# Terrence Ingram - 11 Hives Destroyed by the IDofA



## RiodeLobo

Welcome to the era of big government. The Tyranny of Bureaucrats.


----------



## Aerindel

And I thought the bee fortress was there just to keep out bears....now I think I see another use.

If you want to read about even spookier actions look up some the stores about people trying to drink unpasteurized milk, you would think they where doing meth.


----------



## DLMKA

http://www.pacc-news.com/5-2-12/heart_ingram5_2_12.html

I'm not ready to say whether the state had the right to remove and destroy Mr. Ingram's hives but he had ample notice from lab results foulbrood was detected in his equipment. 

While it is true that foulbrood does not affect humans, it does affect bees. If he had a dead-out that was robbed he could easily spread (and appears he did) to the rest of his hives and also to feral bee populations.

The Association I belong to does push hard on using treatments to keep bees alive and I seem to be at odds and butt heads with members that insist that I'll never be successful overwintering hives without an annual chemical bath for the bees.


----------



## beeware10

It is obvious from the owner of the bees that he does not understand foulbrood and the action of the state probably saved many nearby hives owned by others. a sample was tested positive by beltsville and this is only one side of the story.


----------



## David LaFerney

No idea about what is going on in this particular case, but in TN we are required by law to register all of our hives (free to do) and if AFB is found anywhere the state inspects all known hives in the area - all infected hives are burned. Completely. And they pay you $50 per hive.

However we have very low incidence of American Foul Brood. Personally I don't feel all that violated.


----------



## RiodeLobo

Justified or no, the point is they seized property without a court order and without a hearing in court. Perhaps next time the shoe may be a little tighter.


----------



## DLMKA

RiodeLobo said:


> Justified or no, the point is they seized property without a court order and without a hearing in court. Perhaps next time the shoe may be a little tighter.


They don't need a court order because of the state apiary act. He had months of advance warning to get a second opinion from a 3rd party and could have saved the queens and bought new woodware and package bees to maintain his genetics.


----------



## krad1964

What is the deal with roundup killing his bees?


----------



## beeware10

a mention of big government was made. what is the difference compared to barry putting on the inspectors address without knowing all the facts. It was clear that the owner was notifed and later painted his hives to cover up the inspectors numbers.


----------



## Aerindel

Just the idea of mandatory inspections creeps me out. I doubt I would even try to keep bee's under those conditions.


----------



## buzz abbott

It seems very odd to me that the state transported those hives somewhere rather than destroying them at the site. Didn't they risk spreading the afb by moving them? Why would they do that on a Sunday rather than a normal business day? Why wouldn't they come to him and say we are doing this? Lots of unanswered questions.


----------



## RiodeLobo

beeware10 said:


> what is the difference compared to barry putting on the inspectors address without knowing all the facts.


 Because that is the official address listed on the Department of Agriculture website. 
http://www.agr.state.il.us/programs/bees/inspectors.html

The issue is not the legality of what they did. It is the intrusiveness of the law and bureaucracy.


----------



## Andrew Dewey

I think what is most troubling about this is that Mr. Ingram is an experienced beekeeper and the state seemed to go out of its way to do things behind his back. Much of the story (including the Beltsville tests) were not mentioned in the video. Here in Maine I believe I'd get at a personal communication from our state apiarist before any action would be taken. Of course if I was told "we inspected your hives, suspected foul brood and had our diagnosis confirmed by Beltsville" I'd be ready to light the match. I've always said that if I have a hive with AFB that I'd burn it. But if I didn't take any action, the state would be perfectly justified to act.

The big difference from Mr. Ingram's case is he is calling into question the skills of the person who made the initial diagnosis and collected samples to send off for testing. Without reviewing the Illinois statutes it is impossible to know if one can make such a challenge. In Maine I'm grateful for the one inspector we have and I'm happy to work with him to see to my bee's health. Is he without his opinions? No, but he has earned the right to make those opinions based of his education and years in the field.


----------



## beeware10

some areas have laws against open burning. they were probably taken to an controlled enviroment. not sure but I think he said they may have been taken on sunday which I doubt. as I said this is only one side of the story. If these bees had been next to you Im sure you would like to see them gone. the inspection program is one of the few government programs that helps. they dont care about beekeepers as much as they try to maintain the bees. the facts are the bees had afb and the owner was not complying with the law.


----------



## feltze

I don't know, the video begs more questions than answers. Some innacuracy in symptoms. 

- IF the dept of ag inspected the hives there should be a paper trail, including lab results...
- Was the owner notified? 
- of an inspection comming
- of the inspection results
- of the condemnation of the hives

Smells of a bit of a power play by the dept of ag vs, a beek who has spoken against the "system" 

Neither side is right from what I see... and neither side is telling the whole story


----------



## beeware10

just watching to video is not the whole story. read the newspaper arcticle. all of feltzes questions are answered.


----------



## sqkcrk

There is almost always more to a story that what comes across in articles and videos. On first viewing, it does seem like some things may have been done incorrectly.


----------



## krad1964

"I tried to prove that just because foulbrood can be detected once the hive has been disturbed, doesn’t mean the hive has foulbrood."

Is that true?


----------



## sqkcrk

I don't know what that statement means. Once AFB has been detected, that means it is there.


----------



## NUBE

I'm curious, has anyone ever had a lab test for afb come back negative?


----------



## Heintz88

I'm in a relatively close area to these events. At 15:10 Ingram mentions that "she" pushes for chemical usage. I haven't experienced any of this. "she" mrs. Kivikko has been nothing but great to a beginner such as myself and has only encouraged to go whatever direction I want whether it be chemical free, or chemical treating. I intend to register my hives, with the hopes that it will potentially save another's. Letting AFB go, could potentially cause a leap frog effect, eventually contaiminating someone else's equipment. I believe it is the responsibiliy of the beekeeper themselves to deal with the situation at hand with or without help from the state, and to respect others in the area because it is something that could harm someone else. I for one would like to see a side of the story from the state to see what actions were taken and what laws were and weren't followed by either of the parties.


----------



## feltze

Yep, the article has a bunch of Dept of Ag facts that are not mentioned above. 

Sounds like the old Beek pissed in their cereal and they inspected, found AFB and executed the removal.

One could pontificate that the Dept of Ag hasn't had good luck communicating effecively with the beekeeper and simply had to take matters into their own hands after apparently being blown off by him.


----------



## beeware10

nube asked if a test ever comes back negative. the inspector is probably sure but sends the test in to cover his as-. sometimes there could be a slight doubt and the test just verifys this.


----------



## sqkcrk

When I worked as an Apiary Inspector in NY, when AFB was detected in a beehive by field diagnosis and sample of the diseased material was sent to the Beltsville Bee Lab for Lab Confirmation so the beekeeper didn't have to take the Inspectors word. Of all the samples I ever heard about 99% of field diagnosed AFB was AFB. Call it CYA if you want, I call it backup.


----------



## BoBn

krad1964 said:


> "I tried to prove that just because foulbrood can be detected once the hive has been disturbed, doesn’t mean the hive has foulbrood."
> 
> Is that true?


It could be true, but I would think that a positive lab test with multiple samples would negate that argument. 
Some AFB spores are found in virtually all honeybee colonies just as most humans have some TB in their lungs, but are not all diseased. 
If is was an outbreak, the bees should have been destroyed.


----------



## Barry

beeware10 said:


> compared to barry putting on the inspectors address without knowing all the facts.


I don't need to know all the facts before listing the inspector that was referenced in the article. That is already public knowledge. Where do you think I got the information? Google. None of us know all the facts. However, there is plenty here on both sides to raise real concern.


----------



## slickbrightspear

does anybody know how sensitive the test for afb is. also has anybody taken say 100 apparently healthy hives and tested them at the lab to see if they come back negative or positive, probably not as few people would spend the money to test apparently healthy hives, but if the test is very sensitive you could get a positive but have no active infection.


----------



## BigGun

It seems there may be more to this. He mentioned they took nice stands with the hives but left rotten stands.


----------



## Oldtimer

As an inspector myself in my own country, one of the things that surprises me as I go about my work, is that although AFB is very easy to recognise, you'll often get even quite experienced people who just don't recognise it. So I can go through the hive with them in person and show them, seems like some kind of window in their brain shuts and they just can't see it and they demand a lab test, which we'll do if they want it.

The very worst people to argue with when their hives have AFB is not the nubees. It's experienced people, or those with some kind of scientific background or bent, who are pretty intelligent. They just assume they know best. Just wondering if that's the case in this instance.

Destroying the hives before the guy even had a chance to look was a bad mistake in my opinion. Obviously he will wonder, did they get it right. far better to have shown him, and taken samples for the lab in his presence, it would have put his mind at rest.

On the other hand, although he presents himself as something of a bee expert, he does refer quite often to fairly large bee losses, and even attributes some of them to roundup. Roundup? I spray around my hives with roundup, it has no effect on them at all.


----------



## deknow

One of the Swedish studies looking at gut microbes saw (by doing weekly sampling and lab work) an increasing population of bacillus larvae larvae (AFB) along with increasing populations of other gut microbes. When the flow changed (not necessarily _because_ the flow changed), the "bloom" disappeared....all without any noticeable clinical symptoms (they did not appear to have AFB).
If you have bees, it is likely that AFB is there. If you have no symptoms, either your bees are handling it, or there are antibiotics being used. 

