Jump to content
Ali

Alternative to any hive quota/rights system

Recommended Posts

It is high time for responsibility to be taken for the beekeeping industry by all involved.

I am totally opposed to any quota/rights type system, however do feel strongly that the current practices are bordering on predatory (dog eat dog) and not to the advantage of most or perhaps any in the end.

 

To float the conversation: "what if" beekeepers were licensed to operate hives (yes I know our hives are (registered) already).

No license, no bees, no hives.

Operate within a code of practice or don't operate at all.

What would that code include? 

Control of AFB (fully compliant) in your hives?

Control of Varroa in your hives?

A capping of your hive numbers once a certain number is reached unless you can show there are increased nectar resources? 

Restriction on the raiding of other districts, nectar resources?

Restriction on boundary riding/ placement?

Restriction on hive dumps and there locale?

Maintaining hives in permanent sites only?

 

All pretty contentious stuff!

How could it ever be policed to ensure compliance? 

 

  • Like 3
  • Agree 1

Share this post


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

How could it ever be policed to ensure compliance? 

As said many a time before, okay for the honest ones out there, but what about the dishonest ones, that don't comply with the system and don't get caught.

Share this post


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

How could it ever be policed to ensure compliance? 

 

Very expensively

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Always said hives should be registered to a title = Hives per hectare. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Very expensively

Probably. There may be alternative ways to do this I think. If we were not all trying to out do each other (and no one wins in the end) I think it could be done once established. There would be margins of cheating for certain but if the larger issues were agreed (terms of the license) there would be a lot to lose if caught out.

As for the outriders who have no urge to be licensed, perhaps they may find it hard to purchase gear and harder to sell honey, nucs, Queens etc? No license no buy and no sell.

Setting de licensing would be also contentious but it is time we all got real.

 

No quota, and no elite privledges.

27 minutes ago, Anne said:

Always said hives should be registered to a title = Hives per hectare. 

I don't support this at all. It is a bag of worms - each hectare has differing nectar resources and it will lead to the killing off of the smaller industry players overnight.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the industry has to introduce a quota system, preference would need to be given to those with family managed, long term businesses who over time have already proven that that they are good beekeepers who toe the line - ie AFB dealt with properly and all hives and apiaries registered, as well as advising any colonies sold, with new owners details. In most areas, would not be much debate - the locals usually know who are the cowboys. What would be the sense in diluting their rights to pander to the new, too big, too fasts, most of whom are not really interested in anything other than a quick buck.

Share this post


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

It is high time for responsibility to be taken for the beekeeping industry by all involved.

I am totally opposed to any quota/rights type system, however do feel strongly that the current practices are bordering on predatory (dog eat dog) and not to the advantage of most or perhaps any in the end.

 

To float the conversation: "what if" beekeepers were licensed to operate hives (yes I know our hives are (registered) already).

No license, no bees, no hives.

Operate within a code of practice or don't operate at all.

What would that code include? 

Control of AFB (fully compliant) in your hives?

Control of Varroa in your hives?

A capping of your hive numbers once a certain number is reached unless you can show there are increased nectar resources? 

Restriction on the raiding of other districts, nectar resources?

Restriction on boundary riding/ placement?

Restriction on hive dumps and there locale?

Maintaining hives in permanent sites only?

 

All pretty contentious stuff!

How could it ever be policed to ensure compliance? 

 

Good luck with that ☺

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Jamo said:

Good luck with that ☺

Yup I know! However if NZ beekeepers don't get it together then the quota lobby folk will most probably have their way over everyone else.

There is enormous vested interest in achieving a quota system if they can. Either directly or by a default means. 

2 hours ago, Sailabee said:

If the industry has to introduce a quota system, preference would need to be given to those with family managed, long term businesses who over time have already proven that that they are good beekeepers who toe the line - ie AFB dealt with properly and all hives and apiaries registered, as well as advising any colonies sold, with new owners details. In most areas, would not be much debate - the locals usually know who are the cowboys. What would be the sense in diluting their rights to pander to the new, too big, too fasts, most of whom are not really interested in anything other than a quick buck.

