GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTUKE. 



Oct. 15. 



the standard size. Can that triHiiig increase in 

 size warrant l<eeping anotlier size on the mar- 

 kef? If a thinner section is wanted, the stan- 

 dard 4I4 can be made as thin as any otlier. 

 There is one objection to 4i.j square that would 

 not hold against a size considerably lai'ger: and 

 that is, tlie fact that, being so near 4I4. there is 

 danger of confusion wherever the two icinds are 

 kept in the same place. At present I have sec- 

 tions measuring l\f and 1% in thickness, and I 

 know something of the trouble of having two 

 sizes so nearly alike that they must be held 

 close together to tell which is which. 



Is there any likelihood that\\<- can reach a 

 standard as to the thickness of the 4li? 1 be- 

 lieve it now varies from ]}4 to 2. Very few 

 reach as high as 2. and very few want any 

 thing less than 7-to-the-foot; so that, practic- 

 ally, the contestants may be considered four in 

 number— 7-to-the-foot. 1^4, IX. and 1\^. Possi 

 bly l\'i might come in as the "dark horse." 

 For a long time I supposed ihat 1^^ was the pop- 

 ular width; but. if I am I'ightly informed. 1% is 

 more in use. I changed last year from Ifg just 

 because I wanted togo witii the majority, and 

 also because 1% was lighter weight. Vm now 

 ready to make a further change to 1,^4 or 7-to- 

 the-foot. if the majority say so. 



Se<ing, tlien. that there are only four kinds 

 that are used to any considerable extent, and 

 that there is so very litthi difference between 

 these, it does not seem so utterly impossible for 

 us to get down to two kinds, possibly one. Now. 

 what means, if any. will be successful in bring- 

 ing about such a result? The .State and Na-* 

 tional Societies might do something by resolu- 

 tions. But you may ■■ resolute'" till doomsday, 

 and I'm not likely to make much change unless 

 I see some good n^ason foi' it. How would it do 

 for the manufacturers to agree amoug them- 

 selves to manufacture only the kind or kinils 

 agreed upon as standaid? 1 don't think it would 

 do at all. If they are wise they will hardly at- 

 tempt it. 



No. the thing will not he brought about by 

 any sort of compulsion. Indeed, I do not be- 

 lieve there would hi' any use in trying to get all 

 to agree on one or two kinds. A man who has 

 supers and all otlier fixtures adapted to a cer- 

 tain odd-sized section is not very likely to make 

 any sudden change. But if I see that, in the 

 long run, there will be an advantage gained by 

 changing, and that change can be made with- 

 out great inconvenience, you may count on my 

 making that change. In this way I think it 

 not unreasonable to expect something like a 

 natural gravitation into one or two standard 

 kinds, that gravitation perhaps materially ac- 

 celerated by a little friendly consultation. 



Suppcse i am using 4x4^j. and no one else, or 

 very few. use the same size. When I send for 

 sections there are none of that size kept in stock 

 and I must wait till tliey are made. If the man- 

 ufactiu'ers are crowded with work on regular 

 sizes I may have to wait a long time. This of 

 itself is a pretty strong argument in favor of my 

 coming in with the majority. Then the manu- 

 facturer says to me. '" There is so much call for 

 the standard kind that we keep thousands of 

 them made up ahead, all packed ready for ship- 

 ment, and can ship that kind any day you send 

 in your order. Besides, we make a very large 

 (juantity of the standard at one time, ni'cessi- 

 tating no change of machinery, so giving you a 

 little advantage in the lower prices we can af- 

 ford.'" Unless I am very pig-headed, that sort 

 of argumentwill have its effect on me; and just 

 as soon as I can do so without actual loss I am 

 likely to adopt a regular size. 



Now. who will tell us which of the leading 

 widths is best, giving reasons therefor? I-n't 

 there some reason why one is better than the 



others? If there is no particular reason in this 

 case, and each one tises a particular kind just 

 because he happened to get started that way. 

 then the question is, "What width or widths 

 are in the majority?" Perhaps, Mr. Editor, you 

 will be kind enough to tell us about that. So 

 far as any thing occurs to me just now. the ar- 

 gument in favor of something as thin as or 

 thinner than ix' is, that bees generally seem to 

 prefer nothing thicker than that, and that any 

 thing thicker, at least as it seems to nle. helps 

 to perpetuate the system of selling short weights 

 for full pounds. Against anything as thin as 

 or thinnei' than 7-to-the-foot, it may be said 

 that, when separators are used, this comes so 

 near to the width preferred by the bees for 

 brood-combs that there is more danger of pollen 

 being stored there, and the queen depositing 

 eggs. C. C. Mii.r.EK. 



JNlarengo, 111., Sept. 29. 



[Bee-keepers will have what they want — that 

 is, what their supers take and markets call for. 

 in the way of sections; and supply-dealers can 

 do but little toward regulating a standard size. 

 We have practically only three sizes as stan- 

 dards; viz., I'm. 1^. and 7-to-the-foot — all 434 

 in. square. VVe somewhat question whether it 

 would be feasible or even desirable to have less. 

 Producers and the various markets have their 

 various likes and dislikes. 



Referring to the 1>^ section, theie are two 

 important reasons why they are taking the 

 lead. Wood separators are so much better and 

 cheaper that bee - keepers everywhere have 

 adopted them where they could. As the ma- 

 jority of supers in use took the 1^;] section with 

 tin separators, it precluded the possibility of 

 using iiKjod separators unless a narrower sec- 

 tion were used ; namely. Us- This fact, cou- 

 pled with the other fact that the markets de- 

 manded a lighter section, made the I's the lead- 

 er. Why are light weights desirable ? It may 

 be answered in this way: A buyer comes in and 

 inquires the price of hon(;y per pound. "Six- 

 teen cents."" is the reply, we will say. 



"Well, I will take a section. How much is 

 this one worth ? "" 



" That is wortli 13 cents." 



No objection is made: but if he is met with 

 the statement that the section is worth is cents 

 he may demur. Again, sections are being sold 

 more and more by the piece; and consumers 

 generally understand that a section of honey is 

 usually of light w(Mght — that is. hardly a pound, 

 and when they are charged less there is no ob- 

 jection. Again, for the same money a thinner 

 comb shows oft' better than the same weight of 

 a thicker comb. Next to tlie I's and l^jj size of 

 section, the 7-to-the-foot takes the lead. J 



RAMBLE NO. 69. 



HEE-KEKPIXG AROUND .lURUPA MOUNTAIN. 



The Riverside apiary, described in Ramble 

 (55. is situated upon the extreme eastern point 

 of a broken range of mountains, abotit seven 

 miles in length and not over a mile In width, 

 and known as the Jurupa Mountains. The 

 formation is. in many respects, peculiar, and it 

 is evident that some convulsion of nature 

 thrust them up here in the center of a plain, 

 or it might be calh d a |)i'airie. These moun- 

 tains are nothing more nor less than piles of 

 huge granite boulders. The granite in some 

 places is quarried for building and monumental 

 purposes. Upon another detached mountain 

 near Colton. less than two miles in circum- 

 ference, are limekilns, cement works, marble- 

 quarries, both white and variegated, and an 



