Beemaster's International Beekeeping Forum

BEEKEEPING LEARNING CENTER => GENERAL BEEKEEPING - MAIN POSTING FORUM. => Topic started by: BjornBee on December 30, 2010, 03:42:06 pm

Title: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: BjornBee on December 30, 2010, 03:42:06 pm
I wrote up two new ramblings over some downtime the past couple weeks.

I wanted them to kick off the 2011 bee season, but added them a few days early.

Hope you enjoy.....

http://www.bjornapiaries.com/beekramblings2011.html (http://www.bjornapiaries.com/beekramblings2011.html)

Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: buzzbee on December 30, 2010, 09:02:04 pm
I do have to agree that the small backyard beekeeper is better known to the community than the big commercial guys in most instances..
I would be most willing to wager if someone has met a beekeeper face to face,it was most likely to be a smaller keeper from the local area. And this is the "face " of beekeeping.
 Good rant and observations,and Tew is spot on on this point.
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: BjornBee on December 31, 2010, 06:56:21 pm
Thank you Buzzbee. Glad you liked it.  ;)
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: backyard warrior on December 31, 2010, 08:26:22 pm
So is it me that you are talking about in your ramblings MIke about being younger, more educated and leader in the making  :-D
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: Yuleluder on December 31, 2010, 11:25:59 pm
Where was the younger, stronger, better looking beekeeper comment?  Good stuff Mike! 8-)
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: Acebird on January 01, 2011, 04:46:51 pm
bjorn, Mike or who ever you are, which out of the three groups are you in.

Just curious...
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: BjornBee on January 01, 2011, 08:15:31 pm
bjorn, Mike or who ever you are, which out of the three groups are you in.

Just curious...

I align myself with the hobbyist beekeepers.
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: Acebird on January 01, 2011, 08:52:55 pm
I see that intention, but at the same time you start a spam post that lures readers to your website which has commercial intentions within.  Anyone that is familiar with apple orchards knows full well the pesticides and chemicals that those trees are bombarded with.  Apple blossoms are very short lived and many bees that visit them are too.

I do feel you have an awful lot to offer for the bee community but I will have reservations on what you say when you point fingers at the other groups when low and behold you are clearly involved in at least two of them.
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: BjornBee on January 01, 2011, 09:21:54 pm
I see that intention, but at the same time you start a spam post that lures readers to your website which has commercial intentions within.  Anyone that is familiar with apple orchards knows full well the pesticides and chemicals that those trees are bombarded with.  Apple blossoms are very short lived and many bees that visit them are too.

I do feel you have an awful lot to offer for the bee community but I will have reservations on what you say when you point fingers at the other groups when low and behold you are clearly involved in at least two of them.


Acebird,
I could care less what you think. Hold any reservations you want.

A spam post...with commercial intentions... :lau:  You don't even know who you speak too. I could care less about ANYBODY from this forum ordering from me. There.....is that clear enough for you.

I don't even know what your talking about. Apples, pesticides, finger pointing???? You asked a question. I answered. And you come back and judge me on nonsense. Pure crap!  

You have a really unique way of ticking people off, and are really hard to chat with. Good luck with the others.

Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: BjornBee on January 01, 2011, 09:22:53 pm
Where was the younger, stronger, better looking beekeeper comment?  Good stuff Mike! 8-)

You know I'm bashful about talking about myself.....  :-D
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: hardwood on January 01, 2011, 09:26:09 pm
Amen

Scott
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: D Coates on January 03, 2011, 05:56:20 pm
Bjorn,

Love the website, added it to my favorites so I can catch further ramblings.


Acebird,

Seriously, I'll say it again, try not doing that.  As a beekeeper you should fully know you'll get further with honey than vinegar.  There is so much to learn here without the axe-grinding, finger-pointing, and dead-horse kicking that changes no ones mind but lessens the enjoyment and open discussions on Beemasters.  It's very unpleasant and I am honestly hesitant to read posts you've commented on as I don't enjoy the soapbox drama that invariably seems to follow.  I could ignore posts like this but then it's only encouraged because no one stands up to it.
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: Yuleluder on January 03, 2011, 07:06:13 pm

Seriously, I'll say it again, try not doing that.  As a beekeeper you should fully know you'll get further with honey than vinegar.  There is so much to learn here without the axe-grinding, finger-pointing, and dead-horse kicking that changes no ones mind but lessens the enjoyment and open discussions on Beemasters.  It's very unpleasant and I am honestly hesitant to read posts you've commented on as I don't enjoy the soapbox drama that invariably seems to follow.  I could ignore posts like this but then it's only encouraged because no one stands up to it.

I agree!  Unfortunately, it seems like there are many forum members who take this coarse.  Its kind of like the people who you see in your rear view mirror screaming and hollering because you are not going as fast as they want you too.  They act tough while in their cars, but certaintly would not act that way if face to face.  Constructive criticism is one thing, but outright trashing someone says more about the person doing the trashing then it does the person being trashed.
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: buzzbee on January 03, 2011, 07:06:37 pm
And everyone should remember,being a member here is a privilege,not a right.Behave,be nice to each other,or doors of opportunity may close.
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: BjornBee on January 03, 2011, 08:54:24 pm
Bjorn,

Love the website, added it to my favorites so I can catch further ramblings.

Thank you.
Glad you enjoyed.  ;)
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: T Beek on January 04, 2011, 10:05:50 am
excellent assesments of both issues, many thanks.

thomas
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: charmd2 on January 04, 2011, 10:10:53 am
 Ace. I would hesitate to bash on Mike to much.  He may currently be leaning to hobbiest group but if you do a little bit of research you would know he was formorly a state inspector.  He has a huge open picnic every year where people get to see his whole setup.  He. Got national honey bee day going.  

Now Mike has been known to stir a pot or to himself but like as not it is a good idea to know who you are tormenting before you poke.
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: BjornBee on January 04, 2011, 12:26:42 pm
Thank you guys for the support.

And while I know I have earned a bit of criticism by my own mannerisms, I do want others to know I do certain things for reasons. And anyone who knows me, knows marketing for sales is not one of them. I could post on 5 other forums anytime if I wanted business. Yet this is the only forum by choice I belong too.

As for my website or other perceived agendas, yes I was a state inspector. And I have been very critical of the commercial industry, in regards to chemicals and other dirty secrets. And because I have been outspoken, I have had letter writing campaigns against me, had a commercial beekeeper who happens to be on the state bee association nomination committee try to overthrow my post and refused to renominate me, as well as a host of other crap.

I started NSQBA, because I truly believe micro-breeders can be a growing benefit to the bee industry.

I started National Honey Bee Day, since I believe hobbyist beekeepers should have a stronger voice and I wanted an event not guided by commercial influence or larger national organizations that do not promote local beekeeping, local honey, or local agriculture.

I started the Pennsylvania Backyard Beekeeper Association when it became apparent there was a need for a statewide bee association catering to hobbyist beekeepers.  

While I am a larger than a "hobbyist" operation, I do not move my bees across state lines. So I am not really a commercial migratory beekeeper. I favor a non-chemical approach and have been at adds with commercial guys for years.

Yes, 99% of my customers are hobbyists, and catering to this group is a benefit. Nothing to hide there.

You want to debate a difference in beekeeping philosophy, I'm all game. But please do not suggest I step on toes and make enemies on the scale I do by my writings, for the sole benefit of making a sale. That is laughable.

