Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Maybe what would help in the case of a recalcitrant beek  the AP2 having the authority to delegate a clean up to the aggrieved beek/s ?

"Oh but why should I have to clean up after someone else that's what THEY should be doing"   Old story, if you want a job done properly....(or at all)...

Edited by yesbut
  • Like 1
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 88
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

NucMan,   Your allegation that the Management Agency has not acted on the information you provided is not correct.   The Management Agency has followed up on the information you pr

My bubble is still intact @Dennis Crowley .....and yes , there are many operations that run a clean ship. What always amazes me is the  job ads running looking for beekeeping managers .... 'must

I read a newspaper article yesterday, with congratulations to Kiwis for having 'eliminated COVID-19', and it reminded me a lot of some events from 25 years ago...   NZ's AFB had been regulat

2 hours ago, yesbut said:

the AP2 having the authority to delegate a clean up to the aggrieved beek/s ?

cant see that flying..retaliatory action being the danger.

Task it to competent but unaffected parties and on-bill to the offender.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, AFB PMP Management Agency said:

NucMan,

 

Your allegation that the Management Agency has not acted on the information you provided is not correct.

 

The Management Agency has followed up on the information you provided and undertaken investigation and enforcement actions as described in the Operational Plan

 

https://afb.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/AFB-Operational-Plan-January-2020.pdf

 

Inspection of some of the beekeepers apiaries resulted in the Management Agency identifying a few cases of AFB and multiple non-compliances with plan rules. The AFB hives have been destroyed and the beekeeper has been directed to address the non-compliances identified. The Management Agency has cancelled his DECA.

 

The Management Agency has not initiated inspection of 100% of the beekeepers hives as our inspections did not identify sufficient cases of AFB to justify inspecting all of the beekeepers hives at levy payer expense, or using the Management Agency’s powers of cost recovery.

 

The Management Agency will continue to monitor this beekeeper and notifications of AFB in the surrounding area. We will undertake follow-up actions as appropriate.

Thanks very much with this feedback.  We too often only get one slanted side of these arguments.  Keep up the great work, thankless that it often is. 

  • Agree 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Trevor Gillbanks said:

Thanks very much with this feedback.  We too often only get one slanted side of these arguments.  Keep up the great work, thankless that it often is. 

@AFB PMP Management Agency this is why i like to hear feedback. it also helps show that work is being done even tho we cannot see it.

  • Like 3
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, john berry said:

Removal of someone's deca means they will have to get someone else to inspect their hives at least once a year at their own cost. 

From what I have seen it is not done lightly and I think it is a useful tool for getting people back on track.

i can't imagen anyone to keen to go check a commerical lot of hives and the owner is most likly to be very unhappy at having to pay, and probably drag their heels.

or the owner just uses someone elses name and number on the paper work. i hope @AFB PMP Management Agency has procedures in place to check thats not happening.

  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, AFB PMP Management Agency said:

NucMan,

 

Your allegation that the Management Agency has not acted on the information you provided is not correct.

 

The Management Agency has followed up on the information you provided and undertaken investigation and enforcement actions as described in the Operational Plan

 

https://afb.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/AFB-Operational-Plan-January-2020.pdf

 

Inspection of some of the beekeepers apiaries resulted in the Management Agency identifying a few cases of AFB and multiple non-compliances with plan rules. The AFB hives have been destroyed and the beekeeper has been directed to address the non-compliances identified. The Management Agency has cancelled his DECA.

 

The Management Agency has not initiated inspection of 100% of the beekeepers hives as our inspections did not identify sufficient cases of AFB to justify inspecting all of the beekeepers hives at levy payer expense, or using the Management Agency’s powers of cost recovery.

 

The Management Agency will continue to monitor this beekeeper and notifications of AFB in the surrounding area. We will undertake follow-up actions as appropriate.

Maybe i worded that wrong ...i did thankyou for destroying afb hive ,but really the same hives are still toppled some dead some alive umm treated?  afb check done? and cafefully tipped back on there side yeah right.

 

We are getting reinvasion .

So i guarantee our hives will or have robbed anything weak.

 

I'm not the bad guy 

I'm the frustraded guy

 

You found a couple afb so not bad enough  for 100% inspection .

 

 

What i am trying to say is ,been beekeeping paying levies , ask for assistance.?

Find out the levy I've been paying 

Is fighting the good fight somewhere else in the country where there are bigger problems thats great that a levy im paying is sorting out somebody elses problem and that couple of afb hives are nothing to worry about.?

