': •^SitSVOBf-fa |524 S2 596 'wife ^SE** r '.W' ''A*' ' i* V 'M>i r' * ' I ' UNIVERSITY LIBRARY 3 1924 062 873 090 ALBERT R. MANN LIBRARY New York State Colleges OF Agriculture and Home Economics AT Cornell University EVERETT FRANKLIN PHILLIPS BEEKEEPING LIBRARY Bee Keeping in Maryland. 1 BULLETIN No. 154 OF THE . Maryland Agricultural Experiment Station COLLEae PARK, MD. JUNE, 1911. The Maryland Agricultural Experiment Station.] CORPORATION. ) — . The Board of Trustees of the Maryland ^^ricultural College. Agricultural (Station) Committee of the Board of Trustees. GovEENOE A. L. Cbothees, L.L. D. (Ex-Officio) Annapolis. Chas. a. Councilman (Chairman) Glyndon. David Seibebt. Clear Spring. F. Cabeoll Goldsbobough Baston. EoBEBT Ceain , Baltimore. J. Habold Walsh Upper Falls. E. GiTTiNGS Meeeyman Cockeysville STATION 0FFICEE8 AND STAFF. Haeey J. Patteeson, B. S Director and, Chemist. Samuel S. Buoklet, M. S., D. V. S Animal Pathologist. 3. B. S. NOETON, M. S Botanist and. Pathologist. •Thos. B. Symons, M. S Entomologist. C. P. Close, M. S Horticulturist. N. ScHMiTZ, iM. S Agronomist. E. H. Bbinkley Farm Superintendent. Thos. H. White Gardener. Geo. Edwaed Gage, Ph. D Biologist. Chas. O. Appleman, Ph. D Physiologist. A. B. Gahan, M. S. Associate Entomologist. Roy H. Waite, B. S Associate Poultryman. W. R. Ballaed, B. S Assistant Borticulturist. L. B. Beoughton, B. S Assistant Chemist. *E. N. CoEY, B. S Assistant Entomologist. *0. G. Baboock, B. S Assistant Entomologist. I R. S. Allen , Assistant Dairyman. L. B. Kimble Stenographer. Roy C. Towles Clerk. H. FoBD : Treasurer. *0n State Horticultural Department Work. The Station is located on the B. & O. R. R. and City and Suburban Electric Car Line, eight miles north of Washington, D. C Bell Telephone— I^attsville Exchange. Visitors will be welcomed at all times, and will be given evefy oonor- tumty to inspect the work of the Station in all of its departments. The Bulletins and Reports of the Station will be mailed regularly f-eP of charge, to all residents of the State who request it. <=eui<*riy, nee ADDRESS: AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION, College, Park, Md. THE MARYLAND AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION BULLETIN 154. JUNE, IPU. BEE KEEPING IN MARYLAND. i. the status of bee keeping in the state. By T. B. Symons. Introduction. The keeping of bees for profit is in its infancy in Maryland. Those who gain their entire Hvelihood from this business are few, but there are thousands who keep bees as a side issue to their regular business for either profit or pleasure. There is no industry in whose progress and protection the farming class as a whole should be more interested than in apiculture. It does not follow from this statement that all farmers should be bee keepers, for it is not the aim of the friends of apiculture to greatly increase the number of persons keeping bees, but to make better bee keepers of those already in the business. In the light of comparatively recent discoveries of the existence of serious communi- cable diseases among bees, it is specially urged that only those who are prepared to give the apiary proper attention, should undertake to keep bees even if only for pleasure. The honey bee is an important factor as a poUenizing agentj, es- pecially in cross-pollinating the blossoms of many of our fruits. It has long been known that the blossoms of many varieties of fruit, as well as other plants, require cross pollination to set a full cropi It is , probable that no other insect is superior to the honey bee in performing this service. Many practical fruit growers keep bee« for this purf pose, and the growers of the vegetables under glass, regularly irftrto'-' duce bees into their green houses to pollinate cucumbeSrs and othey flowers. Probably this useful insect