One of the reasons I started PennApic was after talking with several beekeepers from Indiana, and the split they had years ago in their state association. Commercial guys dominated and controlled everything and the needs of the hobbyists were not being met. So now Indiana has the "Indiana State Beekeeping Association" and the "Indiana Beekeeping Association". Funny thing is, most agree this was the best thing to have happened. Both associations now try to "one up" the other, by providing great programs and provide increased support. And for the beekeepers in the middle, they are the ones that benefit.  

a funny thing happened when I first announced the start of NSQBA. Two rather well known people called me and asked by who's authority did I start the association. I said "huh?'. They asked if I had been advised or gotten approval from this person or that person. They stated "who was I" to start a queen association without approval from a few mentioned "academia" type bee people.

It's this kind of elitist attitude I despise.

So yes, if your asking who I consider myself connected too.....it is the hobbyist beekeeper. And my articles hold nothing back when it comes to being critical of the other groups.

I have spend thousands, working towards grassroots associations that cater to hobbyists. They are the ones that are my customers, contacts, and friends. And I would never have it any other way. As I said on my website, they are the industry in my eyes.

I hope by mentioning some of my own story and past, others will be motivated to make changes in their own world of influence. You don't need anyone's approval. You just need to stand up and do it.
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: Acebird on January 04, 2011, 12:45:15 pm
 
Quote
Ace. I would hesitate to bash on Mike to much. 


See here is the problem, I didn't bash him.  All I said was that I (me,myself and I) have reservations on what he may say because I do see he has had his hand in more than one of the three groups.  I acknowledged that he has a lot to offer.  That seemed to get brushed over.

So now I am labeled as the bad guy.  So be it.
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: charmd2 on January 04, 2011, 04:28:05 pm
Ace.  Didn't mean to label you a bad guy at all.  Seriously.  You made a statement i personally refuted.  Not on the basis of what he (Mike) is or is not.  The lines between hobbiest sideliner and commercial are constantly blurred.  And for several years I have lurked reading Mike's posts on different forums where he irks the "commercial powers" by stating the truth as to what goes on behind the scenes. 

I may not always agree with what he says but his positive actions have helped the hobbiest more than I could even guess.  I just opted to defend him because I have followed him by his posts long enough to understand it wasn't a plea for customers.   Once again sorry for making you feel like a bad guy.  I am sure you weren't the only one with questions on it.  Just the one vocal enough to comment.  :-)
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: ziffabeek on January 04, 2011, 04:35:51 pm
Quote
See here is the problem, I didn't bash him.

This is disingenuous.  I think on any forum or anywhere on the internet the phrase
Quote
a spam post that lures readers to your website
would be considered derogatory.  

Acebird - If you do not wish to put credence in something someone says, that is fine. But making that statement after implying someone is being less than honest is bashing, at least in my book.  Maybe not flaming, but still  fairly aggressive and challenging.  The "just my opinion" defense does not fly with me when delivered in such a way.    

Forums are not necessarily a place for stream of consciousness writing.  There should always be a filter, and sometimes keeping some thoughts to oneself is the best course.  

Just my (filtered) thoughts.

love,
ziffa
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: Jim134 on January 04, 2011, 05:11:11 pm
I wrote up two new ramblings over some downtime the past couple weeks.

I wanted them to kick off the 2011 bee season, but added them a few days early.

Hope you enjoy.....

http://www.bjornapiaries.com/beekramblings2011.html (http://www.bjornapiaries.com/beekramblings2011.html)



Good rant and observations many thanks to you.


   BEE HAPPY Jim 134   :)

Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: oliver on January 04, 2011, 05:43:26 pm
Enjoyed the post and website, keep up the good work..
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: D Coates on January 04, 2011, 06:58:58 pm
So now I am labeled as the bad guy.  So be it.

Come on now.  You brag in another post how (I'm paraphrasing) you will not stop spouting your mind not matter who it annoys.  Yet, you seem surprised when you get called on the carpet but then passive aggressively respond with the above quote.  It's like nothings been learned and if this is the case it will invariably be repeated.  This post was a link to light hearted enjoyable rant that's been tainted bitter.  I have nothing against you personally but please be considerate of your posts in the future. 
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: Acebird on January 04, 2011, 08:31:06 pm
Quote
Just the one vocal enough to comment.

Trust me, I agree with a lot about what he says.  But that won't stop me from point out something that looks fishy.
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: buzzbee on January 04, 2011, 08:57:43 pm
If you can't be polite with your disagreements,you will have to do them elsewhere. We have a set of bylaws here that should be read by every member if they have not done so. it is at the very top of the forum.here is a link in case anyone has trouble finding it.
http://forum.beemaster.com/index.php/topic,19652.0.html (http://forum.beemaster.com/index.php/topic,19652.0.html)
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: rdy-b on January 05, 2011, 01:56:49 am
  Nice read*-thank-you*-and also i have been reading about some changes to the term Hobbyist

>The ABF elevated "hobbyist" to "small scale" which brings a little more dedication to the table.  Another great improvement.<
 

>Actually, the reason behind the name change is politically correct, if you
will.  The gummit does not support hobbies, whereas "small scale" beekeepers
are more apt to get a legislative ear.<

so it is "small scale" "sideliner" "serious sidliner" " commercial"   :) RDY-B
 and perhaps add *recreational* to the list
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: cam on January 05, 2011, 07:27:10 am
As a hobbyist who is moving to side-liner status,  I agree with much of Mike's posts. And I note that the larger I get the less "welcome" I am at local beekeeping meetings, which is sad. I think the disconnect between us is a big mistake because we are all connected by the bees. As I try to streamline my operation and use some treatments to fight mites and virus, the criticism mounts. Seems like we have to be "pure" to be accepted.
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: Scadsobees on January 05, 2011, 10:05:05 am
As a hobbyist who is moving to side-liner status,  I agree with much of Mike's posts. And I note that the larger I get the less "welcome" I am at local beekeeping meetings, which is sad. I think the disconnect between us is a big mistake because we are all connected by the bees. As I try to streamline my operation and use some treatments to fight mites and virus, the criticism mounts. Seems like we have to be "pure" to be accepted.

And there's plenty of that here too.

Our club is populated by a lot of old timers (although that's changing), and I cringe at the advice to some of the newbees to faithfully apply the antibiotics every year and the apistan.  We still have a member that kills off his bees every year (to avoid medicating).  But we do have plenty of minimum treatment types too.

But in reality, the big, middle, and hobby beeks all have bees, but need to do things very differently.  Hopefully those difference don't cause unwelcome-ness, though.

Rick
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: schawee on January 05, 2011, 11:12:26 am
bjorn,great post,very informative website.  thanks    ...schawee
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: Acebird on January 05, 2011, 03:17:10 pm
Quote
I think the disconnect between us is a big mistake because we are all connected by the bees.

There is no disconnect.  The more your hobby becomes a business the more you worry about your own bees and less about everyone elses.  Ok, not always but in general.
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: BjornBee on January 05, 2011, 03:35:05 pm
As a hobbyist who is moving to side-liner status,  I agree with much of Mike's posts. And I note that the larger I get the less "welcome" I am at local beekeeping meetings, which is sad. I think the disconnect between us is a big mistake because we are all connected by the bees. As I try to streamline my operation and use some treatments to fight mites and virus, the criticism mounts. Seems like we have to be "pure" to be accepted.

I agree cam. And I think the reasons are many. And I think it comes from both ends of the spectrum. On one hand, I've had larger operation beekeepers tell me that my 10+ years of experience in bees in nothing as I'm still pissin water I drank from before I started bees. On the other, I think that some beekeepers see a more successful beekeeper come along and they are left with only dreaming about building a bee business they could never start for whatever reason. The bee industry certainly is not void of greed, envy, ego, jealousy, etc. It's just like any other industry.

