Aug. 27, 1903. 



THE AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL. 



549 



central Texas. This plant can be found along the banks of 

 streams, and on the sandy knolls adjoining stock tanks. As 

 a honey-producer in central Texas, at least, it is absolutely 

 worthless. The bees visit it but rarely, and only then in 

 the absence of all other nectar-yielding plants. 



A small field of alfalfa was planted on the upland at 

 College Station in the fall of 1902, and in spite of the abun- 

 dant winter rains following, died out completely by May 1. 

 The seed germinated and came up well, but the soil was 

 evidently too poor for its growth. 



The writer has often noticed that California privet — 

 which shrub is largely planted for ornamental hedges in 

 many parts of Texas — when in bloom, is visited by many 

 bees, and the nectar secured is evidently considerable. 

 With a view to determining the value of this shrub as a 

 honey-producer, a small grove was planted during the past 

 winter. Here, again, the lack of help asserted itself, and 

 the work had to be abandoned when about one acre had 

 been planted out. It is proposed to continue this planting 

 until the grove contains at least three acres, and this, in 

 three or four years, should give a good indication of what 

 may be expected from this plant. 



In March, the seed of several plants, including catnip, 

 teasel, milkweed and sweet clover (Melilotus), were planted 

 in carefully prepared soil. None of them grew. 



Of over 40 different plants tested during 1902 and 1903, 

 only borage, mustard, mignonette, Japanese buckwheat, 

 sweet-peas, cow-peas, and California privet promise to 

 thrive under soil and weather conditions existing at College 

 Station. Of these only borage, mignonette, Japanese buck- 

 wheat and privet offer any prospect of being profitable if 

 grown on a commercial scale for honey alone. 



" PBLLONCILLOS." 



This, an unrefined sugar manufactured in Mexico, is 

 familiar to the great majority of Texas bee-keepers, and 

 especially to those of the Southwest, who have often used it 

 for feeding in "off " years. 



With a view to testing its food-value for bees, and its 

 cost as compared to sugar, we secured last autumn about 40 

 pounds of this sugar. The sugar, as ordinarily sold, is in 

 small cones containing about 13 ounces each, wrapped with 

 corn-husks. In December several of these cones were 

 placed in an empty super over a strong colony in need of 

 stores. The bees worked at it slowly but steadily, and at 

 the end of a month over half the sugar still remained in the 

 super. 



On Feb. 10, 11 and 12, the weather being warm and 

 sunny, out-door feeding was resorted to as many of the col- 

 onies were short of stores. About 100 yards from the api- 

 ary three feeders were placed. One containing dry pellon- 

 cillos, one syrup made from pelloncillos and cold water, and 

 the other contained ordinary sugar syrup made from granu- 

 lated sugar (in the proportion of one part granulated sugar 

 to 1^2 parts water). The bees showed a decided preference 

 for the granulated-sugar syrup, and took it fully four times 

 as rapidly as the " pelloncie " syrup. The dry pelloncillos 

 were visited by only an occasional bee. 



The day following many dead bees were found in front 

 of all the hives, and in the afternoon a full quart of bees, 

 dead and dying, were found bunched together by the 

 "pelloncie" feeder. Analysis of the " pelloncie " syrup 

 was made by Prof. H. H. Harrington, State Chemist, and 

 was found to contain a large percentage of acetic acid. The 

 dry pelloncillos were then examined, and were also found to 

 contain acetic acid. The large organic content, aside from 

 sugar, is most favorable for acetic acid fermentation. The 

 presence of a considerable amount of water, for this fermen- 

 tation to take place, is not necessarily essential. For this 

 reason we must conclude that the use of pelloncillos for 

 feeding bees is a most dangerous practice, and in no case 

 should be undertaken without first testing the sugar for 

 acid, and even while being fed it should be tested with lit- 

 mus paper every day to be certain that no fermentation is 

 taking place. 



FEEDING EXPERIMENTS. 



An experiment in stimulative feeding was undertaken 

 the past spring, but owing to the limited number of colo- 

 nies the results obtained were not conclusive. 



In the experiment six colonies, each having six frames 

 of bees (practically 6-frame nuclei) were used. Colonies 8 

 and 9 (old series) were fed from Feb. 13 to April 13, with 

 Doolittle (division-board) feeders, at the rate of one half 

 pint of syrup per day (granulated sugar one part, to water 

 1 '2 parts), the feeding being omitted on cool and rainy days, 

 when the bees refused to take the syrup from the feeders. 



