# Canada Border To Remain Closed…Probably.



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

CATCH THE BUZZ



> Alan Harman
> The Canadian Food Inspection Agency is refusing to release its risk assessment on bees from the United States, but media reports say the agency has concluded the border should remain closed because of four serious risks from the U.S., including Africanized honeybees and medication-resistant pests.


I am surprised they are concerned about Africanized honeybees and am not surprised they are worried about medication-resistant pests. I was under the impression that varroa did exist in Canada though. How do they keep the bees from crossing over the boarder naturally?

http://home.ezezine.com/1636/1636-2013.11.04.11.22.archive.html


----------



## Dominic (Jul 12, 2013)

It's also the small hive beetle antibiotic-resistant AFB.

I'm not done with the document, yet, but I must admit I'm wondering how AFB and resistant AFB strains are only a concern with bee packages, and not all bee exports whatever the form.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Seems like Canadians would welcome AFB resistant bees more than they would fear antibiotic resistant AFB. Resistance or susceptibility to AFB varies in samples across NY, why would one expect the same thing to not occur in Canada too?

Do the different Provinces test their AFB samples for susceptibility or resistance as is done by the Beltville Bee Lab?


----------



## WBVC (Apr 25, 2013)

I am in Canada and have seen varroa here


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

sqkcrk said:


> Seems like Canadians would welcome AFB resistant bees more than they would fear antibiotic resistant AFB.


The organisms that have built up a resistance to man made antibiotics also have built up resistance to the bee's immune system so it is almost guaranteed to get other bees sick. Mrsa is a huge problem in our hospitals today. People who have no infection at all going into the hospital for something non life threatening get it and die. The logic of trying to sterilize our environment is biting us in the butt.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

WBVC said:


> I am in Canada and have seen varroa here


How about Small Hive Beetle? I know that there are SHB in Quebec. BC is probably the exception when it comes to varroa.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Acebird said:


> The organisms that have built up a resistance to man made antibiotics also have built up resistance to the bee's immune system so it is almost guaranteed to get other bees sick. Mrsa is a huge problem in our hospitals today. People who have no infection at all going into the hospital for something non life threatening get it and die. The logic of trying to sterilize our environment is biting us in the butt.


Maybe I should have used the word Hygienic.

AFB cases are at an all time low in the USA. How much of this is due to antibiotic use? Antibiotics have been around quite some time. So it probably isn't the use of antibiotics as much as it may be knowledge and management techniques and hygienic bees.

That's why I don't see why Canadians wouldn't want American queens.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

sqkcrk said:


> AFB cases are at an all time low in the USA. How much of this is due to antibiotic use?


Or it could be that beekeepers stopped using antibiotics and burned the hives instead. Where do you think beekeeping would bee if they hand not stop using antibiotics?


> That's why I don't see why Canadians wouldn't want American queens.


I was under the impression they can get American queens.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

From the link in post #1:


> Canada closed the border to U.S. packages in 1987. Since 1993 it has allowed honeybee queens to be imported from the U.S.


----------



## Dominic (Jul 12, 2013)

sqkcrk said:


> Seems like Canadians would welcome AFB resistant bees more than they would fear antibiotic resistant AFB. Resistance or susceptibility to AFB varies in samples across NY, why would one expect the same thing to not occur in Canada too?
> 
> Do the different Provinces test their AFB samples for susceptibility or resistance as is done by the Beltville Bee Lab?


The ban only concerns bee packages, queens are still allowed. Resistant strains of AFB are rare in Canada, except in Alberta.



WBVC said:


> I am in Canada and have seen varroa here


We have varroa, and a some cases of varroa resistant to coumaphos or fluvalinate. However, the report states that in the US, resistance to fluvalinate is generalized, resistance to coumaphos reported in many states, as well as several reports of resistance to amitraz. On top of this, strains of varroa resistant to multiple products has also been confirmed.



sqkcrk said:


> How about Small Hive Beetle? I know that there are SHB in Quebec. BC is probably the exception when it comes to varroa.


Québec is SHB-free. We've had a couple of reports some years ago, but the situation was controlled and no further reports have been made since. The government has a heavy watch on the border to make sure it doesn't cross over.



sqkcrk said:


> Maybe I should have used the word Hygienic.
> 
> AFB cases are at an all time low in the USA. How much of this is due to antibiotic use? Antibiotics have been around quite some time. So it probably isn't the use of antibiotics as much as it may be knowledge and management techniques and hygienic bees.
> 
> That's why I don't see why Canadians wouldn't want American queens.


Queen imports aren't banned, only bee packages.



Acebird said:


> Or it could be that beekeepers stopped using antibiotics and burned the hives instead. Where do you think beekeeping would bee if they hand not stop using antibiotics?
> 
> 
> I was under the impression they can get American queens.


We can get american queens, at least from some of your states. It's my understanding that people only bother to look for alternatives when the easy methods stop working, which is typically what happens when people systematically use the same chemicals all the time to fight pests or desease.

Personally, I feel systematic and repetitive use of the same chemicals should be against the law... Product rotation should be mandatory.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

Dominic said:


> Personally, I feel systematic and repetitive use of the same chemicals should be against the law... Product rotation should be mandatory.


Rotation with ?


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Dominic said:


> Resistant strains of AFB are rare in Canada, except in Alberta.
> 
> Québec is SHB-free. We've had a couple of reports some years ago, but the situation was controlled and no further reports have been made since. The government has a heavy watch on the border to make sure it doesn't cross over.


I guess it's possible, but I find it hard to believe. SHB fly after all and they don't need bees to live. How is the government watching the border? The same way they watch for people going across the border in an illegal manner?

When you write about resistant strains of AFB, what do you mean that they are resistant to?


----------



## Dominic (Jul 12, 2013)

Ian said:


> Rotation with ?


For Varroa: rotate between amitraz, coumaphos, and fluvalinate, if you are so keen on chemicals, instead of using the cheapest of the three until it stops working. Thymol, oxalic acid, and formic acid can and should be included in the rotation, because according to the experts I heard, the acids operate on acidity, which is extremely hard for anything to adapt to. Obviously, you need to make do with what products are allowed in your country/state...

For AFB, there's oxytetracyclin and tylosine tartrate.

Sometimes, sure, there are no alternative products possible. But when there are, that's when rotations should be systematic.


----------



## Dominic (Jul 12, 2013)

sqkcrk said:


> I guess it's possible, but I find it hard to believe. SHB fly after all and they don't need bees to live. How is the government watching the border? The same way they watch for people going across the border in an illegal manner?
> 
> When you write about resistant strains of AFB, what do you mean that they are resistant to?


For the SHB, they do surprise inspections in apiaries along the border. SHB presence in one's hives must be reported or face sanctions. Infested colonies were destroyed and compensations are granted when they were detected.

As for AFB, resistance to oxytetracyclin is the concern.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Dominic said:


> Infested colonies were destroyed and compensations are granted when they were detected.


That's too bad. They are pretty much harmless to colonies and hives in the North.


----------



## Dominic (Jul 12, 2013)

sqkcrk said:


> That's too bad. They are pretty much harmless to colonies and hives in the North.


If allowed to breed in the North, they'll end up acclimating themselves. Furthermore, most provinces have regulations concerning the introduction of SHB: allowing it to remain would severely compromise our ability to export bees to other provinces. I'm quite in approval of the government's decision to eradicate.

Edit: the report states that, according to the studies, SHB can overwinter in Ontario and Québec.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

The resistance of AFB to oxytet is immaterial if you don't use it. What are the recommended best practices in Quebec when it comes to the use of oxy?


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

Only chemical treatment that still works is Apivar. 
Using acid treatments can have their moments but nobody hangs their hat on them


----------



## Dominic (Jul 12, 2013)

sqkcrk said:


> The resistance of AFB to oxytet is immaterial if you don't use it. What are the recommended best practices in Quebec when it comes to the use of oxy?


Some people do, so it's a concern for those. I can't really tell you what the recommended practices are, for I don't use it myself, but seems to me that it's still best to strive to have the weakest possible strains as possible, so that, should action be required, multiple options present themselves. I think a prescription from the vet is required for the use of such antibotics, though.


----------



## Dominic (Jul 12, 2013)

Ian said:


> Only chemical treatment that still works is Apivar.
> Using acid treatments can have their moments but nobody hangs their hat on them


For now. Apivar is amitraz, and cases of resistances have been identified. If you just use that, sooner or later it won't work for you either. And probably sooner than later.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

I know Apivar is Amitraz, and it's the only chemical treatment we have that works. And I know by using it every year the chances of resistance increases, but by rotating it with chemical treatments that don't work is not going to help the situation at all. 

The limited avdlibility of mite control products is one of our industries largest concerns. Because we only have one treatment. And by trying to keep pests that are resistant to our effective treatments out is probably in our best interests for the short term anyway. This is one of the main points for keeping US bees out


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

I have not read the report, just comments from general discussions around here


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

Ian said:


> The limited avdlibility of mite control products is one of our industries largest concerns. Because we only have one treatment. And by trying to keep pests that are resistant to our effective treatments out is probably in our best interests for the short term anyway. This is one of the main points for keeping US bees out


If you are going to treat wouldn't you be better off letting the cheap bees from the US in? If you are not going to treat I can see keeping the US bees out but if you are already treating you might as well flood the market.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

I don't follow. The fear is bringing in pest resistant to our effective treatment.


----------



## RAK (May 2, 2010)

Ian said:


> I know Apivar is Amitraz, and it's the only chemical treatment we have that works. And I know by using it every year the chances of resistance increases, but by rotating it with chemical treatments that don't work is not going to help the situation at all.
> 
> The limited avdlibility of mite control products is one of our industries largest concerns. Because we only have one treatment. And by trying to keep pests that are resistant to our effective treatments out is probably in our best interests for the short term anyway. This is one of the main points for keeping US bees out


I know keepers who have been using amitraz for over 20 years with no resistance. 1 case of Resistance was observed in Europe but no one knows how true the claim is. Also, 2 acids work very well for varroa when applied correctly. No way mites could become resistant to that.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

20 years? If that's the case we have nothing to worry about. We have found that silver bullet
Acids are like putting out a fire with a garden hose. It works and works very well at certain times but if the fire gets too big and out of hand thanks to the wind, the whole yard will burn


----------



## RAK (May 2, 2010)

Ian said:


> We have found that silver bullet


Thats right. 

These guys aren't losing more than 10% but they also focus on queens and nutrition as well. The only problem is that its getting kinda hard to get the stuff. Im having great results but were doing Maqs in spring, Amitraz September and oxalic occasionally.


----------



## hpm08161947 (May 16, 2009)

Are there examples of hives being "Slimed" north of the border?


----------



## Dominic (Jul 12, 2013)

RAK said:


> I know keepers who have been using amitraz for over 20 years with no resistance. 1 case of Resistance was observed in Europe but no one knows how true the claim is. Also, 2 acids work very well for varroa when applied correctly. No way mites could become resistant to that.


Hearsay and anecdotes are poor justifications for policy.

There are no reports of amitraz-resistant Varroa in Canada, but there _is_ in the United States, as well as some strains resistant to all three products. The people you know are lucky. Migratory beekeeping is a great way to spread the worst bugs all over your country, and it's only a matter of time before one of these migratory beekeepers brings one of those super varroa strains to your buddies. If all they use is amitraz, they'll bee exerting a selection pressure in favor of the resistant varroa and will end up with quite a surprise.



