1898 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE. 



207 



count much outside the conditions hereinbefore 

 mentioned. I once received a shipment of 

 bees by express ; and while there was no 

 necessity for the comb-building act they did 

 build comb in their cages, and were loaded 

 with wax, and had it plastered in many places, 

 evidently just to get rid of it. I have also 

 observed much wax go to waste many times 

 in regular normal colonies. I believe that a 

 flow of nectar or handling of honey is always 

 accompanied by more or less wax secretion. 

 It is an involuntary act, or else voluntary, but 

 without foresight or reason to regulate it. 

 Perhaps conditions lead them instinctively to 

 secrete, or it may be wholly involuntary. 



SCALE-COLONY VARIATIONS — SOME REASONS. 



For several years I have suspected that one 

 scale colony was not a true index. So believ- 

 ing led me to desire to have either a number 

 of colonies on one big scale, or as many each 

 on a separate scale. The nearest I have been 

 able to accomplish ni}' desire was last season 

 when I kept two colonies on two scales, and 

 more scales would have been used could I 

 have had them. Some things were noted 

 that, at least to me, were very interesting. 



Colony one was in a hive about 15x17 inches 

 square, inside measure, i) inches deep a divis- 

 ible brood-chamber. The brood- frames were 

 4 '4' deep by 17 long. When the flow came 

 on, this colony had not yet built up strong 

 enough to use a super, especially in the 

 moderate flow prevailing. They worked with 

 great vigor. From June 6 to June 12 they 

 ga'ned 3 lbs.; the loth and 14th, 1 j^ lbs. each; 

 and the loth, 2)4. Colony 2 was a much 

 stronger one, and stood right beside No. 1, 

 yet their gain exactly tallied with No. 1 up to 

 the loth, when it was only 1}4 instead of 2}4, 

 as was No. 1. 



The lOth and 17th, heavy west and north- 

 west winds prevailed; and although clear, and 

 maintaining about the average temperature as 

 the preceding days, nothing was gained by 

 either colony. On the 16th both colonies had 

 queen-cells, which I removed. The 18th they 

 gained 2}< and 4 lbs. ; the 1 9th, o each; the 20th, 

 6)4 and()><; the 21st, 2and2)< — rain coming in 

 the afternoon. Also again cut cells from No. 

 1. The 22d it was 3 and 5. Notice that colo- 

 ny No. 1 was equaWo No. 2, although nmch 

 the weaker, up to the loth, when it had 2}^ 

 against No. 2, lyi. On the 23d I manipulated 

 No. 2 and lost their record for that day, while 

 No. 1 gained 3 lbs. and cast a swarm about 

 noon, which returned, having a clipped queen. 

 The 24th showed 1 and 1)4 as the gains. 



On the 2oth the gains were and 1 ?2- From 

 colony No. 1 I removed all brood, and all 

 comb except 2 of those 4^4x17 frames, con- 

 tracted to one shallow chamber with starters 

 in the other 8 frames, and put a super on over 

 an excluder, hoping thereby to stop their 

 sulking and swarming notions. I also un- 

 queened No. 2, which had no cells started. 

 Right here is something that interested me 

 much. Colony 2, although unqueened, made, 

 the following days, gains of 4, 7, 7, 6, 6, S}4, 

 3, consecutive days, the best week's work 

 done by either colony throughout the season. 



Colony 1 made for the same days 1, 2)4, 1}4, 

 1, 1, 1)4, and 1^4. 



Three days after removing brood from colo- 

 ny No. 1 I could find neither queen nor eggs, 

 so I ran in at the entrance a laj'ing queen, 

 which the next day I found balled; also found 

 the old queen and removed both, leaving them 

 queenless and broodless for a da}', when a 

 laying queen was accepted at the entrance. 

 This queen soon had brood started, and from 

 this time on the work of the two colonies was 

 about equal to the end of the season. While 

 the most of the time the daily gains were very 

 nearh' equal, there would be a day occasion- 

 ally when one or the other would show a 

 marked variation. 



During this latter part of the season when 

 they were working together, the most of the 

 time showing like gains, each had its laying 

 queen and plenty of room. Why it was, that 

 for a day one should go beyond or fall behind 

 the general record I am not able to explain. 

 It proves, however, that a single colony is no 

 true index, and that there are man}' and com- 

 plicated influences to contend with. I hope, 

 another season, to follow up the study in a 

 more thorough manner. 



Loveland, Col. 



FACING HONEY. 



Marking Cases Heaxier than they are; Section- 

 holder Arrangement Ahead of theT Super; 

 Rate of Sectinncleaning; Fence and 

 the Width of Cleats. 



BY I. S. TILT. 



I do not know to what extent the facing of 

 honey is practiced as stated in Gleanings, 

 page 83, by Mr. Aaron Snyder; but I do know 

 that it is the case to some extent, at least, and 

 that by producers too. I bu}' quite a lot of 

 honey each 3'ear, and I have often noticed 

 that it seems to be comparativel}' eas}- for 

 some people to do this wrong act. I always 

 make it a rule to examine, and grade roughly 

 before buying, so as not to get "left." When 

 I grade honey I try to put a good average 

 comb to the glass. I have had only one com- 

 plaint about honey not being as I represented 

 it. The man wrote me, asking what he 

 should do with it when he received it. I have 

 been told that this man makes a practice of 

 playing sharp. I presume he thought that I 

 had no other place to dispose of it, and would 

 be compelled to sell it to him cheaper than he 

 had bargained for it. It is needless to say 

 that I did not gratify his desire. The man I 

 sold it to afterward thought it was the pretti- 

 est he had ever seen. 



Another evil that often crops out is that of 

 marking the case heavier than it actually is, 

 so as to get pay for more pounds. I noticed a 

 case of this kind in Detroit last fall at a retail 