Colonies 2 ana 12 were fed in the same way from March 

 6 to April 13. Colonies 1 and 3, for comparison, received 

 no feed. At the beginning of the experiment these colo- 

 nies (6-frame nuclei) were, so far as could be determined, in 

 the same condition. All were in 10-frame dovetailed hives, 

 and all had 3-banded Italian queens. 



Summing up the results : Nos. 1 and 3 together pro- 

 duced (up to June 1) IS pounds of extracted honey. Colo- 

 nies 8 and 9 were fed in all 8 26-100 pounds of sugar, which, 

 at 6 cents per pound, cost SO cents. These two colonies to- 

 gether produced a surplus of 23,'3 pounds, a gain of 8>2 

 pounds over the unfed colonies. Honey of the same quality 

 and kind sold in Bryan, Tex., at this time for 7 cents. The 

 gain over the unfed colonies was therefore S9 cents, ob- 

 tained at a cost of SO cents ; profit 9 cents. 



Colonies 2 and 12 received in all S.8 pounds of sugar, 

 which cost 3S cents. These two colonies produced only IS 

 pounds of surplus, which was the amount produced by 1 

 and 3 without feed. Loss, 3S cents. The above results 

 would indicate that the feeding commenced early (Feb. 13), 

 was far more profitable than the feeding commenced later 

 on (March 6). The above amounts of surplus seem very 

 small, but the fact that only nuclei were used in the experi- 

 ment readily explains that point. Had full colonies been 

 used the total yields would have been much larger, and 

 doubtless the benefit (or loss) have been more marked. 



We are prone to believe from this experiment, as well 

 as from previous observations, that whether or not stimula- 

 tive feeding will prove profitable in the increased honey- 

 production will depend largely upon the price paid for 

 sugar, the selling price of the honey secured, and the length 

 of time available for building up the colonies before the 

 main honey-flow commences. For example, in the above 

 instance it is seen that the colonies which were given from 

 Feb. 13 to April 13 to build up not only paid for the sugar 

 furnished them, but made a narrow margin of profit besides. 

 On the other hand, the colonies which were given from 

 March 6 to April 13 to build up, did not even pay for a part 

 of the sugar fed them. 



As an illustration of the bearing of the prices of sugar 

 and honey upon the results, suppose that in the case of 

 colonies 8 and 9, the sugar had been purchased at S cents 

 and the honey sold for 8 cents. The profit would have been 

 27 cents instead of 9 cents. Again, as a somewhat extreme 

 case, suppose that the honey obtained were of good quality 

 and retailed direct by the bee-keeper at 10 cents. The profit 

 due to feeding colonies 8 and 9 would have been (with sugar 

 at 5 cents) 4S cents. 



Two full colonies were also used in a similar experi- 

 ment, one being fed and the other not fed. In this case the 

 fed colony produced but 3 pounds more surplus than the un- 

 fed colony, with a resultant loss of 12 cents. In the case of 

 these colonies, had the sugar been bought for S cents a 

 pound, and the honey sold for 10 cents, the gain in honey 

 would have exactly paid for the sugar fed. In other words, 

 neither profit nor loss. The value of the time necessary to 

 do such feeding is not taken into consideration. These re- 

 sults are not considered by any means as conclusive, but 

 are presented as showing how a very small variation in the 

 price of sugar, or in the selling price of honey, will deter- 

 mine whether stimulative feeding will return a profit or a 

 loss. 



SECTION HONEY vs. EXTRACTED. 



The present season has but confirmed our former opin- 

 ion, that the vicinity of the College is totally unadapted to 

 the production of section honey. A slow honey flow, an 

 abundance of propolis, and above all, a dark honey, are the 

 main deterrent factors. This makes the use of hives, spe- 

 cially constructed for section-honey production — such, for 

 example, as the Danzenbaker — inadvisable. An interest- 

 ing observation was made the past spring in connection 

 with the latter hive. 4xS plain sections, with fences and 

 foundation starters, were placed upon one Danzenbaker 

 hive, and upon one 10 frame dovetailed hive. The colonies 

 in both these hives were 3-banded Italian, and, as nearly as 

 could be determined, of the same strength. Now, as to re- 

 sults ; The colony in the Danzenbaker hive produced 11 

 sections that graded No. 2, and 13 partially filled sections 

 that could not be graded other than culls. The colony in 

 the 10-frame dovetailed hive produced 15 No. 1 sections and 

 14 No. 3 sections. We have no explanation to offer. 



On account of the abundance of propolis the use of 

 closed-end frames, in most parts of Texas, is not practi- 

 cable, and their use by beginners is not to be recommended. 

 Among extensive bee-keepers rapidity of manipulation is a 

 most important consideration. With such a hive as the 