I think the key is too deal with the 90% of the good folks in beekeeping. And don't sweat the 10% that try make your life miserable. I found out long ago that you will kill yourself over the 10%. And even when you do everything to win over the 10%, it will not be enough. They will still denigrate and try to tear you down. I don't sweat the 10% anymore.

Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: T Beek on January 05, 2011, 04:13:22 pm
Man, although I agree w/ you BjornBee, its soooo hard to ignore that 10% since they're usually the loudest (figuratively and literally) in most settings.  But we gotta keep on trying or it'll drive ya nuts :-D

thomas
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: Scadsobees on January 05, 2011, 04:30:28 pm
The bee industry certainly is not void of greed, envy, ego, jealousy, etc. It's just like any other industry.

This is interesting...along the lines of the cam's comment about "pure"ity.  I think there are many people in the hobby that think that beekeeping is charity work because we're doing nature a good deed by keeping bees.  While there are good aspects to keeping bees, and while we can help out the industry or hobby by spreading information about bees, the bottom line is that we're all still humans.  Bees don't make us any more or less human than anything else does.

We're all in it for ourselves at base level.  I do it because I enjoy it.  If my life and money depend on it I'm going to do whatever I need to to protect it.  If I had 10,000 hives (or even 50) I'd be doing things far far different than my current 10.

We're all connected by bees, but that doesn't mean we do things even remotely similar.  I think that there comes a time when a beekeepers association needs to be seperate for hobby beeks and for commercial beeks.  I think it was great for bjorn to start another group for different people, they do things a different way.  It is about recognizing differences and acting appropriately instead of letting those differences destroy.

Although I'm still trying to kill myself over bjorn's 10% difference... :-D
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: T Beek on January 05, 2011, 04:43:22 pm
That bring up the question many have been asking lately:  What if humans just stopped keeping bees?  Would they eventually do just fine and proliferate around the world on their own?  Or would they return to the places they are most suitable for their own survival.

I mean, would honeybees even try to live in Northern climates if humans didn't force them to?

I've seen this discussed other places, but it always deteriated.  Still a relavent question non-the-less and since scads brought it up kinda :)

thomas
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: Acebird on January 05, 2011, 04:51:20 pm
Quote
I think that there comes a time when a beekeepers association needs to be seperate for hobby beeks and for commercial beeks.

I agree with your first statement but what does an association do that would warrent the separation?
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: Acebird on January 05, 2011, 05:20:19 pm
Quote
I mean, would honeybees even try to live in Northern climates if humans didn't force them to?

They would do fine if we would stop poisoning their environment.  There were brought here but they are not forced to stay.
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: Scadsobees on January 05, 2011, 05:22:08 pm
That bring up the question many have been asking lately:  What if humans just stopped keeping bees?  Would they eventually do just fine and proliferate around the world on their own?  Or would they return to the places they are most suitable for their own survival.

I mean, would honeybees even try to live in Northern climates if humans didn't force them to?

I've seen this discussed other places, but it always deteriated.  Still a relavent question non-the-less and since scads brought it up kinda :)

thomas

What do you mean by "northern"?  They survive up here in trees and houses without us.   There just wouldn't be near as many IMO.  They just run into trouble when we spread pests around.  But then again in theory we spread the bees around in the first place, so... :idunno:
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: AllenF on January 05, 2011, 05:27:59 pm
I believe that if us humans quit keeping bees that only 0.001% of the bees outside of the range of AHB would survive to a 5 year period.   AHB swarm and move too much for pests to do much harm to the hive.
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: Scadsobees on January 05, 2011, 05:31:22 pm
I agree with your first statement but what does an association do that would warrent the separation?

If you are a commercial beek and the discussions are all about how to care for a hive and what to do with wax, or if you are a hobby beek and the discussions are about trucking hives, pollination, and types of 80 frame extractors, and you aren't given any say in the topics but have a strong opinion about it, then start a new association.
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: Acebird on January 05, 2011, 05:39:30 pm
Quote
There just wouldn't be near as many IMO.


I don't believe that for one minute.  Food source has to have something to do with their survival.  If you stop tearing down the forest, and stop filling in wet lands, and stop planting corn the bees would thrive.  The more we wreck their habitat the less there will be of them no matter how many boxes we build and how many pounds of sweater we feed them.
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: hardwood on January 05, 2011, 05:48:27 pm
Kinda the same as Farmers assn and garden clubs.

Scott
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: Acebird on January 05, 2011, 05:49:59 pm
Quote
then start a new association.

I could be wrong, but it seems to me if you start a new association you are going to have a smaller group who agree on their ideals but have little say.  My vote is to have one association but you duke it out with the big guys.  You have to keep an ear and and an eye to what they are doing because it could affect you.
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: T Beek on January 05, 2011, 07:20:53 pm
I believe that if us humans quit keeping bees that only 0.001% of the bees outside of the range of AHB would survive to a 5 year period.   AHB swarm and move too much for pests to do much harm to the hive.

that's about what I'd expect as well AllenF.  its humans who proliferate the honeybee, the sick ones and the not so sick for all kinds of reasons.

I'd expect those ferrels that currently winter over in "Northern" climes would eventually die out without local beeks assisting with the genetic pool every year :)

thomas
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: BjornBee on January 05, 2011, 08:14:43 pm
I believe that if us humans quit keeping bees that only 0.001% of the bees outside of the range of AHB would survive to a 5 year period.   AHB swarm and move too much for pests to do much harm to the hive.

that's about what I'd expect as well AllenF.  its humans who proliferate the honeybee, the sick ones and the not so sick for all kinds of reasons.

I'd expect those ferrels that currently winter over in "Northern" climes would eventually die out without local beeks assisting with the genetic pool every year :)

thomas

I agree.

I took part in a three year study of feral bees. One clear thing was seen. the further you got from what some claim as "destruction"...that being farmland and other urban areas, the fewer and fewer bees there were. fact is, deep forest and areas void of human intervention, just does not produce much for bees to survive. After the trees bloom in forest there just isn't much the rest of the year. And while you may get a scattering of one plant or another, you would not get near anything like weeds and meadow plants you get when fields and other areas are left behind after human use.

I think bees would survive in warmer climates just fine. Most bees are from very temperate areas. In colder regions, I think you may have some, but nothing what we have today in the wild. I've said it before, if you circle a 10 mile radius around every beeyard in Pennsylvania (or any state), there would be few areas where bees are not being influenced, impacted, and perpetuated by beekeepers and issued swarms.

BTW...not much remains from a genetic pool after AHBs move into an area. While non-AFB bees may provide a wide range of genetics, AFB dominates and pushes out all other genetic material. We may of lost a great variation of  genetics from survivor bees being lost to the spread of AHBs. Those genetic variations lost could of been the answer to problems down the road.
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: BjornBee on January 06, 2011, 09:09:31 am
I agree with your first statement but what does an association do that would warrent the separation?

If you are a commercial beek and the discussions are all about how to care for a hive and what to do with wax, or if you are a hobby beek and the discussions are about trucking hives, pollination, and types of 80 frame extractors, and you aren't given any say in the topics but have a strong opinion about it, then start a new association.

Here, here!  :cheer:

There is nothing wrong with any new association. Each can offer different things, different approaches, and different opportunities for the beekeepers. Just as having more than one store to shop, or one business to offer a service, the consumer (this case...the beekeeper) can select, support, and join, the association of their choice.

Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: Acebird on January 06, 2011, 09:38:31 am
Quote
the consumer (this case...the beekeeper) can select, support, and join, the association of their choice.

