BEE-spoke-data/bees-v0 huggingface dataset:
**Q. Is honey from a foulbroody colony fit for table use? I never heard of any foulbrood in this neighborhood and there are lots of bees here.**
**A. If nice and clean in appearance it is all right. Foulbroody honey that is death to bees' larvae is entirely wholesome for human beings.**
**Q. After shaking one or more colonies of bees that had
A. The unscaled larva, instead of being pearly white, as in a state of health, is of a distinctly yellow tinge, becoming darker as it dries, until very dark brown or black.
Q. Tell us how to destroy European foulbrood without destroying a lot of nice, straight combs.
A. When I discovered European foulbrood in my apiary, I melted up hundreds of beautiful worker-combs. If I had it to do over again I would try to save them. I have been blamed for encouraging anything of the kind, because in the hands of careless beekeepers there is danger that the disease may be spread through the combs that are saved. But you'll promise to be very careful, won't you, if I tell you how I would do--how I have done? The first thing is to have the colony strong. Foulbrood is not a great strengthener of colonies, and if it has proceeded to any great extent you will need to strengthen the colony by giving brood or young bees, or both, from healthy colonies, or by uniting diseased colonies. But, remember, the colony must be strong. The Alexander treatment requires the removal of the queen, and then 20 days later the giving of a ripe queen-cell or a virgin just hatched of best Italian stock. The bees do the rest. I think I have had just as good success without leaving the colony so long without a laying queen. So instead of waiting 20 days, give the colony a cell or a virgin queen just as soon as it will accept it after the removal of the queen.
Sometimes you may find only a single bad cell, or perhaps 8 or 10. In that case it may not be necessary to do anything. A week or two later you may find that the bees have cleaned out all bad brood and left nothing but healthy brood in the hive. But you may find the case worse than it was, although not yet a very bad case. If the queen is vigorous, and the colony appears prosperous, cage the queen and leave her in the hive. After a certain period let the queen out of the cage, and if your bees do as mine have done the disease will have disappeared in most cases. I say after a certain period. I think a week is long enough, but perhaps ten days is better. You notice that I also say, "in most. cases." Because in more cases than I like the disease has reappeared. But so it did in some cases when I brushed the bees upon foundation and melted the combs.
Q. Colonies have one, two or three cells of European foulbrood, say first of June. If I kill the queen the last half of clover flow and let these bees rear their own queen, will this cure European foulbrood? If so, state time to do it. Clover flow from June 20 to July 20.
A. A cure would be likely to follow. Better not wait until the last half of the flow, as the case would be getting worse all the time, but act at the beginning of the flow. But if only two or three diseased cells are present, and the queen is good, all you need to do is to cage her in the hive for ten days.
Q. If caging a queen for a certain length of time, in case of European foulbrood, stops the disease, should the disease not come to an end in fall, as all brood-rearing stops entirely for several months?
If an apiary has foulbrood one season, will it be free from it next year? There are no young diseased larvae from which the nurse bees can suck the juice and feed it to healthy ones the next spring.
A. The shortest answer to your question would be to say I don't know. And that's the truth. I don't know why caging a queen should stop the disease. If caging a queen stops the disease, I don't know why the winter's rest from brood-rearing does not stop it. But here is the important fact that I do know. I know that in a large number of cases cessation of brood-rearing for a week or so has stopped the disease. Note that I don't say in all cases, but in the large majority of cases. I don't know that in the great majority of cases the disease is conveyed from one cell to another by the nurse-bees sucking the juices of recently-diseased larvae, but it is a pretty satisfactory theory until a better theory is advanced.