Hard to tell what was going on here...but I guess we know how Barry feels...

deknow


----------



## 100 td

Without exacting information from both sides it's hard to work out what and why things were done.
But, this comment from Michael Bush' site which I remember seeing before in discussions is interesting
"AFB spores are present in *ALL* beehives. When a hive is under stress is the most likely time for an outbreak."
To me, this means that AFB could be detected in ANY hive ANYTIME, if they want to look for it.
Michael Bush, I would be very happy from comments/discussion from you.

Oldtimer if you are an an inspector could you please comment on the above.
Could you also let us know of your scientific qualifications, and why or why not the above statement is correct or incorrect.

I am not interested in judging the actual case, (as getting the information would be impossible, the courts can do that), just trying to find out more info on AFB and its detection.


----------



## 100 td

As a follow on, these 2 comments are very interesting

"It is well known that improper diet makes one susceptible to disease. Now is it not reasonable to believe that extensive feeding of sugar to bees makes them more susceptible to American Foul Brood and other bee disease? It is known that American Foul Brood is more prevalent in the north than in the south. Why? Is it not because more sugar is fed to bees in the north while here in the south the bees can gather nectar most of the year which makes feeding sugar syrup unnecessary?"--Better Queens, Jay Smith 

"The great beekeeper Dr. John Eckert relied solely on having strong colonies for the control of AFB. If he came upon a colony with AFB, he simply combined that colony with the strongest colonies in his apiary and let the bees clean up the disease" --The How-To-Do-It book of Beekeeping, Richard Taylor 

From Michael's site.


----------



## Oldtimer

Hmm.. There's a few misconceptions here, albeit commonly held ones.

But first, re my qualifications, I don't have any paper qualifications in this feild other than what's called here an AP2 which is a short course inspectors have to do. However inspectors are drawn from people who already have considerable practicle experience they have all been commercial beekeepers, the AP2 is really just putting some letters on it.

Identifying AFB however can be done by pretty much anyone, long as their mind is not clouded by emotion when dealing with their own hives.

Re the other issues raised, it is not true, either in theory or in practise, that ALL hives have some AFB spores. Many do, but they do not HAVE to, there is no reason why they should. In my country, drugs are not fed to bees for AFB control it's illegal. Yet many randomly collected bee samples tested in the lab show zero spores present, including some of my own apiaries when they were randomly sampled. That result comes back to the client with a disclaimer, that just because none were found does not mean there are none, however there does not have to be.
Of hives that do have spores, the lab is able to say if they are at safe levels that will not become symptomatic, are at risky levels, or are from a hive that must have symptomatic AFB. All this, again with the disclaimer that it's based on the sample tested which is not every bee and all material in the hive, however I've found it very accurate in practise.

Second point, wiping out microbes from a hive should not increase symptomatic AFB, plausable as this may sound. Vegetative AFB itself wages chemical warfare on other microbes present in it's host larvae, wiping them out to allow free reign for itself. It does not need the beekeeper to do this job for it.

Thirdly, in my experience it is not stressed or weak hives that get AFB. It is almost invariably the best hives. Why? I've always assumed it's because they are the ones out and about the most, possibly robbing, and exposing themselves to the most chance of catching an infection. That's of course if the disease is caught early enough. If the beekeeper does not find the disease till some time down the track when the hive has been weakened, he thinks the weak hive caused the disease, not the other way around.

Fourthly, combining an AFB weakened hive with a strong one is something I would NOT recommend. It will most times end in tears. Not to say it hasn't been done and worked but this will not be because of the strength of the colony it will be because of resistant bees, and most bees have some degree of resistance due to millenia of living with the disease.


----------



## Oldtimer

Oh the other thing I should have mentioned, is if a sample from an AFB infected hive is sent to a lab for testing, there is a virtually zero chance of a false result. That's because the sample would not be adult bees, who may have spores anyway, but from a suspected AFb infection a sample of an infected larva would be used. A larva that has died of AFB, once it's turned to a brown gooey mass, will have tens of thousands times more AFB spores in it, than a non afb symptomatic larva. So there's no grey area where it could be said yes there's spores, but not sure if it's enough. There will either be not enough, or obviously enough.


----------



## Michael Bush

While I have seen AFB in other hives when inspecting, I've never seen any in any of my hives. I tend to try to stay out of discussions on what to do if you get AFB since I've never had any hands on experience dealing with it. On the other hand, I tend to believe I'm not just lucky. I think avoiding antibiotics and trying to leave honey instead of feeding sugar syrup etc. helps the bees defend against it. 

http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0033188

Rather than using TM which does harm.
http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0026796

As far as what kinds of tests they did and the results there doesn't seem to be that much detail. Ingram implies that they only tested bees and not brood, but that is not clear. If it's true, then I think he deserved to get a test of the brood back from Beltsville before they destroyed his hives.


----------



## Oldtimer

Yes, a test of bees only would not be conclusive. Don't know what their procedures are but surely any inspector finding symptomatic brood would use that as the sample, not a bunch of bees. I would have thought, anyway.


----------



## honeylove

DLMKA. DId you see what Mr. Ingram was working on a year before? He was making important connections between glyphosate and toxcity to wildlife and HONEYBEES. Need I say more?


----------



## Rex Piscator

In California, in my County, when you register your colonies you consent to allow the State Inspector to enter your apiary at any time. Since everything seems to be 'local'[especially with beekeeping]....curious how the protocol works in this individual's case. Seems there is some similar type of regulations in play here, _based upon the report_.


----------



## D Coates

honeylove said:


> DLMKA. DId you see what Mr. Ingram was working on a year before? He was making important connections between glyphosate and toxcity to wildlife and HONEYBEES. Need I say more?


Yes, you need to say more. Is the insinuation that there's a Govt/chemical mfr cover up going on here? Without knowing his scientific methods or findings (or how the govt or chemical mfrs would find out) this is such a stretch that it drops squarely into conspiracy theory.


----------



## DLMKA

honeylove said:


> DLMKA. DId you see what Mr. Ingram was working on a year before? He was making important connections between glyphosate and toxcity to wildlife and HONEYBEES. Need I say more?





D Coates said:


> Yes, you need to say more. Is the insinuation that there's a Govt/chemical mfr cover up going on here?


I never made such a comment. If you read the article I posted the link to it has a timeline of events with more detail than the video. Mr. Ingram initiated the inspection by giving a frame of comb to the apiary inspector in July 11 for chemical analysis. She must have seen something that indicated AFB to send a sample to Beltsville.

http://www.pacc-news.com/5-2-12/heart_ingram5_2_12.html


----------



## sqkcrk

slickbrightspear said:


> does anybody know how sensitive the test for afb is. also has anybody taken say 100 apparently healthy hives and tested them at the lab to see if they come back negative or positive, probably not as few people would spend the money to test apparently healthy hives, but if the test is very sensitive you could get a positive but have no active infection.


Hives are not tested for AFB, they are visually inspected for the presence of sunken and punctured cappings which may contain vegetative state AFB. This material, the viscous jelly like material, is sampled and sent to the Beltsville Bee Lab for varification of the visual diagnosis.

I don't know what possible test one would do one an otherwise apparently healthy looking hive.


----------



## sqkcrk

100 td said:


> "AFB spores are present in *ALL* beehives. When a hive is under stress is the most likely time for an outbreak."


The virus which causes the common cold in humans is also prevalent on surfaces in your home. The right conditions have to be present for it to cause one to catch a cold. It's the same in beehives. AFB is out there, in the environment. The right conditions have to exist for it to express itself as a disease of honeybees.

The feeding of syrups and pollen protien substitute does not lead to bees who are more susceptible to AFB, in my opinion. I see no reason to believe it does. It is not my experience that it does. That exxperience being in my own hives and hives of other, much larger, Commercial Beekeepers.

Beyond naturally occuring AFB the greatest source of AFB infection is neglect and ignorance.


----------



## Slow Modem

I"m surprised that no one has picked up on the point that Monsanto has probably ended up with the Roundup-resistant queens. No one has admitted where the evidence is yet, right?


----------



## Scrapfe

I ain't got no dog in this here fight. (Sorry Oldtimer) However, I think the truth lies somewhere between and betwinx. There should be clear evideince of AFB as well as the fate of any hives destroyed because of AFB. I have heard of state inspecters (who also kept bees) burning or condeming every hive belonging to competing beeks. 

Most inspectors are conscience public servants. But if an Apiary inspector is in the honey or bee business, IMHO he or she has a conflict of interest from the get go. The problem with hiring non beek inspectors is finding enough "sane" citizens willing to putter around all day in old wooden boxes full of Hymenoptera.


----------



## sqkcrk

Slow Modem said:


> I"m surprised that no one has picked up on the point that Monsanto has probably ended up with the Roundup-resistant queens. No one has admitted where the evidence is yet, right?


Where's the evidence of that, Slow Modem?


----------



## Oldtimer

Scrapfe said:


> I ain't got no dog in this here fight. (Sorry Oldtimer) .