Ian said:


> 20 years? If that's the case we have nothing to worry about. We have found that silver bullet
> Acids are like putting out a fire with a garden hose. It works and works very well at certain times but if the fire gets too big and out of hand thanks to the wind, the whole yard will burn


I don't see how oxalic acid vaporization can be any less controlled and precise than chemical poison strips. I'll grant you that the same can't be said about formic acid given how it is temperature-dependant, though there are various dispensers that help regulate the flow and prevent over-application.



RAK said:


> Thats right.
> 
> These guys aren't losing more than 10% but they also focus on queens and nutrition as well. The only problem is that its getting kinda hard to get the stuff. Im having great results but were doing Maqs in spring, Amitraz September and oxalic occasionally.


They are losing 10% _now_. Pretty sure people always think they found a silver bullet whenever a new chemical comes out.

I'm not saying people shouldn't use amitraz, though. If it works, then by all means, do use it! But do rotations! As you do, with formic and oxalic acid. Hive health should be about a great variety of factors, and nobody should just leave it to some miracle pesticide that one can just count on to fix the rest of one's negligence. Genetics, nutrition, and general practices are more important to hive health than pesticides are, even if pesticides can sometimes mask the deficiencies caused by these.


----------



## Dominic (Jul 12, 2013)

Ian said:


> I know Apivar is Amitraz, and it's the only chemical treatment we have that works. And I know by using it every year the chances of resistance increases, but by rotating it with chemical treatments that don't work is not going to help the situation at all.
> 
> The limited avdlibility of mite control products is one of our industries largest concerns. Because we only have one treatment. And by trying to keep pests that are resistant to our effective treatments out is probably in our best interests for the short term anyway. This is one of the main points for keeping US bees out


It's not your only treatment. I don't think you are allowed to use oxalic acid where you are, but I think formic acid is allowed.

Resistance is also a trait that can be "bred out" of Varroa by avoiding using a given product for multiple generations. This has been demonstrated with fluvalinate, which can return to 90% efficiency. The report states that the same may be possible with coumaphos (17% efficiency), but then again maybe not.

Products like thymovar and oxalic acid really help in the fight against Varroa. If you can't use them at home, then making pressures to have them legalized might be a good thing to do. Coming up with a single new great product at a time is the best way of making all discovered products worthless on the long run.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

Dominic said:


> I'm not saying people shouldn't use amitraz, though. If it works, then by all means, do use it! But do rotations!


That goes against human nature. If you use a drug and it works you are not going to risk using something else that may not work as good or at all. You are more likely to use more of what worked the first time. The same logic occurs for people who treat in general. If they treat and it works they are never going to stop treating even if it doesn't work. You will never get a policy of voluntary rotation to work because the results from each procedure are not the same. I don't even think a communist form of government could control the chemical usage. There would just be black markets.


----------



## Dominic (Jul 12, 2013)

Acebird said:


> That goes against human nature. If you use a drug and it works you are not going to risk using something else that may not work as good or at all. You are more likely to use more of what worked the first time. The same logic occurs for people who treat in general. If they treat and it works they are never going to stop treating even if it doesn't work. You will never get a policy of voluntary rotation to work because the results from each procedure are not the same. I don't even think a communist form of government could control the chemical usage. There would just be black markets.


You need a course, though, to use the synthetic chemicals, no? Or to buy them? It could be stressed there.

And there are a number of ways the government could try to promote or enforce rotations. Even if it doesn't manage 100% compliance, they could certainly increase it significantly.

If it were up to me, I'd make it illegal to register pesticides for any given problem unless there are already alternatives or unless the company presents two different chemicals at a time. The approach of using one product until it stops working completely, and then moving on to the next until it does the same, is completely nonsensical. Such short-term vision does not help agriculture in general, nor beekeepers specifically.

In any case, the document's 91 pages long, I finished reading it yesterday. I tend to agree with it, though I'd have brought the restrictions even higher by banning the imports of bumblebee colonies as well (which can be a vector of SHB and other bee pests) and blacklisting sloppy breeders who manage to ship varroa mites on hand-picked queens...


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

Ok, we need to rotate, got it. We also need more options. And for the short term it is best if we restrict pest movement within our continent. 

Now an opinion from the other side of the story, what about the availability of bees? Speaking only on package bee across the boarder, no comb. 
If we could get a solid supply of package bees to supply our yearly production needs, practicing more of a buy in spring and shake out in fall, treatments could just about be eliminated


----------



## HiveOnTheHill (Jun 17, 2011)

I have read the report and I for one, think that the decision to keep the border closed was the right one. The availability of packages from the US would be a short term gain for the potential of long term pain if the diseases and pests prevalent in the US become established here. We do not have a wide array of treatment options available to us here, which has already been established by other posters. There have been isolated reports of SHB, resistant varroa, AFB etc but since they are isolated they can be dealt with effectively to keep it from becoming a widespread problem. This collection of pests can greatly outpace our ability to contain it since we do not have the treatments available to us, by the time regulations caught up it would be too late. 
CFIA's role is to do its best to protect industry - as a whole. The opinion of the report is one that the Canadian beekeeping industry is better served by keeping things out of the country as long as possible. It is a double edge sword - producers complain that the Govt is regulating our operations and hindering our ability to do what is necessary to maintain our operations. However the same beekeepers that are wanting this get some bad packages that severely hurt their operation which they could spend years recovering from, not to mention spreading it to other operations as well, they will be the first to complain that the Govt should have done more and been more vigilant to the industry and require compensation for their losses. To the industry as a whole it is more important to maintain Canada's status as being 'free' of these pests than to have the cheap supply of packages brought in and jeopardizing this.
I have the 'luxury' of sitting on both sides of the fence but until we develop our own self sustaining system of bee supply, this will be an ongoing issue.


----------



## Dominic (Jul 12, 2013)

Ian said:


> Ok, we need to rotate, got it. We also need more options. And for the short term it is best if we restrict pest movement within our continent.
> 
> Now an opinion from the other side of the story, what about the availability of bees? Speaking only on package bee across the boarder, no comb.
> If we could get a solid supply of package bees to supply our yearly production needs, practicing more of a buy in spring and shake out in fall, treatments could just about be eliminated


The solution is not importation of cheap packages full of super bugs, but domestic breeding.

Of course, from what I gather in the report, the situation is quite different in Manitoba than in Québec and Ontario, where we are much more self-sufficient.

Are you talking about the old practice of killing off all of your bees when winter comes? Aside from the big ethical issue I have with that, such practices do not promote self-sustainability, do not favor the emergence of bees truly adapted to local climate (optimal genetics) and, as stated in the report, presents a significant risk for the introduction and spreading of treatment-resistant pests and disease, some of them escaping and surviving in the environment with or without feral swarms.

It's my opinion that if Manitoban beekeepers want more bees in the spring, they should simply make sure to overwinter more bees in the fall. The shortage of bees in the spring is really not a fatality, but the result of the industry's unwillingness to properly prepare and organize itself.


----------



## hpm08161947 (May 16, 2009)

Sounds like Manitoba would be a very good place for a Shake-collect honey- Shake out kind of operation.... if the price of packages were not so high. The price of a Canadian package is pretty spectacular... or so I've hear..... no idea how accurate the info is.

If package bees could be moved into Canada I suppose one would drive a flatbed down to GA in March (when they are readily available) and load up for about $65/package (assuming a large order.... 500 or so). Given the type of honey yields I have heard of in Manitoba, there would seem to be a good chance for profitability + a long winter vacation.


----------



## grozzie2 (Jun 3, 2011)

hpm08161947 said:


> The price of a Canadian package is pretty spectacular... or so I've hear..... no idea how accurate the info is.


When we started out in 2011, we bought 4lb new zealand packages. Small lot retail, they ran around $250 if memory serves correctly. We didn't realize it at the time, but they are intended to start two hives from, and typically come with 2 queens. We got 3 queens with a pair of packages, and shook them evenly across 3 boxes to start 3 hives.

If the border was opened up, I think the southern package producers would be rejoicing, and, american package purchasers would be horrified at what happens to pricing. I suspect a lot of the producers have been holding off on giving prices for 2014 spring packages, waiting on this decision. If the decision had allowed for northbound bees in package form, prices would have immediately jumped substantially. I also suspect it would have been devastating for australian package producers.

Me thinks there was plenty of politics behind the scenes, that us mere beekeepers were never aware of. I'd actually be quite surprised if there was not some lobby efforts originating with the southern hemisphere producers.


----------



## Haraga (Sep 12, 2011)

Other than saving some money on packages, can anyone give me a reason to import continental US bees?


----------



## Dominic (Jul 12, 2013)

Haraga said:


> Other than saving some money on packages, can anyone give me a reason to import continental US bees?


I'm all for tough restrictions on bee imports, but I wouldn't want queens to be totally banned as they temporarily were. Greater control, perhaps, with possibly a special tax, but queen imports should remain allowed. Or at the very least, germplasm.

The only valid reason in my eyes for importing bees is for their genetics, in order to be able to enrich our diversity and add particular traits developed by American researchers, ex: Primorsky bees, Minnesota hygienic bees, VSH bees, old world bees, etc. I suspect most queen imports are just done because American queens are cheaper and/or available sooner, which results in sub-par bees that don't do all that well in our climate. Genetic pollution more than anything else, really.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Resistance genetics.

Aussie bees have never seen a Varroa.

As for genetic pollution, if you mean AHB in southern US bees, it isn't the case according to a recent study.

I think that calling US stock 'pollution' is a bit over the top.

They're uniquely US Honeybees according to what I'm reading in Honeybee genetics research.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

> Resistance genetics.

It is currently legal to import US queens into Canada. Why would you need to import packages _simply _to get US "resistance genetics" when importing queens is already legal?

The push to import US packages to Canada is from an _economic _impetus, not a genetic diversity issue.

.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

I think that $250 a package is a good reason to import U.S. packages.
Queens can carry all kinds of pathogens anyways. So, what's the issue?


----------



## Lauri (Feb 1, 2012)

I'm planning to send some of my Northern VSH queens to Elmendorf AFB in Alaska next spring for testing . I'd be interested in sending some to Canada to overwinter and get some reports on their performance. PM me if you are interested. I am located in Western Washington State.

Not trying to drum up business here. I'm too small to ship for sales. Still a local producer. I'm more interested in research and development at this point and would like to perhaps do some trading with someone else doing research. The colder and harsher your climate the better

I have mainly survivor high performing ferrell stock collect from a wilderness area and Carniolan VSH hybrids from the Glenn II line. 

This is the Mt. Rainier ferrell strain. Black or black striped daughters:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w-VW_PMRHCs

Glenn Hybrids are Chocolate striped. All my bees are dark.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

The best reason for opening the U.S. Canadian border both ways isn't just for trading bees.
It would be beneficial to migratory U.S. beekeepers who could take advantage of the very long summer days in the northern part of the provinces, and Canadian beekeepers would benefit by overwintering their bees in the south.

