Jump to content

ApiNZ Commodity Levy Proposal


Recommended Posts

For me I was a staunch supporter of the NBA and I was all for the merge with BIG so we could all come under one organisation.

what I didn’t realise was that the new organisation was going to be full of corporates, packers and landowners.

 

i understand that that is what the industry is now but Im very disappointed the old school family commercial beekeeper who might employ a few staff or none at all has been pretty much shunted sideways. 

  • Like 3
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 345
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Thanks for the compliment. I'm male and my moniker is my name. Why hide if you believe in what you say. Ill skip the previous 100 years that formulated a lot of my views, but three years ago we h

JM you may well only be the 'Science and Research Group' of APINZ but for someone seeking funding from the Industry your arrogant message is shocking.   The overwhelming feedback I'm getting

John it is not the $800000 being collected for research that bothers me. It is relatively easy to set this up in a transparent and contestible structure, and while some research ideas are questionable

4 hours ago, yesbut said:

That's going to take years if ever to find out if this thread is anything to go by

Yes it will puss. Especially so with ApiNZ's failure to fully engage with the beekeepers register. They have targeted a small group of the people involved with bees thus excluding many beekeeping people from a vote in the levy matter at all. That and promoted a seriously unbalanced levy rate in respect that low value honey producers will finance the advance of ApiNZ and the Manuka crowd who are the very ones creating many of the problems e.g. dump sites and over crowding in particular areas.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎1‎/‎09‎/‎2018 at 2:31 PM, frazzledfozzle said:

For me I was a staunch supporter of the NBA and I was all for the merge with BIG so we could all come under one organisation.

what I didn’t realise was that the new organisation was going to be full of corporates, packers and landowners.

 

i understand that that is what the industry is now but Im very disappointed the old school family commercial beekeeper who might employ a few staff or none at all has been pretty much shunted sideways. 

Well Frazzle regardless of the fact the corporates, packers and landowners were always going to be part of the APINZ makeup I don't think we can say the old school family or any other commercial beekeepers were purely shunted sideways from what I can see they moved out of the way of their own accord and didn't engage with the new setup.

Who's fault? Who cares!

Without the 'Commercial Sector' APINZ's the equivalent of a rudderless Americas Cup yacht with half a crew and no mast; going nowhere quickly 

Time to jump into the game, engage/join with APINZ and make it 'Commercial Sector' relevant.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎1‎/‎09‎/‎2018 at 6:10 PM, Ali said:

Yes it will puss. Especially so with ApiNZ's failure to fully engage with the beekeepers register. They have targeted a small group of the people involved with bees thus excluding many beekeeping people from a vote in the levy matter at all. That and promoted a seriously unbalanced levy rate in respect that low value honey producers will finance the advance of ApiNZ and the Manuka crowd who are the very ones creating many of the problems e.g. dump sites and over crowding in particular areas.

Nah doesn't need to take long at all Ali:

APINZ haven't targeted ant particular group on purpose; they just don't know how to engage and talk to the 'Industry Engine Room', the sole operators, small-larger/family businesses and the ‘Commercial Industry Good Groups and Organisations’

If the 'Commercial Sector' wants skin in the game immediately then all they've got to do is reach out and take it; its sitting there waiting!

How do they do it?

Engage and join with APINZ they need the Sector and quite bluntly the Sector needs them.

Rip open the package and grab the prize; don't worry about the wrapping (sweat the small stuff); that can be looked at once governance representation and feet under the boardroom table is gained!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/09/2018 at 10:42 AM, Sailabee said:

What is it's full potential that research and investment could uncover? 

This is a very important point and probably the most under rated of them all.
Even at my lowly level Im becoming more and more curious to say the least, about the mechanics of overstocking.
Im seeing things that maybe others are missing and they point to the likelihood that there is a lot more going on with regard to invisible Pathogens than meets the eye, (obviously)

One type of policy  Im very skeptical about is one that encourages larger sites, this is folly IMO and the reverse is required. 


 

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎30‎/‎08‎/‎2018 at 11:58 AM, Bushy said:

 

You are right, but the debate at the moment is just to ensure two things.

1) The greater industry wants/can afford to spend 1.2million outside any research budget.