can be given credit for causing- some of our best varieties that have originated from seedlings. , As the people of this state become more and more interested in horticul- ture, they must at the same time, bear in mind the protection of the honey bee, which aids them in producing full crops. I Aside from the great service rendered by the honey bee in cross jfjollinating the flowers of fruit trees and grains, its ability to manii- lacture the nectar into a most palatable food, which otherwise would I, 228 MARYLAND AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. undoubtedly be lost to man, makes this insect a subject of unusual interest to the general public. It may not be out of place to comment here that notwithstanding the great increase in recent years in the manufacture of , adulterated foods, no one has yet devised a method to manufacture comb honey. Moreover, with the passage of the Pure Food Law by Congress, inferior substitutes for extracted honey can no longer lawfully be sold under the name honey. While the State of Maryland ofifers abundant opportunity for suc- cessful bee keeping, there are comparatively few progressive bee keepers in the state. There are however, thousands who keep a few colonies. These are too often kept under conditions, which are a menace to the industry. While Maryland has not been prominent as a honey producing state, yet she has furnished some distinguished bee keepers. . For sev- eral years Rev. L. L. Langstroth, who may be justly called the father of American apiculture, resided in Baltimore. His perfection of the movable frame hive revolutionized the industry in this country. Prob- ably no improvement has been so universally adopted by the trade as the Langstroth's hive, and his writings on bee keeping speak for his ■genius. One of the hives originally owned by Mr. Langstroth was exhibited by Mr. Chas. H. Lake, a venerable and enthusiastic bee keeper of the state, at the 1909 meeting of the Maryland State Bee Keepers Association. Richard Colvin, who was one of the first to in- troduce the Italian bee to the United States, also lived in Baltimore. No doubt the enthusiasm and knowledge of the business of these men 'were a great incentive to Maryland bee keepers at that time. The first work taken up at this Institution was conducted by Mr. T!!has. H. Lake, now of Baltimore. Mr. Lake is a practical bee keeper, and a keen observer of the bees and their activities. He successfully conducted a large apiary at the College from 1896 to 1899. During these years he did much to educate the bee keepers of the state, by making exhibits and otherwise giving information regarding bee keeping. Prior to the fall of 1910, practically nothing had been done by this department to aid bee keeping. At this time, through the efforts of the department, a State Bee Keepers Association was formed for the purpose of bringing the bee keepers of the state together, so that a general exchange of ideas would aid in bettering the conditions in the State. At the same time there was inaugurated some cooperative work with the Bureau of Entomology, United States Department of Agriculture, which made possible a limited investigation of the status of the industry in the State. A preliminary report of this investiga- tion by the writer, together with a discussion of the management of the apiary by A. H. McCray, Apicultural Assistant, U. S. Department of Agriculture, is here given with the hope that suggestions made will be helpful to the bee keepers. bee keeping in maryland. 