No. 123.] STATE INSPECTOR OF APIARIES. 125 



previous fall. In the fall of 1917, in this number of apiaries, 

 there were 4,818 colonies. In the spring of 1918, there re- 

 mained 2,768, a total loss of 2,050 colonies. The high rate of 

 winter loss was not local, but occurred throughout eastern 

 United States to a large degree. 



Mr. George P. Wood of Peekskill, New York, reported under 

 date of April 3, 1918, an interesting comparison of the losses 

 w^hich occurred there. 



I have lost 20 colonies out of 96, and it would require a detective to 

 determine the cause unless it was principally unsatisfactory honey: 48 

 were thoroughly packed in quadruple cases and 12 died; 48 were wrapped 

 and 8 died; 68 were in square hives and 14 died; 20 were in "warm- 

 enough" hives and 4 died; 8 were in 8-frame Langstroth hives and 2 

 died; 44 square hives were in the cases and 11 died; 4 "warm enough" 

 hives were in a case and 1 died. I considered the colonies in the Lang- 

 stroth hives to be among the strongest, as they were not disturbed much 

 last year. There was no starvation, with honey 4 inches away or 

 less. There was some dysentery, and I think the honey was not suited to 

 bees so long confined. I doubt if the cases were much help either this 

 year or last. 



In eastern Massachusetts one beekeeper lost 100 colonies out 

 of 193. Total losses by some of the small and less-experienced 

 beekeepers were not infrequent. The beekeepers have not yet 

 completely recovered their losses. On the basis of the figures 

 which are available among 914 apiarists whose winter losses it 

 was possible to compute, but a small increase over the spring 

 count has been made. These beekeepers had 2,768 colonies in 

 the spring, and, according to the records, had increased to 2,896 

 (this last figure is merely relative, but represents the minimum 

 increase, because some of the information was collected during 

 the summer and does not accurately represent the fall count in 

 these apiaries). This shows the relative difficulty with which 

 recovery from the losses of the previous season is made. 



Some would say that this high winter mortality could have 

 been avoided. Analysis of the cause for the mortality is im- 

 possible. A few of the contributing factors, however, may be 

 enumerated. Not only was the severe winter a factor, but per- 

 haps even more significant was the lack of preparation by bee- 

 keepers and scarcity of good stores. The beekeepers were not 

 to blame in all instances for the shortness or poorness of stores. 



