# Let's renovate an Apiary Inspection Program



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Let's renovate the New York State Apiary Inspection Program into the NYS Apiary Inspection SERVICE.

Any and all suggestions are valid and will be heard by all who listen here. 

This is the first step.

Joel, peggjam and other NY beeks on this list. I especially want to hear from you. This could be YOUR Service. So, please participate, I know you will.

Out of staters, we will need your help too. Many of you have had experiences that we, here in NY, have not yet had. Please be a help. Thanks.

In case you are thinking, "Who is this guy to call for reform in this manner in this forum?"

Quite often the job goes to the one who shows up. The best person for the job may be out there, somewhere. But that person isn't calling out. So I am calling out. And if by doing so, someone better suited for the job comes along and displaces me, I'm not going to take my ball and go home, I'm going to be right here making sure that I am not needed to fill this position again. 

Showing up is half the job. Anybody who has or has had hired help, like Joel and peggjam (I assume have.) know that.

Respectfully submitted, 
Mark Berninghausen, citizen/beekeeper/reformer?


----------



## peggjam (Mar 4, 2005)

Mark

Lack of comments equal lack of interest??


----------



## George Fergusson (May 19, 2005)

Patience my son. Once the ball gets rolling, there'll be no stopping it. Thrilling idea really, designing an Apiary Inspection Service. I'm still thinking about it. I'll have something to contribute.

My first question: How will it be funded?


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

I have a perfect one. There are no full time inspectors and they don't send an inspector unless you pay them to come out to inspect. There is no registration. There are no fees, expect to pay the inspetor IF you want him. There is no tax money involved. In other words, they leave you alone. Oh... I guess we already have that here in Nebraska.


----------



## Carolina-Family-Farm (Aug 2, 2005)

Mark"

I like the question you've asked here and even though I'm out of state I would like to reply.

My dad was complaining a few days ago about the amount of school taxes he (at 70 years old has to pay) I at 40 am no longer in school but were both paying school taxes for others.

So number one on my list would be to remove the inspection service from the hands of government, beekeepers who want this service should pay for it, not people who have no interest in beekeeping and prefer to keep there taxes as low as possible.

Second

There are beekeeping clubs in every state, turn inspection into a club event with several people from the club doing each inspection. This will minimize issues of the commercial beekeeper/Inspector doing inspections. Allow each club to pay for needed classes to perform the necessary inspections, older beekeeping members would add experience to education and having several rotating club members do the inspections would add honesty. 

Club dues could pay for inspection once a year as well as member classes.

Problem beekeepers who mismanage hives would learn by being involved in the inspection process, other members could help persuade them to change, offer help and education without that member feeling threatened by due coarse of law.
At the very least club members would know who had problem hives and could work with that member on a one on one basics.

Certification to transfer hives from one start to another could be done by club members after inspection, beekeepers inspecting/beekeepers.
No license, registration, fees or cost outside of club dues and membership. 

Beekeepers leaving a state heading back to there home state should pay the local area club to inspect there hives before leaving that state heading home and only pay for inspection, not club dues or membership cost.

I know your thinking what about the beekeepers who aren't involved in their area club, but I think the state already has the same issue, some beekeepers don't register or request inspection from the state and some states don't even have a state inspector.

While this plan isn't a fix all for everyone I think it would be a good starting place.


----------



## Carolina-Family-Farm (Aug 2, 2005)

Dang ......jus what Michael Bush said lol


----------



## Joel (Mar 3, 2005)

I'm thinking mark, this is important, I'll get back to it when I've had a chance to think it through. Great post Idea.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Carolina-Family-Farm,
A similar thing like that was proposed by a club in the mid section of our state. To me, not a bad idea. In practical terms though I would point to the experience that I have had being that people like to get paid for their time. And they like to get paid well and timely.

You should try your idea with your club and see how it goes. Keep us posted.

One thing else that I have noticed is that Beekeepers don't like other people in or even knowing where their apiaries are. 

One of the people who has been promoting club responsibile inspections claims to have only a few yards. There are 3 or 4 registered in his and his wifes names and a variation of his name. He also tells people that he has 500 colonies. He also claims that his honey is Organic. And he lives in mid NY. Organic? Where is there that much organic forage in mid NY? 

So, if this individual would play games with the current system, why would he do otherwise with any other, even his own clubs? I have no reason to believe that he would.

Mark


----------



## peggjam (Mar 4, 2005)

"Patience my son."


Dang......I knowd I was adopted.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Thanks Sis. 

That's just to help keep you under the raydar.


----------



## Joel (Mar 3, 2005)

Here's what I want from inspection services.

1) I need to trust my inspector implicitly. This means there must be standards set. This can be accomplished quite simply through a background investigation (People I hire under NYS civil service in my day job complete an application, a 46 page background questionaire,all school records from kindergarten through college, are checked through NCIC, NYSPIN,FBI, have family friends and ex-wives interviewed,checked through local systems for any criminal history, submit a full credit history and undergo a full physical and psyhchological evaluation) I'm not suggesting anything near this stringent but something more than there is. When I heard a NYS inspector was caught stealing equipment from a South Carolina yard (of a NYS beekeeper) I knew there was something in his background that would have revealed what type of person he was. I see it all the time. Perhaps a thorough background questionaire, credit report, and a NYS criminal history check. I'd be happy to send the one we use along for modification. Make the positions full time and pay at a level that will attract the appropriate people. Right now inspection services resembles an old boy network, there are laws (with both criminal and civil implications) in place to prevent this.

2) If registration/inspection is mandatory ( and it is in NY) I don't want my inspector to be in a conflict of interest situation. (he sells nucs, I sell nucs, he sells honey, I sell honey). I'm researching NYS executive law as well as state and federal anti-trust cases. I am confident what NY is doing is not legal or may have precedent that may have civil impact. I do not believe the state can require me under any circumstances to be inspected by competition. That doesn't mean there can't be part time commercial inspectors, I am entitled to have someone who is not in business inspect my business. For my knowledge at this point, for tools of change if we can't bring our program into line. We pay teachers a years salary to work 8 or 9 mos a year, we could do the same with inspectors if we want an accountable program.

3) Inspections either have to be mandatory for everyone and everyone registers and pays or it is service and those requesting pay. There needs to be provision to inspect beekeepers who are not taking care of business and get reported. If disease is found the beek pays, if not the person who complained pays the fee. I do expect the program to have tax support since NY growers and consumers get benefit from pollination services. If you migrate hives into NYS a nominal fee should be charged with or without inspections, migratory beeks (like me) bring our problems such as AHB, AFB, mites, beetles, with us wherever we go and will ultimately leave something behind. 

4) Don't expect to open my hives during the honey flow. I don't have time to be there when it's done (in many cases), and leave everything exactly the way you found it. I accept once in awhile a queen will get crushed. If you leave and excluder out and kill 4 queens in a day you're not acting responsible, expect to compensate me. My time is worth 30 bucks and hour, if you don't show up and don't call, expect to compensate me. Mark any hive you inspect so I know. Send me an E-mail report of my inspection including any incidental damage done such as a killed queen or a broken frame. I can deal with a small problem if I know about it.

5)Get a website for 11 bucks a month,or get a spot on NYS site that allows me to see what's going on, results of areas where AFB, AHB or other problems are found and where I can contact the department.

6) Show up when you say you will. I've been passed around by NY inspections like a bowl of mashed potatoes at thanksgiving dinner. If you say you're going to do something, be professonal and Keep a log, keep your committments. I would like to be inspected the same time every year.

7) Work with Dyce (who already gets tax money partly thanks to me)and put together some brochures to keep beekeepers informed about the program,common disease identification, treatments and who the inspectors are with contact information.

I'm very willing to pay for this type of program both with taxes and registration fees. Inspections services will always be needed for migratory operations and to protect responsible beekeepers. 

Well, you asked, it is at least a place to start. I really appreicate your efforts regarding this and hope we are on a path to make our inspection services something we can support and gain from.

[ January 15, 2006, 08:50 AM: Message edited by: Joel ]


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

psych eval? that would have helped in the past.

Registration/Inspection Manditory? I don't think so. It's not quite that way.

Thanks for taking your time to think about what you wanted to say. Shall I come down tomorow to look at your colonies? Oh, yeah. I'm not at work now , am I? I'll meet you in Small Cell.
















Since you brought up Dyce Lab. Did you know that the people with their hands on the purse strings are at 10B Airline Drive, Albany, NY?

Hey, isn't that the Dept. of Ag & Mkts?

It sure is.


----------



## Joel (Mar 3, 2005)

Registration/Inspection Manditory? I don't think so. It's not quite that way

Read the state law, I have, It is the same level of mandatory as is burning infected AFB Hives.

(Since you brought up Dyce Lab. Did you know that the people with their hands on the purse strings are at 10B Airline Drive, Albany, NY?)

And don't you think Dyce owes us something for that tax money? And Paleese don't say Master Beekeeping program and thymol research!

{Oh, yeah. I'm not at work now , am I? I'll meet you in Small Cell.}

Did you start this post and ask for a response from me specifically? Don't be offened by anything in my post personally, none of it is a result of anything you've done. I think you may be part of teh solution as opposed to part of the problem. I know what I propose is an ideal (mine), I know we have to deal with reality, but we have to start somewhere don't we. One thing I will say, if you don't want my opinion don't ask!

I think what you are doing is the best thing to happen with inspections in the past decade.

[ January 15, 2006, 09:09 AM: Message edited by: Joel ]


----------



## peggjam (Mar 4, 2005)

Mark

As you know, we talked about this by PM, and my suggestions, while not as detailed as Joel's (Joel stop that, your gonna get yer hands all messed up, an I still need nucs this year LOL), they sound errilly similar, don't ya think?? Bees are so important to our ag businesses, that I somehow can't see the state without a program in place, even if it is less than perfect. I do think that it needs to be updated to take into acount the number of beekeeps doing private research with their own time and funds, such as myself. Granted the results will proably not result in overwhelmingly massive "discoveries" but it is our right to prusue these avenues without undo inpedance from the state. So you pretty much know where I stand.

As far as inspectors not being able to wear gloves, that is just plain stupid. I would rather have someone who is comfortable inspect my bees than someone who is jumpy and nervous because they might get stung more than you could count. Just another reason to keep my hives to myself. LOL!!


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 1, 2004)

I sure like much (but not all) of what has been said so far.

I recall that at one time there was a proposal that those who get Cornell certification as a Master Beekeeper be able to hire themselves out as an Inspector...for whatever the market (the beekeeper) would pay. I was among those who felt this would be a great thing for hobbyists and possibly sideliners. "The market" would quickly seperate the good from the bad. 

One of Richard Taylor's most controversial positions was that 'we' should do away the the state inspection programs as they then (and now, in NYS) exist. He pointed out that they were put in place when AFB was threatening to shut down US beekeeping. Antibiotics largely did away with (or covered up) that problem and, he said, AFB was no more a problem than was/is mastitis (s/p?). Taylor opinioned that Inspection was largely being kept in place to provide employment to inspectors, as it was otherwise of no real use to anyone.

Now, were 'Inspection' to somehow morph into a service that was not government run and was paid for by those who wanted it...Taylor might approve!


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Joel ole buddy,
Either I am or you were mistaking the tone of each others posts.

Didn't you see my tongue sticking out of the side of my mouth?In parts of the post below yours.

I guess as a most recent Apiary Inspector I should be familiar with the laws pertaining to Bees. I'm not. I should be. But I have never used the law to force anything. If I had resistance I back off. I gave out copies to those who wanted them. But I don't know them. Chapter and verse, as I should.

I was never instructed to register apiarys because it is manditory. This may be the source of my confusion. I'll get out my copy and read it cover to cover. I'll check with you to see if we have the same thing.

As I am sure you know, there are laws you have and laws that you use. The manditory part of registration doesn't get used. Not with force anyway.

I agree with you about Dyce Lab. I don't know how much of their money is controled by Ag & Mkts. And as far as Knowledge on this topic. It's anecdotal and therefore suspect and definately incomplete so I probably shouldn't have said anything about it. If Nic or anyone else is out there looking in, maybe they could tell us where their funding comes from?

Yes, I did ask for and I value your input. I will treat this seriously from now on. I've been warned that my sense of humor is sometimes not appropriately used. I apologize.

Thank you for that last line. Let's hope that it's all not a waste. To make sure that it isn't a waste, we have to keep going forward in a positive, unified manner. A consensus like manner. That's what I hope for.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

peggjam,
The reason given for not wearing gloves is: what about when you get into an AFB colony? Burn the gloves? Of course. It has been said that the cost of gloves was too much. What with the amount of gloves that would have to be burnt.

I'm just telling you what I was told.

Personally, I don't like gloves. I like to know that I have what I have in my hands is firmly in my control.

But now we have available chemical resistant gloves and there are rubber coated bee gloves too.

When it comes to OSHA recommended protective clothing for Apiary Inspection workers, we are going to have to wear gloves and suits or the workers comp probably won't be ours to collect.

Finally on gloves or no gloves. You can learn how to work without them in most cases, with practice.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Well, Mr. Spear,
Would you like Aaron Morris to inspect your nucs next spring? What would you pay him? What would his inspection be worth? 

Would you pay his mileage? Or just the actual time he spent in the apiary? 

Would you expect him to keep confidential any findings? Or would he be free to share with others what he found in your nucs or hives?

These are all things that are provided in todays program, a confidentially held inspection from aperson who works to get to you, is paid to get there and be there and therefore has an obligation to do the job well and often under the supervision of the beekeeper. Not as often as we and you would like. But often, anyway.

While I have Mr. Spear's attention, did you answer my question about your six weeks of employment with Ag & Mkts? What was that like for you and why did you leave? If you have followed much of the other threads lately you will see that I can take quite a bit. Is there anything that you would like to say about me or the way you were treated back in 2000?

How about now? How were you treated this past summer? Were your demands for early summer or late fall inspection respected? Any results that you'd like to share?

Mr. Spear, anytime you want to inspect my colonies, just call and we'll set up a time. My number is available from the office in Albany to anyone who asks for it, so I might as well give it out here, too. I won't answer before 6:00 AM, and I won't answer after 9:00 PM.

p.s. to mr. spear, what happened to your angel fish business?

p.s. to all, i believe that "the market" that mr. spear talks about would only find two things. those beekeepers who wouldn't inspect your hive for what you are willing to pay. and just what that rate of pay would have to be. but mostly colonys wouldn't get inspected. you might be surprised at the number of bee havers there are.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

D'OH ! Thanks for participating, Mr. Spear, we need more positive responses from all points of view. Thanks


----------



## BULLSEYE BILL (Oct 2, 2002)

Who was it that said that the best government was the LEAST amount of government?

Although it would be nice to have a knowlegable person to call when you have problems, especially when you are just starting out, I am not sure that I want a 'power that be' sticking their nose into my hives when I don't need them.

I like the fact that we don't have a program in my state. I will be responsible for my own problems and my own solutions. And that is at no cost to anyone else but me.


----------



## David Stewart (Jan 22, 2005)

BB- I concur 100%....While I'm certainly a new beek with a lifetime of information to learn, I prefer my gates remain closed unless I've invited you here. 

David


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Not all posts to the thread need a reply.

That has been my mantra lately. So far, it hasn't gotten through to me, myself.

I still seem to need to respond to each post, as if to let the poster know that they are being listened to by me, if no one else. I'd be the most egotistical person in the world if I thought that that was so. My ego is big,(if you all had not noticed, wink, wink) but not that big.

So, to respond to Bullseye Bill.

With out government where would we be. Ever try to build a road by yourself?

I'm not saying that government should rule. We, in this country, are the rulers, here. You and I and everyone else. 

So, let's get ruling. 

Question for Bullseye Bill,

I am ignorant about KS. Okay we established that.

What is beekeeping like there? Lots of beekeepers? Not many? Mostly Commercial? Mostly Non-commercial? Any migratory beekeepers, coming into and staying for a while?

Being responsible for ones self is everyones responsibilty. For sure.

Who is going to be responsible for the unresponsible citizens of our state and/or country? Individuals or the will of the collective people, in otherword, the government?

Thank you for participating. Thanks in advance for getting back to us with the answers to the questions. Ones that I am truly curious about, as I feel others may be also.

Thanks again, Mark


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Tresspassing by state employees without permission or authority of warrant is illegal in all states, isn't it.

It may happen. It probably does happen. But I still think that it is illegal.

