Jump to content

fieldbee

Members
  • Content Count

    395
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Seller statistics

  • 0
  • 0
  • 0

fieldbee last won the day on September 24 2014

fieldbee had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

180 Excellent

About fieldbee

  • Rank
    Pupa

Converted

  • Beekeeping Experience
    Commercial Beekeeper

Location

  • Location
    edgecumbe

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Comments anyone re the charges moving forward from the agency as per yesterdays email. The way I read it our levies are going up considerably. And they intend to charge non compliant beekeepers but no indications on how those charges will work. Management Agency Response to submissions on proposal to replace the American Foulbrood Apiary and Beekeeper Levy with a Hive and Beekeeper Levy In August 2018, the Management Agency for the National American Foulbrood Pest Management Plan (the Agency) conducted a consultation amongst beekeepers to seek their views about a proposal to increase the American Foulbrood (AFB) Apiary and Beekeeper Levy (referred to as ‘2018 Levy Consultation’). Over 828 submissions were received, and the majority strongly disagreed that the levy should be increased as proposed. The majority of 2018 Levy Consultation submissions considered that the Agency should not continue to use apiaries as a basis for calculating the levy and proposed a hive levy instead. A significant number of submissions were also concerned that non-compliant beekeepers were not paying the costs of the AFB problem they created. In response to 2018 Levy Consultation submissions, the Agency revised the proposal to replace the existing apiary and beekeeper levy with a hive and beekeeper levy. The Agency also decided to fund its compliance and enforcement activities through cost recovery charges under section 135 of the Biosecurity Act 1993. The Agency took the revised proposal back to the beekeeping community for consultation in 2019. The consultation period was for three weeks and opened on 4 March 2019 and closed on 22 March 2019. 477 unique submissions received, of which 466 were from survey respondents. Fourteen letters were sent to the Agency, three of whom were also survey respondents. The consultation findings and detailed description of the consultation process is presented in the companion Consultation Findings report. The Agency would like to thank submitters for their submissions on the future funding of the elimination of clinical American Foulbrood in New Zealand. Summary of Agency decisions Having considered the submissions, the Agency has decided to request the Minister to make a new American Foulbrood – Hive and Beekeeper Levy Order with the maximum rate of levy set at $2.55 per hive and $40 per beekeeper. The Agency has also decided to charge non-compliant beekeepers to recover fair and reasonable costs of compliance and enforcement actions. The reasons for these decisions are set out below: Replace the Apiary and Beekeeper Levy with a Hive and Beekeeper Levy A narrow majority of submissions considered that the existing apiary and beekeeper levy should be replaced with a hive and beekeeper levy. Submissions in favour of the replacing the existing apiary and beekeeper levy with a hive and beekeeper levy stated that it more fairly distributed the cost between large and small operations, incentivises smaller apiaries and encourages people to take up hobby beekeeping. The primary objection stated by submissions against replacing the apiary and beekeeper levy with a hive and beekeeper levy was that it was too easy for beekeepers to under report their true hive numbers. The Agency noted the concerns expressed about the potential for beekeepers to underreport their hives under a hive levy. However, the Agency was not satisfied that these submissions made the case that the under reporting of hives would be significantly higher than the current under reporting of apiaries and believes this can be mitigated by developing new mechanisms to audit hive declarations. The Agency also considered that submissions in favour of changing to a hive and beekeeper levy made a more compelling case for changing to a hive and beekeeper levy than the submissions against as: A hive and beekeeper levy fairly distributes costs between large and small beekeeping operations, A hive levy incentivises smaller apiaries with a lower disease risk, and Replacing the apiary levy with a hive levy removes the financial incentive for beekeepers not to register all their apiaries, thereby improving the Agency’s ability to monitor and manage American foulbrood. Setting a maximum levy rate at $40 per beekeeper and $2.55 per hive A majority of submissions opposed the proposed levy rates. The primary objection was that the proposed levy rates were too high, and beekeepers could not afford to pay them. The Agency is concerned about the financial hardship that many beekeepers are experiencing. However, the Agency is also