Jump to content

ApiNZ Science & Research

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Seller statistics

  • 0
  • 0
  • 0

Community Reputation

65 Excellent


About ApiNZ Science & Research

  • Rank


  • DECA Holder
  • Beekeeping Experience
    Bee Research


  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Fair enough comment @Bushy that it is not just research involved with the levy . . . but as the letter was written by the chair of the science group (and former president of NBA), I think its equally fair that it focused on that aspect. It is also from someone - like you - who can put this in a wider historical context ie was around when the last levy came in and then disappeared
  2. And here's the article - couldn't get the image to upload properly. https://gallery.mailchimp.com/dfc9bc102b10a4fca45b59bc8/files/0f25be82-cb96-4a57-a5af-bf9403c24d1f/Barry_Foster_letter_to_editor_FINAL.pdf
  3. The attached article was written by Barry Foster (BF on these posts and also char of the ApiNZ Science & Research group). An interesting comment on the timing of the last levy. And if you don't like the article, well then I've attached the Gisborne Herald crossword for you. . . [JM]
  4. if you have a look at the ApiNZ levy page https://apinz.org.nz/levy/ - it summarises the findings from the consultations down the lefthand side . . and on the right hand side is the timeline. voting starts at the beginning of Feb - and on March 1st. The results will be known within a couple of weeks. It is worth re-reading the proposal since there are changes to it, based on the consultation meetings [JM]
  5. Quite a different species John. . .but most of the parasitism caused by varroa pre-2000 was ascribed to V. jacobsoni - rather than the actual culprit V. destructor: the varroa that we all know and lov . .hate. Ironically the work to sort out the naming confusion was done by Dennis Anderson in Australia. As noted by another member of the science group, there are also reports now of V. jacobsoni jumping on A. mellifera (just to add to the story) [JM]
  6. Not quite David. Varroa destructor is not a mutation from V. jabobsoni . . . . it is a separate species that has always existed but until relatively recently, wasn't distinguished from V. jacobsoni (a bit like Nosema apis and ceranae) [JM]
  7. OA has only recently been added to this list - as in . . .a month ago ! So yes, game on for dribble, vaporisation . . and staples. Thymol also on the list [JM]
  8. The expert in our group is @Don Mac on these. I believe that only oxalic dribble is available under the ACVM (ie vapourisation is not) but the act allows 'own use' of these products. However what goes on the harvest declaration, by way of varroa treatments administered? As varroa is the number 1 issue rated by beekeepers, the group is keen to help progress this - hence Don's chemical and registration expertise [JM]
  9. The Honey Marketing Board was disestablished many years ago - but in the proposed commodity levy the given splits are 10% for advocacy and 3% for market access. - with another 3% for product benefits. Could all 16% come under marketing/alternative honeys? This might represent $300,000 per year. Apologies for those that don't want the levy mentioned. As you were . . . [JM]
  10. Happy 2019 all. At last year's ApiNZ conference, the science sessions were presented in a different manner . . . . as 'lightning talks' where talks were 10 minutes long. This allowed a wide number of topics to be presented and results shown - albeit briefly. So for those that went to conference last year (2018), can you provide a little feedback as to whether this was a useful format? Longer talks and fewer? Your thoughts would be much appreciated [JM]
  11. The pathogens part features rather prominently @frazzledfozzle - esp if you take viruses/nosemas and AFB together Thanks for the great work @Pike . Very interesting reading. There is substantial (but yes, not industry-funded) work going on in these pathogen areas currently, with room for more work in future [JM]
  12. Specific has already recently been asked - I was just asking it in a more offhand way for research ideas and what others might think they're worth (by how far they'd reach down into their pocket). But for those that want to see the specific research ideas in play currently, please check out NZ Bee Research Priorities Survey by @Pike at Landcare Research (and also a member of the Api NZ Science & Research group) [JM]
  13. Sadly, Dennis is correct. And that refers to an earlier post I made where BF (Barry Foster) was going around various commercial groups trying to raise money for various projects. Barry was successful in raising some funds but not to the extent where co-funding could kick in and make the project happen. One exception is the Giant Willow Aphid project where a phenomenal amount of work went into raising funds to get this work done under SFF. This has allowed the importation of a parasitoid wasp that may help control this pest. So as a non-binding (?) poll, who would kick in X amount for Y aspect of research ? [JM]
  14. The breakdown of the levy is here Daley: https://apinz.org.nz/proposed-levy-investment-programme/ The admin portion of that is due to the current subscriptions to ApiNZ will end ie its not the current ApiNZ subscription *and* levy. I believe this portion is 10% but please confirm this at the meetings A number of suggestions as to who and what might be levied have been raised. The downside to all these worthwhile considerations is that the costs to administer for these would likely rise, thus possibly negating the industry use of the additional money [JM]
  15. Folks, we are the science & research group. We are focused on that - period. The inner machinations of Api NZ membership etc you are welcome to raise at the meetings or in emails to ApiNZ If you wish to attack our (unpaid, voluntary) group( @Ali and others) with an aggressive accusations as to our intent then we can refer you to @Trevor Gillbanks reply above. As our group has stated, we do have the vested interest in that 40% of levy funds raised would go to science and research - potentially accelerating much of the research out there now and also generating new research required by industry. Oh, and should it pass and everyone is now a member of ApiNZ and you want to scream long and loud? You can simply opt out of being a member. I would guess you would also lose any say though . . . [JM]
  • Create New...