Jump to content

JohnF

Members
  • Content Count

    700
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Seller statistics

  • 0
  • 0
  • 0

JohnF last won the day on August 4 2015

JohnF had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

545 Excellent

About JohnF

  • Rank
    House Bee

Converted

  • Business name
    dnature diagnostics & research Ltd
  • DECA Holder
    Yes
  • Beekeeping Experience
    Bee Research
  • Twitter
    dnatured

Location

  • Location
    Gisborne

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Keith, that underlined quote is from me. It is an explanation to Grant . . .but it was not referring to you, if you read my comments re: trolling through this thread
  2. Yes. Keith's posts were answering or expressing a viewpoint to questions . .. not asking the same already-answered questions and yet not providing own examples or viewpoints.
  3. . . but then they came back to you to see if all your hives had gone queenless too John ? Not really something to joke about I guess - but I think a definition of a corporate would have to be more objective. More than 5,000 hives and Managing director did not found the business or not a descendant of founder and less than 50 years old and 3 instances where shown not to be following ApiNZ code of conduct, is it called? . . .for example
  4. Ooh, you're not going to like it when I start accusing another of trolling then @Grant ! But I will be interested in your views reading the thread. I may or may not agree with them but I will be interested in them
  5. JohnF

    Tutu

    Damn money-grubbing scientists ! Why they couldn't . .couldn't . .*cough*, *spasm* *vomit . . . But yes, surely most hobbiests must eat more than a few teaspoons during extraction?
  6. JohnF

    Tutu

    Different view as hobbiest vs commercials perhaps (says the guy sitting with some honey samples to send off for tutin testing). I heard of some samples over the limit - and harvested about Jan 2nd ! (tested at 1.2 . . limit 0.7) Last year it was very dry here - and reduced yield . . . which I felt was increased risk so I got honey tested. This year I'm a bit late to take honey off so yes, will get honey tested as well. Compositing only a couple of samples (rather than all of them) by rough location
  7. Something else to consider . . . who is typically buying the honey from smaller operations? Plenty of people talk of selling their honey to Arataki or Comvita or other corporate companies. So should it be divided into corporate beekeeping and corporate packing ? I guess along the lines of what Comvita have done recently. Of course if you're a smaller operation packing and selling all your own honey and have no business partnership with larger companies - great.
  8. Sure guys - but sorry to repeat it again: https://www.nzbees.net/forums/topic/12282-are-you-a-member-of-apinz/?do=findComment&comment=210872 (part way through) I am a hobbiest. Re: levy funds and being a researcher. As stated before also, there is a conflict of interest there as I'm a member of the ApiNZ Science & Research group (no financial remuneration, in fact its hours of expense instead - even more for others in the group) Our lab has used money generated from our commercial bee pathogen testing (plus other funds) to fund various R&D into things such as varroa resistance to flumethrins, AFB detection and other work. None of it funded by those that would potentially benefit ie all beekeepers. Again, repeating from previous posts but fair enough, you asked again Frazz.
  9. A very good post @Daley A couple of things its raises with me - I am not attacking anyone for having an opinion. What I do not like is repeated asking of the same questions that have been repeatedly answered. To keep asking the same questions is to try and tie up peoples' time to keep answering the same questions. This (to me) is trolling. If Ali will indeed be a levy payer or otherwise be involved with the levy, and will explain considered views (as I believe I have done, Keith has done, Trevor for SNI has done . . . and now you have done) then I will apologise for any offence taken. But one apology is to @Sailabee I think, who was the only one who answered about the Cororapa question I posed. Your comment about the nosemas and lotmaria from @TammyW's work Daley made me realise I never followed on (research benefit for those that want to skip to next post) So some of the most practical and useful research that I've seen in a long time is from Plant and Food on this nosema issue, together with a member of (dare I say it . .OK then) @ApiNZ Science & Research who's a commercial beekeeper. Many will have heard it - some may not have - : the comb sterilisation method. But more recent data shows the benefits in honey production - a 15% increase. (Yes, I know that many are struggling to sell honey currently) but in previous years that might have been 15% HONEY INCREASE ! I fully agree with the corollary to your statement - research paid for by beekeepers must be helpful and have practical application. And that's why the 15% honey increase sticks in my mind. One of the purposes of the levy when first proposed was to help build a sustainable industry - sustainable through the period of growth eg marketing, research, product benefits etc. It could be argued then, are we too late? But if not now, when? When honey production is higher, levies are higher as a result and people don't want to part with higher dollars? It seems it's like the whole consultation/voting 'best time' for beekeepers . . . . . there is no best time. There is only now. Just vote
  10. Haters gonna hate Dave . . . . and trolls are gonna troll. However i dont think the “you are now perpetuating lies and mis-truths” is fair . . . ie, at least the word ‘now’ - as I pinged AliNZ on that quite some time ago and reiterated it a few days ago.
  11. Can you elaborate on the issues Trevor?
  12. Yes, but constantly asking the same ‘asked-and-answered-questions’ and twisting words is just trolling to provoke No, fair’s fair @Frederick - Trevor did announce his intentions ( and that of SNI) a while back.
  13. I am involved with the research aspects Ali - I have provided plenty of answers, not only to the benefits of research to an industry but to the apiculture industry itself. What have you done for the industry? No, not playing your game Ali. In short, you’re a troll.: provoking response just to say ‘ won’t work, don’t trust you’, ad nauseum. Read the levy documents or re-read the threads and you’ll see all the answers. Just checking your list again and . . . yep, . . .all of them. And keep a sense of humour as well AliNZ - look forward to something constructive.
  14. Ah, so you *do* blame ApiNZ for the falling honey prices Ali 😉 if I bring up your negative, repetitive and regurgitated comments then you’re going to feel I’m : . . which is sincerely not my intention. So so what is your answer Ali? How would you raise a fairly spread sum of money to benefit the industry and what would you do with it? we know you don’t want ApiNZ . . . so let’s hear from AliNZ instead. Go for it.
  15. JohnF

    Manuka fail

    My understanding is that the borders were very close to shutting to manuka honey - rather than China asking. This applies to both the China and UK borders with the UK alone importing 3 times more 'manuka' than NZ had hives for Yes, a number of their leptospermum species (e.g. jellybush) have considerably higher levels of the 'active' markers than our NZ manuka. They also have higher levels of leptosperin, I don't know about lepteridine? Their standard is based on DHA and MGO to date ie easily adulterated No. The NZ standard has to eliminate Australian honey because a standard similar to their's (and our old standard) could mean NZ gets swept by a flood of Australian active honey. . .or fraudulently labelled as NZ manuka. If the honey is labelled as NZ manuka and passes a DHA/MGO test (as a standard) then very few might look further to ascertain whether actually NZ L. scoparium honey.
×