If I am wrong, someone set me straight.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Joel,

New York State Laws relating to Bee Diseases, Circular 807. Article 15 of the Ag&Mkts Law Chapter 48 of the laws of 1922, as amended by Chap. 311 of the laws of 1927, Chap. 398 of the laws of 1938, Chap. 526 of the laws of 1948, Chap. 430 of the laws of 1985, Chap. 577 of the laws of 1996.

That is what I have and what each Apiary Inspector gets to hand out each year.

Is that what you have? Is this all of it? I don't know. There could be more.

I will read it.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>Tresspassing by state employees without permission or authority of warrant is illegal in all states, isn't it.

I don't think the constitutionality has ever been questioned, but I certain that many states have laws saying they can inspect your hives, on your property, without notification or a warrant, and in some places the law is not enforced that way and in others it is.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

QUESTION: Would hive entrances fitted with queen excluders retard the takeover of the colony by AHb invader swarms? 

I'm just wondering, if the AHb queen can't get into the colony, does the AHb swarm stay?

I understand that a swarming queen may be slender enough to get through an excluder.

I also understand that I don't know enough about AHb, having no experience with them.

Opinions and education are greatfully accepted.


----------



## Joel (Mar 3, 2005)

The constitution does not prevent the government (including the police) from searching private property, it guarentees us the right to be secure in our homes and protected from unreasonale search and seizure. You are protected in an area that is your house and also what is defined as "curtilage". This would commonly be barns, outbuildings, etc. and areas confined by fences, shrubs etc. Even those areas we are only protected against unreasonable searches. There are also rules regarding plain view. If an agent of the Gov't. is standing on your front porch and you have a bag of what appears to be cocaine and a set of scales commonly used for drug distribution sitting on your kitchen as well as commonly used packaging material a government agent would have the right, without a warrant to enter without your permission to your house to seize that evidence. Not search anywhere else but to seize that evidence only. An agents intent when he is on private property is a deciding factor for legality of what happens. 

Precendent cases have set the standard that areas outside house and curtilage, including open fields, are not protected from search by the Government. Therefore someone could enter an apiary in an open field or an area not part of the "curtilage" to inspect without violating your constitutional rights. Other factors come into play if property is properly posted. In NY that means your posted signs are at a certain height and signed by the owner including his mailing address. Anything less is not legally posted.

In my opinion, In most cases, with or without the law on inspection, inspectors would have the right to enter privat property and inspect hives. This is oversimplified and of course seizing or destroying private propery may add additional burdens on the inspectors.

In NYS this would all be affected if the inspector operates a bee business and you operate a bee business at any level as you now get into into the conflict of interest area. I believe though you would have to show you are registered as a business and claim it as a business on income tax returns. Other factors may still come into play under this scenerio.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Michael,
respectfully i say that I know of a case in Ohio in which a beekeeper sued the State of Ohio for actions, including trespassing.

If someone from Ohio can confirm or refute that story, I'd appreciate it.

In other cases, in NY, I know of beekeeper who kept the Apiary Inspectors from his stored beekeeping equipment, stored supers. Access was gained by warrant.

Under Section 174. Keeping of diseased and banned bees prohibited; existence of disease to be reported.

Paragraph 2. No person shall hide or conceal any bees or used beekeeping equipment from the inspector or give false information in any manner pertaining to this article. No person shall resist, impede or hinder the commissioner or his duly authorized representatives in the discharge of his or their duties.

I really need to read this set of laws. Then when I understand them better, I will post them here. Unless you (everyone) think I shouldn't.

What boggles my mind is why haven't these laws been enforced. No one wants or should need the full force of the law, a court order or judgement, to fulfill the duties of the commissioner or his representatives, the inspectors.


----------



## Joel (Mar 3, 2005)

Mark- I Think those laws about cover it although I don't have them in front of me. A couple of very important points to remember relates to 2 words commonly used. Where the law says "shall" it means just that. Me the beek or you the inspector "must do" where the law says "shall". Where the law says "may" it means just that, may. One other section that will come into will come into play also. Most areas of law have a coverall section that if an area requires something but does not have a violation section this coverall section is what is used. In Ag. & Mkts law if someone, your or me, fails to shall and no specific violation section exists it is established as an unclassified misdeameanor (therefore criminal) offense. Unclassifed misdemeanors are looked at as Class A misdemeanors generally punishible by up to a year in jail or a $1,000 fine. I believe the violation section in Ag. & Mkts Law is Article 40 or 41. 

There is also Executive Law in NYS that governs all official actions as well as sections of Ag. & Mkts law that sets certain standards for employees and inspectors.


----------



## Joel (Mar 3, 2005)

{I really need to read this set of laws. Then when I understand them better, I will post them here. Unless you (everyone) think I shouldn't.}

Please do! Information is our ally in solving the current problems.

{Access was gained by warrant.}

Which can only be obtained in NYS by a police officer or certain peace officers under sections 690.10 and 2.10 of the Criminal Procedure Law as well as Article 26 371/376 of NYS Agriculture & Markets Law.

[ January 16, 2006, 08:28 AM: Message edited by: Joel ]


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

I don't know if this is kosher or not to say but, the poll on having an apiary inspection service is showing 70% For and a 30% Against.

The participation could be higher. Should someone go to the other threads and solicit replys to th poll? Is that idea something that is just not done, not kosher? Someone volunteer, please. I will, if no one else steps up, but not until later. I have things to do, as do you, and things are pilling up.

Thanks somebody.


----------



## danno1800 (Mar 13, 2004)

Hi, Mark, I just looked it up in Westlaw & there is a case in Ohio: Allinder v. State
Not Reported in N.E.2d, 1983 WL 3624
Ohio App., 1983.
Jul 28, 1983 (Approx. 2 pages)
It is not, however, a case that is reported in the usual court opinions from Ohio. I just read it on Westlaw if there is anything specific you'd like to know about it.
The essence was that the trial court was reversed for making several significant legal errors which affected the beekeeper's right to a fair trial. There were a few really interesting issues for beekeepers. 
The appellate court found that AFB was a real problem & properly regulated by the State; that there was a difference between bee inspectors entering an apiary without a warrant vrs. entering a private dwelling without a warrant, and several other issues.
Too bad it isn't a published opinion. Westlaw is copyrighted or I would cut & paste the who two pages for you & others to read.
I hope this help! -Dan


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

A-men Joel, a-men.

I don't know of nor have I heard of a single individual case wherein anybody has ever gone to court to face a judge or has had to pay a fine for violation of any NY State laws relating to bees.

That just blows my mind. If the man in Albany, charged with upholding these laws, doesn't, then maybe someone else, like a State Apiarist perhaps, should. Ya think? I do.


----------



## John F (Dec 9, 2005)

Specifically, what would be the service?

If it is law enforcement, why would I pay to have you come inspect me? Either I am law abiding and feel it a waste of money, or I am doing something illegal and don't want you around.

Why would I pay you to inspect other beekeepers? If I am the law abiding beekeeper, I must be assuming everyone else is not? If I pay you enough, can you make the beekeeper next door go away?

What if I am the only beekeeper willing to pay you; do I then become the law?

I certainly believe in a service oriented system vs Governmental enforcement squad for most things. Right now though, I am having a hard time seeing what service you will provide.

Perhaps an ouline of the service is a good idea.

JohnF


----------



## danno1800 (Mar 13, 2004)

And, by the way Joel, the Ohio Court found that, since this involved the inspection of a commercial beekkeper's apiary for AFB, the State had even more right to enter the premises without a warrant than in a non-commercial situation. 
You seem to have an excellent grasp of the law on search & seizure, so I think this extra fact will make your agrument even stronger. 
Hope that all helps! -Dan


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

A-men Joel, a-men.

I don't know of nor have I heard of a single individual case wherein anybody has ever gone to court to face a judge or has had to pay a fine for violation of any NY State laws relating to bees.

That just blows my mind. If the man in Albany, charged with upholding these laws, doesn't, then maybe someone else, like a State Apiarist perhaps, should. Ya think? I do.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

sorry about that i don't know what happened


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

danno1800,
Thanks. It's that kind of participation that we need, along with all of the others.

I'd just like to say that I really appreciate ALL of those who have and will participate on this thread, ALL, I do mean ALL.

Mr. Spear, you may be changing my perception about you. You have shown that you are willing to participate here. Perhaps you have felt that no one was hearing you. If you got that idea from our interactions, well I am truely sorry about that and I will be glad to listen and talk with you on a new level of respect, if you are willing to also. PM me if that would be easier for you. I said before that I wanted to address you in public so that evryone would see us do so and no one could say anything that wasn't documented.

That's all about that. Except, Thank you.

To those who wonder about what the h I'm talking about, well, if you don't know you don't really need to know. Trust me.


----------



## peggjam (Mar 4, 2005)

"In NYS this would all be affected if the inspector operates a bee business and you operate a bee business at any level as you now get into into the conflict of interest area. I believe though you would have to show you are registered as a business and claim it as a business on income tax returns. Other factors may still come into play under this scenerio."

This being the opretive paragraph dealing with the shortfalls of NYS current inspection program. I have heard of too many abuses prepetated by the inspectors to trust having them in my yards when I am not available to accompany them.

"The constitution does not prevent the government (including the police) from searching private property, it guarentees us the right to be secure in our homes and protected from unreasonale search and seizure. You are protected in an area that is your house and also what is defined as "curtilage". This would commonly be barns, outbuildings, etc. and areas confined by fences, shrubs etc. Even those areas we are only protected against unreasonable searches. There are also rules regarding plain view. If an agent of the Gov't. is standing on your front porch and you have a bag of what appears to be cocaine and a set of scales commonly used for drug distribution sitting on your kitchen as well as commonly used packaging material a government agent would have the right, without a warrant to enter without your permission to your house to seize that evidence. Not search anywhere else but to seize that evidence only. An agents intent when he is on private property is a deciding factor for legality of what happens." 

This would explain why the Amish hide their hives. If, and I am asumming this, the hives were not in plain view, then the inspectors couldn't just enter your property to inspect, correct? 
As far as why and when the current law was placed into effect, there was rampet cases of AFB statewide, and perhaps it was nessacery, that is not the case now. 

I am sure everyone is aware of the Beef Check Off program, and all the other ones like it. These programs allow the majority to force the minority to pay into a program that they neither want, nor support. The minority simply saying that the views expressed by the majority are not their views and by being forced to pay into such a program, that their freedom of free speach is being voliated. I fully agree with the reasoning of these minority producers. They should not be forced to pay into something they neither want nor support. This has direct paralells to the inspection of hives for diseases. Where the minorty is handcuffed to legistated programs that do not express their views, infringe on their rights as indivuals, and as a whole is no longer nessarcery per the orginial legistated issues, AFB.


----------



## Joel (Mar 3, 2005)

{I don't know of nor have I heard of a single individual case wherein anybody has ever gone to court to face a judge or has had to pay a fine for violation of any NY State laws relating to bees.}

Very common in NYS for Ag. Mkts laws related to farming and as it should be. The goal and attitude has been to help not hinder as you stated mark.

Thanks for the post Dan.

}If it is law enforcement, why would I pay to have you come inspect me?}

Excellant point John and this will become a central issue for NYS inspections. Is if necessary and if not why do we have it, and if it is enforcement, which you can see it is, the normal income sources would be regisration fees (think about cars, dog license and building permits) and fines for violations.

Well I gues we kicked over the can of worms.


----------



## danno1800 (Mar 13, 2004)

You are both quite welcome. These are very important issues for beekeepers to understand, in my opinion. Hope I ma helping in that effort. -Dan


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

peggjam,
As per your response to paragraph one.
My response is: If inspectors had fulltime employment they wouldn't need to support themselves with what maybe the only thing that they know how to do or the best thing that they are capable of. That's my case.

I know enough about bees and I have learned enough about marketing, that that is what I do when I think, "I need to do something to take up slack during the lean times of Apiary inspection." 

One of my best friends said, "For me, a poor year of beekeeping is always better than the best year of inspection." In otherwords his bee business brought in more money than his salary as an inspector. He could walk away from inspection and be none the worse.

But I'm not him. To me my bee business helps me to be available to do the inspection. And the inspection compliments the bee business.

Would you have wanted me, straight out of college, inspecting your bees, 20 years ago. Knowing what I know now, through working for Commercial/Migratory Beekeepers during the last 20 years, during inspection and on my days off is one of the best colleges of beekeeping available. 

From my point of view, the best Apiary Inspectors either come from or own their own beekeeping business. 

The hardest working inspectors are those with Commercial/Non-Migratory and Commercial/Migratory experience. One in particular spent 13 or 14 years working for a big name queen producer.

You can't buy experience like that at any college. I value my time at OSU-ATI. But my diploma from the NYS school of hard knocks is very valuable to me.


I don't know the specific situation that you refer to with the Amish in you area. So, What can I say.

Sometimes people just put their hives where they are out of the way and some times people actually hide them. If you know any of these people and you suspect that they might have a disease problem. Help them out by telling them that there is a free service that will come to them to look at their bees with them. The Amish, in my experience, if I must generalize about one group of peoples, are easy to get along with. Especially if you talk to them about their bees, farmer to farmer. Other than us all being people, we here and they where they are are all farmers, farmers of bees. Go from there and you just might make a new friend in bees.

Lastly, and then I really must go until later or my wife will be disappointed, again.

Lastly I will say that, what effects one effects all. Just as it is true, that we won't truly be free until we are all free, what one does effect us all. Sometimes negatively, sometimes positively and sometimes benignly. But we are effected.

With that in mind, I believe that the NHB should be and is primarily supported by the bigger producers of honey.

And if what I am hearing comes to pass, the NHB will become a Packer Board. Unless I am mistaken. And that happens more often than it should, perhaps.

Thanks for your patience. I'm finished for now.


----------



## Jim Fischer (Jan 5, 2001)

In reply to all the 4th Amendment "search and
seizure" discussion, please understand that
Apiary Inspectors are "public health" officials,
and as such, are allowed by specific legislation
to enter any apiary and inspect hives without a "warrant".

If you think that's terrible, understand that
protecting public health, moreso in the case
of human diseases, often trumps the constitutional
rights of those unlucky enough to be carrying an
infectious disease. TB is a growing problem, one
that had been completely licked in the USofA.

Read up on the public health reaction to TB over
the years, and you'll find that the LEAST
"insulting" thing done is to send out caseworkers
to hand you your medication, and WATCH YOU TAKE 
IT. Its not that they don't trust you, the
disease is simply too nasty for them to afford to
"trust" anyone. (The basic problem is that people
who get TB often "get" TB because their systems
have been weakened by heavy drinking, drug use
and so on, things that tend to make one forget
to take one's medication.) Some people have been 
taken into protective custody to insure that they 
took their medication every day. Yes, this is
a "violation of their rights". Tough - it 
protects public health, and it is legal to do so.

You may think that "bee diseases" are not worthy
of such concern, and you may be right. But you
get a whole different view when you realize that
things like AFB tend to re-appear in the same
apiaries year after year after year, as some
beekeepers are indignant about suggestions that
they take their losses early, take them like men,
and honestly admit that they need to change their
practices to prevent such widespread problems in
the future.

So, inspectors, in theory, protect "my hives"
from everyone else's sloppy practices, and I am
only able to enjoy this protection if I support
the Apiary Program as a whole. 

Its just like the local Sheriff. I like him and
his deputies, and I know he is there to "protect"
me. I'm not a criminal, but at the same time,
I cannot complain if he pulls me over and writes
me a defective equipment warning for having a
blown taillight bulb. I'm still not a "criminal",
and the deputy is still welcome to drop by for
coffee, and no more need be said about the
incident, AS LONG AS I FIX THE PROBLEM PROMPTLY.

If I don't fix the problem, then I become a
hazard to safety, and perhaps a "criminal", and 
I can expect to be fined. This tactic agreement 
is how we keep this a quiet and pleasant place to 
live, rather than a lawless hellhole. In extreme 
cases, that's why they wear guns all the time - so
I don't have to.

So, you have two choices - inspectors, who are
able to take limited and well-known steps to
"help" you, against your will if required, or
a mob of nearby beekeepers who take it upon
themselves to torch your hives one night.

One approach is "civilization", the other is
"anarchy". Its a choice.


----------



## John F (Dec 9, 2005)

<sqkcrk>
To those who wonder about what the h I'm talking about, well, if you don't know you don't really need to know. Trust me.

For some reason, I feel that this was directed at me. Sorry if I am wrong.

