June 21, 1906 



531 



American Itee Journal 



tacomas and biguonias. The mints and figwort may well 

 ' be planted in waste-places, for a goodly number of them 

 will serve to fence out famine in the hives in case of failure 

 of other honey-plants. Mr. Harbison — and who can speak 

 with more authority?— feels sure that bee-keepers may well 

 take pains to plant black sage, which he and many other bee- 

 keepers of California think even more productive than white 

 sage, where fire or other agent has destroyed it. 



MIMICING MOTHS. 



I have just had the pleasure of looking through one of 

 the many fine collection of insects of Berlin. The clear- 

 winged Sesias claimed my attention and admiration. They 

 are moths, yet look astonishingly like bees and wasps, which 

 they mimic in a wonderful way. This, no doubt, preserves 

 them from hungry birds that otherwise would snap them up. 

 These Sesiids are borers, and the caterpillars boring in trees 

 and plants often do serious harm. Here belong the destruc- 

 tive peach-tree borers and squash-borers. While these moths 

 fly among bees and wasps in the bright sunshine of noon- 

 day, and in form and color are so like them, they are yet 

 easily told. Their body is tipped with a brush of hairs in- 

 stead of the sharp, polished sting. Berlin, Germany. 



Queen-Rearing —The Small-Nucleus System 



BY HENRY ALLEY. 



WITH the advent of the Langstroth hive success in api- 

 culture rapidly advanced. From the box-hive system 

 which was no system at all, no particular success 

 could ever be expected. The beginner in bee-keeping has 

 been taught by all the text-books on bee-culture that the 

 only way to make apiculture a success was to "Keep all 

 colonies strong." We should keep this fact in mind at all 

 times, and print it in large letters, and post it in some con- 

 spicuous place in the apiary. Experienced bee-keepers well 

 know that weak colonies are worthless and bring no re- 

 turns of any kind. This not only applies to large hives, but 

 to nuclei as well. I would as soon tolerate sick chickens in 

 my coops as a feeble and weakly lot of bees. Of the two 

 nuisances the former are much more desirable. No apiary 

 can be run successfully on babyish principles. Every colony 

 of bees, whether the hives be large or small, should be 

 crowded with bees, brood and food, and each one should 

 have a vigorous queen. If any other methods are adopted, 

 failure will surely result so far as profits are concerned. 



Now, first, the principles of honey-gathering are equally 

 applicable to success in queen-rearing. Good queens can 

 not be reared on the baby system, or by the half-starved and 

 half-nourished way some people say they can. There should 

 be plenty of bees to cover all the combs and brood of a 

 nucleus, so that the temperature at all times may be kept 

 up to the natural point. 



Strong and vigorous queens are the kind that fill the 

 '•ombs with brood, the hive full of bees, and store the 

 honey in the supers. The larger the force of bees, the 

 more honey, and the larger the profits. 



Has any one ever discovered that weak and feeble 

 colonies of bees build queen-cells, and swarm in the natu- 

 ral way? The swarming sometimes takes place, but not in 

 the natural way. What are the conditions under which 

 bees build queen-cells, and swarms issue? Why, strong 

 colonies, hives full of bees and combs full of brood. If the 

 advice some people are giving bee-keepers is taken seriously, 

 many bee-keepers will be dividing up their strong colonies 

 into say about 40 small ones. Now, if a few bees work 

 well in queen-rearing, why won't the same principle work 

 well in honey-gathering? The fact is, such a system won't 

 work well in any case. Don't expect to succeed in bee-keep- 

 ing unless Nature's ways are pretty closely followed 



Some 12 years ago, Mr. E. L. Pratt had a queen-rearing 

 apiary of baby nuclei about 2 miles from my yard. While 

 Mr. P. could manage his system very well, it never would do 

 for me, nor would it do for bee-keepers generally. Well, 

 Mr. Pratt sold his entire outfit to me, and moved away. 

