1894 



GLEANING IN BEE CULTURE. 



687 



I should like some light on that point, as I 

 can't get up even a respectable theory as to the 

 cause of it. 



I vote yes on the picture of the Root family, 

 and good large ones at that, even if it takes a 

 whole number of Gleanings to do it. 



En held, III., Aug. (5. 



[Since publishing what we have in recent 

 nunibi-rs, to the effect that bees do move eggs, 

 we have received a large amount of corres- 

 pondence corroborating the fact enough so that 

 we think we can definitely and positively say 

 that bees do at times move eggs from one part 

 of the hive to another, and even deposit them 

 in queen-cells. If we had room we would pub- 

 lish all the matter on this subject. But the 

 gist of the whole of it is given above — Ed.] 



THE HATCH-ROOT DISCUSSION. 



THE RIGHT SIZE OF RIJIKin NEST; SECTIONS 

 OVER DUMMIES. 



liU Dr. C. C. Miller. 



And now I've something more to say about 

 that Hatch-Root controversy, p. .573. Ernest, 

 you've rudely knocked from under me one of 

 my props without a word of warning. All along 

 I've cherished the hope that in some way it 

 might turn out that there was never any need 

 of having more than eight frames: and now 

 you say a ten-frame hive is too small for a 

 large colony. Are you going to climb the fence 

 to the other side? 



I«n't there something loose-jointed in the 

 working gear of your mind, that will allow you 

 to say that a ten-frame hive is too small for a 

 large colony, and that you found as many as 13 

 to I.') frames of brood in some colonies, and then 

 in the face of that to say that you don't think 

 you secured more brood in ten-frame hives than 

 in eight-frame? Now shut one eye and take 

 a square look at these two questions. Firstly, 

 don't you think a colony for which a ten-frame 

 hive is too small will have more brood in a ten- 

 frame hive than in an eight-frame one? Sec- 

 ondly, don't you think one of those colonies in 

 which you found 13 to 15 frames of brood would 

 have more brood in a ten-frame hive than in an 

 eight-frame one ? 



Leaving that for the present. I note that you 

 both agree that the queen will readily go to 

 work in a story added above, at least if a frame 

 of brood be put in the upper story. I should 

 think sol Why, lots of bee-keepers use queen- 

 excluders to keep the queen from going up, and 

 there's no need of a brood-comb as bait either. 

 But I'm a little puzzled to know whether there's 

 any reason for adding the second story (ihove, if 

 there's good reason for adding a second story at 

 all. I'm not experienced in that sort of thing; 

 but it seems to me there are at least some 

 reasons for putting it below. As Doolittle 

 would say, it seems to me more according to 

 nature. 



A colony starts its combs above, and works 



downward. It lengthens its combs downward, 

 and the brood keeps gradually working down. 

 1 can't imagine bees in a hollow tree working 

 their brood down a certain distance, thv-^n 

 making a fresh start at a higher point. But you 

 say our bees are not in hollow trees. I admit 

 it, and come back to the hive. I suppose the 

 time when you would add the second story is 

 when the bees first begin to be a little crowded, 

 and, likely, that would be in the spring, or be- 

 fore the harvest. Now, at that time you're 

 doing all you can to develop the strength of 

 the colony, and it's considered important to 

 preserve as much as possible the heat. I'ut a 

 second story above, and the bees have twice as 

 much room to keep warm as they had before, 

 for the heat rises into the new story. Put a 

 second story below, and the bees have no more 

 to keep warm than they had before, unless 

 they work down into the new story, and then 

 they have to keep warm only so much as they 

 occupy, while the empty story above must all 

 be kept warm whether they occupy it or not. 



I don't know whether you would contemplate 

 putting on sections while the colony had these 

 two stories; but if you should, I feel pretty 

 sure the bees would not touch the sections till 

 the upper story was filled ; whereas, if the 

 second story was added below I am inclined to 

 the opinion that there might be some work 

 done in sections before the lower story was fill- 

 ed. 



To go back to that comparison of the 150 

 eight-frames with the 130 ten-frames, there's a 

 point that I rather wonder friend Hatch didn't 

 make. The claim is quite generally made, and 

 I believe I never saw it contradicted, that colo- 

 nies do not store honey in exact proportion to 

 their strength, but that strong colonies gather 

 proportionally more honey than weak ones. 

 That is, a colony weighing 8 lbs. will store 

 more than twice as much honey as one weigh- 

 ing 4 lbs.; hnd if we add one-fourth to the 

 strength of a colony we will add more than a 

 fourth to its surplus. According to that, al- 

 though 130 ten-frame hives may be supposed to 

 have only as many bees as 1.50 eight-frames, 

 yet they ought to give more surplus. 



You both seem to agree that bees fill out sec- 

 tions belter over an outside frame of, brood 

 than over one of hcney. I very much doubt it. 

 Over empty combs or over an empty space they 

 make poor work ; but if the outside comb is 

 occupied and filled I could never see that brood 

 in it made any material difference. You say, 

 Ernest, " When we used ten-frame hives and 

 ten-frame supers, at least one outside row of 

 sections was behind the other rows." Thai 

 agrees precisely with my experience; but if 

 you mean to have the inference drawn that the 

 thing is different with eight-frame hives, then 

 your bees don't woik like mine. I don't think 

 I ever knew a case, either with eight-frames or 

 ten-frames, in which the outside rows of sec- 



