Import of NZ bees into UK

[greatbritishhoney]

Topics such as neonicotinoids will always risk taking this thread off at a tangent because a significant minority of posters are interested in a campaign or a conspiracy, ideally both

Dan, surely after all your complaints about other people second guessing your own motives you should be the last to second guess others'.

The issue originally raised is whether this project is ethical / safe as regards bees and beekeeping. If neonics are also involved in the project then that adds another dimension which is perfectly valid to be debated on the same thread.

 

[greatbritishhoney]

OK, so here's my action plan for the Co-op...

1. The project to import queens is relocated to an area where it won't have the potential to interfere with Ron's project.
2. The new location is decided in consultation with local beekepers through the relevant BKA.
3. The Co-op / Plan Bee provides some funding or support for Ron's project.
4. The co-op invests in a native bee breeding program to minimise the need for further imports in the future.

Apart for a bit of administrative and logistical hassle surely this results in everyone being happy - Murray maintains his contract, Plan Bee gets something else to shout about, local beekeepers have their say, Ron's project continues.
It woudl also be nice if they'd reinstate their prohibition of the remaining 2 neonics on their farms until they have acheived their aim of getting the government to review neonic effects on bees.

 

[DanBee]

The way to resolve a dispute is to keep talking. It may get heated at times but dialogue is the only sensible way to come to some kind of understanding. If we had all given up at post number 20 we would have much less understanding of the project.

Now that is a very valid point, well said

I think it's impressive that ITLD is happy to persist here, given the attitude of some, yet he does so with a level of openness that is above and beyond. He could quite rightly have taken the view that "you can't please everybody all of the time" and left them to their baseless accusations and mutual frenzy-whipping; after all the facts portray far less drama than the agitators would have had anyone believe.

I for one suggest we keep away from the neonicotinoids debate. the issue at hand was the import of queens and the introduction of bees onto farmland, and the implications and objections to this. Just to appease those ready to squeal "cover up" or "you would say that", I suggest that a new thread is started to avoid this thread spiralling into multivariate ranting.

The Co-op is a big organisation, and when I approached them at the start of their Plan B effort, I quickly found that the part running Plan B (Membership Services) was little more than a marketing department, and very much removed from the part running the farms (or indeed the supermarkets). They weren't interested in the fact that their film was error-strewn and irrelevant to European beekeeping, because they were "responding to current concerns" and "promoting debate" - i.e. reacting to the media hype and gaining attention. I acknowledge that Plan B has since achieved a lot of good for beekeeping and the interest of the public in beekeeping, but felt it had a shaky start. The key observation here was how autonomous the individual companies within the Co-op Group were.

 

[DanBee]

Dan, surely after all your complaints about other people second guessing your own motives you should be the last to second guess others'.

No, the concern was that a statement was made as to my ethics that could not be supported by fact or experience.

I've said already that the thread was started as a campaign, not as a discussion. Read the first post and that is clear:

...I appreciate this might not be the right part of the forum to raise this issue, but I do so in order to get the most possible reads and therefore more influence of the issue I raise below.

...

So what do we do ? I am very motivated to raise MERRY HELL about this...

...

Please can concerned members reply below.....we need to act fast on this !!

More a call to arms than a discussion opener.

Read also the recent posting that the same poster made on the BBKA forum:

I don't believe in posting things on multiple forums just to get air-time.

However....

The Import of NZ bees thread elsewhere has generated a huge amount of debate, and I would urge interested parties to read 'Swinbees' comments. I respect his viewpoint and stance, particularly due to his status within BBKA at a local level.

I think his comments add real balance to the debate, and balance the comments of the beefarmer involved and his supporters who have posted here.

Is this a campaign ? Well it would seem that it is gathering pace...but we are still waiting a statement from the Co-Op who are now responding with a firm 'No Comment'...

You could read that either as a public service broadcast, or as an attempt to gain a larger audience. It certainly reads like the latter to me

 

[DanBee]

From post 296

From post 302

From post 306

From post 582.

Congratulations on volunteering for the role of Thread Archivist

 

[Hebeegeebee]

The way to resolve a dispute is to keep talking. It may get heated at times but dialogue is the only sensible way to come to some kind of understanding. If we had all given up at post number 20 we would have much less understanding of the project.

Point taken but I equate the forum discussion at this stage to a little like one night a pub where a few pissed blokes have an argument by expressing their opinions. Every one has a splendid time but at a certain point it's time to leave me thinks or you'll be there all night.
In the morning you can't remember what the argument was about at all!

