1903 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE. 



55 



er colonies not divided would ffive no sur- 

 plus at all, but would raise a number of 

 useless consumers. That a swarm hived 

 on starters will give more surplus honey in 

 sections than a swarm hived on empty combs 

 is proven bj' experiments conducted by 

 Hutchinson about 20 3 ears ayo. Under 

 some circumstances foundation may be pref- 

 erable; but to fj^ive empty combs to a forced 

 or natural swarm is a mistake at all times, 

 if comb hone}' in sections is desired. 



Another method of preventing swarms is 

 to remove or cage the queen and to cut out 

 the queen-cells at the right time once or 

 twice, and at last introduce or liberate an- 

 other or the same queen. Compared with 

 my plan I see some objections, and the plan 

 has not found many followers, so far as I 

 know. As soon as the queen is removed or 

 caged, the swarming impulse is started at 

 once, and can be lessened afterward only 

 by weakening the colony considerably. 

 With mj' method the swarming impulse is 

 prevented in the main colony, or checked at 

 once, if queen-cells should have been start- 

 ed, when the colonj' is shaken from the 

 combs. 



The swarming impulse dominates in the 

 hive with the brood-combs; but here it is no 

 disadvantage, because this colony can't 

 swarm before a young queen will hatch. 



Again, colonies in this condition will not 

 work with the same vigor as a swarm. In 

 the third place, finding the queen and cag- 

 ing her takes more time with these strong 

 colonies than shaking the bees and the 

 queen from the combs, to say nothing about 

 hunting up queen-cells and cutting them 

 out. Fourth, as the laying of eggs is dis- 

 continued as long as the queen is removed 

 or caged, the colony will get weak at a cer- 

 tain time, and this is an objection if the 

 honey-flow is of long duration or if a second 

 honej'-flow is to be expected later, as is the 

 case in my locality. 



According to Stray Straws, Dec. 1, Dr. 

 C. C. Miller seems to prefer to breed a non- 

 swarming race of bees to prevent swarm- 

 ing'. It seems to me this is a very difficult 

 problem, and I am not willing to wait till 

 it is solved if I wish toestablisli an out-api- 

 ary. My experience with Carniolans and 

 North German heather bees teaches me that 

 the most prolific races of bees are those 

 which swarm the most. The Italian bees 

 do not swarm as much as these two races. 

 because they diminish breeding as soon as 

 a honey-flow of au3' amount is beginning; 

 and this qualification is not always desira- 

 ble. If we would breed a non-swarming 

 race of bees it seems to me that this race may 

 not have the desirable prolificness, and we 

 want prolific queens from early spring till 

 the commencement of the honey-flow, and 

 we should give them a chance to lay as 

 many eggs as possible at that time. By 

 using large hives this is accomplished in 

 the easiest way. In most localities, and 

 here in most years, the colonies in these 

 large hives will not swarm before the main 

 honey-flow, but they are not in proper con- 



dition for the production of comb honey. I 

 contract the brood-nest as described above, 

 and bring- the colony into the condition of a 

 swarm. This forces the bees at once into 

 the sections, and causes the comb honey to 

 be whiter than if produced over old brood- 

 combs. 



We know that a strong swarm, just before 

 the main flow commences, is desirable for 

 comb-honey production. It has the only ob- 

 jection, that, during the first 21 days, no 

 young bees are hatching, and that this 

 swarm will get weaker every day by losing 

 old field bees. I overcome this objection by 

 giving back all the bees at the right time, 

 so the colony will always have as many 

 field bees as it would have if I had never 

 manipulated it or than the colony would 

 have had if no swarming took place; conse- 

 quently I can see no reason why it should 

 not gather as much honey as another colo- 

 ny not manipulated which did not swarm. 



The necessary manipulations are not dif- 

 ficult, and do not take much time; and I 

 think it is hardly possible to find a more 

 simple and more profitable way to prevent 

 swarming, with the same security, if we 

 work our colonies for comb honey in sec- 

 tions. 



In the above I have neglected all points 

 of less importance which I explained in 

 m^^ two articles in Glkanings for Nov. 

 1 and Dec. 1. I have tried to explain the 

 principles of m}' method as plainly as pos- 

 sible, without theorizing very much, and I 

 hope that this management will be under- 

 stood now by the bee-keepers. 



Converse, Tex. 



[Your plan, as I understand it, does not 

 dift'er greatly from the brushed-swarm plan 

 lately advocated, where the colony is given 

 back its brood in the form of bees at a sec- 

 ond drive. It has seemed to me that this 

 second brushing or drive was a very impor- 

 tant feature of the plan. Without it one 

 will lose a large part of the benefit. The 

 Stachelhausen scheme of brushing or shak- 

 ing has come to stav', I think, even if we 

 were slow to take hold of it at first. We 

 owe friend S. a vote of thanks. — Ed.] 



CANADA'S F0UL=3R00D INSPECTOR'S REPORT. 



The Work of a Successful Inspector in Ontario. 



BY WJI. M'EVOV. 



When on my rounds through the province, 

 inspecting apiaries, I alwa3's pickeYl out 

 the best man in every locality' that I went 

 into to go the rounds with me, and tiiught 

 him how to tell foul brood in every form and 

 stage, and also how to cure the diseased 

 apiaries in the shortest possible time with 

 the least loss of time and materials, and 

 finish \yy having- these same apiaries built 

 up into good paying ones. B3' this system 

 of having a good man in nearl}' ever_v local- 

 ity I was able to manage the business for 

 the whole province, and did get hundreds 