Unfortunately, it's a closed shop as it seems.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

Dominic said:


> Are you talking about the old practice of killing off all of your bees when winter comes? Aside from the big ethical issue


This practice is perfectly suited for the Prairies. It is why it was so widely practiced beforehand. 
Bring the bees up, Oxalic acid treatment before hiving. Feed them a squirt of Fumagillin and that is it for hive treatments, period. Feed them a couple gallons of syrup in the spring, and thats all the feed you have to provide for them. Kill them off in the fall, spend the winter scraping and preparing the boxes for next year. Store them in cold storage to help kill off pest presence and virus. 
Fresh queens every year which would build a fantastic summer time population. An exact measured amount of bees poured into each hive which eliminates all the spring time swarm control work. 

So many advantages in running a package bee operation. It truely was developed for the Northern States and the Canadian Prairies. 

So the question is asked, Should the rest of Canada hold the Prairie beekeepers hostage because it a package operation doesn't suit their operation and practice?


----------



## Axtmann (Dec 29, 2002)

Ian said:


> This practice is perfectly suited for the Prairies. It is why it was so widely practiced beforehand.
> Bring the bees up, Oxalic acid treatment before hiving. Feed them a squirt of Fumagillin and that is it for hive treatments, period. Feed them a couple gallons of syrup in the spring, and thats all the feed you have to provide for them. Kill them off in the fall, spend the winter scraping and preparing the boxes for next year. Store them in cold storage to help kill off pest presence and virus.
> Fresh queens every year which would build a fantastic summer time population. An exact measured amount of bees poured into each hive which eliminates all the spring time swarm control work.
> 
> ...


That is the worst thing I ever heard in my whole life. This are not the words from a beekeeper, it's from a greedy bee killer. 
We have many bee institutes and people work hard to keep the little girls healthy and alive. And now this on a north america forum, " let them work hard, all there live and at the end ... kill them. I thought, the time with keeping slaves are long gone.
Just my opinion


----------



## Frostmork (Sep 8, 2013)

I'm a little surprised at how clueless some people seem. Closing the borders is a quite logical thing to do if you want to limit the spread of pests, heck we even have zones here that nobody imports from as they have had varroa, because it's a good practice. Throwing loads of varroa packages all over the country won't exactly help stopping those little mites...


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

Axtmann said:


> That is the worst thing I ever heard in my whole life. This are not the words from a beekeeper, it's from a greedy bee killer.


It is not in my game plan but in defense, have you ever pinched a queen, split a hive, culled drones or shaked out a drone laying hive? None of these are the bees choice. Beekeeping is farming and farming is about raising animals for your own needs not the animals. Usually it results in slaughter. All the bees that exist in the fall will be dead by spring anyway. How is it any different than requeening every spring? They do that in Germany don't they?


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

Axtmann said:


> That is the worst thing I ever heard in my whole life. This are not the words from a beekeeper, it's from a greedy bee killer.


The North American package bee industry was developed exactly for this purpose. As it was said, by bringing the bees up to we are able to catch the abundance of nectar but cant feasibly overwinter the hives through the winter. Now times have changed and new wintering techniques have been developed so I doubt there will ever be a complete fall shake out but I could see a hybrid version.

Another possibility, 
if the boarder does open, I could stock my yards to the gills with package bees, and ship them all off to California in the fall to catch the Almond flow. Shake/sell them all out in California and bring back empty boxes. The pollination fees would just be a nice fall time bonus and would buy my bees for the following year.


----------



## hpm08161947 (May 16, 2009)

Ian said:


> Another possibility,
> if the boarder does open, I could stock my yards to the gills with package bees, and ship them all off to California in the fall to catch the Almond flow. Shake/sell them all out in California and bring back empty boxes. The pollination fees would just be a nice fall time bonus and would buy my bees for the following year.


Ian... you seem to have really thought this out. I suspect it will never happen, though. Just too many people on "Both" sides of the border opposed to it.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

of course I have thought this out. This is the discussion up here.

I ask you hpm08161947, when change barrels down on you regardless if the change was welcomed, and everything you know changes, what do you do? Sit there and complain about the way it was, or do you start making changes to embrace the opportunity? 

Its the second possibility I mentioned that keeps migratory beekeepers from lobbing heavily to open the boarder. Do you think the Almond growers would welcome another half million Canadian hives?


----------



## hpm08161947 (May 16, 2009)

Ian said:


> Its the second possibility I mentioned that keeps migratory beekeepers from lobbing heavily to open the boarder. Do you think the Almond growers would welcome another half million Canadian hives?


I am sure the Almond growers would welcome the Canadian bees. Just as I am sure the Almond pollinators would not.

All in all.... blocking borders does not fit my model of free enterprise, particularly when there appears to be no significant reason to do so.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

hpm08161947 said:


> particularly when there appears to be no significant reason to do so.


that is one side of the argument up here, and in many ways, they are correct

Africanized bees have not been able to adapt to colder climates. and we all know Canada is a colder climate. Our bees will make cluster pretty much every month of the year! Small hive beetle also seems not to have taken foot hold across the line. Producers find beetles pretty much every spring ( as Im told ) dead in the hives. They fly across the boarder from migratory operations. 
In regards to chemical resistant varroa and antibiotic resistant AFB, yes, this is a significant factor.


----------



## hpm08161947 (May 16, 2009)

Ian said:


> In regards to chemical resistant varroa and antibiotic resistant AFB, yes, this is a significant factor.


If this is a problem in the States... I am not familiar with it. It is probably something like the "Mad Cow" syndrome.........


----------



## Dominic (Jul 12, 2013)

WLC said:


> Resistance genetics.
> 
> Aussie bees have never seen a Varroa.
> 
> ...


I call unadapted genetics pollution, regardless of how well it performs in the area where it is adapted. This is not to say that american bees are poor, I just find it ridiculous to use bees adapted to Californian weather to build up a stock that will live in Canadian climate, unless it's to incorporate specific traits into local stocks. Every locale should breed bees adapted to its own area, and imports should only serve as short-term boosts in colony/apiary strength, their queens not used for breeding and, ideally, replaced with local queens at the first opportunity.


----------



## Dominic (Jul 12, 2013)

WLC said:


> The best reason for opening the U.S. Canadian border both ways isn't just for trading bees.
> It would be beneficial to migratory U.S. beekeepers who could take advantage of the very long summer days in the northern part of the provinces, and Canadian beekeepers would benefit by overwintering their bees in the south.
> 
> Unfortunately, it's a closed shop as it seems.


This is the last thing I would want to see happen. Migratory beekeeping is a horrible practice, bee health-wise. It accelerates the spread of (resistant or new) pests, greatly stresses the bees, and pressures for the concentration of the industry into the hands of a few. The less the bees move, the healthier they are. The less borders they cross, the happier I am.



Ian said:


> This practice is perfectly suited for the Prairies. It is why it was so widely practiced beforehand.
> Bring the bees up, Oxalic acid treatment before hiving. Feed them a squirt of Fumagillin and that is it for hive treatments, period. Feed them a couple gallons of syrup in the spring, and thats all the feed you have to provide for them. Kill them off in the fall, spend the winter scraping and preparing the boxes for next year. Store them in cold storage to help kill off pest presence and virus.
> Fresh queens every year which would build a fantastic summer time population. An exact measured amount of bees poured into each hive which eliminates all the spring time swarm control work.
> 
> ...


That practice was common here too, before, and thank god those days are over. Can you imagine the bad publicity it would generate? I can already imagine PETA going all "BOYCOTT CANADIAN BEE SLAUGHTER", and American companies being all too happy to comply. I have serious issues with that practice. We put our bees through a lot, and they work really hard to earn us a living. We owe them a minimum of respect. And while yes, they are farm animals and don't get the same treatment as pets, mass annual extermination just crosses the line. Manitobans should just overwinter their bees. Otherwise, they should just give up beekeeping altogether, and let neighboring provinces fill in their pollination needs, or rely on bumblebees instead. Such practices are not only morally wrong, but would tarnish the reputation of the rest of Canadian beekeepers. It should outright be illegal. The few should never be allowed to compromise the many.


----------



## Dominic (Jul 12, 2013)

Ian said:


> This practice is perfectly suited for the Prairies. It is why it was so widely practiced beforehand.
> Bring the bees up, Oxalic acid treatment before hiving. Feed them a squirt of Fumagillin and that is it for hive treatments, period. Feed them a couple gallons of syrup in the spring, and thats all the feed you have to provide for them. Kill them off in the fall, spend the winter scraping and preparing the boxes for next year. Store them in cold storage to help kill off pest presence and virus.
> Fresh queens every year which would build a fantastic summer time population. An exact measured amount of bees poured into each hive which eliminates all the spring time swarm control work.
> 
> ...


I'd also like to point out a few things, this way of working is not a means to kill off all disease. You can't have a pest-free province just by killing all of your bees every year.

1) Not everyone will kill off their bees, even if a minority, these colonies will act to maintain and spread the most resistant pests you import.
2) Even those who try won't really kill all of their bees, as it is inevitable that there will be some swarming and thus that feral bees will maintain those pests.
3) "Prophylactic" usage of antibiotics is pretty much the best way to get antibiotic-resistant disease. The spores of which can survive many years, as well as actively spread from surviving colonies.
4) Cold may kill the pests, but not the disease, certainly not the viruses.

This is just lazy beekeeping.

And would you be proud to tell your customers that you kill off all of your bees every year? If it's not something to be proud of, it shouldn't be done.


----------



## RAK (May 2, 2010)

Ian said:


> This practice is perfectly suited for the Prairies. It is why it was so widely practiced beforehand.
> Bring the bees up, Oxalic acid treatment before hiving. Feed them a squirt of Fumagillin and that is it for hive treatments, period. Feed them a couple gallons of syrup in the spring, and thats all the feed you have to provide for them. Kill them off in the fall, spend the winter scraping and preparing the boxes for next year. Store them in cold storage to help kill off pest presence and virus.
> Fresh queens every year which would build a fantastic summer time population. An exact measured amount of bees poured into each hive which eliminates all the spring time swarm control work.
> 
> ...


Ian, Your winter would be stress free.

My ancestors did the same. Shipped package bees from Georgia into Siberia and killed them off in the fall.


----------



## Lauri (Feb 1, 2012)

Wholly Cow Rak, I'd like to hear that story!


----------



## hpm08161947 (May 16, 2009)

Dominic: You will probably be happy to know that most of these operations now simply sell fall shake out bees to southern operations. I am surprised at the amount of bee anthropomorphication expressed here. Are you involved in agriculture?


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

RAK said:


> Ian, Your winter would be stress free.
> 
> My ancestors did the same. Shipped package bees from Georgia into Siberia and killed them off in the fall.


Georgia being a country which borders Russia, right?


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Dominic said:


> This is the last thing I would want to see happen. Migratory beekeeping is a horrible practice, bee health-wise. The less the bees move, the healthier they are. The less borders they cross, the happier I am.


But only after they were brought across the Atlantic hundreds of years ago, right?

So many of these critisisms of those who kill their bees, or would do so, at the end of the beekeeping season are so selfcentered. How many colonies survive Manitoba Winters? I don't think y'all know the whole story. I know I don't. But I am not going to condemn someone for doing what is economically best for them.

I don't care for the idea of killing bees. But I can afford to have that mindset, because most of my bees survive where they Winter. Others may not.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

Dominic , aren't you getting tired of shaking your finger at me?