 I aint got a dog either, plus, didn't know it was a fight? Think it's just a discussion at this stage LOL. 

Other beekeepers burning opposition hives, wow! Where I am, maybe we're a bit more trusting down under, but commercial beeks have actually demanded that inspectors have to be commercial beeks or at least ex commercial beeks, simply because they don't want inexperienced people going into their hives.


----------



## Scrapfe

Yes but it takes all kinds of men and women to make a world.


----------



## sqkcrk

The first Apiary Inspector I knew was Jim Thompson from near Wooster, Ohio. He was a County Apiary Inspector then. Ohio used to have an Inspector in almost every County. He told me he liked being an Apiary Inspector so he would know where the AFB was and that it was dealt with properly.

Now, being as Jim Thompson is and was a small scale beekeeper and all the other beekeepers in his County are and were too, if he found AFB in someone elses hive, followed the Laws of Ohio by verifying the disease, informing the beekeepers of the disease in their beehives, and then burns the infected bees and equipment, does a conflict of interest exist, such that Jim Thompson should not be an Apiary Inspector?


----------



## NorthernIllinoisPlumber

I had a subscription to his Small Beekeepers Journal a while back. He is very big on chemical problems affecting bees, and writes about it often. Very vocal, my impression is that he is the squeaky wheel, and he must have made someone mad.


----------



## Slow Modem

sqkcrk said:


> Where's the evidence of that, Slow Modem?





> 2) Where are his bees? The “evidence” has disappeared, and the IDofA refuses to tell Ingram where they are, before, during, and after the hearing.
> 
> 
> “Is Illinois becoming a police state, where citizens do not have rights?” Ingram asked in desperation. “Knowing that Monsanto and the Dept. of Ag are in bed together, one has to wonder if Monsanto was behind the theft to ruin my research that may prove Round-Up was, and is, killing honeybees. Beekeepers across the state are being threatened that the same thing may be done to their hives and livelihood. I was not treated properly, I don’t want to see this happen to anyone else in this state, and I want this type of illegal action to end.”
> 
> “What was the value of that 3-year-old queen?” Ingram asked. “It could have been that she would have a resistant trait that we could expand into the whole bee culture to help them survive this Round-Up thing. How can you place a dollar value on that potential?”
> 
> Considering the fact that Ingram’s queens, bees, and hives were taken off his property on March 14, rather than being “abated,” as was the “requirement” stated in the notices from the IDofA, the dollar value of such a queen cannot be disregarded as a major motivation for such an act.


There's something really fishy here. Things just don't add up.


----------



## krad1964

"...this Roundup thing."

Where is the research to support this assertion that Roundup is killing bees?


----------



## rainesridgefarm

It would be nice if the past four bee inspectors from the past 15 years could chime in here. They have been telling him to burn those hives all this time. One finally takes action and all the drama. He tells the same strory of chilled brood and spray killing his bees at every meeting for the past 12 years. more drama to come I am sure.


----------



## Oldtimer

Hmm... Suspected something like that.

When you get one side of a story, the other side can be quite different..


----------



## AstroBee

krad1964 said:


> "...this Roundup thing."
> 
> Where is the research to support this assertion that Roundup is killing bees?


Me too. This seems to be gaining momentum - I even heard this from one of our local beekeepers.


----------



## StevenG

AstroBee said:


> Me too. This seems to be gaining momentum - I even heard this from one of our local beekeepers.


It must be true! I read it on the internet! 
Regards,
Steven


----------



## sqkcrk

Has anyone on this Thread been inspected by their States' Apiary Inspector(s) and found to have AFB? How were y'all treated?


----------



## NorthernIllinoisPlumber

krad1964 said:


> "...this Roundup thing."
> 
> Where is the research to support this assertion that Roundup is killing bees?


In his monthly journals he speaks of numerous times that crop dusters spraying Round Up have killed his bees. So I assume he speaks from experience.


----------



## krad1964

I see. How does one breed bees to withstand direct application (on the bees) of any chemical applied to crops? Are there examples of this being done before?

Honestly, he seems to be implying that there is systemic issue with Roundup and bees, not simply a problem when Roundup is sprayed directly on the bees. 

Where is the research to support what he is implying? Or am I totally missing his point about Roundup?


----------



## Oldtimer

When I spray the weeds around my hives I use roundup, it gets on any bees happened to be flying at the time plus on the landing board where it will get walked on by thousands of bees. Never seen any adverse effect. Maybe I have a resistant breed. 

I'm sure others must have used it, perhaps we should start a thread on it.


----------



## jim lyon

krad1964 said:


> Honestly, he seems to be implying that there is systemic issue with Roundup and bees, not simply a problem when Roundup is sprayed directly on the bees.
> 
> Where is the research to support what he is implying? Or am I totally missing his point about Roundup?


There is no basis in fact for what he is implying just his theory which he advances as fact. I have another theory as well which is that Barry has submitted what can only be described as the perfect Beesource thread that is so rich in layers that there is something for everyone here. I tried my best to not get lured in but alas here I am. I am reminded of the perfect country song. You know how it goes. ......."I was drunk the day my momma got out of prison, when I went to pick her in the rain, but before I could get to the station in my pick up truck, I got run over by a ****ed old train".......
Anyway this is only like about post #60 we must have a long ways to go but let's get the record for Barry. :applause:


----------



## Oldtimer

Well I've been hearing about the dangers to bees of roundup both on the net, and from other beekeepers, but it's all been third hand opinion somebody heard from somebody else.

So I've started a thread on roundup, to see if there's any cause for concern about the product.

Here it is http://www.beesource.com/forums/showthread.php?268687-The-Roundup-Thread&p=795257#post795257


----------



## fish_stix

sqkcrk said:


> Has anyone on this Thread been inspected by their States' Apiary Inspector(s) and found to have AFB? How were y'all treated?


sqkcrk; I have been inspected and found to have AFB, but it's been 15-20 years ago. In FL the inspector marks the hive "AFB" in large, red, spray painted letters, plus the date. The beekeeper is responsible for burning the hive. Since we're notified in advance of inspections and are usually there with the inspector it's not a big deal to come back that evening and move the hive to our burn area and burn it. For most of us, AFB is such a rare occurrence there is no excuse for delaying the inevitable; if you decide to delay it probably will result in other hives getting infected and possibly another beeks' hives. Many of our inspectors are, or have been, commercial beekeepers and I find the comments about inspectors "doing away with the competition" amusing, if not downright hilarious! Where and what is the competition in beekeeping? :lpf:


----------



## slickbrightspear

sqkcrk that is exactly what I am saying only hives that look infected are tested. I am asking if anyone has ever had a number of apparently unaffected hives tested to see if the test is so sensitive that it can be found in any hive. apparently according to old timer they do that where he is but what about here in the states.


----------



## sqkcrk

I don't know how one would test a hive for the presence of AFB other than sampling honey and detecting spore presence. Maybe there would be some way to swab the surface of the woodenware, but I doubt that anyone does that or that the technique is perfected and used.

Oldtimer, can you clear this up? How are otherwise undectectable hives tested for AFB? Why would one go to that extraordinary level of detection? Not that I believe anyone does.


----------



## crash2usaf

I am somewhat familiar with this case, I know the bee inspector and have an understanding of Terry ingram and some facts that happened that day and about his past issues. For one he has been selling his equipment to new beekeepers from classes he has been teaching. (duh). Secondly he uses his experience to bully anyone else that disagrees with him, he was unable to bully the inspector which is part of the reason he is crying about it. Third he was given MANY notices including notification that the inspector was coming. The Inspector always calls first, and really makes an attempt to contact people first. She is very flexible and willing to change her schedule so she can meet with the beekeeper and inspect the bees together. 
Her personal hives she does not treat with chemicals, she takes and organic approach. With wearing the inspector hat she does not recommend anything, just answers questions and informs the beekeeper what chemicals can't be used during honey flow (the chemicals are a state regulation not hers). The terry you see in the video he wants you to believe he is the victim, however the people he has sold equipment to are very happy to see this happen (not a lynch mob happy, just a thank god this will help save bees happy). The Raines poster above has a better handle on who terry is because he also is from the local area. The numbers he quotes as to his honey production are awfully high if his hives have been getting hit from crop sprayers for me to believe, not to mention previous inspectors have sent samples in when he has complained before (they found the AFB then and tried to take steps...) and the tests were negative. 
His so called research has, to my knowledge, not been validated in any way shape or form by any kind of scientists, hasn't been documented, and is most likely his opinion. But since he has so much "experience" his word is law... The problem I have with this is that in order to be considered research in my opinion is that results need to be written down, verified, and one ought to be able to replicate the results. So his research is the word of terry and should be taken with a grain of salt. Every beekeeper has their method, and changes those methods to try and breed better queens or increase honey production. We all have our own little experiments to help the bees thats part of the fun and the challenge off beekeeping. 
And just to clarify my position on this I have no real stake in what goes on. No personal grudge against terry other than he is hurting the bees more than helping, and crying victim when things don't go his way. I ignore his experience because I want to develop my own experience and he can and is a bit over bearing. The bee inspector is a little annoying due to her enthusiasm when it comes to bees. She does not have personal grudges and does not compete with other apiaries. If anything she helps other beekeepers suggesting ways and events where they can bring their honey to market so they can sell and better maintain their bees, and beekeeping hobby. Her advise is not to compare the quality of honey that is made by local bees to the price of the honey you find in walmart. The funny thing about this is that she doesn't sell her honey so much as she demonstrates the different flavors of honey and emphasizes the importance of bees. If anything she promotes the cause and advises anyone and every one to buy local honey (doesn't matter whose honey) because it helps local beekeepers and helps the propagation of bees in general, which is why she does what she does. Again her enthusiasm is what drives her, and at times drives me crazy. 
I do take offense to the speculation about her motives and any conspiracy that is going on. I would also like anyone else in the area to speak up if they have had their hives burned, or were treated badly by this inspector or the state. I know Steve Chard the boss as well, and he also has no ill motivations to beekeepers. He tries and succeeds most of the time to follow the proper steps in dealing with people like terry, Sadly this issue has gotten out of hand, but he did not act responsibly, instead he started crying foul long after the fact playing victim to anyone who would listen. Thus stirring up a big mess with his one-sided story.

