1018 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE. 



Oct. 1 



pated, at nine days from preparation of col- 

 onies—not very encouraging. 



June 7, what had been the upper story of 

 No. 12 sent out a swarm ; also No. 7. Here 

 were three swarms before any of the colo- 

 nies which had not been divided at all had 

 given a single swarm. From this inauspi- 

 cious beginning, both upper and lower sto- 

 ries, the whole eight of them continued to 

 swarm until all but one lost or killed its 

 queen. They did good work, though, gath- 

 ering honey. To count the original colonies, 

 giving each one credit for what honey its 

 new colony made, the result was as follows: 

 No. 7, 125 lbs.; No. 9, 75 lbs.; No. 12, 110 

 lbs.; No. 13, 145 lbs., or 455 lbs. in all. 



I now wish to compare briefly these re- 

 sults with those obtained from three colo- 

 nies which I devoted to increase by the nu- 

 cleus plan. Three colonies were increased 

 to 15, and 425 lbs. of honey obtained. Here 

 was 141§ lbs. per original colony, while the 

 Alexander plan gave only 116| lbs. per colo- 

 ny. The nucleus plan gave 300 per cent 

 more increase, and about 22 per cent more 

 honey, than the Alexander plan. Both pro- 

 duced extracted honey; but the latter plan 

 has merit, and I shall try it again. 



Becker Co., Minn. 



[But we have had some very favorable 

 reports from others. See what E. S. Miller 

 says in this issue. Perhaps you did not 

 carry it out correctly. Will Mr. Alexander 

 please tell us where the trouble lay?— Ed.] 



MOVING BEES TO PREVENT SWARMING. 



A Modification of the Sibbald and Danzenba- 



ker Plan ; a Suggestion that may 



Have much Merit. 



BY O. R. BOSTOCK. 



In the foregoing article I explained how I 

 change the positions of hives when moving 

 them to a new location. Since writing that 

 article Gleanings for April 1 has come to 

 hand, and it contains an editorial explaining 

 the Sibbald non-swarming plan. 



After reading and considering the matter 

 it seems to me that it would be better to 

 carry out this work with groups of hives in- 

 stead of single ones. Suppose, instead of 

 one hive, we have three standing close to- 

 gether. When swarming is expected, we 

 come along some time during the day when 

 the field bees are absent, and carry all the 

 hives away to a new location. In place of 

 the group of three hives we now set down 

 one hive containing one frame of brood, the 

 rest empty combs or starters. This new 

 hive will now receive all the field bees from 

 the three old ones, and should make a much 

 better showing than if it received the bees 

 from only one. All agree that, the more 

 bees we can get together, the better. There 

 will be no stinging, for all is confusion for a 

 time at finding their homes gone and only 

 an empty hive there instead. They will, 

 perforce, all chum up together when night 



comes on, and by morning will have settled 

 down contented in the new home. 



Last spring I desired to obtain some of the 

 new season ' s honey for exhibition at a fair. In 

 this case I moved the hives up into groups of 

 three, and then carried two away. The one 

 colony left became in each case very strong. 



The season was a total failure for honey. 

 The expected flow did not arrive until too 

 late, and then these strong colonies being 

 left to themselves threw off the largest 

 swarms I ever saw. In three cases the 

 swarms were so large that they completely 

 filled a bushel measure. 



It seems that this system could be car- 

 ried much further with decided advantage. 

 We will suppose that all the hives have been 

 drawn up into groups of three. When 

 swarming is expected we go to group No. 1. 

 We find that all of them are preparing to 

 swarm. Accordingly all are removed and 

 carried away to a new location where they 

 are set down side by side again. A single 

 prepared hive is left on the site they were 

 taken from. 



We now proceed to group No. 2. On ex- 

 amination we find that two of the hives are 

 preparing to swarm, and that the third one 

 is not. In this case we should smoke the 

 latter well, and place it in the center of the 

 group, if not already there, and carry the 

 other two away. The smoke would prevent 

 fighting, which is never bad at swarming- 

 time, for the bees are too busy with the 

 flowers to have much time for fighting. 

 This hive will now be even stronger than 

 that which replaces No. 1, for one entire 

 hive remains instead of only its field bees. 



This hive could be counted on to start 

 preparations for swarming very shortly, so 

 that it also would need to be moved in, say, 

 ten days or two weeks. Bearing this fact 

 in mind when moving other hives, after a 

 lapse of two or three days I would set down 

 two others near it. and then at the time for 

 the second move the three could be worked 

 again together. 



At group No. 3 we might find that only 

 one colony was preparing to swarm. In that 

 case it would be better to cut out the queen- 

 cells from that one and give some of the 

 brood from it to the other two; then at the 

 next visit the three would all be in about an 

 equal condition. 



In this locality swarming is the great 

 trouble. It is natural that they should 

 swarm, and they will do it. They swarm 

 for about four months. Last year I spent 

 days and weeks cutting out queen-cells, and 

 it was little better than wasted time. If 

 one cell is missed (a very simple thing to do) , 

 all is undone. I am sure the moving would 

 give much better results, and not be a quar- 

 ter the work. They would, as you say, think 

 there was a famine in the land, and cut out 

 the cells themselves. 



Of course, the old hives would soon swarm, 

 if left to themselves, after the first shift; 

 therefore when moving I would set them 

 down again in groups of three. As soon as 

 they were again getting ready to swarm, 