I may not know some specific reason for your inquiry but I do see concept in the discussion. It appears to be the idea of privitizing a service that is now a public service. I believe this to be a good thing.

I don't have any idea what your laws are. In general, I would probably argue against them anyways; searching for something a lot more free market.

As far as an inspection service, I could see interest in a few ways. As a buyer of bees, it would be nice to know that I was buying stock that was deemed healthy by some person willing to stick their neck out somehow. As a producer of those bees I could see where advertising that I have my bees inspected by such-n-so could give me a competative advantage or at least keep me in the market.

Things along these lines.

When you start talking along the lines that a person implicitly agrees to some covanent just by having a hive then I start to think things are going in a bad direction.

As to trusting you, why?

In your last post you seem to suggest that your knowledge of bees is valuable. Why then isn't this something you market?

And I still don't see how you can get rid of the problem of conflict of interest. If you are the law and you are a competitor, ...

Well, why should I trust you again?

JohnF


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Jim Fischer, Thanks for that. Very well put. I hope you don't mind if I use what you have said here sometime. Keep in touch.

John F, That was not directed at you especially. But if the shoe fits...?

I am new to internet communication and I am learning to not take things personally, if I can. Sometimes it's hard.

No, John. The idea is to renovate, to change, to improve and refocus the already existing program in New York.

What I have in mind is a Mind Change thing. The Apiary Inspectors are servants of the people. Similarly to the State Police or the Public Teachers. Now, you might not find very many of those people who would say that they are there to serve you and me, but they are. Isn't there a Police Motto that goes, "To Serve and Protect"?

Well Apiary Inspectors are out there amongst you serving more than beekeepersby protecting he beekeeping industry of New York.

My focus has always been that I was serving the beekeepers of New York State by helping beekeepers to keep their colonies healthier.


----------



## John F (Dec 9, 2005)

<sqkcrk>
I am new to internet communication and I am learning to not take things personally, if I can. Sometimes it's hard.

It gets easier with time as you apparently already assume. Then there is the daily mood swings when we can get upset at out best friends for the most minor of things.

The apparent annonymous aspect of this medium can make it harder. If you need to know who I am I will tell you. I am the sort of person that is not afraid to ask the hard questions or get into someones face; on the net or in person. Don't fear, I consider myself very rational and not likely to make emotional outbursts. (Although, I am no Spock!)

I did not read your other thread prior to this one. Your request at the beginning seems fair to me; how to start a service based business. I enjoy watching people make business.

My intent was to offer an unbiased (as far as the service) opinion. I'm a complete newbie beekeeper but not a newbie businessman. I offered my opinion as to services that make sense to me.

My bias though is smaller government. I seek and then try to destroy in others the idea that government does any good in a free market. You see, you have pointed out that you do a great service for the beekeepers of your area. Cool. But you charge everyone to do it. Why should a Phys. Ed. teacher in the Bronx pay to protect the beekeeping industry in NYS?

So, service to protect beekeeping business - GOOD. Pay for it with tax dollars - NOT GOOD.

Do I expect instant converts? Naw. I only hope one person sits back and thinks, hmmm.

My question of trust can be taken many ways. I would prefer that you assume I am asking in a sincere way and that you consider an answer that promotes your service.

Like I said, I may buy bees from your area and I would like to feel comfortable knowing your name is on my purchase.


----------



## John F (Dec 9, 2005)

<Jim Fischer>
that's why they wear guns all the time - so
I don't have to.

Not so, and a dangerous message indeed.

They wear guns for self protection.

JohnF


----------



## George Fergusson (May 19, 2005)

Here in Maine we have a very active Department of Fish and Wildlife and the enforcement arm of the department are called Game Wardens. Generally nice folks. They carry guns too. They have a very broad mandate and are authorized to enter onto private property without a warrant for just about whatever reason you can think of that's remotely associated with fish and wildlife. Typically this means wandering through your woods looking for illegal hunters or evidence thereof. There have been some issues- at one time, there was a very zealous warden who took it upon himself to shoot any dog he thought was in the process of, or had in the past, or even was likely in the future, to chase deer. Game Wardens can enter your house or property and search it if they have reason to believe you have illegally acquired game, hanging in your barn, in your car, in your freezer, on your dinner table, or hanging on your wall.

Game wardens have also worked closely with the State Police in the apprehension of people growing marijuana. A State Trooper cannot enter your land to search for marijuana plants, but when accompanied by a Game Warden...

My only run-in with a Game Warden involved my friend's sailboat which broke loose from it's mooring one spring, floated away, got holed, and sank. A game warden found it, tracked it back to me, and delivered it- along with a summons for littering which ultimately ended up costing me $60. The way that situation played itself out is hilarious and one of my few run-ins with the law that has served to taint my whole attitude on the matter, but it has nothing to do with this thread, or with beekeeping.

If feral bees were to be viewed as "wildlife" either in need of monitoring or management, I have no doubt that Game Wardens would pursue them with the ruthless efficiency that they apply to everything else. I don't believe at this time they're the least bit interested in feral honey bees or managed apiaries.

[ January 17, 2006, 05:15 AM: Message edited by: George Fergusson ]


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

JohnF,
This is good.

I never thought about it the way you are putting it.

You've opened my eyes to a new possibility.

Coming from my experiences of the lasy 20 years, I have been stuck thinking that this has to be or had to be a Government run program, because it always has been. 

You are taking my brain into a NEW direction. A NEW way of thinking about servicing and protecting the needs of our industry.

WOW, what a concept. Where have you been hiding these past twenty years.

Can you hear my excitement.

I've been spending the last few days, when not here on beesource.com, writing down thoughts andf visions of how my Honey business is going to grow. 

Yesterday, I spent six hours with my publisher friend designing a banner to hang on the wall behind me, when I am at St. Lawrence University's "Meet Your Local Food Producers" Food Show and Banquet.

I went to Timothy's to get a banner. I came home with a banner, new, newly designed and printed, business cards and an 800 number(at $9.99/month for 100 minutes). Can you believe it?

When I showed the banner to my wife and son, Marshall's eyes widened and he said, "Wow,neat." That's all I needed to hear to know that I had something special.

So, you bringing this idea about "privitizing" Apiary Inspection is an exciting idea. Take it out of the states hands. Relieve them of the responsibility. Wow, what an idea.

Thanks, loads.


----------



## Kieck (Dec 2, 2005)

I don't have a problem with privatizing apiary inspections, but then we need to address state regulations and restrictions. If the state no longer enforces its laws, why have the laws?

I know that brings up the next debate: should states have regulations pertaining to bee hives? I also know that one has been debated on this board before.

I think we need to address some questions before we get into details of reforming or recreating inspection services.

1) Should we have state or federal regulations on bees? Are bees important enough as pollinators to warrant concern by the general public? If they are, doesn't the welfare of bees rest in the hands of society?

2) How do we standardize services and issues? For instance, if a producer wants to spray a field, how does he notify beekeepers in the area about his intended application? With private services inspecting apiaries, who acts as a clearinghouse for information?

3) How do we prevent or limit monopolies in inspection services? I can't imagine many businesses will form to compete in apiary inspections, and most Americans agree than competition is necessary or at least beneficial in a free market system, so how do we promote competition and regulate the industry to prevent monopolies?

4) Is there a need to inspections for anything other than AFB? Should inspectors check for Varroa and tracheal mites and SHB and AHB, or should they stick to AFB and other diseases of that sort only?

5) Will private inspectors be allowed to use federal resources (bee labs, in particular, for confirming diagnoses) without paying for the services? Or, should the federal labs be privatized as well? If they are, will they continue to offer apicultural services or will they change focus to make more money?

I'm sure others have plenty of other questions about these issues, too. I just wanted to see how some of you feel about these topics before getting into details of reforming inspection services.


----------



## Joel (Mar 3, 2005)

{Game Wardens can enter your house or property and search it if they have reason to believe you have illegally acquired game, hanging in your barn, in your car, in your freezer, on your dinner table, or hanging on your wall.}

Only if you allow them or if they have a warrant or if the contraband is in plain view. 4th amendment rights or infringements can not be modified by state laws.

A state trooper (or any police/peace officer) in any state conducts any contstitutionally dictated procedured including Miranda, search and seizure, Huntley and Mapp hearings (dealing with search, warrant and incrimination challenges) as well as taking life in the line of duty along the same guidelines.

Having a game warden does not give a trooper any more right to conduct search and seizure in any state than if he was alone, except in the case of vehicles not on the owners property. A game warden may be able to establish different probable cause for a search (warrantless or not) when acting to his special duties relating to game offenses and then be accompanied by a Trooper for the search. In court it will always come back to the intent at that time of the search. Open fields not considered curtilage could be searched constitutionally by either alone or together.

Privitization of many government services usually results in a more efficient operation, I don't know how you get around the enforcement aspect unless you designate by state law certain individuals with authority.

[ January 17, 2006, 12:13 PM: Message edited by: Joel ]


----------



## mwjohnson (Nov 19, 2004)

I am smart enough to know that I can't offer anything that hasn't already been said better by others.

BUT I think that any program should be state run.

I HAVE to get(and pay for)my car to be inspected(and possibly pay the same inspector to repair any violations),even if I have 1 car or a car rental company with 10,000 cars.So what's the difference? 

And,Mark,we ought to have one of those portable irradiation units to use for a modest fee, then possibly, there would be fewer hard feelings IF AFB were detected& confirmed,as the burning of a persons hives is really going to hurt(emotionally and financially)
Then you(the inspector)is less likely accused of being in a position of being able to "harm" the "competition".

Good Luck,
Mark Johnson


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>I HAVE to get(and pay for)my car to be inspected(and possibly pay the same inspector to repair any violations),even if I have 1 car or a car rental company with 10,000 cars.So what's the difference? 

And that is a huge conflict of interest. I had a friend who took his car to several saftey inspectors in OKC on one day back in 1972 and each said he passed except for something they sold. One said it was the muffler, one said it was the tires, one said it was the suspension etc. One finally passed him with no changes to the car whatsoever. He took all the documentation down to the State DMV and asked them what that was all about.

And I haven't had to have my car inspected for many years. I've seldom lived in a state that requires it. In fact all totaled I had cars inspected only in these years: 1972 (OK), 1973(OK), 1993(CO). There was no inspection in Wyoming and has been none in Nebraska since about 1974. No, there was no sudden rise in accidents when the inspection program was scrapped. But I'm sure there was a huge decrease in revenue for the inspectors who sold brakes, suspension work, mufflers and tires.


----------



## John F (Dec 9, 2005)

<Kieck>
I'm sure others have plenty of other questions about these issues, too. I just wanted to see how some of you feel about these topics before getting into details of reforming inspection services.

Your questions are very good questions. I mean that sincerely.

Without getting into too much of a debate on the form and merits of a free market system I think you need to read up a bit. I will gladly help. Start with:

Economics for Real People
An Introduction to the Austrian School
2nd Edition
By Gene Callahan

Free PDF version - http://www.mises.org/books/econforrealpeople.pdf 

Or buy it as a real live paper book at the store at www.mises.org. (This is what I prefer since I do most of my reading at lunch wherever I end up at lunch. I hate reading large books as PDF and I'm a geek with a $700 phone that has Windows on it.)

Strangely enough, this is a suggestion I posted in another thread here on Beesource today!







Well, I seem to be doing my part in spreading the word.

Anyway, I will make some comments from my perspective addressing Kieck's questions that may give some ideas a little room to bounce around in our collective cranium.

1. You cannot have a free market and regulation. These are mutually exclusive ideas.

The market cannot lie, if the pollinators are important then the market will protect them. Don't give up on the power of the market.

2. Standardization is a function of the market. If the market demands it then the service providers will provide it or go out of business. If a producer does not care about someone elses bees then they will not tell the beekeeper. If the beekeeper does not care about their bees then they will not talk to local producers about their spraying program.

3. A monopoly cannot exist in a free market. (This may take some work learning to fully understand) The super simple answer is competition. The basic idea is that: One supplier may "corner" the market by being more efficient and appear to be a monopoly. To remain the leader though this supplier must maintain the difference in efficiency or be pushed off by its competition. A "real" monopoly requires a force of coercion, which usually takes form as governmental intervention.

4. The needs will be demanded by the market. In this case, the beekeepers and their customers will identify the needs by their demands. And, disease may not be the only dimension of inspection. I may, for example, wish for an unbiased knowledgable assessment of a package producers idea of gentleness.

5. The argument against a State's (NYS for example) involvement is also the argument against a State's (the Federal Government) involvement. A lab service should live or die by the need of the service. Making swim instructors pay for the needs of the beekeeping industry promotes many bad things, such as an unrealistic idea of need. (And then a surge of regulation to coercively provide the need.)

JohnF

[ January 17, 2006, 01:07 PM: Message edited by: John F ]


----------



## Kieck (Dec 2, 2005)

Thanks for the info, JohnF! I won't pretend for a minute that I really understand economics -- I don't. My understanding of economics is pretty rudimentary at best. With that said, I do intend to read the book you suggested. It might be a while before I get to it, but I do intend to read it.

To give an example of how poor my understanding of economics is, I once asked a vice president of a bank about the interest rates paid on savings accounts (passbook, CDs, etc.). I said I believed that banks make their money (profit) on the difference between interest rates; banks loan out money at higher interest rates than they borrow money in the form of bank accounts. This vice president informed me that the two rates aren't linked at all, and banks do not make money on the difference between the rates. I couldn't understand that argument then, and I still can't comprehend it today. 

I have several problems with this "free-market" system of inspections. I want top-notch inspections at low or no cost. Obviously, I'm unlikely to find that.

I also want top-notch inspections of YOUR bees. I'll help pay for them. I want to make sure that your bees don't have problems that might spread to my bees. Can the free market support such a practice, where I pay for inspections of your bees whether you want those inspections or not?

Public health rarely enters well into the free market system. That's where I see a shortcoming when we talk about the value of pollinators in general. If the public creates a system of inspection because the people are worried about the health of the bees and the impacts of that health on humans, and the public contributes financially to fund those inspections, how does that differ from having a governmental inspection agency? Isn't such an agency, by definition, a "governmental" agency?

>>A monopoly cannot exist in a free market. (This may take some work learning to fully understand) The super simple answer is competition. 

Can you (or anyone else) explain this? I understand that if competition is eliminated (creating a monopoly), by definition it's no longer a "free market," but isn't this the aim of big business? Think of the airlines: after deregulation, many of the airlines are going out of business. Some are going bankrupt, some are merging, some are buying others out. Why couldn't this end up as one big airline? What prevents such a situation from winding up as only one left in the business? Wouldn't that be a monopoly?

>>Standardization is a function of the market.

To some extent, I think you're right about this, but then I think of instances where products aren't standardized. Think of computer software and hardware. Most PCs won't run Apple software. At the same time, if all software was produced by one company (think "Microsoft"), wouldn't that constitute a "monopoly?"

Honestly, I support state-run inspection programs. I think government shines in this sort of venue. Just to give a different perspective:

The dairy industry is heavily regulated (because of financial support issues, health concerns, etc.) and inspected. Dairy farmers are subject to state inspections to test the quality of the milk produced at their facilities. I like this idea for several reasons. I like some regulations on the safety of the milk I drink. I like the standardization of the ratings. (I realize that the free market might be able to do all of this as well.) But I also like knowing that I'm not going to wind up paying the health costs of individuals who decide, for whatever reason, that they don't want to drink inspected milk, wind up getting sick, and either can or can't afford the health care. If they have insurance, my policy's premiums go up because the insurance company won't just swallow those costs. If they don't have health insurance, those emergency treatments get covered by tax money. I think, in the long run, I might pay less for those state dairy inspections than I might for the problems that come from not having state-run inspections.

Maybe that's a form of "free market," too. If government services cost less than privatized services in the big picture, maybe that's what the market should choose.


----------



## John F (Dec 9, 2005)

<Kieck>
I once asked a vice president of a bank ...

LOL. I have 3 good friends that are bank presidents. (Granted, one is my banker so he may not count, but the other two are just goods buddies) I expect that I would get 3 different answers if I asked them seperately since I would expect them each to identify their difference in the market place. In a room together I know what they would say and what your VP has told you is only sort of off base. Truly, this difference you identify is not the BIG difference that they use to make money so it comes down to what we mean by make money.

But this isn't really economics.

Honest, go grab the PDF I posted and read just the first chapter talking about what is economics. It's small. I would enjoy discussing the book when you get around to it but don't feel pressured to tackle until you are ready.

<Kieck>
I want top-notch inspections at low or no cost.