I thought an association was a collective group (meeting of the minds so to speak) that would act on the behalf of all.  If it is not, how does it differ from any normal club?  If you break up into smaller specialized groups you will be happy with yourselves but you will be powerless to affect the whole.
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: D Coates on January 06, 2011, 12:36:24 pm
An Association is a fancy name for club in my definition.  When a club or association becomes to large of diverse to act on the behalf of all it splits much like a swarm.  A bunch of hobbyists they can't speak effectively for commercial and visa versa.  Duking it out isn't an option as an agreement will not be reached.  I'm not afraid of conflict but having to listen to some newbee with a hive preach to me on what I'm doing wrong is simply not going to end well.  Likeminded individuals form an association of their own to perpetuate their similar ideas/ideals.  It's also a great way to reduce the 10%.
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: Scadsobees on January 06, 2011, 01:43:59 pm

I thought an association was a collective group (meeting of the minds so to speak) that would act on the behalf of all.  If it is not, how does it differ from any normal club?  If you break up into smaller specialized groups you will be happy with yourselves but you will be powerless to affect the whole.

I think an association and club, association and board, are sometimes interchangeable.

There are boards that are mandatory if you want to sell stuff (there's a cattle board, milk board, some have proposed a honey board) and speak for everybody even if you disagree and you still are forced to pay.  There are homeowner's associates which you must join when moving into certain neighborhoods.

There are american cancer, american diabetes, and national rifle associations which are voluntary but have grown so they can have a large affect.  But you are welcome to set up similar associations.

The way things are done in the honey hobby versus in the honey industry (defined here as those who's lively hood depends on it and have more than a few hundred hives)  are so different that a) I don't want the industry affecting my hobby and b) I don't think my hobby has any right affecting the industry.
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: VolunteerK9 on January 06, 2011, 02:19:20 pm




The way things are done in the honey hobby versus in the honey industry (defined here as those who's lively hood depends on it and have more than a few hundred hives)  are so different that a) I don't want the industry affecting my hobby and b) I don't think my hobby has any right affecting the industry.

I agree with you, but how can the industry not affect my hobby when the industry has the largest voice?
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: D Coates on January 06, 2011, 03:10:46 pm
It undoubtedly will.  But if your livelyhood was being made with bees what would you think of hobbyists trying to affect your business?  Fare is only in the dictionary, the bigger you are you louder your voice.  I've got only +5 years under my belt, +/- 15 hives, but I know my place in the big picture.
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: HomeBru on January 06, 2011, 03:23:03 pm
Bjorn, do you know which club in Indiana became which group? I went to meetings of both groups last year and they were both pretty heavy on production and making $$$. I wasn't really impressed with either, they took my money, I didn't win the drawing and watched them open up a nuc then everyone sat in small groups just like middle school. Not sure what I expected, but I wasn't really impressed.
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: VolunteerK9 on January 06, 2011, 03:24:16 pm
It undoubtedly will.  But if your livelyhood was being made with bees what would you think of hobbyists trying to affect your business?  Fare is only in the dictionary, the bigger you are you louder your voice.  I've got only +5 years under my belt, +/- 15 hives, but I know my place in the big picture.


Yup, if this was my career (hope it will be +/- 12 years when I retire), then my attitude would be different. When something is your bread and butter, you take things far more seriously than as a hobby. We used to have Reserve Police officers before they done away with the program. (gladly so) Reserve officers would get you in far more crap than your daily partner. They had a different look on things because it wasnt their primary source of income.
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: T Beek on January 06, 2011, 04:00:19 pm
We can have fragmented parts (individuals, clubs and associations) as needed and a giant whole (Unions and federations) when neccessary. 

Although much of the history has been distorted or completely AWOL from text books we should never forgot the power of unionizing (just gotta keep the Chamber of Commerce out of the meetings somehow :-D)

thomas
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: BjornBee on January 06, 2011, 04:46:57 pm
Bjorn, do you know which club in Indiana became which group? I went to meetings of both groups last year and they were both pretty heavy on production and making $$$. I wasn't really impressed with either, they took my money, I didn't win the drawing and watched them open up a nuc then everyone sat in small groups just like middle school. Not sure what I expected, but I wasn't really impressed.

I am very certain that the association using the designation "State" was the first. There can only be one official "state" organization. That is why the other association just simply dropped the term.

I am sorry to hear that about the associations. And I hope you voice your concern. It is almost automatic for some to assume the state associations should ignore the backyard beekeepers, leaving it to the local or county associations to do their bidding. But I am sure most state associations are like Pennsylvania, where 98% of the state membership is comprised of hobbyists. Something a few forget. Making the separation and the alienation between the groups very evident, specially when the 2% rule the roost. It may take enough people banding together to either change the direction, or starting a new association once again. And sometimes, even a majority can not get the necessary change.

Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: Acebird on January 06, 2011, 05:23:05 pm
Quote
are so different that a) I don't want the industry affecting my hobby and b) I don't think my hobby has any right affecting the industry.

I am not so sure that can happen.

Here in the state of New York we lack a definition for "honey".  You can practically drop a teaspoon of honey in a bottle of corn syrup and call it natural honey.  We are seeking the help of the farm beauro because they already have representation in Albany.  We are hopeful something will get through.  I don't see why that would be beneficial to all groups.
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: D Coates on January 06, 2011, 06:18:03 pm
While getting the definition of "honey" on the books is a step in proper direction in my view but unless there is an organization to police it, it's kinda useless.  There are plenty of rules already on the books for just about everything and crooks and scoundrels get around them all the time.  If there's a financial incentive unscrupulous people will find a way to exploit it.  The definition does at least set the standard by which they can be held accountable if someone calls them on the carpet.
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: T Beek on January 06, 2011, 06:37:59 pm
Now that's what I call "nailin' it."  thanks D Coates

thomas
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: Yuleluder on January 06, 2011, 06:38:17 pm
fact is, deep forest and areas void of human intervention, just does not produce much for bees to survive. After the trees bloom in forest there just isn't much the rest of the year. And while you may get a scattering of one plant or another, you would not get near anything like weeds and meadow plants you get when fields and other areas are left behind after human use.

You describe an area very similar to where my bees are placed.  The flow is very strong from mid April to early June and then there isn't anything.  I've positioned my hives around a forested park in montogomery county where there are thousands of tulip poplars.  I tell all the new beeks in the area to keep a good eye on their bees in July because the stores can be consumed quickly and they will starve.  There is aster and golden rod along the roads and in open fields in the fall, however it does not produce nearly as much nectar as it does pollen. Any colony that completely shuts down brood rearing during the dearth will not be strong enough to gather the limited fall nectar.  I do have colonies who put up 4 and 5 deeps worth of bees and honey by mid June.  I usually harvest 1 or two deeps and leave the other two or three. They do not need any feed come fall.  I think there would probably be some areas of a forest where bees could survive.  The forest would have to have the right type of nectar producing trees and shrubs along with well adapted bees.

What types of trees dominated the forests you were testing in?  






Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: Acebird on January 06, 2011, 07:09:36 pm
Quote
The definition does at least set the standard by which they can be held accountable if someone calls them on the carpet.

That is right.  You have to start with something.  You can't police a law that doesn't exist.
I lot has to do with the consumer.  If there is no definition of honey then you can't get the consumer involved.  the consumer can be the police force.  But you have to have a standard even if it isn't perfect.
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: skatesailor on January 06, 2011, 08:10:02 pm

 

>Actually, the reason behind the name change is politically correct, if you
will.  The gummit does not support hobbies, whereas "small scale" beekeepers
are more apt to get a legislative ear.<

It's probably more about the gov not TAXING hobbies but they do tax small scale ops. I just finished filling out my ag census and bees were included.
Interesting rant Bjorn.
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: BjornBee on January 07, 2011, 07:35:14 am

 

>Actually, the reason behind the name change is politically correct, if you
will.  The gummit does not support hobbies, whereas "small scale" beekeepers
are more apt to get a legislative ear.<

It's probably more about the gov not TAXING hobbies but they do tax small scale ops. I just finished filling out my ag census and bees were included.
Interesting rant Bjorn.