22'j The Needs of Such an Investigation, .;. . ,.,": '-., As pointed out ajbove, prior to 1908, very little had been doiie iri tHs Stjfte to promote scientific apiculture. The only information available concerning the industry in the State was that given ])y the tensus of 1900. It was there stated that 5,098 farmers in Maryland had reported 28,013 colonies. These bees produced in 1899, 306,788 pounds of honey and 7,860 pounds of wax, valued at $38,857. Few people are aware that the industry amounted even to this much, as it had not been promoted in any organized manner, and even the few individual expert bee keepers had not properly advertised their business. While brood diseases of bees had been reported from Maryland by the Bureau of Entomology United States Department of Agriculture, no extensive attempt had been made to ascertain the distribution of these diseases, or to prevent their spread by the education of the bee .■keeper in the best method of treatment and prevention. No attempt had been made to increase the demand for pure honey in our markets, and thus curtail the sale of the cheap manufactured syrup compounds. The bee keepers who were in the business, were working independ- ently and not cooperatively, and those who desired to improve their apiaries had no opportunity to exchange views with their associates in the business, and few were aware of the sources for up-to-date in- formation concerning the business. Results of Cooperative Work. At the outset, this limited investigation in cooperation with the Bu- reau of Entomology, it was necessary to secure the names of as many bee keepers in the state as possible, in order to communicate with them and thereby learn the status of the industry at that time. A report blank asking various questions concerning the apiary, was sent to each bee keeper, whose name could be secured. A list of the publications of the Bureau was also inclosed so that the bee keeper might indicate in which he was especially interested. By this means valuable information was secured, and made possible, a preliminary study of the needs and possibilities of the industry. The desire of the bee keepers for information, was indicated by their request for one or all of the publications of the Bureau of Entomology on Apiculture. Distribution of Bees in the State. From information at hand, it would seem that about 80% of the bees in Maryland are kept on the Western Shore. Of this, 80% on the Western Shore, about 74% are kept in the Northern and West coun- ties. No explanation can be given for this condition, as bees would probably do better in the Eastern and Southern parts of the State, than in other regions. However, this distribution indicates the need of development of the industry and the education of the people to the 230 MARYLAND AGRICDLTDEAL EXPERIMENT STATION. opportunities for bee keeping in other sections. Thus far, Montgom- ery County is the banner county for the bee industry, with Frederick,. Garret and Baltimore counties closely following. The distribution in the Western counties is about equal. This distribution explains in part, the occurrence of disease. The Eastern Shore, as far as known, is free of brood diseases, as is likewise Southern Maryland. This is no doubt due in part to the scarcity of bees in those regions. Increase and Loss of Colonies. From figures received it seems that during 1908, there was an in- crease of 33% in the number of colonies, while during 1909 only 165?; increase was reported, making an average of 24.5% each year. Prac- tically no difference in figures of increase of colonies can be noted in relation to territory where the bees are kept. The reported winter loss- also does not seem to differ in the different sctions. From data re- ceived, it is believed that most of the winter loss in this State is due to lack of attention, and, in many cases, to ignorance on the part of the bee keepers as to the proper care of a colony prior to wintering. Often- too great a quantity of honey is removed, and artificial feeding is sel- dom practised to make up for the loss. Thus the colony is weakened by a meager