I read this as: I want top-notch inspections that someone else pays for. Remember, nothing is free.

<Kieck>
Can the free market support such a practice, where I pay for inspections of your bees whether you want those inspections or not?

This discussion would get very deep. Lot's has to be argued about your intent and such. And then the whether you want it or not. Hmm. I don't want you to be frustrated by my response...
Can we keep this question on the back burner until you better understand the framework?

<Kieck>
Can you (or anyone else) explain this?

Yes, but first the framework grasshopper.

<Kieck>
but isn't this the aim of big business?

As a businessman it is certainly my aim to be the only supplier for my market. I keep trying to out perform my competition but it seems that they keep trying to outperform me. We all aim to win, it is why we play.

[another way to play]
If I could just come up with something that would get rid of the competition... I know, I'll get my Gov. buddy to institute a regulation...

This is competition by force. Winning by pointing a gun.

<Kieck>
Why couldn't this end up as one big airline?

It could.

<Kieck>
What prevents such a situation from winding up as only one left in the business?

The power of the law of supply and demand. If this one company does not operate at peak efficency some enterprising individual will become a new entrant and try and profit from the delta. (hehe, a little play on words







) In a free market, there isn't anything to keep entrants out.

<Kieck>
Wouldn't that be a monopoly?

No. Let's toss in the definition:

Monopoly: Exclusive control by one group of the means of producing or selling a commodity or service: Monopoly frequently... arises from government support or from collusive agreements among individuals (Milton Friedman).

It's a matter of control. Having only one supplier is not a monopoly unless they also can control whether an new entrant can enter the market.

<Kieck>
if all software was produced by one company (think "Microsoft"), wouldn't that constitute a "monopoly?"

Again, by the same argument as above, no. But specifically addressing standardization: Standards are subject to the same forces as anything else in a market. You see a couple in the computer world because each business is trying to show the market that it is the more efficient choice. Their standard being their differential in the market.

As a side, I spent a couple of years on an ANSI standards committee. I happened to be unbiased in the standards I worked with but many folks that were there represented actors in the market that had their idea of a standard. I eventually used the trips to mostly see the local sights and show up only for the final arguments. Still nothing got done.

<Kieck>
I think government shines in this sort of venue.

I think Government has a purpose, which I have not stated and this isn't the place for it. I do not believe that Government shines when it get involved in economics in any way. You are stating that the Government does this better than any business ever could. I would argue that folks that make this claim have a vested interest in the thing they point out.

For an example:
Some people have their own ideas as what is safe and what is not, like in the dairy industry. Some folks will support heavy regulation of this industry because it supports their idea of the ideal. They may not support heavy regulation of the marshmallow industry.

I could now direct our discussion into one of tyranny by the majority and how it lacks the corrective mechanism that the free market provides. Let's hold this off for a later time too.

<Kieck>
Maybe that's a form of "free market," too. If government services cost less than privatized services in the big picture, maybe that's what the market should choose.

Lacking some basics of "free", yes, you are thinking along the right line. Remember, to be free (in a market sense) it must allow competition.

JohnF


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Is this the "Want to renovate the freemarket system thread?" or what?


----------



## John F (Dec 9, 2005)

<sqkcrk>
Is this the "Want to renovate the freemarket system thread?" or what?

Isn't every thread?  

[stops playing dumb]

ok.









Your excitement is good. I wish you well and hope some of what I have mentioned helps you out.


----------



## Kieck (Dec 2, 2005)

On my last post, I said:

>>I want top-notch inspections at low or no cost.

JohnF then wrote:

>>I read this as: I want top-notch inspections that someone else pays for. Remember, nothing is free.

I can see where someone could take my comment this way. "I want top-notch (fill in the blank) that someone else pays for." That's really what our market system is all about. I want a really nice car that's really reliable, but I don't want to pay all of the cost. I think that's why winning the lottery appeals to so many people.

Right not, I get, what I consider to be, good inspections at a reasonable cost. Taxpayers in SD help support bee inspections, but beekeepers also pay fees when they register apiaries. In fact, (this refers more to another thread) an additional fee applies when you become a "commercial" beekeeper (more than 200 hives) in SD.

>>Can the free market support such a practice, where I pay for inspections of your bees whether you want those inspections or not?

>>This discussion would get very deep. Lot's has to be argued about your intent and such. And then the whether you want it or not. Hmm. I don't want you to be frustrated by my response...
Can we keep this question on the back burner until you better understand the framework?

Actually, this is where I really want to go. See, like most beekeepers on this board, I'm convinced that what I'm doing is the best for my bees. I realize my ideas of sound practices and anyone else's ideas might vary, and that's why I value the inspections. 

So, my bees have no health issues in my eyes. Now, where could problems come from? Easiest answer: the guy down the road with a yard of bees. He doesn't do things the way I do -- I think most of us could agree that we don't do things the same ways as other beekeepers -- so I'm concerned about his management and the potential for diseases and/or pests coming from his hives. What can I do about it? Legally, I can't go destroy his hives (unless we really do get rid of all regulations and laws). Morally, I can't go destroy his hives. If I go tell him, "I'm worried about diseases and/or parasites in you hives," I'm likely to offend or alienate him, and I still haven't corrected anything. But if an independent party checks his bees, that other inspector might be able to convince him that he has a problem.

The next problem comes from the source of funding: if I'm paying the inspector, that other beekeeper is still unlikely to believe what he's being told. And I don't blame him. If some inspector told me I had a problem, and I found out (you) had hired him, I'd be suspicious of both his report and (you).

I guess what I'm trying to say is that I'd like the hives of others inspected so that I don't wind up with problems that spread out of those hives. I'd also like to avoid conflicts of interest, because conflicts of interest just cast doubt on any reports from those inspectors. I'm willing to have my hives inspected because, 1) I really have nothing to hide; you want to check my hives, go ahead and check my hives, and, 2) I want others' hives inspected, and I can't expect that I will be treated any differently than anyone else.

So under a free-market system of inspections, who pays for the inspections? If a package supplier pays for the inspection, should I worry that the inspection might be biased to make me more likely to buy those packages? If a neighboring beekeeper pays for the inspection, should I worry that he just wants to get rid of my bees so he can put more hives on land close to my yards? If I pay for the inspection directly, should I worry that the inspector might gloss over problems just to make me more likely to pay for inspections in the future?

Earlier on this thread, someone commented about a 70-year-old man paying school taxes when he's no longer attending school or has children in school. Personally, I see a great value to having an educated society. That's why we all pay taxes to support schools. I think the same sort of thing applies to bee inspections; I believe society benefits from bees and beekeeping, and to maintain those benefits, society should help pay for inspecting hives to help keep bees healthy.

Changing subject a bit, does anyone know of a private bee-inspection service anywhere? Can such a business really make a go of it?


----------



## John F (Dec 9, 2005)

<Kieck>
That's really what our market system is all about.

I have many comments on this but refrain. In general this is call a welfare state. It's basic infection is called entitlement. It is not the intended market or the ideal market but a decent description of a symptom.

For Mark, this would have to be discussed in a different thread.

<Kieck>
Actually, this is where I really want to go. See, like most beekeepers on this board, I'm convinced that what I'm doing is the best for my bees. I realize my ideas of sound practices and anyone else's ideas might vary, and that's why I value the inspections.

This is a discussion of economics. If you want to discuss this with me, you have your homework, go do it. Otherwise, continue the current system. All I can tell you is that there are choices, your questions are excellent, your nightmares can come true.

<Kieck>
Changing subject a bit, does anyone know of a private bee-inspection service anywhere?

This is a really good question! (And on topic too!)


----------



## Kieck (Dec 2, 2005)

>>I have many comments on this but refrain. In general this is call a welfare state. It's basic infection is called entitlement. It is not the intended market or the ideal market but a decent description of a symptom.

How is it NOT the intended market? I thought the free market revolved around making as great a profit as possible (I'll confess that I haven't done my homework yet, so if you decline commenting about this, I understand). Using logic, selling a product at the highest price the market will bear while getting someone else to pay the production costs would produce the greatest profit possible.

I asked about the private bee-inspection service because I believe one might exist already if the market is there. Would anyone on this board pay for a private inspection service unless you absolutely had to? Would you request a private inspection service over a state inspection service if you had to pay more personally for the private service?


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

I know plenty of people who pay for private bee-inspection. It's done by their employees or partners.

But, if you mean inspection that results in a certificate the says, These bees are ok., then no. I've never heard of one.

Not to pooh pooh someones idea (personally i like the idea.) but, I don't think that it would last, if it ever got off the ground.

Who would do the inspections, if not other beekeepers? Who would certify the inspectors as competent or accurate?

How often would you pay for a service if you thought that your bees were fine? Whether they were or not.

You may or may not be surprised how often an inspector goes to check a yard and the owner says that the bees are okay, only to find them not okay, but dead and robbed out. "Well they looked like they were flying alright so I thought that they were okay. What are you going to do now, burn the equipment?" "No, I say, you are. Under supervision of the inspector, me."


----------



## Joel (Mar 3, 2005)

I just have one thing to add!

Well said Kieck!


----------



## John F (Dec 9, 2005)

<Kieck>
How is it NOT the intended market?

We are mixing words and need to be careful. I'm glad you intend on doing the homework.

I speak specifically about a welfare state economy and the economy as intended at the founding of this country.

Let's try to not hijack sqkcrk's thread any more than needed.


<Kieck>
Would anyone on this board pay for a private inspection service unless you absolutely had to?

Nobody would pay for anything unless they absolutlely had to. Now, who decides that you absolutely have to?

<Kieck>
Would you request a private inspection service over a state inspection service if you had to pay more personally for the private service?

Loaded question. Let's take this as a given, each entity has to live or die by the money it makes from beekeepers paying for their service.

Yes if the private service provided a better value.

Is it right though if the state service requires kindergarten teachers to cover the costs of beekeeping?

Not all things are equal in your question.

<sqkcrk>
but, I don't think that it would last, if it ever got off the ground.

I will assume that your arguments are:

<sqkcrk>
Who would do the inspections, if not other beekeepers? Who would certify the inspectors as competent or accurate?

Someone knowledgable for sure. Someone knowledgable for sure.

It will depend a bit on what service you are providing. But I have a suggestion; have you ever heard of Underwriters Labratories Inc.? This is a private certification company that is paid by suppliers in the market because they believe that their customers value the listing and will make choices based on it.

Perhaps it would be a good model.


----------



## John F (Dec 9, 2005)

<Joel>
Well said Kieck!

Oh my. Which statement are you endorsing?

JohnF


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Don't kindergarden teachers pay for second grade teachers, just like me and you, and they aren't going to use them either.

And what about the kindergarden teacher who doesn't drive. Doesn't he pay for the roads and highways?

So, far, I believe that the "test" for getting hired is, "Are you alive? Can you fill in forms? Will you show up to work? Can you work beehives without gloves? What kind of experience have you had? How many years?" and things like that. 

I'm not sure what qualified me exactly, if it wasn't my education and my willingness to do the job. I certainly have learned alot more since the begining. And knowing what I know now, I might have hired me. But, only on a trial basis, with one on one direct supervision, until I was really ready to go out solo.


----------



## Joel (Mar 3, 2005)

Virtually all of it with the exception I am willing to pay for inspections. I don't believe I'm entitled to anything free from the government. Taxpayers should also add support since they get value (cheaper food) from mass production made possible by bee pollination. Although I think privatization has the ability to greatly increase efficiency I think there would neither be a market (unless mandated) for such service and dealing with the enforcement aspect of inspections would be a nightmare.


----------



## Joel (Mar 3, 2005)

Ok, we have beat the issues about to death, let's get to the next stage! Straining out the essence.

Here are what I see as the issues.

#1 Is apirary inspection needed/wanted (Marks poll and I think this post answers yes)
#2 Apirary programs are underfunded. How do we change that.
#3 Some beeks do not want to be inspected by the competition. Some beeks (hobyists mainly) have no concerns about this issue. Do we employ both then?
#4 Inspectors need to have something more than "I have 20 yrs expericance so hire me" I'm assuming no one is beating down the door for this job so how do we recruit qualified people.
#5 Inspectors can not survive in the off season without competing.
#6 Should registration be mandatory and should there be fees. 
#7 It is clear NY beekeepers on this post and outside do not trust the inspection service due to actual problems. How do we change this, is it a mangement problem?
#8 Should we consider privitization?
#9 What other services should be offered?

Let's do it by the numbers.


----------



## ozzy (Feb 5, 2005)

I seldom post on this site but feel I can add something in this case. In my state the Illinois Department of Agriculture has managed an apiary inspection program here for many years. This is only one of many inspection programs that run the spectrum from nursery stock to livestock. Inspectors through active inspection programs insure that diseases and pests are monitored and controlled. A quick look at the web site will explain how it all works http://www.agr.state.il.us/regulation/index.html
Illinos manages its apiary program through regional apiary inspectors overseen by a state inspector. I am a regional inspector so many of your comments and concerns are issues that I have heard before. 
The Apiary Inspection act allows inspection even if the beekeeper is not present or refuses to allow inspection. Inspectors try to work with the beekeeper, however the inspection isn't an option or only for the newbee. The inspection program would be worthless if the inspector could only inspect by invitation or permission. I have found more AFB and improper use of chemicals in commercial yards than you could imagine so experience or size is no determinate of good management or disease free apiaries. Even knowledgeable beekeepers can have ideas that actually encourage the spread of disease so inspection for everyone, benefits everyone in the long run. I have had some that felt they would use an AFB infected apiary to cull out the nonresistant strains and develop a resistant strain of bee. In the meantime the disease was being spread to apiaries of other beekeepers. Unless I had the ability to inspect and work with such a beekeeper I would just be wasting my time.
One of the main concerns of beekeepers is the transmission of disease by the inspector. This is a valid concern unless proper precautions are taken. In practice I seldom see disease but you must take every precaution to avoid disease transmission. I use throwaway plastic gloves, torch my hive tools and launder my bee suits. I carry a cardboard box to throw used hive tools and plastic gloves and carry many clean and flamed hive tools so I am always using a clean tool at the next hive or yard. 
It should be stressed that one of the most important tasks of the inspector is educational. While the main task is to monitor for disease there is a lot of information that can be shared during the inspection. From where the honey flow is good to who is getting what for their honey. That is why I prefer to inspect when the beekeeper is present. I cover a large area with thousands of hives so it isn't always possible to have everyone present when I am inspecting in an area. 
Registration is required but the registration and the inspection are free in Illinois. It is part of the budget of the IDA.
What happens when a hive is found with AFB? A sample is sent to Beltsville for verification. A burn order is issued and the beekeeper is expected to burn the hive within two weeks. A reinspection is done and if the beekeeper refuses to burn the diseased hives then a warning is sent from the state inspector. Failure to comply hasn't happened but there are additional fines etc that can occur. The state will burn the hives if it has to but it is the goal to work with each beekeeper and not be confrontational.
Inspectors are knowledgeable beekeepers that are trained by other inspectors in how to make an inspection.
It would be nice if we had some way of saving the frames of diseased eq. but that isn't the way the law is written and there isn't money for doing it. There is no doubt that people don't like you trespassing or looking in their hives but as one guy at a beekeepers meeting said, "as much as I don't like an inspector poking around in my hives when I am not there I am glad he is looking at my neighbors because he is a lousy beekeeper with hives full of AFB. If the inspector doesn't clean those hives up then nobody ever will."


----------



## Joel (Mar 3, 2005)

Thanks Ozzy, hope you post more often. Looks very well organized. Sounds like you have the best interest at heart. Are you full time, may I ask the pay scale and do business operating beekeepers conduct inspections?

By the way, love your music, especially those classic guitar licks in Crazy train!


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Thanks ozzy, It is good to here from another inspector. Please contibute any additional comments that you feel you can and would be helpful.

Joel, you gotta stop outing people. your just scaring them away.


----------



## Kieck (Dec 2, 2005)

Excellent job paring down the issue to specific points, Joel! I like your numbered system.

I've been giving this issue a lot of thought. I've even talked to some of our local commercial beekeepers about inspections and regulations. I'm sure others have pointed it out before on this board: most of the regulations were put in place at the requests of beekeepers. The idea initially was to avoid conflicts between beekeepers and reduce or prevent the spread of diseases and/or pests.

