Jump to content
jamesc

Chasing the gold

Recommended Posts

I was reading John B's post's about genetics this evening and it got me thinking.

 

We been taking off honey today  today .....  and as you do sweating away in the January sun, lifting boxes, pulling frames looking for sunken brood, varroa mite, chalk brood  and mice, one's thoughts run loose .... about the guys that carted their bees several thousand k's  for half a kilo, carted them home and lost a third sweated in the truck to a fizzer of a southern flow ..... gets one thinking as you lift the boxes... light one's , heavy ones, dead ones....

We is already planning for next year. How do we do it better ?

 

And then earlier this morning we were putting over nucs ... good ones and plain old ugly ones.  Some are gonna make you a dollar, some are gonna be a pain in the butt. And the old adage of  'an average  Beeman with good sites' can make it ......  a good Beeman with bad sites will go broke '. 

 

We put bees in to a couple of magic M   sites this year.  Both good sites. The flower yielded for about five days. The strong bees made two boxes. The bees behind the eight ball made a living, they missed the mother load by a week.

What brought it home to me today was putting those nucs over. All made up at the same time. Some were bursting at the seams. And some were pretty ho hum.

 

I've always been a bit casual about genetics. At last years calf sales the top calves made a hundred bucks more than ours.  When we questioned the auctioneer  his response was 'good genetics.'  He took me to a bull sale during the winter  and we came home quite a lot poorer, but with a hope for the future. Same with the deer. Some do and some don't. 

 

So too with the bees. We have a homegrown breeder picked out for next year. She is as quiet as,was an early starter and is loaded with honey.  

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 5
  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep Genetic and animal health is key.  You would probably find the difference between the stars and the dubs are more animal health than genetic in bees. Bees have to be healthy to reach there potential. 

Edited by flash4cash
  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very good observations James.

I have also seen folk sell their weaner calves and lambs and not understand why they did not get the top price.

Genetics and taking care to ensure that you  breed the best is the secret.

And has been the reason for successful farmers for many years now.

I am certain it will work for beekeepers, we just need to do the work and record the results.

Take a look at the work of Sheep Improvement Limited (SIL). https://www.sil.co.nz/

 I quote from their website; " It is part of Beef + Lamb New Zealand (B+LNZ) Genetics – a wholly-owned subsidiary of B+LNZ.

It is therefore owned by New Zealand farmers, being funded by sheep meat levies and fees charged to breeders.

SIL provides tools and information for ram breeders and commercial farmers – with the goal of improving the profitability

of sheep farming in New Zealand." 

What we need to see is an industry funded model like this for our Queen breeders, so their customers know what they are purchasing.

A beekeeper needs to know they are getting the best value bred bees for their business.

This is why I support the Api NZ Levy as 40% of the money is for research.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

40% of the levy for research is no where near enough, that is why I will vote NO for the current levy proposal.

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is never ending story.. To enhance a chance of positive results, I think should include also drone selection ( drone mother/s)..

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

40% of the levy for research is no where near enough, that is why I will vote NO for the current levy proposal.

 

 

Olbe, you are forgetting that research is a broad category, any research for Bio-security can come out of the bio-security portion etc, and these are staring points, the levy payers are the main ones to decide from the members where and when. So you would rather vote no and have no money spent on research as it is now rather than starting to get some money spent on the things we want as a starting point and build from there?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NZ Beekeeping Inc are already funding some research from subscriptions etc - but then, they are not funding an ever growing corporate structure, and they get to choose which ones and how much, all beekeepers, no hangers on making the decisions.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Sailabee said:

 all beekeepers, no hangers on making the decisions.

 

And that for me is the crux of the matter,

I was a staunch supporter of the NBA there are many posts on this forum where I tried  to promote them.

when it changed to Apinz and membership was open to corporates, landowners packers etc I felt it had moved away from its core business of looking out for the guys out there doing the hard yards.

whether this is real or perceived it’s how I feel 

  • Agree 3

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...