Oct. 5 1905 



THfc AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL 



695 



-V (£ontributcb ^- 

 Special Clrttclcs 



^ 



J 



Changing to a Larger. Full-Weight Section 



BY I.. V. RICKETTS 



IN advocating a change from the present to a larger size 

 section, there are many things to take into consideration. 

 Tlie thicl<ness, length and hight of the section sliould be 

 suitable to tlie inside dimensions of the super. The super 

 should be of the same length and width as the brood-chamber. 

 The width and length of the Langstroth hive is thi' standard. 

 There are many millions of dollars' worth of hives, frames, 

 combs, etc., of this dimension. A hive of the Langstroth 

 dimensions is perhaps as near the right size as we will ever 

 get. I believe the Langstroth dimensions are here to stay. 

 There is something connected with this hive that is dear to 

 every true bee-keeper in this country. It is the name, 

 " Langstroth." 



From the above we conclude that we should use a section 

 whose dimensions are best suited to the inside dimensions of 

 the super in which they are to he used. Perhaps the ^\i\- 

 4'+xl%-inch bee-way section is the one in most general use at 

 the present time. Its width and thickness are suited to the 

 width and length of a hive of the Langstroth dimensions. 



A section thinner than 1% inches will require more comb 

 foundation per pound of honey than will the 1%. Therefore 

 we conclude that as to width and thickness the 4Xxl?^-inch 

 section is the most desirable of any of the sizes. 



As stated in a previous article, this section, when fairly 

 well filled with separatored honey, does not weigh more than 

 14-3 ounces per section, or 22 pounds per case of 24 sections. 

 This, I think, should be increased to 16 ounces per section, or 

 24 pounds, net, per case of 24 sections. 



As already stated, the width and thickness of the 414x1% 

 section is suited to the width and length of the Langstroth 

 hive. Then in order to have them hold 16 ounces of honey it 

 will be necessary to use a section taller than 4Ji inches. We 

 find by calculating, that if a 4;4'x4'4.Klps-inch section holds 

 only 14=3 ounces, one of the same width and thickness should 

 be 4js inches high in order to hold 16 ounces. Therefore we 

 conclude that a section 4'4 x4j8Xl^s is the best size of section. 

 A section narrower than 4'4' inches does not fill the length of 

 the super as it should. If more than 4'4 inches wide four of 

 them will not go into a super with common section-holders. 

 A section thinner than l";s inches will not (ill the width of the 

 super as nicely as does the IJs, and it will require more comb 

 foundation per pound of honey. 



The cost of changing from the square to the tall section 

 should not amount to very much. A strip of wood ?^-inch 

 thick nailed on the top or bottom ot the super makes all the 

 necessary change in the super. The end pieces of section- 

 holders, together with separators and shipping-cases, will 

 need to be % inch taller. I believe the manufacturers' prices 

 for these supplies (sections included) would be no higher than 

 for the ones now in use. ]5y the old way we use 24 sections, 

 24 sheets of comb foundation, and one shipping-case in order 

 to produce and sell 22 pounds of honey. I5y the new way we 

 produce and sell 24 pounds for virtually the same expense for 

 supplies. 



Ky the old way the consumer pays for 2 pounds of honey 

 that he never receives, and is disappointed. This pay usually 

 goes to the retailer, and is so much over and above a reason- 

 able profit. This extra pay does not benefit the producer in 

 the least, on the contrary, it is an injury to his business. I!y 

 the new way the producer sells and receives pay for 24 ])ounds 

 of honey, and the consumer pays for and receives 24 pounds — 

 both are satisfied. 



In using a section 4|s inches tall with the bottom of the 

 section-holder % inch thick, and a X-inch bee-space above the 

 sections, it will require a super SJj inches deep. This can be 

 changed to the Heddon hive or shallow extracting super, by 

 fastening ,'i-inch strips on top with screws or nails. Tln-se 

 strips can be removed without injury to the super. This 

 super can be used for a separable or shallow brood-chanibir, 

 which, for those who prefer such a hive, would be convouienl 

 indeed. Then we have a hive-body, section-honey super, i ■ - 

 tracting super, and chunk-honey super — all in one. 