So to get to Joel's numbered points:

#1) Are inspections needed or wanted? Like he said, this thread and the poll indicate that inspections are needed or wanted. In some of these states (I'm thinking specifically of SD and ND now), conflicts can arise over "territory." Beekeepers set hives in specific areas, regulated through the state. I suppose beekeepers could band together, form an organization, and establish the same process if they want it, but what's the difference between that and a state-run agency? They amount to the same thing, in my mind. "Inspections" are necessary to verify the presence of hives at those locations, even if the hives wouldn't be opened for any other reason. Again, no enforcement of the rules renders the rules meaningless.

The other part (reducing or limiting the spread of diseases/pests) is relevant here, too. Many of the inspections initially were set up to help control AFB. One of the polls on this board (I believe Joel set that one up, too?) indicated that AFB is now way down on the list of problems for most beekeepers that participated in the poll. Adding a little of point #9) here, inspection services could be used for other pests/diseases in addition to AFB to better serve beekeepers, and many states do inspect for other diseases and pests.

#2) Funding is always a problem. The way I view things, beekeeping is important to everyone in our society, whether they directly keep bees or rely on bees or not. We all like to talk about the value of bees as pollinators for fruit crops; if they're that valuable, everyone who benefits should help protect them. Beekeepers should perhaps pay additional fees.

#3) I think beekeeping is a unique industry in that information is freely shared about so many aspects. Inspections by the competition? Can you imagine the idea in most any other industry? How would Ford feel about General Motors conducting the quality inspections at the Ford plants?

As far as conflicts of interest, I see a lot of room for problems. Not just stealing hives, or deliberately destroying hives. Imagine someone who sells queens and inspects other beekeepers telling those other beekeepers that their hives will do better with the inspector's queens? What about someone who sells a chemical treatment for a disease inspecting hives? Do you think that person might be more likely to diagnose the disease or pest that his treatment targets than an inspector who doesn't sell such a treatment would be?

#4) and #5) Both go back, in part, to #2). MONEY. We can recruit better inspectors if we pay them more money. They can survive the offseason without running a business as a potential conflict of interest by receiving more money from their jobs as inspectors. The problem is funding the increased pay.

#6) I have no problem with mandatory registrations. In the county where I live, registering dogs and cats is mandatory. I know, I know. It's an "invasion" of privacy, of personal rights. But it's also a way to assign a form of responsibility to the animals. A dog goes out and bites a child or kills another person's animal or, well, you name it, how do you know who's responsible? With the rights and privileges of some of these types of freedom come responsibilities.

#7) Trust? How do we establish trust? I think that has to be earned. Avoiding conflicts of interest -- even the perceptions of conflicts of interest -- will help, I think. But it's always easier to lose trust than to gain trust.

#8) Privatization? Is there enough demand to support private inspection services? Can we have state laws regulating beekeeping, and let those laws be enforced by private individuals? I think that would indeed be a unique situation. Can you imagine contracting out, say, the highway patrol duties to a private company?

The idea is that private companies do things more efficienty than government, and competition can help drive that. For the most part, I can agree with that concept. If a state employee needs a tool, it costs the state far less to go buy that tool than it would to purchase the equipment and pay someone to make the tool. At the same time, government shouldn't make a profit on their services (think if it as a break-even situation), so regular services can be provided by government at less expense than similar services provided by private businesses.

It comes back to that question I asked before: given the option, would you pay more for a private inspection conducted by a person of your choosing than for an inspection by a state agency? If enough beekeepers would, maybe there's a whole new industry associated with beekeeping in it.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Joel and all,
Joel brought up the incident about an Apiary Inspector from NY gathering apiary location info on South Carolina apiaries.

I want to assure you all that that was an isolated occurance. There never was an authorized practice in which NYS Apiary Inspectors were supposed to gather that sort of information. That sort of info is SC's to gather, for their purposes.

This is not to say that this occurance didn't happen, just as Joel described, it did. I don't know the details.

This is not to say that it couldn't happen again. Of course it could. If it does, hopefully things will turn out better than before.

The concern expressed by Joel in bringing this issue up arte valid and important and need to be addressed. As it was and as it will be, in the future, if need arises.

Senior Inspectors are supposed to supervise their subordinants. But, they don't follow them around constantly, therefore things will happen, from time to time. I'm sure you all understand that.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Why would anyone take hard earned cash, out of their pocket, to pay me for something that is paid for with their taxes? 

Seems to me that in both situations, money is being taken for services rendered, but in a way less costly, per unit of service, and less personally painful, by it being that everyone who pays taxes, pays for the inspection of your bees and mine.


----------



## John F (Dec 9, 2005)

<Kieck>
but what's the difference between that and a state-run agency?

free market -vs- socialism.

<Kieck>
The way I view things, beekeeping is important to everyone in our society, whether they directly keep bees or rely on bees or not.

The road to ruin is paved with good intentions.

<Kieck>
A dog goes out and bites a child or kills another person's animal or, well, you name it, how do you know who's responsible?

So, if I do not register my dog I am subject to a fine for not registering dog but absolved of responsibility should it run rampant and kill a school yard full of kittens?

<Kieck>
If a state employee needs a tool, it costs the state far less to go buy that tool than it would to purchase the equipment and pay someone to make the tool.

I don't understand this comment. You think it is cheaper for the state to buy stuff?

<sqkcrk>
XXX are supposed to supervise their subordinants. But, they don't follow them around constantly, therefore things will happen, from time to time. I'm sure you all understand that.

I heard this argument when some folks were talking about an incident at Abu Gihrab [sp?].

I suppose I could just go away. After all, I'm just a newbie beekeeper hobbist. What do I know about the puritanical impulse of the human and the need to see everyone else do it my way. The socializing of an industry and use of coercion to control a market. The justification that social benefit always makes a dip into the public largess right. After all, Government money is free.

Naw, it may not be my industry, but it is a really bad idea.

The answer is: If it can't succeed in the open free market then it isn't necessary; no matter how you think other people should operate their business.

John


----------



## John F (Dec 9, 2005)

<sqkcrk>
Why would anyone take hard earned cash, out of their pocket, to pay me for something that is paid for with their taxes?

Good point. Nobody would. (Assuming they trusted that the service was the same.)

<sqkcrk>
Seems to me that in both situations, money is being taken for services rendered, but in a way less costly, per unit of service, and less personally painful, by it being that everyone who pays taxes, pays for the inspection of your bees and mine.

You are right again. It is always cheaper and easier to spread the cost. (Well, except for the personally painful part, that would be subjective.)

I certainly hope that you never ever complain about your taxes. You do not have the right. No matter how they are being spent.

JohnF


----------



## John F (Dec 9, 2005)

Let's face it.

#1 You think inspections are necessary.
#2 You want to be paid for doing them.

This is what an entrepreneur in a free market would call an opportunity.

BUT

#3 You don't think it will fly.

SO

#4 You suggest that it should be support via the coercive force of regulation.

#5 You think it should be paid for out of the public purse.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

So, JohnF, just to make sure that you aren't playing devils advocate, you think that Apiary Inspection should stop and let beekeepers and the rest of us fend for ourselves. Is that correct?


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Nope never complained about my taxes.

Complained about the way those moneys were spent.

Took steps to give someone else a chance to spend it more wisely.

Been disappointed many times.

Haven't killed myself, yet. 

Gonna keep on trying and hoping.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

JohnF, In New York State, it already is paid for by the public purse. And it is mandated by law to be so paid for and regulated.

What I would like us to focus on here is making it better. 

Do you have any suggestions about how to do that?


----------



## ozzy (Feb 5, 2005)

Joel,
What pay? Actually it is probably about 15. per hr plus travel expenses. I think the last time I looked it was 45 cents a mile plus some meals if you were out all day. As you might have guessed I don't do it for the money. I inspect when the weather is nice and when I can schedule an inspection, it isn't a full time job but can keep me busy for a month or two. Since I enjoy beekeeping I also enjoy sharing ideas with other beekeepers. Being a retired teacher it gives me a chance to teach something I enjoy. Some want to learn all I can give them and others aren't interested in learning anything else. Regardless, you would be amazed at the creative ability of beekeepers. Often beekeeping is the least creative thing they do.
Yes, probably the majority of inspectors are running commercial operations and do inspections when they have time. I don't have many hives anymore and so I am not in competition with my beekeepers. Having commercial operators inspecting beekeepers sharing the same forage area can be a problem even if both are doing a good job. When your in competition with someone they can always complain that you are using your position as inspector to get rid of their hives. I would guess that the job of inspector is not something the commercial beekeeper wants but takes so he can make sure hobbiest hives in his area are kept disease free.
I find a lot less AFB now, especially in commercial yards-probably due to use of tylosin. I now spend more time looking for SHB and doing mite counts. One thing that is of help in tracking the spread of SHB and AFB is the maping of all registered apiaries on my computer. If I find a problem in one area I can look to see what apiaries are within a 3 to 5 mi radius and check them as the source of contaimination. This may be of value to beekeepers that may not know they have located their hives near other apiaries. I found one area that had over 150 colonies within a 3 mile radius. I informed the beekeepers that of the density in that area so that if they were concerned about disease spread, robbing, or low production they could move them.
The comment about trust is good. As a new inspector in an area that hadn't had an inspector for years I needed to work to earn that trust. I contine to try my best to show people I am there to assist them not control them. No matter what you do there will always be complaints. I have been blamed for things that happened to hives during the early spring even though I live in Florida during the winter and don't go north till mid April. I think the guy was very surprised when I told him I couldn't have been in his yard because I was living in Florida.
I can't imagine a private company doing inspections. It would be way too expensive. I don't know how many hives you have in your state but if you can't get them all inspected on a regular basis for under 50K I would be surprised. There isn't that much money in it that you could generate competition between private companies. Certainly that little amount is a drop in the bucket when one looks at what is spent in most state budgets.
One of the problems you have overlooked is the inappropriate use of chemicals. New and uninformed beekeepers are buying and using chemicals in ways the manufacturer never intended. Without an inspection program there is nobody to spot these problems and educate the beekeeper. It is extremely important that the public regard honey produced here as pure and uncontaminated or we are all out of business. Regardless there is always someone that doesn't read or follow directions. My latest concern is that people who once treated for aFB are now using the same dosage and mix with Tylan.


----------



## John F (Dec 9, 2005)

<sqkcrk>
So, JohnF, just to make sure that you aren't playing devils advocate, you think that Apiary Inspection should stop and let beekeepers and the rest of us fend for ourselves. Is that correct?

I may be playing a devil's advocate, but that would be valuable, right?

Good question's though.

I'll work my way through...

Apiary inspections:

The loudest arguments I see for inspections involve the neighbors bees and AFB. I'll use these for my argument, there may be others.

You have an apiary. It is clean and prestine and operates exactly as you feel it should be. Good. Down the road is another apiary ran by a different guy who has a different idea. We'll make it a given that he even has AFB.

Scenario #1: He is a loser and AFB will kill all of his hives forever and ever. He won't burn the hives because he thinks that would be a huge financial burden.

I would think that this guy either has a huge fortune that he is making into a small one or he will go out of business. Buy him out or go somewhere else (and then eventually buy him out). It seems counter productive to me to ignore the problem on his part and in the end you win out even better since you lose one competitor (if that is what he is.).

Scenario #2: He has this idea that he thinks will ultimately result in a resistant race and has the experiment in progress. Here, he will either succomb to scenario #1 or HE WILL BE RIGHT! Either way, you win.

Scenario #3: This guy is trying his dangedness to make a go of this beekeeping thing and he keeps running into this problem. Notices you next door and meets at the fence. You explain the whole AFB stuck in you woodenware and he needs to fix that first. You share your knowledge, he learns a thing or two, his apiary gets better, you win in the end.

Scenario #4: Starts same as #3 except he notices this ad on a billboard in downtown NYC. He decides that the 23 junior bacon cheeseburgers are worth keeping this thing going and gives you a call. Same end as #3.

Scenario #5: Even better, you offer to zap his stuff in your zapper box and this will save him tons-o-cash over buying all new woodenware. (Can exchange for wax dipper if needed.)

Scenario #6: This guy is just pathological. He has decided that he hates beekeepers and their whole business so he vows to take-em-all-out albiet a slow and stupid way. I suppose this could happen. We could weigh it against the probablity that someone with state power might abuse their position.

Scenario #7: This guy is really really stupid. Well, tough call here. Lucky bastard if he doesn't succomb to #1.

Rest fend for selves:

This is sort the business way. You succeed or you fail on your own merit. I object when you decide that to fend for yourselves you do it with the pointing of a gun or that might makes right.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

We have alot more hives than what $50,000.00 would cover.

My boss informed me and others one year that the budget contained $250,000.00 for salaries. There was another similar amount or there abouts available for travel expenses. 

Travel expenses include, mileage reimbursement and motel and meal expense reimbursement. These are REIMBURSMENTS, not PAY. 

The meal allowance is paid to an Inspector who is away from home on duty, overnight. The meal allowance pays for a dinner and a breakfast, at Federal OMB rates ,depending on the county or city that one is in or near. Lunch is on your own dime.

Computer? Is it yours or the states? If it is yours, does anyone else have access to it? How about GPS locaters, do you have one of those?

What happens to an Inspector, out in an apiary, who gets hurt and no one else is there?

How long before anyone finds him? No one knows where we are.


----------



## Kieck (Dec 2, 2005)

>>but what's the difference between that and a state-run agency?

>>free market -vs- socialism.

I think you missed this part: "I suppose beekeepers could band together, form an organization, and establish the same process if they want it. . . ."

Now, what's the difference? The first is "free market" because people took it upon themselves to organize and establish a process of inspections and registrations in the name of an "organization?" The second is "socialism" because people organized and established a process of inspections and registrations in the name of "government?" Your comments about good intentions are good; leaving the intentions out of this scenario, how do the two differ practically?

>>I don't understand this comment. You think it is cheaper for the state to buy stuff?

At times, yes. At other times, no. It depends, to quote Michael Bush. It depends on the scale of the production.

I'll give you a specific example. The state of South Dakota once needed many, many light traps to sample flight patterns of moths. Rather than pay (I don't know the exact amount, so I'll use the current amount) $300 a piece for 100 commercially-made light traps, the state bought the sheet metal and hardware and electrical parts and paid an employee to make the light traps. The total for those 100 light traps -- all materials and labor considered -- was considerably less than the $30,000 that the commercially-made ones would have cost. In fact, the figure was less than half of the cost of the commercially-made traps.

On the other hand, more recently, one of those traps had to be replaced. Rather than buy the parts, the sheet metal, and pay an employee to build one light trap, the state bought a commercially-made trap. The cost of the materials and the labor to build one trap was greater than the price of one of the commercially-made traps.

>>So, if I do not register my dog I am subject to a fine for not registering dog but absolved of responsibility should it run rampant and kill a school yard full of kittens?

How do I prove in a court of law that that dog is yours if it's not registered? You could claim that it's a stray, or you've never seen it before, or it belongs to someone living down the street. Besides that, registration of dogs here, anyway, accompanies rabies vaccinations. In my opinion, failing to get rabies vaccinations on a dog or a cat is shirking both your responsibility to your pet and to society. You've endangered an animal and, potentially, the well-being of other animals (including humans) by failing to be responsible.

Like others, I'm assuming that you don't want state registrations or inspections, JohnF? How do you propose privatizing apiary inspections? If you don't want them at all, what's the point of joining in on a thread that discusses possible improvements to the system?


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

I'm not going to argue with a philosopher. I'm not equiped.

Besides I think that JohnF is good at debating, too. 

So, instead of trying to convince JohnF of anything at all, I challenge JohnF to argue the points that would support an Apiary Inspection program. If that is the right way to put it.


----------



## John F (Dec 9, 2005)

Ozzy,

I tell you, your post is full of opportunity.

<sqkcrk>
Do you have any suggestions about how to do that?

First, get rid of the public drain. Okay, I had to say that.









In general, who is to define better? How will you know what you are doing is needed by the industry if the industry itself isn't the one providing the estimate of value? (Ok, if they don't pay for it themselves?)

You need to look at the supply chain. What are the needs and concerns of the beekeepers customers? Can you show that you can provide a service that could help his bottom line? What about the beekeepers suppliers? Perhaps you could help the makers of Tylan by suggesting that for a fee you will romp around and do seminars. What of corollary income? Like a wax dipper that could be used for the poor AFB guy as well as anyone that has new equipment?


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

JohnF, You made a pretty good list of Mark's assumptions a few posts ago but left out a few.

#6 The only cause of AFB is only AFB spores. Not genetically weak bees who have no resistance nor stressed bees.

