June, 1919 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CUIjTURE 



365 



FROM THE FIELD OF EXPERIENCE 



dwindling to death or becoming so reduced 

 as to be of no value as a surplus lioney-pro- 

 ducer for the season. In the cool nights of 

 fall the activities of the skunk are again 

 renewed, and frequently colonies are so far 

 depleted of bees as to render it impossible 

 to bring them safely thru the winter. Bee- 

 keepers whose apiaries are infested with 

 skunks may attribute a part of their winter 

 losses to their depredations. 



The provisions of the conservation law in 

 New York State in reference to skunks are 

 as follows, viz.: "Skunks may be taken 

 either in the day time or at night and in 

 any manner, but they shall not be taken 

 from holes or dens by digging, smoking, or 

 the use of chemicals, and they may be pos- 

 sessed from November tenth to February 

 tenth both inclusive. Skunks which are in- 

 juring property or have become a nuisance 

 may be taken at any time in any manner; 

 but* the skunk or any part thereof so taken 

 shall not be possessed, bought, sold, or traf- 

 ficked in. ' ' 



The skunk's well-earned reputation for in- 

 juring property and becoming an intolerable 

 nuisance is recognized in this law by the 

 provision allowing them to be killed ' ' at 

 at any time and in any manner ' ' when they 

 do so injure property or become a nuisance. 

 The skunk is the only animal mentioned in 

 this conservation law that for any reason 

 is outside the law's protection. 



The skunk is a nuisance per se, and I pre- 

 dict it will become increasingly so as long 

 as fostered by conservation. Protecting it 

 benefits a few sportsmen, trappers, and fur 

 dealers; and for this the State, thru its 

 beekeepers, is made to sustain a loss many 

 times the value of the skunks. Conserva- 

 tion, in its broad and accepted sense, means- 

 the preservation of that which is valuable. 

 If it costs more in value to conserve an ob- 

 ject than that object is worth, then it is 

 plain that the opposite of conservation has 

 been accomplished. 



But as long as the law is in force all good 

 citizens will wish to have it respected. 

 Moreover, the surest way to obtain the re- 

 peal of an objectionable law is to enforce 

 it. It is to be hoped that the enforcement 

 of this section of the conservation law will 

 speedily create sufficient sentiment against 

 it as to result in its repeal. 



Kenmore, N. Y. Orel L. Hershiser. 



30^C«= 



SWARM PREVENTION 



Warning Against the Dependability of Some 

 Highly Recommended Plans 



If anybody contemplates trying the so- 

 called "Sheppard plan of swarm preven- 

 tion," as given on page 39, January Glean- 

 ings, my advice would be to try it in a 

 limited way at first. Briefly, this plan is 



that of putting the queen with a little un- 

 sealed brood in the second story of combs or 

 foundation over a queen-excluder, eight or 

 nine days later tearing down all but one 

 queen-cell below the excluder; and, after 

 the young queen below is mated, removing 

 the old queen; and eight or nine days later 

 destroying the queen-cells above. 



A number of years ago I worked out a 

 similar scheme for hatching queens below 

 the excluder while retaining the old queen 

 above. At that time I could see no reason 

 why it would not work out in practice. In 

 fact, I had so much faith in the plan that 

 I tried it with about 50 colonies. In nearly 

 every case the young queen disappeared to- 

 gether with a goodly number of the bees. I 

 have since learned from experience that if 

 a queen-cell is permitted to hatch with a 

 laying queen in the hive, the bees will near- 

 ly always swarm if weather and other condi- 

 tions are not unfavorable. If the old queen 

 is clipped or confined within the hive, the 

 virgin queen goes with the swarm. Like- 

 wise, if cells are allowed to hatch above the 

 excluder, the young queens often squeeze 

 thru and lead off a swarm. The owner ex- 

 amining the colony later, finding brood in 

 all stages and the old clipped queen on duty, 

 concludes that there has been no swarming. 

 Here is an illustration: 



At an outyard brood had been placed 

 above excluders. Being unavoidably delay- 

 ed, I arrived a day behind schedule time for 

 removing queen-cells. Soon after reaching 

 the yard, a swarm came out, and a few min- 

 utes later a second colony swarmed. In 

 each case the clipped queen was found in 

 front of the hive and caged. In hiving the 

 two swarms three virgin queens were ob- 

 served to run in with the bees of the first 

 swarm and two with the second. The combs 

 of the two colonies were then carefully ex- 

 amined, and it was found that no queens had 

 emerged from cells below the excluder in 

 either case, but three and two respectively 

 from cells above the excluder. There was 

 no possible chance for these virgins to es- 

 cape from the parent colony except by pass- 

 ing thru the queen-excluder. I have many 

 times observed swarming under like condi- 

 tions as probably have hundreds of others, 

 and yet frequently articles appear which 

 seem to imply that it is a safe plan to allow 

 cells to hatch when separated from the lay- 

 ing queen by an excluder. 



I agree with Dr. Miller when he says, 

 "Breed from the best and eliminate all 

 queens that fall below the average," but it 

 is a wise beekeeper who can surely deter- 

 mine which is best. With due apologies to 

 my venerable namesake, it certainly is not 

 always the colony which stores the most 

 honey. In the above case, a "let-alone" 

 beekeeper, coming around a week or so later, 

 and finding no evidence of swarming, would 



