Jump to content
Daley

Are you a member of APINZ?

Are you a member of APINZ  

186 members have voted

  1. 1. Are you a member of APINZ



Recommended Posts

Seems to me from looking objectively from the outside, there'll never be a united industry voice until all non hobbyist hives are in the hands of a few corporates. 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, JohnF said:

I'm not trying to swing your vote frazz - your view and others are fixed. But if you want to talk about the benefits of research . . . .

 

Im not against research I think it’s very important.

For me it comes down to having absolutely no faith in Apinz to look out for the interests of the smaller operations , the ones that are run by a real beekeepers who are hands on in the job.

As soon as Apinz opened their arms to corporates , landowners and packers that was the end of it for me. 

I don’t trust Apinz to distribute the money to areas that will help the small guys.

As far as Im aware the voting for where the money is spent is on hive numbers and it’s the corporates that have the most hives so they will sway the vote.

 

Apart from that Im just so sick and tired of working my ring out to hand over most of my money to pen pushers,

whether that the IRD , ACC , the labs for all the testing, OSH and all there requirements , MPI and all their fees and Levy’s Im just over being robbed blind 

So I’m feeling very negative right now

Edited by frazzledfozzle
  • Like 2
  • Agree 2
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@frazzledfozzle do you think corporations will want to continue participating in the industry if there is no money in it .

Traditionally beeks have taken up bee keeping for a multitude of reasons but making a fortune was never one of them .

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎27‎/‎01‎/‎2019 at 10:40 PM, frazzledfozzle said:

 

Im not against research I think it’s very important.

For me it comes down to having absolutely no faith in Apinz to look out for the interests of the smaller operations , the ones that are run by a real beekeepers who are hands on in the job.

As soon as Apinz opened their arms to corporates , landowners and packers that was the end of it for me. 

I don’t trust Apinz to distribute the money to areas that will help the small guys.

As far as Im aware the voting for where the money is spent is on hive numbers and it’s the corporates that have the most hives so they will sway the vote.

 

Apart from that Im just so sick and tired of working my ring out to hand over most of my money to pen pushers,

whether that the IRD , ACC , the labs for all the testing, OSH and all there requirements , MPI and all their fees and Levy’s Im just over being robbed blind 

So I’m feeling very negative right now


 Fair enough frazz - but you're not the only one hit by IRD and ACC. I cant talk for the honey testing labs but if you're ever in Hamilton, you should make a time to visit your preferred company. The cost of the instruments they're required to use now is eye-watering.

 

To me it comes down to one simple expression - and we use it in our company as well ; "Insanity is doing the same thing over and over, and expecting different results". And the concern at the moment - is doing the same thing . . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, kaihoka said:

@frazzledfozzle do you think corporations will want to continue participating in the industry if there is no money in it .

Traditionally beeks have taken up bee keeping for a multitude of reasons but making a fortune was never one of them .

 

They will not if there is no money in it. But there is still money in manuka so that's where they will be.

  • Thanks 1
  • Agree 1

Share this post


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


. The cost of the instruments they're required to use now is eye watering 

N Why is this ?

What has changed about what they are doing .? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, kaihoka said:

N Why is this ?

What has changed about what they are doing .? 

Like all medical and scientific (and Aircraft) equipment .  The manufacturers really rip off the price they charge for this equipment.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Trevor Gillbanks said:

Like all medical and scientific (and Aircraft) equipment .  The manufacturers really rip off the price they charge for this equipment.

A couple of years ago on TV 1's Rural delivery program they showed the Hills soil analysis gear - 500 samples at a time, compared to when we were taking three very busy weeks to do 16 samples juggling glassware. We simply have little idea of the scale of the instruments and the greater accuracy - even for tutin - just think how many samples that are done every season, and that is only one test in one industry.

  • Thanks 1
  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, kaihoka said:

N Why is this ?

What has changed about what they are doing .? 

 

For those that have been around for a while, the price of a lot of the testing (esp for manuka and the 3 tests) has dropped significantly. This has been on the back of new methods (chemistries) that have required even more expensive instruments. @Jacob could comment on it better -far better !

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, JohnF said:

 

For those that have been around for a while, the price of a lot of the testing (esp for manuka and the 3 tests) has dropped significantly. This has been on the back of new methods (chemistries) that have required even more expensive instruments. @Jacob could comment on it better -far better !

 

As a very general rule of thumb for chemical testing, the lower the concentration something the harder it is to look for, which means you need more sensitive equipment, which of course costs more money. For example the tutin test needs to run on a mass spectrometer, which costs a million dollars to buy, and doesn't include maintenance or running costs. 

 

  • Good Info 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know how much our very small operation has to spend on testing.

the total spend nationwide would be in multiples of millions.

The labs wouldn’t do it unless they were making a good profit.

Edited by frazzledfozzle
  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

going to the dentist this afternoon... all that honey I eat.  Who eats honey?  I guess there must be a few who don't....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Gino de Graaf said:

Who eats honey?  I guess there must be a few who don't....

I've stopped. Resisting sugar is a lot easier than some of the horrible diets out there.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


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

The labs wouldn’t do it unless they were making a good profit.

What is a good profit on a million dollar capital outlay ?

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, yesbut said:

I've stopped. Resisting sugar is a lot easier than some of the horrible diets out there.

No Carb diet? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Gino de Graaf said:

No Carb diet? 