#7 That it is possible to eradicate the spores, or at least most of them, and the only way to stop AFB is to do so and beekeeping would be better off, the more often this happens. In other words the bees will not get resistance to AFB and allowing them to try would be a mistake.

#8 If this isn't done many hives will be needlessly lost.

#9 The only way to accomplish this (and enforce this) is if the Government does it.

From that point of view finding and burning AFB hives is a neccessity for the survival of any Apis mellifera on this continent.

Interstingly the poll on treatments didn't seem to rank AFB as that common of a problem.

Now from that point of view your scenarios don't make sense to Mark because you allowed all those AFB spores into the environment which will kill all of his bees and spread to all the Apiaries around which will then spread to all the Apiaries around etc. So the neighbor losing his hives to AFB does not, from Mark's point of view, resolve anything.

Of course if this point of view were true, then all the States, such as Nebraska, Iowa, Arizona etc. would have all of our hives dying from AFB right now since there has been no inspection system for several years and there are bound to be hives dying of AFB and no one catching it starting a chain reaction of infection and spread of AFB spores.


----------



## Kieck (Dec 2, 2005)

>>Can you show that you can provide a service that could help his bottom line?

One of the services that could help my bottom line, in my opinion, is keeping your bees far enough away from mine that they aren't competing directly for nectar and pollen and aren't interacting, thereby reducing the chance that my bees will pick up a disease or a pest from your bees. How can a private industry supply this service to me?


----------



## John F (Dec 9, 2005)

<Kieck>
how do the two differ practically?

I make the assumption that the organization is voluntary. People choose to belong or not. This is not coercive. In the government case I assume that the idea is to regulate. You belong because you have decided to have a hive. Not a choice, coercive.

(I didn't miss the part, I just made the assumption above.)


<Kieck>
I'll give you a specific example.

Okay. This is true for anyone really. I just thought you might be saying that the state get a special price because it is the state. Economy of scale makes sense.


<Kieck>
How do I prove in a court of law that that dog is yours if it's not registered?

Sounds like the safe route is to not register to me. The point I was trying to make is that if this dog is mine and shown to be mine, regardless of whether I registered it, I'm gonna pay.

<Kieck>
How do you propose privatizing apiary inspections?

I've given examples.

<Kieck>
what's the point of joining in on a thread that discusses possible improvements to the system?

Because I believe that I have given good ideas for possible improvements to the system.

<sqkcrk>
I'm not going to argue with a philosopher. I'm not equiped.

hehe... We are all philosophers my friend. The only ill equiped folks on this planet are injured or pathelogical. You are doing a fine job.

<sqkcrk>
So, instead of trying to convince JohnF of anything at all, I challenge JohnF to argue the points that would support an Apiary Inspection program. If that is the right way to put it.

If you are suggesting that I take the handoff of your baton, then this is the right way to put it.

but

FOUL!

You have made the claim and it is yours to defend.


----------



## John F (Dec 9, 2005)

<Kieck>
One of the services that could help my bottom line ...

This one is super simple. I will assume that you are not suggesting that you should be a monopoly.

You go to all of the landowners for the area you care about and you buy the exclusive right to keep bees in the area. Of course this is a free market so you should not be surprised if I come along and out bid you.

<Michael Bush>
#9

I had this one, but it never hurts to point this out again!


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

So according to what JohnF says, above Michael Bush, I'd like to propose, devils advocatewise, that Apiary insoection be dione away with for 4 years and then when it comes back we will see the value.

Wait a minute. We already did that. When Apiary Inspection restarted in 2000 we had a higher than normal average rate of AFB. My memory doesn't have the figure, right handy. I'll bet Paul Cappy has it at his finger tips. 

But let's say that the disease rate was above 4.5%. This year it wa below 2%. Direct corollation? You tell me. 

Over 20,000 colonies. Inspected by 13 inspectors in 6.5 months in 2005. 

The oldest inspector is 72 years old. The youngest is in his 20s. 

Thirteen inspectors for over 40,000 colonies, that we know about. 

Encountering who knows what from beekeepers who think that it's alright to use whatever they wish in order to keep themselves in business.

Most beekeepers are glad to see the inspector, to have someone to talk bees with, to have someone from the state to complain to, to have someone to go through every one of their 800 colonies to verify to them that their efforts and employees are doing what they set out to do. 

I know apple growers who are glad that there are Apiary Inspectors working to help insure the health of NYS's bee population.

I'll bet that the people at the fruit and vegetable growers convention in Syracuse aren't griping about those darn Apiary Inspecors. I'll buy JohnF lunch, if they are.

Michael Bush, please keep your assumptions [edit] away from my mouth. I'm pretty well equiped at getting things, like my foot, into my mouth all by my lonsom, thank you.

[ January 19, 2006, 07:31 AM: Message edited by: Barry ]


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>Michael Bush, please keep your assumptions [edit] away from my mouth. I'm pretty well equiped at getting things, like my foot, into my mouth all by my lonsom, thank you.

Please feel free to clarify where I have misunderstood you. But you seem to be very adamant that AFB must be controled by regulation and that it will be a disastor if it's not.

Please list the specific assumptions I made that were wrong and correct them.

[ January 19, 2006, 07:32 AM: Message edited by: Barry ]


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

There once was a beekeeper who had been in business for many years with hundreds of hives each year.

One year, another beekeeper comes into the area. 

Since the first beekeeper likes to keep a low profile, it wasn't obvious that someone else was close by. 

So the second beekeeper asked the farmed if he could put his bees on his land. Turns out that the farmer was the landowner of the land where the first beekeeper had his hives.

The first beekeeper complained that he wasn't going to get as much honey as the year before. Maybe the second beekeeper should have left, but he didn't until after the season.

The first beekeeper made more honey that year than ever before. What happened?

By the way, there are no laws in NY stipulating apiaries/sq.mile density or by mile proximity.


----------



## John F (Dec 9, 2005)

<sqkcrk>
... apple growers ... the people at the fruit and vegetable growers convention ...

See! A little brainstorming and you are already identifying either direct or indirect customers for your service! WTG!

<sqkcrk>
I'll buy JohnF lunch, if they are.

For a free lunch, John asks the all important question: Why would they? They only care about the bees.

<sqkcrk>
Michael Bush, please keep ...

Fair call. Sqkcrk, you may rebut the paragraph that contains "Mark's point of view" and "don't make sense to Mark". Sorry Michael, I did assume that it was your opinion but it was not identified as such. Penalty stands.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

MB:>>Please list the specific assumptions I made that were wrong and correct them.
MWB>...What happened?

Is this supposed to clarify your position? It's not helping me.


----------



## John F (Dec 9, 2005)

<sqkcrk>
What happened?

This is one of those logic puzzles, isn't it?

Let's see...

Oh, I give up.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Michael, First off let me say that I was hired to do a job that has state laws and regulations attached to that job. 

Therefore my personal opinion or philosophy isn't part of the job if it is in conflict with that job. 

I guess I mean, that if I have feelings or opinions that are contrary to the job, maybe I should stay home.

So, yes you are right on some assumptions and when I get finished labeling tomorrows orders, I'll try to address your points as best I can.


----------



## Kieck (Dec 2, 2005)

I'd be interested to see comparisons between states with strong beekeeping regulations and states without regulations. For example, SD and ND have strict regulations even on minimum distances between apiaries (SD and ND are also among the top 5 states in terms of honey production annually normally, but that may be a chicken-or-egg type concept). Kansas has no regulations on beekeepers.

I'd like to see comparisons, such as percentages of colonies with specific problems (heavy Varroa loads, tracheal mites, AFB, etc), between states with strong regulations and states without regulations.

I think we also need to remember that beekeepers and beekeeping associations were, in large part, responsible to establishing the state regulations and inspection services that are in place. I think it's always good to consider the value of such things (like, do we still want them or not) as well as possible ways to improve programs like these, but remember while we're considering these issues that other beekeepers before us believed this system was in their best interests. I believe we need to ask then, "What's changed?" Or, maybe the ones who helped create the system were way off base in the first place?


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>Kansas has no regulations on beekeepers

I believe there are some regulations. Just no inspections or registration. This is true of many states including NE, IA, AZ and I'm sure a lot of others. I've heard of no major outbreaks of anything as a result.


----------



## olddrone (Sep 16, 2004)

"So, yes you are right on some assumptions and when I get finished labeling tomorrows orders, I'll try to address your points as best I can."

Now, this is coming from someone home sucking off the teat of Unemployment Insurance instead of taking an honest job. 

How can there be any doubt of what NYS beekeepers think of the Inspection Program?


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

This is my reply to Michael Bush's assumptions of what I think.

#6. Wrong assumption. Or at least you are selling me short.

My opinion: The major cause of AFB is Bacillus larvae. Without it, no disease.

How to react to it, once found?
1. Reduce the presence of the causitive agent. Burning, burial, irradiation, ETO. These work. Not all of them are available or very safe. ETO causes cancer.
2. Buy or raise hygenic queens.
3. Keep strong colonies. But even strong colonies come down with the disease. So refer to 2., before hand.
4. Manage your apiaries and colonies to reduce the mixing of equipment from hive to hive or apiary to apiary.
This difficult for the 1000 colony beekeeper, but it can be done. And it should be easier for those of us with fewer.
5. Inspect yourself. Every time you do a hive manipulation, check the brood for signs of AFB.
This might be hard for some. But hey, you want to be a beekeeper or just have bees.
6. This probably should have been #1. Know your enemy. Know AFB and be able to recognize it. 
If you are unsure of what you are seeing is or isn't AFB, call you local Inspector, or at least someone who knows what it is when they see it.

Assumption #7. AFB cannot be stopped. It cannot be eradicated. We are not willing to take the right steps to see that that happens.
It can be managed. It should be managed.

I have seen plenty of cases where people allowed their bees to try to gain resistance against a disease that was already killing them.

I don't know how you let a colony try to get resistance to a disease like AFB, once it has it in a form that is visually evident.

Now, if you are talking about treatments, that is a different thing and is not resistance. I don't recommend TM or Tylosin.

Assumption #8. I'm confused as to what this one refers to. Would you please restate it for me?

Assumption #9. Other than self enforcement, self control(which everyone should do, but they don't always) of course the government must enforce, insist that people do what they should have done if they had any regard for their neighbors and the animals in their care.
I think about the woman who had the house near town where our dog used to live, with all of those other 100s of dogs and cats and sheep and a donkey and a horse. She wasn't taking care of them.
So, what should government do? Say,"Oh well, she's doing the best that she can. And yes, the animals will probably eat each other in an attempt to gain resistance to starvation. But there is nothing that we can do."
Is a negligent beekeeper any different?
And what about the innocent beginner beekeeper, who goes and buys a nuc or some used equipment? Should he have to learn the hard way? 
Or should it be that every beekeeper in thwe state of NY should have to have a certificate of inspection to be able to sell nucs? Shouldn't someone try to keep people from selling diseased nucs? Seems to me that that is criminal negligence, at least wanton disregard for the well being of another person.
I really think that we have an obligation to try to make things better at the risk of making things worse.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

olddrone, Please don't assume that you know what you only assume.

This is what I was trying to get across to some folks last September, when someone who shall go nameless said that he knew that there were AHbs in New England and NY.

Don't assume what you don't know.


----------



## The Honey House (May 10, 2000)

Moderator is raising the YELLOW card.

General warning regarding negative personal comments. 

Let's watch what we say and how we say it.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

My apologys, if I offended anyone.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>Assumption #8. I'm confused as to what this one refers to. Would you please restate it for me?

>#7 That it is possible to eradicate the spores, or at least most of them, and the only way to stop AFB is to do so and beekeeping would be better off, the more often this happens. In other words the bees will not get resistance to AFB and allowing them to try would be a mistake.
>#8 If this isn't done many hives will be needlessly lost.

So far the only one you seem to disagree with is #7 and the olnly part you disagree with seems to be the word "eradicate".

> And what about the innocent beginner beekeeper, who goes and buys a nuc or some used equipment? Should he have to learn the hard way?
>Or should it be that every beekeeper in thwe state of NY should have to have a certificate of inspection to be able to sell nucs? 

You already have an inspection system and AFB infected nucs still get sold. How did the law help? In the end the word will get out and he will be out of business.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

If you only knew of whom you speak. And he is still in business.

To clarify my reply to your list, what came after Assumption #7, Assumption #8 and Assumption #9, in my post are my replys to your numbers. I got out of sinc.


----------



## Kieck (Dec 2, 2005)

>>>Kansas has no regulations on beekeepers

>I believe there are some regulations. Just no inspections or registration. This is true of many states including NE, IA, AZ and I'm sure a lot of others. I've heard of no major outbreaks of anything as a result.

Actually, to some extent, you're right. Kansas does have some "regulations." I'll confess that I wasn't thinking it through fully when I posted my comment.

Kansas "regulates" what chemical treatments can be used in hives, and when they can be used. For example, Kansas has a "regulation" that applications of Check-Mite+ must follow the directions on the label.

I was thinking about minimum distance requirements between apiaries and state inspections when I made my comments about "no" regulations. Like I said, I was wrong; I didn't take time to consider some of these other "regulations."

I will still say, though, that without any enforcement or checking for compliance, the "regulations" cease to exist. If we post speed limits on highways, but never issue tickets to violators, what, really, are the speed limits?


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>If we post speed limits on highways, but never issue tickets to violators, what, really, are the speed limits? 

Back before Jimmy Carter got the Double Nickel passed there was no speed limit on the highways in Nevada and there was only a speed limit at night on the highways in Monatana. I remember asking at every gas station, "I know the speed limit is 55 a night because there are plenty of signs that say that, but what is the speed limit?" To which they would reply: "55 at night"

Not having speed limits or having them makes little difference. People drive as fast as they think is prudent regardless. Tickets or not.


----------



## Kieck (Dec 2, 2005)

>>Not having speed limits or having them makes little difference. People drive as fast as they think is prudent regardless. Tickets or not.

To some extent, I agree. If I remember my numbers right, though, the average speed that drivers travel is something like 6 or 7 mph over the posted limits. To me, that means that the effective speed limits are higher than the posted limits, mainly because enforcement does not occur that those speeds or the enforcement is rare enough or light enough that people take the chance.

I think you see my point, anyway. If we have a law on the books, but it's never enforced, is it really a law?

To apply it to beekeeping, let's use the minimum distances between apiaries in SD as an example. Right now, the state enforces those distances. Hives must be registered, and you face fines if your hives aren't located where your permits say they're supposed to be. Failure to register hives is a misdemeanor, punishable by some pretty stiff fines and/or jail time. 

But, if no one "inspected," or checked those hives, or enforced the penalties on those who violate the regulations, what would deter a beekeeper from violating the minimum distance requirements? Sure, in some cases, personal morals or ethics, but what about those people out there who don't care about such things?


----------



## John F (Dec 9, 2005)

<sqkcrk>
Shouldn't someone try to keep people from selling diseased nucs?

Sounds like an awesome idea! I say give it a go and see if the market agrees.

<Kieck>
"regulations" cease to exist.

Could you state your purpose for the context shift? Really, I would be glad to discuss this but don't understand where you are headed. Are you trying to argue that adding a regulation is ok because if we decide later that it isn't effective we can just decide it went away by ignoring it?


----------



## Kieck (Dec 2, 2005)

>>Could you state your purpose for the context shift?

In my mind, anyway, this context came up because of the discussion changing inspection services. I think, if we're discussing privatizing inspection services, we first need to discuss whether or not we have state regulations or laws then. Can you give any example where state or federal regulations or laws are enforced by a private service?

Then, secondly, it came from the discussion about the differences in state inspections. For example, I made the comment that Kansas doesn't have regulations or inspections, and Michael Bush caught my error and corrected it. Kansas DOES have regulations. They don't have inspections, meaning then that those regulations aren't enforced. I questioned whether or not they're really "regulations" if they're not enforced.

But it still comes down to the other question: do we want state regulations or laws? If we don't want any, we obviously don't need an inspection service. If we do want some legal guidelines for beekeeping, we need some sort of oversight system in place. To me, that means state inspection services.

I'm assuming, from the way that you're talking about state inspections, that either 1) Colorado doesn't have any regulations or laws regarding beekeeping and doesn't require state inspections, or, 2) Colorado has a system and you're upset with the way it's working.

So, to get back to the thread, are you upset with the system in general, or do you have specific improvements you'd like to see in the system? This is a thread about renovating the system, after all. I understand you'd prefer a privatized system, and I've been giving that one a lot of thought.

