MAY. 1917 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE 



345 





FROM THE FIELD OF EXPERIENCE 



and many other i'uch ridiculous f lories, nol 

 woi'thy the mentioning'. Wlien Ihe true 

 and only reafon why Beos thrive not with 

 every man alike, is either the want of 

 judgment or care, or both, in thofe who look 

 after them; as appeareth by this proverbial 

 inftanee, that when the owner of the Bees 

 dies, then the Bees alfo (as if they had a 

 Sympathy with their owners) will die foon 

 after; wliich I have known, feemingly veri- 

 fied, by fome ancient perfons who kept Bees, 

 had skill, and looked well after them whilft 

 they lived, but they dying, the greater part 

 of their Bees within one year after have 

 died alfo, which happened not becaufe the 

 owners died, but becaufe the skill and care 

 of the Bees died with thofe owners." 



Wise Moses Rusden ! He belongs to our 

 generation and the superstitious friend of 

 yesterday belongs back with those other 

 Englishmen of 1679 who, according to this 

 Bee-master to the King " have run into 

 many errors and by-paths of ignorance." 



Zounds! Methinks this epiftle is of un- 

 feemly length, yet I do humbly befeeeh thee 

 to accept gi'aciously this grain of Ineenfe 

 offered with much devotion by your Maj- 

 efty's moft loyal and most obedient Sub- 

 ject and Servant, Mary. 



=ta ^ac 



The Purpose of Laying-workei Drones 



Why do we have laying-worker drones? 

 Allow me to give my opinion, which is, 

 that thru these drones lies our greatest 

 opportunity to improve on the qualities of 

 the bee. Why? Because, in almost all ani- 

 mal and insect life, the Creator made male 

 and female capable of caring for all their 

 needs, such as gathering and storing food 

 and making for themselves suitable shelter 

 or whatever they might need for their 

 sustenance, or else he placed them in the 

 midst of all their requirements for their 

 existence, that they might live in the midst 

 thereof and multiply. The honey-bee is an 

 exception to the rule, for here we find that 

 neither tlie male nor female takes any part 

 in the gatheiing or storing of their food or 

 preparing for their protection from the 

 elements, but are looked after and in most 

 part fed by their slaves, the workers. Now, 

 bear in mind that neither the father nor 

 the mother has any tendency or instinct 

 to take notice of or feed upon blossoms, or 

 to gather food for themselves, or lielp to 

 protect themselves in any way; yet they 

 are supposed to produce an endless supply 



of workei-s, the great ambition of wliich 

 is to do the very thing which their parents 

 have no instinct to do. If it were not for 

 the laying workers the usefulness of a 

 colony would be at an end when they be- 

 come queenless. However, they have one 

 function yet to perform before they cease to 

 be, and that function is to do their part in 

 keeping their species from developing into 

 a lot of lazy idlers. To accomplish this, 

 the workers, after a certain length of time 

 (about 28 days), begin laying eggs hatching 

 nothing but male bees, which are allowed to 

 exist unmolested in the hive to the end of 

 their natural life, and perhaps become the 

 fathers of a good number of the young 

 queens in their locality. These drones, as 

 we know, are the jDroduct of the mother 

 worker alone. Having no father, they 

 should possess the traits of the worker 

 bees, or at least their progeny would be 

 more inclined that way than the progeny 

 of a drone whose ancestors for countless 

 generations back had on the maternal side 

 done nothing but lay eggs and be looked 

 after, and on the paternal side live perhaps 

 for but a few days, fly out, and meet their 

 mate and fate. 



As to worker drones being inferior or 

 short-lived, or producing bees that are, I 

 do not believe, for the reason that a worker 

 bee is tougher, and can stand more hard- 

 ships than a queen can. The experiment of 

 comparing _ the longevity of their drones 

 would be interesting. It must be under- 

 stood that tliis article is dealing exclusively 

 on theory; and we all know that theory does 

 not always work out in practice; but if I 

 had the time to do some experimenting 

 along this line I certainly would enjoy it. 

 It may take a good many bee generations 

 to^ make any noticeable difference. It 

 might develop the combative qualities, but 

 I don't think it would. One cross might 

 give good results while more would be too 

 much of a good thing. 



I happen to think of the mule for an 

 illustration. How much has the mule im- 

 proved as a work animal on account of the 

 generations he has been used for that pur- 

 pose? It has been said that " he is neither 

 proud of his ancestry nor hopeful of his 

 posterity," and surely the same could be 

 said of the posterity of the working bee 

 unless we allow the drones of the workei-s 

 to perpetuate their working instincts. 



Springfield, Mo. W. J. Purvis. 



[Mr. Pritehard suggests, in answer U 



