ntmm SMBRICSK BlBlt JOURKfflr. 



245 



Dividing and Contracting; to 

 Pri-rent Drone-Couib. 



Written Sor the American Bee Journal 



Unory 626 — If I divide my bees by taking 

 the queen and frame of brood, and place it 

 on the old stand, shake most of the bees off in 

 front of the hive on the old stand, remove the 

 old hive to a distance, and g-ive the new 

 swarm, say five empty frames with starters, 

 fill the empty space with dummies, and place 

 the sections from the old hive on the new, 

 will they be more liable to build drone-comb 

 than it allowed to swarm naturally, and con- 

 tract to the same number of frames ?— Iowa. 



No. — Mahaxa B. Chaddock. 



No. — Dadant & Son. 



They will.— J. P. H. Brown. 



I think uot. — Eugene Secor. 



I should think so. — J. M.Hambaugh. 



No, I do not think that they will. — 

 H. D. Cutting. 



I think not ; but I cannot say for 

 certain. — Mrs. L. Harrison. 



I doubt if you will find much differ- 

 ence. Try it and report. — C.C.Miller. 



I think not unless there is a " swarm- 

 ing fever," which is not allayed by the 

 division. — R. L. Taylor. 



I do not think so. I see no reason 

 ^vhy they should. Possibly, however, 

 a desire to swarm might be retained, 

 then there would be more danger. — 

 A. J. Cook. 



Yes, they would be very liable to 

 build drone-comb. It is a poor way to 

 increase your bees. — C. H. Dibbern. 



I should saj' no. A queen-excluder 

 should be used, to prevent the rcaiing 

 of brood in the sections.— J. M. Shuck. 



Probably there would be little differ- 

 ence. That frame of brood will be 

 apt to cause some drone-comb in either 

 case — G. M. Doolittle. 



Your plan would be an excellent 

 one, were it not for the liability of 

 bees to build drone-comb when not 

 wanted. I should expect more to be 

 built with your plan.— W. M. Barnum. 



I think that thcj" would be more likely 

 to build drone-comb, but much would 

 depend upon the number of bees, the 

 age and prolificiiess of the queen, and 

 the honey-flow. — M. Mahin. 



I do not know, but I should think 

 not, if there was i)lenty of room in the 

 sections for storing surplus, and the 

 queen was excluded from them, and 

 the dividing done before the swarm- 

 ing impulse. — A. B. Mason. 



It will depend upon the age of the 

 fjueen. But little store or drone-comb 

 will be built in the brood-nest, if the 

 queen is young and prolific ; otherwise 

 there will be too much drone-comb. 

 But as a rule, there will be drone- 

 comb built by proceeding in the way 



you mention. I have tried your plan 

 often. Init I now prefer to let the bees 

 swarm. — G. W. Demaree. 



This question opens up too big a 

 subject for the space allowable, as the 

 whole matter of division, in connec- 

 tion with natural increase, is at issue. 

 A plain answer cannot be given, so I 

 " pass."-^J. E. Pond. 



No ; but the procedure named will 

 usualy result in getting a lot of bee- 

 bread in the sections ; for, until comb 

 is built in the brood-chamber, there 

 will be no other place to put the pol- 

 len. One of the live frames should 

 contain emptj" comb, or the sections 

 should not be put on till comb is built. 

 — G. L. Tinker. 



Probably you would discover but 

 very little difference. There are too 

 many uncertainties about the matter 

 to give a direi't answer. — The Editor. 



Uniting Colonies AVitlioiit De- 

 stroying llie Queens. 



Written for the American Bee Journal 



Query 627.— 1. In uniting two ordinary 

 colonies of bees without destroying one of 

 the queens, is there not great danger that 

 both will be killed ? 2. If not, is there not 

 danger that the surviving queen may be 

 seriously injured ?— Bee-Keeper, 



Yes. — G. L. Tinker. 



No, to both queries. — A. B. Mason. 