I think, however, that no one has advanced the theory that the disease is in all cases conveyed by means of larvae that have been dead only a short time. It may in some cases be conveyed through spores in dried-up scales of larvae that have been dead a long time. But I suppose these last cases are exceptional. Now, although I don't know all about it, if you will allow me to theorize, I'll tell you what I think is possible in the case you mention. In early spring or winter, when the brood-rearing begins, there are no diseased larvae present. But there are dried scales containing spores. One would expect that the disease would begin rather slowly from these. And observation confirms that supposition. In a colony which has not been badly diseased in the previous year, the first examination in the following spring shows very little disease-possibly none. Subsequent examinations will show it on the increase, although if I am not mistaken there are some cases in which a colony will remain healthy which has been slightly diseased the previous year. If a colony has been very badly diseased this year, next year you may look for it at the very start with plenty of diseased larvae, probably because of the millions of spores that are present.
Q. In treating colonies with European foulbrood by dequeening or caging the queen all agree the first thing to do is to make the colony strong. I find that ideas differ on this matter of strong colonies. What is the minimum strength with which you could expect success?
A. You have struck a new question, yet now that it is asked the wonder is that it was never asked before. Without being dogmatic about it, I should say that the colony should be strong enough to have six Langstroth frames well filled with brood--to be more specific about it, each frame being three--fourths filled. I think it also important that there be a good force of young bees, and without this it would not be likely that six frames would be well filled with brood. Old bees that have begun work afield are not the ones that do house-cleaning, and it may well be questioned whether doubling up such bees to any extent would answer the purpose.
Q. Are the germs of European foulbrood transmitted by honey, or, in other words, would a frame of sealed or unsealed honey (with no brood) from an infected colony infect a healthy one?
A. I think it would in some cases. I know that in some cases it does not. I would have little fear of surplus honey from an infected colony. I would not feel quite so safe about a brood, even if it contained no brood. With American foulbrood the case is different. However, in either case, I should prefer both honey and combs that had never been within a mile of a foulbroody hive.
Q. Would combs that have never contained brood be affected in any way, even if they had been drawn out by colonies affected with European foulbrood? Would it be safe to use any of those combs? Now I have 200 self-spacing frames all drawn-out combs. They have been exposed to the diseased colonies, but not used for brood-rearing. The diseased colonies had stored honey in them, and I extracted it. Would it be all right to use them, or would it be better to make wax out of them? Everybody's bees are affected around here, as one of the beekeepers left his hives out to be cleaned up where bees had died.
A. I have used such combs without bad results. Whether it would always work so well I cannot say. If I had never had the disease I should not want to use them. But in your case, with the disease all around you, and having already been in your apiary I should not hesitate to use them. The likelihood is that it will be some time before you are entirely rid of European foulbroad, but it will gradually become less troublesome, and will not hinder you from getting crops of honey.
Q. You state you will never melt up any more combs on account of European foulbroad. What would you do with combs partly filled with honey, or empty, that were left by a colony that had died with the disease?
A. Candidly, I must confess I don't know. As you state the case, I can imagine a colony so thoroughly rotten with the disease that it dies outright, leaving combs containing some honey, but most of the cells filled with diseased and dead brood. If I had such a case I should feel a good deal like burning up the whole thing. I'm pretty certain I should if it were the only diseased colony in the apiary. If the disease were spread throughout the apiary, I think I would let such bad combs dry until the dead larvae were dry. Then, if there was honey in some of the combs that I thought fit for table use, I might extract it. Whether the combs were extracted or not, I might give them in an upper story to some colony having the disease but not wholly affected. In fact, this latter is just what I did, piling the diseased combs four or five stories high--only the combs were not so badly diseased as in the supposed case.
Even while saying that, with a single case in the apiary so bad as imagined, I should burn up the whole thing, I will stand by my assertion that I will never melt up any combs on account of European foulbroad, because I am very sure I'll never allow a case to get so bad as supposed.
**Foundation (See Comb-Foundation.)**
**Frames.--**_Q_. Is there any difference in the size of the Hoffman and Langstroth frames? If so, what are the outside dimensions of each?