food supply, the vitality of the bees becomes greatly di- minished and, they are therefore, much more susceptible to cold and dampness during the winter. This condition is no doubt, also largely responsible for complaints against the wax moth that have been made by so many bee keepers,, who have cooperated by giving information concerning their apiaries. It is known that this moth is able to gain a foothold only in those in- stances where the colony has been so depleted as to render it incapable of overcoming the attack. Moreover, winter loss is often really due- to disease having previously weakened the coloiiy. The large number of complaints of heavy winter loss and moth depredation, would in- dicate that brood diseases are more generally spread in the State than- we even now know. Production of Honey and Wax. Calculating the average pounds of comb and extracted honey per bee keeper of those who have reported, and applying this average to the probable number in the State, the approximate annual pro- duction of honey is about 500,000 pounds, of which only about 15% is extracted. This amount does not nearly approximate the quantity of" honey used in the State annually, ■ even at the present limited demand in the markets of, our cities and towns. , As pointed, out previously, this product has not been advertised, directing attention to its usefulness and adaptability to the diet of every day life. It is believed that a larger per cent of honey should' be extracted and put on the market in convenient sized bottles, jars- and larger containers, such as quarts, gallons, e,tc..,,,I/ndoubtedly much, of the honey produced 'n M.aryls^nd, is- toq, dark :, to,, make first class- BEE KEEPING IN MARYLAND. 231 comb honey, and the honey flows are slow, which is also not favorable for comb honey production. As far as known, little or no honey is exported from Maryland. On the other hand, we have definite information from wholesale dealers that quantities of honey are imported into the State from the northern and western states. Even under the present demand, there is great opportunity for the promotion of the industry in the State from the point of view of strict business possibilities alone. Moreover, the total approximated crop of 500,000 pounds in the State is very meager when it is considered that single apiaries in western states often pro- duce from 50 to 100 tons in a year, in locations that are little better for keeping bees than are many parts of Maryland. The production of bees wax is correspondingly low in the State. Based on an estimate similar to that for honey, the total crop woidd amount to about 10,000 pounds per year. The common practise of bee keepers to make wax only from old comb, makes the annual production variable. Outbreaks of disease or severe winter losses ordi- narily cause an increase in wax output the following year. The com- mercial value of this product is an additional incentive for increasing the industry in the State. Sources of Honey. Every bee keeper should familiarize himself with the bee flora of his locality. While it is sometimes very difficult to learn the sources from which bees secure their products, yet every effort should be made to ascertain the principal nectar yielding plants of a neighborhood, and the approximate dates of beginning and ending of each important honey flow. Clovers are considered by far the most important honey. plants in Maryland. Of all those reported, the clovers are placed as the princi- pal surplus plants. White clover is the most useful where it occurs in large areas, and the honey secured from this plant ranks high in color and flavor. Alsike clover, which is an excellent nectar yielding plant, is now being grown quite generally in the State. A common practice among farmers in sowing clover for forage, is to mix the