IS*,!-.' 



GLEANINGS IN HKE CUI/rURE. 



193 



tlicii' Ix'iiiir ffd nnili;ri'sti'(l iiollcii troiii llic 

 sprayi^d irccs. as cxijlaiiit'tl by I'rof. t'()ol<. 'Tlic 

 writci' aiiswcfcci liim llial ilic nollcn led the 

 worker larvio was always partially diffcslcd in 

 the sioiiiacii of ilic iims(>-i»t'(>s. Si-rrctary Da- 

 daiil piompily I'orn'ctt'd (V) liiin by sayiiiR liiat. 

 after tin- foiiitii day. the larva' ar(> fed uii- 

 chaiiiri'd (•!• midijit'sicd ixiljcii. and tiuM-cfori' 

 that thi- loss niiirlit be so ai'i-onnti-d for. I'lof. 

 ('ool< and Dadant arc inistakrn in tiicir statc- 

 MH'iiis and tcai'liinirs, for it is a w<'ll-('slal)lishrd 

 fai't tiial (lie worker larva' do nol rci-civo nn- 

 digosied pollen at any period. I ref<'r to this 

 snbjeet a2;ain b(>cunse of its inipoitanee. If the 

 larva- wi-re fed pollen Jnst gathei'ed from the 

 poisoned trees, the explanation would be easy, 

 bnring the tiist three days the larva' receive 

 nothing but digested food: and after that tin; 

 same with honey added. If worker l)rood is 

 poisoned at all by pollen it is by [)ollen tliati has 

 been as far as the second stomach of the nnrse- 

 bees. If poisoned l)y honey fed to larva' 

 over three days old. our authorities would hav<' 

 us understand that such honey has been no 

 further than the tirsl stomach. In the human 

 stomach, arsenic does not poison for .some time, 

 and we should expect not only e(iual Imt much 

 greater immunity from poison in the honey-sac 

 of the bee. since it is undo\ibtedly trui'. as 

 Cheshire says, that true digestion does not com- 

 mence here. Thus it is possible for bees to 

 carry a deadly poison into the hive, and either 

 feed it to their young or ileijosit it in the cells. 



A few years ago one oi more of our leading 

 entomologists falsely accu.sed the bees of punc- 

 turing grapes, and recommended the free use of 

 poison. As no limit was given as to the 

 strength of the poison to be administered, such 

 advice was fraught with danger to th(i human 

 family. Truly the time has come for putting 

 more restrictions on the public use of poisons. 

 The writer asked Dr. Lintner why he thought. 

 if arsenical poisons of a certain strength so 

 readily kill noxious insects, that they will not 

 injure bees. He re[)lied that, in the case of the 

 the codling moth, as well as with some other 

 insects, llu; etlort \\as to kill the newly hatched 

 larv;e and nol the mature insects, and fortius 

 purpose a very weak poison would be as effect- 

 ive as a very much strongei' one for full-grown 

 insects. Now. within the bee -hive we have 

 just as young larv;e that may be poi.soned; and 

 in the absence of further knowledge we may 

 assume that a poison strong enough to kill the 

 newly hatched ap|)le-worm will likewise kill 

 the newly hatched bee-worm, or larva. Thus, 

 if the doctoi-"s own statements ai'C admitted, we 

 have sul'ticient |)roof to condemn the practice of 

 spraying during bloom, for the vi-ry weak ar- 

 senite tliat passes safely through the Hrst stom- 

 ach of the tield-woiker. or safely through the 

 second stomach of the nurse-bee, will surely 

 kill the tender larva \\ hen it reachc^s it. We 

 hav(! accepted the statcnnents of our western 

 friends, that tin? brood in Mr. Smith's hives 

 was poisoned, as nndoubtr-dly it was. but we 

 have no conclusive proof of it. Tin- brood, in 

 the absence of the nuituic bees to feed and pro- 

 tect it. w(juld have perished, and lieeti dragged 

 out in the satue way. We need to know wiial 

 part pollen has in this poisoning, whet her it has 

 any or evei'v part. We also need to know how- 

 strong an arsenite the blossoms of fruit-trees 

 will bear: for it may be that tlu^ blossoms are 

 so much more tenrler than the foliage that it 

 will be impossii)le to spray them with any thing 

 strojig enough to kill even the most tender in- 

 sect. 



