IHW 



(JLIOANINC.S IN HEE CULTURE. 



lM(t 



luiijcst ami iiii'csi i-clls tliai jjivc us tlic t)t'st 

 (lUtu'iis; liciu-c I alwavs prefer to fiive a iiiieen 

 \s lieiiexer 1 eaii, rat liei' tliaii a cell, tof tlieii I 

 know wital I am doiii^." 



" Were you usually sui'eesst'ul in iul I'odueiii;^ 

 virgin (lueens?" 



" Yes, quite sm'0(>ssful. .\t leasi 'X, per cent 

 were aeeepled at lirst trial.'" 



•• Do you lliiiil< you got as much lioney where 

 queens were removed as you would were tliey 

 run the ohi way ■.'"' 



"I think not. providing then> had heeii a good 

 experienciHJ |)ersoii at each apiary. However. I 

 liiinl< 1 realized as much profit from my bees as 

 I should to iia\t' h'wod help to run them the old 

 way. There are advantages and disadvantage's 

 in both methods." 



■• How did the crop from your live apiaries 

 compare with that of tlie other two run the old 

 way ?■' 



•■ They averaged better than did the other 

 two apiaries: but I believe, could I have man- 

 aged the two apiaries myself, I could have 

 made a better average with them than the five 

 where the (lueeiis were removed (but. Charles, 

 don't tell Fred or Henry of thi.s — please don't).'' 

 •■ Was there any swarming in the five apiaries 

 after the hcmey season '.'"' 



'• Yes, to some extent. I think that probably 

 six per cent of the young (lueeiis swarmed wfiile 

 buckwheat was in bloom. Thi-se, of course, 

 were the lirst introduced; and. liaving filled 

 their liives with brood, and honey coming in at 

 a moderate rate, they swarmed out." 



'• Of course, you were not there to hive such 

 swarms or care for the parent colony: hence, 

 was it not an injury to them ?" 



•' No: I was not there to hive the bees. They 

 went to the woods: and as to the injury to the 

 old stock. 1 think that, in most cases, it was no 

 detriment to them, as I visited the apiaries 

 once a week: and wherever I found that a 

 swarm had issued I fixed them up with a laying 

 queen." 



•• How old a virgin (pKien is it safe to intro- 

 duce?" 



" I am not positive about that point. I am 

 conducting sonje experiments regarding this 

 matter. 1 think, however, that the best results 

 will be attained by introducing virgin queens 

 before they are eight days old. 1 think when 

 they are two to five days old is the better time; 

 but last S(!ason. in stmie of my yards I was 

 obliged to use some (pieens older than eiglit 

 days to save an extra trip: in fact. I have in- 

 troduced some that were lifteen days old; but I 

 found such old ones were not always reliable 

 when accepted, and I fancied such were more 

 apt to b<> followed out by a swarm wiien they 

 left the liive to mate: and in two or three cases 

 such queens proved to be drone-layers; and on 

 the other hand, soiik^ of the best queens I luive 

 (apparently so last fall) are those that were in- 

 troduced at from ten to fifteen days old; yet I 

 would not advise any one to use such. When 

 shipping virgin queens I always send those that 

 are i)ut two or three days old." 



■■ While the colonies were qu(;enless. did they 

 not store up large quantities of pollen, to the 

 fietriment of the colonies later on ".'" 



" Yes; the bees gathered pollen right along, 

 and it seemed to me at tirst they would pack 

 the c(jmbs full; and, in fact, some of them were 

 pnaty well lilled; but as tlie greater part of ray 

 colonies were requeen<'d. and the qu(;ens laying 

 before basswood blossomed, and as but very 

 little pollen is gathrjred during its bloom, and 

 as the young queens wiT'e laying so profusely. 

 th(! pollen was consumed to a great extent in 

 brood - rearing before another pollen harvest 

 came on." 



" Do you not have some colonies that have an 

 excess of pollen at the close of basswood '.'" 



■' Yes, oftentimes. In tliiit, case I remove such 

 (■oml)s jis are well lilled, and divide them among 

 my nuclei that I am working up for winter, 

 this being my only metljod of increase witii this 

 management." 



"Do you think the bees work as well in sec- 

 tions wliile they are qiieenless?" 



" No. Charles, not as a rule. Some colonies 

 do; but many do not. The majority of them 

 store the greater part of tiieir hoiKsy in the 

 t)rood- combs, from which young l)ees hatch out. 

 They are sure to keep such combs full; but 

 with strong colonies, wlieii there is a good flow 

 of honey, work seems to progress as w<'ll in the 

 sections as where they hav(^ a laying queen, be- 

 cause they .so .soon get the brood-combs full. 

 The great rush for the sections, however, comes 

 right after tlie young (lueen commences to lay. 

 Then all tlu^ uncapped lion(\v is carried from 

 the brood-combs to the sections. This is when 

 I get the greater part of my gilt-edge honey, as 

 th(! sections are filled and capped over very 

 quickly.'' 



" Do you think your bees are in as good con- 

 dition for winter, by your method of removing 

 the queens ".'" 



" Yes, I do, and, if any thing, in better condi- 

 tion, owing to the fact that, with young prolific 

 queens given them in midsummer, tliey rear a 

 large amount of brood before winter sets in." 



" Do you find it necessary to feed back as 

 much for winter stores by this method as when 

 swarming is allowed?" 



'• No. I do not: because they, being queenless 

 for several days during the height of clover 

 bloom, are apt to cap over quite a little in the 

 brood-combs, which, of course, remains there 

 for winter's use." A. E. Manum. 



Bristol. Vt. 



[You have suggested some very valuable 

 points, inasmuch as they help to clear up some 

 of the difficulties regarding colonies from which 

 queens have been removed to prevent swarming 

 during the honey-flow. We are aware of the 

 fact that many who have tried the unqueening 

 of colonies have found it to be a failure; but as 

 long as such men as Manum. Ehvood. and oth- 

 ers are successful, it is a great mistake to give 

 the plan only one trial on a few colonies, and 

 then give it up in disgust. The possibilities in 

 this line are too great to be lost. Mr. Manum, 

 we presume, could give us some very valuable 

 points on the minimum cost of a pound of comb 

 honey, and some of the short cuts he has sug- 

 gested go a long way toward solving the prob- 

 lem. It does not lower our calling, as has been 

 argued, to produce comb honey for less money 

 per ]jound. If we could secure 20 cts. a pound 

 for coirb honey at wholsale, then we might go 

 on and produce honey in the old-fashioned way. 

 It is impracticable to raise; tlu; price, but there 

 is a great deal of hope that we can reduce the 

 cost, and facts and tigur(>s in this and the last 

 issue are not wanting to show it. J 



MORE ABOUT GRADING HONEY. 



I)]{. .M1I,I-EK ( ONTINIKS THK .sUB.IKCT. 



The requirements of the first grade of honey, 

 as adopted at Chicago, were so exacting that 

 very many thought there could be very little 

 first-grade honey. .J. A. (ireiiii's highi'St grade 

 is open to the same objection, and is also open to 

 the objection that it multiplies grades, and too 

 great a number might make trouble about 

 marketing. For years I have sold the bulk of 