Sorry for the novel.....


----------



## buzz abbott

Still would like answers to a couple of questions. Why were the hive removed rather than burned at the site. Is there a good paper trail showing that they were infected and were destroyed?


----------



## crash2usaf

buzz abbott said:


> Still would like answers to a couple of questions. Why were the hive removed rather than burned at the site. Is there a good paper trail showing that they were infected and were destroyed?



Yes there is a paper trail (for liability reasons due to what happened), and the bees were removed because there is some kinda goofy regulation that dictates where hives are burned


----------



## crash2usaf

sqkcrk said:


> I don't know how one would test a hive for the presence of AFB other than sampling honey and detecting spore presence. Maybe there would be some way to swab the surface of the woodenware, but I doubt that anyone does that or that the technique is perfected and used.
> 
> Oldtimer, can you clear this up? How are otherwise undectectable hives tested for AFB? Why would one go to that extraordinary level of detection? Not that I believe anyone does.


I believe what happens is that if the foul brood is really obvious they take a sample of the actual brood not the honey or the equipment. Since the AFB affects the brood not the honey... Do a google on it to see the procedures.... No way can they test every hive they inspect that would bankrupt Illinois OH WAIT we are already bankrupt... If Im not mistaken inspectors are looking for the overall health of the hives, watching out for new trends or disease outbreaks, and very importantly checking out the hives getting imported/exported so that these diseases don't spread.... I've been googling this stuff, and Ive had my hives inspected several times and asked "whats the point?" I think they swab it or cut a little chunk of suspected brood out... That dude who was an inspector in NY had good insight.


----------



## beeware10

crash2usaf
thanks for what they call "now for the rest of the story". many pieces of the story are starting to make sense. part of the problem may be lawyers and a court is involved. the state kind of has their hands tied. Im sure the states lawyer told them to say nothing so they cannot defend there actions. thanks for the background info. there were a lot of peope really getting ahead of themselves.


----------



## crash2usaf

beeware10 said:


> crash2usaf
> thanks for what they call "now for the rest of the story". many pieces of the story are starting to make sense. part of the problem may be lawyers and a court is involved. the state kind of has their hands tied. Im sure the states lawyer told them to say nothing so they cannot defend there actions. thanks for the background info. there were a lot of peope really getting ahead of themselves.


Well lets just say I'm sooo glad they did what they did AFB is a nasty disease...


----------



## Oldtimer

Just to answer that previous question directed to me, for random sampling of hives for AFB, samples of adult bees are taken, a jar of around 200 bees. Don't know just what happens to them in the lab but by whatever means, the end result is a spore count. Quite a lot of hives will have some AFB spores but it will be below the threshold needed to be able to kill a larva and start a symptomatic case of AFB in the hive.
For actual symptomatic cases of AFB we take a sample of the actual dead larva, ie, the brown gooey stuff.

I'll also say Crash2usaf, that what you describe kind of rang a bell with me, we have people exactly like that over here. Would like to have a rant and say more but I can't. However I do believe there is a personality type that exists, similar to what you describe, there are several of them here and no doubt they occur everywhere. One of the giveaways, is that they know everything, nobody else knows anything, and they've had recurring AFB issues for years but believe they have a unique knowledge of the subject and will not follow standard procedures.


----------



## sqkcrk

crash2usaf said:


> I believe what happens is that if the foul brood is really obvious they take a sample of the actual brood not the honey or the equipment. Since the AFB affects the brood not the honey... Do a google on it to see the procedures....
> 
> That dude who was an inspector in NY had good insight.


crash, I know how to inspect a hive for AFB. I did it for 20 years. I think "That dude" you refer to is me. What I read and asked about was about how to detect AFB when it is not visually detectable. Maybe I misread something.

Oldtimer, thanks for the explanation. I have never heard of that method being used anywhere in the U.S., though it could be in use somewhere. Do such tests ever result in confiscation and destruction of anyones' bees and equipment?


----------



## Oldtimer

sqkcrk said:


> Do such tests ever result in confiscation and destruction of anyones' bees and equipment?


 On their own, no. The adult bee samples are mainly used to get a "demographic" on areas with high counts.

If samples from somebody's hives had counts high enough to be concerning, the person would be informed a proper inspection should be undertaken to see if there is a symptomatic infection.


----------



## crash2usaf

Thanks old timer for the better explanation of how they test for AFB.... SQ didn't mean to offend I was trying to make a point, I just don't want people to get their hackles up over bee inspections. They are there for a reason and aren't usually this dramatic.. My experience is that a good bee inspector is primarily there for the bees. They also are a handy resource to call on if you have questions as they tend to see all sorts of beekeeping techniques when they are out inspecting.

BTW old timer I the best advise I've had while beekeeping was from this old fart who said he has been keeping bees for 45 years and every time he thinks he has something figured out and learned it all... the bees come up with something new...


----------



## sqkcrk

No problem crash. I think good Apiary Inspectors are underappreciated. Kinda like the Police. Very few people appreciate them.


----------



## Oldtimer

From what people have presented in the roundup thread, it looks like roundup is fairly benign in regards to bees. The subject of this thread has claimed his bees have been being killed by roundup and chilled brood. Seems more likely it's something else killing them but he just thinks it's roundup and chilled brood.

Also the claim the inspector has wiped out the line of roundup resistant bees he's spent years breeding, since nobody elses bees appear to have problems with roundup I'm wondering on what the claim is based his bees are a line of roundup resistant ones he's spent years breeding. How did he go about breeding them, what was the breeding program, what were his benchmarks to measure improvement?


----------



## jim lyon

First of all I have no opinion on what the state may or may not have done because we have only heard one side of the story and some anecdotal information from the other side. But on the issue of roundup resistant bees it seems like if he had the roundup resistant bees he claims his numbers wouldnt have fallen from 120 hives down to 3 and and he wouldnt have been dependent on packages and nucs from someone else to recover. I guess the crux of his argument is that the one live hive they destroyed was the magic hive that was going to be his salvation. That kind of sounds like a reach to me. Of course this is all predicated on his assertion that it was roundup that killed them in the first place and that these agents of the state of Illinois simply didnt know the difference between AFB and chilled brood and that their presumptive testing was also flawed. As distasteful as I find it to hear a story about the state destroying someones hives, in my mind Mr. Ingram's story just dosent sound terribly believable.


----------



## crash2usaf

The thing about him is that if you attended the association meetings his story changes all the time... What troubles me most is that he won't listen to anyone with less than 58 years of experience lol


----------



## NorthernIllinoisPlumber

crash2usaf said:


> and the bees were removed because there is some kinda goofy regulation that dictates where hives are burned



What regulation is that? The only reg I can find on the Illinois site is about burning bees, comb, brood and honey...and equipment can be possibly be salvaged. I would be very concerned about tainted hives traveling the state, which could possibly lead to more contamination.


----------



## crash2usaf

Im not sure what equipment that reg refers to. I think suits and that kinda stuff is what they consider "salvageable". To leave hive bodies makes no sense to me because the comb, brood, and honey are in them..... Anything that can easily be sterilized like tools, hive stands, etc should be fine... One issue I have is that he sells used equipment (hive bodies, supers etc) to new beekeepers that take his class. Which has spread AFB around, Ive asked the inspector if there had been any other cases in the area.. 

When I started there was a local beekeeping class, the instructor mentioned to us that you have to be careful buying used equipment because of transporting diseases (Terry was referred to, but not mentioned by name). The fellow had spare equipment but wouldn't sell it to anyone for two reasons; 1 disease spreading 2 conflict of interest. He was uncomfortable selling to new beekeepers taking his class. He was a volunteer ( maybe compensated by park district but doesn't matter) So he didn't want to appear, or have the stigma of possibly taking advantage of newer beekeepers. Real nice fellow honest and very straight forward. Im not a burn first ask questions later, but Id rather torch a few to save the rest.... AFB is nasty


----------



## Barry

It's not an issue of "leaving." The point was raised that the infected material should never have been removed from the property. It should be dealt with where it is, if it's truly infected.


----------



## crash2usaf

Barry said:


> It's not an issue of "leaving." The point was raised that the infected material should never have been removed from the property. It should be dealt with where it is, if it's truly infected.