Here's the way I've been thinking about it. If you have better knowledge or different opinions, let me know.

I thought about private inspection services from the perspective, "If I started a business offering apiary inspections, what would I do and how much would I charge?"

Obviously, I could check for the standard diseases and pests. I could also make some judgements about relative strengths and weaknesses of colonies. Personally, I'd be willing to pay for such a service.

So, then I reached the point about setting a price. Let's see: home inspections cost generally around $300 in most of the country. I doubt many beekeepers would pay $300 per hive. But, if they had an apiary of 20 hives, they might pay $300 for inspections of the hives in that apiary.

Wouldn't be too bad. That would work out to about $15 per hive. I could probably even go as low as $10 per hive.

But then I run into a guy with one hive. Probably not fair to charge him $200 or $300 like I would for an apiary. I wouldn't take the time to go out for an inspection of his hive for the money, anyway, if I only made $10 or $15. So, I probably wouldn't do it.

That means that the small-scale beekeepers would end up facing much higher rates per hive for inspections, which, in my mind, means that most hobbyists wouldn't get inspections because they wouldn't want to pay for them.

Then, we're back to an idea that commercial beekeepers might pay for inspections. But would they? Don't they already do much the same thing when they pay their employees to work hives?

Then I thought I understood; "privatizing" inspections is really a way to make them go away.


----------



## Kieck (Dec 2, 2005)

Michael Bush:

You made some comments about Nebraska's system early in this thread. I'm curious about a couple things:

1) There's no tax money involved? I understand that apiary inspections operate under the authority of the Nebraska Department of Agriculture. Doesn't that mean that some tax money IS involved?

2) In reading Nebraska regulations, I came across this: 

"Registration Fee. There shall be paid to the Department an annual registration fee of 15 cents per colony, except that a minimum fee of $5.00 shall be required, by every person owning, leasing, or possessing more than four colonies of bees. "

Does Nebraska still collect this registration fee? Do they enforce this regulation, or have they let it slide? Other regulations talk about the state having reasonable access to hives for inspections, whether the owner wants them or not. Do they use those regulations?

Honestly, I'm curious about the system there. I've been trying to come up with ways that I think apiary inspections could be improved, and was reading back on some of the early comments.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>1) There's no tax money involved? I understand that apiary inspections operate under the authority of the Nebraska Department of Agriculture. Doesn't that mean that some tax money IS involved?

No. You pay for the inspection if you want it and they only do it if you sell bees so you can get a certificate. I pay every year.

>2) In reading Nebraska regulations, I came across this: 
"Registration Fee. There shall be paid to the Department an annual registration fee of 15 cents per colony, except that a minimum fee of $5.00 shall be required, by every person owning, leasing, or possessing more than four colonies of bees. "

That was the law until 2002:
http://entomology.unl.edu/beekpg/tidings/btid2002/btdmay2002.htm#Article3

On May 22, 2002, the Nebraska Department of Agriculture (NDA) released the following announcement:

"During the 2002 session of the Nebraska Legislature, changes were made to the Nebraska Apiary Act. These changes, along with cuts to NDA's budget, will result in changes in how the apiary program is administered.

"Effective immediately beekeepers will not be required to register their apiary locations and pay a registration fee to the NDA. A health certificate will not be required by the NDA from beekeepers who are bringing honey bees into the state of Nebraska. Entry permits from migratory beekeepers will also be discontinued. If a beekeeper requests to have a health certificate issued for the sale of honey bees or because another state requires a health certificate to accept a shipment of bees from Nebraska, the NDA will attempt to accommodate beekeeper's needs. However, NDA will no longer employ an apiary inspection specialist and a qualified inspector may not always be available. Fees for these services will be charged directly to individuals who request inspection services at the rate that is currently adopted in the rules and regulations of the Apiary Act. All other inspection activities have been discontinued. If you have any questions regarding these changes, you can contact the Bureau of Plant Industry at (402) 471-2394."

>Does Nebraska still collect this registration fee?

No.

> Do they enforce this regulation, or have they let it slide?

It was repealed.

> Other regulations talk about the state having reasonable access to hives for inspections, whether the owner wants them or not. Do they use those regulations?

They may still be in effect, but there is no registration or inspection system, so they have no reason to. I'm not certain if those portions were also repealed or not.

>Honestly, I'm curious about the system there. I've been trying to come up with ways that I think apiary inspections could be improved, and was reading back on some of the early comments. 

There is none here except for paid inspections to get a certificate for other states requirements.

There are still regulations saying you can't bring in AHB or Cape bees etc. but no inspections and no requirements for certificates from other states.


----------



## Kieck (Dec 2, 2005)

For my better understanding then, who provides the inspections? Is it a private individual, or a state employee? How do they establish standards to verify that the person is qualified to make inspections along their guidelines (state regulations)? How many beekeepers operate in Nebraska, and about how many request inspections? And, maybe most importantly, about how much does an inspection cost in Nebraska? (I know the last one is a nosy question; don't answer it if you feel uncomfortable about it.)


----------



## John F (Dec 9, 2005)

<Kieck>
we first need to discuss whether or not we have state regulations or laws then.

Ok. The question following this sentence in your paragraph isn't important.

<Kieck>
I'm assuming, from the way that you're talking about state inspections, that either 1) Colorado doesn't have any regulations or laws regarding beekeeping and doesn't require state inspections, or, 2) Colorado has a system and you're upset with the way it's working.

3) Don't know and don't care.









Actually, I did ask around because I certainly don't want to end up in the pokey with all of my marbles taken away. If they exist, it appears to be on paper only. See, your point applied!

<Kieck>
So, to get back to the thread, are you upset with the system in general, or do you have specific improvements you'd like to see in the system? This is a thread about renovating the system, after all. I understand you'd prefer a privatized system, and I've been giving that one a lot of thought.

The system will never need renovation if it existed in a free market. The free market will dump it like a load of bricks if it is not needed. Privatizing is the number one suggestion I can give to fixing your woes with the system. I cannot help you if your neighbor has a different idea of beekeeping.


<Kieck>
Then I thought I understood; "privatizing" inspections is really a way to make them go away.

You were on the right track until this point. Give it more thought. Read my suggestions to sqkcrk as to how and dig a business plan out of an idea.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>For my better understanding then, who provides the inspections? Is it a private individual, or a state employee?

I never asked him. I know his name and his signature is on the certificate. My impression is that he works for the Department of Agriculture in some other capacity but is the knowlegable beekeeper there. But if I was in Western Nebraska (550 miles from here) I don't know who they would send.

> How do they establish standards to verify that the person is qualified to make inspections along their guidelines (state regulations)?

I don't know. He's certainly a knowlegable fellow, but how they determined that, I don't know.

> How many beekeepers operate in Nebraska

I don't know off the top of my head. But in 2003 Nebraska produced over 3 million (3,330,000) pounds of honey.

> and about how many request inspections?

Best I can tell, I'm the only one judging by the number assigned to the certificate. Either that or I'm just the first in line.

> And, maybe most importantly, about how much does an inspection cost in Nebraska?

$200


----------



## Kieck (Dec 2, 2005)

>>Read my suggestions to sqkcrk as to how and dig a business plan out of an idea.

It's always easy to tell someone to do something, but often much more difficult to come up with detailed plan that will work. That's what I keep bumping up against, the "will work" or "feasible" part.

Sure, I could charge someone $100 to inspect a nuc when they buy it and give that person a report on the general health of the nuc, but if the person paid, say, $75 for the nuc, would he be likely to pay $100 for an inspection of that nuc? I doubt it. Financially, it would make more sense to have that nuc fail and simply replace it.

So, you've been throwing the "privatize 'em" idea around for a while, and I can see some advantages to such a system, now let's hear some of your specific ideas on how to make it work. Saying, "The market will sort it out," or something of that nature that's already been said, won't add much to discussion at this point, IMHO.

>>My impression is that he works for the Department of Agriculture in some other capacity but is the knowlegable beekeeper there. 

So there could be taxpayer money involved, just not directly? In my opinion, if someone is working for the state in one capacity and performs a duty for the state in another capacity (even if that other duty requires a fee for that particular service), the overall salary and benefits that that state employee receive come from taxpayer money, at least in part.

At any rate, I doubt that the $200 fees for inspections could keep even one person in business in Nebraska. If it did, say at a low salary, and inspector receives state or federal aid in some form, wouldn't it still be supported in part by taxpayers?

I also wonder, if Nebraska did have to send that same guy 550 miles one way, if the $200 fee would remain the same. In a case like that, just the costs of travel would greatly exceed the fees for the inspection.

>>Best I can tell, I'm the only one judging by the number assigned to the certificate. Either that or I'm just the first in line.

My first impression was that you might be the only one in the state who gets inspected. Then, having some idea about how conscientious you are about your operation (and that's a good thing, I believe), I wondered if you might indeed just be first in line. Regardless, I doubt many beekeepers in Nebraska have hives inspected, so I imagine the amount of money available for the services are pretty low.

I've done some general musing on state inspections, and have some questions for any and all who might have knowledge about the system.

1) If you have or had state inspections in your state, who lobbied for the inspections or who drafted the bills or regulations? In my experience with legislators, they don't just come up with these things off the tops of their head, especially things like "apiary inspections" that directly impact such a small percentage of the population.

2) What was the intent or the aim of the people who established the regulations/laws and of the enforcement (inspections) of those requirements? Do the same goals still exist, or should we move on? Are the inspection services doing anything to accomplish those goals?

3) Why do state inspection services continue to receive funding in some states? I know a lot of people complain about "big government," but really many programs are being cut because of budget reductions. Look at education as an example; school districts across the country face budget cuts virtually every year. It seems to me that state legislators would be quick to eliminate the funding for state inspections if they felt they could. Who continues to support state inspections, and why?

4) What do you expect from an inspection (state or private)? For those who refuse either, I understand you feel your rights are being violated by having outside inspections. For the rest, what sort of benefits, direct or indirect, do you expect from an inspection service? Could a private system provide the same benefits as your state system does currently? 

The initial point of this thread was improving or renovating apiary inspection services. I really liked Joel's comments early on in this thread about what he thinks should improve in inspection services. Personally, I find myself in agreement with most if not all of his comments, but I would value them even if I couldn't agree with them. The points are specific about what improvements should be made.


----------



## John F (Dec 9, 2005)

<Kieck>
It's always easy to tell someone to do something

Man, the world would be so much easier if I were king of the universe!







Of course, what happens when they revolt...  

<Kieck>
That's what I keep bumping up against, the "will work" or "feasible" part.

If it doesn't work or isn't feasible then it isn't necessary. No matter that you think it is. (I left out the, then you are doing it wrong, argument because I assume that you are a smart guy.)

<Kieck>
now let's hear some of your specific ideas on how to make it work.

I'm sorry but I can't. I don't have the experience in this market to be specific, I'll have to take the role of business advisor. Besides, if I had the information you are now requesting, you would be reading about it in my marketing brochure.

But I love to help others brainstorm their business plan.

Kieck, I won't address your specific list because I believe I cannot. I will leave a general comment because it is the same for all things regulated.

These sort of things occur because someone wants to control how someone else does something for some reason of their own. They get passed because this someone may have paid for it, ie. greased the wheels, or the someone else was having a picnic that day. When things appear on paper, the public that doesn't know assumes it got there for good reasons so it becomes very hard to get it taken off. 

Also, political arguments are designed to pass something as truth and win whereas philosophical argument is designed to get to the truth win or lose. It is generally believed that people do not want the truth, they want to win.

For #4 you ask, "Could a private system provide the same benefits as your state system does currently?" For those with state run inspection services the answer will always be no. The state run service will always seem free.

I like Joel's list as well. Looks like opportunity.

[ January 20, 2006, 12:00 PM: Message edited by: John F ]


----------



## Kieck (Dec 2, 2005)

>>Kieck, I won't address your specific list because I believe I cannot. I will leave a general comment because it is the same for all things regulated.

>>These sort of things occur because someone wants to control how someone else does something for some reason of their own. They get passed because this someone may have paid for it, ie. greased the wheels, or the someone else was having a picnic that day. When things appear on paper, the public that doesn't know assumes it got there for good reasons so it becomes very hard to get it taken off. 

I see your point, but how do you address the budget issue? It must still be in demand from at least a few very influential lobbyists, right? Otherwise, it seems to me that state inspection programs would get slashed pretty quickly from state budgets, especially in states like SD.


----------



## John F (Dec 9, 2005)

<Kieck>
how do you address the budget issue?

I think ikkybeer suggested to look for who profits. Right off the bat I would imagine that the inspector would argue for it. How good is the inspector at political argument?

Most successful political argument for things that just seem wrong to casual observation employ a technique called FUD. Fear - Uncertainty - Doubt. If you can get this going in a population large enough, you can win just about anything.


----------



## Kieck (Dec 2, 2005)

Possibly, but I doubt the network of inspectors in SD carry enough clout -- political or otherwise -- to keep the money for inspections in the budget.

I know you use logic in thinkin about things like this. I've read your arguements. So, think about this one logically.

The apiary inspectors, except a single "state apiarist," are not full-time employees. They're part-time or seasonal or both. Most inspectors cover a couple to several counties, and South Dakota has roughly 65 counties, so there aren't very many inspectors. I'm skeptical that these inspectors have the wealth to really influence politics, otherwise they probably wouldn't be inspectors.

So, several modestly-paid people have the influence to keep the service in the budget? I doubt it. If that's the case, why is the state funding for schools being cut in SD virtually every year lately? The NEA and teachers associations and school districts lobby hard to keep funding, yet they still don't even get as much from the state as they have in the past. But a few apiary inspectors can successfully lobby to keep their funding intact? I doubt it. If they can, they're the "political allies" I want I my side.  

My guess would be that the beekeeping industry in South Dakota generally supports the regulations and the enforcement (read "inspections") of those laws.


----------



## John F (Dec 9, 2005)

Frederick Bastiat, an early economist from about a century ago, wrote an essay [roughly translated to english] "What is Seen and What is Not Seen."

I will pull from this when I point out that your mistake is not looking for the unseen.

Who would benefit if there was never enough money for schools? How could they make sure there was never enough money for schools?

One quick answer to #2 is to give money away to places people aren't looking.


----------



## Kieck (Dec 2, 2005)

You really believe that's the way it works? That sounds like a conspiracy theory to me.

But what you're really saying is that someone is saying, in effect, "Let's give money to apiary inspection programs so it won't go to (education, or any of the other programs that face cuts in the annual budgets)?"

Now, more specifically, what exactly would you like to see provided by an inspection service? Any changes to the system you're operating under that you'd like made?


----------



## John F (Dec 9, 2005)

<Kieck>
You really believe that's the way it works?

You were asking how things could be. I gave you possibilities. I have no idea why SD has an inspection program. Have you asked the inspectors involved?

As to the other question in your question. Yes, I believe this method is in use right here in the US of A. I'm witness to it firsthand.

<Kieck>
Any changes to the system you're operating under that you'd like made?

I am perfectly happy with the system I am operating under. No changes. [I assume you mean bee inspection programs.]

[ January 20, 2006, 02:09 PM: Message edited by: John F ]


----------



## John F (Dec 9, 2005)

<Kieck>
So, think about this one logically.

Jon, I had to chuckle at this. Truthfully, I'm not sure I can otherwise, or at least it is the most natural form for me.

I sometimes hear from my wife, kids, parents, siblings, friends:

Don't be so logical and think about this for a second...


----------



## ikkybeer (Jan 11, 2006)

Hi Kieck (and others),

May I jump back in here? It seems to me that we, who want the ability to peacefully engage in a satisfying hobby or profession, should demand of you, the details in the justification of using force to solve bee problems. Does it seem odd that you can't convince people to act in their own interest voluntarily? 

Also, when we use the terms 'privatize' or 'free market', it does not mean to have some thug enforce the law. It means to leave everyone alone and we will all band together voluntarily to solve any and all problems.

Walid


----------



## Kieck (Dec 2, 2005)

>>I have no idea why SD has an inspection program. Have you asked the inspectors involved?

Yes. I have. I've even stated the reason here in the past. I'll say it again, just so you can hear it again.

In SD, beekeepers organized and created a list of goals, including a method to limit contacts among bees from different apiaries (to slow the spread of diseases/pests, which, I know, can be argued that it really might not) and avoid conflicts among beekeepers, expecially commercial operations. After coming up with these "rules" or "regulations" or "codes" or whatever you wish to call them, they presented them in bill form to the state legislature and the Department of Agriculture with the understanding that they could become law and would then be enforced by the state. It was and is a cooperative arrangement with the state. I'm of the opinion that, if most of us beekeepers no longer want these rules or the inspections that enforce them, we'll see to it that they change.