2) Is ApiNZ the best vehicle to be given this extra 1.2million. For this amount of money, there are likely to be any number of acceptable options if we are just given time to digest everything and plan properly, looking to take the best of all industry groups.

 

While this has been on ApiNZ's agenda for 2+ years, for many non Apinz members this was brand new news only 8 weeks ago.

Bushy love your input but I reckon its time the 'Commercial Sector' took a pragmatic approach and joined/engaged positively with APINZ: Hey its got plenty of wrinkles that need ironing out but its the only realistic option for moving the Industry forward. There's no reason APINZ shouldn't reflect the commercial sectors requirements to the same extent the 'Commercial sector' are the 'Industry'!

Effectively get on board, get positive and get on with the games the only way to move forward for Beekeeping in NZ.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎30‎/‎08‎/‎2018 at 9:34 PM, Bushy said:

Thanks for the compliment. I'm male and my moniker is my name. Why hide if you believe in what you say.

Ill skip the previous 100 years that formulated a lot of my views, but three years ago we had industry unification in the palm of our hands. I was a supporter, but Unfortunately a small group of individuals pushed through a hasty agenda that was arrogant and completely disregarded  a precious and hard fought history. We requested an extra year to work through all the issues and build the best from NBA history, with a modern future. 

The actual became smaller family run business were dumped on, branch social networks disbanded, NBA history was ignored, and we were told ApiNZ was the only group like it or lump it.

 

Instead of getting an 80% to 90% vote in support of change, ApiNZ had already created enough disconnect to scrap through just over 50%. Personally this was a sad day as an opportunity was lost.

 

Now this same group is asking for $2 million dollars for activities that have not been discussed enough to truly make a decision of this magnitude. 

Personally if all this was put on the back burner for 12 months to set up structures that took the best from the NBA, family business interests, and yes, larger operators we would have a different situation. Use transparent and truly contestible trusts to hold research money, and put "industry good/administration" money in a trust contestible but all industry groups. 

 

So many people have requested ApiNZ to connect to grass roots beekeeping. How long would it take. Probably not long. 

 

 

Grass roots beekeeping's got to take the initiative off APINZ and engage/join with them.

Don't look to a myriad of trusts and organisations with the right people (in your opinions); look at the option in front of us, be bold, be pro active and initiate contact/engagement with APINZ.

Options for the 'Commercial Sector':

                          1)  Look forward positively as a formidable voting block and engage with and mould APINZ into the peak representative industry body it has the capacity to be.

                                                                                                                                             or

                          2)  Continue to look back, lick old wounds while dwelling on the way the industry's developing without being at the table setting/directing the agenda/direction and influencing our future

 

 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

@Frederick, interesting angle altogether. You are proposing a take over from within by getting everyone to join up? 

That is what ApiNZ risks by compelling membership and the proposed levy. However it is takeover by only the largest interests currently.

It is a logical approach in my view however the present proposals really need to be shelved firstly in the interests of the entire beekeepers register.

ApiNZ needs to be restructured, the Board needs changing in a large part to ensure representation of the primary producer to a greater extent to ensure the interests of all beekeepers. 

ApiNZ has failed to engage with the beekeepers register and this needs to change first and foremost before any grand plans.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Ali said:

@Frederick, interesting angle altogether. You are proposing a take over from within by getting everyone to join up? 

That is what ApiNZ risks by compelling membership and the proposed levy. However it is takeover by only the largest interests currently.

It is a logical approach in my view however the present proposals really need to be shelved firstly in the interests of the entire beekeepers register.

ApiNZ needs to be restructured, the Board needs changing in a large part to ensure representation of the primary producer to a greater extent to ensure the interests of all beekeepers. 

ApiNZ has failed to engage with the beekeepers register and this needs to change first and foremost before any grand plans.

 

Spot on  summation of APINZ's failure to engage Ali; but to go back to the drawing board and come out with what?? I think not!

APINZ's structure isn't to far off the mark it just requires the 'Commercial Sector' to jump on board and own the future through APINZ and I'm pretty sure it would work.

Our biggest hurdle is apathy and hey I'm as guilty as anyone in that regard albeit I'm trying to make amends and ensure in 20 years time its not the 'Same S.... Different Day'

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bushy said:

 

I am not going to argue with you as the "commercial sector" does have a lot of power as it is our money everyone wants. We are also happy to share that money, but if a group wants to claim $2 million per year, and $12 million over the six years of this commodity levy proposal, they had better come to the industry with more than "trust us as we know what we are doing".

