DECEMBER 1. lOl'J 



755' 



G. M. DooLiTTLE, you say, p. 653, bees 

 will winter in almost any cellar with a 

 proper even temperature. I'm coming to 

 think they'll stand almost any change of 

 tempei'ature with proper air. [We are not 

 so sure of the first proposition; but we 

 are more sure that the bees will stand a 

 considerable range of temperature provid- 

 e<l they can have plenty of fresh air. Too 

 much light, however, and a temperature 

 above CO might cause large losses of dead 

 bees in spite of an abundance of fresh air. 

 It is not wise to strain these jaropositions 

 too far. On the other hand, Mr. Doolit- 

 tle's statement is reasonably correct ; but in 

 nearly all cases it is almost an impossibility 

 to maintain a uniform temperature of 45 

 degrees Fahrenlieit throughout the winter. 

 At 45 the bees will go into a state of hiber- 

 nation w"]]ere the respiration is low and the 

 consumption of stores is light. — Ed.] 



Henry Reddert, you are quite right, 

 as Editor Root says, p. 699, "in believing 

 that the color should be a minor ^.-onsider- 

 ation compared to the taste" of honey. 

 Pardon me if I say I think it is, and that 

 you are mistaken in thinking "Beekeepers 

 have spoiled their own game by advocating 

 color for quality." Before there was a bee 

 journal in which there could be such ad- 

 vocacy, there was the same preference by 

 the majority for clover that there is now, 

 and the same preference by a minority for 

 buckwheat. I agree with the majority in 

 preferring honey of lighter color, not be- 

 cause of its color, but because of its flavor, 

 and -yon may advocate till you're black in 

 the face without making me think I like 

 buckwheat as well as clover. It's all a mat- 

 ter of taste, friend Reddert; and when the 

 majority prefer the taste of the darker 

 honey, the darker honey will bring the bet- 

 ter price, and not till then. Neither do I 

 believe, Mr. Editor, that it depends very 

 largely upon what the customer is used to. 

 I know those who greatly prefer buckwheat 

 to clovei', and yet they have seldom tasted 

 buckwheat. 



Are you not just a bit daffy on the 

 safety business, Mr. Editor? Regular ship- 

 ping cases were considered safe with carri- 

 ers. Then came safety-eases, which the cat- 

 alog says "do not require carriers." Then 

 when I raise the question, p. 68.3, whether 

 safeties without carriers are as safe as reg- 

 ulars with carriers, you say, "We would 

 recommend both safety cases and carriers 

 combined." And then a dim fear is raised 

 that you may have something more up your 

 sleeve when you say, "We believe it is very 

 wise to give comb honey all the protection 

 it can reasonably have." [In the last few 



moi ■ we have revised our opi.iion. We 

 have 1 personally seen large shipments of 

 comb hoiiev all smashed down for want of 

 a little cart m packing. In some cases it is 

 a lack of s-a '^t^y cases, and in others it is a 

 lack of earrieis. Why, then, have we re- 

 vised our opinion? Because we are con- 

 vinced that comb honey, even in safety 

 cases, can not be thrown down, piled up 

 upside down, or on end without bieaking. 

 The carrier is relatively so much heavitii 

 that freight ind express handlers can not 

 throw it. It can not stand up on end, and 

 it is too heavy to end up ; and it can not 

 be placed upside down. Large quantities 

 of comb honey are broken down in oommon 

 shipping cases when placed in carriers, 

 showing clearly that the carrier alone is 

 sometimes not a sufficient safeguard against 

 breakage. We now believe, therefore, that 

 not only carriers but safety cases should be 

 used. — Ed.] 



I mentioned your preaching "more ex- 

 tracted," Mr. Editor, p. 683, and you ask 

 where. On p. 542, 1910, ycu say, "There 

 IS plenty of evidence to show a tendency 

 on the part of comb-honey producers to go 

 into the business of raising extracted," and 

 conclude by saying, "It is not at all sui- 

 prising that there should be a marked tend- 

 ency toward the relatively cheaper article 

 that api3arently yields a larger return for 

 the investment." [The quotation refexTed 

 to on page 542 simply states a condition 

 without any recommendation — at least wa.-^ 

 so intended. In all the subsequent preach- 

 ing, recommending the production of comb 

 honey, the condition referred to in the quo- 

 tation relative to extracted was recognized. 

 In our footnote on page 683 we made this 

 statement : "Where did we continue to 

 preach more extracted, as we are now advo- 

 cating more comb-honey production?" No- 

 tice that we use the word continue. You 

 have not yet furnished us the quotation 

 called for. We may say, in further ex- 

 planation of our policy for advocating the 

 production of comb honey, that at the pres- 

 ent rate of decrease in the production of 

 comb honey the time will soon come (unless 

 we can turn the tide) when there will be 

 but very little comb honey produced. As 

 we tried to point out, the trouble is not be- 

 cause comb honey is not in demand, but 

 because of the poor and slovenly way in 

 which beekeepers have been grading it and 

 shipping it to market — so much so that the 

 dealer has in many cases refused to handle 

 it. But the public wants it; and at the 

 present time thei'e is a very strong demand 

 for comb honey with but very little in sight, 

 with a large supply of extracted. — Ed.] 