----------



## HiveOnTheHill (Jun 17, 2011)

Its the second possibility I mentioned that keeps migratory beekeepers from lobbing heavily to open the boarder. Do you think the Almond growers would welcome another half million Canadian hives?[/QUOTE]

Roles reversed = Would you really welcome a half million hives showing up on your doorstep? I know I wouldn't

And as for the package bee operation suited to the prairies - have you done the math? It does not make any financial sense to operate this way. Overwintering is a much cheaper alternative


----------



## Dominic (Jul 12, 2013)

hpm08161947 said:


> Dominic: You will probably be happy to know that most of these operations now simply sell fall shake out bees to southern operations. I am surprised at the amount of bee anthropomorphication expressed here. Are you involved in agriculture?


Yes, I am involved in agriculture, and fail to see any comparable situations. Livestock sent to the slaughterhouse at least have the dignity of having a meaning to their death: feeding people.

And whether one cares for it or not, one has to account for anthropomorphism. A bunch of these lobbies are currently our allies, fighting against the people responsible for bee declines. Beekeeping benefits from significant public support, because of the general public's vision of how we operate in harmony with nature and sell "100% natural honey". Unethical beekeeping, the likes of an annual mass extermination, is the kind of thing that will not only get all of these environemental groups to stop working with us, but will get them to work against us.



sqkcrk said:


> But only after they were brought across the Atlantic hundreds of years ago, right?
> 
> So many of these critisisms of those who kill their bees, or would do so, at the end of the beekeeping season are so selfcentered. How many colonies survive Manitoba Winters? I don't think y'all know the whole story. I know I don't. But I am not going to condemn someone for doing what is economically best for them.
> 
> I don't care for the idea of killing bees. But I can afford to have that mindset, because most of my bees survive where they Winter. Others may not.


I don't live in California or Hawaii or some other sunny beach State. We have harsh winters in Québec too, and we overwinter our hives. And not just on our southern border, either. If it can be done here, it can certainly be done over there too. The whole of Canadian beekeeping should not be jeopardized just so one province's can be lazy and kill their bees off every year.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

You lambaste migratory beekeeping yet you have benefited from migratory beekeeping. Were it not for migratory beekeeping you would not have bees.


----------



## hpm08161947 (May 16, 2009)

Dominic said:


> I don't live in California or Hawaii or some other sunny beach State. We have harsh winters in Québec too, and we overwinter our hives. And not just on our southern border, either. If it can be done here, it can certainly be done over there too. The whole of Canadian beekeeping should not be jeopardized just so one province's can be lazy and kill their bees off every year.


Are we talking about Insects here? Do they spray for mosquitoes in Quebec? And you think there should be laws past to prevent fall shakeouts in Manitoba? How does it hurt the people of Quebec?

Do I sense what is really going on here.... a vast difference in the people of Eastern Canada and the Prairie Provinces? At least a big attitudnal difference....

I can not imagine any of my neighbors giving a hoot if I shook out all my bees this winter..... perhaps if I lived closed to some urban center..... NYC, Philly, LA... etc - who knows..


----------



## cg3 (Jan 16, 2011)

HiveOnTheHill said:


> have you done the math? It does not make any financial sense to operate this way.


http://www.beesource.com/forums/sho...Honey-Production&highlight=householder+method

Of course, this depends on a cheap, early supply of packages.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

First of all, I would challenge the assumption that they don't already have exactly the same Honeybee health issues in Canada that we have here in the U.S. .

Quite frankly, after the massive losses in some of the Canadian provinces that have made the headlines, I wouldn't attribute the majority of those high loss levels to pesticide kills. They already have a serious Honeybee health problem in Canada in my opinion. So, the closed border is more about protectionism than keeping out disease.

What I've referred to before is the 'missing leg' in the Honeybee pollinator 'relay'.

If both U.S. and Canadian migratory pollinators had to ability move Honeybees all the way up north into the provinces, and then all the way down south in the states, productivity would increase well into the double digits.

Essentially, it would be like a never ending flow.

No more dearths for most of the year.

Unfortunately, closed borders have a way of keeping managed pollinators from following nectar/pollen flows.


----------



## hpm08161947 (May 16, 2009)

WLC said:


> Essentially, it would be like a never ending flow.
> 
> No more dearths for most of the year.
> 
> Unfortunately, closed borders have a way of keeping managed pollinators from following nectar/pollen flows.


A rather well known Alberta beekeeper once said that he doubted that 1/10th of the available honey in the prairie Provinces gets harvested. I wonder if that is true. 

If they come south guess we can go North.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

oh and we would flow south too! Package bees would restock our yards, make the honey and they would all go south to California to cash in on the Almond pollination as an end of year bonus.

How many migratory beekeepers would follow their bees up here into Canada? I doubt very many, and I would also assume virtually none of their workers would get across the boarder either. So, I would then see the hives getting contracted out to Canadian beekeepers to manage. Crop sharing I presume. Who would end up on the right side of that ledger?


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

Another interesting point made by talking to a neighbouring beekeeper here today. 

Those 100 000 or so packages that would of been sold to Canada, is 100 000 worth of bee hives not available to the Almond flow. Becasue as the deal would of stated, package bees across but not back. As far as we can see from up here, you US guys are not quite self sufficient enough to cover your California pollination needs. Take a couple hundred thousand packages out of the US "bee herd" equation and pollination brokers are going to have to search farther afield to replace them.

The sense we get from up here is that package operators and pollination brokers took a good sigh of relief with the continued ban on honeybee movement across the boarder


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Uh, Ian...

By the time pollination has finished going from California to Washington, there's more than enough migratory pallets to sell to migratory pollinators on the Canadian side of the border.

How can I put it...

The splits keep splitting.

When the migratory season is over in Canada, I'm sure that you can find someone on the U.S. side to take them off of your hands.

I think that there might be a few U.S. and Canadian beekeepers that don't need to take their shoes and socks off to understand how the math works out.

As it stands, there's no access to the flow north of the border, and all of those truckloads of migratory pallets have no choice but to be turned into cash for any increases made, right here in the U.S. .

That closed border is lost productivity and income for all.

It's lose-lose.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

your missing the circular aspect of it, WCL ( whoever you are )

and Im referring to strictly to package bees crossing the boarder, bees on comb is more than forever away


----------



## hpm08161947 (May 16, 2009)

WLC said:


> That closed border is lost productivity and income for all.
> 
> It's lose-lose.


Yup... that is what I see. Psuedo-Political Economics. But I am not sure it's the U.S. contributing to keeping the border closed...... more like an internal Canadian thing.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

I do know that Canadian beekeepers have filed suit in their federal court over the U.S. package issue.

Quite frankly, after the big hit beekeepers in Manitoba and Ontario have taken recently, someone is going to come to the revelation that the 'bio-security' issue is peripheral to the potential collapse of beekeeping in Canada.

Packages from New Zealand, Australia, and Chile? 

That's not going to fix the underlying problem.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

you have no idea what your talking about WLC , not a clue


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Really now?

Who made you a 'Minister'?

45% and 36% losses?

That's a big hit in Canada.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

Yes we had a terrible spring, AND highlights the need for available and affordable replacement stock.

your point???


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

I bought in replacement stock from NZ, my neighbour decided to forfit his honey crop this year and split his hives all summer. 

He is living on bread and butter this winter. Hard to live off nothing

It was two and a half weeks of timely terrible spring weather that killed off our bee stock this past year. Nobody escaped it


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Ian said:


> I bought in replacement stock from NZ, my neighbour decided to forfit his honey crop this year and split his hives all summer.
> 
> He is living on bread and butter this winter. Hard to live off nothing
> 
> It was two and a half weeks of timely terrible spring weather that killed off our bee stock this past year. Nobody escaped it


Your government is saying that there's a serious pesticide contamination issue.

I'm truly sorry to hear about your misfortune.

My point remains, closed borders are a big part of the problem.


----------



## Haraga (Sep 12, 2011)

Wlc the NZ packages could not have been better. Canada does just fine without the US bees. Bottom line we don't need them.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Haraga said:


> Wlc the NZ packages could not have been better. Canada does just fine without the US bees. Bottom line we don't need them.


Yet, Canadian beekeepers have filed a federal suit since the U.S. package ban caused them a loss in income. Papers are currently being filed to make it a class action suit.

Obviously, you don't speak for ALL Canadian beekeepers.

I hope that I've made my point.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

WLC said:


> Yet, Canadian beekeepers have filed a federal suit since the U.S. package ban caused them a loss in income.


Here is more information on that lawsuit.


> Field LLP has commenced a $200-million proposed class action lawsuit on behalf of Canadian beekeepers against the Federal Government for its alleged negligence in maintaining a prohibition on the importation of live honeybee colonies from the mainland United States after *December 31, 2006*.The plaintiffs are 3 Western Canadian beekeeping operations, which collectively maintain about 8,000 honeybee colonies.
> 
> http://www.fieldlaw.com/practicearea_currentactions.asp?practiceID=89


Note that the plaintiffs are three (3) Canadian beekeepers, who have about 8,000 hives. Compare that number to _Ian's _estimate that there are 600,000 to 700,000 hives in Canada. So the plaintiffs represent significantly less than 2% of Canadian hives.


Looks more like a law firm trolling for fees to me.  :no: 

.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Class Action means that others may enjoin. 

So, how many can enjoin? Hmmm.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

Not I , this is the wrong way of going about it. We need to follow consensus , not bull heading the process by a few rouges


----------



## Haraga (Sep 12, 2011)

Wlc you are right I don't speak for everyone. You keep your bees south of the 49th and we will keep ours north of the 49th. If and when we need your bees we will open the border. I am assuming that you know what the 49th is.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

Haraga, I think most every beekeeper in Canada fears the fact that exact thing, if the process opens the boarder even a little bit, it will not be long before we Canadian beekeepers loose control of our own precious foraging landscape


----------



## Haraga (Sep 12, 2011)

Yes Ian. All we need is 200k hives coming up here and lowering the pollination contract prices. In my area on canola seed we get 400 an acre for leaf cutters and honey bees. We don't need that price to drop. The reason it is at that price is because of a limited supply of bees.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

I'd be okay as for holding my territory. We farm a lot of land and I know my land owners in my area pretty well. It would just take a longer coffee conversation to explain why I need to hold my area exclusively to myself.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

Haraga, how many honeybee hives do you stock per acre on that pollination contract? And what field distribution do you manage ?


----------



## irwin harlton (Jan 7, 2005)

"if the process opens the boarder even a little bit, it will not be long before we Canadian beekeepers loose control of our own precious foraging landscape "

I don't think so, American migratory beekeeping outfits would be classified as foreign investors in Canada ,and would be subject to our gov't rules and taxes,(same as a Canadian taking bees south to pollinate) it would require them to make a substantial investment in Canada to reap any rewards.And don't think for one minute you will pollinate almonds for free in the good old USA
As for the border opening to US packages, our bureaucrats can't look after what we have here now and what we are currently importing.There is some type of parasite ,mite on NZ bees being imported and the CFIA, is ,it would seem blind


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

Working under the "open boarder" seneario , US operators would be able to contract their hives to Canadian Producers though? Right or wrong ?


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

irwin harlton said:


> There is some type of parasite ,mite on NZ bees being imported and the CFIA, is ,it would seem blind


Not Tropilailics clarea is it? I hope not.


