514 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE. 



July 



we have adopted the policy of treating the 

 colony immediately, foul brood is now get- 

 ting to be under our control, and only an 

 occasional colony shows evidences of the 

 malady. The point is, friend W.. that, 

 while you have a number of diseased colo- 

 onies in the apiary, the intermingling of 

 bees from one hive to another is almost sure 

 to carry the infection everywhere ; so I 

 think the policy of taking diseased brood- 

 combs, and allowing the bees to hatch out, 

 and putting said brood-combs in a colony 

 by themselves, is as unwise as it is danger- 

 ous. 



WHY WERE THE QUEENS MISSING? 



In March I had 1.5 colonies of bees (Italians) to 

 put out. They had all wintered well. All swarms 

 appeared to be strong, and had plenty of honey. 

 After they had been on their summer stands about 

 a month 1 noticed ^lat two of the colonies did not 

 seem to be making the headway that the others 

 were. 1 examined them and found that they were 

 queenless, with a small patch of brood that might 

 have been is davs old, and without any queen-cells. 

 Since that time I have lost Ave more queens, mak- 

 ing seven in all. The queens disappeared first, and 

 1 think there is hardly a possibility of their having 

 gone out in a swarm. In all cases from lU lo 30 lbs. 

 of sealed honey was left in the hive. What was the 

 cause? After the bees were set out, the weather 

 was mild, the bees Hying every day. 



Mazomanie, Wis., May 39, 1887. P. F. Sticknev. 



Although I have several times noticed 

 queens disappearing from a good many 

 hives, all at about one time in the spring of 

 the year, I have never been able to account 

 for it. It usually occurs when bees have 

 what is called " spring dwindling," and ev- 

 ery thing in the hive seems to be upset, as 

 it were. They almost always die when 

 there is only a small patch of brood in the 

 hives, and not enough bees to cover and 

 care for the broody 



THE DOOLITTLE QUEEN-CELL PKUTECTOH. 



I came in the house this morning and said to my 

 wife, " Well, Doolittle's queen-cell pi-otcctor is a 

 daisy— one of the best inventions for a queen- 

 breeder." And I must say 1 was not a little sur- 

 prised when, in a few minutes after, I read in the 

 last issue of Gleanings of your partial failure. It 

 has worked to perfection in every instance with 

 me. I was very particular in every instance to fit 

 the cell in the apex of the cage, so no bees could 

 get at the side; then I removed one frame from the 

 hive and hung the cage in the space, so it had plen- 

 ty of room without pressing the cage. Perhaps this 

 was unnecessary. Then I was sure to have the col- 

 ony or nucleus queenlgss from 13 to 24 hours be- 

 fore I introduced the cells. 1 consider it a bonan- 

 za. Frank A. Eaton. 



Bluffton, Ohio, June 17, 1887. 



Thanks, friend Eaton. We are very glad 

 to receive your report ; the more so, because 

 our experiments with the Doolittle queen- 

 cell protector seem to be a partial failure. 1 

 can not very well understand now why we 

 did not succeed better. I have this to say, 

 however, that the protectors were tried dur- 

 ing a dearth of honey, after apple-bloom and 

 before clover — a time when, above all others, 

 bees seem most disposed to tear down (|ueen- 



cells. There were something like two or 

 three dozen queen-cells tried in the protect- 

 or, and yet out of this number only two 

 hatched successfully. In former seasons we 

 have not had such poor success with queen- 

 cells liatching, even witiiout the protector. 

 It is possible that the peculiarity of the sea- 

 son has much to do with the results ; and we 

 dont therefore propose to abandon trying 

 the protector because we at first seemingly 

 failed. We sliall give some to Neighbor II., 

 and let him try his hand at it. We hope to 

 give, ere long, a better report, because we 

 feel pretty sure that such a man as Mr. Doo- 

 little would not say it worked successfully 

 unless it did. 



uo king-birds swallow their victims? 



In Gleanings of May 15, 1887, p. 395, W. A. Wick- 

 ham asks the question, " Do king-birds," or, what I 

 have always heard them called, bee-birds, "swallow 

 their victims?" and seems to think they do not. I 

 killed one to-day that had four drones in his crop, 

 l)ut no workers. I killed a frying-si/.e chicken that 

 had 64 drones in its crop, and no worker-bees. In 

 May 1st issue, p. 357, Grant Scofleld thinks chickens 

 catch worker-bees. I think that is a mistake. 1 

 have noticed them catch drones often, but never a 

 worker. They know the difference as well as we do. 



I. T. McCracken. 



Rosebud, Ala., June 15, 1887. 



Thanks, friend ('. While recent reports 

 seem to indicate that kingbirds do not swal- 

 low their victims, yours goes to prove that 

 they do — at least sometimes. As there 

 seems to be a diversity of opinion in regard 

 to this matter, we should be glad to hear 

 from our readers; that is, do king-birds 

 swallow worker-bees, or do they simply 

 crush them in their bills, extract the nec- 

 tar, and then cast the robbed victim awayV 

 Grant Scofleld, to whom you refer, said that, 

 on dissecting the crop of a chicken, he dis- 

 covered that it hail eaten ten times as many 

 workers as drones. The fact that you dis- 

 covei'ed no workers in the crop of tlie chick- 

 en you dissected does not prove at all that 

 chickens may not sometimes eat worker- 

 bees. It simply proves that .(/(xn- chickens 

 did not. 



DAMP AND DRV AIR; A WELL THAT TELLS WHEN 

 IT IS GOING TO RAIN. 



Some time ago the question was asked, which was 

 heavier— damp air or dry. One of my little boys who 

 reads Gleanings to me while I am busy doing oth- 

 er things, said, " Whj-, pa, if damp air is the heavi- 

 er, why don't the clouds come down? It must be 

 awful damp up there." Does not the mercury in 

 the barometer rise in tine weather? If it will inter- 

 est you any, I will give you an account of a singular 

 well that we had that would foretell a change in 

 the weather sooner and more accurately than our 

 barometer, which was a good one too. 1 have asked 

 many for an ex])Ianation of its peculiar action, but 

 could never get any satisfactori' answer. I can only 

 explain it by the change in the weifiht of the air. 



Hondo, Texas, March 31, 1887. Geo. E. Hailes. 



Friend II., your boy's suggestion seems to 

 be a clincher." I'ou may thank liim for me. 

 By all means, tell us about the singular fea- 

 ture of your well. You know we liave been 

 discussing wells and the temperature of 

 well-water for some time back. 