A. Both the same size--17%x9%%.
Q. Are the self-spacing Hoffman brood-frames the best?
A. If the bee-glue is not troublesome where you are, you will find them excellent. If glue is plenty, they are bad.
Q. Do the metal-spaced frames give ample room for bees to pass between frames?
A. Yes, they take up almost no room.
Q. Which frame do you think is the better, the Hoffman or loose-top, staple-spaced frame, and which is the easier to handle? What frame do you use, also what size section or extracting-frame?
sjqujoo pueuugoH auj a3H auoS 'japp s30u3jajajd 'V would not have it around, because the bees glue the frames together, making them harder to handle than the other kinds of frames. With the metal spacers latterly used on the Hoffman, it is not so objectionable.
I use the Miller frame, which is a plain Langstroth frame with common galvanized shingle nails for side-spacers and small staples for end-spacers. I use the same for an extracting-frame, although if I were going extensively into extracting I would likely have a shallower frame. I use the section most generally in use, 2-bee-way., 4%x4%x1%.
Q. Using plain frames, how do you manage to keep them from swinging and killing the bees when hauling over rough roads?
A. In the same sense you seem to mean, I don't use plain frames. Nothing can be plainer than the Miller frame, except that there are common nails, as I have often explained, used as side-spacers, and staples as end-spacers. Nothing is needed at any time to prepare the bees for hauling, except to close the entrance with wire-cloth.
Q. Would there be trouble with frames made short enough so that there would be a half-inch beospace between the end-bars and the inside of the hive? I have trouble with the standard frame on account of smashing bees. Would the bees fill the space between the end-bars and hive-ends with comb? I use the staple-spaced frame.
A. You would be badly troubled with combs built in such a large space; at least in some cases. Possibly you might like W. L. Coggshall's plan. Drive staples into end-bars at the lower end, so the end-bars cannot crowd against the end-wall of the hive.
Q. In an answer to "Virginia," you tell him to use the wedges that come with the frames. I make my frames. Please explain how to make or get them, and how to use them.
A. A saw-kerr is made in the under side of the top-bar, into which the edge of the foundation goes. Then close beside this is another saw-kerr made by a finer saw, and into this narrower kerf the wedge is crowded. The wedge is a thin strip of wood as long as the under side of the top-bar, one side being chamfered down to an edge, so as to enter the kerf. If you make your gwn frames it will perhaps be easier for you to have no saw-kerr in the top-bar, but merely let the foundation come up to the top-bar on the under side, and cement it there with melted wax.
Q. How close can frames be together where there are no foundation sheets used? Can they be 1% inches apart? 1 have them 1% inches, from center to center, and the bees build more combs in a hive than there are frames.
A. You cannot have combs built true without having at least
starters, and full sheets are best, and 1% is close enough. If you try 1% you will find the bees will do still worse than with 1%.
The Dadants use frames spaced 1% from center to center.
Q. Would you advise wiring or putting splints in shallow extracting-frames (5% inches deep), or would they be as well without wire or splints?
A. You can get along without any sort of support for the foundation by being more careful in handling the frames and taking a little more time with the extractor, especially while the combs are new. The time of putting in the supports must be figured against the extra time of manipulation without supports.
Q. I suggest, instead of the 10-frame hive being made wider, that the frames be made one-sixteenth of an inch narrower, which would leave five-eighths of an inch more extra room than there is now. So as not to decrease greatly the space between the top-bars it would probably be good to have the top-bars at least one-thirty-second of an inch narrower than they now are
Figure 18: Section of a grooved frame, showing method of fastening foundation in the top-bar with a wedge.
* I believe frames one and five-sixteenths inches wide would be plenty wide enough.
* A. I don't believe you would like the plan. If you had loose-hanging frames it might do, and in that case there would be no need to make frames any narrower. But now fixed-distance frames are mostly in use, and 1% from center to center is as little as ought to be allowed. Indeed some prefer 1%. You say, "I believe frames 1.5-16 inches wide would be wide enough." I should say so! I think no one has them wider than 1%. Evidently you mean the space from center to center, and, as already said, I don't think you would be satisfied with less than 1%. If you should try it, better try it on a very small scale.
* Q. What size of extracting-frames are better, the shallow frames or the full depth?