While that would be wonderful I don't know how that could become a reality. I think all would have right to be licensed as such at least initially. Non compliance with any code requirements on an ongoing basis should sort out the outlaws ( if in fact it could be policed/compliance checked).

It is easy to target ones opposition as a cowboy operator but not what I think would be  workable way forward.

I don't think a dilution of rights is in order but some sense needs to brought into the industry. The large essentially pillaging operations need reining in as much as the smaller renegade types.

It is my opinion that previously substantial operators who have chosen to make very large increases in hive numbers perhaps should be given cause to re think what they are doing to the industry also. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Overstocking is the number one problem issue raised by beekeepers, so any discussion around quota's or licences has got to be worth-while.  

 

Re policing I think other beekeepers will be the ones who report on non complying beekeepers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, CraBee said:

Overstocking is the number one problem issue raised by beekeepers, so any discussion around quota's or licences has got to be worth-while.  

 

Re policing I think other beekeepers will be the ones who report on non complying beekeepers.

I think you are right @CraBee. While neighbour dobbing in neighbour is a sad scenario I think when someone comes along and places hives next to your own ( say within?? 8 - 9 hundred metres? More?? Ideally a lot more) there needs to be some redress available. If the perpetrator was subject to license loss I would think the hives would move pretty quickly.

I firmly believe that dump site practices equally call for some redress to existing apiary operators. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many family owned beekeeping businesses including some pretty big ones have been rapidly increasing their hive numbers along with everyone else. I know quite a few of them that have done it to try and protect themselves from encroaching new beekeepers but I don't think that has been the answer.There is nothing like a war to increase the birthrate. How about a concerted industry approach to government asking them to stop hyping up the beekeeping industry . Pollination  is the reason bees are in New Zealand and honey is just a byproduct important only because it finances beekeepers

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10yrs ago  everybody ignored bee keepers , like the media , councils , govt  etc.

bee keeping never got any attention untill there was money in it  and some bees in USA vanished.

Now there is no money in it anymore it will fade from view and no one will think to bother regulating it .

Half the hives will vanish and overstocking will disappear .

Things will go back to how they were .

The people entering the industry will either be passionate about bees or socially and phsycologically unfit for anything else .

  • Like 1
  • Agree 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, john berry said:

Many family owned beekeeping businesses including some pretty big ones have been rapidly increasing their hive numbers along with everyone else. I know quite a few of them that have done it to try and protect themselves from encroaching new beekeepers but I don't think that has been the answer.There is nothing like a war to increase the birthrate. How about a concerted industry approach to government asking them to stop hyping up the beekeeping industry . Pollination  is the reason bees are in New Zealand and honey is just a byproduct important only because it finances beekeepers

That's a perspective that is interesting and perhaps where beekeeping is returning at least in part, pollination as a primary role rather than nectar gathering (excepting of course the Manuka gatherers). I noticed the big C intending to chase pollination with more intent also. A return to the roots perhaps. With hive numbers as high as they are I think it may become quite competitive.

"The war" may become a bit like the Russian front of old if everyone continues the same old way. Lots of casualties. Or are we already there?

50 minutes ago, kaihoka said:

Now there is no money in it anymore it will fade from view and no one will think to bother regulating it .

Half the hives will vanish and overstocking will disappear .

Things will go back to how they were .

The people entering the industry will either be passionate about bees or socially and phsycologically unfit for anything else .

I suspect not. The next season or three will tell of course but I don't see the big and the biggest operators slowing the grab of the nectar resources where ever they can. The dump site problem will persist with that unless some sense is brought to the fore.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tighter rules and regulations for the honest beekeepers to take care of a few greedy a**holes...

 

tell me how lower speed limits stop speeding. Or other bad driving habits very common in nz...

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was only a few years ago that the big C was telling its suppliers not to do pollination because of the risk of spray contamination. If it cost you $800 a year to run your business then pollination will not save your bacon.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


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

Tighter rules and regulations for the honest beekeepers to take care of a few greedy a**holes...

 

tell me how lower speed limits stop speeding. Or other bad driving habits very common in nz...

I think it is the nature of many people to want to become bigger/better, make more and more money etc. It is not just a few in my opinion @Christi An in this industry, it is quite a few that act without regard (or in ignorance) to all others.

