712 



THE AMERICAN BEE JOURNAL. 



J^'ov. 



/. 



might as well expect a nest of goose-eggs from a flock of gan- 

 ders, as to Inok for strawberries in this patch. 



The Doctor asked me if I conid raise a crop of Crescent 

 strawberries with no staminate blossoms within a mile. Yes, 

 sir ; I can raise a crop of strawberries from any pistillate 

 plants, if there were no staminate blossoms within 10 miles. 



As he seems to be rather skeptical about all varieties pro- 

 ducing both staminate and pistillate plants, I will defy the 

 Doctor to send me any variety of strawberry-plants that 1 

 cannot return to him within two years — plants of the same 

 variety that will be either all staminate or all pistillate, or 

 both kinds, if he wishes. Of course it is understood that I do 

 not mean any of the so-called pistillate varieties, for they 

 have no stamens, owing to the originator accidentally failing 

 to cut any runners from the staminate plants, and as no 

 staminate plants were ever sent out, they were accepted as a 

 pistillate variety, but they are only accidentally so, not nat- 

 urally. But any varieties, such as the Wilson or Jessie will do. 



Franklin, Pa. 



The Swarming Habit — Breeding it Out. 



BY BERT L0WNE8. 



Since Dr. Miller, on page 582, disagrees with my article 

 on "The Possibility and Desirability of Breeding Out the 

 Swarming Habit," on pace 549, I shall ask the readers to 

 bear with me in an attempt to defend my former article, and 

 also to point out more clearly, if possible, the impossibility as 

 well as the undesirabllity of breeding out the swarming habit. 



Notice in my previous article that I maintained that 

 swarming is not, properly speaking, a linbit ; and although I 

 am still of the same opinion, I shall, for convenience, speak of 

 the bees' desire to swarm as " the swarming habit." 



Before going into detail, however, I wish to say that I 

 write this article, as I wrote the other, entirely without malice 

 or unkiud feelings toward Dr. Miller or any other person. I 

 simply wish to present my views on the question, and leave 

 results with the readers. 



First, Dr. Miller finds fault with my statement that " the 

 desire to swarm has existed ever since the bees were created, 

 and, I can truthfully say, will exist until they become ex- 

 tinct." Now, if I had said, as I should, " and I helieiK will ex- 

 ist until they become extinct," it is quite probable that he 

 would have passed it by without comment. 



Further on he says: "Even supposing he proves that 

 bees have always swarmed, he will need to prove that 

 they will swarm, and always have swarmed, when not at all 

 crowded," etc. No! I think not. It is not necessm-y that I 

 prove that they always will swarm, " when not at all crowded," 

 or that they always have swarmed, under the same conditions, 

 in order to prove that it is impossible to breed out the swarm- 

 ing habit. If that were the case, I might as well quit right 

 here, for it has already been proven that they have not altrays 

 swarmed when " not at all crowded," but though they did not 

 swarm, neither was the swarming habit bred out. Suppose 

 that I can ?!ot prove that bees always will swarm. Can Dr. 

 Miller prove that they will not swarm ? Suppose I cannot 

 prove that bees always have swarmed, " when not at all 

 crowded." Can Dr. Miller prove that they always have not 

 swarmed when not crowded ? or can he prove that those that 

 did not swarm, would still refuse to swarm on bfiiir/ crowded ? 



Since Dr. Miller advances no argument to prove that the 

 swarming habit could be bred out, I think I am slightly ahead 

 on that score. 



Now for the next : "As to the desirability of getting rid 

 of the habit, he is not so positive. He only thi7>l:s that no 

 drones would be reared if there were no swarming. But others 

 may think they would bo reared if swarming were forever to 

 cease, so the matter of desirability stands just as it did before." 



I cannot agree. I am ./ii.sJ as positive that it is not de- 

 sirable to breed out the swarming habit as I am that it is 

 impossible to do so : what I am not so positive on, is, whether 

 or not drones would be reared. Even if that were the only 

 undesirable feature in breeding out the swarming habit, the 

 factt of my thinl;iiirj they would not be reared, and some one 

 else thitildnij they would, does not leave the question of desir- 

 abiiity as it stood before, loiJcss our arguments were equal. 

 Supposd Mr. A. (not Abbott) should steal a horse. B. has him 

 arrested, and he is asked, " Did you steal that horse ?" He 

 answers, "No 1" B. is then asked, " Did A. steal that horse?" 

