Bees and the law

[greatbritishhoney]

Hi,
I've heard a few things lately about laws relating to bees and was wondering if anyone can clarify whether some or all of these statements are true and, if so, provide a reference to where it can be verified...

(I should point out that I am pretty sure some of them are totally wrong)

- Bees are wild creatures and don't technically belong to anyone under the law (if so, why do we bother with PLI?)

- Once a bee is out of your sight it ceases to be your property and is a wild creature.

- Once you approach a swarm with the intention of collecting it it becomes your property irrespective of where the swarm came from.

- If you see a bee on a flower in your garden and follow it back to the hive you are entitled to a share of the honey (I know this one sounds crazy but I believe it is some ancient law that technically still exists).

Would be interested in everyone's views.

Regards
Andy

 

[Winker]

Hi,
.

- If you see a bee on a flower in your garden and follow it back to the hive you are entitled to a share of the honey (I know this one sounds crazy but I believe it is some ancient law that technically still exists).

Would be interested in everyone's views.

Regards
Andy

This one reminds me of the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. If you find the end of the rainbow you get the pot of gold!

 

[psafloyd]

We have discussed some of these in recent months and this is what I understoond to be the case based on precedent.

Bees are wild creatures and don't technically belong to anyone under the law (if so, why do we bother with PLI?)

They are treated a bit like cats from what I can gather, unlike most other 'livestock'. This is because they are essentially wild and cannot be domesticated to the extent they may be shepherded.
However, if you practice husbandry, you have some responsibility for them being on your property and therefore if your bees (you'd say they were yours if someone stole the honey) did injury to someone, they might reasonably seek redress. Especially as the effect might be fatal.

Once a bee is out of your sight it ceases to be your property and is a wild creature.


Bees come back to their colony, so this is moot. However, if they swarm from your hive, it wold appear you need to have seen them go and approach the landowner of wherever they alight to declare they are yours and seek to reclaim them.

Once you approach a swarm with the intention of collecting it it becomes your property irrespective of where the swarm came from.


See above. Seems reasonable if noone has laid claim to them.

If you see a bee on a flower in your garden and follow it back to the hive you are entitled to a share of the honey (I know this one sounds crazy but I believe it is some ancient law that technically still exists).

Seems so arcane as to be unlikely to be applicable even if still in existence.

There was a thread on this some months ago and it cited a case from early in the last century concerning two identical names, possibly brothers.

 

[Teemore]

Andy,

Google the term "ferae naturae" or else look it up in a legal dictionary as a starting point. You will find the terminology exists in a fair bit of legislation relating to nuisance and trespass etc. Bees are not fully domesticated and this gives rise to the principle that once out of your sight, a honeybee is considered a wild animal. Much of the law relating to Honeybees still has as its basis Roman Law.

I'm not sure about the one where a swarm becomes yours if it is your intention to hive it; I believe the principle is actually that a swarm belongs to whomever hives it first.

 

[greatbritishhoney]

I'm not sure about the one where a swarm becomes yours if it is your intention to hive it; I believe the principle is actually that a swarm belongs to whomever hives it first.

I think I first saw it in a BBKA leaflet.

 

[EdNewman]

- If you see a bee on a flower in your garden and follow it back to the hive you are entitled to a share of the honey (I know this one sounds crazy but I believe it is some ancient law that technically still exists).

Would be interested in everyone's views.

Regards
Andy

According to a lawyer friend of mine, if your neighbour has an apple tree (or any other kind of crop plant) that over hangs your property, the produce of that plant rightfully belongs to your neighbour, even if it falls on your land. If you follow the letter of the law eating, moving or disposing of the crop without permission from your neighbour counts as theft. The same could be applied to the above I guess.

But being realistic, the owner of the flower would have to prove which bit of honey his nectar produced, good luck with that!

Ed.

 

[greatbritishhoney]

But being realistic, the owner of the flower would have to prove which bit of honey his nectar produced, good luck with that!

Ed.

Yes, following a bee for 3 miles to claim your 0.000003 microns of honey might be a bit of a waste of time!

 

[For want of a better word]

My bees are outlaws...
and my inlaw did eat the bait sausage

 

[enrico]

A couple of things. Domesticated animals is criminal law and relates to dogs horses cattle and a few others. this mainly relates to straying on the highway. bees do not come under this at all. However civil law may be used if the victim can prove that through some fault of your you are liable for your bees actions. (Criminal and civil law are very separate issues).
As for the bit about picking apples, that applies because, again under criminal law, it is an offence to pick anything from any private land that has been cultivated, howver this does not apply to wild things growing wild, such as mushrooms (Although the civil law of trespass could apply!)
Bees are nothing to do with apples, they are not in the same category at all.
Hope this helps a bit rather than confusing even more!!!

