Gleanings in Bee Culture 



\E(S)Y 



\Fm(S)m (B^ra^m^ 



J. L. Byeb, Mt. Joy, Ont. 



See here, Arthur C. Miller, you ought to 

 be ashamed of yourself for trying to poke 

 fun at two innocents as you hsivedone, Mar. 

 1, page 131. It so happened that the two 

 boys referred to never knew that they were 

 preparing an article at the same time, so you 

 see there was no deep-laid scheme between 

 us, and we were running a big chance of 

 tripping one another. However, when all 

 is said and done, you may rest assured that 

 none of us are going to try to prevent your 

 using a hive that needs a paper-hanger to 

 get it in shape for winter. On the other 

 hand, if spared till another fall this scrib- 

 bler will pack the bees just a little bit better 

 than ever before, for fear next winter ynay 

 be colder than the last one. 



QUEEN REARING WITHOUT GRAFTING. 



The plan of getting queen cells by laying 

 a brood comb flat on top of the combs of a 

 colony, as described in March 15th Glean- 

 ings, also in March Canadian Bee Journal, 

 seems to be creating a lot of interest. It 

 certainly looks well; and in June I hope to 

 try it on a small scale. When friend Greiner 

 wrote it up last year it appeared to me to be 

 something really original, although in some 

 ways it had a resemblance to the Alley 

 plan. It seems funny that more notice 

 was not taken of the plan which Mr. Greiner 

 so fully described at the time; and this only 

 shows how prone we are to overlook a good 

 thing until a number call our attention to 

 it. While the plan will especially appeal to 

 the busy home producer, I doubt if it will 

 ever be popular with the commercial queen- 

 rearer, as he would not care to mutilate so 

 many combs as would be necessary when 

 thousands of queens were being raised. 



inbreeding to a harmful extent not 

 possible. 

 Much has been said during the past few 

 years about "in-breeding" of bees. Of late 

 I have been thinking the term a misnomer 

 in so far as it relates to bees. Recently it 

 has been my privilege to attend the short 

 courses at Guelph Agricultural College; and 

 after seeing how closely line bred are all our 

 various kinds of stocks, including poultry, 

 I have come to the conclusion that it is vir- 

 tually impossible to inbreed bees to a harm- 

 ful extent. Why? Simply because of par- 

 thenogenesis defeating our plans, and be- 

 cause of the fact, too, that, so far, we have 

 no successful plan of controlling the male 

 parentage. .Judging from the amount of 

 trouble that breeders of different kinds of 

 stock have in getting true distinct types, 

 even when they can control both sides of 

 the parentage, I confess to being a bit skep- 

 tical as to the probability of beekeepers do- 

 ing much along that line until some method 

 is found of controlling the mating of our 

 queens. 



Regarding these short courses, it is indeed 

 a healthy sign to see hundreds availing 

 themselves of the benefits to be derived 

 from these institutions. While I had little 

 time to attend the beekeeping course, yet 

 my few visits convinced me that there were 

 many earnest students in attendance. The 

 program -was intensely practical, and the 

 facilities for demonstrating very fair, con- 

 sidering that beekeeping has just recently 

 been recognized. If I am correct, I believe 

 that about 50 attended the course. I shall 

 have more to say about this in a future issue. 

 4). 

 WHAT ARE HYBRIDS? 



Dr. Miller is quite a stickler as to the use 

 of correct language; and yet, in common 

 with the rest of us, he unblushingly makes 

 use of the word "hybrid " when speaking 

 of cross-bred bees, page 152, March 15th. 

 Now, we all know that the term "hybrid" 

 refers to the offspring of the crossing of two • 

 different species; as, for example, the mule 

 in the animal kingdom, or emmer, or speltz, 

 in the varieties of grain. As nearly as I 

 can find out, beekeepers are the chief sin- 

 ners who use this misnomer when speaking 

 of cross-bred stock. Just why this is the 

 case is hard to explain, unless the excuse 

 of brevity will have to explain the matter. 

 No, I have no fault to find, but it only 

 shows how we can change the real meaning 

 of a word by constantly misusing it; and 

 after all no harm is done so long as no con- 

 fusion results from the change. Possibly 

 "shook swarming" will soon be recognized 

 as being perfectly in order so far as the doc- 

 tor is concerned. 



4>- 

 DEEPER FRAMES THAN LANGSTROTH PRE- 

 FERRED. 



Regarding the discussion on depth of 

 frames for wintering, provoked by that ar- 

 ticle of Mr. Simmins in a recent issue of the 

 C. B. J., it appears that both sides of the 

 controversy are going to extremes, as is very 

 apt to be the case in all discussions along 

 this line. With the hive advocated by Mr. 

 Simmins, certainly his claims appear ridic- 

 ulous when it is considered how little dif- 

 ference in size there is between the hive he 

 is censuring and the one he is upholding. 

 On the other hand, I am firmly convinced 

 that a frame one-third or more deeper than 

 the L. size is away ahead of the latter for 

 wintering outdoors in our climate. I do not 

 say that bees can not be wintered on these 

 shallower frames, for such a claim would be 

 absurd; but it takes far more attention to 

 be sure of results with this frame than it 

 does with the deeper frame. This assertion 

 will, I believe, be accepted by nearly all 

 who have tried the different depths side by 

 side. Personally I much prefer the deeper 

 frame, but at the same time I generally ad- 

 vise beginners to start out with the stand- 

 ard frame. 