 

Has there been a follow up inspection ?

Have the hives been tidyed up?

 

Maybe i should post the hive site photos to get the opinion of fellow beekeepers

This is not a personal attack on the afbpm  ,this is me saying afbpm needs more power in a obvious situation that is going to cause problems.

 

 

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, AFB PMP Management Agency said:

NucMan,

 

Your allegation that the Management Agency has not acted on the information you provided is not correct.

 

The Management Agency has followed up on the information you provided and undertaken investigation and enforcement actions as described in the Operational Plan

 

https://afb.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/AFB-Operational-Plan-January-2020.pdf

 

Inspection of some of the beekeepers apiaries resulted in the Management Agency identifying a few cases of AFB and multiple non-compliances with plan rules. The AFB hives have been destroyed and the beekeeper has been directed to address the non-compliances identified. The Management Agency has cancelled his DECA.

 

The Management Agency has not initiated inspection of 100% of the beekeepers hives as our inspections did not identify sufficient cases of AFB to justify inspecting all of the beekeepers hives at levy payer expense, or using the Management Agency’s powers of cost recovery.

 

The Management Agency will continue to monitor this beekeeper and notifications of AFB in the surrounding area. We will undertake follow-up actions as appropriate.

thank you for engaging

as for @nucman -thank you for acknowledging that your accusations were technically (and likely only techincally - no doubt on the truth re the beeks involved!) a touch out of line - understand exactly where you're coming from - i think you're stuck in a horrible place timing and situation wise and cross my fingers foryou. Great news is that it seems that the agency is on the same page as us, and now both has powers, funding, and enthusiasm for doing work that we (or at least I) endorse wholeheartedly

Edited by tommy dave
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm .... I think we are going full circle here .

I remember going to an AFB meeting the other year and asking similar questions.

One of the replies was that the main role of the agency is not to find and destroy, but to monitor and collate info and figures.

But they also dabble in inspections with the AP2 program.

 

I wonder perhaps if we need a resurrection of the Agency, again, with a staunch sub branch ..... a hit squad with powers to find and destroy .....electric trucks with jerrycans of petrol, PPE and mobile incinerator and a name and shame culture to weed out the perpetrators.   

 

Yesterday I got a TXT notification of an AFB outbreak within 2k's of our site 241.   Site 241 wasn't used last year because we picked up a bit of AFB there the year before .

I'm not pointing any fingers, as I know that generally I am my own worst enemy, but ....

I'd like to know who has bees in the vicinity as they may well need a hand to sort their &&&&&&& out so that we can all live in peace and harmony again.

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 29/04/2020 at 8:12 AM, NickWallingford said:

 

I would urge all of us to keep 'eliminating' any COVID-19 cases - and keep trying to eliminate American foulbrood.

So your saying we should burn people who have covid19? 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Kiwifruiter said:

So your saying we should burn people who have covid19? 

I believe if you have a DECA you may be allowed to recover equipment using paraffin wax dipping...

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
40 minutes ago, NickWallingford said:

I believe if you have a DECA you may be allowed to recover equipment using paraffin wax dipping...

I was asked to inspect an abandoned with a lot of new plastic plus boxes, about 50 hive with a large amount of new gear.I asked if I could remove the beekeeping gear and dip it in paraffin as per my deca but was told by the ap1 no.The whole apiary was evenually buried by an excavator, not even burnt I think.

Edited by Mummzie
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Re robbing out of wets, what happens then if there is a sub-clinical / non-visible infection and honey is infected?  AFB could be spread to other beekeepers.

The very long standing large bk in our local area has a known AFB problem @ 6% of their hives per annum and they put their wets out this way to be robbed out.

It's not best practice, so why do it, and how do those who do do it know whether others have been infected with AFB?   How do I know if I have case of AFB pop up that it wasn't from this source?  If the problem is new beekeepers, then why do we even have AFB - its the old beekeepers who have kept it going for the last 140 years.....just because it has been done this way doesn't mean it is right.

 

Edited by yesbut
Sorted out formatting. couldn't help myself
  • Like 1
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe I would agree with that decision.  *If* the Mgmt Agency gets so far down the track that they are preparing to destroy AFB infected hives from an abandoned apiary - the owner has not been able to be located - it would be very questionable whether any such gear could be given away to another beekeeper rather than being destroyed.  It seems a real waste, but is one of those compromises that the PMP would have had to come to in order to obtain such powers as entry, inspection and destruction.  The Govt has never been all that keen to allow individuals or groups those powers - the ability for the PMP to use them came after a lot of arguments and discussions.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/05/2020 at 8:55 PM, Nuc_man said:

Maybe i should post the hive site photos to get the opinion of fellow beekeepers

It's not what the outside of the hives look like, it's the inside of the hives that matter.