concerned that continued underinvestment in AFB elimination has the potential to further erode beekeeper incomes due to hive losses associated with AFB, particularly at a time when AFB may increase as a consequence of the financial pressures that beekeepers are experiencing. The proposed levy rate for 2020/21 and maximum levy rates are approximately $0.65 (proposed) and $1.80 (maximum) per hive above the current levy rate. The Agency considers that the additional levy is justified to reduce the costs associated with losing hives and production to AFB. Charge non-compliant beekeepers to recover the costs of compliance and enforcement actions A majority of submissions agreed that the Management Agency should charge non-compliant beekeepers to recover the costs of compliance and enforcement actions. Submissions in favour of charging non-compliant beekeepers to recover the costs of compliance and enforcement actions stated that they believed that non-compliant beekeepers are the most responsible for the AFB problem and they supported strong penalties to deter non-compliance. The primary reason given by submissions opposing charging non-compliant beekeepers to recover the cost of compliance and enforcement actions was that they believed the penalties were too severe, would encourage non-compliance and underreporting in order to avoid penalties. Under the National American Foulbrood Pest Management Plan beekeepers are responsible for the costs of eliminating AFB from their beehives. Cost recovery is intended to recover the costs of the additional AFB control activities required to manage the consequences of non-compliant beekeepers’ behaviour. The Agency believes it would be unfair to expect compliant levy payers to fund these actions from the levy and has therefore decided to recover the costs of compliance and enforcement actions from non-compliant beekeepers. The analysis of submissions and the Management Agency’s response can be found on the levy webpage or by selecting the links below: 2019 AFB Levy Consultation Findings Report 2019 Management Agency Response to Submissions
  2. Hey @Philbee please explain
  3. Careful @Ted there could be lots of ladies lining up for lessons from your wife.
  4. Oh @Alistair cut it out, you've done a good turn for many people, enjoy this one.
  5. @Alastair um I have probably missed something, why did you call them death strips? just wondering.
  6. @jamesc can you explain what exactly about the industry has shocked him. Ta in advance
  7. @SeanMonica have you a website link to direct me to for the waspy thingees.
  8. Interesting comments @frazzledfozzle A few years ago we got kanuka from a new site, very thick (no hot room) had to milk it through the filter socks which took two days. In bulk been stirred. I always had a good slurp on my fingers before washing them. That tested at nearly a 7 and I thought wow you silly woman. But no adverse affects.
  9. The question many of us are asking @Adam Boot
  10. @Trevor Gillbanks I think John just called a spade, well I guess ..a spade. haha It's late is that what you were saying in a polite round about way?
  11. @Oma Thanks for that, I have been told by the agrisea rep that he go rid of the brown rot by spraying the ground twice in a year with the soil agrisea and 3 times a year on the leaves with the foliage agrisea. I was very busy and only got the foliage done once and what a difference no where near perfect but a big enough difference for me to make sure I do it this year. Also improves roses from brown spot. anything not to use chemicals..
  12. Till yesterday I had 30 odd hives at my house site. They have been right into fallen pears apples, peaches etc that are split and starting to ferment. Now the hives are gone those fruit have lots of flies and some wasps, till the cattle get them that it. My opinion could easily be fallen rotting fruit. I had one land owner saying our hives were robbing her peach tree about a month ago. .
  13. Hi @Oma a couple of questions, do you have it where cattle can eat it and do they. and how many plants do you have near you apple trees, a few or lots? I have apple trees with codlin moth and huge old pear trees that are prolific fruiters but heaps of moth. Thanks in advance
  14. So one staff is complaining of being affected by OA strips, I have never had a problem. Head aches, cant get to sleep. But then I'm the boss and made the decision to change. Can other tell me if they or their staff are affected by fumes. I also say dont breathe over it or breathe it in.. What sort of gloves do people wear when putting the strips in the hives.
  15. Hi @Jamo how many are eaten out like this? My question is how many staples this eaten in each hive (rough guess) and how many hives have this much eaten after 5 weeks? And is this the latest staples with the most stitching? Looking at the picture it looks as though there is still a lot of staple on the sides for the bees to rub over, would this be one of your most eaten staples?
×
×
  • Create New...