Yeah....I could see the gov one day calling a small garden an agriculture enterprise, and being taxed for the tomatoes you get from the backyard garden.

It's always baby steps.....until you just don't realize how far all those little baby steps went until too late.  :roll:
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: T Beek on January 07, 2011, 08:02:14 am
I wouldn't worry about this too much.  Our goverments steady path toward implosion is on course and I believe they'll be way to buzy to bother with gardens. ;)

thomas
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: BjornBee on January 07, 2011, 08:04:59 am
I wouldn't worry about this too much. 
thomas

That's exactly what they want you to do.....  ;)
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: T Beek on January 07, 2011, 08:10:37 am
please don't mistake my words for being unprepared or unaware. :-D

thomas
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: deknow on January 07, 2011, 10:37:11 am
Here in the state of New York we lack a definition for "honey". 

well, there are lots of ways to deal with these issues.

1.  there are now more sensitive testing for sugar adulteration (polarmetrics has a FTIR machine that will test down to 2-3% adulteration, and will test for rice syrup).

2.  there are labeling laws, and i can assure you that many selling not so pure honey are buying it in and selling it as their own (often they are unaware of this..they get sold this "honey" because the seller knows it will never get tested).
Quote
When the food is not manufactured by the person whose name appears on the label, a qualifying phrase such as “Manufactured for _________”, “Distributed by ________”, or other expression of facts, shall appear with the name.
....these beekeepers will never want to admit that they are not selling their own honey (this is true for 2 reasons...the customer wants to buy honey from "the beekeeper that produced it", and health regulations are different for packing your own honey and packing purchased honey).

3.  relying on the govt to regulate this is (imho) largely a waste of time.  we deal with these issues by educating the consumer directly.

4.  the biggest problem is how are you going to define honey (from a legal standpoint)?  many states have done this, but they have really created a problem for themselves, as if the standards are applied, virtually no commercial honey would qualify (and very little 'hobbyist' honey either).  ...so the standards are not applied, and nothing changes (see florida's standard for this).

5.  we've tested honey (both our own and honey we purchased from beekeepers and off the shelf) for sugar adulteration.  in one case, a very well respected health food store has now taken the $11/lb honey "from a local organic farm" (99% certain it is bought in from a migratory operation) off the shelf (it was 30% beet sugar), and the producer who's product was 5% adulterated was asked to please do better in the future.

6.  the hardest part of this issue is the common practice of beekeepers buying in honey (either because of a bad season, or that they have more customers than they can serve) and calling it their own.  because this is so common, and because honey sold this way is not likely to be "100% pure", almost every beekeeper is reluctant to "crack down", because this is "how things are done" and virtually everyone has bought in less than pure honey.  who is left to want to change things?

in our experience, beekeepers are keen to disparage "foreign" honey, but not so keen to look too closely at domestic honey, no matter how adulterated it is (no one wants to "hurt the industry" or other beekeepers).

deknow
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: Acebird on January 07, 2011, 11:09:44 am
Quote
...the customer wants to buy honey from "the beekeeper that produced it",


Are you kidding me?  The customer wants to buy "honey" for the lowest price.  Have you ever been to a Walmart?  Why do you think everything is produced in China now.  Where the customer is foolish is they don't know what they are buying and what happens to the price structure in the future when you no longer can produce products in your own country.

Without a standard, labeling means nothing.  That is what you have now.  Walmart will be less likely to put products on their shelves that are adulterated because when they get caught it affects their other business.  This is where an association can be effective.  Go into a store and buy a product, test it and blow the whistle.  First the standard, then the labeling, then blow the whistle.

We have the internet at our finger tips people.  Bad news travels fast.
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: deknow on January 07, 2011, 11:55:58 am
ok, what "standard of identity" for honey are you proposing?  (please be specific here...if you want "a law", let's hear what you think a good law is).

deknow
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: T Beek on January 07, 2011, 12:03:08 pm
They built a Wall-Mart a half hour away from here about 6-7 years ago in a town of 1800, been there a few times, they don't sell local honey, just some clear looking liquid with honey on the label and distributed by------------.  

During the rare times when I've had to buy honey I'll buy at the Co-Op with the beekeepers name, address and phone # listed, living about three hours away.  Sure hope they're not doing what deknow was describing.

thomas
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: D Coates on January 07, 2011, 12:20:11 pm
Are you kidding me?  The customer wants to buy "honey" for the lowest price.

Indeed you are correct.  The bulk of the population does want the lowest price.  You'll loose that battle every day.  Don't even try to keep up unless you've got money you're trying to get rid of.

However, there are customers who are willing to pay more for local honey though.  Those customers really like buying direct from the beekeeper who produced it and will pay more for better quality.  I sell mine for premium prices (went up 20% this year) and I'll still run out before the next harvest.  I lost a few customers but I gained more.  Make sure it's high quality and looks gift worthy (custom labels from Amy's Labels :)), put a face to a name and make yourself visible and locally known.  Sell varietal honey and ask what they want when they get refills just to let them know you have it and offer things they can't get elsewhere.  It starts conversations and that create relationships.  I don't even do Farmers markets (not enough time), all of my customers are word of mouth.  It takes time but you can get there.
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: deknow on January 07, 2011, 12:22:20 pm
first, the "buying in of honey" by beekeepers is ubiquitous....or do you think all the "local beekeepers" have everything figured out so that they sell all their crop yet never run out of honey?  even in a bad year?  even in a good year?

second, if you are a large producer, you know that any large buyer (packer, blender, retail chain) is going to do at least the basic tests on the honey (antibiotics and sugar adulteration).  the sugar adulteration tests test to 10% or 5% (depending on how much you spend for testing), and they don't detect rice sugar (one blender who is using the FTIR technique fond that 30% of the honey they were being offered as "pure" contained rice syrup...some samples up to 50%).

so, if you are a larger producer and have some honey from a pollination contract where the bees were fed heavily and you don't think it will pass the above tests, what do you do?  you sell this to beekeepers to sell as their own....the beekeeper is already lying to the customer ("it's from my bees") _and_ the beekeeper is totally unaware.

the customer thinks that "beekeeper honey" is better than "supermarket honey"...yet the opposite is often the case.  customers buy the "purest" honey they can find, and then find that there is nothing special about it.

there are some beekeepers that only sell their own honey, or are upfront about where it came from.

deknow
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: Acebird on January 07, 2011, 12:25:14 pm
Quote
just some clear looking liquid with honey on the label and distributed by------------. 


It might be in a bottle that looks like honey but it isn't "honey" at all.

Quote
ok, what "standard of identity" for honey are you proposing?