----------



## irwin harlton (Jan 7, 2005)

it is not Tropilailics


----------



## HiveOnTheHill (Jun 17, 2011)

Under Section 160 of the Health of Animals Act - the key wording is *'will cause *or* likely to cause *disease or the spread of disease.


----------



## RAK (May 2, 2010)

Ian said:


> Working under the "open boarder" seneario , US operators would be able to contract their hives to Canadian Producers though? Right or wrong ?




Right, 

and Canadian beekeepers would be able to treat their bees to some almond pollen and nectar in February for a fraction of today price...If not for free.


----------



## ryan (Apr 3, 2010)

Yes an open border might create some price movement. But most (all) things were good when our borders were completely open. It would be win win to open things up again. I think.?! 

A few random points:

Not all the bees in the US go to CA. There are lots of beekeepers who do not do almonds or do a very limited #. Canadian bees would probably not all go south and not all of those would go to CA. 

600,000 hives is about what the state of North Dakota supports. Canada has about that amount in the whole country. Any real pressure on bee forage seems unlikely given the land mass involved. 1/10 forage is is use in Canada? I'll bet its closer to 1/1000. 

AFB, EFB, mean bees, beetle problems, restant pests? Nope. Not really anything going on here. 

Killing of bees used to happen in the US also. If I didn't kill or sell hives every year I would own 9 million hives today. And so would everyone else. Managed hives grow at a fast rate. Comments about reducing hive counts being unethical are uneducated or inexperienced comments.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

ryan said:


> 600,000 hives is about what the state of North Dakota supports. Canada has about that amount in the whole country. Any real pressure on bee forage seems unlikely given the land mass involved. 1/10 forage is is use in Canada? I'll bet its closer to 1/1000.


Look at an agricultural map, not a roads map. Lots of trees, rock and , snow LOL



ryan said:


> AFB, EFB, mean bees, beetle problems, restant pests? Nope. Not really anything going on here.
> * *


You promise ?


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

It appears that the closing of the boarders is more politics and the fear of spreading disease is the pressure to support the politics. Can someone explain why Manitoba is so rich in nectar flow or is that it is the best of what Canada has and the rest is poor?


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>Not Tropilailics clarea is it? I

Sooner or later it will be. I think anything we can do to make it later is a better plan. Importing from NZ will make it sooner.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

RAK said:


> Right,
> 
> and Canadian beekeepers would be able to treat their bees to some almond pollen and nectar in February for a fraction of today price...If not for free.




Rightly or wrongly that's what I would then do. In our hypothetical little world we have created here. 

Buy as many packages as I had boxes, take the honey crop off them, winter them til Jan 1 st and send them all to Cali to be managed by whoever. They would pollinate and then empty my boxes for for a set fee and ship empty boxes back without bringing back half of the nations pests. 
Is there a hole in this strategy ?


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

I would think shipping cost would kill you. It might be better to look for disposable equipment so it only makes one trip.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

Yup, it would have to make sense with shipping. Bees are shipped tractor trailer now under the same margins


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

> It might be better to look for disposable equipment 

The drawn comb in those boxes is perhaps as valuable as the boxes themselves.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Michael Bush said:


> >Not Tropilailics clarea is it? I
> 
> Sooner or later it will be. I think anything we can do to make it later is a better plan. Importing from NZ will make it sooner.


Then we in the US may need to close the Border to Canadians before they open the Border to us. We sure don't want their problems any more than they want ours.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Acebird said:


> I would think shipping cost would kill you. It might be better to look for disposable equipment so it only makes one trip.


Not necessarily Brian. There are plenty of beekeepers who ship hives from the East Coast to California and back and make money doing so. I do know of one guy who shipped bees to CA and sold them out of the groves. I don't know how common that is. A matter of personal economics.


----------



## hpm08161947 (May 16, 2009)

Ian said:


> Rightly or wrongly that's what I would then do. In our hypothetical little world we have created here.
> 
> Buy as many packages as I had boxes, take the honey crop off them, winter them til Jan 1 st and send them all to Cali to be managed by whoever. They would pollinate and then empty my boxes for for a set fee and ship empty boxes back without bringing back half of the nations pests.
> Is there a hole in this strategy ?


Looks good to me. As far as the shipping costs go, from here on the east coast to CA it was about $7500 (semi - 400 Col.) one way. A bit more for dual drivers.

Given the climate in Manitoba, what time of the year would you want your packages? May? That might be a problem, but maybe not.


----------



## Michael Bush (Aug 2, 2002)

>Then we in the US may need to close the Border to Canadians before they open the Border to us. We sure don't want their problems any more than they want ours. 

Sure. That imaginary line will keep the bees and the Tropilailics clarea in Canada if we pass the right laws... bees never fly across national boundries...


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

hpm08161947; said:


> Given the climate in Manitoba, what time of the year would you want your packages? May? That might be a problem, but maybe not.


Mid April


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

Tropilailics clarea has not been found in Canada. Michael your statement suggest as such.


----------



## ryan (Apr 3, 2010)

Hi Ian

Yes I promise. Nothing to be found south of the boarder except good living and easy money. 

Mites are the same. No mean bees, you already have our queens. Foul brood has never been less of an issue than it is today. Commercial Beekeepers can skip treatments or simply not treat for years.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Ian said:


> Tropilailics clarea has not been found in Canada. Michael your statement suggest as such.


Actually Irwin Harlton wrote that there is a mite on bees from NZ which Canadian Authorities are blind to, so I asked if it was T. clarea and got no answer.


----------



## JRG13 (May 11, 2012)

Is it more of an issue that we want to sell bees up there or take bees up there for honey cropping?


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

He's referring to V mites Mark


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

I hope so. But r u assuming?


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

No . Irwin can speak for himself but CFIA is doing what CFIA is legislated to do, and that is to monitor and manage pest and disease exportation and importation . So much so that I sometimes think they get off on disrupting business and trade. Believe me I know all about CFIA's authority, exporting live cattle into the US And overseas .


----------



## ryan (Apr 3, 2010)

Quote 
It was two and a half weeks of timely terrible spring weather that killed off our bee stock this past year. Nobody escaped it. 

This type of thing is painful to watch. Bees are plentiful healthy and cheap here in march and April. 4-5 frame box in Early march in the southeast 1 frame of brood and a 1/2 shake of bees with a cell makes up a perfect full size hive in time for any honey flow. Record high prices this year, $19 for brood $4 for cells. 900 of 1000 nucs would take. Yes you would have to truck them. 18 barrels of honey would more than pay for the bees AND queens, in the best 900 hives you've ever owned. 

I'm one of those dreaded American migratory beekeepers. We are far more of an asset to you than a threat. If you open up for bees on comb, you can come down and be the one selling the brood or nucs. 

There will be bumps in the road, but no ones neighbor will ever spend the winter eating only bread and butter. Open borders are much more fun. 

We wish all Canadians the best. Thanks for considering my observations. 

Peace.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

When was the last time the boarder was opened to comb? I think it was as far back as the 40's


----------



## ryan (Apr 3, 2010)

It was open to bees on comb headed south in 2001 or near then. I bought some.


----------



## ryan (Apr 3, 2010)

That may have been a short window opened by mistake. It happened right when Canada started accepting queens again.


----------



## jim lyon (Feb 19, 2006)

ryan said:


> Quote
> It was two and a half weeks of timely terrible spring weather that killed off our bee stock this past year. Nobody escaped it.
> 
> This type of thing is painful to watch. Bees are plentiful healthy and cheap here in march and April. 4-5 frame box in Early march in the southeast 1 frame of brood and a 1/2 shake of bees with a cell makes up a perfect full size hive in time for any honey flow. Record high prices this year, $19 for brood $4 for cells. 900 of 1000 nucs would take. Yes you would have to truck them. 18 barrels of honey would more than pay for the bees AND queens, in the best 900 hives you've ever owned.
> .


Shhhhh. So easy a cave man can do it. . Yes it can be done with a single comb but in a nuc box, as Ryan points out, and they probably need to be built by the first week of March at the latest which means not with late March "almond bees". Ryan is in a little earlier country than we are up in Marion county though. The ole 3 comber in a 10 frame deep in late March rarely fails us up here, we quit paying the "package tax" years ago. Catch a queen by the first of April and beekeeping is reduced to box moving, box stacking, honey pulling and extracting.


----------



## ryan (Apr 3, 2010)

Thanks Jim. 

You're absolutely right. Things have to be RIGHT. And it only lasts a short time. I wanted to demonstrate how/why some guys can afford to skip almonds. 

There was also a lot outrage earlier about killing bees in the fall, even though it'll probably never happen again. But very little concern about the guy who worked all summer and is without a crop to sell this fall. His family and others will go without because of politics. He could have bought cheap in the spring or named his terms for lease bees this summer. People need to be reminded how easy it could be. 

Hard to watch.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

Awesome hearing from Beekeepers who actually get it. 
You can tell who has had to put it all on the line before. That common bond between beekeepers needs no explanation


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Ian said:


> Awesome hearing from Beekeepers who actually get it.
> You can tell who has had to put it all on the line before. That common bond between beekeepers needs no explanation


Ian:

They're not agreeing with your own protectionist views.

On the contrary. They think it's causing unnecessary suffering in Canada.

I don't blame anyone for looking out for their own best interests.

But, some folks are clearly suffering the consequences of a questionable policy.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

>>There was also a lot outrage earlier about killing bees in the fall, even though it'll probably never happen again. But very little concern about the guy who worked all summer and is without a crop to sell this fall. His family and others will go without because of politics.<<

This is what I was referring to in the previous statement, if you were wondering


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Ian:

I don't agree with your own viewpoint on Canada's policy regarding U.S. Honeybees.

No one should find that surprising.

Regardless, neither one of us is likely to change things one way or the other by having a discussion on a forum.

Did you get that?


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

I haven't heard anyone mention NAFTA with regards to the prohibition to U.S. Honeybees entering Canada.

Here's something to chew on:

http://www.honeybeeworld.com/diary/articles/border/jim.htm

"... under NAFTA "Chapter 11", an individual exporter can recover all the revenue he MIGHT have earned if not for the protectionist barrier...."

Interesting reading.

Here's another one:

http://www.honeybeeworld.com/diary/articles/border/border.htm


----------



## ryan (Apr 3, 2010)

I got what you meant. I do understand the concerns. All due respect inteneded for our brothers up north.


----------



## Allen Martens (Jan 13, 2007)

ryan said:


> It was open to bees on comb headed south in 2001 or near then. I bought some.


I think the border has been open for bees on comb heading south from Canada to the US for a long time. It's only recently (5 or so years?) that the US no longer allows bees on comb to be transported across the border. If I recall correctly that part of the reason for this change was the fear that under NAFTA Mexico could challenge the closure of their border if Canadians were allowed to bring bees on comb across the border. Almond pollination fees would probably drop substantially if Mexican bees were allowed across.


----------



## Dominic (Jul 12, 2013)

WLC said:


> Ian:
> 
> They're not agreeing with your own protectionist views.
> 
> ...


I think you are not properly asserting Ian's stance, for he is quite interested in having the border open up, unlike the rest of the Canadians to have spoken up here (myself included).