Ill have to look it up to see why, best guess it has to do with some disposal procedure.


----------



## Beregondo

I'm pretty sure that what have to say about this won't be very popular, but here goes:

A statute that permits an inspector to enter a person's property and inspect, searching for evidence of a devastating disease may be _*legal*_, but it is not *lawful*.
It violates Amendment Four to the Constitution for the United States of America.

I understand that over the years, we as a people have become gradually accustomed ot the government asserting power over many aspects of our lives, but that does not make such inspections, expedient as they are in the control of foulbrood and other diseases either _lawful_ or _right._

I understand the economic damage that might occur to others from an outbreak of foulbrood. 
I know it would be expensive. 

But I doubt that any of us would assert that even a thousand hives are of greater value than a single human life.

Our liberty is not free, it is very costly.
Many of us have put our lives to peril in defense of Liberty.
Some have paid for _our_ Liberty with _their_ lives.

It is a Natural Right to produces one's food.
Regardless of whether the State followed its own rules in taking this man's property or not, 
his property (land / hives) was _*searched*_ for foulbrood without a warrant;
his livestock and property were _*seized*_ without a warrant,
and one of his means of producing food has been *denied* him by the government.

A simple way to control a people is to control their food supply.
Continued tolerance of such unlawful (violates Constitution) though sometimes legal (if passed by the legislature or assembly of state, and not merely mandated by bureaucracy) is likely to result in people being denied their right to drink their own milk, eat food from untreated (organic) land, and to embolden false authority to broaden the abuse of power they (and we) are already accustomed to.

It might even lead to requiring us to subject ourselves to indecent imaging or groping just to travel by air.
(That's probably ludicrous...free people would not tolerate it!)


----------



## Oldtimer

We also have outdated founding documents in my country, a treaty signed with the indigenous people (see treaty of Waitangi) that now applied literally makes a modern society almost impossible. Remember the Constitution for the United States of America did not apply to everybody. It was for whites, and not black slaves. Indians? questionable.


----------



## Beregondo

Not to disrespect your opinion, but there is nothing outdated about our Constitution.
Antiqauted views concerning who is and is not a person notwithstanding.

(That defect was in the society of the day, not in the document.)


----------



## Oldtimer

A modern society requires certain things, such as for example, protection of aircraft from underpants bombers. Documents written hundreds of years ago cannot have foreseen some of these circumstances and should not be used to say that while something is "legal", it is not "lawful". A nonsense position.

However I'm digressing into politics so for me anyway will leave it there.


----------



## sqkcrk

Barry said:


> It's not an issue of "leaving." The point was raised that the infected material should never have been removed from the property. It should be dealt with where it is, if it's truly infected.


Maybe there are local restrictions on open burning? Maybe the State has a policy which includes taking the infected material to an insinerator or a deep burial sight?

I see no problem moving infected equipment if handled properly. It's not like a swarm of foraging bees is going to decend on to a truck of AFB infected equipment while stopped at a traffic light, spreading disease that way. What's the problem?


----------



## sqkcrk

Beregondo said:


> A statute that permits an inspector to enter a person's property and inspect, searching for evidence of a devastating disease may be _*legal*_, but it is not *lawful*.


How do you think things should be handled? Do you know how things are done and have been done in NY, regarding the inspection of beehives and the handling of diseased bees, and equipment? Are you knowledgable on the History of the Bee Laws of most States? Why they came into existence?


----------



## NorthernIllinoisPlumber

sqkcrk said:


> I see no problem moving infected equipment if handled properly. It's not like a swarm of foraging bees is going to decend on to a truck of AFB infected equipment while stopped at a traffic light, spreading disease that way. What's the problem?


If the truck gets a flat tire, in an accident, breaks down, they stop for lunch...that would be my problem. If it is so serious, then the material should be disposed of where it stands. The state has regs on quarantines, they should have used that option as well.


----------



## sqkcrk

I highly disagree. None of those senarios pose great danger to bees, in my opinion. AFB is not so transmissable as to treat it like nuclear waste.


----------



## Barry

sqkcrk said:


> I see no problem moving infected equipment if handled properly.


I'm not convinced it was handled properly. If what Mr. Ingram said is true, that the equipment was removed without an official warrant/letter stating the date it would be removed, etc., then I would have a problem with that. The removal was done when he wasn't there.


----------



## sqkcrk

That may be so. Some things probablyt could havce been handled better. But, we are armchair quarterbacking a situation we are not intimately involved in. As an Apiary Inspector I probably would have done things differently, but I wasn't there.


----------



## DLMKA

crash2usaf said:


> Third he was given MANY notices including notification that the inspector was coming. The Inspector always calls first, and really makes an attempt to contact people first.


I spoke with another inspector Friday evening. He confirmed this was the case. Mr. Ingram was warned many, many times and failed to act on his own. An inspector finally DOES something and now Ingram is trying to portray himself as the victim.


----------



## beekeeper120

This has been an interesting thread and to be honest this is a he said she said. Until a report is completed, turned in and can be requested VIA FOIA (freedom of information act ) or heads to court ,we will most likley never know the whole story. The fact that Mr. Ingram said he will take this to court has a chain reaction and most government entities will never comment on a case that is pending litigation or that is still on-going. We can arm chair quarterback this to death to what end? There will be hurt feelings, high blood preasure, and people upset about something they are not involved in. 

To answer a post by somebody forget who, if you know anything about state statues, most of the time they have laws under one statute and the enforcement in another, unless you know where to look, the statue about the hives having to be moved to another location to be burned could be in there just under another statue.

Beregondo, I understand where your coming from; however, the consititution is a living document that can be changed as society deems fit. We base all our laws on it, but it is not the end all. I disagree though how you apply it here. Yes per the constitution the government can not enter your property and seize property without a warrant. but, it does give the government the right to produce laws and regulations. I cant speak for this state, but I know in mine if you want to become a beekeeper, part of the regulation is you have to allow an inspector to access your property(without a warrant) and if a they deem the hives to be a hazard to other property, humans or live stock they have the right to site you and force you to take steps to correct the problem, if you dont you can be subject to further action. 

Ill give you another example thats not popular but is the same thing. Like it or not when you fly on an airplane at an airport, you purchase a ticket to board the plane. As part of that you have to be screened by everybodys favorite TSA. If you dont you dont fly. If you want to fly then your 4th amendment is temporary taken away and you are forced to submit to screening (PS IM TALKING IN GRENERAL AND NOT THE EXTREAMS THEY ARE ACCUSED OF DOING)

Another example if you are licenced to carry a firearm, (2nd amendment) As part of the regulation you are not allowed to take it into government buildings. If you want to go into a government building you either not carry it into the building or leave it in your car. Its the same issue as you bring up in your statement.

IMO if Mr. Ingram was warned numerous times and he took no action, then shame on him, no matter how much/long he has been involved in beekeeping. If anything he should be held to a higher standard for knowing the rules and doing nothing about his problem. If on the other hand the state was wrong then they should own up to it and pay damages for the hives. Everything else is academic.

Remember as citizans of the US if we dont like laws/regulations we have to power to change them.
(


----------



## sqkcrk

If he had that many warnings, maybe Mr. Ingram moved them. If there was a problem which he recognized,and wished to avoid the current outcome, seems like he would have moved them. Apparently Ingrams' pov is different from those who regulate bees and bee diseases.


----------



## beeware10

as a past nys bee inspector I cant see any reason for debate in this case. there was a poor beekeeper selling problem hives. he was warned and tried to fight the state. he lost and good thing. when I started the job as a bee inspector I had to train for a number of weeks with a senior inspector. you can not learn until you actually see afb. I was taken to a number bee yards of dr richard taylors yards. he was a much better writer than beekeeper. he had a lawyer to try and fight get the state from burning bees. he lost. bee inspectors are one of the few government programs that help the industry.


----------



## crash2usaf

Thank you beware... Barry deleted my post that had several strong words... 

What it boils down to is that the guy shoulda fixed it himself, taken responsibility and perhaps a little common sense.. I asked the question If the folks who thinks his rights were violated, how happy would they be if their hives were nearby? 

Barry I am trying to behave!!! There were all sorts of words I wanted to use and didn't you gotta give me credit for that lol


----------



## sqkcrk

beeware10 said:


> bee inspectors are one of the few government programs that help the industry.


And you hardly ever see three of them standing around while one is working.  Not your stereotypical State worker.


----------



## jim lyon

crash2usaf said:


> Barry I am trying to behave!!! There were all sorts of words I wanted to use and didn't you gotta give me credit for that lol


Get credit for that which you didnt do? No it dosent work that way crash. That is kind of like the folks who want assume that their bees are dying from an undetectable amount of their favorite chemical "whipping boy". Actually my main reason for posting is that this thread deserves at least 100 posts and I wanted to take credit for getting us there. Come on folks there are still some unexploited nuggets, how about his assertion that he raised $1400 worth of honey off of one hive?


----------



## sqkcrk

Not bad work if you can get it. One hundred lbs of honey sold for $14.00 per. Quite a salesman. You jealous Jim? I am. Is he claiming that as income loss? If so, he'd have to show proof before someone, such as a Judge, would award him that amount, wouldn't he?