different clovers which increases the value of such fields to the bee keeper. Many reports have been received, giving crimson clover as an excellent surplus plant. It is also being more generally grown in the eastern, southern and central parts of the State. While red clover is most commonly grown by farmers and has more or less continuous bloom, it is ordinarily not useful to the honey bee. Sweet clover, which some consider a weed is common along the roadsides in many parts of Maryland, and is an excellent honey plant. Inasmuch as this plant is useful, being a legume, it is worthy of; more attention in this State. Fruit Bloom. The, bloom of app^le; peach, pear and cherry, is given in the reports as next in importance as honey producing plants. These fruits are 'Common throughout most parts of the State. No surplus 232 MARYLAND AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. honey is secured from fruit bloom as a rtile, but the colonies are stimu- lated by such early bloom to early brood-rearing. Buckwheat. This Plant ranks third, according to information re- ceived as a surplus plant. This crop is not generally grown except in the western counties. Locust and Ba^swood. The black locust ranks high as a yielder of nectar. It is a hardy tree and found commonly over the State. In some sections basswood is still a prominent source of surplus. Like tulip poplar, however, these trees are being largely cut from our wood- lands. Miscellaneous. Goldenrod and asters are reported as important in providing surplus for wintering, while the bloom of sumac, wild rasp- berry and blackberry are among the more important wild plants that abound throughout the State, that are abundant honey producers. The maples are usually considered as valuable for bees, principally for pollen. As a rule, too little attention is given by the bee keeper to the honey plants of the locality. A bee keeper should know the principal honey plants of the vicinity, when they come into bloom, so as to manipulate the colonies to obtain the maximum surplus. The following list of plants constitutes a partial list of the bee flora of Maryland, and their general distribution. Mounted specimens of these plants with dates giving their approximate value as honey plants in northeastern sections of the State, were exhibited at the State Bee Keepers Association in Baltimore, November 30 and December i, 1910, by Mr. J. Ford Sempers, of Aiken, Md., to whom the writer is greatly indebted. The data given on these specimens has been supplemented by data concerning their range in the State, and their usefulness in other sections. BEE KEEPING IN MARYLAND. 283 a cd S c 3 3 O o 13 ja si O bCi bo 3 3 ^ O o JS .a « tH HH to a 3 3 o o E S B a c o UU < o <1 -t-> 3 bD+f 3 3 O O u ^ J3 M in >> !>> a a 3 3 „ 3 0) ® ai o o t. 3 3 3 rf !B a> ri (ti ri -1-3 -t^ 4-1 mmui +j -tj +j 3 3 3 O O O U] bo tis J^ -4J 3 3 3 3 ';2 o o o 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 o O o iiij a a a a a o o o 0) Ji 3 o ja bo 3 O u S} H 3 •a 3 C3 CU 03 bO 3 o u si H 3 3 o o a a a a o o O O 3 3 ° •s a ^ a 1=1 m O a 9 . O O •w +J O 3 3f< O O bo sisi 3 bo bo o 3 3 ii o ofi HH 3 o gga a a « o o 3 OOD ffi 0) a> ■t^ +J +J * la (8 4J -1-3 -t-S 3 3 3 O o O ja^,3 . bO bO bo S 3 3 3 3 O O O 3 3 3 3 O o o o aaaa aaaa o o o o uooo 3 M^ SbOfl 3 So o 3 3 ^ ,:, 3 3 3 3 "t! r^ Ti ^ Tl ^ 3 3 3 -1-3 3 o o ■5 3 o u 3 ca ca cs ca > > 3 m -H -H •< 3 CQ hn-i-t bo bo si Si I bo bo I 3 cQ 3 m ca ca 2 =3 2 ^ o » o 'B <0 3 "ca >5 a 3 ca- 5 9S2 o^ != ^ -^ ':3 'i -w ca n ca g ca ca -s rt ca 3 .3 ;3 S S 3 a m > CD 03 03 M " . > o "^ o '^ .3 .3 w iS w S > ^.g bo 3 bo bo 3 u bo 03003 OJOOCQ bo O.S O CD ca ca SS ■a -d 3 3 t3 ca ca » ■=''2 ca ts « P. P< „ < < ■3'0 h-flj -"d "O h ;J .2 la 'E i^ "E t; ^^ C8H P.^ P.