Do you think I am qualified to write the specification?  I don’t.  I would hope someone of your caliber could write something more meaningful.  There may be a need to qualify different aspects of honey similar to what you have with milk (skim, 1%, 2%, whole, or raw)  At least get something on the books so the Chinese cannot put cornstarch and two drops of honey in a bottle and call it “natural honey” like they are now.
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: deknow on January 07, 2011, 12:52:30 pm
Do you think I am qualified to write the specification?  I don’t.  I would hope someone of your caliber could write something more meaningful.
...i know enough about this to know that it's a complicated issue, that if you define honey (as florida has done) as only the ripened nectar collected by the bees (this is a paraphrase...you can read the whole thing below), that virtually no commercial producer's honey would qualify.  many are in favor of such a standard, but it would devistate the industry:
http://www.americanhoneyproducers.org/standards/FL%20Standard%20of%20Identity.pdf (http://www.americanhoneyproducers.org/standards/FL%20Standard%20of%20Identity.pdf)
i should also say that we have been contacted by commercial beekeepers (including at least one from New York) about this issue because we are virtually the only beekeepers willing to talk about such things...and note that we have taken actual action.

someone of my "caliber" knows that this is way more complicated than you make it out to be, yet you are insisting that it's so simple.  in order to make any progress in this issue, you need pure honey to offer...simply telling people not to buy "unpure honey" will in most cases mean "don't buy honey" unless you have pure honey to steer them towards.  ...and don't assume that the best meaning hobbyists and sideliners in your club have honey free of adulteration (when the FTIR device was being tested, the solicited samples from the local beekeeping club....what was supposed to be "pure honey" had cane or beet sugar...the manfacturer of the machine didn't know anything about beekeeping, and didn't know that hobbyist beekeepers fed routinely).

Quote
There may be a need to qualify different aspects of honey similar to what you have with milk (skim, 1%, 2%, whole, or raw)  At least get something on the books so the Chinese cannot put cornstarch and two drops of honey in a bottle and call it “natural honey” like they are now.
did you read my posts above?  we have "local" honey that is 30% beet sugar....produced and sold by red blooded americans.  but to point fingers at "the chinese" is the easy way out...it's pretending to care about the quality of the honey.

deknow
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: deknow on January 07, 2011, 12:59:59 pm
It might be in a bottle that looks like honey but it isn't "honey" at all.

we haven't tested honey from the walmart shelf, but we have spoken to a number of labs that do honey testing routinely.  the consensus is that the larger the retail chain (walmart specifically included), the less likely it will test adulterated.  they have the most to lose, they spend the most on testing, and they have the most purchasing leverage (ie, they can afford to reject a load because they buy so much).  certainly it is overheated, blended, and nothing more than a sweetener....there may even be rice syrup present (because most tests can't definitively test for rice syrup), but i bet it tests better than the "local beekeeper honey" we had tested. 

unless you have had testing done?  have access to test results?   ....or are you just going along with the bandwagon and parroting the tired tirade against chinese products?

deknow
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: Acebird on January 07, 2011, 01:31:18 pm
Quote
the less likely it will test adulterated.

I worked in the medical industry for 23 years so I am blown away by the term "test adulterated" when you don't have a standard.  You think if we put a label on your heart pills saying it was produced by Bristol Myers at plant xyz that's good enough? :?

Nothing involving regulation is simple.  I never said it was.  But for Gods sake you can't say something "tested adulterated" if you don't have a standard to test to.  That is just nuts.

Maybe what you are arguing about is what the standard should be.  I suggest it should be graduated so the commercial people can meet their standard, the puritans can meet their standards and the local beeks can do what ever they please for those that have faith in what they are doing.  You are never going to eliminate the snake oil salesman on a local basis.
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: BjornBee on January 07, 2011, 01:48:57 pm
Sorry deknow....something does not add up.

Your suggesting that the big boys are clean due to what they have to lose, and suggest it's the "local honey supply" who are peddling the Chinese stuff. By who? The local beekeepers?

Around here, it's all locally produced. And when a beekeeper needs additional honey, they go to a place such as Dutch Gold honey for a few buckets or barrels. This is one of the largest packers on the east coast. One hour they are kicking out one super markets label, and the next hour it's someone elses. And if your suggesting that the stuff they are kicking out to fill the super market shelves is clean, I would suggest the same for what they sell clubs and individuals.

Not sure where these lowly "local beekeepers" would even get their honey in your neck of the woods, but I could not even begin to know where to buy honey if needed, unless I went to a large packer such as Dutch Gold. I've never heard of anyone hawking good from the back trucks in dark alleys selling to beekeepers.

From what I understand, most of the tainted (fake) honey, never gets placed into a honey bottle. It's used in the food industry. (cereal, etc.) Making the big motive behind much of this whole pure honey crap, an issue with lost revenue with such places as the honey board who gets shorted from their assessed tax, by containers being shipped in with less than a pure product, and not being assessed, by not being pure honey.

I honestly don't think any beekeeper around here is peddling Chinese honey. Unless it's coming from the same packers you say are somewhat clean. It just does not add up.

This is the first time I've heard that the general "local honey" supply is the one as you say "parroting" of tainted honey. I don't buy that for one minute.
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: Scadsobees on January 07, 2011, 01:59:34 pm
Here in the state of New York we lack a definition for "honey". 

well, there are lots of ways to deal with these issues.

1.  there are now more sensitive testing for sugar adulteration (polarmetrics has a FTIR machine that will test down to 2-3% adulteration, and will test for rice syrup).

5.  we've tested honey (both our own and honey we purchased from beekeepers and off the shelf) for sugar adulteration.  in one case, a very well respected health food store has now taken the $11/lb honey "from a local organic farm" (99% certain it is bought in from a migratory operation) off the shelf (it was 30% beet sugar), and the producer who's product was 5% adulterated was asked to please do better in the future.

Quote
the less likely it will test adulterated.

I worked in the medical industry for 23 years so I am blown away by the term "test adulterated" when you don't have a standard.  

He was referring to his own standard of testing adulterated with sugar.  Please spend more time reading and less time typing.

In reality we have a tiny group of people pushing for regulation that will affect a lot more.  Somebody will pay, somewhere.  What you end up doing is driving up the price of honey, and then as people forget what it is and no longer use it because they've cut a non-essential from their budget, thereby eliminating a market,  and end up cutting the demand for honey.  The law of unintended consequences will bite, somewhere, somehow.  No association will pass anything like that unless they force a Honey board, then that will open up a whole new can of really ugly worms.

Bjorn, my impression is that the locals tested for beet sugar, not chinese.  This implies to me very sloppy feeding habits, unintentional more than not.

Rick
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: deknow on January 07, 2011, 02:25:10 pm
I worked in the medical industry for 23 years so I am blown away by the term "test adulterated" when you don't have a standard.  You think if we put a label on your heart pills saying it was produced by Bristol Myers at plant xyz that's good enough? :?

uhhh, honey that contains beet sugar, cane sugar, rice syrup, tapioca syrup, corn syrup (HFCS or just corn syrup) is adulterated.  it contains something other than honey.

Quote
Nothing involving regulation is simple.  I never said it was.  But for Gods sake you can't say something "tested adulterated" if you don't have a standard to test to.  That is just nuts.
this is why i think the regulation angle is a waste of time.  one can (as the NHB has tried to do) define honey as something that hasn't had anything added to it _after_ it is extracted from the comb, which of course doesn't tell us anything about what is in the honey, or even if it sugar syrup stored by the bees.
the public, on the other hand, understands that if honey has beet sugar in it, it is not pure honey.  we know what beet sugar is, we know it isn't a component of honey...so regardless of what is supposed to be in the honey, the beet sugar is an adulterant.

Quote
  I suggest it should be graduated so the commercial people can meet their standard
that's bass ackwards.  that's not a standard, that is an acceptance of the status quo.  "the commercial people" will quickly become the largest packers, importers, and co-ops (as they have the money and influence to guide the legislation), and it will be like "organic" all over again.