* A. The shallow frames are the better, probably in every respect except that they cannot be used interchangeably with brood-combs. Shallow extracting-frames with side-bar 6 inches deep are liked best by the Dadants.
* Q. Which is the better extracting-frame, the seven-eighths-inch top-bar with two grooves, or the half-inch top-bar with one groove for extracted and chunk honey?
* A. One will probably work as well as the other.
* Q. How many frames would you advise putting in a 10-frame extracting-super in order to get nice, thick combs, using full sheets of foundation? I think it is easier to uncap thick combs. Will not the bees build brace or burr-combs if the extracting-frames are too far apart?
* A. Either 9 or 8 frames will work well. No trouble with combs built between in either case. If only 8 frames are used, it will increase the space between combs one-third of an inch, and bees will not start an extra comb in so small a space.
* Frame, Miller, Q. Please explain the Miller frame.
* A. The frame is, of course, the regular Langstroth size, 17%x 9%. Top-bar, bottom-bar and end-bars are uniform in width, 1% inches throughout their whole dimensions. The top-bar is %-inch thick, with the usual saw-kerr to receive the foundation, and close beside this is another kerf to receive the wedge that fastens the foundation. The length of the top-bar is 18% inches and %x 9-16 is rabebetted out of each end to receive the end-bar. The end-bar is 8 9-16x1%x3%. The bottom-bar consists of two pieces, each 17%x%x3%? This allows % inch between the two parts to receive the foundation, making the bottom-bar 1% inches wide when nailed.
* A. The bottom-bar is 17%x3%.
The object of the two parts to the bot'om-bar is to allow the foundation to come down between them, thus making a close fit without any pains to cut the foundation exactly. After the comb is built in the frame the bottom-bar is no better for being in two parts--perhaps not so good. Some of my frames have a solid bottom 17$x1$x$x$4, with the foundation cut to fit exactly down on the bottom-bar. I like them just as well.
The side-spacing, which holds the frame the proper distance from its next neighbor, is accomplished by means of common wire nails. These nails are 1$4 inches long and rather heavy, about 3-32 inch in thickness, with a head less than 1$4 inch across. By means of a wooden gauge which allows them to be driven only to a fixed depth, they are driven in to such a depth that the head remains projecting out a fourth of an inch.
Each frame has four spacing-nails. A nail is driven into each end of the top-bar on opposite sides, the nail being about an inch and a half from the extreme end of the top-bar, and a fourth of an inch from its upper surface. About 2$4 inches from the bottom of the frame a nail is driven into each end-bar, these nails being also on opposite sides. Hold the frame up before you in its natural position, each hand holding one end of the top-bar, and the two nails at the right end will be on the side from you, while the two nails at the left end will be on the side nearest you. The end-spacing is done by means of the usual staple, about 3$ inch wide.
\(Q\). How is the foundation fastened to the top-bar?
A. I prefer what is the usual way at the present time, as suggested in the foregoing description, the foundation being received in a saw-kerf and wedged there, but it can be fastened in any other way.
\(Q\). I would like to ask your opinion, after reading your book entitled "Fifty Years Among the Bees." On page 3 you give the dimensions of your frames, and further on you mention splints, which I think I would like. How would it do to make the bottom-bar the same thickness as the top-bar, and instead of having two grooves, one for foundation and one for wedge, have only one groove in each bar? Then by having a board nearly the same size as inside of frame, and thick enough to come to bottom of grooves, the foundation, by buckling a trifle, conild be made to enter grooves? After boiling the splints in wax, buckle them into place the same as foundation. Then use hot wax along the top and bottom-bar to fasten it in. This would reduce the size of frame, but with the Hoffman frames I find it hard to get the bees to build down to the bottom bar as they should, so lose some space there anyway.
A. Your plan will work all right. But you don't need to have any kerf in the bottom-bar, and then you won't need to have it as thick as the top-bar. Indeed, if you wax the foundation, top and bottom, you will not need kerfs either place. I have some frames without the split bottom-bar, and it works all right. You may say you want the kerf to hold the splint. I never yet put a splint in a kerf, and see no need of it. Of course, the top-bar must be thick, kerf or no kerf.