There is plenty of material here for experi- 

 ment: and the point is not, have we any thing 

 to [)rove. but have we any one to prove it ? The 

 I'liited .States have a young man in their em- 



l»h)y. located at the Michigan Agricultural 

 College, and caring for its apiary of seventy or 

 eight y colonies. It is not to be expected tJiat. 

 alli'i' loitking after this number of st(»cks. he 

 will have much time for experiment. Tiie 

 government has also an able man (Frank Hen- 

 ton) at \Vashington: but all the bees they fur- 

 nish him for experimental purposes are «om<^ 

 spet'imens |)reserved in ak-ohol. Dr. LintiK^r 

 referred us to i\hode Island, the smallest StaUf 

 in the I'liion. as the' one most likely to aid us. 

 This brings us to the question, " What ought 

 the States and general government to do for 

 apiculture?" _j _ P. II. Ki.woon. 



Starkville. N. Y. 



[Our correspondent has indeed suggested 

 some [joints on which we need more light, We 

 ntost heartily commend Mr. .1. H. Larrabee, of 

 the Michigan .Vgricultui'aJ College. He has all 

 the facilities at hand, and we believe he could 

 furnish us some valuable data. This is a case 

 where science and practice go hand in hand; 

 and at what better place can these things be de- 

 termined than at an experiment station, under 

 the auspices of the State or national govern- 

 mentVi 



HOW THE BREEDING OF OUR BEES IS EF- 

 FECTED BY THE MATING HABITS OF 

 QUEENS. 



.V XOX-SWAHMI.VO STKAIN OF BEp;S: .SHALL WK 

 GET IT ? 



Every apiarist recognizes the necessity for 

 good ([ueens. Those reared under conditions 

 where sulticient heat and food are absent are 

 not wanted, txood, healthy, perfectly develop- 

 ed queens are longer-lived as well as more pro- 

 lific. Thus when we breed and mate a queen- 

 bee, we determine the character of a colony for 

 a number of years. Besides desiring to breed the 

 queens large and healthy, we wish to ijreserve 

 certain qualities present in the ancestors. In 

 the dii-ection of color we have succeeded some- 

 what: but have we made any progress toward 

 |)reserving the valuable traits of i)erfect winter- 

 ing, honey-gathering, and non-swarming? 



The Albany convention, without doubt, rec- 

 ognized the fact that we have made litth^ or no 

 progress in the breeding of non-swarming bees, 

 as, in the scale of points that is adoi)ted for 

 judging the Italian bee, there is no mention 

 made of the trait of non-swarming. 



W. F. Clarke, in his essay read at the same 

 convention, was of the opinion that swarming 

 is not a normal condition. I'res. Elwood be- 

 lieved that th(!re was a difference in strains 

 (iKjt I aces) of bees upon this point. The opin- 

 ions held by both these gentlemen show that 

 there is a belief lurking among apiai'ists that 

 there is something in it. Though non-swarm- 

 ing strains of bees are often boomed fora while, 

 we do not remember that they were ever a suc- 

 cess. We of America are too anxious for the 

 dollar of to-day to work patiently for a series of 

 years to attain any degree of success with non- 

 swarming he(!S. It is desirable that th(^ queens 

 of a whole apiary, and perhaps for miles 

 around, be bred with this in view, and drones 

 as well as queens selected. 



Let us now consider why we have not suc- 

 ceeded better in our lireeding efforts toward 

 this end. The methods of queen -rearing in 

 vogue in most apiaries are against any results 

 ever being attained. Nearly all queens are 

 reared from swarming cells, and the colonies 

 tliatdontjt swarm do not survive. I believe 

 that nine-tenths of all tlie (jiieens in the land 

 are bred under the swarming fever, and this 



