Jump to content

Recommended Posts

One of the biggest risks caused by glyphosate are muppets who 'up the dose level' to get it to perform to their wishes on those plants it is less than effective on - in some countries, it has been the cultural norm - for example in Thailand it can be used at 16 times the recommended dose and still not work, and if that happens in NZ, it will make readings in honey and other foods much higher than would have otherwise have been the case.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 196
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I have just watched the big expose on TV one about roundup in manuka honey. Man they must be short of news to put on such a anti roundup biased piece of garbage. No mention of other honey types which

What a blatant piece of advertising from purity to the detriment of every beekeeper in New Zealand. As for some of the crap from the other beekeeper . Saying that hives have died from roundup poisonin

If I had any doubts about television journalism then I have no longer. I just read an article on the TV one News online about how an incest repellent may help protect you from covid . I'm not sur

Posted Images

9 hours ago, frazzledfozzle said:


so MPI are responsible for the article ?

The info regarding glysophate was found by using the Official Information Act, someone needed to apply for the research information officially. MPI most likely didn't want it released.

Link to post
Share on other sites

'Muppets'.  Nice word that.   OK you Muppets ..... look at it from a different angle. TV 1 exposed the problem .... if there is a problem.  Twist the negative advertising to positive.  

Test your honey and the world will come clamouring to your door ..... or not.

So much to learn, so much to do.

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, jamesc said:

 

Test your honey and the world will come clamouring to your door ..... or not.

So much to learn, so much to do.

... So much to pay for before we try to find a buyer. 
I noticed two labs had emailed us within 24hrs of the first article being released advertising testing. 
Another cost for the beekeepers to absorb if we want to sell our honey. It’s not so bad of you have big batches and can spread the cost, but all the extra testing will mean small outfits  will be a thing of the past. ☹️

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sailabee said:

One of the biggest risks caused by glyphosate are muppets who 'up the dose level' to get it to perform to their wishes on those plants it is less than effective on - in some countries, it has been the cultural norm - for example in Thailand it can be used at 16 times the recommended dose and still not work, and if that happens in NZ, it will make readings in honey and other foods much higher than would have otherwise have been the case.

The problem isn't the 'Muppets' or 'Monkeys' carrying out the aerial spraying operations.  They are professional contractors carrying out legit spraying operations on nearby farms to where the positive tests have been recorded. They are the same guys that lift your hives onto Heli sites, they certainly are not Muppets or Monkeys. In another incident a rival beekeeper/landowner in a territorial conflict lifted lids and contaminated honey boxes with glyphosate because they knew they tested for it.  Except for that last instance, this is not a health issue, the levels being found are far below levels that could cause a risk to health, even if you ate several kilos of the contaminated honey at a sitting. The Problem is the Testing. The Testing Regime we are inflicted with now is insane. What's next- Tordon, Metsulfuron, the potential list is endless.  

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, David Yanke said:

 In another incident a rival beekeeper/landowner in a territorial conflict lifted lids and contaminated honey boxes with glyphosate because they knew they tested for it. 

 

There is proof of that?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Gino de Graaf said:

The info regarding glysophate was found by using the Official Information Act, someone needed to apply for the research information officially. MPI most likely didn't want it released.


so why would a towny reporter be interested in glyphosate in honey ?

how would he even know such a thing even existed ?

of all the contaminants in all our different foods why did he do an article on glyphosate in honey ?

in my opinion it wasn’t something he thought up himself, someone in the know has whispered in his ear.

knowing who would answer the question of why .

 

Could be labs wanting even more of our dollars than they already get.

Could be companies like Puriti who make a big deal out of testing it’s going to be someone with an agenda and someone who will benefit financially from it.

Edited by frazzledfozzle
  • Agree 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/27/2020 at 8:14 PM, jamesc said:

Uh Huh .....Lets do a bit of homegrown journalism tracking down who initiated the story .  I see that for a dollar you can sign up as a Stuff journo.


could the reporter be Australian he has a bit of an ozzy accent , maybe the faux Manuka honey industry in Oz have whispered in his ear ?

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, David Yanke said:

The problem isn't the 'Muppets' or 'Monkeys' carrying out the aerial spraying operations.  They are professional contractors carrying out legit spraying operations on nearby farms to where the positive tests have been recorded.

i've had about 4 times where we have had to vacate the site due to being sprayed on or next to.

several of those was with helicopters and plane.

  • Good Info 1
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/27/2020 at 8:16 PM, frazzledfozzle said:

According to his twitter feed it was months in the making ! 
🤣

5260643E-FD49-4445-B6CB-38A6B022D28E.png

 

A lot of half-arsed journalism if this mis-information is the result of months of work. Would have been a good place to start at looking closely into those claiming "glyphosate free" and the credibility in that.

 

Edited by Dave_Angel
  • Like 2
  • Good Info 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, tristan said:

i've had about 4 times where we have had to vacate the site due to being sprayed on or next to.

several of those was with helicopters and plane.

It's not just aircraft that do that!  You can maybe cut aircraft some slack for wind drift, but with GPS systems there's really no excuse.

I have been sprayed on directly from a big overhead ground based unit while monitoring for pests in a Vineyard here. "Muppets" wasn't the word I used at the time! (Pesticide obviously, not Glyphosate.)

Edited by milkandhoney
  • Sad 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, john berry said:

They say there is a first time for everything.