----------



## jim lyon

sqkcrk said:


> Not bad work if you can get it. One hundred lbs of honey sold for $14.00 per. Quite a salesman. You jealous Jim?


Not really, just a little suspicious. Do they really retail for $14? I should probably raise some comb honey some year but I don't really have the time or patience for it. If you want to maximize your profits off a limited number of hives, though, its probably a pretty good deal.


----------



## sqkcrk

Yeah, comb honey might do it.


----------



## Sherman

Just received an email from the Illinois State Beekeepers Association. It doesn't identify the beekeeper but since there seems to be such an uproar about this case I am assuming this is what the email refers to.

Here is the text-

-------
These are the facts concerning the AFB affected hives:

1) An Illinois State Bee Inspector inspected the hives and found the presence of American Foul Brood. The inspector reported these findings to Supervisor Steve Chard, Illinois Department of Agriculture, and the initial findings were also reported to to the hives' owner.
2) Mr. Chard sent another Bee Inspector to the apiary in question, along with original Inspector, who confirmed the presence of American Foul Brood.
3) Samples were taken from the hive and sent to the USDA Bee Research Laboratory in Beltsville Maryland. They confirmed that it was indeed American Foul Brood.
4) The owner was notified that he was in violation, was sent a copy of the USDA laboratory results and was told to destroy the hives in accordance with Illinois State statutes.
5) After numerous notices from the Illinois Department of Agriculture the owner refused to destroy the infected colonies.
6) The Department abated the nuisance, as specified by the Illinois Bees and Apiaries Act.
7) A hearing was held in Springfield. where the owner was present and was allowed to rebut any and all statements, plus allowed to ask any questions of Department staff present at the hearing. The State then issued a penalty to the owner for failure to abate the nuisance.

ISBA
------


----------



## beeware10

Its good that the facts are finally coming out. now some of the previous posts appear to be done too early without the facts before hitting send.
so much for the guys in black cars and suits. lol


----------



## RiodeLobo

My issue with the case is in the order of the events. Number 6 and 7 should be in the reverse order.


----------



## beekNIL

These are the facts concerning the AFB affected hives in Illinois. I further request that this list hereby redact the Inspector's name and address. It has NOTHING to do with this! It's not disturbing -- would you want your neighbor to have AFB? I'd think not! Punishing the Inspector and even the second inspector is riduclous!

1) An Illinois State Bee Inspector inspected the hives and found the presence
of American Foul Brood. The inspector reported these findings to Supervisor
Steve Chard, Illinois Department of Agriculture, and the initial findings were
also reported to to the hives' owner.
2) Mr. Chard sent another Bee Inspector to the apiary in question, along with
original Inspector, who confirmed the presence of American Foul Brood.
3) Samples were taken from the hive and sent to the USDA Bee Research
Laboratory in Beltsville Maryland. They confirmed that it was indeed American
Foul Brood.
4) The owner was notified that he was in violation, was sent a copy of the USDA
laboratory results and was told to destroy the hives in accordance with Illinois
State statutes.
5) After numerous notices from the Illinois Department of Agriculture the
owner refused to destroy the infected colonies.
6) The Department abated the nuisance, as specified by the Illinois Bees and
Apiaries Act.
7) A hearing was held in Springfield. where the owner was present and was
allowed to rebut any and all statements, plus allowed to ask any questions of
Department staff present at the hearing. The State then issued a penalty to the
owner for failure to abate the nuisance.

Registration of hives is mandated by law in Illinois.
Bee Inspectors are interviewed and experienced.
The diagnosis was double-checked.
The course of action is covered under Illinois Civil Statutes and was followed - mandatory abatement whether by owner or the State.
The complainant was clearly in violation given the Civil Statutes.

Disturbing? NOT! Would you want your neighbor to harbor AFB? I don't.


----------



## beekNIL

Check with item #5 first, please.


----------



## beekNIL

RiodeLobo said:


> My issue with the case is in the order of the events. Number 6 and 7 should be in the reverse order.


Did you notice #5? That's the key. 6 and 7 are in the right order. 5 is critical.


----------



## beekNIL

sqkcrk said:


> Not bad work if you can get it. One hundred lbs of honey sold for $14.00 per. Quite a salesman. You jealous Jim? I am. Is he claiming that as income loss? If so, he'd have to show proof before someoThane, such as a Judge, would award him that amount, wouldn't he?


That might be for a colony affected by AFB?


----------



## buzz abbott

beekNIL said:


> The complainant was clearly in violation given the Civil Statutes.


Could you please site a source for the civil code that allows the state to transport infected hives from the site they were found to another location thereby risking the spread of the foulbrood?


----------



## rainesridgefarm

They moved the hives 18 miles to a state highway yard to burn them. The fact that he was gone was just good luck on the inpsectors part. They planned to move them and burn them so they could avoid any more conflict if he was home. He is a very aggressive person and has made threats of harming people in the past. He stated at one of our meetings he took out his shotgun and told the county guy spraying weeds on the road if he came near his place he would be sorry. There is no research for roundup, how can you state that you have research going back five years then at every picknic every year he states all his bees died over winter and he had to buy packages to start again. The lies keep coming and now he has made his bed and will sleep in it.


----------



## buzz abbott

Under what authority did they move the hives? They had law enforcement with them to avoid any more conflicts.


----------



## MJuric

*Under what authority did they move the hives? They had law enforcement with them to avoid any more conflicts. *

Let's assume that when you register your hives in Illinois that you hand over the authority to allow the Inspector to not only enter your property but also the authority to deal with any nuisance situations that they feel are not being dealt with properly. I believe this is the case and I believe this is stipulated in my Illinois license.

By giving such authority to the state you also give them the authority to deal with the nuisances in a manner they believe to be appropriate. My guess is that the appropriate way to deal with AFB is to burn the hives. My secondary guess is that the appropriate way to burn 11 hives, which is a considerable amount of wood filled with a flammable wax, is under controlled circumstances, not on someones property where the fire has a larger chance of spreading and causing ancillary damage. Furthermore if there was any reason for there to be additional conflict with the owner it only makes sense to move the hives and allow an uninterrupted and unharassed disposal regardless of presence of law enforcement.

In essence the authority was granted the second one decided to have bees in the state of Illinois, with or without a license. By agreeing to the license you grant the authority, by not having the license you are operating illegally and thus...well...granting the authority.

Not saying I agree with any of this, just saying this is the way it is and not only with bees. 

~Matt


----------



## rainesridgefarm

The overall safty of everyone is what they took into consideration. I think it is common sense more then authority but that seems to be lacking in this day and age.


----------



## whalers

Speaking of raw milk, I think you will enjoy this video!

http://www.farm-dreams.com/video/legalize-the-white-stuff


----------



## Captainfester

MJuric said:


> *Under what authority did they move the hives? They had law enforcement with them to avoid any more conflicts. *
> 
> Let's assume that when you register your hives in Illinois that you hand over the authority to allow the Inspector to not only enter your property but also the authority to deal with any nuisance situations that they feel are not being dealt with properly. I believe this is the case and I believe this is stipulated in my Illinois license.
> 
> By giving such authority to the state you also give them the authority to deal with the nuisances in a manner they believe to be appropriate. My guess is that the appropriate way to deal with AFB is to burn the hives. My secondary guess is that the appropriate way to burn 11 hives, which is a considerable amount of wood filled with a flammable wax, is under controlled circumstances, not on someones property where the fire has a larger chance of spreading and causing ancillary damage. Furthermore if there was any reason for there to be additional conflict with the owner it only makes sense to move the hives and allow an uninterrupted and unharassed disposal regardless of presence of law enforcement.
> 
> In essence the authority was granted the second one decided to have bees in the state of Illinois, with or without a license. By agreeing to the license you grant the authority, by not having the license you are operating illegally and thus...well...granting the authority.
> 
> Not saying I agree with any of this, just saying this is the way it is and not only with bees.
> 
> ~Matt


right on, this may be the land of the free but you arent free to break the law. he kept hives in IL, IL has laws regarding hives. Hence he is bound by those laws.


----------



## MJuric

*The overall safty of everyone is what they took into consideration. I think it is common sense more then authority but that seems to be lacking in this day and age. *

I don't disagree, it's just a question of belief, proactive safety versus reactive safety. Proactive safety obviously needs a higher level of control by the state than does reactive safety.

~Matt


----------



## sqkcrk

buzz abbott said:


> Could you please site a source for the civil code that allows the state to transport infected hives from the site they were found to another location thereby risking the spread of the foulbrood?


I think you are nit picking and overly unnecassarily paranoid about what you think is the possible spread of AFB. Let it go. Have faith that those responsible for the inspection know how to handle and dispose of diseased equipment in a manner which minimizes to the slimest of all possible chances the spread of this disease. Unlike the person cited, apparently.


----------



## honeyshack

There seems to be questions as to why they moved the hives.
I put forth three possible reasons, which unless we live there, we cannot know the answer
1. are there any fire regulations set in place because the area might be two dry? Burning bans? 
2. Burning that many hives creates quite a heat and will create it's own wind. Would it be safe? Is the area treed? Is it dry? Houses or buidings or people close by which could get damaged or hurt?
3. If this fellow is as controversal as he is on the vid, would he have created an unsafe enviroment for the state workers? Above all else, the employees must adhere to safe work practices.
Removing the hives and burning them else where may not have been the best for disease control, but it might have been prudent for worker safety, area safety and passerby safety.