^ p< > >. >i ca ca A ■d "3 -a O 333 o ^ ca cj ^ -t-3 j-^ t^ ^; "E ^ >• ^ a ft a Ph p, ra rt ca <3 II ca 3 I o •d 3 (p . cQ ta Ph 3 a 2^ == ca I" Zo 3. SB ca ,3 « 3 >> ca 3 o m bo >3 oj o P CQ 3 3 3 3 u ca CQ A a s' ■d m "5 3 0; 3 ,3 £"t5 ca 3 ca ^-1 »-3 ro c3 „ bo ai-S M 5r boO 30'S ^ "SSca" b i; ca t. fj >. >. h >> ca CLi OkomfH u ca u h ca o,Q « 3 o 3 c3 " to ca S ca fe « '^ "^ M3 h I a) Cli CQ 4J O to O El r- <" 2 « g g a s a N a o " " o m o a> C8 CQ +J 3 O .a ui 3 O .a Eh o a a o . . « -1-9 -4-> ra 3 +^■^3 2 3 3 o P O O rt ^3 ,a.dtor M to 3 E-l 3 3 o p ou a (h ^t rt O SS^a ,a ■a 3 rtfl o o o S o aa»^ o Oh 3 OOfcO OOfoU O U o C3 3 o 3 ja . . ■r* -u +j 13 ,a ja d to Ui c a "p. p. B m .of a to s 3 >> >^ Qj a5 ^^ *" ^ 3 J? g 3 ft ° O 1M> ■" 3 3 S E? 3 • 0) d c -s s c s 4-3 •«-> -t^ r3 fP .f.3 P, •3 a 3 to to 3 t, •2 o o a s o 3 .2^'S^- g^ ca m 3 'b3>"| Oft-^a S 3 g w .~5 m .3 3 u _ ^^ tj 3 ca p. O »3 O 3 dSooj o u o m o.a ri 03 d o3 ^ c3 sag sag 3 3 i-j •a 3 cS &>• aa 0) a 3 1-5 ■3 3 0> 0) 3 3 3 3 1-5 1-5 -a-o 3 3 c8 ca &&fl333333n ca la 33333333 a a g i-a I-; >-5 I-; I-; I-; i-a v^ W N >i (A l-H 1— I I-H t— I 3 3 3 3 l-J l-J l-Sl-5 •O "3 "3 "3 3 3 3 3 . ra ca ra a aj oj oj oj oj 3 3 3 3 3 33333 < <

E g ■43 0) ft m a 3 sis 2U ca §a 3 c" S 3 SS o ■2S:l'3 «E-iO S 3 93 O C4j o 3 oS ca h ■a a 3 >) » ja . to ca .5 3, '-3 .S "o CO ■3*3 3 O fc, ,3 caK o 2 M tota ca 3 a, o •2 S3 a) M 2 >> M CO "9 4.^ c3 h ca ca o cqtfQcQ o b 09 e ca £h X4 ca •S ca i4 =3 £ 2 'u og-a ca ca •=; « ^ cc ce QgJHOo I- . a w ca o'^ . > h o •=> 3 ft o d CO m o 4-; t- to O) 07^ 'O j3 ca «.! h 3 •^fti cqtnK o K t. 0! to '2 J2 d ca § '- 3 3 b5 O - 5 '3 m 54 3r^ a (c a •■3 u ca j3 ?> 3 « 3 . .i^Sca^; catocuijfe ^li a> a § M a ftS'S 2 gwca Mp^a . ^,--.3car^fc,ofcica'3 ®°Cj33 BEE KEEPING IN MARYLAND. 235 d S .a » ® ® W WM 3 fS g o o 2 •a '5,60 3 = o o g t. fc. s o o a> a as Sao o o t. OOEl, m a a a ■S-y tJtJ n4 n CO Co ^ +J +J +J mMmm ■ti « ■ti "B o o o o Ul to ^ Ml = =1 5 S o o o o t: t^ S S 0) S (D CD a 4J4J |3^ MM og , ,N 3 3^3 O O o3 O XI jd +^ XI r-( >-< " F^ 3 3 O O ' H E-i .a i t, O (h tH iri o o ^ ^t tn a fl rt o o o oaa o o o o o o o 5 2^3 M 9" ■pN 3 O HI d 3 3 a o o o o ts e« ta « +j -M -tj "ti MMM^ «« wM 3 3 3 .o O O O rt bo bo bo hn 3 3 3 3 O O O o U t-i ^ t^ 3 3 3 3 3 3 o o o o o o aa aa aa aaaaaa o o o o o o QOUUUO ■3 as ■3 _ O O Q < < O cd > S ^ •^ 1,1 s bO 3 0) 3 o ti MOfe h ;.( ^ goo -^ -p -u 3 3 3 ,„• SS.-S 3 'C 'C *G f-; -4-3 4-1 -M Pi 3 3 3 h O o O 3 QUOM •3 <1> "3 O >? 3 ri fi s E 3 3 a> o u Ufe >i > >i>i 3 d d 3 3 (O O ti Qfe 3 3 J3X! 3 3 o o •a "a P> >; -JJ +J "tn 3 3 3 "> <" s 3 3 E 0) (D 3 h h O fefeo h 00 ►" » OS O -t-> 4^ 4-> 3 3 03 3 J2,Q X! 'E 'E ^ 'E +J +J 2 -tJ 3 S-oS 3 o o •« o o 1-1 W o .f-l tn < < Ah bo O.S CD s a CS M a Ci3 3 o a a o o rdM 3 o e3 +-> '3'3'3 '3'33'3 l-5l-5>-5 1-3 I-5H3I-3 Ot Pi Pi P( Pi Pi . (V bo M m MM §3,MM3 *i3 'O ''3 "O fO 'O '^ ^^ +J+jC-Mf3+JC3fl+JdflPlO bobobobobobobobiibo'^bbboci 33333333305333 ■^ 1=3 -3 ^ w .d d O 0} .1-) tn oi ° . 3 .S ca .S Ota 2 o) _, 3 m S OJ OJ pj TO B^a ng 3 EQ 3.3 CI o g 3 y Pi o i-:i °o a-i 1-^ ca <» ca ■§ a; 3 ca ca 3 S"bO ca I- is rt w ca . 1^ ID [» U '0 CQ 3 5 " !? OJ <1> a liSa X! « CD d a Pi 173, 3 > bo^ 3 S O cfl ^H ^M<J ' fT^TiPRlDirtPiCD C-S3p'^3» s^E & fl o Eh g S O P^ < m P M O foul brood. Circular No. 138. "The Occurrence of Bee Diseases in the United States. fPreliminary Report.)" By E. F.. Phillips, Ph. D. 1911. 25 pp. ■ t A record of the localities from which samples of diseased brood were received prior to March 1, 1911. Bulletin No. 55, "The Rearing of Queen Bees." by E. F. Phillips, Ph. D. 1905. 32 pp., 17 figs. A general account of the methods used in queen rearing. Several methods are given, so that the bee Iteeper may choose those best suited to his individual needs. Bulletin No. 70, "Report of the Meeting of Inspectors of Apiaries, San Antonio, Tex., November 12, 1906." 