THE BEE-KEEPERS' REVIEW 



145 



Aii®ttlhier FHamio 



BY F. GREINER. 



IWTR. EDI 

 -L-^i I hav€ 



R. EDITOR, I am free to say that 

 e looked with even greater 

 anxiety for the April Review, in which 

 I expected to find adverse criticism of 

 the Sibbald method, than I did for the 

 March issue with the promised 

 original. 



I am not a little surprised to think 

 that such experienced men as you, Mr. 

 Editor, as well as Mr. E. R. Root, 

 should be so taken up with a method 

 of handling bees, as the Sibbald, for 

 the production of comb hones'. In my 

 estimation it has nothing to commend 

 it. 



THK CONDITION OK COLONIK.S OF MUCH 

 IMPOKTANCK. 



The one point which the bee-keeper 

 ought always to keep in sight, is, how 

 he can bring about the best coiiditions 

 for his bees; how he can put them in 

 such shape that they will work in the 

 sections at once and vigorously at that; 

 storing the largest amount of white 

 honey. 



In looking at the two divisions of 

 the colony made b}' Mr. Sibbald, what 

 have we ? One is robbed of a large 

 part of the field bees, and one brood 

 comb with the adhering young bees, 

 etc. For perhaps a week, or more, 

 little can be expected of it; practically', 

 it loses this time, right during the 

 heaviest hone^' flow; and, if another 

 "draft" is m ide on it, will lose even 

 more time. This would be bad. 



The other division is in even worse 

 shape. It has no queen; it has only a 

 few young bees; but, if we have good 

 hick, we may have the larger part of 

 the field bees. Probably quite a few 

 j'oung bees were added with the super 

 from the parent colonj'. Mr. Sibbald 



sa3's, "The bees in this colon3' will 

 build but little comb in the brood 

 chamber, but, instead, work in the 

 sections." His bees must be more ac- 

 commodating than they would be here- 

 abouts. A queenless colony builds 

 little comb anyhow; what it does build, 

 is largely in the brood chamber and of 

 drone size — a very undesirable thing. 



The colony could not possibly have 

 even a virgin queen sooner than eight 

 or ten days; and, under these condi- 

 tions, even with more bees in the hive 

 than can possibly be there, we would 

 lose the ten days or more right in the 

 honey season. 



It does not seem to me that we could 

 make a worse blunder than to break 

 up our colonies, a la Sibbald; on the 

 other hand, managed by the shook- 

 plan, we at once have each original 

 good colony in working trim, and we 

 can keep them thus by re-enforcements 

 from the parent colony'. 



THK DOOLITTLE PLAN OF MAKING 

 INCRKASE. 



With the Sibbald plan it would be 

 quite essential that the to-be treated- 

 colony should have started queen cells. 

 Many bee-keepers think the best time 

 to "shake ' is when queen cells are 

 started and pretty well along, or 

 nearl\' sealed, but it seems to me that 

 the success of the shook method is in- 

 dependent as to this. Other bee mas- 

 ters think so. Our friend Stachelhausen 

 is one. We have another old bee- 

 master here in this part of New York 

 State, Mr. E. Becker, of Vine Valley; 

 he does not pose as a writer, but, 

 nevertheless, we can be proud of call- 

 ing him one of our number, and 

 swarms are a rare thing with him. 