----------



## sqkcrk

rainesridgefarm said:


> They moved the hives 18 miles to a state highway yard to burn them. The fact that he was gone was just good luck on the inpsectors part. They planned to move them and burn them so they could avoid any more conflict if he was home. He is a very aggressive person and has made threats of harming people in the past. He stated at one of our meetings he took out his shotgun and told the county guy spraying weeds on the road if he came near his place he would be sorry. There is no research for roundup, how can you state that you have research going back five years then at every picknic every year he states all his bees died over winter and he had to buy packages to start again. The lies keep coming and now he has made his bed and will sleep in it.


When things like this have occured in NY, State Troopers have accompanied Apiary Inspectors to serve notice and to maintain security. In NY, Apiary Inspectors are Deputies of the Commissioner of the Dept of Ag and Mkts. Employees of the State of New York, w/ all the duties and responsibilities any other State official has. Just like anyone else they serve the citizens of the State.

I was never threatened by someone w/ a firearm during my 20 years. I was runoff half way thru an inspection w/ hives still left opened. That was kinda hairy. But, fortunately my life was never threatened.


----------



## RiodeLobo

beekNIL said:


> Did you notice #5? That's the key. 6 and 7 are in the right order. 5 is critical.


Yep I did in fact read the list. If he skipped his hearing that is one thing, if the government confiscated his property without that hearing that is another. The fact that they sent notices for the hives to be destroyed does not change that. My issue in not with the outcome. It is with the process, when we grant the rights of the court to the bureaucracies we lose our freedoms. Regulations are replacing laws and bureaucracies the courts. This case is a symptom of greater problem in our current social/political reality.


----------



## sqkcrk

MJuric said:


> In essence the authority was granted the second one decided to have bees in the state of Illinois, with or without a license. By agreeing to the license you grant the authority, by not having the license you are operating illegally and thus...well...granting the authority.
> 
> Not saying I agree with any of this, just saying this is the way it is and not only with bees.
> 
> ~Matt


The Authority exists whether ones' apiary is registered or not. Whether one pushes that authority to its' ultimate limit is up to the Commissioner or Program Director, as seen in this case. Under routine inspection the disease was found present. Verification was established twice, in two different manners, notification to abate the nusiance was made, more than once, the diseased material was confiscated and disposed of under the statutes legislated by the State.

Seems to me like everything was done by the book, as far as the Apiary Inspectors actions are concerned. They are welcome to inspect my bees whenever they wish, w/in reason.

Here in NY, it was my practice to notify by phone call that I was working a certain area and woulkd like to check the beekeepers' hives for pests and diseases of honeybees. If I got no reply, I would try again. Sometimes a number of times. If still no answer I would reserve that yard or yards for later date, perhaps the next year.

If a beekeeper said they didn't want an inspection I'd ask why, tell them what I was doing and why and try to get them to allow an inspection, w/ them present as often as possible. Usually they would say Okay, go ahead. But, if they had good reason I would leave them be. Especially if there was no disease history in the past. Some times people don't want you disturbing colonies being used for queen rearing. Or, "What do you want to disturb them for now, there's a nectar flow on."

Common sense, common curtiousy and knowledge of beekeeping are good tools to Inspection. People skills are important too. You still get some folks though. That'll always happen.


----------



## sqkcrk

honeyshack said:


> There seems to be questions as to why they moved the hives.
> I put forth three possible reasons, which unless we live there, we cannot know the answer
> 1. are there any fire regulations set in place because the area might be two dry? Burning bans?
> 2. Burning that many hives creates quite a heat and will create it's own wind. Would it be safe? Is the area treed? Is it dry? Houses or buidings or people close by which could get damaged or hurt?
> 3. If this fellow is as controversal as he is on the vid, would he have created an unsafe enviroment for the state workers? Above all else, the employees must adhere to safe work practices.
> Removing the hives and burning them else where may not have been the best for disease control, but it might have been prudent for worker safety, area safety and passerby safety.


Perhaps digging a firepit large enuf to burn eleven hives was more than the Commissioner wanted to press his/her luck w/ under advice from the Legal Department. They did the prudent thing by burning it where they could control the fire and the property on which it was burned.

They may have used barrels too, to burn the equipment in.


----------



## sqkcrk

RiodeLobo said:


> This case is a symptom of greater problem in our current social/political reality.


The Laws governing this situation have been around since the 1930, so nothing new and nothing current about any of this.

What would you substitute for what is in place currently?


----------



## buzz abbott

not disputing the right of the state to destroy the hives, but don't you think that if someone on the travel path of the movement comes up with AFB that the state could be held responsible for that outbreak? If the stated goal of destroying the hive is the control of AFB should not the state do everything in it's power to constrict the movement of hives that have been condemned as infected?


----------



## sqkcrk

buzz abbott said:


> not disputing the right of the state to destroy the hives, but don't you think that if someone on the travel path of the movement comes up with AFB that the state could be held responsible for that outbreak? If the stated goal of destroying the hive is the control of AFB should not the state do everything in it's power to constrict the movement of hives that have been condemned as infected?



Show me the exposure. Maybe each hive nody was contained in its own heavy plastic bag, inside a cardboard box. Would that pose a risk?

I dealt w/ a case in which an individual have about 75 hives at his house which were all diseased w/ AFB. Both live and dead. Another Apiary Inspector and I spent days killing live hives w/ Resmethrin, the only insecticide speciffically labeled for the killing of hoineybee colonies. Then we loaded his equipment intyo his flatbed truck and hauled all of it to a landfill for deep burial, in a landfill in the proicess of closing, being capped.

I guess we were supposed to burn the truck bed too? (sarcasm)

People should be knowledgable and aware of AFB, how bees get it and how it is spread. But, people should also be respectful of the disease and not unduly frightened. Be vigilant, but relax.


----------



## RiodeLobo

sqkcrk said:


> What would you substitute for what is in place currently?


Having the hearing BEFORE the hives were destroyed (assuming you want to fight the destroy order). That is the only change, because than due process has been done. 
A simple example is a speeding ticket. You get the ticket, you can pay the fine or go to court. The court will hear your case and decide the outcome. Than you comply with the outcome. 
What happened here is you got the ticket than you were ordered to pay. You didn't pay so they came into you house took the money. THAN you get have your day in court to determine if it was justified. Old or new wrong is still wrong.

Again I am not saying the outcome was wrong, and I would have burned the things after the lab results. The process is wrong.


----------



## rainesridgefarm

I agree the process is broken because 4 inspectors over the past 15 years have all told him he has afb and sent him notice to fix the problem. Why did the state take so long to finaly get this done. I know of at least 9 beekeepers that came down with afb after taking his classes when he sold them his used equipment and had them cleaning his hives up with their hive tools. He should have been in court 4 times because he never complied. This situation is like the guy they finally put in jail after 12 DUI's How many people does this guy have to hurt before he has a day in court.


----------



## RiodeLobo

rainesridgefarm said:


> I agree the process is broken because 4 inspectors over the past 15 years have all told him he has afb and sent him notice to fix the problem. Why did the state take so long to finaly get this done.


Another good point. If this has been an issue for this long the issue should have been dealt with years ago.


----------



## sqkcrk

RiodeLobo said:


> Having the hearing BEFORE the hives were destroyed (assuming you want to fight the destroy order). That is the only change, because than due process has been done.
> A simple example is a speeding ticket. You get the ticket, you can pay the fine or go to court. The court will hear your case and decide the outcome. Than you comply with the outcome.
> What happened here is you got the ticket than you were ordered to pay. You didn't pay so they came into you house took the money. THAN you get have your day in court to determine if it was justified. Old or new wrong is still wrong.
> 
> Again I am not saying the outcome was wrong, and I would have burned the things after the lab results. The process is wrong.


That makes sense. Have you ever seen or gotten a Disease Quarantine and Abatement Order? I don't know what ILs' reads like, but NYs' states how soon the Order must be complied with. It also States that one has a certain number of days, or weeks, I forget, to appeal the order. This is all done so if there is any question on anyones part, the Lab analysis will confirm or deny the Field Diagnosis. The beekeeper is free to agree w/ the Field Diagnosis and burn the infected material before the end of the order, preferably under Inspector supervision so it is done correctly and completely.

Mr. Ingram was inspected and notified of the disease problem and was ordered to abate the nuisence. Did he appeal the order? Did he communicate to the proper authorities that he disagreed w/ the field diagnosis? Did he disagree w/ the Lab Confirmation of the Field Diagnosis? Did he do anything? Or simply ignore the order?

With the Field Diagnosis and the Lab Confirmation it appears as though he was not convinced. A Hearing, in front of who, would have prolonged the exposure to bees in the surrounding area and to anyone he sold anything to. Especially the latter. 

So, whereas, having a hearing would be more satisfactory, I believe the right thing was done.

This may not be a fit comparrison, but, what if one had a rabid dog. The Animal Control people find out you have a rabid dog. Before they take possesion of it and destroy it, should there be a hearing? Maybe, maybe n ot til after the animal is dead and its' brain autopsied.

