Jump to content
Trevor Gillbanks

Beekeeping "Levy" Do we need one.

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Don Mac said:

oh for a funding levy!

Great article and research. 

It is such a pity that this (the Levy )  needs to be kept being bought up.  A bit like the Democrats cannot get over the fact that Trump is POTUS and they cannot figure out why.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


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

Great article and research. 

It is such a pity that this (the Levy )  needs to be kept being bought up.  A bit like the Democrats cannot get over the fact that Trump is POTUS and they cannot figure out why.

Yet Trev there is so much research to help this industry and the bees that is not happening because of no levy. We all complain when spray issues arrive or we cant sell our honey or there's to many beekeepers/hives, (insert any other issue you can think of) but we don't want to pay for it either.

You cant have it both ways, either pay nothing and live with what you get and don't complain, or think about the future and pay, plan, participate and move forward. 

Take a leaf out of all the other industries that have done just that.

But what do I know, i'm not a hobbyist or semi commercial(which is just a bigger hobbyist) my livelihood is this industry, not a side line to my day job or a retirement hobby. 

 

Edited by Dennis Crowley
  • Like 1
  • Agree 3

Share this post


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

But what do I know, i'm not a hobbyist or semi commercial(which is just a bigger hobbyist) my livelihood is this industry, not a side line to my day job or a retirement hobby.

Let's not get into a personal slanging match.  What is done is done.  I don't want to stir up the past.  It was done for me.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no doubt about it ...... there is so much we don't know . It would be nice to have a vibrant and strong industry that is  able to discretionary fund issues that ultimately affect every one's bottom line.

 

We packed  a very limited edition of Honey Dew this afternoon ...... only because the pots were in short supply.

2 hours ago, Don Mac said:

Hi Beekeepers and interested readers.

The first survey ever of the effects of neonicotinoid pesticides has been published in NZ.

Imidacloprid was first registered as a seed treatment in 1992 and it has taken 27 years to research and publish environmental data on its fate in our soils.

You see  the EPA or MPI or growers do not do any monitoring or measuring of pesticides and their effects in the environment.

And this study by Dr Chris Pook (now working at the Liggins Institute) was only done because beekeepers said they could not keep their hives alive near maize growing areas immediately after harvest.

His study measured the levels of neonicotinoids in the soil. We do not know yet how this is connected to the death of the hive. More research needed - oh for a funding levy!

Some of this work was presented at an Apiculture Conference in Rotorua three years ago and at the EPA Hearing for APP202077. Now it has been published internationally unfortunately behind a pay wall. But the press release is attached.


https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0269749119301381?via%3Dihub

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2019.113075
I rest my case your Honour.
 

 

Press release - Chris Pook 2019 - Neonicotinoid residues in NZ maize field soil.docx 16 kB · 1 download

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By ‘stirring up the past’ you’re referring to the idea of a research levy Trevor then I say stir away !

But now we can discuss, debate, argue the merits (or otherwise) without a deadline. 

 

One outcome was was the common belief that money was needed for research. Antibacterial profile of bush honey anyone? To market something (a non-manuka honey for example) means benefits, value and it’s selling proposition. And a lot of that comes from research. 

 

Bee researchers do do know that many in the industry are hurting. It seems a lot of current research is on immediate industry issues (AFB, varroa, nosemas). But if the industry wants to direct research or direct the outcomes in a particular way then there needs to be an industry contribution. 

 

Well done Chris Pook ( and @Don Mac / Barry Foster from ApiNZ Science group who assisted in this work)

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Trevor Gillbanks said:

Great article and research. 

It is such a pity that this (the Levy )  needs to be kept being bought up.  A bit like the Democrats cannot get over the fact that Trump is POTUS and they cannot figure out why.

 

I think the Democrats know well why he is POTUS, lots of good ole boys from the boondocks with a primary school education voted for him. 

  • Like 3
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Trevor Gillbanks said:

Let's not get into a personal slanging match.  What is done is done.  I don't want to stir up the past.  It was done for me.

 

It is not a personnel slanging match Trev, just a reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey John

You said

"By ‘stirring up the past’ you’re referring to the idea of a research levy Trevor then I say stir away !

But now we can discuss, debate, argue the merits (or otherwise) without a deadline. "

 

In the golden days before the #lotsofgoldformetoo or the #canIabeasirtoo movments quite a bit of fund raising and assistance was given by beekeepers.  

