Enforcing licenced products

[mazzamazda]

A subject that came up on a page yesterday, has anyone been fined, convicted of using unlicenced products. I am referring to specifically varroa products.

 

[domino]

I don't know any amateur beekeepers who have. I'd image commercial ones occasionally get a ding.

In the UK I can't see the NBU tracking you down for using OA.

 

[Erichalfbee]

All those beekeepers using apibioxal more than once a year per hive are in for it as well

 

[robinharman]

If you want to know the answer do a FOI Act enquiry to the VMD/NBU.

 

[ericbeaumont]

I'd imagine commercial ones occasionally get a ding.

The only prosecution that comes to mind relates to EFB, when in 2017 Murray McGregor was prosecuted and found guilty on two technicalities of possessing Terramycin. Murray's side of the story was written up on the BKF here and also in the Bee Farmer magazine.

Fact is that the NBU approve the use of Terramycin for some EFB outbreaks, but those in authority disapproved of Murray getting on with the job in advance of the paperwork protocol. You may conclude that the media attention given to the prosecution of a big player was intended to warn the rest of us to keep in line. Whether the prosecution was a wise use of public money, or had any effect on the intended audience, is a moot point.

Note (in answer to Mazzamazda's question) that Murray was not prosecuted for using Terramycin.

The most likely unlicensed varroa product is oxalic acid, but for a prosecution to be launched the VMD would have to identify its presence at the time of inspection, which sounds unlikely as (a) it is present naturally in hives (b) it declines rapidly after application and (c) the SBIs (who carry out the field work for the VMD) are either busy with AH or shutting up shop at the time when it's most likely to be used: September.

 

[jenkinsbrynmair]

and (c) the SBIs (who carry out the field work for the VMD) are either busy with AH or shutting up shop at the time when it's most likely to be used: September.

Or use it themselves so .............

 

[ShinySideUp]

It should be noted that oxalic acid is a legitimate product for cleaning wood so it's possession is not illegal even if you are a beekeeper.

 

[ericbeaumont]

It should be noted that oxalic acid is a legitimate product for cleaning wood so it's possession is not illegal even if you are a beekeeper.

That leads to the inescapable conclusion that a beekeeper would have to be caught in the act of using OA to be liable to prosecution. Even if honey were taken for testing in late summer, it is said to be a natural component of honey, and treatment with oxalic does not appreciably increase the concentration of it in honey (Brødsgaard, 1998). Couldn't find that doc, but this https://www.researchgate.net/public...arroa_destructor_in_honey_bees_Apis_mellifera says We conclude that OA spray application in periods without brood during spring and summer poses little danger to honey bee queens and that in sugar stores harvested in summer, OA residues are within the limits of natural variability.

 

[jenkinsbrynmair]

It should be noted that oxalic acid is a legitimate product for cleaning wood so it's possession is not illegal even if you are a beekeeper.

Not so - unless you have a licence, changes in the poisons and precursors act a few years ago makes it illegal to posess unless you have a licence or are a commercial outfit.

 

[foghornleghorn]

Tic tak could be what is being referred to...

 

[mazzamazda]

Thanks for your replies, I'm just having a moan, there seems to be some scare stories going on in Portugal, mainly through associations that are supplying slightly cheaper licenced awful products. It not that I'm against the official line, I just wish they were better quality and not so expensive.

Apibioxal for example is such a awful product even without the price tag. A "New" licenced product for Amitraz has just been released, no different to the much frowned upon taktic or sytraz, just a different % it is called Amicel, comes in a bottle with strips you do yourself, but hey it is licenced now so it is good to go. I'm not referring to any particular product, it is just without enforcement how are people expected to follow, my local bee store doesnt even sell official products, they sell under the counter amitraz strips from Spain and couldnt even get Apivar when I asked.

 

[Ian123]

Before apivar was widely available here it could be used under prescription from a friendly vet as I believe it was already licensed in some European countries. Double check but worth looking into?

 

[birdsandbees]

Or use it themselves so .............

 

[ShinySideUp]

Not so - unless you have a licence, changes in the poisons and precursors act a few years ago makes it illegal to posess unless you have a licence or are a commercial outfit.

Are you sure? I bought some three years ago from a reputable online dealer. It came with gloves and safety glasses and at no time did anyone ask for any documentation. In fact you can buy it online at Amazon:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Oxalic-Buc...=p&keywords=oxalic+acid&qid=1571768862&sr=8-5

 

[jenkinsbrynmair]

Are you sure?

Yes

 

[BMH]

Not so - unless you have a licence, changes in the poisons and precursors act a few years ago makes it illegal to posess unless you have a licence or are a commercial outfit.

That's really interesting. Its widely available in shops and online with no mention of any legislation changes.

 

[jenkinsbrynmair]

That's really interesting. Its widely available in shops and online with no mention of any legislation changes.

It's always been on the poisons list, but the usual bueraucratic broad brush approach to controlling precursors (which are covered by the same act) meant that all now need to be held under a licence unless there's a good commercial reason.
It was discussed in detail on here a few years ago.

 

[Erichalfbee]

It's always been on the poisons list, but the usual bueraucratic broad brush approach to controlling precursors (which are covered by the same act) meant that all now need to be held under a licence unless there's a good commercial reason.
It was discussed in detail on here a few years ago.

So who commits the offence?
The supplier, the buyer or both?

 

[jenkinsbrynmair]

So who commits the offence?
The supplier, the buyer or both?

both IIRC, it's more about knowing if there are any small scale holders/buyers of precursor chemicals than anything else, but pretty pointless really as I recall during my train the trainer's course making explosives with ingredients you could buy in Tesco and which were not even on the precursors list.

 

[Beefriendly]

Its not illegal to buy solid OA. What requires a licence is if it is sold as (or you make and sell or wish to buy) a greater than 10% solution (regs state 10%w/w).
The exact wording is "A member of the public must provide a valid EPP licence and associated photo ID if they wish to buy or receive any of the regulated substances above the specified concentration limit." Which is specified as weight for weight (W/W)
https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...ome-users-of-poisons-and-explosive-precursors
The example the government gives is Sulphuric acid, which you can legally buy at any concentration up to 15%, above this you need a licence as you do for greater than 10% OA solutions.
But the irony being you can so easily make a 10%+ solution from legally bought solids.....but those OA strips at 33% OA w/w are definitely illegal
Ho hum all those hives exploding.....