Quote
the puritans can meet their standards and the local beeks can do what ever they please for those that have faith in what they are doing.  You are never going to eliminate the snake oil salesman on a local basis.

what you have described is EXACTLY the status quo...except you are missing a critical link.  the "local snakeoil salesman" is also the best of intentioned local beekeeper.

deknow
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: deknow on January 07, 2011, 02:45:17 pm
Your suggesting that the big boys are clean due to what they have to lose, and suggest it's the "local honey supply" who are peddling the Chinese stuff. By who? The local beekeepers?
first, there is always a difference between "clean" and "testing clean".  lots of honey adulterated with rice syrup "tests clean".

second, i think it would be unusual to find honey that will (with the standard tests) test more than 5% (or in some cases perhaps 10%) adulterated at large retail chains.

what you posted above is not what i said.  i don't think the local beekeepers are peddling chinese honey, i think they are peddling honey they buy from larger producers, and in many cases, it is an easy way for the larger producers to get rid of subpar honey (as it will never get tested).

Quote
....if your suggesting that the stuff they are kicking out to fill the super market shelves is clean, I would suggest the same for what they sell clubs and individuals.
i can't speak for what happens at dutch gold.  i have tested honey from a beekeeper that bought in honey from a large beekeeper...15 and 20% beet sugar (one sample was from the liquid on top, one from the crystals on the bottom).   ...from an organic farm (which bought honey in from the same beekeeper)...30% beet sugar.  tested honey from the supplier's own label?  came back pure.

Quote
Not sure where these lowly "local beekeepers" would even get their honey in your neck of the woods,
...i'm not sure what is "lowly" about local beekeepers, but there is plenty of supply available (it might be extracted in Massachusetts, but it might not be produced in Massachusetts).  ...also, remember that dutch gold is a packer, not a producer, the honey that dutch gold sells has already been tested and accepted before a beekeeper can buy it from them.

Quote
From what I understand, most of the tainted (fake) honey, never gets placed into a honey bottle. It's used in the food industry. (cereal, etc.) Making the big motive behind much of this whole pure honey crap, an issue with lost revenue with such places as the honey board who gets shorted from their assessed tax, by containers being shipped in with less than a pure product, and not being assessed, by not being pure honey.
this is correct....but not all of the fake honey is chinese, and much of it is ending up in jars at health food stores.

Quote
This is the first time I've heard that the general "local honey" supply is the one as you say "parroting" of tainted honey. I don't buy that for one minute.
as i've said before, we tested a number of samples.  our honey and honey from beekeepers that we know don't feed came back pure.  honey from our bee inspector (who feeds sometimes, but is a very good beekeeper) came back pure.  2 that were supposedly local and from beekeepers were 15-20% beet sugar in one case, and 30% beet sugar in another.  one locally produced honey was 5% (and the producer said, "that sounds about right" when we told him), and the other larger localish brands were clean.

deknow
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: Acebird on January 07, 2011, 02:50:29 pm
Quote
the public, on the other hand, understands that if honey has beet sugar in it, it is not pure honey.


Who you kidding?  The public (the consumer) has no idea what honey is and what is in it because it hasn't been defined.

Your whole beef is that honey has various sugars in it?  I got blasted because I said I wouldn't feed anything but honey and now you are surprised to find various sugars in honey? :? You got a hard sell on this forum trying to eliminating sugar from honey.  Good luck with that one. 
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: deknow on January 07, 2011, 03:10:02 pm
Who you kidding?  The public (the consumer) has no idea what honey is and what is in it because it hasn't been defined.
our customers do know the difference, as do our readers and conference attendees.
Quote
...I got blasted because I said I wouldn't feed anything but honey
i didn't blast you for that...we only feed honey, and although i think it's necessary to feed in some cases, and that good honey from a known source is the best feed, i also think that in many cases feeding sugar _is_ the best option.
Quote
...and now you are surprised to find various sugars in honey? :? You got a hard sell on this forum trying to eliminating sugar from honey.  Good luck with that one.
surprised?  i was surprised to see 30% beet sugar.  ...but what you say above is exactly my point wrt to a honey standard.  _any_ standard that has no tollerance for feeds in the honey has to consider that tests become more and more sensitive, the will detect them eventually.  any standard that allows "pure honey" to have .5%, 1%, 5% "other sugars" is simply not "pure honey"...might as well define pi as "3" for simplicity.
but of course, i brought all this up not to "sell" members of the forum, but to point out how any honey standard (the thing that you want yet can't define) is both absurd ("lets define honey as something other than honey") and/or problematic.

deknow
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: AllenF on January 07, 2011, 03:11:28 pm
Back in the summer, one of the guys that work for me was bragging about the sugar free honey he bought from Kroger.   He thought he had done good in buying it.   It was imitation honey.  He just did not know.
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: BjornBee on January 07, 2011, 03:17:06 pm
Ok, I thought after glancing over the posts, that this was about foreign honey. I understand now it is about testing local beekeepers honey, and calling it snakeoil while denigrating them, for what their bees sometimes go out and collect.

For "pure" honey, you would need to.....

....never feed.
....not allow your bees to collect from anything other than flowers.

Ok, I'll stop at two. No need to go further since no beekeeper could ever guarantee their bees were not working the recycling bin with the neighbors soda cans, the farmers feed bin, the hummingbird feeder down the street, or anything else.

And if this is the reasoning and testing that will ultimately be used to condemn local beekeepers who happen to put honey on the shelves that happen to be "tainted" with certain sugars....God help us all.

Here is a beekeeper, that would never of even know of what his bees were collecting, if it were not for the red dye. His bees do what every other beekeeper's bees do. they collect from any source they want. Of course I would never outright call this beekeeper, or any beekeeper, someone peddling "snakeoil". What a nasty thing to say about beekeepers, when you have no clue probably how any sugars got into their honey.

http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2010/11/there_are_red_bees_in_red_hook.html (http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2010/11/there_are_red_bees_in_red_hook.html)

I have no doubts that this "pure" honey standard will come back and bite many in the butt in ways we can not even imagine.

This may be the unforeseen consequences of a honey law, originally put in place by folks to protect the money flow of honey assessments, but I have no doubts this will be used to harm good natured beekeepers in the future.

Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: deknow on January 07, 2011, 03:38:59 pm
And if this is the reasoning and testing that will ultimately be used to condemn local beekeepers who happen to put honey on the shelves that happen to be "tainted" with certain sugars....God help us all.
i think we can agree that if the honey is 30% beet sugar, there is a real problem?  that regardless of "intentions", this should not be on the shelf as pure honey?

Quote
Of course I would never outright call this beekeeper, or any beekeeper, someone peddling "snakeoil". What a nasty thing to say about beekeepers, when you have no clue probably how any sugars got into their honey.
what if the beekeeper is large enough scale that they are having their honey tested, and selling the rejects to the unwitting local beekeepers?  we are actually seeing this, this is not theory.

"snakeoil" was acebird's term, not mine.

no, in the case of the marachino cherries, no one was trying to pull anything off (except perhaps keep bees where there isn't adequate forage)....but should that end up in a jar called "pure honey"?  if it does and someone is allergic to cherry syrup or corn sugar, what happens?  it isn't honey, and the person selling it is ultimately responsible.

deknow

Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: BjornBee on January 07, 2011, 03:56:39 pm
And if this is the reasoning and testing that will ultimately be used to condemn local beekeepers who happen to put honey on the shelves that happen to be "tainted" with certain sugars....God help us all.
i think we can agree that if the honey is 30% beet sugar, there is a real problem?  that regardless of "intentions", this should not be on the shelf as pure honey?

Quote
Of course I would never outright call this beekeeper, or any beekeeper, someone peddling "snakeoil". What a nasty thing to say about beekeepers, when you have no clue probably how any sugars got into their honey.
what if the beekeeper is large enough scale that they are having their honey tested, and selling the rejects to the unwitting local beekeepers?  we are actually seeing this, this is not theory.