But the new regime seems to have exclude the people who enjoy fund raising and now the researchers just keep on pushing to take what little money we have left to put food on the table

 

Perhaps the new regime needs to stop pushing away the volunteers away (and yes Dennis we do run business and have the skills and the  knowledge and enjoy running events)  and work on sorting the politics out so the fund raising branches can reform and get back to supporting the researchers       

Edited by morporks
  • Like 1

Share this post


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

POTUS ?

 

Potus.  President Of The United States.

On 20/10/2019 at 4:39 PM, Dennis Crowley said:

But what do I know, i'm not a hobbyist or semi commercial(which is just a bigger hobbyist) my livelihood is this industry, not a side line to my day job or a retirement hobby. 

 

20 hours ago, JohnF said:

By ‘stirring up the past’ you’re referring to the idea of a research levy Trevor then I say stir away !

But now we can discuss, debate, argue the merits (or otherwise) without a deadline. 

10 hours ago, morporks said:

"By ‘stirring up the past’ you’re referring to the idea of a research levy Trevor then I say stir away !

But now we can discuss, debate, argue the merits (or otherwise) without a deadline. "

Well,  a little stir up it is.

 

@Dennis Crowley I was not on the Committee or organisation that decided we needed a "Levy".  Nor did I set the rules by which we would vote on it.  Nor did I decide who would vote on it.

 

Our SNI Beekeeping Group, carried out a Survey Monkey poll to see why people voted the way they did.

 

ApiNZ stated that the Levy was rejected because of the downturn of the industry. Our Survey Monkey results showed us that the vast majority of respondents wanted the Levy.  However, they voted against it because they did not want to be forced into joining and paying funds into ApiNZ.  

 

I am sorry if the OP has been side tracked but the OP put in the bit about wanting a Levy.

 

Edited by Trevor Gillbanks
Quote error
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Agree 1

Share this post


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

Our Survey Monkey results showed us that the vast majority of respondents wanted the Levy.  However, they voted against it because they did not want to be forced into joining and paying funds into ApiNZ.  

So the take home from this is a levy could be a goer if the administrative organisation was not ApiNZ.  Then the next question is how would such an organisation have to differ from ApiNZ to be acceptable to potential levy payers ?

  • Like 2
  • Agree 2

Share this post


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

So the take home from this is a levy could be a goer if the administrative organisation was not ApiNZ.  Then the next question is how would such an organisation have to differ from ApiNZ to be acceptable to potential levy payers ?

Yes that's correct. So far as I understand from the NZ Beekeeping survey, there was no problem with a levy, it was more about how it would be controlled.

 

  • Like 2
  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Talk is cheap and its important to consider the possibility that the "I dont want ApiNZ" reason for a no vote on the levy was just a smoke screen for "I dont want to pay"

  • Like 2
  • Agree 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Following on from a few off topic posts in another thread, it seems obvious the relatively recent Commodity Levy proposal was rejected because of mass suspicion and distrust of  ApiNZ

If another levy proposal were to be put forward, how would the administering organisation have to differ from ApiNZ in order fort a levy to be acceptable to the masses ?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having made the comment about the Levy, in hindsight such a levy probably wouldn't have produced much revenue anyway.

In which case IMO the responsibility falls back on the tax payer.
Not something that someone with my political beliefs  says flippantly but in this case probably a reasonable position.

 

In order to save the Fisheries the Govt introduced Quotas which restricted the availability of fish therefore modifying the market supply.

This had two effects, it reduced the pressure on the fishery and created a market where the value of fish was subject supply and demand.

So the consumer funded the recovery of the fishery or at least an attempt at recovery.

 

Bees and Honey are different than fish but IMO the solution or attempt at a solution of the Bee's problems need to be funded by the Consumer/ Taxpayer and as the Chooks come home to roost hopefully our politicians will realize this. 

 

  • Agree 2

Share this post


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

Following on from a few off topic posts in another thread, it seems obvious the relatively recent Commodity Levy proposal was rejected because of mass suspicion and distrust of  ApiNZ

If another levy proposal were to be put forward, how would the administering organisation have to differ from ApiNZ in order fort a levy to be acceptable to the masses ?

IMO a waste of time and money to implement.
There isnt enough money in the industry to warrant a levy.

  • Agree 2

Share this post


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

5 words lamenting the fact we do not have funding for research for our industry. Look what it created. Sorry guys.