 

[nelletap]

One of the speakers at the Bucks County seminar Day was a lawyer/solicitor or whatever. As an aside to the main part of his talk he did state that when bees swarm, as they are wild, then they are no longer the property of the beekeeper. So it seems to confirm one part of the original post.

Tricia

 

[For want of a better word]

Private or even public nuisance?

ie not allowing anything onto your land that could be deemed to be a nuisance, eg dead dogs,chemical pollutants, lighting bonfires, dust, smells, noise etc
but I believe a "cohort of people" must complain and have evidence to back their claim!

 

[For want of a better word]

(Although the civil law of trespass could apply!)

Has to be criminal damage.... trespass was thrown out along with the outdated enclosure acts.
Although the NERC Act gave landowners some medieval rights back !

 

[victor meldrew]

(Although the civil law of trespass could apply!)

Has to be criminal damage.... trespass was thrown out along with the outdated enclosure acts.
Although the NERC Act gave landowners some medieval rights back !

Trespass has been included in criminal law whereas it used to be a civil matter ?

John Wilkinson

 

[For want of a better word]

Trespass has been included in criminal law whereas it used to be a civil matter ?

John Wilkinson

Thought that was only in Naval Dockyards.... but then I am no expert at the wierd property and land related laws of this land,... that seem mostly to have been passed to protect the interests of the privalaged few!

 

[Teemore]

In terms of bees and "nuisance" there is a whole host of issues to be considered such as whether the use of the land (for keeping bees) is 'unreasonable' i.e. are you keeping bees in a place and in a manner that is unsuitable....... You are more likely to find case law on the issue of keeping poultry in a manner that constitutes a nuisance to your neighbours etc than bees. When I did a bit of reading on this subject I turned up more cases from outside the UK than from within it but AFAIK case law such as Rylands v Fletcher and Donoghue v Stevenson still do apply in terms of what constitutes reasonable use of land.

 

[Dishmop]

the issue of keeping poultry in a manner that constitutes a nuisance to your neighbours

I have seen where you can keep chickens..... but not cockerels.....

 

[For want of a better word]

I have seen where you can keep chickens..... but not cockerels.....

1949 Town & Country planning act...... now much superceeded by a plethora of new and much muddled legislation! still it keeps the Barristers on a high and healthy income!!!

Pity about other Laws & institutions set up in 1949 NHS etc.. now being dismembered and sold off for profit to the few for wealth creation

 

[louiseww]

Hi,
I've heard a few things lately about laws relating to bees and was wondering if anyone can clarify whether some or all of these statements are true and, if so, provide a reference to where it can be verified...

(I should point out that I am pretty sure some of them are totally wrong)

- Bees are wild creatures and don't technically belong to anyone under the law (if so, why do we bother with PLI?)

- Once a bee is out of your sight it ceases to be your property and is a wild creature.

- Once you approach a swarm with the intention of collecting it it becomes your property irrespective of where the swarm came from.

- If you see a bee on a flower in your garden and follow it back to the hive you are entitled to a share of the honey (I know this one sounds crazy but I believe it is some ancient law that technically still exists).

Would be interested in everyone's views.

Regards
Andy

Codswallop!!!! The only law that is relevant is the Roman one that says any swarm on your land belongs to you!
Louise

 

[Poly Hive]

My understanding of the law is very limited but from talking with law students in Aberdeen I was told that Scots law was based on Roman law and English was based on common or case law.

There is an old (1993) but interesting book called:

Beekeeping and the Law- Swarms and Neighbours.

ISBN 0 905652 25 8

Some information in there regarding past cases and one of the authors was sec to IBRA plus being a judge.

PH

 

[Nomadickarl]

Law

A couple of points...

Enrico, your reference to domestic animals refers to the Road Traffic Act:

C - cattle
H - Horses
A - Ass
M - Mule
P - Pig
S - sheep
D -dog
G - goat

You will notice that cat is missing, hence when a cat is run over there is no obligation to report it as a cat is not considered property under this legislation - Road Traffic act only.

In terms of criminal and civil law, trespass frequently comes up in criminal law. The big one being burglary. 'A person enters a building or part of a building as a trespasser...' No trespass, no burglary!

Sorry, that doesn't help with beesmuch does it.