1902 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE. 



937 



that they will be more easil}' understood. 

 According" to his way of fig-uring:, my esti- 

 mate of 150,000,000 lbs. of honey would 

 make 700u carloads. The United States 

 census report on the same basis would 

 make 6667 carloads, or only 333 less than 

 my estimate. These figures are significant 

 when we come to consider the fact that they 

 were arrived at through totally different 

 and independent sources —significant be- 

 cause they are so close together. But my 

 estimate, as made three years ago, was 

 figured on a very conservative basis; and 

 ihe United States census report of 18^9 

 probabljr did not take account of all the 

 honey produced. In that, as our readers 

 know, I have questioned the accuracy of the 

 report. But either way we figure it, both 

 estimates are under the actual output of 

 honey in the United States at the present 

 time. I think we should be safe in conclud- 

 ing that we may estimate that the actual 

 product of this country is not far from 

 10,000 carloads. This seems like an enor- 

 mous amount of hone}'; but if one will go 

 through some of the large supply-manufac- 

 tories of this country, and look over their 

 order-books, he will have no occasion to 

 doubt these figures. 



The general public is dazed when it tries 

 to take account of them, and therefore con- 

 cludes that so much honey could not be hon- 

 estly produced from the hive, and that, 

 therefore, it is largely glucosed. It is evi- 

 dent that we ought to enter on a campaign 

 of education. As Dr. Miller suggested in 

 his address before the Denver convention, 

 the National Bee-keepers' Association 

 should find means for educating the public 

 to the actual facts of the honey business — 

 how the honey is produced, and the proba- 

 ble annual product. 



Referring again to Mr. Bennett's recloth- 

 ing of the United States census report, we 

 copy from the Pacific Bee Journal his fig- 

 ures by States. They read as follows: 



The United States Honey Report of 1899 shows Cal- 

 ifornia p oduces 170 cars of honey; Texas, 220 cars 

 (marketed mostly at home); New York, 160 cars; Mis- 

 souri, HO cars; Iowa 120 cars; Kentucky, 180 cars; 

 Illinois, 135 cars; Ohio, 85 cars; Colorado, 81 cars; Ar- 

 kansas, 65 cars. I have figured out the carlo ids at 

 22,000 pounds to the car. This makes 26,000-pound 

 cars, leaving 4000 as weight of cases 



THE HONEY RESOURCES OF CUBA. 



It will be interesting to know that Cuba 

 is now turning out something like 200 car- 

 loads of honey every year, notwithstanding 

 only a very small portion of its bee locations 

 are utilized, especially by modern bee-keep- 

 ers. We learn from official sources that we 

 consider reliable that the annual product of 

 honey inCuba is asstated above. WhatCuba 

 could do easily if its territory were taken 

 up with modern bee-keeping, with its long 

 seasons of honey-flow, no one can estimate. 

 It is not too much to suppose that it could 

 produce in the neighborhood of 500 car- 

 loads. California has put out in one sea- 

 son an amount equal to this. But proba- 

 bly Cuba has better and more extended 

 honey resources than any other province, 



state, or island, on this hemisphere; and I 

 should not be at all surprised if her annual 

 product ten years hence — well, I dare not 

 estimate. Some of the local bee-keepers of 

 Cuba might give me a good thrashing if I 

 ever set foot on their fair island, so I will 

 leave the reader to guess. 



PROF. COOK ON PEAR-BLIGHT ; ITS CAUSE 

 AND CURE. 



When I visited the bee-keepers in the 

 pear-blight district of Hanford, California. 

 I looked over the situation as a representa- 

 tive and officer of the National Bee-keepers* 

 Association, and I became convinced that 

 the bee-keepers of that section had a grave 

 problem to deal with. Profs. Pierce and 

 Waite had both decided that the bees were 

 responsible for spreading the blight from 

 tree to tree, or at least had a part in it. 

 The pear-growers in and about Hanford 

 were in no good mood toward the bee-keep- 

 ers. They threatened poison, and threat- 

 ened to bring suit for damages, etc. As an 

 officer of the Association I recommended a 

 truce and a suspension of hostilities, dur- 

 ing which the bee-keepers should remove 

 the bees for experiment from a district 

 where the blight was raging the worst. 

 This was done. In the mean time I sug- 

 gested that Profs. Cook and Gillette might 

 possibly be interested in looking into the 

 matter, and give their opinion of the situa- 

 tion. Well, in the Ainerican Bee Journal 

 for Oct. 16 appears an interesting article 

 from our friend, and he gives it as his own 

 opinion that the bees are guilty as charged. 

 He says: 



Prof. Waite, of the Department of Agriculture — the 

 same who did such admirable work proving that bees 

 were a necessity in the orchard - has now done equal- 

 ly valuable work in showing that our bees a .so are 

 chief agents in spreading pear-blight. Prof. Waite 

 has proved this beyond any question. He shows that 

 the microorganisms which cause pear-blight can live 

 only in a liquid or semi-liquid medium. They there- 

 fore reach only to the outside of the plant when car- 

 ried by some secretion or exudation of the same. The 

 bacteriologist has only to visit the plant with a pin- 

 prick, and then in.sert the same pin into another plant 

 to carry the disease. The tip of the stigma bears the 

 sticky secretion whose natural function is to catch and 

 hold the pollen. This liquid, or semi liquid, also dom- 

 iciles the microbes. The bee in quest of nectar touches 

 the stigma and bears away some of the liquid with 

 the microbes, as it does also the pollen-grains. It 

 then hies away to other blossoms, possibly on other 

 trees. Here it leaves not only the pollen but also 

 some of the bacteria. Thus the inoculation is as cer- 

 tain as in case of the pin prick. 



Again, the tender buds are protected by the thin 

 film of liquid resin, which also attracts the bee, as it 

 is here that it gets its propolis or bee-glue. Without 

 doubt the microbes are also in this semi-liquid secre- 

 tion; and as the bee flics to other buds for more of the 

 resinous secretion, the inoculation is again performed, 

 and so we understand how pear-blight spreads in the 

 nursery-rows, and how young trees which have never 

 blossomed may die of the blight. 



This, coming from our own Prof. Cook, 

 who has always been a friend of the bee, 

 and who, it is presumed, would be glad to 

 exonerate them from the serious charge if 

 he could in all honor and honesty, to say 

 the least is unpleasant reading. But if it 

 is the truth, we must not conceal it nor 

 shirk our fair share of responsibility. But 

 Prof. Cook does not believe that the removal 



