92 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE 



Pebbttabt, 1920 



FROM NORTH, EAST, WEST AND SOUTH 



In Northern California.—?^" ^^^*« 



has an en- 

 viable record in honey production; for not 

 only has she a very high average production 

 per colony, but she also continues to lead 

 all other States in the quantity of honey 

 produced. According to the Bureau of Crop 

 Estimates of the United States Department 

 of Agriculture, California produces more 

 than twice as much as Texas, her nearest 

 competitor; or in other words, our State fur- 

 nishes 15 per cent of the total amount of 

 the honey produced in the United States. 

 Texas comes next with 7 per cent, followed 

 by Iowa with 6 per cent; and then come 

 New York, Illinois, Michigan, and Wiscon- 

 sin, with 4 per cent each. California's aver- 

 age production per colony for the past six 

 years is 60 pounds per colony. The average 

 of other leading States is as follows: Texas 

 37 pounds, Iowa 57, New York 45, Illinois 

 47, Michigan 49, and Wisconsin 58. Ninety- 

 seven per cent of our honey is placed on the 

 market in the extracted form, leaving but 

 three per cent as comb honey. There is no 

 other State that produces a greater per cent- 

 age of extracted and less comb honey than 

 California. Last year the ratio was not so 

 great, being 90 per cent extracted and 10 

 per cent comb. Outside markets take 85 

 per cent of our crop, there being no other 

 State that is compelled to seek outside mar- 

 kets for the disposal of their crop so exten- 

 sively as California. The marketing prob- 

 lem with her is much more of a problem than 

 it is with any other State. We produce 15 

 per cent of the honey produced in the United 

 States and must seek an outlet for 85 per 

 cent of the amount. Texas produces 7 per 

 cent and disposes to outside markets 60 per 

 cent of her crop. Iowa produces 6 per cent 

 and has only 20 per cent of the amount to 

 dispose of outside the State. Obviously the 

 marketing problem in Iowa is not a leading 

 one. The three States, Illinois, Michigan, 

 and Wisconsin, that produce each 4 per cent 

 of the crop of the United States, have for 

 disposal to outside markets respectively only 

 15 per cent, 25 per cent, and 28 per cent of 

 their crops. Like Iowa, these States do not 

 consider the marketing problem as a vital 

 one. This problem is essentially a Western 

 problem and concerns itself principally with 

 California and Texas. Colorado, Idaho, and 

 Arizona produce respectively 3, 2 and 1 per 

 cent of the honey produced in the United 

 States, and the disposal of the crop to out- 

 side markets is respectively 69, 75, and 68 

 per cent. 



Of late there has been some discussion in 

 the journals regarding the feasibility of 

 federating the various marketing associa- 

 tions of the State into a central national 

 body. In view of the above, the Eastern 

 States have very little in common with their 

 Western sisters, and an organization of this 



kind would more than likely result in fail- 

 ure. A federated marketing association of 

 Western States would be more likely to 

 prove a success; yet, even an attempted 

 federation of this kind, at this time, in the 

 opinion of your correspondent is unworkable. 

 Nor does he believe that the time is near at 

 hand when such an organization is neces- 

 sary. California and Texas organized mar- 

 keting associations because they had to do 

 so. The speculative buyers had become very 

 bold, and not a few used unscrupulous meth- 

 ods. Colorado and Idaho also found it neces- 

 sary to organize. Arizona markets 75 per 

 cent of her crop outside her boundaries and 

 is today the stronghold of the speculative 

 honey -buyers. Arizona will soon find out 

 that she has to organize. Marketing asso- 

 ciations do not come into being because they 

 appear attractive to prospective members or 

 seem to be a good thing — ^they come into be- 

 ing simply because they have to. It has 

 proved a distinct advantage for beekeepers 

 to join together in a central marketing 

 scheme; and when this scheme reaches a 

 high state of perfection (which is by no 

 means the case today), it will be possible 

 for the beekeeper to realize even greater 

 Ijrofits than did the speculative buyers, and 

 that too, without increasing the price to the 

 consumer. In time, if California or Idaho 

 or Texas or any other State or any combina- 

 tion of States find that they must co-operate, 

 such a federation will be a necessity. These 

 problems are worked out by themselves and 

 can not and should not be anticipated. 

 Modesto, Calif. M. C. Eichter. 



« » » 



In Southern California "^'^ Janu- 

 ary — and 



the New Year finds Southern California far 

 short of rain sufficient to give us any assur- 

 ance of a crop for 1920. To be sure, we 

 have had some rain, which started the grass 

 nicely but did not wet the ground to any 

 great depth. High, drying winds have car- 

 ried away much of the moisture. During 

 such years as the one just past, one is most 

 forcibly impressed with the fact that the 

 greater part of southern California is de- 

 pendent almost entirely upon the rainfall 

 for its honey crop. Notwithstanding the 

 fact that the alfalfa, oranges, and many of 

 the beanfields — what are known as the ir- 

 rigated crops — produce many carloads of 

 honey, yet I feel safe in saying that, with 

 an abundance of rainfall, the honey crop of 

 these sections would be fully two or three 

 times as great as in a dry year. In talking 

 with beekeepers who depend entirely upon 

 the sages, buckwheat, blue curl, sumac, and 

 the so-called wild plants of our waste lands, 

 I am surprised to find so many who made lit- 

 tle or no honey during the season of 1919. 

 It has been several years since we have 

 had a heavy rainfall, and many people feel 



