776 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE 



Dec. 15 



comb in the manner shown in the accom- 

 panying photographs The smaller bit of 

 waxwork I broke from the frame. It is un- 

 usually interesting, inasmuch as it exhibits 

 in a very small space the three styles of cells 

 to be found in a normal colony of bees. Note 

 the dozen or so queen-cells, and there are 

 others on the reverse side. 



The larger photo is interesting, too, in 

 many ways. It will be noticed that the 

 queen was "not up to her speed," else she 

 would have been more careful in her egg- 

 laying — there would not have been so many 

 skipped cells. The honey-storage was am- 

 ple and good. 



Oakland, Cal. 



A SEASON'S AFTER. THOUGHTS ON 



FEEDERS, FEEDING, AND 



COVERS. 



BY F. DUNDAS TODD. 



Since coming west I realize more and 

 more each day how very much must be in- 

 cluded in the word "locality," the bee-keep- 

 ers' technical term for environment; for as 

 I read the pages of this magazine word by 

 word and line by line at least twice I often 

 find myself saying, "That is all right for Ill- 

 inois, but not for this neck of the woods." 

 Conditions are so different, and I am yet far 

 from understanding them, especially when 

 on every hand I am assured that this has 

 been a most exceptional year, the tempera- 

 ture and seasonal arrangements having been 

 turned topsyturvy. This is a great pollen 

 country, especially when, in May, the Scotch 

 broom blazes forth in gorgeous golden yel- 

 low, a positive eye-feast of splendor; and 

 yet under the date of April 3 my notebook 

 reports, "Been a dearth of pollen up to 

 now." The first pollen of the season was 

 carried in on Feb. 22. The trouble was not 

 with the flowers but with the daily tempera- 

 ture, which rarely got up to 48°, so that the 

 bees could not fly. We had a cold wave the 

 first half of January, when almost zero was 

 reached; but by the 20th the bees had a 

 flight From that date until March 17 the 

 thermometer hung around 40 to 48 degrees 

 with deadly uniformity, once in a while 

 reaching 50 for a couple of hours — sufficient 

 for a flight, but not long enough for much 

 work to be done. 



It was during this distressing period that 

 I began to get a new light on the problem of 

 feeders. My bees were in desperate need 

 of stores. This is matter for another story, 

 possibly with a moral new to many that may 

 be told later, and so I got out the bottom- 

 board feeding-tins, and put them into oper- 

 ation. 



My readers may remember I selected this 

 style because I thought they would be equal- 

 ly suitable for spring stimulative and fall 

 solid feeding. For the latter purpose they 

 are all right, though not nearly as good as 

 the Miller feeder ([ have used both), and I 

 have just finished feeding 3ii0 pounds of su- 



gar to make certain the bees will not be de- 

 pendent on honey-dew alone in winter — the 

 only crop they secured being composed of 

 that wretched stuff. 



As a spring feeder in this locality the bot- 

 tom feeder is a failure, for (and here is a 

 fact I have not yet found in bee literature) 

 bees will not take up thin syrup from below 

 when the temperature is under .50°. For 

 back feeding, as Mr. Hand uses this feeder, 

 I believe there is nothing handier, because 

 in August, a year ago, I fed slowly to a num- 

 ber of hives in an effort to get combs, and 

 learned its convenience. But my season's 

 experience convinces me that in a climate of 

 steady low temperatures, like this and that 

 of the British Isles, the best spring feeder is 

 one that slips into the brood-chamber like an 

 ordinary frame, the Doolittle being the type. 



THE DENSITY OF HONEY; DIFFERENT SYRUP 

 FORMULAS; MEASURE OR WEIGHT OF SU- 

 GAR AND WATER. 

 While discussing feeder problems I am 

 naturally led to that of the syrup, especially 

 that given for winter stores, it has been 

 shown that the greatest economy is exercised 

 by giving a syrup as nearly the consistency 

 of honey as possible. Nowhere can I find an 

 authoritative statement as to the density of 

 honey excepting in the United States Phar- 

 macopeia, where it is given as 1.37. Honey 

 by bee-keepers is generally assumed to be 

 half as heavy again as water — that is, pos- 

 sessing a density of 1.5. But Mr. I. Hopkins, 

 government apiarist of New Zealand, is 

 quoted as advising that no honey be market- 

 ed unless it has a specific gravity of 1.4; and 

 he thinks 1.4 even better, as all samples he 

 had tested of that specific gravity, and up- 

 ward, were perfectly ripe. In making the 

 feeding syrup we may, therefore, take 1.4 as 

 a safe standard, and so prepare a solution 

 that will be of slightly less density, say 1.2. 



Mr. E. D. Townsend recommends a syrup 

 composed of three parts of sugar and two of 

 water, which, he says, weighs 11 pounds to 

 the gallon — that is, has a density of 1 37; and 

 I note with pleasure he says he weighs both 

 the sugar and the water. Several writers 

 recommend so many parts sugar, so many 

 parts water, by weight or measure, the as- 

 sumption being that sugar and water, bulk 

 for bulk, are of the same weight, which, as a 

 matter of fact, they are not. An ounce of 

 water, fluid measure, weighs an ounce, ex- 

 actly, in Britain, and approximately so in the 

 United States, so that the United States pint 

 of 16 ounces weighs practically a pound. 

 But a pint of sugar, such as I have been us- 

 ing, weighs about 13^4 ounces; therefore a 

 formula that recommends quantities "by 

 weight or measure " is a very unsafe one to 

 follow. Mr. Doolittle's recipe consists of 

 boiling water, 15 lbs., or 15 pints; granulated 

 sugar, 30 lbs., or 35 pints; extracted honey, 

 5 lbs., or 3.5 pints. 



I would estimate the total bulk of the 

 above to be about 38>^ pints, so that the 

 density of the feeding syrup is probably 

 about 1 3. 



