Now Is The Chance To Have Your Say

[GingerNut]

Once sold ,your son in law will be out of the picture .

I'm afraid it doesn't work like that, they have copyright on all content and it can only be reproduced with permission.............and further payment.

Surprisingly, the National papers are very honest with the agencies, cos without them they wouldn't fill their papers.

It's different if the paper has the story in the first place, but when it's done by an agency there is much more control over the content.

Yours Roy

 

[m100]

Or the subs should be a reasonable price in this day and age, £50 - £80 per year.

One man's reasonable is another man's extortionate.

As it is its a case of 2 quid public liability insurance... and 13 quid for four issues of BBKA news and 'overheads' The BBKA should be rolling in cash. Its overheads and 'hangers on' that are draining funds as quick as they can be replenished. 4000 new members in the past couple of years is a wet dream for the executive, more cash to waste on more free lunches and pointless meetings with their 'extensive contacts in government' and those that they can't disclose for 'confidentiality' reasons, meanwhile they choose not to participate in the FERA Healthy Bees Project Board.

As for value for money a similar sized organisation I'm a member of (nothing to do with beekeeping) produces six 48 page colour magazines a year and a colour A4 calendar (12 pages), arranges dozens of discount offers with suppliers, runs free events for members at least once a month, runs one big charity raising event a year, takes 12 quid per annum from around 12000 members, yet its donated in the last year over £30000 'profit' to that years charity nominated by the members. It runs a extremely active online forum and the paid administration is just two part time staff, the board (it's a non profit limited company) has 10 members voted for by the members and with regular rotation of board members so there is no 'old wood' The board meets every few months, and sometimes more often 'online' So no corporate HQ in the arse end of nowhere, nothing like a BBKA apiary in the arse end of nowhere that no member wants to fund (or even knows about?) but an association in regular contact with the members, serving them every day and acting as an interface point with a major UK manufacturing company and providing, in the manufacturers own words, very valued feedback on users of their products. We even get a proper membership card, just like a credit card, and not some cheapskate printed thing laminated with sticky backed plastic.

The BBKA is sadly, by a very, very, very long way the least value for money of any association I have ever belonged to, and as a so called 'members' association by a very long way by far the least democratic and transparent.

 

[Poly Hive]

I will not argue with a word of that.

PH

 

[jimbeekeeper]

One man's reasonable is another man's extortionate.

Yes I should have clarified that, that I would pay more, but of course expect more hence the use of my words "in this day and age"

 

[grizzly]

Thank you Gingernut, and thank you to those of you who have/will respond with your comments.

I myself would love to but i only get a couple of sentences out before i swear or get chest pain through rising blood pressure, nor do i have an impressive command of the English language as some do on here, coupled with lack of experience i could lay us wide open for ridicule.

The BBKA do not represent me as a Beekeeper, they are a shambles and a farce, its about time we started shouting and drawing attention to their behaviour.

 

[tonybloke]

One man's reasonable is another man's extortionate.

As it is its a case of 2 quid public liability insurance... and 13 quid for four issues of BBKA news and 'overheads' The BBKA should be rolling in cash. Its overheads and 'hangers on' that are draining funds as quick as they can be replenished. 4000 new members in the past couple of years is a wet dream for the executive, more cash to waste on more free lunches and pointless meetings with their 'extensive contacts in government' and 'those that they can't disclose' for confidentiality reasons, meanwhile they choose not to participate in the FERA Healthy Bees Project Board.

As for value for money a similar sized organisation I'm a member of (nothing to do with beekeeping) produces six 48 page colour magazines a year and a colour A4 calendar (12 pages), arranges dozens of discount offers with suppliers, runs free events for members at least once a month, runs one big charity raising event a year, takes 12 quid per annum from around 12000 members, yet its donated in the last year over £30000 'profit' to that years charity nominated by the members. It runs a extremely active online forum and the paid administration is just two part time staff, the board (it's a non profit limited company) has 10 members voted for by the members and with regular rotation of board members so there is no 'old wood' The board meets every few months, and sometimes more often 'online' So no corporate HQ in the arse end of nowhere, nothing like a BBKA apiary in the arse end of nowhere that no member wants to fund (or even knows about?) but an association in regular contact with the members, serving them every day and acting as an interface point with a major UK manufacturing company and providing, in the manufacturers own words, very valued feedback on users of their products. We even get a proper membership card, just like a credit card, and not some cheapskate printed thing laminated with sticky backed plastic.