Q. What is your opinion of the use of the Miller or "metal-spaced" frame with top-bars seven-eighths inch square for any location, either comb or extracted honey, the idea being that the combs could be trimmed to the proper thickness with the narrow bar, while the knife would not work against the metal or nails, and at the same time the frame might be used for producing comb honey?
A. It might work satisfactorily; but only after trial could one be sure about it. How much the metal spacers would be in the way of an uncapping-knife would depend upon their construction. If there is metal at each end on each side, there would be trouble. As you know, I use common nails as spacers. These are only on one end on each side of the frame, and by starting the knife at the end where the spacers are, there ought to be little danger of striking the knife on the metal. I have seen in foreign bee-papers mention of metal spacers that were removable, being taken off for extracting, and then put on again upon returning to the hive.
Q. How thick should the follower be in order to hold the frames solidly together?
A. Strictly speaking, the frames are never held solidly together. They are crowded closely together against one side, but there is left a loose space at the other side between the dummy and the side of the hive. No possible harm can come from this except that it allows a little movement when hives are hauled over very rough roads, but I have never had any trouble in that way. The dummy is five-sixteenths of an inch thick.
Q. How wide were the top-bars of the unspaced frame formerly in use by you?
A. Seven-eighths of an inch.
Q. Did you find disadvantages in the unspaced frame other than those mentioned in your book?
A. Yes, there was at least one other. As the frames hung entirely free, in time there was a little warping of some of the top-bars. Every slight twist of the top-bar would allow quite a bit of swing out of true at the bottom of the frame, so that it sometimes happened that at the bottom, the end-bars or bottom-bars were glued together, a very unpleasant annoyance.
**Freezing of Bees.--Q**. Do bees often freeze to death with plenty of stores?
A. No; unless the colony is too weak or a small cluster of bees gets caught in a cold spell away from the main cluster.
**Fruit, Bees Injuring--Q**. Do bees injure sound fruit?
A. No, they do not and cannot, since the mandibles of the honeybee are rounding, and cannot pierce the skins of sound fruit. Tests of this were made at the Ottawa Experiment Station in Ontario, Canada. First, strawberries were tried, then raspberries, neither of which were injured.
The fruit was placed inside the hives, also in other places easy of access to the bees. Inside the hive the fruit was exposed in three different positions.
(1) Whole fruit without any treatment.
(2) Whole fruit that had been dipped in honey, in one half the super.
(3) Punctured specimens in the other half the super.
A second test of the same kind was made with peaches, pears, plums and grapes.
"The bees began to work at once both upon the dipped and punctured fruit. The former was cleaned thoroughly of honey during the first night; upon the punctured fruit the bees clustered thickly, sucking the juice through the punctures as long as they could obtain any liquid. At the end of six days, all the fruit was carefully examined. The sound fruit was still uninjured in any way. The dipped fruit was in like condition, quite sound, but every vestige of honey had disappeared. The punctured fruit was badly mutilated and worthless; beneath each puncture was a cavity, and in many instances decay had set in. The experiment was continued during the following week, the undipped fruit being left in the brood-chamber; the dipped fruit was given a new coating of honey and replaced in the super, and a fresh supply of punctured fruit was substituted for that which had been destroyed.
"After the third week the bees that belonged to the two hives, which had been deprived of all their honey, appeared to be very sluggish, and there were many dead bees about the hives; the weather being damp and cool was very much against those colonies. These colonies had lived for the first three weeks on the punctured fruit and on the honey off of the fruit which had been dipped; as there were at that season few plants in flower from which they could gather nectar, these bees had died of starvation, notwithstanding the proximity of the ripe, juicy fruit. The supply of food which they were so urgently in need of was only separated from them by the skin of the fruit, which, however, this evidence proves, they could not puncture, as they did not do so."
**Fruit-Bloom.--Q**. Is there much honey from fruit-bloom (principally apples)?