APIS Volume 13, Number 10, October 1995
In this issue
- A Stable Pollination Service-A la Franciase
A STABLE POLLINATION SERVICE-A la Francaise
In 1976, S.E. McGregor wrote about what he called a "stable pollination service." In the "Pollinator's Bible," Agriculture Handbook 496, USDA ARS, Insect Pollination of Cultivated Crop Plants, (see July 1995 APIS) he said: "A pollination service ...must be equally interested in the welfare of the grower and the beekeeper." And, in order to be stable, according to McGregor, a pollination service should be relatively large in scope and regional in focus. He also suggested that it be based on pollination consultants that would "give equal expression in determining the services the grower needs and the fees that the beekeeper receives." Even before the advent of the personal computer, McGregor also suggested a large-scale pollination program would lend itself to computerization. For example, he concluded: "...various grower and beekeeper locations could be fed into the computer, along with dates bees might be needed and when they are available. Then the computer could, without bias, determine the nearest or most logical beekeeper available for pollination of a specific crop."
To my knowledge, we have yet to see in this country any sustained stable pollination service of the kind described by McGregor. In France, however, the idea appears to have taken hold. Dr. Bernard Vaissiere, a Texas A & M Graduate, now a pollination researcher at the Laboratoire de Pollinisation Entomophile, INRA Unite de Zoologie, 84914 Avignon Cedex 9, France, FAX (33) 90.31.62.70, Tel. (33) 90.31.61.69 (email: bernard.vaissiere@avignon.inra.fr), wrote the following in his contribution to the notes of a Workshop on Bees for Pollination, Brussels, 2-3 March, 1992: "...there was often little cooperation among the beekeepers renting colonies for pollination to define a pollination service. Indeed, the production of honey or other bee products remained the prime activity while commercial pollination was usually regarded as a side business."
"...it is symptomatic," Dr. Vaissiere continued, "that the beekeeper association which claims to represent most of the commercial beekeepers calls itself the Syndicat des Producteurs de Miel Francais (French Honey Producers Association). Clearly it is a honey producing association; there is no mention of pollination. ...colonies rented to growers varied considerably among beekeepers and from season to season, depending upon the expected nectar flow and the price of honey. Colonies were usually managed with little regard to the crop to pollinate and there was little, if any, monitoring of the foraging activity at hive entrance or in the target crop once the colonies were delivered." These conditions mirror those found in much of the United States today (see March 1995 APIS).
Several things occurred in France, however, that have stimulated beekeepers to take a second look at commercial pollination. In the process, they developed, what Dr. Vaissiere says is "a fairly original solution." It looks a lot like that envisioned by McGregor almost two decades ago.
The first pivotal event, according to Dr. Vaissiere, was year- around availability of bumblebee colonies in southern France. In 1989, growers were given an alternative to the haphazard commercial honey bee pollination efforts of the past. Bumblebee companies used a combination of sleek marketing brochures, monitoring and replacement of defective colonies and followup observations of foraging activity in field to tap the lucrative greenhouse tomato pollination market. A monthly fee structure (instead of per colony) was instituted along with a pollination per unit area of crop. In spite of relatively high prices, growers jumped at the opportunity to take advantage of these services. Previously, the only alternative was hand pollination. Bumblebees (B. terrestris) now pollinate all commercial greenhouse tomatoes in southern France.
In the latter part of 1990, honey prices declined in France. At the same time, the veterinary service in the departments (provinces) of Tarn and Garonne attempted to monitor colony movement and coordinate fluvalinate treatments for Varroa. The timing seemed propitious to consider commercial pollination as a more organized enterprise. Some ten beekeepers who knew each other and had some pollination experience joined forces. After several meetings over a period of months, the Midi-Pyrenees GRAPP (Groupement des Apiculteurs Pollinisateurs Professionels) was formed.
The GRAPP association developed a set of bylaws to which each member agreed in writing. Among key provisions was a guarantee by the larger group that the maximum time span for delivery/removal of colonies after notification be 48 hours, even if an individual contracting beekeeper was unable to comply. Additional guarantees were also provided, including the sanitary condition and size of colonies.
Other factors were key to the GRAPP. All members shared a strong interest in pollination and used most of their colonies in this activity. Members considered branching out into bumblebee culture, a logical next step (See July 1995 APIS), but this did not materialize. The GRAPP was also composed of "professionals"; only full-time beekeepers could join. The group insisted on a professional image and believed that including part-time beekeepers would not be profitable. In practical terms, beekeepers seeking entry had to have at least 300 colonies, be sponsored by two current members and be admitted by the majority of a five-person governing board. The board's decision was final with little chance for appeal.
The Midi-Pyrenees GRAPP used marketing strategies not available to individual beekeepers. These included a brochure mailed to all growers in the region and a computer bulletin board providing information on an array of pollination questions. The GRAPP also provided growers with a free evaluation of their pollination requirements in relation to their current agricultural practices. Members were in contact with most grower organizations and gave interviews to journalists and appeared on television.