 

[RoseCottage]

Ok so I left this thread about 30 pages ago when the tone turned a little too personal to allow the genuine issues to appear clearly.

Now I have seen the page turn over 60. Wow. I have come back to see how it has progressed.

I have read all posts (so now should get a thread warrior campaign medal admin) and see that not all that much us has changed in the cut and thrust. Obviously Ron has made an appearance and expressed some good, deeply held, concerns for which I have a lot of empathy.

Where does it go now? How do we as a group move to a position where this thread comes to a natural finish?

The only aspect of the thread that remains to be addressed fully is the aspect of the Co-Ops ethics. Most of the rest of people's concerns have been discussed several times already.

There is no satisfactory resolution possible for those who oppose these specific imports until they can open a dialogue with a group within the Co-Op with control over the project. So how is this engagement to be achieved?

For those in favour of these specific imports, where next?

If everyone is keen for open dialogue should we not recognise our limitations as a group and band together to engage the company?

What could the outcome then be? An end to the circular discussion, a demonstration of the effectiveness of discussion to educate all parties and the result of a professional engagement with the Co-Op that allows them to listen and address (whatever way) the genuine concerns of the community and their near neighbours.

It could end up with good press for all.

I don't buy the headless project view. If there needs to be an approach to a group of stakeholders in a co-ordinated way then that is possible.

What do people think?
Sam

 

[greatbritishhoney]

I totally agree Sam and refer you to my post number 602. I think the frustration in this debate is partly due to the lack of co-op input. Granted ITLD has put the co-op's point of view but he has no ability to change co-op policy even if he wanted to.
A gesture of co-operation (no pun intended) from the co-op would go a long way to building some bridges.

 

[greatbritishhoney]

No, the concern was that a statement was made as to my ethics that could not be supported by fact or experience.

OK Dan, but remember saying "some" want a campaign or a conspiracy implies that anyone against the project is some kind of maniac. If it's just an extension of the DanBee Vs Somerford battle then it pays to make it clear who you are talking about or use PM.
And, yes, I'm sure I'm guilty of it too.

 

[Tom Bick]

I totally agree Sam and refer you to my post number 602. I think the frustration in this debate is partly due to the lack of co-op input. Granted ITLD has put the co-op's point of view but he has no ability to change co-op policy even if he wanted to.
A gesture of co-operation (no pun intended) from the co-op would go a long way to building some bridges.

If not already I suggest that you contact the CoOp you will find that they respond perhaps not to your satisfaction but the more people contact them things may move forward.

I contacted them and amongst other things pointed out the work of Ron and got a reply that they had been contacted this week from the BBKA informing them of Ron’s operation and I hope the importance and I hope they are thinking about it?

So like I say if not already drop them a line they wont come here can you imaging all the meetings to agree on any replies they may have.

 

[greatbritishhoney]

Thanks Tom, I'll do that.
I fully expect that the Co-op will, at some point, issue a response. But it will undoubtedly have to be a carefully considered one.

 

[Tom Bick]

That’s great go for it greatbritishhoney it can only help, the thing is as I see it now is the debate has gone on and well covered and more to come ITLD has given great replies and I for one have been grateful for that but it is now time as I see it to move out from the confines of the forum after all it is a talking shop and a very good one at that.
ITLD is a good chap but he is also a deflecting shield taking all the flack we should be focusing on the decision makers now, they will never come hear we have to go to them and anyone else who may listen.

 

[RoseCottage]

Ok so if contact is made then who do people start with?

Here is a link to the Co-Op executive:
http://www.co-operative.coop/corporate/aboutus/ourexecutive/

I think that it would be helpful if we can agree on who to contact first as this would prevent people inadvertently spamming the company.

Who have people contacted so far?

ITLD if you have no issue with people contacting the company and engaging with them in an open dialogue (which is the purpose here) then can we ask you to identify a good starting point in the organisation, other than the press office...of-course, we all should respect your right of privacy, confidentiality, etc. You can always decline information without anyone being critical...afterall it is your business.

Clearly there are some who want to make contact and I would seek to give them the best chance to get their views across in a polite, constructive, and meaningful way.

All the best,
Sam

 

[greatbritishhoney]

Sam,
From what I remember, way back in the mists of time, at the start of this thread the replies from the Co-op were coming from someone called Naomi. Perhaps those who had contact from her could share the contact details with us via PM.

 

[Tom Bick]

I have an email address for a Naomi Davies Who is the Environmental Advisor she was my point of contact and I got it from Somerford.

I was surprised that she replied so soon and informed me about the BBKA contacting them, but don’t know how I stand regarding putting the email address on the forum, I can always pm it but will be off home soon and have poor internet reception at the moment so it will be tomorrow.