The BBKA is sadly, by a very, very, very long way the least value for money of any association I have ever belonged to, and as a so called 'members' association by a very long way by far the least democratic and transparent.

 

[MrB]

Gingernut
Firstly may i congratulate you on this, i hope it gets through to the right places.
As a beginer i have been amazed at what i have learned in the last few months about pesticides and the highly probable adverse effects they have on our bees.
I am not realy in a position to make an valid contribution here at this stage, but i shall watch with interest.
I am looking forward to the seminar at stoneleigh on Neonicotinoids given by Dr Julian Little, now the communications & government affairs manager of Bayer CropScience.
it will be interesting to see if he is given a hard time!

Good luck

 

[GingerNut]

Gingernut
Firstly may i congratulate you on this, i hope it gets through to the right places.
As a beginer i have been amazed at what i have learned in the last few months about pesticides and the highly probable adverse effects they have on our bees.
I am not realy in a position to make an valid contribution here at this stage, but i shall watch with interest.
I am looking forward to the seminar at stoneleigh on Neonicotinoids given by Dr Julian Little, now the communications & government affairs manager of Bayer CropScience.
it will be interesting to see if he is given a hard time!

Good luck

Thanx

I am also a beginner, which is why I'm asking for others to contribute.

The good news is I have had a few responses

But I would like some more please?

Either PM or email me - roy at jast dot co dot uk - with your thoughts, a word doc is fine.

You name and contact details are also useful as James Piercy (the journalist) will probably want to get in contact to ask questions as he doesn't understand the situation.

Thanx again to those who have sent stuff......................and keep it coming in

Yours Roy

 

[jimbeekeeper]

I am going to play devils advocate and say it will not work!

Why?

1 Bayer and the other chemicals are too big, have to much money and too many fingers in to many pies that they control most things!

2 Yes public support might spike and give a great surge (a bit like it is currently doing/starting to do with bees), but look at the recent Free range chicken drive HFW and others did. Yes a roaring success for a couple of weeks, no free range hens left to buy in the Uk, but now, 99% people back to the 2 birds for £5 type deals.

3 There is no question that these chemicals kill/ can kill, even if I drank the stuff (in concentrated form) I am sure I would be very ill or die, but living in a major arable area with regular crop spraying etc, my experience of my negligible losses is easily accounted for in other ways, mainly due to me!

4 America is a different ball game all together, that is just miss management of hives.

Just look at this recent newspaper article regarding “gender bender chemicals” is this not a threat as well, potential chnagin the bees?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/a...als-putting-risk.html?ITO=1708&referrer=yahoo

To many smoking guns!

Its just another view point!

 

[Brosville]

Sadly, I agree with you - the lobbying groups have bottomless pits of money to spread lies and disinformation, a really good article will probably at best only slow the onward march of the forces of darkness by a smidgeon, but I still think it's"worth doing", who knows, perhaps one day the penny may drop with the mass of the public that we're skating on the edge of eco-disaster thanks to the toxins pumped into our environment in the quest of profit.
I agree with the old Chinese saying "it is better to travel hopefully than arrive"

I suspect that you're "part right" about the US of A - they stress their bees dreadfully by the way they treat them, but they've also got the likes of Coumaphos to cope with, and also the insidious effects of GM (which the lobby groups and GM frankenmakers have so far largely managed to hush up.......)

As for gender bender chemicals, I've long known about them, and suggest it's something that needs addressing urgently........
At risk of a riot, I suspect modern generations of males are far less masculine than those born around the middle of the last century and earlier - in those days one peered down one's trousering, and according to what you saw was your sexuality settled....(as well as the raging hormones that left you in no doubt). Nowadays it seems to be a moveable feast, "choose any one of 19 possible permutations"

 

[roche]

I think it is important to distinguish between the two issues:

The use of pesticides, and the BBKA endorsement of pesticides for money.

The issue I have been trying to address is the BBKA endorsement of pesticides. For me, it represents the betrayal of the trust of the membership, and the continued unethical behaviour of subsequent exectives of endorsement for money.

In spite of the mandate apparently granted by membership (through a flawed democratic structure), there is nothing to prevent the BBKA executive from stopping the policy.

Roche

 

[GingerNut]

I think it is important to distinguish between the two issues:

The use of pesticides, and the BBKA endorsement of pesticides for money.

The issue I have been trying to address is the BBKA endorsement of pesticides. For me, it represents the betrayal of the trust of the membership, and the continued unethical behaviour of subsequent exectives of endorsement for money.

In spite of the mandate apparently granted by membership (through a flawed democratic structure), there is nothing to prevent the BBKA executive from stopping the policy.

