166 



THE BEE-KEEPERS' REVIEW 



from swarming'' by cutting" out queen 

 cells everj' six daj's until they were 

 strong" in bees (strong" enough to swarm 

 under normal conditions) and then 

 shaken, have done very satisfactory 

 super work, but even these would have 

 given far better results if they had 

 been stronger in bees. 



Any method or management of 

 swarming that divides the forces of 

 the bees is inimical to the production 

 of comb honej'. In naturjil swarming, 

 restricted even to prime swarms, the 

 division is carried too far for profitable 

 results. The same is true, in a lesser 

 degree, of shook swarming", at least 

 such is the teaching of this season's 

 experience. Even though nearly all 

 the bees were shaken out and addi- 

 tions were made twice a week by 

 shaking the hatching bees with the 

 main colony, the force was not large 

 enough to begin work in the super un- 

 til the brood chamber, contracted to 

 six Hoffman frames, had been filled. 

 To get the best results, work should 

 begin in the brood chamber and super 

 simultaneously, and there should be 

 bees enough in the super to do as rapid 

 work as the strength of the iiow will 

 allow. To secure these essential con- 

 ditions, imiformly, either a large force 

 of bees must be reared or the bees of 

 two colonies should be shaken together 

 to form the working colon}'. Our av- 

 erage queens would, perhaps, fill a 

 half depth super with brood in ad- 

 dition to the regular standard brood 

 chamber. This would give one-third 

 to oiie-half more bees. 



The idea of shaking the forces of two 

 colonies tog"ether to secure an enormous 

 army of workers is not original with 

 us. We saw it advocated a year or 

 two ago in the Review, as a means of 

 securing profitable crops in a very poor 

 locality. Recently, it was again call- 

 ed to our attention by our genial bee- 

 keeping neighbor and friend, A. F. 

 Foster, who sees in its practice a pos- 

 sible means of overcoming some of the 

 adverse conditions imposed b\' natural 

 and artificial swarming. Some of his 

 experience this season points strongly 

 in that direction. So far as we are 

 concerned the idea has found lodgment 

 in friendly soil; we believe in it and 

 expect to test it thoroughly next 

 season. 



To handle an apiary on this plan 

 expeditiously, the colonies should be 

 arranged in pairs facing in the same 

 direction. The colonies of each pair 

 should be equalized as nearly as pos- 



sible about forty-five days before the 

 beginning of the main flow and then 

 worked up to the greatest possible 

 strength in bees and brood. At the 

 proper time the bees of both colonies 

 should be shaken together in a con- 

 tracted brood chamber on starters with 

 as manj' supers added as is necessary 

 to accommodate the enormous working 

 force thus created. One of the old 

 hives of each pair together with queen 

 and brood and few remaining bees 

 should be reserved for a colony in 

 order to keep the original number of 

 colonies intact. This would be a good 

 colony in a few days and would easily 

 fill a super of extracting combs before 

 the close of the flow. The other hive 

 of brood should be united with the 

 working colony as fast as it hatches. 

 In our judgment, such a colonj' 

 would produce more supers of fancj' 

 and No. 1 honey than the same bees 

 would in any other juxtaposition, and 

 this plan would overcome the fatal 

 weakness of both natural and forced 

 swarms. It would not only render 

 swarming while absent from the apia- 

 ry improbable, but would create ideal 

 conditions for the rapid storing of hon- 

 ey in the supers and giving it that per- 

 fect finish that so delights the heart of 

 every apiarist. 



In one apiary of Italians the swarm- 

 ing fever was so malignant that both 

 natural and shook swarms swarmed 

 out from one to three times each on 

 successive days before they settled 

 down to contented toil. In all cases 

 these swarms were given a frame of 

 unsealed brood. Finally, the brood 

 was omitted and there were no further 

 attempts at absconding. Clearly, the 

 brood was a detriment, though the re- 

 verse is the general rule. 



Dequeening was a failure. The 

 bees loafed until the young queens be- 

 gan laying, and at least half of the 

 colonies so treated failed to rear queens 

 at all. Perhaps the result would have 

 been more satisfactory had a ripe cell 

 been given to each at the time of de- 

 queening. 



With us shook swarming has come 

 to sta}' in the yards that are managed 

 for comb honey, but we are now strong- 

 1\' inclined to the opinion that the reg- 

 ulation plan should be modified to se- 

 cure a larger force of bees in the work- 

 ing colonies. After all, in honey 

 production, it is the aggregate number 

 of bees working as a unit, not individ- 

 ual colonies, that is effective in produc- 

 ing results. 



