CONTROL OF AMERICAN FOUL 

 BROOD IN THE UNITED STATES 



By Jas. I. Hambleton, B.S. 



(Principal Apiculturist, Bureau of Entomology and Plant 

 Quarantine, United States Department of Agriculture). 



During the time that Dr. G. F. White, of the Bureau of Entomology, 

 U.S. Department of Agriculture, was investigating the brood dis- 

 eases of bees, about 1906, a survey was being conducted to determine 

 the distribution of American foul brood in the beekeeping localities 

 of the United States. It soon became evident that the disease was 

 by no means localized but widespread throughout the country. 

 Before this time some of the States had begun to realize the serious 

 inroads that American foul brood was making. 



As early as 1877 San Bernardino County, California, passed a 

 bee-disease law, and 6 years later a State law was enacted in Cali- 

 fornia. It is interesting to note that the State law specified that 

 infected colonies be burned. The State of Michigan passed a bee- 

 disease law of State- wide application in 1881 which also prescribed 

 the burning of infected colonies. In 1897 Wisconsin appointed the 

 first State apiary inspector, N. E. France, with headquarters in the 

 State Capitol. Other States followed suit by enacting special laws 

 and appointing apiary inspectors, and to-day practically every 

 State has a bee-disease law or some administrative organization 

 imder which bee inspection is carried on. 



These early inspectors did their best. Upon receipt of a call from 

 a beekeeper, a gross diagnosis would be made in the apiary and in- 

 structions left as to how to treat. Burning had already been frowned 

 upon as unnecessary and wasteful. In some cases, where the 

 inspector felt so inclined, he would lend a hand in the unpleasant 

 task of treating colonies by the so-called shaking method. The next 

 day he would be responding to a call in some other part of the 

 State. Although the inspector would cover a great many miles of 

 territory during a season, the beekeepers who benefited by his 

 visits were insignificantly few. His activities nevertheless filled an 

 educational need, and soon every beekeeper was on the look-out 

 for disease. 



In the light of present knowledge it can be seen that from the 

 very beginning the shaking treatment was unsatisfactory. Reduced 



31 