1907. 79 pp., i plate. Contains a brief history of bee-disease investigations, an account of the rela- tionship of bacteria to bee diseases, and a discussion of treatment by various In- spectors of apiaries and other practical bee Iseepers who are familiar with dis- eases of bees. Bulletin No. 75, Part I, "Production and Care of Extracted Honey." By E. F. Phillips, Ph. D. "Methods of Honey Testing for Bee Keep- ers." By C. A. Browne, Ph. D. 1907. 18 pp. The methods of producing extracted honey, with special reference to the care of honey after it is taken from the bees, so that Its value may not be decreased by Improper handling. The second portion of the publicaflon gives some simple tests for adulteration. Bulletin No. 75, Part H, "Wax Moths and American Foul Brood." By E. F Phillips, Ph. D. 1907. Pp. 19-22, 3 plates. An account of the behavior of the two species of wax moths on combs contain- ing American foul brood, showing that moths do not destroy the disease-carrying scales. Bulletin No. 75, Part IH, "Bee Diseases in Massachusetts." By Burton N. Gates. 1908. Pp. 23-32, map. An account of the distribution of the brood diseases of bees In the State, with brief directions for controlling them. Bulletin No. 75, Part IV, "The Relation of the Etiology (Cause) of Bee Diseases to the Treatment" By G. F. White, Ph. D. 1908. Pp. 33-42. THE MANAGEMENT OP BEES. 269- The necessity for a knowledge of the cause of bee diseases before rational treat- ment is possible Is pointd out. The present state of knowledge-of the causes of disease is summarized. Bulletin No. 75, Part V, "A Brief Survey of Hawaiian Bee Keeping." By E. F. Phillips, Ph. D. 1909. Pp. 43-58, 6 plates. An account of the beekeeping methods used in a tropical country and a com- parison with mainland conditions. Some new manipulations are recommended. Bulletin No. 75 Part VI, "The Status of Apiculture in the United States." By E. F. Phillips, Ph. D. 1909. Pp. 59-80. A survey of present-day beekeeping In the United States, with suggestions as to- the work yet to be done before apiculture will have reached its fullest development. Bulletin No. 75, Part VII. "Bee Keeping in Massachusetts." By Bur- ton N. Gates. 1909. Pp. 81-109, 2 figs. An account of a detailed study of the aplcultural conditions in Massachusetts. The object of this paper Is to point out the actual conditions and needs of bee- keeping In New England. Bulletin No. 75, Contents and Index. 191 1. Pp. viii+iii-123. Bulletin No. 75, Parts I-VII, complete with Contents and Index. 191 1. Pp. VI11-I-123. Bulletin No. 98, "Historical Notes on the Causes of Bee Diseases." By E. F. Phillips, Ph. D., and G. F. White, Ph. D., M. D. (In press.) A summary of the various investigations concerning the etiology (cause) of bee- diseases. Technical Series, No. 14, "The Bacteria of the Apiary, with Special Reference to Bee Diseases." By G. F. White, Ph. D. 1906. 50 pp. A study of the bacteria present in both the healthy and the diseased colony, with, special reference to the diseases of bees. Technical Series No. 18, "The Anatomy of the Honey Bee." By R. E. Snodgrass. 1910. 162 pp., 57 figs. An account of the structure of the bee, with technical terms omitted so far as- possible. Practically all of the illustrations are new, and the various parts are in- terpreted according to the best usage In comparative anatomy of insects. A brief discussion of the physiology of the various organs is Included. BUREAU OF CHEMISTRY. Bulletin No. no, "Chemical Analysis and Composition of American Honeys." By C. A. Browne. Including "A Microscopical Study of Honey Pollen." By W. J. Young. 1908. 