 I converted the entire thing into kindling-wood, as I could 

 find no one who wished to purchase it from me. His nucleus 

 frames were 4% x 4% x % section boxes. Eight of these 

 sections just filled a brood-frame about the size of the stand- 



ard Langstroth frame. Now this whole thing in theory was 

 very ingenious, but far from practical. I tried to use the 

 small frames in the way Mr. Pratt did, but I could not in- 

 duce any queen to deposit eggs, except in a few of the cen- 

 tral combs. The queen did not take to the wooden parti- 

 tions right in the center of the hive. Queens want a clear 

 field to work in. I could not rear a strong colony of bees 

 by any such arrangement. 



Another great difficulty with the Pratt system was in 

 the arrangement of the combs in the nucleus boxes. As the 

 small combs had no projecting top-bar, the frames had to rest 

 on cross sticks at the bottom. When opening such hives the 

 bees naturally run to the bottom of the boxes. By so doing 

 there is great danger of crushing the bees and queen when 

 the frames are replaced. 



If I understand correctly, the system above mentioned 

 is now largely used by Mr. Pratt. I also understand that 

 he now fastens the frames to the cover of the hive, so that 

 all lift out together. The difficulties attending this method 

 need not be explained here. All can see them at a glance. 



The question is, Why is all this clap-trap arrangement 

 in queen-rearing necessary? Can any one explain it? Dare 

 any reader of the American Bee Journal rise up and say 

 that such a contrivance is any improvement, or even as 

 good as small combs constructed on and used as per the 

 Langstroth system? Doesn't the reader see that the small 

 hive (call it baby nucleus, if you please) having hanging 

 frames and so constructed that each frame can be lifted out 

 separately, is far more practical and much easier to manipu- 

 late in every way? 



These new-fangled notions in connection with bee-keep- 

 ing are perplexing indeed, and to those who love simplicity 

 in all things used in practical bee-culture, they seem like a 

 nuisance. 



I am not tooting my own horn, as I have nothing in the 

 way of bee-supplies for sale. My whole time is devoted to 

 queen-rearing. To carry out the entire Pratt system of queen- 

 rearing, one requires about a cart-load of fixtures. Some 

 60 pieces in number, and an expenditure of some $8. This 

 does not include hives for nuclei. 



For many years I have used small boxes for nuclei. Per- 

 haps they cannot be classed as "baby" nuclei, as each box is 

 large enough to take four 5x5 frames, 3 pints of bees, and 

 the boxes are kept full of bees and brood at all times, as 

 much so as it is possible to do. The hanging frames are 

 used, as they are easily and quickly removed without dan- 

 ger of crushing the bees. So long as these small boxes are 

 kept well supplied with bees and brood, the young queens 

 are sure to make a successful mating trip. There are suffi- 

 cient bees to defend the hive against robber-bees, and the 

 bee-moth. Now, I know from long experience that when 

 such small nuclei are used, and not kept up in young bees 

 and brood, the queens, when they make the mating flight, 

 are pretty sure to be balled as soon as they enter the box. 

 Mr. Pratt says this is not so with his baby-nucleus system. 

 Try it, and see if I am not correct. Rather queer, isn't it, 

 that bees behave so much differently in some parts of the 

 country than they do in others? 



In 00 percent of all cases where nuclei contain only a 

 few old bees, and no brood, the young queens will be de- 

 stroyed when returning from the mating flight. Young bees 

 will not do such mean work, but bees, like the human 

 family, don't stay young. Old bees are worthless in queen- 

 rearing, and are a nuisance in the apiary at all times. 



Speaking of these small boxes, I wish to say I rear no 

 queens in them. Only the strongest colonies of bees are 

 used by me in the production of queen-cells. My queens 

 are kept in small nuclei after they hatch until they have 

 filled the combs with eggs, and the queens are tested. 



Now there may be many of the readers of this Journal 

 who are contemplating making queen-rearing a business, and 

 I am quite sure I can give some good practical advice to all 

 such people. 



If I were to start again in the queen-rearing business, 

 I would not tolerate even the small boxes I now use in 

 ray apiary. Now these boxes are very handy and convenient, 

 and almost inexpensive, but there are several reasons why 

 I would not, with my present and past experience, use such a 

 system again. At present I am established, and am sort of 

 obliged to continue in the same old way. But take my ad- 

 vice. If one is about to enter the queen-rearing business, 