We all have a vested interest including myself of course and that of course colours our view and actions.

I have said it elsewhere on the forum and will repeat it here. I think a code of practice with penalties for non compliance is required. Licensing (a revokeable license) is the thought that dominates my thinking currently. There could be a better way of course but other than quota I have not heard another solution as yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pre manuka, there was an unwritten code of practice, and it has only been since manuka madness that things have gotten out of hand. In earlier times it would have been recognised as laughable for someone to decide, without any or very little experience in beekeeping to set up a beekeeping business by just throwing a heap of money at the idea. Much like any other profession or trade, you 'served your time' with someone whose skills you respected and tried to emulate, often initially for very little pay, much like an apprenticeship.

Truth is, that those old hands who lived that process will mostly do well or at least live well on savings even under the current circumstances until the market/stocking levels sort out. They have little to gain from a quota system the new entrants would like to foist  on the industry.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1

Share this post


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

 a quota system the new entrants would like to foist  on the industry.

Can you share where you sourced this please ?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, yesbut said:

Can you share where you sourced this please ?

Easy, follow the posts, those with real time in the industry have already considered most ways to solve the overcrowding and other problems several times over the decades, and have worked out the downfalls to it,  and it shows in their posts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Sailabee said:

They have little to gain from a quota system the new entrants would like to foist  on the industry.

31 minutes ago, Sailabee said:

Easy, follow the posts,

 

I may be blind, but I cannot see any post on this thread promoting a quota.  Philbee in another thread is the only post promoting a quota. Is @Philbee a new entrant ?

Edited by yesbut

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, yesbut said:

 

I may be blind, but I cannot see any post on this thread promoting a quota.  Philbee in another thread is the only post promoting a quota. Is @Philbee a new entrant ?

Not promoted on this thread, but over several others. As far as Philbee question, he was a new hobbyist as I remember it when he joined back in 2014, and while he has really concentrated on beekeeping, would surely agree that it's not quite the same as some who have several decades of experience to draw on.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

On 15/07/2019 at 12:15 PM, yesbut said:

Very expensively

Apiweb 
Also, If the total number of Hives in NZ is to be reduced by say, 40% and a large portion of that reduction is due to attrition, then this reduction will likely be seen substantially as a reduction  total site numbers.
Sites that exist but are not registered are much easier to identify than Hives per legal site.

So, If every Commercial Beek understates their actual Hive numbers by 15% (which is far more acceptable and likely than having unregistered sites) then the total mismatch between actual total  and listed total would be a rather modest number of 90000 Hives based on a listed total of 600000.
So instead of having 1 million or more hives we would have between 600000 and 690000.

 

Any system that requires a payment based on Hive numbers is going to include a budget for auditing anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

22 minutes ago, Philbee said:

So, If every Commercial Beek understates their actual Hive numbers by 15% (which is far more acceptable and likely than having unregistered sites) 

 

We have intense surveillance programmes - AFB PMS & exotic.  If beekeepers were understating their hive numbers, shouldn't this misrepresentation be shown up by AP2s comments?  If hive numbers consistently were understated and not matching surveillance forms as noted by AP2s, then surely these beekeepers would be targeted for audity.  In the past I have undertaken huge amounts of surveillance and I have never come across any commercial outfit understating their hives more than the occasional one hive, in the occasional apiary.  And when I inspected commercial outfits, there were always a number of apiaries in their outfit. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Maggie James said:

 

 

We have intense surveillance programmes - AFB PMS & exotic.  If beekeepers were understating their hive numbers, shouldn't this misrepresentation be shown up by AP2s comments?  If hive numbers consistently were understated and not matching surveillance forms as noted by AP2s, then surely these beekeepers would be targeted for audity.  In the past I have undertaken huge amounts of surveillance and I have never come across any commercial outfit understating their hives more than the occasional one hive, in the occasional apiary.  And when I inspected commercial outfits, there were always a number of apiaries in their outfit. 

Thanks for that info Maggie.
My point was to demonstrate the effects of a worst case scenario
A system that can still remain effective in the face of extreme abuse is a robust system

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Good to see amicable discussion.  Hopefully this is how the industry will solve some of the issues we are experiencing. 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 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...