We should strive to establish, as nearly as practicable, a 



standard in all our apiarian fixtures, and, above all, to estab- 

 lish and maintain a standard weight for a case of No. 1 sep- 

 aratored honey. This should be 24 pounds, net, including 

 weight of sections for a casc^ of 24 sections. 



Although I have given the foregoing but little thought, I 

 will suggest that the weight of No. 2 separatored honey be not 

 less than 21 pounds, and No. 3 not less than 18 pounds per 

 case of 24 sections. This would be an average of 16 ounces 

 per section for No. 1, 14 ounces for No. 2, and 12 ounces for 

 No. 3. Whitman Co., Wash. 



# 



Extracted vs. Comb Honey for the Masses 



BY U. .\. 8J1ITH 



FROM time to time wo find set forth in \he different bee- 

 papers the way in which some one has successfully dis- 

 posed of his season's crop of honey. Why should this bo 

 such a perplexing problem in some localities ? The miller has 

 no trouble selling his flour, or the butcher his meat. Why, 

 then, does honey not meet with the same demand ? 



I think I have found the reason, at least in this locality. 



Honey is considered an expensive luxury, and I believe 

 the little one-pound section, which is composed partly of indi- 

 gestible wax and wood, to be at the bottom of the trouble. 



To talk honey up to the public brings before their mind's 

 eye a neat little square of white c{)mb honey, which is cer- 

 tainly very tempting, but the cost prevents them from invest- 

 ing in more than a few sections. These are not the conditions 

 which are going to get a crop of honey off our hands. 



Well, then, why not alter these conditions ? Produce less 

 of those nice, tempting supposed-to-be pounds of honey, and 

 give the people something far easier to digest, and something 

 a great deal easier to buy, and more for their money. 



Some one may suggest dropping the price of section honey 

 to overcome the evil. We are not getting any too much for 

 our section honey now, considering the price of sections, foun- 

 dation, separators, shipping-cases, etc. We can not afford to 

 sell it any cheaper, and if the price of materials goes up 

 any further, the price of section honey must go up also. 



We found out long ago that wax does not digest, and no 

 doubt in many instances the supposed indigestible honey, but 

 really the wax has prejudiced many against honey. 



As I said before, when one buys a section of honey he very 

 seldom gets the full pound, and even then a large portion is 

 taken up by the useless wood and harmful wax. On the other 

 hand, when buying extracted honey, one gets his full pound 

 of honey, with no indigestible element, and for at least 5 cents 

 a pound cheaper than comb honey. 



I believe before we can educate the public to treat honey 

 as a cheap and wholesome article of food, bee-keepers will 

 have to leave the comb where it belongs — with the bees. 



Ontario, Canada. 



# 



Sulphur vs. Bisulphide of Carbon for Fumi- 

 t2Xmi Empty Combs 



HY F. OREIXEK 



IT requires a great deal of watchfulness to summer over a 

 lot of combs without being damaged by wax-moth. It is 

 not the large wax-moth which is so troublesome, but the 

 larvto of a very small, silvery moth which puts in her work. 

 There is also another dark-colored, almost shiny little larva 

 or caterpillar ; it has a fuzzy garment on, so it seems, and 

 often molts, judging from th(> skins accumulating. Neither 

 one of these pests tunnels through the combs, as the large 

 wax-moth larva does, but lives more on the surface and in the 

 cells, and destroys the combs, although not as rapidly as the 

 large moth. It is taxing my vigilance to keep the upper hand 

 of them, and the 60 sets of combs, not used this year on ac- 

 count of the poor season, have to be gone over every little 

 while. 



Sulphur fumes will rid us of these pests, but have to be 

 applied from time to time during the warm season. Instead 

 of the burning of sulphur, bisulphide of carton has been 

 recommended by a number of bee-keepers of late years. This 

 liquid drug, when it evaporates, forms a gas which is detri- 

 mental to all animal life. Ii is also very explosive;. It must 

 be handled with great care. Our C.orman bee-keepers warn 

 against its use on this account. I have experimetited some- 

 what with it, and have been successful irtjridding my fields 

 from woodchucks, but not my combs from the molh-larv:o, etc. 

 Probably I did not use enough of the stuff to kill. 



