Published Monthly by The W. T. Falconer Mfg. Co. 



Vol. XIII 



FEBRUARY, 1903 



No. 3 



BEE=HIVE5. 



The Merits and Disadvantaces ot Modern Types 

 Discussed. 



(Arthur C. Miller). 



IT Was Mr. Hutchinson, I think, who 

 said that in the line of hives and 

 implements we have gone about as 

 far as we can; that from now on we 

 must look to co-operation and organi- 

 zation to improve our condition. He 

 used the Heddon hive, but could suc- 

 ceed with ''any old thing." So far as 

 it goes, the Heddon hive is good and 

 emb(5dies many excellent features, but 

 it is by no means near enough perfect 

 to warrant the belief by Mr. Hutchin- 

 son that no improvement can be look- 

 ed for. The cry of '"perfection" is as 

 old as man, but still each successive 

 generation sees the old ways and im- 

 plements supplanted by new. 



It is the purpose of this article to 

 point out some of the shortcomings of 

 tj-pes of hives now in use — and later 

 possibly of some other instruments — 

 hoping thereby to stimulate effort to 

 overcome such evils, to the end that 

 better hives may be evolved. I shall 

 not assail any hive, but shall allude 

 only to principles involved. Before go- 

 ing further let me say it should be 

 borne in mind that no one style of 

 hive is adapted to all climates and all 

 S3\stems. 



The essentials of a hive are simpli- 

 city, durability, adaptability to a maxi- 

 mum number of systems of manage- 

 ment, and low cost. A rectangular 

 box, loose hanging frames, flat bottom 



and top is doubtless the most simple 

 form of movable comb hive, but its 

 simplicity is secured at a cost of sever- 

 al essential features. The frames swing 

 loose with all the evils that implies. 

 When storified, the bees connect the 

 two sets of frames, and attempts to 

 move the upper disturbs the lower, and 

 trouble ensues. Spacing between combs 

 is not constant. To overcome part of 

 the trouble the closed end or "self- 

 spacing" frames were devised. It was 

 an advance, but with them came other 

 evils. Unless the frames were press- 

 ed together the bees would work pro- 

 polis between them until it was dififi- 

 cult to get frames back into a hive 

 once they were removed. It also hin- 

 dered ready mjanipulation. Without 

 compression much the same trouble 

 was met in storifying as with unspaced 

 frames. Again, with or without com- 

 pression, it was found best to use a 

 "follower" to keep the bees out of the 

 spare space necessary in such hives. 

 Such followers either swell fast or are 

 glued fast and by many bee-keepers are 

 well considered an abomination and a 

 needless expense. 



The next step was so to fit frames 

 to hives as to prevent bees getting 

 behind the frames to glue them (Hed- 

 don and Danzenbaker types), but in 

 many climates the wood of both frames 

 and hives were so swollen that it is im- 

 possible to remove the frames. Again, 

 the hive-sides and ends swell so that the 

 space below hanging frames and above 

 standing frames is increased to such 

 an extent that when storified the "bee 

 space" is much too great, or in exceed- 



