GLEANINGS m BEE CULTUKE. 



Jan. 



EIGHT OB TEN FRAMES, "WHICH? 



GOOD REASONS FOB PREFERRING THE LATTER; 

 CONTRACTING. 



J^% EFORE this question drops out of discussion I 

 Oc wish to say a few words on the subject. For 

 ""^l the two last seasons I have been testing hives 

 ^^ of eight-fi-ame capacity. My ex])erience is 

 not extensive with such small brood-apart- 

 ments, but suflBcient to furnish a pointer in the 

 right direction. Since quite a small boy I have 

 kept an apiary of an average of 75 colonies. I am 

 now 43 years old. This gives me, as you see, a deal 

 of experience, especially when I tell you that I have 

 used hives holding all the way from one peck to five 

 bushels, and have used frames of nearly all shapes 

 and sizes. 



About twelve years ago I settled down to the use 

 of a hive containing ten L. frames, which seems to 

 me to be the nearest the proper size of any other 

 for most localities. By the use of contractors, 

 suitable space may quickly be arranged to suit the 

 requirements of any size of colony; and by the use 

 of chaff division - boards, or contractors, made to 

 take the place of the two outer frames, the space is 

 reduced to the capacity of an eight-frame hive, and 

 that, too, without interfering with the size of the 

 surplus apartment. Cases and crates used for ten- 

 frame hives in the surplus apartment may also be 

 used on the so-arranged eight-frame hives, and no 

 confusion. So much argument was produced in 

 favor of eight-frame hives, I decided to reduce the 

 brood-apartment of a dozen hives to this number, 

 which was done by the before-described method. 



During the first season's experience with these 

 hives, ray bees were at no time, by a good honey- 

 flow, led up to the swai-ming-point. 



About the same amount of surplus was taken 

 from these eight-frame hives that was taken from 

 my ten-frame hives. By a close estimate the small 

 hives contained 9 lbs. less honey to begin the winter 

 on than the ten-frame hives had; and as no honey 

 was gathered the following season before June 10th 

 1 had to draw on the ten-frame hives for honey to 

 run the small hives through. 



Here it may be well to remark, that as it is true 

 that farmers and nearly all beekeepers having less 

 or more bees, but making this branch of rural econ- 

 omy but a secondary matter, will be found negli- 

 gent in the care of their bees, and, in consequence, 

 would lose more extensively with hives of small 

 capacity. Hence it may be easily seen that even 

 the specialist must give more time, more labor, and 

 more frequent manipulations where small hives 

 are used. 



As my second season's experience with the eight- 

 frame hives was even worse than the first, I soon 

 abandoned the use of them. Soon after the honey- 

 flow began, and just as my bees had made a fine 

 start in the sections, the swarming fever broke out 

 in the apiary, and within three days 11 of the 13 

 eight-frame hives had swarmed, while but one in 

 six of the ten-frame hives swarmed that season; 

 and as I wished to conduct my apiary as far as pos- 

 sible on the non-swarming principle, I at once was 

 out of conceit of hives of less capacity than ten 

 frames. There is a difference of opinion about this 

 matter of running bees on the asfar-as-possible- 

 non-swarming plan; but with me this plan is the 

 most profitable, and reduces the running expenses, 

 as well as the labor of the apiary, to the minimum. 



If I may be indulged further I should be pleased 

 to say a few words on the question of 



CONTRACTION. 



Taking into consideration the extra time and 

 labor of, first, contracting the brood-nest to five or 

 six combs, at the time of putting on sections, trou- 

 ble in disposing of the extra combs removed, the ma- 

 terially lessened room leit immediately ahove hvooA- 

 combs for sections; and, second, the returning to 

 place combs that were taken away, cost of sugar, 

 preparation and feeding of same, expense of feed- 

 ers, etc., would the apiarist be any better off with 

 this system of management than he would be were 

 all the frames left undisturbed in the brood-apart- 

 ment throughout the year, and take what surplus 

 the bees were able to produce? I am of the opinion, 

 that, taking a number of years in succession, the 

 best results would be obtained by leaving all the 

 frames in their proper place. What can be gained 

 by forcing all the honey into the surplus receptacles, 

 to be extracted and sold in a hard market at 7 cents 

 per lb., "keg thrown in," then go home, buy sugar 

 at about the same price to feed up again for winter? 

 Yes, I've tried this too. Why not take just what 

 your bees can spare, stored in sections, or surplus 

 combs for the extractor, and, when removed, re- 

 place your slatted honey-board, put on quilt, then 

 chaft' cushion, and go away from them? They are 

 ready for the winter. J. A. Buchanan. 



Holliday's Cove, W. Va., Dec. 10, 1885. 



Friend B., although 1 have not experi- 

 mented as you have, I had come to the same 

 conckision you do, and for about the same 

 reasons. The greatest reason besides the 

 above is, that the eiglit-frame and ten-frame 

 Iiives could not be made interchangeable 

 when used on the Simplicity plan. I think 

 it would be a serious mistake to commence 

 making narrow hives. 



THE HO-NEY-MARKET OF NEW YORK. 



SINGLE-TIERED CRATES VERSUS THE DOUBLE-TIER- 

 ED; ADULTERATION OF FOOD. 



JT^ URING my stay in New York I have taken 

 f\ cl some pains to look into the honey-trade of 

 "^1^ that city, and the results of my investiga- 

 ^^ tions are as follows. Thurber, Whyland & 

 Co., have on hand from 50 to 60 tons of as 

 fine a lot of honey as I have seen. Messrs. McCaul 

 & Hildreth Bros., who give quotations of honey in 

 Gleanings, have about 35 tons. Something over 

 half of these lots of honey is comb honey, put up 

 in single-tiered crates; that is, those having but 

 one layer of sections. These crates are very sim- 

 ilar to the Heddon - Hutchinson style — a cut of 

 which appeared in the last issue, and do not hold 

 over 15 or 20 lbs. of honey. Neither of these firms 

 cares to handle honey in the double-tiered crates. 

 The reasons given by them for rejecting the double- 

 tiered crates are about as follows, and are similar 

 to those given by Heddon: 



The sections are not as easily gotten out, are 

 more apt to be daubed, and during shipment are 

 not as liable to be broken. I am satisfied, from 

 conversation with these gentlemen, that the 48 or 

 50 lb. crate or case is undesii-able, being both un- 

 wieldy by reason of its weight, and not as salable 

 as the smaller package. It is no easy ta,sk to lift 

 a .50-lb. crate of honey to or from a wagon or car. 

 A smaller crate will always insure more careful 



