1909 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE 



495 



either of these cases would very likely de- 

 feat the very object sought — that of rearing 

 a queen. A case of apathy often occurs 

 when a colony allows an old queen to re- 

 main in the hive through the season, having 

 barely vitality enough to keep the colony 

 alive; and another where a colony is queen- 

 less. In both of these cases almosrt any bee- 

 keeper knows what should be done. Shak- 

 ing would do no good in either case. 



To make a long story short, it is my con- 

 tention that the change effected, not the 

 manner of bringing it about, is what pro- 

 duces results. The hive first referred to 

 was simply clogged with bees, brood, and 

 honey; and had this condition continued a 

 week or ten days longer, the colony would 



Srobably have cast a swarm. If these bees 

 ad been passed through a bee-escape into 

 their new home; or if frames of bees had 

 been moved, never so carefully, into their 

 new quarters, making, say, two colonies of 

 the one, the operation would have been just 

 as successful as the most vigorous shaking, 

 and would have been less cruel. I have 

 made many such changes with the most sat- 

 isfactory results. 



I should like to refer to an item or two in 

 Mr. Williams' article on page 313. One is 

 the reference he makes to moving an apiary 

 by Mr. Dadant. Which, think you, caused 

 tlie greater activity of the bees — jolting over 

 a rough road or changing their environment 

 and causing- them to mark their location 

 anew, as well as to make new explorations? 

 If shaking were all that they needed, why 

 not set them back on their respective stands 

 in the home apiary again? 



He says, "Whenever, in going among the 

 bees, I rind a colony that, for one cause or 

 other, fails to come up to this standard (i. e., 

 the condition of a newly hived swarm), I 

 shake it. This brings it up to the desired 

 condition." I do not know that I quite un- 

 derstand his meaning when he thus speaks 

 of shaking bees. If he means that he simply 

 shakes the colony, leaving it in every other 

 respect as before shaking, the practice seems 

 to be very objectionable. I can hardly think 

 that this is what he means to convey. As 

 evidence, note the following: "A promiscu- 

 ous shaking will not bring you a pound of 

 honey unless the conditions warrant it; but 

 if you study the above rule, and apply it 

 whenever the bees need it, I am sure you 

 will be pleased with the results; and this 

 summer I want you all to select the worst 

 old loafer you can find, and when every 

 thing else has failed, shake it out on empty 

 frames, with two-inch starters, leaving a 

 frame or two of eggs and young brood to 

 keep the queen below; and if the results are 

 not entirely satisfactory I am no prophet." 



Exactly! "Shake it out on empty frames, 

 with two-inch starters," etc. Here is the 

 whole matter in a nutshell. No practical 

 bee-keeper will doubt, I think, Mr. Williams' 

 statement as to results in tlie case mention- 

 ed; yet there are other ways of doing the 

 work, or bringing about a change without 

 shaking the bees at all. 



I have yet to see a strong colony, however 

 strong it may be, having accessible storage 

 room and proper ventilation, during a sea- 

 son of nectar flow, sulking. It sometimes 

 happens that proper attention is neglected 

 till after sulking begins, when neither ad- 

 ditional room nor any other means, except- 

 ing breaking up the colony, does the least 

 good. In sucn case, undoubtedly, the 

 swarming fever has been contracted, and to 

 break it up is like attempting to break a hen 

 of sitting. The thing to do in this case is to 

 run the colony on to frames of foundation or 

 starters, as recommended by Mr. Williams, 

 or make two colonies by division in some 

 one of the ways familiar to nearly all bee- 

 keepers. But that shaking, pure and simple, 

 adds any thing to the value of a colony of 

 bees I do not believe, any more than I be- 

 lieve that jabbing a pitchfork at the rear 

 end of a mule adds any thing to the quality 

 of its docility. 



You say on page 313, "There is no deny- 

 ing the fact that a natural swarm is much 

 superior to an ordinary colony for honey 

 production." If you mean superior to the 

 parent colony, scarcely any one conversant 

 with the subject will question the statement; 

 but if you apply it to colonies built up strong 

 for honey production, which do not develop 

 the swarming impulse, I should say no, most 

 emphatically. If such an idea is to be taken 

 as bee-keeping gospel, what shall we say of 

 the desire of Dr. Miller and others to breed 

 out the swarming impulse? I can hardly 

 think you meant all that these words imply. 



Evanston, 111. 



[We quite agree with our correspondent 

 in saying that giving extra room and supply- 

 ing foundation goes a long way toward pre- 

 venting swarming. Just how far the shak- 

 ing, as recommended by Mr. Williams, may 

 contribute toward this result we are not 

 prepared to say; but we are of the opinion 

 that it has some effect. We have also had 

 the same experience where he says that he 

 has yet to see a strong colony sulk having 

 plenty of storage room and proper ventila- 

 tion during the season of the nectar flow. 

 These statements will harmonize well with 

 an article written by us in this issue before 

 we saw what Mr. Whitney had written. 



But we most decidedly take issue with our 

 correspondent when he doubts the superior 

 working qualities of a natural swarm over 

 an ordinary colony of the same strength. 

 We meant exactly what we said, nor did we 

 have in mind any comparison with the par- 

 ent colony. It was no less an authority than 

 Langstroth. In "Langstroth on the Honey- 

 bee," edition of 1859, p. 153, Mr. L. makes 

 this general statement: 



Although the movable-comb hive may be made more 

 effectually to prevent swarmint: than any with which 

 i am acquainted, still there are some objections to the 

 non-swarmintr plan which can not be removed. To 

 say nothinti of its preventing the increase of stocks, 

 bees usually work with diminished vitror after they 

 have been kept in a non-swarmincr hive for several 

 seasons. This will be obvious to any one who will 

 compare the surperaboundintr energy of a new swarm 

 with the more slutrirish working of even a much 

 Kirontrer non-swarming stock. 