"snakeoil" was acebird's term, not mine.

no, in the case of the marachino cherries, no one was trying to pull anything off (except perhaps keep bees where there isn't adequate forage)....but should that end up in a jar called "pure honey"?  if it does and someone is allergic to cherry syrup or corn sugar, what happens?  it isn't honey, and the person selling it is ultimately responsible.

deknow



Should the beekeeper put the tainted honey in a jar? Not since it's obvious that the bees collected the cherry juice.

But I guess my point is that unless every beekeeper tests their honey, there is no way to even know what is in it.

And now that everyone jumped on this bandwagon, pointing fingers, making accusations,...is it a far stretch to think that one day we may all have too have testing to prove honey is not tainted?

Honey for all beekeepers, has always been what the bees collect. Discounting obvious sugar feeding (which lets be honest, is not a huge problem in this country) and obvious cases like the cherry company, no beekeeper could even guarantee that honey is pure.

Asking about some customer being allergic and the liability to the beekeeper from something like HFCS, has NEVER been  problem up to now. But guess what....set a standard, call attention, and make statements like some do....and now you have a situation that liability as an issue.

Has there ever been a case of someone being sued? I am not aware of it.

So we will have a honey standard in place, that each and ever beekeeper has one choice to protect themselves....have your honey tested every year. And this is exactly what I said would eventually happen when this all first started. And to do so, makes every beekeeper open to the possibilities only limited by what their bees go out and collect.

I find all this about the same as beekeepers seeking protection, getting a gun, shooting themselves in the foot, suggesting it's for their best interest and the best interest of the public (which never complained before), and walking down the street bleeding all over the place, thinking they were better than they were before. The grass is always greener before you get to the other side of the fence. But it rarely ends up being true.
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: rdy-b on January 07, 2011, 04:29:55 pm
  Gota do better than this--back to square one--MOISTURE CONTENT not to exceed 23%
every one keeps reverting to this as it should be the foundation for others to follow
I say in spirit yes-But this is not the best we can do--RDY-B
http://www.americanhoneyproducers.org/standards/FL%20Standard%20of%20Identity.pdf (http://www.americanhoneyproducers.org/standards/FL%20Standard%20of%20Identity.pdf)
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: D Coates on January 07, 2011, 04:59:58 pm
But I guess my point is that unless every beekeeper tests their honey, there is no way to even know what is in it.  ...one day we may all have too have testing to prove honey is not tainted?

Honey for all beekeepers, has always been what the bees collect. Discounting obvious sugar feeding (which lets be honest, is not a huge problem in this country) and obvious cases like the cherry company, no beekeeper could even guarantee that honey is pure.  So we will have a honey standard in place, that each and ever beekeeper has one choice to protect themselves....have your honey tested every year. And this is exactly what I said would eventually happen when this all first started. And to do so, makes every beekeeper open to the possibilities only limited by what their bees go out and collect.

I find all this about the same as beekeepers seeking protection, getting a gun, shooting themselves in the foot, suggesting it's for their best interest and the best interest of the public (which never complained before), and walking down the street bleeding all over the place, thinking they were better than they were before. The grass is always greener before you get to the other side of the fence. But it rarely ends up being true.

Well crud, that's an uncomfortable but good point.  Imagine if you harvest your honey and find (through testing that does make me uncomfortable) that your girls got some sugar in there from somewhere.  What are you to do then?  Your complete harvest or year could be made useless, by someone intentionally or unintentionally leaving out a few gallons of something the bees collect.  You could resubmit something else get the approval then sell what failed earlier, or sell it to someone else who has gotten approval for them to sell it off.  Or you could go out of business...

Ooofff  :-P  I don't like this game.  I just want to have my bees and sell my honey.
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: Acebird on January 07, 2011, 05:27:50 pm
Quote
i was surprised to see 30% beet sugar

Why?  Monsanto has GMO'd corn and now they are GMOing beets.  The two sugars are interchangeable in the food industry.  So why does it shock you?

Yes, my wife just showed me the cherry juice article.  At least they finally legalized bee keeping in the city even though it has been going on for years.

The honey industry is no different than the maple syrup industry.  It has all been done already.  There is no need to drawn a new road map.  Anybody that wants to tap a tree and sell a few gallons can do so.  Once you get to a certain size then you need to be regulated.  What size that is, I don't know but it all starts with defining what you want to call maple syrup and what you want to call imitation. It would be the same for honey.  Nothing is pure, not one single food item is ever pure and non of the regulations expect it.
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: skatesailor on January 07, 2011, 05:35:51 pm
Considering all the atttention contaminated Chinese honey is getting don't be surprised if some well-intentioned :?congressman with little knowledge of the bee industry proposes legislation that affects us all. As always the most fearful words one can hear are "I'm from the government and I'm here to help you." Does anyone know if honey is being addressed in the latest Food Safety Modernization Act.
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: deknow on January 07, 2011, 05:44:07 pm
Quote
Nothing is pure, not one single food item is ever pure and non of the regulations expect it.
did you read the florida honey standard i posted earlier?
Quote
"Honey" means the natural food product resulting from the harvest of nectar by honeybees and the
natural activities of the honeybees in processing nectar.
...that leaves no room for feeds, for any sugar other than nectar, no matter the source.

deknow
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: Scadsobees on January 07, 2011, 05:51:02 pm
Quote
i was surprised to see 30% beet sugar

Why?  Monsanto has GMO'd corn and now they are GMOing beets.  The two sugars are interchangeable in the food industry.  So why does it shock you?


<sigh> :tumbleweed:
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: hardwood on January 07, 2011, 06:01:32 pm
I would think that regs for maple syrup could be more straight forward than for honey. After all...maple trees don't fly around getting in to who knows what.

Scott
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: fat/beeman on January 07, 2011, 06:34:14 pm
I guess I should just shut up and just read might learn been told I ramble too. that's what old men do I guess. I don't want to change anyone's mind on any thing if it works for you go for it.
Don

I'll not post for couple weeks to let you rest=bye
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: D Coates on January 07, 2011, 06:55:55 pm
GMO'd anything has nothing to do with this discussion.
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: BjornBee on January 07, 2011, 07:14:17 pm
I guess I should just shut up and just read might learn been told I ramble too. that's what old men do I guess. I don't want to change anyone's mind on any thing if it works for you go for it.
Don

I'll not post for couple weeks to let you rest=bye

Yo, Yo,....and YO!

Don't start some trend. You start that "I'll give you guys a break" crap, and then there will be more pressure on others to do the same. Like ME! And I bet some are praying for that right now.  :-D

Long days, a few extra beers, dim light, too many kids running around, lack of sleep.....I would like to think everyone throws stuff out that makes no sense. It's just some are better than others.  ;)
Title: Re: New Ramblings for 2011
Post by: T Beek on January 07, 2011, 07:38:35 pm
I would think that regs for maple syrup could be more straight forward than for honey. After all...maple trees don't fly around getting in to who knows what.

Scott

Back when we had slave labor (our kids were still in the home :)) along with another like minded family we made syrup every year and it was great fun.  We always had plenty for ourselves and made a few bucks each spring while waiting for the roads to dry up, always selling out locally.  Well one year we went hog-wild and put out over 400 taps (bless those little chillins) and made syrup like it was nobodys business, but we saturated the local market quick and none of the stores around here would take it, "fresh, raw with no label" as it was, so we hauled it about 100 miles away to.XXX..Company where they just let us dump it in a big vat along with all the other syrup being made or bought up that day.  Definitely an eye opener, nearly 25 years ago, we never put that many taps out again after that and since the kids have all left its more like 25-50.  Just thought I'd share that with you all.  Time for an Ale.

thomas