1903 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE. 



547 



hive. Our colonies are strong in two-story 

 ten-frame or three-story eight-frame hives. 

 We have never been troubled with second or 

 after swarms when all the bees were re- 

 turned to the old hive; and by giving room 

 they always do better with me than when 

 allowed to swarm. 



To tell how takes much more time than to 

 do the work. I have screened two large 

 swarms in live minutes, using the same 

 hives and honey-boards for both. 



I used to dread the sw^arming-time; but 

 now my mind is at rest, for in my apiary I 

 am master of the situation when there is no 

 virgin queen with the swarm. Possibly 

 there might be after-swarms in some local- 

 ities, but I do not have them. 



Russell, Ala. T. J. Adams. 



SHAKEN SWARMS FIFTY YEARS OLD. 



Is not Father Laagstroth the Originator of the 

 Forced'swarm Method ? 



I have been so situated that for months 

 past I have read none of the bee papers. I 

 now have before me Gleanings for Nov. 1, 

 in which I find several references to 

 " forced " or " brushed " swarms, and an 

 article of some length by Mr. Stachelhau- 

 sen, on the same subject. Some question 

 seems to have arisen as to who is "the 

 author of the brushed or shook swarm 

 method;"' and an editorial note appended 

 to Mr. Stachelhausen's article gives him 

 the credit, as he has practiced it for over 

 twenty j'ears. 



Now, if I am not greatly mistaken Mr. 

 Langstroth practiced substantially the 

 same method more thaLU Jotiy years ago. I 

 have before me his book published in 1862, 

 in which he devotes several pages of the 

 10th chapter to "Artificial Swarming." 

 Beginning- on page 154 he describes at 

 length his method of forming forced swarms. 

 Is it not a fact that father Langstroth is 

 entitled to the honor of introducing the sj-s- 

 tem? 



Springfield, Mo. 



[You are right. In the chapter on artifi- 

 cial swarming, Mr. Langstroth does de- 

 scribe a method of "forced swarming" 

 very similar in manj- of its details to the 

 plans we have been lately advocating. He 

 goes on to saj' how unsatisfactory mere di- 

 viding is to secure the results obtained from 

 natural swarming; all plans of artificial 

 swarming he condemns save one, which he 

 calls " forced swarming." He directs that 

 the operation be performed at the beginning 

 of or just before the swarming season. The 

 parent hive is to be removed from its stand, 

 and an empty one or a decoy hive put in its 

 place about ten in the morning, when the 

 bees are flying thickest. The old hive re- 

 moved is turned upside down, and the bees 

 from it are drummed up into a box. This 

 is then set down on a temporary stand. 



The old hive is put back on its old stand ta 

 catch the flying bees, and the bees in the 

 decoy hive which had been on the old stand. 

 It is then removed to another stand, when 

 the hive or box with the drummed-out bees 

 is put back on the old hive stand. Just why 

 Langstroth recommended so much unneces- 

 sary manipulation is not explained, any 

 more than that, in his opinion, field bees 

 were necessary to take care of the brood 

 from the parent hive. Perhaps this may 

 be a sufficient explanation ; but ordinarilj'^ 

 we would not suppose field bees were just 

 the ones for this kind of w^ork. Had he rec- 

 ommended, as he suggests further on in the 

 chapter, removing the old hive, shaking the 

 bees in the morning, and getting nearl}' all 

 the bees in a new hive on the old stand, his 

 plan would have been virtually the same as 

 the shake-out plan of to-day; at all events, 

 we have Langstroth indorsing the basic 

 principle of the shake-swarm plan now in 

 vogue, and condemning the plan of artifi- 

 cial increase b}- a mere dividing. 



It is remarkable how Langstroth ante- 

 dated so manj' of us in our new (?) discov- 

 eries. This is not the first time we have 

 reinvented some methods found in his book. 

 While it is possible that a novice taking up 

 his work, and reading his methods of 

 "forced swarming" would fail to get the 

 real essence of the plan now in vogue, 3'et 

 there is no denying that he had the u/ea; 

 and I believe it is no more than right that 

 we accord to him the palm of original dis- 

 coverj' of " forced swarming." When I say 

 "forced swarming," he used exactly that 

 term in the first edition of his book away 

 back in 1852 and 1857. We thought we 

 were new in adopting this name; but here 

 again Langstroth was ahead of us. Noth- 

 ing but consummate genius could have cut 

 the ground clean out from under us fifty 

 years before in so man}' things as is done 

 by the father of American bee- keeping. 

 Well does he deserve the title that has been 

 so justly applied to him. — Ed.] 



USE OF FOUNDATION. 



Full Sheets are More Profitable ; the Fallacy of 

 the Crowded Brood^nest. 



BV ADRIAN GETAZ. 



A few days ago, w'hile looking over my 

 bee-papers for some information, I came 

 across several articles about the use, non- 

 use, and abuse of foundation. If I have not 

 misunderstood the writers, the only point 

 considered was the amount of wax saved to 

 the bees by the foundation given, or lost to 

 the bee-keeper, in case the bees could have 

 secreted that amount of wax just as well. 

 This seems to me the smallest side of the 

 question, if that expression can be used. 

 But before going further, let me make a 

 comparison. Suppose you have a brick 

 wall 32 feet long by 20 feet high. It takes 

 4 feet of space to accommodate a brick-lay- 



