1366 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE. 



Nov. 15 



natives of foreign countries where disease is ram- 

 pant and unchecked, is now scattering disease in 

 new territory in the United States. A tariff on 

 wax is recommended because much of the im- 

 ported article is rendered in solar wax-extractors 

 ajt a comparatively low temperature, or not suf- 

 ficiently high to kill the germs of disease. 



It is further argued that a high price on do- 

 mestic wax would redound greatly to the benefit 

 of the producer of extracted honey, and would 

 not affect the producer of honey in sections, be 

 cause the enhanced price of the wax and d'ark or 

 ill-flavored honeys would more than pay for the 

 extra cost of his foundation. 



There are a good many angles to this proposi- 

 tion, and Gleanings does not propose to take 

 any sides; but we do say something should be 

 done to prevent the spread of disease in this coun- 

 try; for foul brood and black brood — especially 

 the latter — are spreading over this country at an 

 alarming rate, invading sections where these dis- 

 eases were never known to exist before. The old- 

 fashioned (or American) foul brood is easily held 

 in check by an intelligent bee-keeper; but the 

 black (or European) foul brood is an entirely dif- 

 ferent disease. It spreads more rapidly, and 

 seems to resist in some cases the most intelligent 

 methods of cure. It has come very near ruining 

 some bee-keepers, and has put others out of bus- 

 iness. 



With the advance in the price of wax, which 

 would be inevitable if a tariff were placed on it, 

 it would mean that the bee-keeper would have to 

 pay correspondingly more for his foundation; but 

 he would get more for his wax. It is argued, 

 therefore, that one will offset the other. It has 

 also been suggested that, with the higher price 

 on wax, one might be able to produce it in some 

 of the Southern States at a profit for wax only. 

 However this may be, we can not say. 



This is a legitimate subject for discussion, and 

 our columns are open for it; but we must respect- 

 fully decline to publish any thing of a partisan 

 or political nature involving the whole question 

 of free trade and protection as it applies to gene- 

 ral articles manufactured and consumed in this 

 country. The discussion must be confined 

 strictly to wax and honey, and, what is more, 

 must be free from any partisan bias. 



SHOULD A BEE-KEEPER MELT UP HIS OLD COMBS.? 

 HOW FOUL BROOD, IF PRESENT, MAY BE EN- 

 TIRELY ERADICATED BY THE PRACTICE. 



Dr. Miller presents the following Straw in 

 his regular department; but as it required a more 

 extended reply than the limits of the space in that 

 department would allow, we insert it here. 



" It would pay any bee-keeper to melt up his combs every four 

 or five years, and fill the frames witn new sheets of wired foun- 

 dation," page 1306. I wonder how many in this country believe 

 that. I wouldn't exchange five-year-old combs for frames of 

 foundation if you would do all the work of melting up, give me 

 back the wax, and charge me nothing for frames of foundation. 

 In other words, I agree with the large number who value old 

 combs more than new. 



You are speaking, doctor, from the standpoint 

 of the comb-honey producer, and in a locality 

 where there is no foul brood and never has been. 

 But there are some producers of extracted honey 

 who are beginning to question whether or not 

 the honey from these old dark combs is of as good 

 a flavor and color as that from newer and lighter 



combs. On the other hand, it may be said there 

 are some of this class of producers who prefer old 

 combs because they are stronger — that is to say, 

 they will stand a higher centrifugal force in the 

 extractor; but if they be well wired they will 

 stand almost any kind of intelligent extracting, 

 even if they are not old. 



But some bee-keepers are learning, to their sor- 

 Eow, that foul brood once in a locality has a tenden- 

 cy to break out every now and then. They are 

 able to keep it in control but not to prevent it 

 appearing here and there in stray colonies. And 

 why.' Because the disease-germs lurk in these 

 old combs; and under the right conditions foul 

 brood will be developed from them, even years 

 afterward. 



Some have about come to the conclusion that 

 the only way to keep the disease out of their yards 

 is to melt up their old combs every four or five 

 years; and if one will keep an exact account of 

 his figures he will be surprised to see that there 

 is no great loss in the operation, providing such 

 combs, when emptied of honey, are stowed away 

 to be melted up at the most convenient season of 

 the year. Some figures bearing on this point 

 will be introduced at a later time; and in the 

 mean time the reader is urged not to pass judg- 

 ment until these figures are produced. 



For some years back we have been convinced 

 that there is no other way to eradicate foul brood 

 from a yard than to melt up the combs every four 

 or five years. Indeed, we have been practicing 

 that policy for the last six or seven years. We 

 are this very day melting up some 300 or 400 

 combs, many of them good ones, for no other 

 reason than that they are four or five years old. 

 So far as we know they are and always have been 

 free from disease. But we sell bees by the colo- 

 ny and nucleus, and we realize the very great im- 

 portance to the general bee-keeping world of send- 

 ing out bees on only fresh new combs, and in the 

 mean time eliminating any possible chance of the 

 disease breaking out, by putting an age limit on 

 our combs. Our experience shows that the wax 

 secured will pay for the foundation at the price 

 the bee-keeper pays, and even for the labor of 

 rendering, since the work may be done at a time 

 when a bee-keeper can not do much else. 



Again, there are many producers who are har- 

 boring in their yards a lot of combs containing a 

 very large excess of drone-cells. When these are 

 in the yard one never knows but he may be in- 

 curring a big expense by raising a lot of unnec- 

 essary drones, unless he is keeping a close watch. 

 No, it does not pay to keep drone comb, even in 

 extracting-supers. It had better be all eliminated 

 and good worker comb substituted. It will pay 

 in the end. 



But right here some will say that "the Root 

 Co. are makers of foundation. They can well 

 afford to advocate the policy of melting up combs 

 every four or five years." This is a specious ar- 

 gument against the practice, and we admit it may 

 have a bad look. But we only ask the bee-keep- 

 er to conduct some experiments of his own on a 

 sufficiently large scale and then tell us what he 

 finds. The truth is what we want, cut where it 

 may. Right here we may say the old-fashioned 

 methods of old-comb rendering will not secure 

 enough wax to pay for new foundation by a long 

 way. 