I agree @Don Mac. It is like all the discovery programs all have to throw in the Climate Change argument.

 

I would have loved to have seen the Levy.  However, with the down turn in the buying/selling of honey in the last 12 months, I am not sure how many beeks would have been happy with paying the levy and not being able to sell the honey.

 

And Yes I am concerned about the neonic problems.

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Philbee said:

IMO a waste of time and money to implement.
There isn't enough money in the industry to warrant a levy.

Also, after the feelings that were generated with the last levy proposal, I have my doubts that it would get over the line.

 

1 hour ago, yesbut said:

how would the administering organisation have to differ from ApiNZ in order fort a levy to be acceptable to the masses ?

It would need to be a completely independent body that is not controlled by any of the current beekeeping groups.  There is just too much distrust and bad feelings.

IMHO.

 

For the record again.  I would like to see some sort of research levy.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is next to zero money for a levy Trev and the situation is likely to get much worse over the next few years.

The Govt know this, the Banks know this, even the Police know this.

The Bees and the Beekeepers are the canaries in the Mine here.
 

 

Edited by Philbee
  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll quote these ones from the neonic thread over here.
 

4 hours ago, morporks said:

 

But the new regime seems to have exclude the people who enjoy fund raising and now the researchers just keep on pushing to take what little money we have left to put food on the table

 

 

No, I think researchers are doing very little pushing. More of the pushing is coming from those who have no market for their no recognition, no name honey.  Wishing things were different is not going to make it so.
Look at the kiwifruit industry when Psa hit. What saved that? Research. Research into new cultivars. Did the research stop when the industry plummeted? No, it ramped up.

 

2 hours ago, Don Mac said:

Oh dears.

Our industry has a problem - still more worried about who does the work with the money - rather than look at the issue I wrote about.

5 words lamenting the fact we do not have funding for research for our industry. Look what it created. Sorry guys.

 

 

No, probably timely Don.  A lot of talk about how we need research - and then when the levy talk goes quiet then so does the research talk.

Now may not be the time for a levy - at least in the proposed form. I hope that doesn't stop the discussion on it though

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For me I distrust the validity of those applying for research funds.

Time and time again I see people with their handout for “research” on this that or the other with nothing coming of it.

I really don’t want to fund someone’s project out of our business to keep their business afloat.

 

Edited by frazzledfozzle
  • Like 1
  • Agree 2

Share this post


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

Look at the kiwifruit industry when Psa hit. What saved that? Research. Research into new cultivars. Did the research stop when the industry plummeted? No, it ramped up.

Money and lots of it is required.
In my view that expenditure should be classed as infrastructure investment and time will demonstrate this.

IMO view also almost 100% of policy makers would not have a clue what is at stake given that we now have too many Bees
How bad can it be they must say?

 

 

 

Our Bee population / existence  is like a  gas fire.

A  gas fire  burns as long as a gas supply is turned on.

When the gas is turned off, the fire disappears.
Bees are the same, they exist only as long as the Beekeeper puts time and money into them.

Turn that tap off and the Bees all but disappear

There are no wild ones that can take over the job or provide a resivour .

This is why the task of raising research money via the tax payer is so important, the worse the situation with markets and Hive health becomes, the less able the industry is to fund the required work.

Its a downward spiral that appears much further off than it really is.
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are some big differences between the kiwifruit growers and beekeepers

The government passed laws sometime back that only Zespri could export kiwifruit (Turners  to Oz) 

In the beekeeping industry its dog eat dog,  long knifes and flaming arrows

 

Until the government mandates a single desk seller for honey it is no point comparing 2 different industry structures

 

The first thing to sort out is the industry politics and from that will flow the research 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NZ Beekeeping did a survey of members after the No Vote to explore all the why's and wherefore's. This has been reported on in the presidents report as part of an email to members. Final report on that not yet done. I don't feel comfortable with posting any of that. Overall, I think the Levy has dropped down the priority list a little due to increases in financial stress and other problems considered more immediate. However they intend to work on a levy proposal that would be viable/feasible. As mentioned before it was not the money that was the main stumbling block at the time. The cost may actually be a bigger problem now, I don't know. However if the cost is related to honey sold/exported, rather than honey extracted, the honey stockpiled around the place wouldn't be such a sticking point in terms of cashflow.

  • 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...