Roche

Yours Roy

 

[jimbeekeeper]

Sadly, I agree with you - "

Phew! Thanks Brosville, Tin hat off now. I felt I had to say the above.

I think it is important to distinguish between the two issues:

The use of pesticides, and the BBKA endorsement of pesticides for money.

Yes I agre roche, which is why I said a few pages back, if you are going to sell you sole to the Devil, get a good price.

 

[Stiffy]

I am going to play devils advocate and say it will not work!

Why?

1 Bayer and the other chemicals are too big, have to much money and too many fingers in to many pies that they control most things!

2 Yes public support might spike and give a great surge (a bit like it is currently doing/starting to do with bees), but look at the recent Free range chicken drive HFW and others did. Yes a roaring success for a couple of weeks, no free range hens left to buy in the Uk, but now, 99% people back to the 2 birds for £5 type deals.

3 There is no question that these chemicals kill/ can kill, even if I drank the stuff (in concentrated form) I am sure I would be very ill or die, but living in a major arable area with regular crop spraying etc, my experience of my negligible losses is easily accounted for in other ways, mainly due to me!

4 America is a different ball game all together, that is just miss management of hives.

Just look at this recent newspaper article regarding “gender bender chemicals” is this not a threat as well, potential chnagin the bees?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/a...als-putting-risk.html?ITO=1708&referrer=yahoo

To many smoking guns!

Its just another view point!

I sadly think you are right but unless someone pokes their head above the parapit and points out to the many blindly going along with the BBKA they will continue to say that its a small minority that doesnt like what it is doing!
Cheers


Quote: If you never change your mind, why have one? Edward de Bono

 

[mbc]

Its a classic case of divide and conquer - I doubt any individual member associations would hold their hand up and admit to aggreeing with any endorsement of pesticides but collectively under the umbrella of the bbka they appear to
Do I have to bath my cat in neem oil or can I have my cake and eat it ?

 

[m100]

I am looking forward to the seminar at stoneleigh on Neonicotinoids given by Dr Julian Little, now the communications & government affairs manager of Bayer CropScience.
it will be interesting to see if he is given a hard time!

Jeez, that one will be packed out to the rafters

I guess I better avoid it though as

a) my blood pressure would soar
b) the temptation to hit him / kneecap him / feed him a lethal cocktail of pesticides and dump him to die a long lingering death in a field in the middle of nowhere might be too great...

In spite of the mandate apparently granted by membership (through a flawed democratic structure), there is nothing to prevent the BBKA executive from stopping the policy.

There are rumours circulating that this has already happened, although the BBKA has yet again failed to communicate anything to members so until it's in print I won't start to believe it and even then I'd want to see clear evidence that they have changed their ways. Any existing 'contracts' would in all probability have to continue for the defined period.

 

[Somerford]

Its a classic case of divide and conquer - I doubt any individual member associations would hold their hand up and admit to aggreeing with any endorsement of pesticides but collectively under the umbrella of the bbka they appear to
Do I have to bath my cat in neem oil or can I have my cake and eat it ?

PERHAPS..... then we need to find some associations who were dead against this from the start and have voted accordingly and get their perspective....Twickenham ????

any others ?

and also views from said members who are outraged

regards

s

 

[roche]

There are rumours circulating that this has already happened, although the BBKA has yet again failed to communicate anything to members so until it's in print I won't start to believe it and even then I'd want to see clear evidence that they have changed their ways. Any existing 'contracts' would in all probability have to continue for the defined period.

I believe the stance is that no further endorements will be made, and that existing contracts will come naturally to end of life as the products age.

That is not the same as saying "this policy is morally wrong, we must end it"

 

[Heather]

That is correct, no further endorsements and this will cease as soon as this contract ends naturally- but what damage has been done in the meantime. Maybe 'they' (BBKA) have learned a very salutary lesson.

We were let down by BBKA,causing it irreversible damage, IMO- and promoted produce from Bayer carried the BBKA logo giving them credence that is totally undeserved.

 

[Poly Hive]

I button holed Martin last year at Stoneleigh and that is what he intimated to me, that they, the Exuctive, intended the policy to "wither on the vine"

However it does not excuse them form taking on such a silly idea in the first place and nor does it excuse them from being undemocratic. I for instance pay more than any normal member but do not get a vote and when I challenged it I got a very cheeky and snotty letter back from the Membership Sec.

Further there is an arrogance which is endemic in the "senior" levels which is institutional.

Watch the stewards strut at Stoneleigh.

PH