230 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE. 



Mak. 15. 



ed before that we might have an easier figure 

 to remember, and here we liave it. Just J of an 

 inch.— Ed.] 



I DID SUPPOSE there was at least one place 

 where I could have the last say: but the editor 

 seems to be so overstocked with those "ever- 

 lasting footnotes" that he has to pack some of 

 them away in straw. I don't know what I can 

 do unless I get a new editor with no footnotes 

 attached. 



Fun w^as poked at me for talking about 

 making foundation on a press without sheeting. 

 On inquiry I find that a metal press, the Riet- 

 sche, has been in use for ten years, the wax pour- 

 ed in the press without sheeting, and that fiOOO 

 such presses are now in use. Will Review and 

 Progressive please correct? 



The plan to estimate the comb-honev crop 

 by the number of sections sold by manufactur- 

 ers fell through because all would not tell, and 

 I'm not at liberty to give any of the partial fig- 

 ures sent to me: but one thing 1 think I may 

 tell; and that is, that I was astonished at the 

 large amount manufactured by some of what 

 1 thought the little concerns. 



Friend A. I., you say of that new forage- 

 plant, the Wagner pea, that you are properly 

 excited about, "We do not know whether it 

 yields honey or not." If you will rake over the 

 Straws in Jan. l.'Jth Gleanings, you will find it 

 is "a new honey-plant that's getting a boom 

 across the water." According to accounts in 

 German bee- journals, it's well worth atrial. 



It's queer that in Germany all honor is giv- 

 en to Dzierzon and none to Langstroth, and in 

 America the case is reversed. If I am not mis- 

 taken, the two great men worked independent- 

 ly, each knowing nothing of the work of the 

 other, and both are entitled to the highest 

 praise. I'm glad for the sake of the younger 

 bee-keepers to see that sketch of Dzierzon by 

 friend Mathey. 



Thanks, Mr. Editor, for the item (p. 19.5), 

 " Confusion in the use o terms." But in the 

 9th line, please say " a " instead of " the same." 

 For the colony before swarming is not the 

 "same collection of bees" as the swarm. Now 

 let's stop saying " rabbet " when we mean " sup- 

 port, and " hatch " when we mean "emerge." 

 After the hatching from the egg there's no oth- 

 er hatching. [We will agree to the correction 

 on the word swarm, but we protest hard against 

 trying to change the name of two well-known 

 apicultural terms. They have been in use too 

 long to change; in fact, it can't be done now. 

 We say, the " sun rises," but the phrase is as in- 

 accurate as rabbet for support. But why should 

 we change ? The use of " rabbet " and " hatch " 

 causes no confusion. We would try to change 

 a word only when, for example, like swarm, it 

 makes confusion. Some of John Phin's defini- 

 tions are more nice than practicable. — Ed.] 



EXTRACTED VERSUS COMB HONEY. 



the shallow extracting supers; more 

 than twick as much extracted 



AS COMB. 



Dij J. A. NaslL 



My first extractor— the " Peabody" — looked 

 like the family wash-boiler mounted on a pivot. 

 A peg, semi-centrally located on top of the can, 

 served as a handle, and a comb was hung in 

 each end. As compared with modern extractors 

 this was decidedly crude; but it was a great 

 improvement on the first extractor. 



This was before the days of sections, and our 

 apiary was arranged to produce comb honey in 

 small boxes with glass sides — six of these cov- 

 ering the top of a Langstroth hive. Here I got 

 my first lessons in tiering up. 



For many years I have produced comb and 

 extracted honey in the same apiary, though the 

 greater part of the time the comb honey has 

 been a side issue. I have kept accurate ac- 

 counts of profit and loss, and know that the pro- 

 duction of extracted honey is more profitable 

 with me than comb. 



Now, while I have had a single colony store 

 a greater amount, I have never been able to 

 make a large number average more than .50 or 

 60 lbs. of section honey to the colony, while 

 colonies in the same yard, run for extracted 

 honey, have averaged from 135 to 1(50 lbs. I 

 will say right here, that, when I make up my 

 average of surplus, I deduct the honey in combs 

 (sometimes a large amount) kept for feeding, 

 and speak only of what is actually surplus and 

 for sale. I seldom if ever molest the brood - 

 chamber when extracting, but often put combs 

 of sealed honey below, as bees are not apt to 

 crowd the queen when plenty of room is given 

 above, but the contr.. *■ is often the case. 



In poor seasons the di rence between comb 

 and extracted is, with me, still more marked 

 than in good ones, as I have several times ob- 

 tained, by the use of shallow extracting-cases, 

 20 to 30 lbs. to the colony, when the foundation 

 in sections in the same yard would be merely 

 drawn a little, or perhaps a few sections partly 

 filled, and therefore unsalable. 



Of course, the bees run for extracted honey 

 were provided with empty combs. Where a 

 part of the apiary had to build combs above, 

 they usually stored a little more than those 

 working in small boxes or sections, an illustra- 

 tion of the fact that bees will build more in one 

 large box than in several small ones. 



I clip all my queens, and, with colonies run 

 for extracted honey. I have little or no trouble 

 with swarming. The hives are close to the 

 ground, and a board leans against the alight- 



