I notice that the question whether bees destroy sound grapes is again being discussed. I have been a bee-keeper for 11 years and during most of that time have raised grapes enough for family use, and I have given considerable time and attention to the question under discussion. All my observations go to show that bees do not puncture sound grapes. I have seen them sucking the juice from grapes that had been broken by birds, and have picked off the broken grape, and watched the result. The bees would run about over the bunch hunting for an opening, and finally abandon the search. Last season a great many grapes were destroyed or injured in this part of the country, and I gave the matter special attention. Many of the grapes cracked more or less from the effects of rains following dry weather, and many more were broken more or less by birds. As forage was scarce the bees worked industriously on these broken grapes until they were all gone. But on all the bunches there were some grapes that were not broken, and these remained on the vines until late in the season. After the juice had been sucked from all the broken skins I saw the bees for many days vainly searching for openings from which they might obtain the supplies they had been accustomed to draw from the broken fruit. These sound grapes remained on the vines, in some cases, for weeks after the bees had ceased to get anything from the broken ones. Now it is plain that the juice of these very ripe grapes would have been quite as acceptable to them as that from the ones they are accused of having punctured and destroyed. And to my mind it is clear that if they had punctured and destroyed as many as they are accused of doing, they would not have become suddenly reformed as the grapes became sweeter and more delicious. I will not affirm that the bees cannot puncture the skin of a grape, but I do affirm that as far as my very careful observation enables me to judge, they do not. And if I am correct in this the injury done to the grapes is very small. The injured grapes would spoil in a few days if the bees were not to touch them.
As far as I have been able to observe wasps, hornets, &c., do little injury to grapes. The mischief results mostly from the cracking of the skin, by a very few days, even, of wet weather after it has been dry for some time. The skin of the grapes becomes so full that a jar from the wind or from the alighting of a bird on the bunch, will cause them to crack, and then, if there is a dearth of honey, they are sure to be sucked dry by the bees, with more or less help from yellow jackets, hornets, and wasps. It is possible that in some cases the skins are cut by wasps, &c., but I think the cases are exceptional.
Huntington, Ind., March 4, 1881.
For the American Bee Journal.
The Use of Separators for Box Honey.
GREINER BROTHERS.
In starting an apiary it is of great importance to adopt a hive that will prove satisfactory to the manager, in all its features, for the present as well as for the future. It is not an easy matter after an apiary has been started and hives and appliances have accumulated, to change the sizes or dimensions of such, if they should not be satisfactory. In the different manifestations of the hive we find that it is necessary to have brood frames and sections interchangeable, in fact, it is still more convenient to have all the different parts of the hives as uniform as mechanical workmanship can produce them, so that frames, honey-boards, division-boards, covers, sections, mats, &c., may be picked up anywhere and adjusted to any hive desired.
The use of separators is another feature of this kind; if once adopted and the bees arranged accordingly, it may cause considerable trouble to remodel a lot of appliances, especially if separators of any perceptible thickness are used.
In the Bee Journal for Feb. 2, Mr. Heddon gives some very good hints on “hive and section making,” but we can not endorse all his points, and in this article we refer in particular to his closing sentence.
It seems strange to us that Mr. Heddon pronounces separators “nuisances,” whilst other prominent bee-keepers, and we believe the majority, use them and advocate their use. It must certainly be a query to young beginners, who seek information amongst the contributors of the Journal, to encounter such square contradictions. Our experience is about as follows:
The 2 first years of our experience in bee-keeping found us equipped with open surplus cases, we mean by surplus cases the adjustable half-story, with the proper number of frames containing sections. The seasons were good and the crops abundant, but the shape of a good share of our honey was anything but desirable; it was not uniform in thickness nor even; some being thick on one end and thin on the other, some were missed entirely, whilst the adjoining one bulged out to take up the space; in short, the variations were many.
To glass and crate this honey for market cost us considerable trouble and we concluded to try separators. The 25 cases we had prepared and used the next season at our honey apiary proved to be a success; the honey was “just splendid;” the sections in shape, thickness and weight were as near perfect as could be desired, and we decided at once to produce honey in no other way. However, we were not entirely satisfied; we knew separators were objected to by some bee-keepers on account of a smaller yield. Mr. Heddon says, on page 33 of the Journal, “These separators cost me too great a portion of my surplus crop.”
To satisfy ourselves on this point we used the following season about 100 cases, rigged as the first 25, with separators, which we scattered in our different apiaries side by side with open ones. The result was that we noticed very little difference, if any, in the amount of honey stored, and the editor’s opinion, on page 59, was exactly our experience.
Again, Mr. Heddon claims the first cost and trouble of manipulating to be objectionable. We admit separators are an expense, but they need not be very costly. We use basswood, costing us less than a cent each, and even at twice that cost, would it not be economy then to expend a comparative small amount if we can thereby produce honey in much more attractive shape? Besides we claim separators lessen the trouble of manipulating instead of increasing it. The reason we use wood is because it is cheaper than metal and we believe better adapted, on account of its being the most natural material for bee-habitations.
Since we introduced separators the percentage of unfinished honey is greatly reduced. At the end of the honey season we formerly found open cases almost filled with comb and honey and not one single finished section among them. This is not so much the case since we use separators; when the flow of honey begins to diminish, we have noticed our bees to be at work in a portion of the sections, whilst the remainder would not be occupied at all; we have also taken off cases at the end of a honey flow, which were entirely empty, except 2 or 3 sections, and these were finished and marketable. To be sure these are extremes, but it shows the benefit of separators.
It might appear from the last part of this article, that we apply surplus cases regardless of the working capacity of our colonies. Circumstances may sometimes compel us to do so, but we aim to give our bees no more surplus room than they can occupy.
Naples, N. Y., March 6, 1881.
For the American Bee Journal.