Each GRAPP member joined with an established customer base, which remained with the beekeeper. New customers, however, were allocated by the secretary based on geographic location; the nearest member got first choice. All members used standard contract and billing forms. Based on bills submitted, a voluntary assessment was requested to support GRAPP activities, which included a part-time secretary and the printing of informational materials for distribution to growers.
The fee structure was decided by majority vote by the general assembly (all GRAPP members) which met 4 to 5 times per year. There was a base fee for standard service; on top of this, extra charges were assessed. These included feeding colonies upon arrival, inserting pollen traps and/or implementing "flash pollination" (scheduling bees to arrive with 24 hours notice instead of 48). Of more than passing interest, the fee structure was designed to provoke growers into asking questions about the precise meaning of each possible option and advantage of its use. Although many members believed the rates were not high enough, there was optimism they could be raised once growers were familiar with the quality of service provided.
A final step implemented by the Midi-Pyrenees GRAPP in 1991, according to Dr. Vaissiere was registering its name, bylaws and logo with the INPI (Institut National de la Propriete Industrielle). This meant that other organizations using the name or logo, must endorse the bylaws. These specify, among other things, that only one GRAPP exist per administrative region (22 of these exist in France). Members must agree to the definition of a pollination service adapted to each crop, including: (1) determining minimum quality standards; (2) monitoring foraging and resultant pollination; and (3) using a base fee per hive. GRAPPs are free to support any research they desire, but must share the results with all others, and apart from those mentioned above, any GRAPP can develop its own set of internal rules and/or organization. Finally, every association must agree to take part in a national body of GRAPPs to make more uniform, the language, rates and service specified in the pollination contracts.
More recent information from Dr. Vaissiere indicates the GRAPP Midi-Pyrenees disbanded two years ago. There is indication, however, that it is likely to be restarted. Two others, on the other hand (GRAPP Rhone-Alpes and GRAPP Mediterranee) are active and growing. The latter had a gross income of $300,000 last year. The formation of the national organization did occur in 1994, but has yet to be fully functional.
Beyond the many advantages noted above concerning GRAPPs, there exists, according to Dr. Vaissiere, a unique opportunity for these associations to define and carry out needed pollination research. As an example, consider the present differences between bumblebee and honey bee providers in France. The former charge by unit area for greenhouse tomatoes, but by colony for crops grown in the open. Honey bee providers only use the latter method. Perhaps, under the dictates of a GRAPP, honey bee keepers will also shift to charging by unit area, not only inside greenhouses, but outside in the field. This focuses on what a pollination service is all about, getting crops efficiently pollinated, not a stocking rate (number of hives/unit area), which is really only a means to pollinate.
Dr. Vaissiere emphasizes that shifting from stocking rate to unit area is an important step because the relationship between forager density (bees/100 flowers) and pollination intensity (the number of conspecific pollen grains per floral stigma) is fairly close. The relationship between forager density and stocking rate, however, can fluctuate considerably based on other floral resources nearby the target crop and other environmental conditions.
As long as the price of pollination is on a per/colony basis, Dr. Vaissiere says, some solution is needed to guard against the vagaries of environmental factors. The usual method, "saturating" the target areas with imported pollinators, is costly to both farmers and beekeepers. In addition, growers may not understand the subtleties involved when a neighbor gets a good crop with a stocking rate of one colony/acre while he is being charged for 5 colonies/acre for the "same" service. Finally, the saturation strategy ignores the effect of the native pollinator potential in an area and may backfire in some situations (apples, peaches) where too much fruit set is detrimental.
In conclusion, Dr. Vaissiere says, it is essential that the pollination service be clearly defined and understood by both parties so it can be objectively evaluated and appropriately rewarded. Past experience show this to be unlikely with individual beekeepers. Increased exposure, visibility and capability of the GRAPP structure can provide orchard growers, seed producers and others with a better working knowledge of the pollination process. This allows farmers to better plan for adequate pollination and provides a guarantee of prompt delivery and proper management of their insect pollinator potential.
With the advent of Varroa in the United States, commercial pollination has taken on a new meaning (see November 1993 APIS). The trials and tribulations of the individual beekeeper as a commercial pollinator are also well documented (See March 1995 APIS). Thus, it behooves beekeepers considering changing the focus of their enterprises toward pollination to consider the successes and failures of the French GRAPP experiment in establishing the world's first country-wide stable pollination service. For more information, interested persons can contact the president of the GRAPP Mediterranee, Jean Vilain, Les Bouletines F- 13980 Alleins, Tel. 90.57.35.14; FAX 90.59.35.58.
Sincerely,
Malcolm T. Sanford
Bldg 970, Box 110620
University of Florida
Gainesville, FL 32611-0620
Phone (904) 392-1801, Ext. 143 FAX: 904-392-0190
BITNET Address: MTS@IFASGNV
INTERNET Address:MTS@GNV.IFAS.UFL.EDU
APIS on the World Wide Web--
http://gnv.ifas.ufl.edu/~entweb/apis/apis.htm
Copyright (c) M.T. Sanford 1995 "All Rights Reserved"