 

ApiNZ requires constitutional and attitude change to win the minds of many, and if they had any intention for this to happen over the last three years, it could have been done in a heartbeat.

 

I think ApiNZ will now roll the dice on vote and hope to get a yes vote without making any concessions.

 

So I have two options to consider.

1) Vote yes and "hope" changes are made that helps the whole industry.

2) Vote no and force this issue back to a place where Apinz and other industry groups want to actually engage with everyone and prove beyond doubt there should be one entity, and one levy.

 

Im going to go talk to my bees for guidance.

 

 

 

 

So true in so many ways Bushy and hey I don't mind healthy debate: Funning thing I've been talking to the Bees for weeks and they're not to sure either!!!

 

Vote Yes or No and then just sit back and nothing constructive is likely to happen (in fact its likely the worse will ensue): However be pro active and just maybe some good can come be achieved for the Industry.

 

I'd like to get some guidance from APINZ on where they're at but it seems they're not going to say much until the road shows are over.

 

Let me know what your bees have to say!

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Frederick said:

So true in so many ways Bushy and hey I don't mind healthy debate: Funning thing I've been talking to the Bees for weeks and they're not to sure either!!!

 

Vote Yes or No and then just sit back and nothing constructive is likely to happen (in fact its likely the worse will ensue): However be pro active and just maybe some good can come be achieved for the Industry.

 

I'd like to get some guidance from APINZ on where they're at but it seems they're not going to say much until the road shows are over.

 

Let me know what your bees have to say!

Rained all day and the bees didn't want to know me, so I still don't know anything.

I think the forum discussion has been healthy, and you and I and many others are on similar pages despite coming from slightly different angles, but a lot of discussion is still required before money is requested. If our industry really is healthy and we are here for the long haul, then spending 6 to 12 months getting people, proceedures, and expectations lined up is time and money well spent.

 

If we are in such a hurry we must decide our future in next six weeks without many facts, what does it actually say about the health of our industry and the competence of our administrators.

 

The alarming constant in the last 6 weeks in all this discussion has been the lack of input from ApiNZ. Their CEO that is paid lots of money and will oversee all the levy millions has said nothing. Dennis has shown class by giving his best opinions, but there have been no "official" comment, or your guidance, from ApiNZ front office or the board.

 

I completely agree that being proactive is the key. Time will tell what this actually entails.

 

  • Agree 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Bushy said:

If we are in such a hurry we must decide our future in next six weeks without many facts, what does it actually say about the health of our industry and the competence of our administrators.

The First thing I did when this show rolled into town was have a good look at the Minister behind it.
 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Frederick said:

So true in so many ways Bushy and hey I don't mind healthy debate: Funning thing I've been talking to the Bees for weeks and they're not to sure either!!!

 

Vote Yes or No and then just sit back and nothing constructive is likely to happen (in fact its likely the worse will ensue): However be pro active and just maybe some good can come be achieved for the Industry.

 

I'd like to get some guidance from APINZ on where they're at but it seems they're not going to say much until the road shows are over.

 

Let me know what your bees have to say!

Three more meetings to have this week then we will be sitting down and look at all the feedback and discussion thats been had. Coming out with anything before we fin the meetings would be jumping the gun. Lots of ideas, some good some bad, some workable some not, lots of notes to go through.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a message for Both ApiNZ and The Minister
MPI could tune in also 

For a about 3-5 million dollars this Autumn /Winter we could kick Varroa back to the early 2000's 

Or if thats insufficient notice then the following Autumn/Winter
One Winter of Gib Staples at 40-50% strength would put Beekeepers on top of the problem and able to manage it themselves going forward.
Fortunately, we now have some breathing space on this so think about it
 

Link to post
Share on other sites

What has not been discussed in the debate to date is the issue of who has control of our beekeeping technology.

If Beekeepers do not invest in their industry, they will only encourage large players (not necessarily beekeepers) to invest in research and development and those large players will own that technology.

If Beekeepers invest in R & D they will own the technology for the benefit of all NZ Beekeepers.

