November, lSl2. 



American l^ee Journal 



pean foul brood and United States European 

 foul brood. 



Theaverace sample of Canadian European 

 foul brood has a decidedly pronounced odor 

 which cannot be compared to any tliiny that 

 we might mention in the papes of the Bee 

 Journal. Yours very truly. 



MoRLEY I'ETTIT, 



Here are two men, in the word of 

 either of whom I would place the 

 greatest confidence, almost flatly con- 

 tradicting one another. At least it has 

 that look. In Europe, American foul 

 brood is called lu'ihlsl/iikiinh- Fciidbrut 

 (non-stinking foul brood), and Euro- 

 pean foul brood is called sli)i/;eiide 

 J-'uulbrut (stinking foul brood). Mr. 

 Pettit receives a much-traveled speci- 

 men of European foul brood of so vile 

 a smell that it drives people out of the 

 office. He forwards it to Washing- 

 ton, and Dr. Phillips says the odor 

 is not noticeable. Is it that under the 

 American flag, in this boasted " land of 

 the free," European foul brood does 

 not feel the same freedom to send 

 forth its characteristic odor that it 

 does under kingly rule in Canada and 

 Europe, or is there, as Mr. Pettit sug- 

 gests, a lack of olfactory development 

 in the States ? 



In all seriousness it is not likely 

 that the same stage of the disease may 

 have a smell at all different in one 

 country from what it has in another. 

 And it is a matter of some consequence 

 that there should be a very full under- 

 standing regarding the matter, if for 

 no other reason than that the novice 

 should not be confused unnecessarily 

 when he has, or suspects he has, either 

 European foul brood or American foul 

 brood in his apiary. There is good 

 ground for the belief that what will 

 hold European foul brood in check 

 may have no effect whatever upon 

 American foul brood. So it is desir- 

 able that Messrs. Pettit and Phillips 

 should come to entire agreement. 

 From the character of the two men, 

 one may judge that a thing very likely 

 to happen. 



In the meantime it may do no harm 

 to speculate a little as to why there 

 should be a difference in the sample 

 whose smell in Mr. Pettit's office was 

 so strong, and yet not noticeable 

 in Dr. Phillips' oflice. It is reasonable 

 to believe that in any given sample the 

 odor is not continuously the same in 

 strength. Like any other odor that 

 comes from decay, it increases until it 

 reaches its maximum, and then fades 

 away. So it might be that Mr. Pettit 

 had the sample at its maximum, and 

 Dr. Phillips after its decline. Only it 

 seems hard to understand how the de- 

 cline should be so rapid. 



For practical purposes, however, is 

 it not more important to know how the 

 disease smells in the apiary than to 

 know about it some time after it has 

 been taken from the hive? How has 

 Mr. Pettit found it when opening up a 

 diseased colony? How about a mild 

 case ? How about a very bad case ? 

 And, by the way, is there any agree- 

 ment of opinion as to what constitutes 

 a mild or a very bad case ? What per- 

 cent of the brood is diseased in the one 

 case and in the other ? Here is a point 

 upon which light is needed. When 

 Mr. Pettit speaks about a mild or a 

 very bad case, does he mean exactly 

 the same thing that Dr. Phillips does 

 when he uses the same terms ? 



As a trifling contribution to the sub- 

 ject, I may say something about the 

 smell of European foul brood " in this 

 locality." When it was at its worst in 

 my apiary, I do not remember that I 

 ever recognized any odor upon open- 

 ing the brood-chamber of a diseased 

 colony unless I held thediseased brood 

 close to my nose, and not then unless 

 it was what I called a very bad case. If 

 several stories of diseased brood were 

 in a pile, when I lifted ofT the cover I 

 would recognize the odor, not, how- 

 ever, as something unprintable, but 

 rather as something mildly objection- 

 able. I do not count it a matter of 

 congratulation that European foul 

 brood is more gently offensive here 

 than in Canada, if there really is a dif- 

 ference. In that case, it is the Kanucks 

 who are to be congratulated, for the 

 worse it smells the better, since it will 

 be the more readily detected. But I 

 sincerely hope that the whole matter 

 shall be fought out to a finish by our 

 two leaders, one on each side of the 

 line. c. c. M. 



Care of Sectioii.s 



Sections that have had no honey in 

 them may be kept over from one year 

 to another, or even for a number of 

 years, and if kept in a dry, proper place, 

 they will be just as good as fresh sec- 

 tions. To be sure, there are some who 

 say that foundation in sections is not 

 fit to use a month after it has left the 

 foundation-mill, but others have kept it 

 for years and then found that the bees 

 accepted it with entire satisfaction. If 

 one is to be exceedingly exact, it is 

 possible that foundation a month old 

 is not quite the same as the day it left 

 the mill, but the difference is so infini- 

 tesimal that the bees would not be able 

 to recognize it. 