I have made an official complaint about the two news items and encourage others to follow suit. I have grown increasingly tired over the years of seeing beekeeping(news) stories that have just been taken word for word from someone with their own agenda .

Mostly they have been pointless bits of fluff that do nothing but misinform the general public and raise my blood pressure but this last effort !. A month in the making! You would think even a television journalist would realise they were being led round with a ring in their nose by that time.

There are so many things to do with beekeeping that could give them really good in-depth articles on things like overstocking and the effects of having half 1 million hives more than we need.

 

Agree... I have also lodged a complaint and asked if the reporter looked into the credibility of his interviewees who seem to be at the centre of the debacle. Just a big misleading, marketing ploy which ended up with free advertising for the betterment of one brand. I also asked if there was any research at all undertaken into the "Glyphosate Free" claims that were made by said brand or who issued the "independent certification" that they state on the website as, from what I can see on the website, is that there is very little information other than outrageous claims, scaremongering statements and very little substance to back it up.

  • Like 3
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, tristan said:

i've had about 4 times where we have had to vacate the site due to being sprayed on or next to.

several of those was with helicopters and plane.

Those were the bad ole' days. Now most operators are very professional, and almost paranoid when it comes to spray drift because they know their business is at risk if they stuff up.  They spend small fortunes on spray  rigs and nozzles that control droplet size to help ensure that that the spray only goes where it is meant to go. Their GPS guidance  shows exactly  where they have sprayed and is accurate of less than a meter, and all that information is kept in case there is a complaint. I am only sticking up for them because they are not the problem here.  Testing, and the people responsible for that News Item are the problem.

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Generally speaking there is less hive damage from all kinds of sprays than there was 20 years ago and that was way better than 50 years ago. My one exception was around six years ago when I lost 50 hives when gorse was sprayed on an adjoining forestry block. I have no doubt at all that it was caused by an organo- silicate but the spraying was done sometime in early winter and several months have passed before we found out about it. The hives were full of dead bees inside and out but they were too old to get decent samples.

  • Good Info 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, john berry said:

I have made an official complaint about the two news items and encourage others to follow suit.

I too made a complaint at the same time I posted the link to show where it could be done and this complaint has been acknowledged by their complaints committee.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, David Yanke said:

Those were the bad ole' days. Now most operators are very professional, and almost paranoid when it comes to spray drift because they know their business is at risk if they stuff up.  They spend small fortunes on spray  rigs and nozzles that control droplet size to help ensure that that the spray only goes where it is meant to go. Their GPS guidance  shows exactly  where they have sprayed and is accurate of less than a meter, and all that information is kept in case there is a complaint. I am only sticking up for them because they are not the problem here.  Testing, and the people responsible for that News Item are the problem.

bad old days like last year or two ?

its lazy farm and heli spraying staff that don't sign post/lock the gates or tell anyone that they are spraying.

and a few old school orchards who don't have spray boards on the entrance and will start spraying while we are in there, including their own workers.

  • Sad 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, ChrisM said:

I too made a complaint at the same time I posted the link to show where it could be done and this complaint has been acknowledged by their complaints committee.

What's the bases of your complaint?

Be good to have some sound argument here to use in a complaint.

The facts are correct, glysophate residues in honey. That buyers overseas don't want that. The story in nut shell.

What's the argument? 

The side story? A brand got promoted.

Glysophate is present in lots of food.

Low residues compared to other countries.

Alarmists.

Need sound argument to uphold complaints.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole thing was alarmist, damaging and poorly researched but if that was a criteria for complaints there would be very little left on television. I submitted that there was a lack of balance but mainly focused on the fact that they had a beekeeper making completely false and untrue statements although he may well have believed them to be true.

It's not something you can make a complaint about but the whole thing smelt very strongly to me of anti-spray hysteria similar to articles from anti-vax campaigners and animal welfare articles written by members of SAFE.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, john berry said:

I have made an official complaint about the two news items and encourage others to follow suit.

 

TVNZ have been complained against before on the glyphosate issue.

 

The complaint was dismissed on a number of grounds, but a key one relating to "balance" was that it was taken over a period of time and incorporated various programs on TVNZ.  So the article in question may have been unbalanced, but there were other articles at other times that could be considered as part of the balance.

Another key point is that the "expert" was said to only be expressing his "opinion" and when one looked at the quotes, it was easy to see how you should talk when in front of the media!!

Edited by Emissary
  • Like 1
  • Good Info 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

If those two TV news items were months in the making, then it really does speak volumes (of trash) about the overall quality of ANY news item being presented.    On a personal note, I was actually suffering skin-creep during the second such item and not over the use of round-up.  It was bad, but for reasons of delivery and choice of the interviewee(s).   The tenuous relationship between beekeepers and farmers - well, I would not like to see that person coming on to my farm again.  Whether other companies were approached or not, how are we to know.   Puriti answered the (one and only ?) call, presumably they had something to say... but they could have been more truthful in that all honey is tested and that the levels are practically undetectable.  They just had an opportunity to  market the fact that some of theirs was luckily 'glyphosate-free".     

Was the price of NZ honey looking like trending back upwards in a way that might be difficult to compete for stocks again, and it became necessary to stomp it right back down to ensure that you have 'pick of the litter'? 


I kind of had to get that off my chest.   I sound sour, I know. 


 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...