1901 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE. 



671 



Mr. Rauschenfels, will give foul hrood, I have never 

 yet seen a case of fo\il ItoocI in niv lie, al lioiigh this 

 malady exists to a slight extent here, but is confined 

 to a few di^tl•icls; and, instead of lendiig to spread, 

 it is disappearing, thanks X.i watchfulness and the 

 ease with which tranie hivts with movable b.jtioms 

 can be inspected." 



Mr. Rauschenfels add.s : 



So frightfnl a proportion of infecttd hives among 

 healthy ones is found in no other conntiy. 



Mr. Dadant replies as follows, wbich I 

 translate from the French : 



To replj' to Mr. Rauschenfels, I should add that the 

 under.scored word heie does not refer U> n\y home, 

 but to the State of Illinois, as is shown by the words 

 " few districis." I will add that the four inspectors 

 appointed by the government went to New York, as. 

 after having assisted at several aviicultural congresses, 

 it was decided that New York was the most badly 

 affected. And even there they found the di.'ease con- 

 fined to a narroiv district iu'the eastern part of the 

 State, the middle and west having uo traces of the 

 trouble. 



As to the proportion of foul-broody hives in the 

 United States as compared with that of foreign coun- 

 tries, I may cite the case of Mr. Dzierzon, who lost, in 

 one single year, 500 colonies, being able to save but 10, 

 or only two per cent. One may read this in a letter 

 written by Mr. Samuel Wagner, a German, who, 

 some time after, founded the American Bee Jouinal. 

 This letter was published by Mr. I^augstroth in the 

 third edition of his book. 



In New York according to the citations above, the 

 colonies attacked did not reach 25 per cent, and even 

 the greater part of the.'e were saved. 



The thing that incites Mr. Rauschenfels to write 

 those few lines is his belief that foul brood is of spon- 

 taneous generation; for we read in his "Bee and its 

 Cultivation," 1901. page 100, that experience actually 

 shows that the bad management of bees, etc., may 

 lead to this disease without thtre having been actual 

 contact. He cites, as proof, a certain bee-keeper who 

 made an apiary, and carried to it, in June, 31) colonies. 

 These were all attacked by foul brood, and cied, as 

 well as ten which he bought to replace them in the 

 fall, and which he fed with honey from the colonies 

 that died. 



These things prove absolutely nothing. It is enotigh 

 that one single colony should be diseased in order to 

 impart to the others the disease. After hauling them, 

 especially in summer, it is a common thing to find 

 the bees of one colony mingled with those of another. 



We have had hives the frames of which were brok- 

 en in hauling, and others in an apiary which, not 

 being sufficiently sheltered from the direct ra5-s of 

 the sun, had their combs melted; but none of these 

 hives produced foul brood. 



This disease is so rare in the United States that 

 I,angstroth never saw it; and although my son and I 

 have visited numerous apiaries, neither one of us has 

 ever yet seen a case of foul brood. 



The hive with movable bottom, according to Mr. 

 Rauschenfels, will not winter bees well outdoors. 

 After having tried the cellar and the silo, we keep our 

 bees outdoors, and our losses never exceed 5 per cent, 

 yet the winters here are long and severe A winter 

 in this part of Illinois is considered mild when the 

 mercury does not go below 4 degrees below zero, 

 Fahrenheit; and 30 to 35 is not rare. 



Aside from the points involved in the above, 

 it is interesting as showing the tenacity with 

 which old ideas cling to nations as well as to 

 persons. 



R.J.H.,Ill.—l\. is hardly probable that 

 the swarm you refer to in your letter of July 

 30 came out without a queen. The fact that 

 you could not find her would hardly be evi- 

 dence that the virgin or something that the 

 bees regarded as a queen was not in the swarm. 

 Some virgin queens are ver)' small, and look 

 so much like the worker bees that one might 

 very easily overlook them. 



.i^Cj^-^i- .tf^^- 



CONFINING LAYING QUEENS A BAD PRACTICE. 



Why Brood-combs should be Kept Out of the Ex- 

 tractor; the Difference in Colonies ; Some 

 Fair Criticisms from a Fair Man. 



BY F. GREINER. 



Rlr. Editor: — I have just read your issue for 

 June l-5tb, and I feel prompted to do a little 

 criticising, or call a halt, as Mr. Doolittle puts 

 it. Swarthmore says, on page 506 : " The cut 

 below is a drawing of an improved nursery- 

 cage for the incubation of cells and the con- 

 fining of virgin or laying queens." The words 

 I wish to draw the attention of bee- keepers 

 and queen-breeders to are at the end of the 

 sentence quoted. They give rise to the ques- 

 tions, "Is it safe to confine laying queens ? " 

 and, "Do queen-breeders practice any such 

 thing? " I have nothing at all to say against 

 Swarthmore's cage. I believe it is go,.^d if 

 rightly used ; but against caging laying queens 

 in them I must raise my voice. I have re- 

 peatedly proven to my satisfaction that a lay- 

 ing queen is more or less injured by confine- 

 ment during a season when she would be most 

 active. It does not make any difference, 

 either, whether she is absolutely confined, or 

 simply restrained by means of queen-exclud- 

 ing zinc. The injury is in proportion to the 

 length of time a queen is kept confined. I be- 

 lieve queens suffer less by the rough handling 

 in the mails than they do from the length of 

 time the confinement lasts. The confinement 

 in the mailing-cages during transit can not 

 well be avoided, as bad as it is ; but if to this 

 we add days or possibly weeks of unnecessary 

 confinement in nursery-cages, then good-by 

 queen business. I for one would quickly drop 

 any queen-breeder who stores queens in this 

 wholesale fashion. The only proper place to 

 keep laying queens is in small colonies ; or, if 

 they can be thus safely kept, in separate com- 

 partments inside of a hive where they may 

 follow their natural inclination by depositing 

 eggs. 



I do not know that Swarthmore meant to 

 have it understood that he advised or sanc- 

 tioned the confinement of laying queens ; but 

 some queen-breeders who have not had the 

 experience may conclude that it is a good 

 way, and practice it. To sell such queens aft- 

 er some confinement would seriously injure 

 his trade and his customers. I wish to de- 

 nounce the method before it becomes a prac- 

 tice. 



As to using these or any blocks for queen - 

 cell starters, I am not so sure that they are 

 the best thing for the purpose. I confess I 

 don't like my cells set into a block or any 

 thing else ; and it seems to me more natural, 

 and for the best development of the queens, if 

 the bees have access to the cells on all sides, 

 bottom included. Little blocks of wood with 



