. 



Authorities on bees differ greatly as to the 

 number of bees in a hive. Mr. J. Hewitt, in 

 the BriUyih Bee Journal for July 1, 1884, says 

 7(3,000 worker-bees, and believes that something 

 like 200,000 bees in a hive at a time may be 

 found. Abbt^ Martin says lOO.WO workers, which 

 figures he arrives at by multiplying numbers 

 which have almost 'become, in bee-keepers' 

 minds, an esiablished erior. 



You can hardly see a book or article but you 

 read of :'.(hX) eggs a day. Suppose, now. these 

 3000 eggs are to be multiplied by 21; that makes 

 63.000, and this goes on. Anotiier one >ays it is 

 known that one bee brings in :^~ of a gram, and 

 remains 10 minutes on a trip, and works 8 hours 

 a day. This equals so many pounds; hence so 

 many bees. But there are a great many buts 

 which must always be remembered; for neither 

 does a queen lay 3(J(30 eggs every day. nor is the 



