Bee basehive count....

[Hivemaker.]

That would be compensation, not a payment as you were implying.

Implied no such thing, but don't the farmers get a payment as compensation and, beefarmers don't.

You can call it whatever you like, but it still boils down to the government or some government quango paying out money to farmers.

 

[farmerboy5470]

Oh, you mean the way beekeepers are compensated for their loss if their hives/colonies are destroyed after an AFB outbreak? Oh, wait! They aren't.

Maybe they would get compensation if everyone filled in the survey as there would be more funding available...

As I said in a previous post this is pretty much off topic as beekeeping is pretty much unregulated, whereas other "livestock food producing farmers" as Hivemaker put it are very heavily regulated.

 

[farmerboy5470]

Implied no such thing, but don't the farmers get a payment as compensation and, beefarmers don't.

I'd be careful what you wish for, especially involving a government body.

 

[B+.]

Maybe they would get compensation if everyone filled in the survey as there would be more funding available...

As I said in a previous post this is pretty much off topic as beekeeping is pretty much unregulated, whereas other "livestock food producing farmers" as Hivemaker put it are very heavily regulated.

I doubt it. The Government is not interested in beekeepers losses. The only possible compensation would come from insurance (BDI) which is a cost to the beekeeper.

I have previously argued in favour of registration so it comes as no pleasure to be holding the NBU to account for their bias. To put it in perspective, I doubt the NBU will miss the additional funding they might have received. For me, it is more a matter of principle: Government agencies should be seen to be completely impartial.

 

[Hivemaker.]

I'd be careful what you wish for, especially involving a government body.

Well we don't have to ear tag the bees yet...but we do have to use the treatments they say we can, we do get standstill orders in case of legally notifiable diseases, cannot refuse bee inspectors looking through our hives and even buildings, in case of disease, get our bees destroyed with zilch compensation, and then there are the various honey regulations and testing to abide.

 

[farmerboy5470]

Well we don't have to ear tag the bees yet...but we do have to use the treatments they say we can, we do get standstill orders in case of legally notifiable diseases, cannot refuse bee inspectors looking through our hives and even buildings, in case of disease, get our bees destroyed with zilch compensation, and then there are the various honey regulations and testing to abide.

That will be clarity that it's very unregulated, thanks.

 

[Stiffy]

I haven't updated mine as yet but probably will.

interestingly considering the view point that they are biased toward amm bees when one of my apiaries was inspected this year I felt the opposite.

the inspector was far from supportive of 'native bees' claiming them to be nothing more than horrible dark bees.

on the plus side once he had opened them up he said they were nice, calm and healthy, more so than he expected.

I do want to keep and breed amm but I am also interested in trying out other sub species, currently having a few BF and Italian queens, I have accepted that the chances of keeping them pure by open mating are almost nil so have invested in I.I

if anything I have been the one on the receiving end of negativity when speaking to other beekeepers about amm?

I am unwary of letting anyone know the location of my apiaries, even 'officials' but distrust is probably a bit strong.

I wont use the term I used originally as it upsets those of a gentler disposition and the inadequate few then latch on with abuse.

I was originally wary of the SBI after my contact details were given out, (I assume) by them some years ago.
I then had a few 'problems' from other 'keepers' close to one apiary site when I refused to have DNA testing of my bees to see if they were AMM.
As I know the provenance and past pedigree of my bees, a simple phone call or email would have sufficed.
I needn't have been concerned as I found the SBI to be very good, knowledgeable and approachable.
S

 

[Hivemaker.]

That will be clarity that it's very unregulated, thanks.

Clarity that it should not be regulated at all.

 

[B+.]

Maybe they would get compensation if everyone filled in the survey as there would be more funding available...

I haven't heard anything that funny in ages!

 

[farmerboy5470]

Clarity that it should not be regulated at all.

Post #63, if you want compensation be prepared for regulations.

All primary food producers should be regulated, it's in the public interest, I'm surprised beekeepers have got off so lightly for so long.

 

[farmerboy5470]

I haven't heard anything that funny in ages!

Thanks, it was meant to lighting the mood. You're comparing chalk and cheese.
As I said in my first comment Hivemaker was taking this comparing other "livestock food producing farmers" with beekeepers/farmers.

 

[Hivemaker.]

Post #63, if you want compensation be prepared for regulations.

Post #65, we are already regulated.

 

[madasafish]

Anyone who seriously suggests beekeeping can be regulated in the way cattle, sheep and pigs are is not living in the real world.

It's difficult (but not impossible) to hide 100 cows or sheep and self slaughtering is at best problematic..

