APIS Volume 14, Number 7 July 1996
In this issue
- The Apis-L List--Apis Goes Interactive
- More on Honey Bee Domestication
- National Honey Board Referendum
- More on Royal Jelly as a Health Hazard
THE APIS-L LIST--APIS GOES INTERACTIVE
Electronic delivery of this newsletter has changed not only how it is distributed, but the very nature of the publication itself (see December 1995 APIS). Originally it was a paper document carrying on the tradition of information delivery begun back in the 1950s. I began to send out the newsletter as electronic copy in 1984 on BITNET (Because It's Time Network) which has now been retired in favor of the Internet. It was a short-year-and-a-half ago (see January 1994 APIS) that I noticed it was being collected at several Gopher sites around the country. All back issues are now mounted on our site at the College of Agriculture (IFAS): (gopher://gnv.ifas.ufl.edu/11gopher_root3%3a%5bdatabase%5d). One added advantage of this (for IFAS ONLINE users only at the moment) is that it is keyword searchable.
In October 1994, I reported that this publication had its own World Wide Web site: (http://www.gnv.ifas.ufl/~entweb/apis/apis.htm). This makes it possible to follow certain topics by linking to past issues. In spite of these archives, I continue to get requests from around the world to receive the newsletter electronically as it is published.
In accordance with its mission (see June 1996 APIS), this newsletter is still available in a paper version to residents of Florida only and can be requested in writing or by telephone, either through county agents or this office. The paper edition is sent to about 800 subscribers, down from its high of 1,800 in 1972. I have also maintained a list of those asking for the electronic copy and have routinely delivered each issue to the BEE- L discussion list (BEE-L@CNSIBM.ALBANY.EDU), which has more than 450 subscribers and several other lists.
To make it easier to comply with requests for the electronic version and to take the APIS traffic off other lists, I have resorted to an automatic list manager at the Northeast Regional Data Center (NERDC) on this campus. Anyone around the globe can now automatically subscribe to this newsletter electronically via the Internet. During the two weeks after my preliminary announcement, some 155 persons had already added themselves to the list. It's easy to do. Here's what the screen looked like when I subscribed:
To : listserv@nervm.nerdc.ufl.edu
listserv@nervm.nerdc.ufl.edu
Cc :
Attchmnt:
Subject :
-------Message Text--------
subscribe apis-L Tom SanfordYou should receive a verification message to send back. After that, the listserver will send a final confirmation that you are added to the list.
Using the Apis-L list has advantages. I no longer have to keep up with requests for subscriptions and deletions; interested persons can subscribe or unsubscribe at will; other lists do not have to carry full issues of the newsletter. The listserv program also gives subscribers other options, including reviewing the subscription list to find e-mail addresses. Anyone on the list can also send a message out to everyone else, providing an opportunity for subscribers themselves to add to and comment on the newsletter's contents. Finally, I, or any other subscriber, can send occasional tidbits of information to the list which I might add to the paper edition. I did this recently, reporting informally on my recent trip to Uruguay and Brazil in conjunction with bee meetings.
There are some downsides to using a listserv. Although the technology has been around awhile, many people still don't use it correctly. Those new to the automatic discussion list concept inevitably make errors and violate list "netiquette" as they learn its use Because an unthinking machine is managing the list, self- interested subscribers can take over the list for their own purposes. This is particularly true for those who engage in "spamming," sending out commercial messages to huge numbers of people whether they want them or not. Electronic junk mail may also be generated by subscribers who purposely or naively monopolize the list to espouse their own points of view.
As a consequence, here are some initial guidelines for the Apis-L list that I'm asking subscribers to adhere to:
- Use the list only to comment about specific topics mentioned in the APIS newsletter. Please don't submit general beekeeping questions or queries. These should be sent to either the BEE-L or the USENET group (sci.agriculture.beekeeping), which are designed to handle these kinds of things.
- Use the "reply" button with care; this command will usually send your message and a copy of what you receive. I have received thank you notes for sending the newsletter, for example. However, a full copy of the APIS issue for which I am being thanked was attached. In order to see the one word "thanks," I have had to page through six screens. Besides the annoyance, some subscribers may have to pay for every word received from the list. They could wind up paying the APIS electronic freight a huge number of times!
Beyond automated delivery, implementing the Apis-L list could be a huge change for author and subscribers. In the past the paper edition, authored by myself, was a one-sided view of events. Now, however, the readership is able to become more involved; the newsletter can be more "interactive." As an example, I plan to submit the newsletter first to the list for feedback before issuing the final paper copy. Subscribers will, therefore, have a chance to correct any errors or add important points before the paper and World Wide Web editions are published. In essence, the electronic readership will now have more "ownership" of the document. These are privileges and responsibilities not to be taken lightly, however. I will be interested to see how the readership responds.
MORE ON DOMESTICATION
Beyond the communication I got asking whether honey bee domestication was relevant to my audience (see June 1996 APIS), I also received notes from several folks who were intrigued with the topic. Jennie Bester (Jbester@idpr1.agric.za) in Zambia quoted from a book, Domesticated Animals from Early Times by Juliet Clutton- Brock, published by British Museum (Natural History), London and William Heinemann Ltd., 10 Upper Grosvenor Street, London W1X9PA in 1981, concerning the criteria for domestication. She said these were proposed by Francis Galton about 1865 and are still used today by archeozoologists. Candidate organisms should:
- Be hardy, requiring minimum care.