And I think you greatly underestimate the amount of suffering open borders could cause. American beekeepers, the large ones that is, are significantly larger than their Canadian counterpart. Our biggest beekeeper in Québec has like 6 000 hives. Adee has, what, 80 000 hives? Personally, I have a hard time seeing the entry of big american beekeepers as a good thing for anyone. Wintering in the South is much easier and cheaper, allows more early and rapid colony growth, how are we to compete with that? The sudden flood of available hives would drive prices down, all of them. More bees, earlier will increase the honey yields and thus lower the price of honey, increase in hive offer against a stable pollination demand will result in lower pollination prices, flood of cheap package bees will considerably undermine local breeding sales... Longterm, it would just pressure all of the major beekeeping to move down south, make living off a "small" number (hundreds) of colonies impossible, significantly increase the spread of resistant pests, bring the decline of northern genetics in favor of discount southern genetics, and doom Canadian beekeeping to hobby farming.

I really can't see any way in which open borders would be good for Canadian beekeeping. Cheaper bees does not equate to a healthier beekeeping industry.

That being said, the issues of "open borders" for hives, and the sale of bee packages, are not quite the same.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

Dominic said:


> I think you are not properly asserting Ian's stance, for he is quite interested in having the border open up, unlike the rest of the Canadians to have spoken up here (myself included)...
> That being said, the issues of "open borders" for hives, and the sale of bee packages, are not quite the same.


Im NOT in favour of open boarders, your mis understanding my hashing out of ideas. Open mind right Dominic? You do understand the position on both sides of the argument I hope. Or are you scared to, because the other side of the argument holds a lot of potential for beekeepers with ambition and energy. Status quo is the easiest scenario. 

To be honest, Id be ready for what ever happens. I would survive without package bees from the US as I am now. I run a solvent business. But Id take advantage of the availability of US package bees if I had the opportunity. I'd also hash out a strategy that would fully exploit pollination opportunities if the boarder opened completely with the availability of package bees. 

I know one thing I would not do is sit in the corner waving my finger at everyone crying about the old days if change happened


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

I asked this question earlier to anther beekeeper, and here I ask it again.
Dominic when change barrels down on you regardless if the change was welcomed, and everything you know changes, what do you do? Sit there and complain about the way it was, or do you start making changes to embrace the opportunity?


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

I think that regardless of fears and concerns, eventually, there will be free trade of Honeybees across both our northern and southern borders as NAFTA intended. I also think that allowing beekeepers to cross borders for pollination, etc., will also come to pass.

Simply put, it would improve both the economics and productivity of the beekeeping industry as a whole.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

Dominic said:


> I have a hard time seeing the entry of big american beekeepers as a good thing for anyone. Wintering in the South is much easier and cheaper, allows more early and rapid colony growth, how are we to compete with that?


There is a way. You manage their bees and equipment and then send them back. A migratory work force is not cheap. It could be a benefit to both.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

Ryan, just another hypothetical ,
If you had the opportunity to send your hives north across the 49th, how exactly would you manage them? Immigration would not allow half your work force across, if any, so you'd have to contract the hives out. Just another cost to tally up, that big lucrative crop wouldn't find your pocket anyway.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Acebird said:


> There is a way. You manage their bees and equipment and then send them back. A migratory work force is not cheap. It could be a benefit to both.


Have you ever entrused your bees to someone, for them to manage? Were I to take someone elses hives to SC I would take care of my bees first and there would have to be detailed expectations written and agreed upon first. Who pays for what for instance.

My point being, Brian, it's a lot easier for you to suggest such a thing than it is to do it.


----------



## hpm08161947 (May 16, 2009)

In the long run I suspect the borders will open, but it will be a very long time - the politics are just not there to pry it open. Very few below the 49th seem to care and those above 49 seem to have a strong desire to maintain their protectionist policies in the face of economic logic.


----------



## ryan (Apr 3, 2010)

I have locations just south of the boarder, so I'm unlikely to cross over. I imagine it would work much like ND has for the past 10-15 years. West coast guys would find ND beekeepers that would sharecrop, or find yards and organize things, or sometimes sell out. Or any combination of things. Then in the fall the ND guy has good contacts out west and the same deals get worked. Overall it has worked well for lots of bees going both ways. It's hard to tell who is from ND or CA anymore. Everyone kinda claims both states. But ND is getting a little full and CA still has extra bees in the summer. Canada is a second best option because of politics. The international border will always make us uneasy. Beekeepers are a bit adventurous so I imagine some would try it out (80 years from now when the border actually opens for hives). 

As you have said, the packages only is a more likely reality. That is a little more straight forward. I would think most would attempt to winter the bees instead of killing them or selling them as blow outs. Who knows. It really depends on the details of the law.

I would sure love to hear about/from some of the Canadians who got rich using US packages back before the border closed. Legend has it that for many years Canadians with US packages were the most profitable and reliable beekeepers in the world.


----------



## ryan (Apr 3, 2010)

hpm quoted
'Very few below the 49th seem to care and those above 49 seem to have a strong desire to maintain their protectionist policies in the face of economic logic.'

That hit the nail on the head.


----------



## hpm08161947 (May 16, 2009)

ryan said:


> I would sure love to hear about/from some of the Canadians who got rich using US packages back before the border closed. Legend has it that for many years Canadians with US packages were the most profitable and reliable beekeepers in the world.


He did not get rich.... but it is a fun read and true story about Sask. beekeeping. Ron Miksha's "Bad Beekeeping" - for 10 years he based his business plan on being able to travel back and forth between Sask. and Fla. to pick up package bees... he was quite successful for a small operator.... until they closed the border. A drought didn't help either. It's a good read about the old days.


----------



## BeekeepingIsGood (Aug 12, 2012)

We have good bees up here that have been acclimatized to our winters. You'd have a hard time convincing me to run anything other than local bees. 

We had SHB fly over from detroit a few years ago and the province has worked like crazy to contain it. I'd be suprised if anyone has lower AFB levels than we do. I believe ontario was one of the first the get an inspection program going and so many years later we are still experiencing the benefits of this. 

In my part of the country I don't see forage going to waste. There are bees everywhere. Every time I think a location might be good for bees I find there's already someone there.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Beekeeping.IsGood.ca said:


> We have good bees up here that have been acclimatized to our winters. You'd have a hard time convincing me to run anything other than local bees.


So you must not buy any of the Imported bees, eh?


----------



## BeekeepingIsGood (Aug 12, 2012)

sqkcrk said:


> So you must not buy any of the Imported bees, eh?


Ontario bees:


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Nice. And I'm sure they all look like that,eh?


----------



## BeekeepingIsGood (Aug 12, 2012)

sqkcrk said:


> Nice. And I'm sure they all look like that,eh?


From a third year queen.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

"Canadian beekeepers pushing to open border to imports"

http://www.producer.com/2013/11/canadian-beekeepers-pushing-to-open-border-to-imports/


----------



## grozzie2 (Jun 3, 2011)

WLC said:


> "Canadian beekeepers pushing to open border to imports"


A lot of these posts here, are truely confusing the opinions of a few vocal folks online, with that of the majority consensus. No matter how much a few squeaky wheels natter online, majority consensus is for keeping the border closed. It's only a small percentage making the noise.

As for the NAFTA arguement, big red herring. NAFTA was written for manufactured goods, and not even all of those are included. I've never heard of any operation that manufactures bees, they are something you grow, not something you build. We can only wish that NAFTA actually covered everything. If it did, there would be no quotas and tarriffs on lumber headed south. There are a lot of sawmills shuttered and finished these days, because of those protectionist barriers for shipping stuff south.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

It's an imperfect world. 

However, it was mentioned in one of the previous Honeybeeworld links that some beekeepers have successfully sued Canada under NAFTA for unfair protectionist barriers.

So, somebody was successful, in a way.

Who knows, it might be a developing trend?


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

sqkcrk said:


> My point being, Brian, it's a lot easier for you to suggest such a thing than it is to do it.


Mark, maybe you can see a difference between an operation that has 500 hives verses one that has 80,000 hives. There is contracts, lawyers and a whole bunch of accountability in the corporate world. Nobody trusts anybody that's why you sign your name.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

sqkcrk said:


> Nice. And I'm sure they all look like that,eh?


Actually yes, that's what our spring time colonies look like. Queens lay like a bugger as soon as that early pollen starts it's flow. If we don't see three or four frames of that we requeening the hive.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

sqkcrk said:


> Nice. And I'm sure they all look like that,eh?





Beekeeping.IsGood.ca said:


> Ontario bees:


That looked like my NZ packages this past spring, minus the empty spots lol


----------



## Delta Bay (Dec 4, 2009)

I'm hearing from some of the beekeepers up hear that we could get cheap packages if the boarder was open. What is the consensus on cheap and how will demand effect the price? What would the package prices look like for use Canadians after the boarder was open?


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

Not $170 per 2 lbs package , that is for sure


----------



## HiveOnTheHill (Jun 17, 2011)

Speaking of protectionism - obviously the COOL (Country Of Origin Labeling) system set up below the 49th does not fall into this category.


ryan said:


> hpm quoted
> 'Very few below the 49th seem to care and those above 49 seem to have a strong desire to maintain their protectionist policies in the face of economic logic.'
> 
> That hit the nail on the head.


----------



## wildbranch2007 (Dec 3, 2008)

HiveOnTheHill said:


> Speaking of protectionism - obviously the COOL (Country Of Origin Labeling) system set up below the 49th does not fall into this category.


thanks, had never heard of COOL (Country Of Origin Labeling), not sure why you think its protectionism, when they started talking about sending chicken from the usa to china to be processed, my wife started asking before buying where it had been processed. glad to see it will have to be labeled. to protect from one county all must fall under the bus.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

China isn't part of NAFTA,


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

This bee importation issue kinda draws parallels with the North American BSE issue we went through.

A BSE case found in Canada, the trade of all cattle stopped flowing into the US. Even though our North America herd is exactly the same, managed exactly the same, being fed by exactly the same feed sources, and having known BSE cases in the US, the boarder still closed, sealed in fact. 
Rightly or wrongly that's what happened. So blah blah blah our boarders opened and nearly all trade of cattle resumes. Cost producers hundreds of millions in lost revenue. 
This COOL issue has nothing to do with bio security and is a direct violation of the NAFTA agreement, as the Free Trade Tribunal had determined time after again. An act of protectionism, yes.

Closed boarder to bees is not a violation to our NAFTA agreement


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Ian:

"Closed boarder to bees is not a violation to our NAFTA agreement "

The fact remains, U.S. and Canadian beekeepers have successfully sued the border closing to U.S. packages under NAFTA.

So, you're voicing your opinion. The border closing is a violation under NAFTA.

I'm curious to see how the class action suit proceeds once all of the papers have been successfully filed.

I'm also curious to see how many commercial beekeepers enjoin the suit once it is officially a 'class action'.

I'm betting that there will eventually be more than 3 commercial beekeepers involved.

Call it a 'hunch'.

Follow this link for more information on the class action and enjoining/registering your apiary:

http://www.fieldlaw.com/practicearea_currentactions.asp?practiceID=89


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

WLC said:


> Ian:
> 
> "Closed boarder to bees is not a violation to our NAFTA agreement "
> 
> ...


What successfully tried case are you referring to?


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

> What successfully tried case are you referring to?