 

The world has changed.

When the properties of Manuka Honey were investigated by Dr Peter Molan and his team they were not copyrighted or patented.

The result is that today all beekeepers can choose to participate in that product's success.

Today if that product development had occurred, Waikato University would be looking at owning some of that technology developed in their labs. And they could sell it to the highest bidder.

Please do not complain if someone develops a new honey use (example)  and then controls it by royalty or profit sharing who can use that application.

 

Unfortunately the days of when Government money was invested in Agricultural Science for developments that all could prosper on at no cost other than paying tax are long gone.

The benefits of Agricultural extension services, research and development that helped develop today's NZ farming base ended back in the 80s. 

Example, The Ministry if Agriculture through Grasslands Research developed many ryegrasses and clovers for all farmers to benefit by - examples Huia white clover, Tama, Ruanui and Nui ryegrasses. Today all NZ's grass and clover development is in private hands (NZ and overseas companies) who own the plant breeding rights to those plants.

 

Beekeepers have a choice, to use their own funds to invest in R & D to support their future or let private sector investors jump in and invest in future developments which they will own.

 

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Don Mac said:

If Beekeepers invest in R & D they will own the technology for the benefit of all NZ Beekeepers.

That would be a great outcome if it were to be reality. I haven't seen any proposal that even hints at this so far.

NZ has a long history of great discoveries/invention that has seldom brought a lot of direct benefit by ownership to the country. The capital required for development to a marketable end has often required the selling on of the technology.

I am sure arrangements can be such as they do result in a longer run financial benefit back to beekeepers but I see this as highly unlikely in reality. ApiNZ is hardly a commercial enterprise. The benefits hopefully would come in the form of answers to problems we are currently struggling with.

Capture by commercial interests outside of beekeepers would be highly likely.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Don Mac said:

What has not been discussed in the debate to date is the issue of who has control of our beekeeping technology.

Hmm Don you haven't read the whole thread because I raised this point a few weeks ago.
There was some discussion about it

From memory the context of my point was based on the economics of R&D by various groups.

Eg. who could make the best use of research dollars.

Who is the leanest and meanest
 

Edited by Philbee
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Philbee said:

Hmm Don you haven't read the whole thread because I raised this point a few weeks ago.
There was some discussion about it

From memory the context of my point was based on the economics of R&D by various groups.

Eg. who could make the best use of research dollars.

Who is the leanest and meanest
 

Phil with respect to R & D it is not necessarily the "leanest and meanest".

 

Every R & D project will vary in scope and application......and 'bringing home the bacon' will require different levels of investment.

Sometimes you will require a partner with very deep pockets to get a product through regulatory hurdles then to market - example a new varroacide discovery which has global benefit.

Being mean does not assist this type of project.

 

The selection of projects will be determined by a vote of levy payers, so I expect that they will have a NZ need focus initially. 

The success of the R & D project will determine the opportunity benefit.

And from there it  has to be managed well for Api NZ/Levy payers to continue to participate with any new intellectual property if discovered.

 

Some R & D projects will not be successful but we can still learn from them.

Other projects will not provide that financial benefit but may substantially help NZ beekeepers in other ways.

Example; an evaluation of products offering nutrition and health benefits for bees, will help beekeepers make the right choices through publishing of the data results.

Identification of a biological predator for small hive beetle in advance of its arrival in NZ.

Example the recent EPA prior approval to introduce a predator for Brown marmorated stink bug if it should arrive in NZ.

This sort of research cannot be to lean, because they can present real benefits for a beekeepers future operations. 

 

One industry that has done really well out of grower levy funded research efforts is Kiwifruit - they have in the past 10 to 15 years developed a number of coloured Kiwifruit when they all used to be green, plus strains that are PSA resistant (bacteria resistant strains of plants), as well as a spray programme that does not encourage spraying during pollination (benefitting beekeepers). Those new Kiwifruit varieties are managed closely and deliver Zespri an increase in income through royalties. 

Zespri have taken their levy and obtained other funding from Government and elsewhere to increase the value of the R & D investment.

 

If we agree to put the levy in place, you will be surprised by the number of projects that could be funded by that levy.

There was 17 Science papers presented at conference and I think only 3 of them had beekeeper funding. 

There will be lots of choice.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...