1. There is some danger. 2. There 

 might be.^ — J. M. Hambaugh. 



It is best to destroy one queen before 

 uniting. — H. D. Cutting. 



1. There is danger. 2. There is. 

 Always cage the best queen and de- 

 stroy the other. — J. P. H. Brown. 



1 and 2. Unless the uniting is so 

 done that there is no fighting among 

 the workers, I should fear injury to 

 both queens. — R. L. Taylor. 



1. It would seem so, and yet I have 

 had no experience to confirm the fear. 

 — Eugene Secor. 



I think not ; thougli I usually destroy 

 the queen that I think is the least val- 

 uable. This is certainly wise, if there 

 is any choice in the queens. — A.J.CoOK 



1. If rightly done at the right time, 

 I do not think that there is much dan- 

 ger. 2. Not miicli.Ithink. — C.C.Millek 



There is some danger of it, indeed. 

 It is much better to kill one queen, es- 

 pecially as one of them is almost sure 

 to be moi'e valuable than the other. — 

 Dadant & Son. 



No, not in swarming time, as we 

 have frequently united two, and many 

 times three swarms, in one hive, and 

 left them to adjust the queen question 

 to suit themselves, and usually with 

 good results. Still, if we always had 

 time to examine and find the queen, 

 we should pi-efer to give only one, and 



that of course the one which we con- 

 sidered best. At any other than the 

 swarming period, we should never 

 think of allowing more than one queen. 

 — Mrs. L. Harrison. 



1. No ; both queens are never killed. 

 This is my experience. 2. The surviv- 

 ing queen is all right. — Mahaxa B. 

 Chaddock. 



1, The bee-keeper should choose be- 

 tween the two. and do the killing him- 

 self. If he does this. No. 2 needs no 

 answer. — J. M. Shuck. 



1. I think not ; still I prefer to re- 

 move the reigning queen before in- 

 troducing the new one. 2. If proper 

 precautions are taken, any queen may 

 be safely introduced. See various 



articles written on the subject J. E. 



Pond. 



1. No. I never knew such a thing 

 to happen. 2. No. A queen not worth 

 looking after in uniting, will generally 

 come out all right. If I had 2 choice 

 queens, I should prefer not to treat 

 them that way, as each would be worth 

 saving. No improvement of stock can 

 be made by the above plan. — G. M. 

 Doolittle. 



This method is quite commonly 

 practiced, and, usually, with good re- 

 sults. Of course, there is danger of 

 the surviving queen being disabled ; if 

 so, the bees will attend to that matter. 

 This " method " is based upon the sup- 

 position that there is plenty of brood 

 in the hive. I would never introduce 

 a really valuable queen upon this plan. 

 — Will M. Barnum. 



No. My experience is that only one 

 will be killed. The queen is balled by 

 the bees, and finally killed. I do not 

 think that one mature queen ever de- 

 stroys another ; neither is it likely that 

 the surviving queen will be injured.— 

 C. H. Dibbern. 



1. I have never known both queens 

 to be killed, but I think that there is 

 danger of it. 2. In a case of that 

 kind, I had both wings of the surviv- 

 ing queen gnawed to the stubs, and 

 the stubs to shred.s. She was not other- 

 wise injured. — M. Mahin. 



1. It is a dangerous proceeding, but 

 they sometimes come out all right. 

 Soiuetimes both queens are " balled,'" 

 and both maj' sometimes be killed. To 

 say the least", it is a sloven, careless 

 way to unite bees. 2. Yes ; where a 

 queen has once been balled, as she is 

 most likely to be under such ti-eatment, 

 she is rarel3' ever worth much. — G. W. 

 Demaree. 



Seldom, if ever, are both queens 

 killed, and it is not alwaj-s the best 

 cpicen lliat survives — it is therefoi'e 

 better to select the best queen if you 

 can, and kill the other yourself, for 

 there is some danger of the surviving 

 queen being injured. — The Editor. 