- Have an inborn liking for humans; be a social animal whose behavioral patterns are based on a dominance hierarchy so that it will accept man as the leader, and will remain imprinted on him in adult life.
- Be comfort-loving and not be adapted for instant flight as are, for example, many members of the antelope, gazelle and deer families. These animals will not feed or breed readily if constrained in a pen or herded too close together.
- Be found useful.
- Breed freely, a necessary factor for successful domestication, as can be seen from the difficulty of maintaining breeding colonies of many species in zoos, even under the most favorable conditions.
- Be easy to tend.
The honey bee fits most of the above points. I wonder what most readers think about numbers two and three. In the end, however, the insect may not qualify, as Ms. Bester further quotes Galton: "A man irritates a dog by an ordinary laugh, he frightens him by an angry look, or he calms him by a kindly bearing; but he has less spontaneous hold over an ox or a sheep. He must study their ways and tutor his behavior before he can understand the feeling of those animals or make his own intelligible to them. He has no natural power at all over many other creatures. Who for instance, ever succeeded in frowning away a mosquito, or in pacifying an angry wasp by a smile." Perhaps, Ms. Bester concludes, the honey bee is merely an endangered species dependent on humans for its survival.
NATIONAL HONEY BOARD REFERENDUM
Next month is set for the third National Honey Board referendum. Formal notice was published in the Federal Register on July 2. Ballots will be mailed to known producers, producer- packers and honey importers in July; voting will take place between the first and 31st of August. Those eligible must have done business from January 1, 1994 through December 31, 1995. If you do not receive a ballot and are eligible, contact Richard Schultz, Research and Promotion Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Division, Agriculture Marketing Service, USDA, Room 2535-S, P.O. Box 96456, Washington, DC 20090-6456, tel 202/720-5976.
In two previous referendums, according to Mr. Troy Fore, Secretary-Treasurer of the American Beekeeping Federation, the National Honey Board has received widespread support. Initial approval of the Board in 1986 was voted by 87.5 percent of those voting, representing 87.3 percent of honey produced and imported by all voters. The followup vote in 1991 was even more supportive; 90.73 percent of voters approved continuation. They represented 89.01 percent of honey produced and imported by all those voting.
These favorable ratings are also found in other commodity programs. In his March/April 1996 newsletter, Mr. Fore relayed the results of a survey by The Agricultural Issues Forum made up of 15 different California commodity organizations. Eighty-one percent of farmers and public policy leaders found mandated programs to be "very important" or "important" for doing research, responding to legislative/regulatory issues and providing information to farmers and advertisers. The overriding conclusion was that commodity organizations serve a vital communications link between producers and consumers.
For voters who need more information, I recommend the Official National Honey Board Handbook. This document discusses the history of the organization and shows in graphic detail the rise in retail honey prices since the Board was formed. In 1986, 60 million pounds were sold in the United States. Ever since, however, there has been an annual increase in most years, reaching a high of 90 million pounds sold on the retail market in 1995.
The Handbook lists the following efforts that have contributed to much of this increased demand: full-color advertisements in many national magazines; new and improved uses for honey; affordable marketing materials; recipes, press releases and photographs; honey hotline information; regular newsletter; market research; and others. The results of many of these efforts have been reported in the pages of this newsletter (see February and March 1995 APIS).
A breakdown of the funding for the Board is also shown in the Handbook:
Advertising and Public Relations 51.5%
Product Research and Technology 21.2%
Office Expenses 9.2%
Export Marketing 8.7%
Industry Relations 4.5%
Board Expenses 2.8%
USDA Expenses 2.2%Finally, the publication concludes with a list of things it cannot do based on its charter. These include: lobbying Congress directly, suggesting how much producers should charge for honey, and setting quality standards for honey. For a copy of the Handbook, send a request to the Board, 390 Lashley St., Longmont, CO 80501-6045, ph 800/553-7162.
MORE ON ROYAL JELLY
I have received a letter from Mr. Ian Dutton concerning the article on royal jelly as a potential health hazard (see May 1996 APIS). Mr. Dutton of Dutton's Meadery, N.S.W. Australia, says he is an asthmatic from birth and has been associated with beekeeping all his 81 years. Royal jelly, according to Mr. Dutton, has an astringent action on the throat and should never be used for asthma. He reports that the young lady in question (a twelve-year-old girl) was a chronic asthmatic. During an attack, her ventilator did not work, so the mother administered royal jelly imported from China which contained alcohol. The fact that the mother had to drive 20 minutes to a local hospital and then waited another 15 minutes for admission contributed to the situation. Mr. Dutton urges those involved with asthmatics to review closely emergency procedures recommended by qualified physicians.
Malcolm T. Sanford
Bldg 970, Box 110620
University of Florida
Gainesville, FL 32611-0620
Phone (904) 392-1801, Ext. 143 FAX: 904-392-0190
http://www.ifas.ufl.edu/~entweb/apis/apis.htm
INTERNET Address: MTS@GNV.IFAS.UFL.EDU
©1996 M.T. Sanford "All Rights Reserved