It is easy to hide 10 hives. And virtually impossible to go looking for them if hidden in woodland.

So regulation is possible..just pass a law- but enforcement is a different kettle of fish.. To enforce a law you first have to find the bees.

Of course when you do enforce it, think of all the hundreds of deaths from food poisoning and bees stings that you will save.. The entire UK will rejoice that such a scourge on our national well being has been avoided..


Bee keeping is effectively a very low risk food business if a few simple precautions are taken - eg washing. Stronger regulation will cost a lot of money with minimal benefits. Only Governments with lots of money and no sense will go down that route.. very few UK Governments now and in the future are likely to possess both attributes.

 

[jenkinsbrynmair]

Bee keeping is effectively a very low risk food business.

To the extent that, in quite a few counties beekeepers who need a food safety certificate to trade and are voluntarily requesting registration are being refused inspections by EHO's because the authority doesn't deem it necessary.

 

[For want of a better word]

Thought it might be....be better if maff (or what ever their current name is) also paid out the same as to other forms of livestock food producing farmers.

Totally agree....

However if the livestock ( say beef) farmer has to have a beast destroyed due to a notifiable disease the system only pays compensation out if the farmer has insurance... and then the insurance company claims this back ( plus a handling fee) from the government.
No insurance ... no payout!

NOT the same with bees... I can not get bee disease insurance ( Forget BDI miniscule compensation designed for hobbyists).

BFA insurance covers a lot of risks.. as does the NFU Mutual commercial bee insurance policy.... but not any compensation for notifyable ( or other ) disease,

Perhaps compulsory registration for bee keepers would flush out a few who persist in keeping diseased bees... but more probably not!

I wonder how many unlicensed shotguns rest primed and hidden under their owners beds

 

[Gilberdyke John]

Anyone who seriously suggests beekeeping can be regulated in the way cattle, sheep and pigs are is not living in the real world.

It's difficult (but not impossible) to hide 100 cows or sheep and self slaughtering is at best problematic..

It is easy to hide 10 hives. And virtually impossible to go looking for them if hidden in woodland.

So regulation is possible..just pass a law- but enforcement is a different kettle of fish.. To enforce a law you first have to find the bees.

Of course when you do enforce it, think of all the hundreds of deaths from food poisoning and bees stings that you will save.. The entire UK will rejoice that such a scourge on our national well being has been avoided..


Bee keeping is effectively a very low risk food business if a few simple precautions are taken - eg washing. Stronger regulation will cost a lot of money with minimal benefits. Only Governments with lots of money and no sense will go down that route.. very few UK Governments now and in the future are likely to possess both attributes.

Government doesn't have money. They take it from the taxpayers!

 

[madasafish]

Government doesn't have money. They take it from the taxpayers!

No you are wrong.. you just keep borrowing OPM (Other People's Money) and when you have spent it all, pay nothing back. See Venezuela. And Greece.

 

[birdsandbees]

I tend to be wary, rather than unwary about letting just anyone know..

thats an unfortunate typo/auto correct, of course I meant Wary

 

[Into the lions den]

1. I completed the hive census. It IS quite important for several reasons, and for us especially so as we are getting on for 2% of the total UK colonies, (which would have a real impact on NBU.Scot Govt. funding). Undeclared apiaries increase the risk of undetected diseases.

2. I GENERALLY trust the NBU and the inspectors (there are a FEW very opinionated exceptions) and have cordial contact with the head office and the RBI and SBI's we encounter in England.

3. I do NOT completely trust the people who pull THEIR chain. The NBU is pretty near the bottom end of the food chain, and they have to do what they are told on some issues.

4. The survey was fine up to a point but plainly had some 'native bee' PC input into a couple of the questions, so yes, there WAS a bias to it.

5. Black bee zealots? Yes, there are some around, and they have seriously rose tinted glasses about their merits. Good bees are good bees, bad bees are bad bees. The types don't matter a jot if they work. There are also Buckfast zealots. There are 'locally adapted' zealots too.

6. The EU funding has a set of very specific aims identified in the support programme. The UK (and its not alone) rather fiddle the story and keep all the cash 'on house', and have openly said they will keep it that way and any chance of any of it trickling down as cash (or in the form of free test kits etc) to beekeepers is zero. Which does rather make all the survey filling a bit of a 'you do the work, we keep the money' exercise.

 

[Hivemaker.]

Don't get this wrong, I may be the only person who is talking openly about this but I'm far from the only person who has chosen not to disclose information.

Indeed, not filling it out either, not because of any conspiracy theories, but simply because there is no incentive to do so.