It is a good thing that foundation in 

 sections will keep over to another year 

 or later. It would be exceedingly in- 

 convenient for many if it were not so. 

 For one who has a considerable num- 

 ber of bees it would not be at all handy 

 to be putting foundation in sections 

 when the flow of nectar is on. He 

 must prepare his sections in advance. 

 He cannot wait to know what the 

 harvest will be. He must have enough 

 sections ready not only for an average 

 season, but for the largest possible 

 crop. Then the season may turn out a 

 failure, and it is a good thing for him 

 that the preparation already made will 

 stand good for the first good season 

 that comes along 



But a qualification must be made. 

 While there may be sections 5 years 

 old that are practically as good as new, 

 thousands of sections may be found all 

 over the country not fit to put on a 

 hive, and yet the foundation in them is 

 not a year old. It is because they have 

 been left on the hives at a time when 

 no honey was coming in. Early in the 

 season it seems to do no harm, and it 

 is better to have sections on the hive 

 at least a little in advance of their be- 

 ing needed, for then the bees begin 

 work on them more promptly when the 

 flow does come. One cannot know in 

 advance exactly when the flow will be- 

 gin, so sections may be put on about 

 10 days in advance of the time they are 

 supposed to be needed. 



But to leave sections on the hive 10 



days after the harvest is over is a seri- 

 ous mistake. .Xt this time of year, if 

 the bees cannot put honey in them they 

 will be very likely to treat them liber- 

 ally with bee-glue. And after a coat of 

 bee-glue has been painted over the 

 foundation in a section, the bees will 

 not store in it. Even if no glue can 

 be seen on it, the bees object to a sec- 

 tion that has been left on the hive 

 through the fall months. The writer 

 has seen a section-super on a hive with 

 every section in it filled with honey 

 but one, and the foundation in that 

 section not drawn out at all. The 

 foundation in it looked all right, but 

 something was wrong with it, perhaps 

 a coating of propolis so thin that only 

 the bees could recognize it; at any 

 rate they would have none of it. 



Sometimes one flow of honey closes, 

 and then another flow opens in a few 

 days, or many days, later. The bee- 

 keeper thinks it is hardly worth while 

 to take off the supers, but leaves them 

 on until the later flow begins. Perhaps 

 the later flow fails to materialize, and 

 he waits day after day, finally taking 

 off the supers only when winter is 

 staring him in the face. When the flow 

 ceases, take the sections off, even if it 

 be in June. If another flow opens a 

 week or a month later, it is no great 

 task to pvit them on again. But re- 

 member that except very early in the 

 season, when bees can do no good 

 with sections they are likely to do 

 harm with them. When off of the hive 

 the sections must be sheltered from 

 the dust or from the sunshine. 



Au Open Letter to Dr. lionney 



Dear Dr. Bonney, I'm not at all sure 

 exactly what you do believe about im- 

 provement in bees, but at any rate I 

 don't agree with you. That doesn't 

 sound so very reasonable, and I may 

 as well confess to you that I am more 

 governed by desire than by reason. I 

 don't agree with you chiefly because I 

 don't want to agree with you. You 

 holdup "Improvement in Bees" as a 

 craze, and say you hesitate to subscribe 

 to it. The general tendency of your 

 teaching is to discourage any attempt 

 at improvement. 



The situation is peculiar. If you were 

 to discourage attempts at improve- 

 ment in any other kind of stock, it 

 wouldn't make the same difference to 

 me. If you were to get all my neigh- 

 bors to believe that there was no use 

 in trying to improve any other kind of 

 stock, it would make no practical dif- 

 ference with me. I could go right on 

 breeding pure stock and trying to im- 

 prove it, and the scrub stock all around 

 me wouldn't make a particle of differ- 

 ence. But if you get all the surround- 

 ing bee-keepers to believe that im- 

 provement in bees is a tulip-craze- 

 south-sea-bubble affair, you knock into 

 smithereens a large part of my chances 

 for improvement, for the chances are 

 heavy that my young queens will meet 

 surrounding drones of poor grade. 

 And the same thing applies to every 

 other bee-keeper who desires to im- 

 prove his bees. Don't you see that if 

 you should happen to be mistaken, and 

 if there should happen to be something 

 to this matter of improvement, you are 

 doing all you can do to hinder those of 