 He answers, " Yes." Now because A. says ?ie didn't, and B. 

 says he did, will the matter be dropped there ? Hardly. The 

 matter will be settled according to the arguments that A. and 

 B. set forth. 



There are a great many reasons for believing that breed- 

 ing out the swarming habitwould be undesirable {some I shall 



speak of later on), of which the following is not the least: It 

 is impossible to improve upon Nature by working directly in 

 opposition to her laws; therefore, the bees cannot be im- 

 proved by having the swarming habit bred out, and without 

 improvement it is not desirable. 



Lastly, Dr. Miller speaks of "the encouragement in 

 knowing that Mr. Lownes has faith that it is both possible 

 and desirable to prevent swarming ;" but adds that his faith 

 in that line — the line of possibility — " is not as strong as it 

 once was." 



First, I will call attention to the fact that my statement 

 in regard to the prevention of swarming wasexactly as follows: 



" While I believe that it is not possible or desirable to 

 breed out the desire of the bees to swarm, I do believe that it 

 is both possible and desirable to perfect a plan whereby the 

 •prevention of swarms will be a practical success ; but even 

 then I think there would be a few exceptions, owing to the 

 strong hold the swarming instinct has on the bees." Mark 

 that last clause. Now I wish to make this statement : 



Inasmuch as the prevention of swarms is necessarily the 

 first step to be taken in breeding out the swarming habit, 

 there cannot be the slightest hope in the possibility of breed- 

 ing out the habit until we succeed in learning apian that 

 prevents swarming to fJwohtfe per/ectfo)>. (Even though we 

 knew of such a plan it does not follow that breeding out the 

 swarming habit would be possible.) 



Now notice Dr. Miller's answer to the query on page 419 : 

 "As it is not essential for the existence of a colony, and as 

 some bees are more given to swarming than others, I don't 

 see anything impossible in having bees not given to swarming 

 at all " 



As I mentioned before, his faith in the possibility of pre- 

 DC?ifto?i " is not as strong as it once was;" on page 406 he 

 says, in regard to "How to prevent swarming" — "That's 

 always an enticing question, but one gradually learns not to 

 expect too much from it." Could anything be more contradic- 

 tory ? In his answer to the query he does not see anything 

 impossible in having bees not given to swarming, but still he 

 hasn't a great deal of faith in the prevention of swarms. Just 

 imagine a bee-keeper approaching Dr. Miller, and saying: 

 "Well, Doctor, I have at last succeeded in having the swarm- 

 ing habit bred entirely out of my bees, but for the life of me I 

 can't hit upon a successful plan of prevention." 



Now I believe I have met all of the Doctor's objections; I 

 shall therefore proceed next week to point out more clearly 

 the impossibility and undesirabllity of breeding out the swarm- 

 ing habit of the bees. Charter Oak, Iowa. 

 (Concluded next week.) 



One Dollar a Year is a "dirt cheap " price for a 

 weekly like the American Bee Journal. I think everybody 

 who is at all familiar with it admits that statement. Compar- 

 ing it with the price of almost every other bee-periodical of 

 to-day, it should be 32.00 a year. Granting that, each sub- 

 scriber will readily see that the Bee Journal publishers are 

 saving him or her just $1.00 a year. Now, in return for that, 

 why not each reader resolve that each year he or she will pro- 

 cure at least one new subscriber for the Bee Journal ? Surely 

 each could do that, at least for a few years. Besides furnish- 

 ing a low-priced paper, the publishers are willing to pay liber- 

 ally for the work of getting new subscribers. As an evidence 

 of such fact, see page 722 of last number. 



The American Bee Journal is trying all the time to work 

 for your interest. Why not you try to work for its interest ? 

 That is a mutual afifair that ought to be self-commendable. 



Earn Your Own Subscription.— Any present 

 subscriber can earn his or her own subscription to the Ameri- 

 can Bee Journal for one year by sending three, neiv subscribers, 

 with $3.00. A copy of "Bees and Honey" will also be mailed 

 to each new subscriber, and the Bee Journal will be sent to 

 the new readers from the time the order is received up to the 

 end of 1896. This is an easy way to earn your own subscrip- 

 tion and at the same time help to circulate the Bee Journal. 

 Remember, getting 3 new subscribers pays for your own sub- 

 scription for 1 year ! Of course, no other premium will be 

 sent in addition. This is a straight offer by itself. 