Yes and no. Raw cauliflower & cheese dip for tea palls after a while. I've mutinied and will stick to minimising sugar intake where reasonably possible. Pies will still have tomato sauce !

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, yesbut said:

What is a good profit on a million dollar capital outlay ?

 

I have no idea 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 25/01/2019 at 11:01 AM, Don Mac said:

My expectation is that it will be the bankers who will slow hive growth and seek a return to lower hive numbers. They have that power, and to many financially insecure beekeepers will be told to get another job. It will not be Government (they do not want to) or the Beekeeping industry (they cannot agree how) that will sort out the overstocking issue.

 

I was of the impression that banks don’t like to lend money to beeks - if there is no other security the beeks can offer..     Hives die out and an empty hive is worth firewood and  as most beeks don’t own the land the bees are on - the banks won’t lend.  The only security they have in honey in the drum and we know the joke about that worth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Bees said:

with all this expensive research equipment out there - and the work Peter Molan etc have done on Manuka -  does this  mean that researching other honeys will be faster/easier to do?  Because of the experience already built up and newer technology out there?

 

I am curious to know how long it would take to research one type of honey - say  for example Honey Dew.    Would it take a year or longer for researchers to tell us what’s  so special about it?     And is there anyway a cost could be applied to the research?      

 

I guess I am being too simplistic - but it would be very cool to focus on one honey type per year for research.  After 5 years we could have another 5 unique quality honeys we could market to the world. (In my dreams)

 

Bees, the length of time a research project takes will be determined what is being researched.

Example; you maybe able to test a hive introduced product in one season if checking for residues in wax. 

But to test pest control effiacy you may need 2 or 3 seasons to ensure that the results are repeatable.

To determine human health benefits for another honey to the same level as our knowledge about manuka honey may take 5 to 10 years.

 

The length of time for a project is determined by the project itself and the complexity of the project.  There is no simple answer.

Investing in the levy is a long term project for the future of the beekeepers.

Example; it could take 6 months to gather all the existing data we have on Beech honey dew honey for example, before any lab work gets underway.

 

John Berry makes a very good summary of the benefits of the old levy the NBA had.

See the thread "What is an acceptable margin?" and his post of Saturday 26 th January.

If the old folk at the NBA had kept the levy in place, this debate would not be taking place today.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Soooo....in the near future there is little to help the smaller operator who may be compelled to contribute.

I have said it another thread and will say it again here: The levy vote is not about research (except of course for those who will receive our money), it is all about capturing the NZ beekeeping industry in the APINZ name to the exclusion of other associations.

It is a king maker vote rather emotively and I think unethically cloaked in the 'research' flag. 

In essence if you want APINZ to run the show then vote for the levy and then accept the consequences in the following years.

If you don't fancy APINZ then vote no levy and thus disallow APINZ from assuming the lead role.

Make no mistake, this is what it is about.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Ali said:

Soooo....in the near future there is little to help the smaller operator who may be compelled to contribute.

I have said it another thread and will say it again here: The levy vote is not about research (except of course for those who will receive our money), it is all about capturing the NZ beekeeping industry in the APINZ name to the exclusion of other associations.

It is a king maker vote rather emotively and I think unethically cloaked in the 'research' flag. 

In essence if you want APINZ to run the show then vote for the levy and then accept the consequences in the following years.

If you don't fancy APINZ then vote no levy and thus disallow APINZ from assuming the lead role.

Make no mistake, this is what it is about. So many seem to think ( have been mislead) that the levy vote is only about research. It really is only about APINZ ascending the throne in totallity. They will have the monopoly as such and the smaller operator will rue the day!

Oops double post now with the edit but perhaps it is worth saying twice.

Edited by Ali

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There have been some really good arguments both for and against. I am still undecided. I would have preferred and did suggest that all levy payers have the option of which organisation they want the money to go to 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So really what options are there - vote yes for levy. Or vote no.       Is there any other option?     Not voting is not an option.     

If one voted NO to ApiNZ - then what happens - ApiNZ still will be in control and we workers are going nowhere.?     - I am a small fry in the commercial world and I personally lean towards NZ Beekeepers Inc. but what would they be able to do differently regarding  Research?        

If there ain’t no money in the pot then no one can do anything  - I do understand that.      

 

And I can absolutely see the need to get our act together and get our own research.   It’s hard to know who to trust because everyone seems to have their own agenda. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Bees said:

So really what options are there - vote yes for levy. Or vote no.       Is there any other option?     Not voting is not an option.     

If one voted NO to ApiNZ - then what happens - ApiNZ still will be in control and we workers are going nowhere.?     - I am a small fry in the commercial world and I personally lean towards NZ Beekeepers Inc. but what would they be able to do differently regarding  Research?        

If there ain’t no money in the pot then no one can do anything  - I do understand that.      

 

And I can absolutely see the need to get our act together and get our own research.   It’s hard to know who to trust because everyone seems to have their own agenda. 

 

Bees you are right a non vote is not an option,

If the vote is no- things stay as they are with a dwindling effect, die hards will still belong to whatever group they want and as the older and been in the game longer ones slowly move on the lack of new and young beeks that have an interest in running an organization fades as well. 

Vote yes we capture all those that want to freeride and then encourage people who you want to run the organization who have the interest in sitting in places around the table to stand for election and then ride their arse hard to perform, and be an active participant in ideas/help/suggestions etc or something like that.

Edited by Dennis Crowley
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...