If there _really _ _was _a "successful" case the border would be "_open_", wouldn't it?

:gh:


----------



## HiveOnTheHill (Jun 17, 2011)

If you read through the class action suit - it does not have much merit, even if I could I would not join in. The Health of Animals Act is set up and has specific wording for a reason. I believe the lawsuit has more to do with bringing attention to the issue rather than actually having a chance at winning it.
As I said earlier, there are people that will sue to allow the border to be reopened, but then when it goes badly they will then sue again because an open border now has caused different problems for them and they need to be compensated.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

The thing is, if the bee boarder dispute had anything to go with NAFTA, they would be presenting the case in frount if the tribunal. Far as I can gather the suit is against the CFIA aka the Canadian government. Hope they have deep pockets for this awareness campaign of theirs. 

You do know how NAFTA works, right WLC ? 

This is not a NAFTA issue, regardless how much this WLC tag name claims it to be.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

:gh:


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Ian:

We both have our opinions.

But then, there's a number of objective events, like the suits, that have occurred.

As to how the border issue will resolve itself is anyone's guess at this point.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

WLC said:


> Ian:
> 
> We both have our opinions.


The difference is you base your facts on opinions


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Ian:

I just wanted to note that I've tried to support my own opinions with some facts.

Albeit, the supporting information comes from third parties like Honeybeeworld.

I've also noted that you have a tendency to take things personally.

I'm not trying to say anything personal, but you seem to be misrepresenting some of the facts.

It appears that Manitoba's beekeeping organization is in favor of ending protectionist practices and allowing U.S. packages to enter.

It's just one of those facts.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

WLC said:


> I'm not trying to say anything personal, but [HIGHLIGHT] you seem to be misrepresenting some of the facts.[/HIGHLIGHT]


Speaking of *facts *...

How about providing a link or other _specific _citation to the "_successful_" lawsuits you keep trumpeting? :scratch:



Here is one of your claims, in case you need a reference:


WLC said:


> The fact remains, U.S. and Canadian beekeepers have successfully sued the border closing to U.S. packages under NAFTA.



:gh:


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

I'm not mis representing anything, your gathering facts from third party blog sites.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

"Manitoba Beekeepers Association president Allan Campbell said the hazards identified in the CFIA report already exist in Canada.

“The highest risk in the assessment, which was still a moderate risk, not a high risk, was importing varroa mites that have resistance to amitraz, our main control (for mites),” he said.

“As long as we’re using Apivar (brand name for amitraz) strips in our hives, which we are, we’re building resistance.”

The other moderate risk was resistance to oxytetracycline, an antibiotic that protects hives from American foulbrood.

“Again, it’s a drug we’re using so we’re building resistance too,” Campbell said.

Manitoba and Alberta beekeepers support opening the U.S. border, but other associations do not."

Ian:

Do you agree with Campbell's quote?


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Rader Sidetrack said:


> Speaking of *facts *...
> How about providing a link or other _specific _citation to the "_successful_" lawsuits you keep trumpeting? :scratch:
> Here is one of your claims, in case you need a reference:
> :gh:


Just ask 'Jim'.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

Yes

WLC, talk about, U.S. and Canadian beekeepers who have successfully sued the border closing to U.S. packages under NAFTA.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

WLC doesn't seem to like to get pinned down by "facts", so I will be surprised if he actually can support his _claim _about successful lawsuits. For a real education on the WLC _twist and spin_ tactics see this earlier thread on a _Time _article that mentioned Randy Oliver:

http://www.beesource.com/forums/showthread.php?287733-Time-Article/page4

:digging:




:gh:

The "_big fluffy pillows_" in post #70 is a real winner!


.


----------



## hpm08161947 (May 16, 2009)

I wonder if WLC actually means 'Successfully brought suit", rather than successfully sued...... which means to us non-lawyers that someone (judge or jury) found for the appellant? But we most likely will never know... as this thread is headed in the direction of Puzzle wrapped in an enigma, shrouded in mystery - kinda deals.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Now that you mention it, I could have been mistaken about beekeepers successfully suing Canada under NAFTA for closing the border to U.S. Honeybee packages.

The Paradise Honey, LTD., may be the first such 'Class Action' suit.

However, I bet you that Ian was mistaken about a few things as well.

Manitoba beekeepers seem to want the borders open to U.S. packages.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

>>However, I bet you that Ian was mistaken about a few things as well.<<

Haha ha ha , what are you three years old? 

You wreck your own credibility WLC, 

The other difference is I actually have skin in this game,


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Let's see...

You're a member of a beekeeping association that wants the borders open to packages, but you don't.

Regardless, if I can't find a case, I can't find it.

But, protectionist practices, like closing the Canadian border to U.S. Honeybee packages, are still covered under NAFTA.

"The other difference is I actually have skin in this game"

Gee, I bought a few packages recently. Any change in price could affect me as a consumer.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

WLC said:


> The Paradise Honey, LTD., may be the first such 'Class Action' suit.


Its actually "Paradis Honey Ltd." ( no "E"). 

You can read the Crown's (Canadian government) response to this _PROPOSED _class action suit here:
http://www.fieldlaw.com/Initiatives/PLEAD_Statement_of_Defence.PDF

It has _not _been certified as a class action suit, so it is still "_proposed_", at least as of the date of the linked pleading.


:gh:


----------



## Haraga (Sep 12, 2011)

Wlc, sometimes it's better to keep quiet than remove all doubt.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Cute Haraga. Real cute.

I'm just glad Ian stopped the whole 'Beekeeping Brothers' routine.

Don't call a beekeeper 'brother' if you're against their Honeybee packages being sold in your country.

It's disingenuous, like your post.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

....


----------



## wildbranch2007 (Dec 3, 2008)

Ian said:


> China isn't part of NAFTA,


not sure what nafta has to do with the beef, its part of the farm bill and applies to all counties.

Country Of Origin Labeling (COOL) (or mCOOL [m for mandatory]) is a requirement signed into American law under Title X of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 (known as the 2002 Farm Bill). This law requires retailers to provide country-of-origin labeling for fresh beef, pork, and lamb. The program exempts processed meats. The United States Congress passed an expansion of the COOL requirements on 29 September 2008, to include more food items such as fresh fruits, nuts and vegetables


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

IMHO, the protectionists in Canada don't have a legitimate argument to keep their borders closed to U.S. Honeybee Packages.

They already have the same diseases that we have here, and they're importing Varroa from New Zealand as well SHB from Australia.

Of course, it's a NAFTA violation.

The best hope for opening the border to U.S. packages currently rests with a small group of Canadian beekeepers filing a class action suit.

U.S. package producers should find some of the protectionist arguments being made to be transparently specious if not outright laughable.

As for who has 'skin in the game', there are many small time beekeepers in both the U.S. and Canada who collectively have more than enough 'skin' exposed in terms of # of hives, dollar amounts, and political weight, that I find the dismissive remarks of the protectionists to be amusing if not pointless.

Let's not forget that there are plenty of commercial beekeepers who also want to see an end to closed borders both here and in Canada.

I would venture to guess that the protectionists, as vocal as they may be, are in fact collectively a minority.

We should respect minority views as long as they're making legitimate arguments.

I don't see that to be the case.


----------



## Haraga (Sep 12, 2011)

Ok wlc, since you must continue to remove all doubt I will play along. If we have the same diseased bees as you, then we probably don't want diseased bees from you. 
Let me tell you something about Canadians, since you obviously don't know, they are not very "protectionist and vocal" at all. 
You might as well drop the nafta argument as you obviously have no experience with it.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

So, now you're speaking for all Canadians?

As for NAFTA, I do know that the Honeybee Act was amended to meet the import/export requirements of NAFTA.

That applies to packages as well.

" ...since you must continue to remove all doubt... "

On the contrary, a couple of you have removed all doubts in my mind as to the legitimacy of your discourse.

You're empty handed, and you're lashing out at anyone standing up to your 'special interest' agenda.

I've got a hunch that our small time beekeeper 'brothers and sisters' in Canada are sick and tired of paying inflated prices for packages since special interests want to keep gouging them on prices while also gouging farmers on pollination fees.

That special interest wants to keep the borders closed for personal financial gain. The other arguments are nothing but smoke. 

Why should anyone pay inflated fees for a special interest greed?

I would love to hear from the Canadian farmers who are being price gouged by a small special interest group of protectionists.

I would also love to hear from Canadian beekeepers who are being gouged as well.

I'll bet you that they've got something to add to the discussion.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Are we going to call for the opening of the Border w/ Mexico? That's a NAFTA thing too, isn't it?


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

WLC said:


> We should respect minority views as long as they're making legitimate arguments.


How about when they simply just _fabricate _the "facts" supporting those views? :scratch:  :lpf:


Look back a few posts for examples of that ...

:gh:


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

sqkcrk said:


> Are we going to call for the opening of the Border w/ Mexico? That's a NAFTA thing too, isn't it?


Yes it is. But, the AHB issue needs to be addressed there.


----------



## Haraga (Sep 12, 2011)

Wlc you continue to remove all doubt. 
The 400$ is paid by the seed company. In my area it is Monsanto. They actually pay more than that because there is a middle man between Monsanto and the farmer. 
Do you have any references to this "honey bee act" ? I suspect not. 
You continue to post about issues that you have little or no experience with. The least you could do to validate yourself is have a reference.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Rader Sidetrack said:


> How about when they simply just _fabricate _the "facts" supporting those views? :scratch:  :lpf:
> 
> 
> Look back a few posts for examples of that ...
> ...


RS:

Cut the usual antics. Do you have an actual opinion regarding protectionism? Or, is your sole purpose here to bust shoes?

By the way, you're on the wrong side of the border argument.

You need to get back on the U.S. side.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Haraga said:


> Wlc you continue to remove all doubt.
> The 400$ is paid by the seed company. In my area it is Monsanto. They actually pay more than that because there is a middle man between Monsanto and the farmer.
> Do you have any references to this "honey bee act" ? I suspect not.
> You continue to post about issues that you have little or no experience with. The least you could do to validate yourself is have a reference.


Haraga:

You're looking out for number one.

It has nothing to do with the quality of U.S. packages.

You simply want the border closed, and prices inflated, for monetary reasons. 

And, it's clearly impacting other Canadian beekeepers of all stripes.

The real heroes are those few Canadian beekeepers who have filed the Class Action. They're righteous.

As for the special interests, something as common as money isn't always a winning argument, especially when others are adversely impacted.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

WLC said:


> RS: ... Do you have an actual opinion regarding protectionism?


Above you claim that I have *not *expressed my opinion, and in the same post you say:



WLC said:


> By the way, you're [HIGHLIGHT] on the wrong side of the border [/HIGHLIGHT] argument. You need to get back on the U.S. side.


How is it you can tell that I'm on the *wrong *side of the argument, since according to you I have _not _expressed "an actual opinion"? :scratch: :lpf:

:ws:


My opinion is that _Haraga _has _at least_ one valid point.  see post #179


:gh:


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Then, you're both wrong.

You need to address the substance of the argument.

You're both dancing around it.

They want the borders closed to keep prices inflated.

Their only argument is monetary.

All their other thrusts are 'deflections'.

It's that simple.

