THE BEE-KEEPERS' REVIEW, 



289 



Bee - Diarrhoea — Is It a Disease 1 



G. M. DOOLITTLE. 



" By timp subdued, what will not time subdue ?" 



T TAVIJNG care- 

 i 1 luUyreadBro. 

 Hutchinson's arti- 

 cle in the Ameri- 

 can Bee Journal, 

 which is to be the 

 "leader" for the 

 October Review, 

 as I uuderstaud, 

 1 would like to say 

 a few words there- 

 on, with the edi- 

 tor's permission. 

 Before touching the real matter up for dis- 

 cussion, I wish to say that I supposed it set- 

 tled some years ago that when we spoke of 

 oar wintering troubles we were to call it 

 "Diarrhoea" instead of "Dysentery," as 

 the word dysentery was not thought to be at 

 all appropriate to the case. If diarrhoea is 

 the word, would it not be well for us to all 

 use that word ? 



About the first thing we find in the leader 

 is, "The disease, if such it can be called," 

 and from this I gather that there are some 

 who still think that the over-loading of the 

 intestines of the bee is a disease. That diar- 

 rhoea only exists under like circumstances 

 has led some to believe that it is the effect 

 of a cause, rather than a disease, myself be- 

 ing one of this latter number. The cause 

 that produces the effect, called "Bee- Diar- 

 rhoea," is confinement. This, no one has 

 successfnlly denied, although many have 

 been the attempts to do so. Bees are na- 

 tives of a warm climate, where they can fly 

 at their own sweet will nearly every day, as 

 winters are really unknown where all of the 

 environments are suited to bee life, and our 

 bringing them into aland where the environ- 

 ments are not all suited to them, is where 

 the trouble comes in, and that trouble lies 

 largely in the fact that these latter environ- 

 ments keep the bees from flying to void their 

 faeces for from two to six months. " But," 

 says one, "canyon tell us why one colony 

 escapes while another sutters, when both are 

 wintered precisely alike, if diarrhoea is not 

 a disease ? Unless you can do this, I must 

 differ with you." With all due respect to 

 such, I would ask them to account for this 

 state of affairs along the line of disease. 

 This was the very ground on which I left the 



"disease theory." To all the "knowing 

 ones," who answered questions in the bee 

 papers, I propounded the following ques- 

 tion : Two colonies sitting side by side and 

 as near alike, as to stores, bees, etc., as two 

 peas, as far as can be seen, are prepared in 

 the same way for winter. One dies before 

 April 1st spotting the combs and soiling the 

 hive, while the other comes through in splen- 

 did condition. What caused one to die and 

 the other to live ? The reply, vyithout ex 

 ception, was, " We do not know." Will any 

 reader of the Review answer the question ? 

 Let me explain a little and see if it is not 

 all plain along the line sf being caused by 

 confinement. In 1878 I was put on record as 

 saying " that with a long, steady cold winter 

 would come great mortality of bees, while in 

 winters during which warm spells occurred, 

 wherein a chance was given bees to fly, the 

 mortality would be at a minimum, even al- 

 though the average temperature might be 

 several degrees colder than the former." 

 The twenty years which have elapsed since 

 then have proven this correct. 



Mauy have told us the wintering problem 

 was solved, but a winter like the last always 

 proves that a loss of bees is sure to follow 

 when spring arrives. During one of our 

 hard winters, a few years ago, I had 145 col- 

 onies, fifty -five of which were placed in a 

 warm cellar for winter, and ninety left on 

 their summer stands. From the 22nd day of 

 October till the 2Cth day of March, there was 

 not a day warm enough for the bees to fly, 

 although the average temperature of the win- 

 ter was above those we frequently have. The 

 result was I lost seventy-five colonies out of 

 the ninety, while of the fifty- five wintered in 

 the cellar fifty-four came out in splendid 

 condition. The question is why did the sev- 

 enty-five die, and why were the fifteen ex- 

 empt? Simply because from a little more 

 vitality on their part the fifteen were enabled 

 to hold out a little longer than the seventy- 

 five, while a month more of the same weath- 

 er would have caused the loss of all that were 

 out door. 



There is a period of confinement beyond 

 which a colony possessing the most vitality 

 cannot pass, as all must admit, hence, I ask 

 is it disease which kills the last ? If not, 

 and the one possessed with the least vitality 

 succumbs earlier, is it disease which kills 

 the first ? Again, if bees having this " dis- 

 ease" have a good fly so as to empty them- 

 selves, they are cured at once, thus proving 



I 