93 pp., i fig., 6 plates. A comprehensive study of the chemical composition of American honeys. This publication Is technical in nature and will perhaps be little used by practical bee keepers, but It is an important contribution to aplcultural literature. By means^ of this work the detection of honey adulteration is much aided. HAWAII AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENTAL STATION, HONOLULU, HAWAII. Bulletin No. 17, "Hawaiian Honeys." By D. L. Van Dine and Alice R. Thompson. 1908. 21 pp., i plate. A study of the source and composition of the honeys of Hawaii. The peculiar- conditions found on these islands are dealt with. PUBLICATIONS OF The Maryland Agricultural Experiment Station These Bnlletlns are sent free of charge to any address upon application. Only the Bulletins named helow are avaUaVle for distribution. Uetln No. 58, Aug., 1898, " " 01, June, 1899, " 73, April, 1901, " " 75, June, 1901, " 87, Nov., 1902, " '* 89, June, 1003, " " 102, May, 1905, " " 103, June, 1905, . " 104, July, 1905, " " 110, gept.. 1906, " " 119, July, 1907, " 121, Sept., 1907, " " 122, Oct., 1907, " 123, Not., 1907, " 124, Dec, 1907, " 125, Feb.,- 1908, " 126, April, 1908, " 127, May, 1908, " 128, June, 1908, " 129, July, 1908, " 130, Aug., 1908, " 131, Nov., 1908, " " 133, March , 1909, " " 134, April, 1909, .;" , , " 135, May, 1909, " 136, June, 1909, " 137, July, 1909, " 138, Aug., 1909, " 141, Jan., 1910, " 142, Feb., 1010, " 143, Feb., 1910, " 144, Feb., 1910, " 145, June, 1910, " 146, July, 1910, " 147, Aug. 1910, " 148, Nov. 1910, " " 149, Dec, 1910, " " 150, Jan., 1911, " 151, Feb., 1011, . " 152, Apr., 1911, " 153, May, 1911, " 154, June, 19il, The Hessian Fly and Wheat Dlseasea The Sugar Beet In Maryland. Suggestions About Combatting the San Jose Scale. The Effect of Hydrocyanlc-Acid Gas on Grains and Seeds. The Periodical Cicada or Seventeen-Year Locust. Experiments with Potash Fertilizers. The Leucocytes in Milk and Their Signlflcanee. Methods of Tobacco Seed Selection. Tests of Materials for Bedding Cdws. Investigations on Liming Soils. Greenhouse Pests in Maryland. Beef Cattle Industry of Maryland. Stable Manure Experiments. The San Jose Scale and Peach- Lecanlum. Strawberries. Nut Growing in Maryland. Manuring and Fertilizing Truck Crops. MlsceHaneous Greenhouse Notes. , The Effect of Animal Digestion and the Fermentation of Manure on the ¥itallty of Seeds. Silos and Silage in Maryland. Nurseries and Nursery Inspection. Treatment for San Jose Scale. Cabbage Experiments and Culture. Brown-Tall Moth, House Fly, Mosqultoe. Butter-Making In Maryland. Whipped Cream. The Angoumols Grain-Moth. The Poultry Industry in Maryland. Corn, Variety Tests, Seed, Selection, Testing, and Breeding. The Codling Moth. Plant Diseases and Spray Calendar. Apple Culture. Tuberculosis of Animals. Poultry House Construetion. Wheat — Variety Test, Smuts and Scab. For the Control of San Jose Scale. The Terrapin Scale. Hog Feeding and Hog Houses. Fertilizers for Asparagus. Aphiaiinae of North America. Bacteria and Animal Organisms Found in the Feces of CUieJcens. Bee Keeping in Maryland. CONTENTS. BEEKEEPING IN MAEYLAND. I. The Status of Beekeeping in the State. By T. B. Symons. t/ Introduction .• ^ -. 227 The Needs of Such an Investigation •.'. ,. 229 The Distribution of Bees in the State. 223, Increases and Loss of Colonies. , 230 Production of Honey and Wax \ 2^0 Sources of Honey 23,1 Average Experience of Beekeepers; Hives and Kind of Bees. .;. . T^ Bee Diseases in the State 236I The Needs of the Industry in Maryland ,•••■•■ 236 II. The Management of Bees. By Arthur H. McCray. Introduction 237; Equipment of the Apiary 242 The Apiary, Its Location and Size 247 ' Transfering, General Manipulations , 249 Spring Management 253 Swarming • 256 Securing the Harvest 258 ., Marketing the Crop 263 The Production of Wax 263 Wintering 26.5 Diseases ^ 2641' Insect Enemies ....". 266 Miscellaneous Information 266 Photomount Pamphlet Bind.er Gajrlord Bros. JSaMxta Syracuse, N. Y. Pn.J«l 21,1901