Quite frankly, with all the suffering that's going on, it's reprehensible.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

sqkcrk said:


> Are we going to call for the opening of the Border w/ Mexico? That's a NAFTA thing too, isn't it?





WLC said:


> Yes it is. But, the AHB issue needs to be addressed there.


Ya, the threat of importing and exporting AHB between the US and Mexico has to be addressed before that boarder can open.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Yeah, we don't want Mexican AHB mixing w/ our US AHB, do we?


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

Rader Sidetrack said:


> Above you claim that I have *not *expressed my opinion,
> 
> ....
> 
> ...


Graham , how dare you express an opinion ! Don't you know we only speak on facts here!


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Ian said:


> Ya, the threat of importing and exporting AHB between the US and Mexico has to be addressed before that boarder can open.


All that you need is an inspection certificate from the exporting side to handle that or any other issue.

It's not a big deal.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

Haraga said:


> Let me tell you something about Canadians, since you obviously don't know, they are not very "protectionist and vocal" at all.
> You might as well drop the nafta argument as you obviously have no experience with it.


I agree Haraga, I think this protectionist opinion is coming from someone who would have a hard time finding Canada on a map. 
Canada has just signed a massive free trade deal with the EU. The deal is worth billions. Over this past five years our government has signed countless trade deals over the world. Canada is open for trade and we have set up our economy to suit it. Like any country our integrity has to be maintained, and that is at a cost to business but overall the trade of our products and services is very fluid. These trade deals speak for themselves. Protectionism is a very small part of our economy. Milk, eggs, cheese, air travel for example. 
To add honeybees in there is laughable. What part of the industry is being protected? the landscape? The government has nothing to do with that,.? Not like in Montana or North Dakota where as apiary sites need to be registered through the government. Maybe your speaking of Canadas Nuc production industry.... or our queen production industry? But wait, some of our Canadian queen operations set up in California and Chili, for obvious reasons. 
Hmmm


----------



## Dominic (Jul 12, 2013)

WLC said:


> Yes it is. But, the AHB issue needs to be addressed there.


Double standards. The US has AHB, just as Mexico does, but Canada doesn't. And the argument that they can't survive the winter is both unproved and worthless, because if they come in a package in early spring, they have more than enough time to develop and cause public health concerns.

Canada and the US do not have the same pests. Saying both have Varroa, and leaving it at that, is quite an oversimplification. We don't have the same strands of varroa and disease. There are much tougher and treatment-resistant strains in the US than in Canada. Maybe you haven't experienced these strains yet, but that doesn't mean they aren't there. And with the massive migratory beekeeping practices, it's likely just a question of time before you get them.

If New Zealand is exporting stuff that we don't have, then the border should be closed to them as well. The solution isn't to just let all of the pests pour in.

If the whole world opened up to international world-wide migratory beekeeping, the spread of pests would be so quick and uncontrolled that there is no way we could come up with solutions fast enough. We would require a ton of emergency authorization of products not properly tested and would lose a great portion of our bees and thus genetic diversity. Wide-open borders is neither good for the bees, nor the beekeepers. Of course if you have all of the pests, you'll have no problems by being able to spread them elsewhere too. But as the US is just as protectionist and fickle about letting foreign bees in, arguments to have others do what it isn't willing to do itself is quite ridiculous.



WLC said:


> All that you need is an inspection certificate from the exporting side to handle that or any other issue.
> 
> It's not a big deal.


That's not worth much. Certificates are required to export American queens into Canada, yet there are still some sloppy breeders that manage to send varroa mites along for the trip. But that's the deal with the packages, really, as stated in the report: there is just no way of properly inspecting a package to see what is in it, even if you tried.

Domestic animal health concerns take precedence over foreign economic interests. You can't even bring in a steak when crossing the border into the US, and yet it should be OK for the US to flood the Canadian market with super-pest infested bee packages?


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

I see the maintained closure to the boarder as being adequate. I would desperately love to see cheap packages flow across the boarder but not at the cost to the way we currently operate our apiaries. Apivar has provided us with the ability to maintain mite populations ( Apivar is 3% as compared to the 10% Home Made doses I'm hearing about) AHB is a continued threat for obvious reasons, and by the sounds of it, managing a beekeeping operation without SHB is a treat. 
The justification of the continued ban is justified and has been accepted by our Canadian government along with the US government. Neither government is challenging the findings.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

We're dancing around the main issue again.

You're benefiting from the inflated prices, while others are going under or being forced to pay higher prices unnecessarily.

As long as the border remains closed to U.S. packages, this practice suits you just fine because you're padding your margins.

Others, who are on the short end of the stick, aren't doing as well, and they have had enough.

It's just a matter of time before the Class Action runs it's course, and if necessary, makes its way to the NAFTA Tribunal.

That's a fact.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

WLC said:


> You're benefiting from the inflated prices, while others are going under or being forced to pay higher prices unnecessarily.
> 
> As long as the border remains closed to U.S. packages, this practice suits you just fine because you're padding your margins.


???

by restricting cheap package bees across our boarder, to prevent the spread of the listed pests and diseases, we are padding our margins???

Im sensing a total lack of background beekeeping and international trade knowledge from you WLC to actually get whats going on here.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

I better shift my beekeeping focus on to nuc production, so that I can get in line to pad my pockets


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

We already know that you have exactly the same pests, parasites, and pathogens in Canada that we have here in the U.S. .
You're even importing Varroa and SHB from New Zealand and Australia respectively.

I'm not buying your deflections, and neither are other folks.

Perhaps you should simply admit that you want to keep things the way they are since it suits your own best interests.

I would not want to be in your shoes if the borders open to U.S. packages and the prices drop.

Canadian beekeepers and farmers won't appreciate having been price gouged for all these years.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

WLC said:


> It's just a matter of time before the Class Action runs it's course, and if necessary, makes its way to the NAFTA Tribunal.
> 
> That's a fact.


Go back and read the link *you *posted. Its a suit against the Canadian Government. _No one else._ The highest that can go is the Canadian equivalent of the Supreme Court.

That lawsuit has _nothing _to do with NAFTA, as that would be an international issue!


:gh:

More "_facts" _that you just make up! :no:


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

Rader Sidetrack said:


> That lawsuit has _nothing _to do with NAFTA, as that would be an international issue!


And international issues are generally dealt with through their governments, unless you have a VERY loud voice and DEEP pockets,


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

If the beekeepers who filed the Class Action lose against the Crown, they can bring their $200 million claim to the NAFTA Tribunal.

$200 million is a pretty big claim.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

Would you fund it? Or are you a lawyer? You could argue on their behalf ! It would be a sure win for sure then ! You pretty much have everything laid out here, you have a solid case WLC, you could even represent yourself as WLC so that anything you say that makes no sesnse doesn't matter, because it would just stick to you tag name


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

I've had as many as five attorneys at the same time for various reasons.

If I were you Ian, I'd register with the Class Action as a hedge. If they lose, you make the same money as before. If they win, then you still make money, perhaps enough to cover your current margins.

You can even end up in the best of both worlds: the borders remain closed but NAFTA orders the $200 million in claims paid. NAFTA can't change laws, but it can levy penalties. 

You seem to be that kind of a businessman.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

No, Tag name WCL, the best strategy is to be ready for whatever happens. Like I had mentioned before, status quote still equals a solvent business(for me anyway) open boarder to packages changes the dynamics a bit on the complete reliance on wintering hives, fully open boarder opens up potential pollination opportunities. The latter two senerios come at potentially higher pest risk. To which our government has deemed the risks to out weigh potential opportunities. 
I think your confusing my opinion and what the CFIA has enforced. I'm agreeing with their decision. A decision to which you have zero background knowledge of.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

Do you want to add another 11 pages saying the exact same thing? This is all I can contribute to the conversation. I've pretty much hashed out both sides of this issue well enough that I'm getting the gears from both sides of this argument from what I have publicly stated here, from personal correspondence. 
Most comes from Beekeepers challenging my open boarder thoughts and it's potential "opportunities". 

Big issue up here. Wish more would publicly chime in instead of watching from the stands


----------



## BeeCurious (Aug 7, 2007)

Wouldn't U.S. beekeepers be paying more for packages if Canadians were permitted to buy them? 

I wonder how much of a price increase could be anticipated.... 

Perhaps it's best to "leave bad enough alone".


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

I think the number bounced around, in the short term, was 100 000 packages that would be imported into Canada annually, how that would influence US package prices depends on how big of demand there is for the April May package market


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

"I think your confusing my opinion and what the CFIA has enforced. I'm agreeing with their decision. A decision to which you have zero background knowledge of. "

I've read their current decision in at least 3 or 4 different places already. It's public knowledge.

100,000 packages isn't a whole lot of packages for U.S. producers to come up with given enough notice.

I think that it would impact your package, hive, and pollination prices a lot more than it would here.

In fact, I could see prices dropping by at least 50% in Canada.

Isn't that what you're really worried about? A price drop?

This was never really about bees. It's about price fixing.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

If there are about 600 thousands hives in Canada, and your losses are over 30%, wouldn't the real number of potential packages be around 200 thousand?

So, we're downplaying the potential market size as well.

Cute. Real cute.


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

Not sure why you keep referring to this topic as cute. It's business. 

The potential importation of packages into Canada may we'll be higher than 200,000. But the number bounced around here by actual beekeepers actually involved with this issue on either side of the issue talking on a short term perspective is roughly 100,000. From there, looking forward as the industry dynamics change( and there are so many factors at play that it's hard to predict) the potential could be higher.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

Right. It's much higher.

So 1/10th to 1/100th of available forage is currently being utilized in Canada according to estimates.

If the research on soybean pollination is correct, then there's over 50 million acres in the U.S. alone.

The potential market is far larger than anyone is projecting to date.

When I say cute, what I really mean is, "What a piece of work!' .


----------



## Ian (Jan 16, 2003)

You keep throwing these vague comments out on pollination. Hargra mentioned he pollinates canola, ask him how many of those acres there actually is to pollinate. The vast area of cropped country side is open pollinated food production. No fees for pollination there. Move east and you will get into blueberries. 

50 million acres of soybeans is a bad thing for beekeeping. But I'm sure you already know that.... Being a beekeeper and all...


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

"50 million acres of soybeans is a bad thing for beekeeping."
Someone figured out that Honeybees can indeed pollinate soybeans (some varieties) and increase their yields by double digit %ages.

So, soybeans could be very, very good for beekeeping.

I recall reading in an article that Canada could increase yields if they had more managed pollinators.

I'm not sure where you're getting your info.

One of my points is that removing protectionist barriers to beekeeping could allow for a great deal of market expansion.


----------



## sqkcrk (Dec 10, 2005)

Ian said:


> Not sure why you keep referring to this topic as cute. It's business.


Cute as in small. WLC's beekeeping is on the small side.


----------



## WLC (Feb 7, 2010)

sqkcrk said:


> Cute as in small. WLC's beekeeping is on the small side.


Actually sqkcrk, your beekeeping is on the small side.

50 million acres short.

The market is potentially much larger than you realize, but it would take the combined resources of the U.S, Mexico, and Canada to get there.

Ultimately, protectionism is hurting beekeeping.


----------



## Lauri (Feb 1, 2012)

I think it might be a good idea to close this thread...It needs to become constructive and at least a bit on the positive side or it may come to an end. Fair warning


----------