 

On a number of occasions I have inspected absolutely beautiful hives on the outside to find AFB within.

 

I hope we aren't going to see a heap of photos of the exterior beautiful looking hives being compared with some rough looking hives.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, CraBee said:

Re robbing out of wets, what happens then if there is a sub-clinical / non-visible infection and honey is infected?  AFB could be spread to other beekeepers.

The very long standing large bk in our local area has a known AFB problem @ 6% of their hives per annum and they put their wets out this way to be robbed out.

From memory, it will take something like 5,000,000 AFB spores per mg to create an infection in another hive.  The argument that open robbing is 'safe' would rely on that, that even if several boxes from the stacks came from an active AFB hive and were open robbed, there would not be the concentration required to cause clinical AFB.  Robbing out a 'dead out'?  That's a different story, categorically, in terms of spore spread...

 

To my mind a bigger risk, if someone had up to 6% AFB, would be the implicit acts of regularly transferring equipment between hives.  Now *that* would cause infections for sure, and to a degree somewhat higher than the convenience of drying supers in the open...

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, NickWallingford said:

From memory, it will take something like 5,000,000 AFB spores per mg to create an infection in another hive.  The argument that open robbing is 'safe' would rely on that, that even if several boxes from the stacks came from an active AFB hive and were open robbed, there would not be the concentration required to cause clinical AFB.  Robbing out a 'dead out'?  That's a different story, categorically, in terms of spore spread...

 

To my mind a bigger risk, if someone had up to 6% AFB, would be the implicit acts of regularly transferring equipment between hives.  Now *that* would cause infections for sure, and to a degree somewhat higher than the convenience of drying supers in the open...

 

@tristan how much residual honey do you think there would need to be in wets to cause an AFB infection?

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

 

@tristan how much residual honey do you think there would need to be in wets to cause an AFB infection?

 

Back in about 1993, Dr Mark Goodwin did this:  20 supers were collected from hives with a light (est 5 larvae/pupae showing infection).  The honey was extracted, and the next spring the 20 boxes were put on 20 clean hives.  There were another 20 clean hives that did not have the infected supers placed on them in the same apiary.

 

Within 2 days, all hives (even those without the infected supers) tested positive for AFB spores, even though no obvious robbing had occurred when the wets were added.

 

Ultimately only 45% of the hives given the infected gear developed AFB infections.  20% of the hives *without* the AFB infected supers developed infections.

 

Two things catch my eye: the 45% is lower than I might have expected in these circumstances, and I feel the 20% is a high hive infection rate given the situation...

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
45 minutes ago, Bighands said:

I was asked to inspect an abandoned with a lot of new plastic plus boxes, about 50 hive with a large amount of new gear.I asked if I could remove the beekeeping gear and dip it in paraffin as per my deca but was told by the ap1 no.The whole apiary was evenually buried by an excavator, not even burnt I think.

If you are an AP2 and you ask to adopt abandoned gear you were asked to inspect as part of your AP2 role. You would be using privileged information for personal gain..... Therefore, good on the AP1 who stopped you from doing so.

Edited by Bee Real
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I was offered some bee gear , boxes queen excluder etc , by a friend who had quit bee keeping 30 yrs ago. It had been in his shed .

I was advised to decline . It was in good condition but he said he never knew what foul brood was .

The gear was burnt .

Did I make the right decision .?

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Bee Real said:

If you are an AP2 and you ask to adopt abandoned gear you were asked to inspect as part of your AP2 role. You would be using privileged information for personal gain..... Therefore, good on the AP1 who stopped you from doing so.

you are correct but what a waste of resources no wonder the industry is in the state it is in.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, kaihoka said:

The gear was burnt .

Did I make the right decision .?

 

Careful paraffin wax dipping, combined with some degree of equipment quarantine, combined with serious and effective inspections and the gear (boxes and excluders - not drawn comb) could be brought back into service.  But I think you maybe did the right thing by passing.  Often the reason all that gear is put into the shed is that the bees died.  To simply add it into your own equipment would be a very, very risky move IMHO...

  • Thanks 1
  • Agree 2
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...