APIS Volume 5, Number 6, June, 1987
In this issue
- Sulfa Testing in Honey
- National Honey Board Activity
- New Zealand Beekeeping
- Value of Bee Pollination and Productivity
MORE ON SULFATHIAZOLE TESTING
The February writeup on sulfa residue in honey has gotten some attention. Most notably was contact from Joe Hilliard, Canadian Food Products Development Centre, Manitoba Research Council, 810 Phillips St. (P.O. Box 1240), Portage la Prairie, Manitoba Canada R1N 3J9. Mr. Hilliard indicated his laboratory used liquid chromatography to find sulfa residues in accordance with "Reverse Phase Liquid Chromatographic Determination of Sulfathiazole Residues in Honey," by C.P. Barry and G.M. MacEachern,Journal of the Association of Analytical Chemists, Volume 66, No. 1, 1983, pp. 4-7.
Beyond this, Mr. Hilliard offered limited consulting on the question and said his facility was available to do limited testing. There would be a nominal charge, and he can't do large numbers of samples. If anybody in interested in working with Mr. Hilliard on the issue, please write him directly at the address above.
NATIONAL HONEY BOARD ACTIVITY
A press release dated May 14 from the National Honey Board indicates that the Board has awarded funds for three market research studies. These include a consumer usage and attitudes study which will sample some 5,000 consumers across the country and a one-month retail distribution study to be performed by a Chicago based firm, Associated Marketing, Inc. The third study by the Hale Group, Danvers, Massachusetts will attempt to discover volume and penetration of honey into the food service industry.
According to the release, these studies were recommended by other commodity boards. The idea is to provide enough information which will enable the Board to focus its promotional efforts, thereby getting maximum use out of its funds.
NEW ZEALAND BEEKEEPING IN PERSPECTIVE
Spaceship earth becomes smaller each year; futurists are calling for a world economy fueled by the information age. In order to keep this perspective, it is more than instructive to see what problems/solutions beekeepers in other parts of the world might have. One area with a developed beekeeping industry is New Zealand. I am in receipt of two newsletters (magazine format) from Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries (MAP) officers which provide interesting reading.
Over 10,000 tons of honey were produced in New Zealand last year. Hive numbers have reached a new high of 309,428. The yield per colony was 33 kilograms (about 72 lbs).
New Zealand has no European foulbrood (EFB) and does not want it. As a consequence, it severely restricts entry of used beekeeping equipment, bees and honey into the country. This is convenient for the beekeeping industry. It is able to export honey, but due to these regulations, has little competition from imports. On the other hand, half moon disease exists which appears to be very similar in symptomology to EFB, so much so that a visitor from Australia was willing to bet the diseases were the same. He apparently lost.
Toxic honey and honeydew in New Zealand have caused problems. Certain areas with the plant called "tu tu" at times provide poisonous nectar to humans, although the bees are not affected. In addition, the honey dew secreted by certain vine hoppers feeding on the plant is also toxic. Fortunately, the problem area is known, as is the time of year so that with some planning beekeepers can avoid harvesting a poisonous crop. This is similar to the "ti ti" plant in Florida, the nectar of which is not poisonous to humans, but will affect bee colonies by killing and turning the brood purple.
Pollination is a big industry in New Zealand. A major beneficiary is the kiwifruit industry which offers Ph.D. scholarships in a variety of fields, including pollination by honey bees. A major focus of a public affairs announcement to tourists about the dangers of bringing in honey and bee equipment is the potential damage to the large, lucrative kiwifruit export market.
The closing of the eastern Canadian border to queens and package bees from the U.S. because of tracheal mites may be a boon to New Zealand beekeeping. Only time will tell if it will be profitable to ship bees so great a distance, rather than buying them from sources closer to Canada.
VALUE OF BEE POLLINATION AND ITS PRODUCTIVITY
A recent article represents a milestone in the continual search for scientific proof of the value of a honey bee as pollinator. It's entitled, "Bee Pollination and Productivity Growth: The Case of Alfalfa," and was written by A.L. Olmstead and Donald B. Wooten for the American Journal of Agricultural Economics, February 1987, pp. 56-63.
The authors' thesis is that the spread of commercial pollination has received little attention in the literature which analyzes the growth of U.S. agricultural productivity since World War II. This omission is serious, according to the authors, because by 1980 over fifty commodities, valued over $5 billion, had become largely dependent on the honey bee to produce a commercial crop. The focus of the article is "...to elevate bees from an abstraction in an arcane literature on externalities to their rightful place as an essential cog in the growth of U.S. agricultural productivity."
Among many important crops like apples, melons, almonds, plums, prunes, pears, cherries, berries, pumpkins, squash, the authors say, yield would drop by over one half if honey bees were used only at the density associated with efficient honey production. In addition, honey bees have become essential to the production of commercial seeds for most vegetables, grasses and legumes, the value of which exceeds $10 billion, including broccoli, cabbage, carrots, cauliflower, cucumbers, lettuce, onions, clovers, alfalfa and vetches. These specialty crops, the authors conclude, are even more dependent on honey bees than are fruits and nuts.
As the title suggests, the growth of the alfalfa industry in the western U.S. is used as a test case by the authors to prove their point. The authors claim that intensive bee pollination was the primary cause for a regional specialization in alfalfa beginning in 1949 due principally to phenomenally large gains in yield during the period. The value of the alfalfa industry is 50 percent greater than cotton, and only corn, wheat and soybeans are worth more.
A short history of the alfalfa situation reveals some of the same kinds of issues that beekeepers are face today, and might provide ideas in developing a pollination service. The fair price for a pollination colony was guesswork at best. Because beekeeping was competitive with one of the lowest financial costs of entry for any type of agricultural enterprise, and hives could be moved fairly easily, growers only had to cover a beekeeper's opportunity costs. Many plans were conceived to compensate beekeepers ranging from so many dollars per beehive to a set moving fee plus a percentage of the crop in excess of some base figure. An innovative Valley Pollination Service (VPS) was also organized in Kern County, California specializing in renting hives to alfalfa seed growers. It not only facilitated contracting in a developing market, but also guaranteed quality of colonies and helped beekeepers insure against losses by spreading the risk of farmer default.
The authors' state in their summary that the alfalfa case study illustrates a number of propositions that are a common theme in U.S. agricultural development. Specifically, these are the importance of a network of decentralized scientific research stations in conjunction with the land grant college system which helped develop the methodology and trained those who became the innovators in the field. Finally, they conclude that: "Many other crops (besides alfalfa) also experienced significant growth of output with the introduction of commercially supplied bees, but as yet we know relatively little about the timing and extent of these changes."
Sincerely,
Malcolm T. Sanford
Bldg 970, Box 110620
University of Florida
Gainesville, FL 32611-0620
Phone (352) 392-1801, Ext. 143 FAX: (352)-392-0190
http://www.ifas.ufl.edu/~mts/apishtm/apis.htm
INTERNET Address: MTS@GNV.IFAS.UFL.EDU
©1987 M.T. Sanford "All Rights Reserved