 

[greatbritishhoney]

I have an email address for a Naomi Davies Who is the Environmental Advisor she was my point of contact and I got it from Somerford.

I was surprised that she replied so soon and informed me about the BBKA contacting them, but don’t know how I stand regarding putting the email address on the forum, I can always pm it but will be off home soon and have poor internet reception at the moment so it will be tomorrow.

Tom, I've already sent it to Sam.

 

[RoseCottage]

All,
If people intend to contact the Co-Op folks should give it 24hrs for others to come forward and make some suggestions and then perhaps agree a contact point.

As for Naomi Davies - she is referenced on the web in several places (but admittedly without a direct e-mail address). She is described as the Plan Bee Campaign Manager. Next to her name is usually the email address: [email protected]

One interesting reference is the Vanishing Bees Blog:

http://vanishingbees.co.uk/blog/indexca35.html?ccm_paging_p_b152=2

The problem with a general mailbox is accountability. I would recommend actually making contact with a human being who can be chased, if necessary, to respond to a specific communication or group of communications.

So are there other suggestions? Do those who wish to raise this with the Co-Op select someone higher in the organisation, from the executive, who people can engage in a collective way after perhaps expressing individual concerns?

Someone higher in the organisation may find it more difficult to ignore the issues around corporate ethics and may also be able to identify the groups who are actually stakeholders in this project.

Sam

 

[Poly Hive]

The classic agitator route is to buy a share in the company and lobby as a share holder. Also to find out who the major share holders are and lobby them.

They tend to be insurance companies who are shall we say delicate when it comes to PR.

However the Co-op is owned by the membership so not much leverage there but they do flaunt themselves on Facebook.

http://www.facebook.com/planbeecampaign

PH

 

[greatbritishhoney]

Could I suggest that if we want to send some kind of co-ordinated e-mail to the co-op then we discuss it via PM. It was stated a while ago that they were keeping an eye on this thread, so it would be pointless to let them know the exact contents of the e-mail in advance.
I also think that a single e-mail from a group of us would be better than several e-mails all saying the same thing. The contents of the e-mail could be agreed via PM.
I'd suggest that anyone interested in contributing should perhaps PM Rose Cottage (if that's OK with you RC).

 

[Somerford]

No, the concern was that a statement was made as to my ethics that could not be supported by fact or experience.

I've said already that the thread was started as a campaign, not as a discussion. Read the first post and that is clear:


Quote:
...I appreciate this might not be the right part of the forum to raise this issue, but I do so in order to get the most possible reads and therefore more influence of the issue I raise below.

...

So what do we do ? I am very motivated to raise MERRY HELL about this...

...

Please can concerned members reply below.....we need to act fast on this !!

So what's your problem with that, DB ? What have you got to hide ? I hear you're a little wet behind the ears on all this, and not perhaps up to speed as you claim to be....

What I see in your response is that you resent anyone, particularly another beekeeper questioning your methods, practices et al, that you'd rather be able to continue unencumbered by anyone questioning what you do...well welcome to the new world....we, the consumer, are demanding greater visibility in the food we eat, that is not going away. That Honey might be on that list (at last) is a good thing...unless you have something to hide ?

More a call to arms than a discussion opener.

Read also the recent posting that the same poster made on the BBKA forum:


Quote:
I don't believe in posting things on multiple forums just to get air-time.

However....

The Import of NZ bees thread elsewhere has generated a huge amount of debate, and I would urge interested parties to read 'Swinbees' comments. I respect his viewpoint and stance, particularly due to his status within BBKA at a local level.

I think his comments add real balance to the debate, and balance the comments of the beefarmer involved and his supporters who have posted here.

Is this a campaign ? Well it would seem that it is gathering pace...but we are still waiting a statement from the Co-Op who are now responding with a firm 'No Comment'...

You could read that either as a public service broadcast, or as an attempt to gain a larger audience. It certainly reads like the latter to me

Again I ask what have you got to hide ? Yes I am incensed at the whole debacle, Yes I was the first to raise it, but I am sure many others were considering it, Yes I think some sort of campaign is required...and the fact so mnay here have contacted the Co-Op would suggest that is happening, albeit a little dis-organised at present.

I am prepared to post things on the other forum, which I don't use alot, to raise the importance of the issue. What are you scared of ? You posting the cutting smacks of someone running to their teacher saying hummmm, miss, so and so is being naughty, quite a tell-tale ! But I don't really care.

and so to some of the points raised since post 512....

regards

S