I don't know the history of how other states' regulations came into being. Maybe outside groups really were trying to exert their power over apiculture.

>>I am perfectly happy with the system I am operating under. No changes. 

Then why are you offering suggestions on how it could be improved?









>>It seems to me that we, who want the ability to peacefully engage in a satisfying hobby or profession, should demand of you, the details in the justification of using force to solve bee problems. 

I haven't seen any examples of "force" in the inspection process here in SD. I did have one inspector show up on a rainy, chilly day to inspect a couple hives less than a week after I started them from packages. I asked him to wait, at least until a warmer, sunny day, to open the hives. He agreed without any hesitation.

If the state finds a problem, it notifies you of the problem. The inspector doesn't deal with the problem -- you do. That limits the state's liability as well; you have time and opportunity to confirm any diagnosis made by state inspector before you deal with the problem.

I'm sure some beekeepers in SD complain about the laws governing beekeeping here and the inspection process. Personally, I see some room for improvement, too. Overall, though, I don't hear many in this state complaining about the system. Maybe that's because, like I repeated earlier, beekeepers here helped write the laws and feel they have a method to change the system if they wish.

How, exactly, do regulations and inspections prevent you from peacefully engaging in beekeeping?


----------



## John F (Dec 9, 2005)

<Kieck>
Yes. I have. I've even stated the reason here in the past. I'll say it again, just so you can hear it again.

Let me restate so that we keep the context in which the question was asked.

I have no idea why SD has kept pouring money into an inspection program. Have you asked the inspectors involved why the inspection program keeps it's budget?

<Kieck>
Then why are you offering suggestions on how it could be improved?

Because it appears to me that the system that we are to renovate could be made better if it were to operate more in line with the system that I operate under.
















<Kieck>
I haven't seen any examples of "force"

You seem to have a resistance to the definition of force. I'm guessing then that in your example:



> you have time and opportunity to confirm any diagnosis made by state inspector before you deal with the problem.


I can choose to ignore the problem as my way of dealing with the problem. Right?


----------



## mwjohnson (Nov 19, 2004)

Mark
So anyone really talking about renovating the NYS inspection service?
If so,I think that a health certificate for sales of nucs/hives within NYS should be mandatory.
Our AFB problem here is due to a guy who knew,but didn't care,you know him,(ask Allan Nirschl about it).
And how about that irradiation facility?Syracuse maybe? I'm sure that burning hives worked great in 1906,but it is 2006.

>and that's a HUGE conflict<
You can drive out and repair the violation yourself,as long as your sticker hasn't expired.
Do commercial vehicles get a safety inspection out there?I'm sure glad the loggers& stone cutters around here do.Especially when I'm halfway up a mountain and meet one that's coming down it.
Are these just talking points,or are you getting something going?
Mark Johnson


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Mark Johnson,
No, renovating the Apiary Inspection Program, in NY, is something that I thought that I would bring up in this forum, to see what folks had to say and suggest.

As far as anyone talking about the program, period? That's the problem, in my opinion. There are lots of thoughts and concerns that I have. Thoughts and concerns that I doubt if anyone is thinking about. But, how would I know? Once the season is over, I don't hear a tjhing from anyone until about a week before it is time to return to work.

As far as an AFB problem in your area? I don't have any personal knowledge of what you are talking of. I know the quarentines that I issued and am familiar with the ones that the inspectors under me issued. But I don't usually hear anything about anyone elses and probably wouldn't normally remember them unless it concerned some one that I knew of otherwise.

It would also be improper for me to talk about an individual in specific terms. Confidentiality is important. As you can probably imagine.

I think that you are correct. Health certificates for anyone selling nucs, live beehives, queens and especially used beekeeping equipment is a good idea. you can't buy queens or packages from out of astate without health certificates. Why is that not true in state.

You should let Mr. Mungari know how you feel. Write him, e-mail him or call him.

From what I have heard, having never seen one, irradiation units are currently located in NJ and MA. They are run for many things. Diseased bee equipment is a very minor use. What goes through an irradiation unit does so in or on a train car. There are specific requirements of packaging what you want to put through the unit. It is logistically difficult to put to use. The expense is high, too, I believe. But if one were available near by, many people would use it. Lots of beekeepers that I know have said so.

If you weren't satisfied with the results of the AFB incident that you mentioned, make your concerns know to Albany. As far as I know I am in the same boat as you. A civilian, that is.


----------



## ikkybeer (Jan 11, 2006)

Hi Kieck,

Just because the inspector shows up with out a gun it is completely understood that he does so with the backing of force. When he shows up, just say "I'll take care of things myself, thank you. Will he agree with you?" Don't you think it is odd that you must resort to force to get people to act in their own self interest?

Walid


----------



## ikkybeer (Jan 11, 2006)

Kieck,

What if some guy in a suit comes up to your store and says "pay me money" because I will protect you, if you don't pay me, bad things will happen".

Now this mafia character is clean and gentlemanly and he has no gun on him. Isn't this force?

Walid


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Actually it has been my experience, more times than not, that people are generally glad to see an apiary inspector. 

Sure you are going to have the individuals who would rather not be bothered. 

And if they say so, I say okay and leave, after trying to engage them in conversation about bees, bee diseases and pests and their neighbor's bees. 

If I get a cue that they don't want to talk, no problem and I leave.

Sometimes they see my point about the value of something that doesn't cost them anything, because they and their fellow tax payers have already paid for it.

And in most cases, when AFB is found, they aren't glad about that, but they are glad that someone pointed it out to them.

During the last 20 years, I have been told to leave, after starting an inspection, only once. The man was sitting in his car and told me to stop killing his bees and to get off of his property. He told me to leave the hive alone, when I tryed to put it back together. I was taking a sample of bees in alcohol, to check them for varroa. I had told him of this mehod of checking for varroa, during our pre-inspection visit. Being hard of hearing, perhaps he didn't understand what I had told him.

My main point here, and I'm not bragging about my powers of charm, is that once in twenty years is a rare occurance.

If there are a number of cases of AFB in the surrounding neighborhood, then the inspector may have more reason to want to inspect all known hives in that area. Under this condition, when met with resistance from a beekeeper, the force of the law can be used. I never have gone this route.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Joel, peggjam, mwjohnson, MountainCamp and all of you other New York Beekeepers,

I just got off of the phone with Paul Cappy. He had called me to inform me that the NYS Ethics Committee ruled that Apiary Inspectors who own enough beehives to generate income or Inspectors who sell honey can no longer be Apiary Inspectors.

Perhaps this is the way that it should be. It always has been a conflict of interest that was tolerated by the Department, because who else are you going to get to inspect the bees?

It will be interesting to see how things turn out.

It will be interesting to see how the beekeeping industry of NY reacts to this news.

So, if you all want more than just seven people working at Apiary Inspection, next season, in NY, you'd better do something about it.

Anything I do will be seen as me trying to get my job back. And therefore suspect. 

The balls in your hands now. Don't drop it.


----------



## Carolina-Family-Farm (Aug 2, 2005)

Mark"

This may be the perfect opportunity to start a private inspection service, the ball may still be in your court. 

I think you could sell this to NYS pretty easy by making them aware some people are resistant to government involvement in private property.

What could it hurt to try?


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

You want to put up the start up money, let's say $1,000,000.00 for the first year and another $1,000,000.00 for the second year and I'll be glad to find someone to run it. Otherwise, I don't think that a private Apiary Inspection Service would have a chance. That's just a pipe dream.


----------



## Carolina-Family-Farm (Aug 2, 2005)

Well if that's what you think I'm sure your 100% correct.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Well, It is what I think, whether I am correct or not. And I meant no insult to you by expressing my point of view.

It just seems to me, that if this was a realistic idea, it would already exist, somewhere.

And I haven't heard that it does. I know that the Mid-York Beekeepers, an association of beekeepers in the middle of NY, more or less, had a go it alone, we don't need your help attitude, at least at one time. And if they were serious about inspecting themselves, they did a prety poor job of it, compared to what the State's Inspectors did. 

So, there is a case that shows, lack of desire of someone to do the inspections, lack of willingness to let someone know where ones yards are, etc. 

There may not have been the level of trust in the State Program that there should have been. Trust that what the Inspector was telling you was true, without personal motive on the Inspectors part. 

Maybe there will come a time for that trust to build, if Apiary Inspectors are not allowed to keep bees. We will see what we will see.

One thing that I will predict will happen, if those Inspectors that can return, do return, is that they will spend their time inspecting those closest to themselves, for most of the season. And then towards the end of the season, say Sept. and Oct., they will do what migratory inspections that they can.

This means, inspecting inteer-state beekeepers at a rate of 10% of the number of colonies that one wants to transport to another state. This the standard level of inspection agreed upon in the Eastern States Agreement.

So, when you are streched thin, you do as much as you can.

This last season, we had a goal of 20,000 colonies inspected and we went over that, by a little. A couple hundered or more.

Next years goal was to be 30,000 colonies inspected. We were going to loose two guys and there was one guy that was interested in inspecting. So, we could have had almost the same number of people. 

30,000 would have been a loafty goal. It could have been reached, if those inspectors who didn't work 40 hrs/wk had done so, me included.

I'll be interested to see what the program will do, production wise. 

If there are any educators amomgst them, perhaps their time would be better spent teaching classes to beekeepers on diseaeses and pests and how to id them and deal with them.


----------



## Carolina-Family-Farm (Aug 2, 2005)

I didn't take your statement as an insult, I just don't always see changes as a bad thing. There are times when its just opportunity knocking.

No ofence intended and none taken.

Have a great weekend


----------



## Joel (Mar 3, 2005)

{I just got off of the phone with Paul Cappy. He had called me to inform me that the NYS Ethics Committee ruled that Apiary Inspectors who own enough beehives to generate income or Inspectors who sell honey can no longer be Apiary Inspectors.}

How could they veiw it any other way. It is verification for those of us who have been stating the obvious.

Now we need to show support for the new regime. I am going to get in touch with a master beekeeper I know and a few club presidents and see if I can get him moving in the direction of organizing qualified clup members who fit the bill.

This is a start. I'm assuming someone must be monitoring what's here or hearing loud and clear what Mark and others are saying. 

It's a great start, now we need to keep moving in the right direction.


----------



## Jim Fischer (Jan 5, 2001)

> Apiary Inspectors who own enough beehives to 
> generate income or Inspectors who sell honey 
> can no longer be Apiary Inspectors.

So, given that even one hive can generate 
income, and the honey from even one hive 
can be sold, does this mean that only 
non-beekeepers and ex-beekeepers can be bee 
inspectors?


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Thanks CFF. Just checking. It's so hard to tell how folks take things.

Joel, I have no indication that anyone is monitoring, but it is always possible. The timeing of this ruling is somewhat curious. But it would be a little premature to think that anything said here brought about this action. Unless someone brought it to someones attention. I guess that that could be possible.

Jim Fischer, from what I understand, hobby beekeepers are okay. I'm not sure if anyone has set a number of colonies limit.

I guess that the ideal would be a person with commercial experience who doesn't have any bees.


----------



## Kieck (Dec 2, 2005)

I went back today and reread the entire thread to try to glean the actual recommendations for improvements out of all the other debate about inspection services. So far, many people have jumped in on this topic, but the number of suggestions hasn't changed much since the beginning. I've tried to summarize and group the suggestions that have been posted so far (for example, if one person said something about privatizing inspections and another recommended making inspections voluntary and "pay-as-you-go," I lumped them together). I apologize in advance if I accidentally left out your idea from this list:

1) Privatize inspections. So far, a lot of people responding to this board keep hammering away on this one. Make inspections voluntary, make them "user-pays-the-fee," put them in the hands of beekeepers organizations, etc.

2) Remove the conflicts of interest from the system. It sounds like NY is taking steps to do this.

3) Improve funding for inspections. This one goes along with removing the conflicts of interest, in a way.

4) Some system of accreditation for inspectors, including background checks or education or both.

5) An "all-or-none" system. Either everyone faces the same type of state inspections, or no one faces state inspections. One of my favorite suggestions to date (thanks, Joel) was a recommendation that beekeepers could "turn in" potential problems. If the state confirms the problem, the owner of the problem hive(s) pays for the inspection. If the state finds no problem, the person requesting the inspection pays.

6) Inspectors should do no harm. Inspectors should be very careful to leave hives and apiaries in exactly the same conditions as they found them (no covers left off, etc.). Hives shouldn't be opened during honey flows. Any accidental killings of queens should be noted and those incidents reported immediately to the owners of the hives.

7) Findings should be reported. Inspection services should use forms of media (websites, paper reports, etc.) to convery information about their findings, such as detections and spread of diseases and/or pests, AHB, etc.

8) Inspectors should show up when they say they will.

9) Inspection agencies should cooperative with research institutions. The issue of private research (thanks, Peggjam) was brought up, also. Beekeepers interested in conducting private research should have opportunities to test their ideas without fearing inspections for compliance with regulations.

10) No trespassing by inspectors. This one really gets back to #1), the whole voluntary or private idea.

11) Inspections should provide health certificates for queens, packages, nucs, etc. The suggestion was even make (thanks, I believe, JohnF?) that private inspectors could offer a buy-back guarantee through suppliers.

12) Inspectors should offer services to help deal with problems when they find them, such as methods of irradiating or dipping hives contaminated with AFB spores.

I noticed in going through this list that almost every one of these recommendations was made by Joel. Way to go, Joel! While the rest of us have been quibbling about matters really pertaining more to whether or not beekeepers even want inspections (really, a topic covered by a different thread), you've been coming up with most of the recommendations on the list.

One that I particularly like is the idea of reporting the findings more widely. From a personal standpoint, I'd like to see more effort put into spreading news about changing conditions in beekeeping.

I'd also like to see more education services provided through the inspectors. I realize that inspectors offer some education to each beekeeper they inspect, but how about offering some outreach-type programs to interest other people in keeping bees?

Any other specific suggestions for improving inspections? For example, if you'd prefer privatized inspections, what sort of services would you pay for? What would make you request inspections?


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Well done, Kieck.

In New York an Apiary Inspection Program Report is given each year at the State-wide beekeepers club meeting. That would be the Empire State Honey Producers Association.

They do the same in Vermont, apparently, as I learned today, in Barre, VT, at their annual winter meeting.

I imagine that other states do the same.

Other ways of diseminating this information may not be as effective, though they have been tried. How could this info be published in the newspaper, so that it would get to everybody, when you have such a large state.

Perhaps County Extension newsletters?

The idea of Apiary Inspectors educating or advising beekeepers has been brought up, here in NY, many times. The reply from the Director of Plant Industry has been that we are regulatory and Cornell is extension. So, beekeepers should look to Cornell for management or treatment advice. It is also said that the beekeeper is responsible for educating himself/herself.

Perhaps there is reason for this point of view because, for a regulatory agency to give advice might leave that agency open for legal action if that advice doesn't pan out in the positive. Who knows.


----------



## Kieck (Dec 2, 2005)

I see your point about a regulatory agency giving management or treatment advice, at least in a formal sense. Maybe an extension-type service should be coordinated with the state's inspection service?

From other regulatory agencies here in SD, though, I've seen short summaries printed and mailed. I think, for instance, that a short "newsletter" distributed to all registered beekeepers at the beginning of the season and one at the end of the season would be valuable. These could include things like incidences of diseases/pests in hives, issues that pertain to beekeeping, etc. 

One other issue in inspections/registrations that I had forgotten about, but came up in another thread, was the idea that commercial and private pesticide applicators should notify the apiary regulatory agency before applying any pesticides. The agency then notifies any beekeepers that might be in the vicinity about the pesticide application so beekeepers can close up their hives temporarily or move them out of the area. If a state doesn't already provide this service, this is an important improvement to inspection programs, I think.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

A good idea that has been tried in the past and should continue to be tried.

There was, one time, an aerial applicator who was going to spray for mosquitoes, near Jay, NY. Notices were put out on peoples mailboxes, the morning of the planned spraying. Not any real time to react. 

I believe that this was done either by the town or the applicator. Bees died. Apiary Inspection didn't know about the beekeepers before hand. 

People need to see the value in Inspection and get registered.

Extension Apiculture work needs to continue, for sure. It needs to be funded so it can work.


----------