Let Mr. Ingram take the State to Court to redress his grievance. OH just about lost its' Inspection program when someone did that.


----------



## leonphelps

I laugh at the hilarity of man. Do humans ever think that species will evolve to conquer disease if we kill all infected beings? Only the people who have no authority seem to assume they have absolute authority. 

I can say with certainty the people who discuss these actions never are able to comprehend issues like this with help from others, like myself. I call them part of the idiot human race. 

Put a badge on an idiot and call him law.


----------



## sqkcrk

leonphelps said:


> I laugh at the hilarity of man. Do humans ever think that species will evolve to conquer disease if we kill all infected beings? Only the people who have no authority seem to assume they have absolute authority.
> 
> I can say with certainty the people who discuss these actions never are able to comprehend issues like this with help from others, like myself. I call them part of the idiot human race.
> 
> Put a badge on an idiot and call him law.


Should I send you some AFB? Hey everybody!! Looks like someone wants your AFB.

How about all of my Chalkbrood? And my varroa mites? Want them too. I sure your hives are resistant enuf to handle disease and pests, or they soon will be if tested.

Or maybe you were being funny?


----------



## leonphelps

honeybees have been around for 14 million years. people with chips on their shoulders wearing badges, less than 3,000. you can get as mad as you want but history is on my side here. 

any infectious disease doctor will tell you the best thing for an organism to do is to conquer a pathogen itself. I know that the world of law enforcement does not want to hear that, but it is reality. 

Mark B "If you want truth, never be for or against. The struggle between for and against is the minds worst disease." you should get that written on your forehead.


----------



## beekNIL

The same is true in IL. The inspectors always give the hive owner the courtesy of prior notice. As it should be. Under duress the Sheriff or State Police can accompany them to protect their person and complete the inspection. If you deny you might have something to hide.


----------



## beekNIL

Is not serving notice enough? He had his chance to respond and rebut. The Hearing was to determine his penalty.


----------



## beekNIL

I'd add some Small Hive Beetle, Nosema (both Ceranae and Apis), and a few threats to be named later to that mix! No!


----------



## Oldtimer

leonphelps said:


> any infectious disease doctor will tell you the best thing for an organism to do is to conquer a pathogen itself.


 So, since he was loosing all his hives and replacing with packages, do you think he was achieving that?

In (you say) 14 million years, bees have obviously not conquered AFB. So. Since when is Ingram going to achieve it. Heck, he doesn't even recognise AFB and thinks he's breeding against roundup.

The rest of your arguments are too simplistic. You do not understand the difference between intensive farming, and a natural environment. Bees these days, are intensive farmed, even by hobbyists, in comparison to a natural environment where a natural balance can exist.


----------



## sqkcrk

Bees can conquer AFB, up to a point. Then AFB gets the upper hand and that's all she wrote.


----------



## beeware10

leonphelps go back and read my post 105. think about it.


----------



## NorthernIllinoisPlumber

beeware10 said:


> Its good that the facts are finally coming out. now some of the previous posts appear to be done too early without the facts before hitting send.
> so much for the guys in black cars and suits. lol



How do we know THESE are the correct facts? The only one I have heard from (via video) is Terrance, so I know he actually exists...all other opinions stated as FACT are posted here, by unknowns.


----------



## Oldtimer

Agreed. It's all a conspiracy, by Monsanto and their agents.


----------



## beekNIL

Facts? From a deluded old man? Please. Give it up!


----------



## beekNIL

Since when is video a "fact?"


----------



## Roland

It is obvious that alot of those that post have not heard the horror stories of AFB from the 20's through the 40's. SQKCRK , help me here, was it not the introduction of Sulfa drugs AND inspection programs that finally cleaned u[p the mess and dramatically reduced losses from AFB?

In an article from 1924, my Great Grandfather found a hive in his yard with the author, and immediately sulfured and burned it. The gentleman in question had alot more time than that. 

Crazy Roland


----------



## NorthernIllinoisPlumber

beekNIL said:


> Since when is video a "fact?"


Re-read my post. I never said his video was fact. All I know is he ACTUALLY exists...


----------



## NorthernIllinoisPlumber

Oldtimer said:


> Agreed. It's all a conspiracy, by Monsanto and their agents.


No, I do not believe that.


----------



## beekNIL

As my mentor plumber Frank told me "Water goes up and "stuff" goes down. This is just "stuff."


----------



## NorthernIllinoisPlumber

beekNIL said:


> As my mentor plumber Frank told me "Water goes up and "stuff" goes down. This is just "stuff."




Stink up, poop down, payday is on Friday, and do not bite your nails on break!


----------



## beekNIL

How do you know his video is actually true? You DO NOT! He is not in his right mind. Can I post a video and you will believe that?


----------



## Live Oak

David LaFerney said:


> No idea about what is going on in this particular case, but in TN we are required by law to register all of our hives (free to do) and if AFB is found anywhere the state inspects all known hives in the area - all infected hives are burned. Completely. And they pay you $50 per hive.
> 
> However we have very low incidence of American Foul Brood. Personally I don't feel all that violated.


Thanks for posting the $50 "compensation". That is laughable. A good producing hive is worth about 8 times that amount. I will will be contacting my legislative representatives about this and lobby to that so called "compensation" and ask them to show me where I can buy a honey producing hive for $50. 

A finished cypress wood hive will cost at least $200 (hive stand, 2 brood boxes, 2 honey supers, inner cover, telescoping cover, 20 brood frames, 20 honey super frames, foundation, and bottom board, painted). Figure $80-$100 per bee package, then extapolate to the value of 50,000 to 100,000 bees is a big strong hive. Then figure the value of your time building all of this, the sugar syrup, dry feed, and tending to the bees to get the hive all drawn out in comb, treatments, etc. Reasonable compensation in my opinion would be about $400. Yeah, I can hear the laughter now from the TN State Bee Keeper Mike Struder and the TN Dept. of Agriculture now. 

$50 is NOT compensation........that is an outrageous insult. 

On the issue of accountability and responsibility of state employees, their limted immunity should be immediately stripped if it is proven that they have violated any law, regulation, or engaged in any miscoduct. When their homes, retirement plans, pensions, savings, salary, and personal belongings are put at risk of civil forfeiture........it is amazing how responsible and down right reasonable they conduct themselves. DON'T hold your breath waiting for this to happen. 

Even if this guy's bees did have foul brood, this could have been handled MUCH MUCH better.


----------



## crash2usaf

Seems like the I's were dotted and the T's were crossed. The only one who could have handled this better would have been the beekeeper. It is a shame that it came to this. It is also a shame that he is in denial. Hs bitter and he knows not why. I have been all over the world and have seen countries with very little law and order. People risk everything to come here for what we have. Freedom isn't free= it comes with responsibilities. First one is to do no harm to others. This man was- by his denial. He will continue though. If this were a police state he wouldn't be allowed. The problem equipment was abated ( at least we hope)
I fought for our freedom and will again. It is everyone's responsibility.


----------



## Barry

Let's find civil ways to disagree with each other. Thanks.


----------



## Live Oak

crash2usaf said:


> I have been all over the world and have seen countries with very little law and order. People risk everything to come here for what we have. Freedom isn't free= it comes with responsibilities. First one is to do no harm to others. This man was- by his denial. He will continue though. If this were a police state he wouldn't be allowed. The problem equipment was abated ( at least we hope)
> I fought for our freedom and will again. It is everyone's responsibility.


I am not debating whether the old guy is denial. It appears that his hives did likely have foul brood but the state handled the situation very badly.

I am a retired military aviator. Got war tee-shirt, sweat pants, running shoes, and baseball cap. PLEASE DON'T bore me with federal government progressive propaganda about how freedom is not free. YOU and I DID NOT fight for ANYBODY's freedom. Not in this country at least. 

Yes, I heartily agree that true freedom requires self governance and responsibility. I am right there with you about doing no harm to others unless in self defense. 

This guy may well be in denial.........he has a naturalborn and constitutional right to due process which includes the state clearly communicating with him and working with him to help him when and where possible. Stealing his private property while he is gone is not my idea of how that works. The state representative could have picked up the phone and set up an appointment to visit Ingram, explain her findings and show him her data and other information. 

[edit]

The problem has NOT been abated. There was not adequate oversight of what the state employees did, not to mention documentation kept on file, or provided to Ingram. A little more outreach, goodwill, cooperation and working to teach Ingram what he may not be realizing would have gone a LONG ways and VERY likely avoided this mess. 

[edit]


----------



## Lburou

*Haven't we heard it all....Several times.*

Since the debate here won't sink any lower, and nothing new is forthcoming in the exchange, I'd like to join the crowd and assert two more conclusions: 

1) Old age will dim the lights on all of us, sooner or later....The bulb burns only dimly in the mind of the beekeeper in question, leave him be. 

2) The real elephant in the room that nobody acknowledges is AFB, and the full host of Pests afflicting apis millifera, are all alive and well in that ailing bee tree just down the road from your house....and we act like AFB and that host of pests only live in our hives.....:shhhh:


As we used to say in the Air Force....Keep 'em flying!


----------

