APIS Volume 18, Number 3, March 2000
In this issue
- Amending the Honey Marketing Order:
- Bees as Mathematicians:
- Keeping Bees on Public Lands: A Continuing Struggle
- Testing for Coumaphos: Adpen Laboratories
- Reducing Risk Management Through Cooperatives:
- Bee Meetings:
AMENDING THE HONEY MARKETING ORDER:
The USDA’s Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) has issued notification that changes to the Honey Research, Promotion, and Consumer Information Order (HRPCIO) have caused proposal of certain amendments, which were published in the Federal Register on February 28, 2000. These include board makeup, voting and nominating procedures. Assessments would also decrease for domestic honey producers from 1 cent to .75 cents per pound, while assessments on imports would increase from 1 cent to 1.5 cents per pound. A new assessment of .75 cents per pound would be charged to handlers of honey and honey products. Finally, it is proposed to establish a quality research regulatory program and to allocate 8 percent of yearly assessments for production research. The latter is less controversial than the former <http://www.ifas.ufl.edu/~mts/apishtm/apis99/apnov99.htm#2>.
According to AMS, certain proposed changes must first be approved by honey producers, producer-packers, handlers, and importers voting in a referendum. Other changes contained in this proposal are required by statute, and will be implemented in the honey order regardless of the outcome of the referendum. Comments on the changes will be accepted until April 28, 2000. They should be mailed in triplicate to the Research and Promotion Branch, Fruit and Vegetable Programs, AMS, USDA, Stop 0244, 1400 Independence Avenue S.W., Washington, DC 20250-0244, ph 888-720-9917, fax 202-205-2800 or e-mailed to malinda.farmer@usda.gov. Copies can be obtained from the above address and are also available on line <http://www.ams.usda.gov/fv/rpdocketlist.htm>.
The National Honey Board (NHB), funded by the HRPCIO, has recently appointed Nathan W. Holleman as its new chief executive officer <http://www.nhb.org/pressrm/holleman.html>. He succeeds Bob Smith, who was CEO for 10 years. Mr. Hollenman has experience as director of the California Walnut Commission and Walnut Marketing Board. The NHB has a long <http://bee.airoot.com/beeculture/digital/1999/column10.htm> and varied <http://www.ifas.ufl.edu/~mts/apishtm/threads/nhboard.htm> history.
BEES AS MATHEMATICIANS
The March-April 2000 issue of American Scientist has an article by Erica Klarreich titled: "Foams and Honeycombs." According to the abstract, among the famous questions in mathematics is the following: What is the way to divide all of space into cells of equal volume, while minimizing the surface area of the cell walls? Lord Kelvin once declared, "This problem is solved in foam," and his solution, an aesthetically pleasing 14-sided polyhedron, was accepted for more than a century. Now two physicists have beaten Kelvin at the space-filling game, building on the principles of the honeycomb and also new ideas for how you would fill a two-dimensional space, a problem dating back to a conjecture by Johannes Kepler <http://www.sigmaxi.org/amsci/articles/00articles/Klarreich.html>.
The article suggests that mathematician bees are perhaps responsible for the structure of their comb as described eloquently in literature from Arabian Nights to writings of Charles Darwin. In the latter, the renowned biologist says, "Beyond this stage of perfection in architecture natural selection [which now has replaced divine guidance!] could not lead; for the comb of the hive-bee, as far as we can see, is absolutely perfect in economizing labor and wax." Others, according to the article, have suggested that the hexagonal design arises not through intention or instinct, but because the cells of the honeycomb are formed when heated wax forms bubbles, and these should obey the same area-minimizing principles as soap bubbles. This would presumably apply when remelting wax. Wax coming from the bees’ glands is also secreted as liquid through the cuticle and solidifies on the wax mirrors.
Curiously, the article says, the three-dimensional honeycomb partition is not optimal. Each cell is a hexagonal prism capped off on one end by three rhombi, but substituting a truncated octahedron would produce a small saving. The full honeycomb consists of two layers of these cells, stacked together so that the caps of one layer fit into the gaps of another, like a jigsaw puzzle, and has characteristics more like a wet foam than a dry foam. And in fact when a dry foam with the optimal octahedron configuration has liquid added to it, the structure suddenly switches to the bees’ configuration. It seems, then, the insects got it right after all.
KEEPING BEES ON PUBLIC LANDS: A CONTINUING STRUGGLE
Keeping honey bees on public lands continues to be an issue that will be contentious and controversial well into the future as human impact on the environment increases in Florida and elsewere.<http://www.ifas.ufl.edu/~mts/apishtm/apis97/apjan97.htm#2>. For several years, the Florida State Beekeepers Association has lobbied in Tallahassee to make available state areas closed to apiculture with mixed success. Now comes word that Crocodile Lake National Wildlife Refuge in Key Largo, managed by the U.S. Department of the Interior, has deemed apiculture not compatible with refuge goals and management objectives.
In a letter to beekeeper Mark McCoy dated February 23, 2000, the refuge manager, Mr. Steven Klett, describes the background for commercial beekeeping on the refuge, which began in 1988 with 200 colonies. Beekeeping was tolerated as it was thought to be a compatible use by aiding mangrove pollination. Hives, however, were located in small clearings in tropical "hammocks," which are the home of five endangered and threatened species: Key Largo wood rat, Key Largo cotton mouse, Schaus’ swallowtail butterfly, eastern indigo snake and Stock Island tree snail. Continued placement of colonies in these areas, served by abandoned roads, according to Mr. Klett, may contribute to the spread of exotic species (imported fire ants) and/or invasive plants (melaleuca, Brazilian pepper) that adversely affect these populations. These activities may also contribute to exotic black rat introduction and illegal dumping. The income from beekeeping ($17,497 from 1994-99) does not benefit the refuge directly, but is placed in the general fund of the Federal Treasury.
The bottom line, according to Mr. Klett, is that if an activity is not contributory to wildlife, it has no business being in the refuge. This not only includes beekeeping, but also recreational activities like swimming and sunbathing. Mr. Klett says there is sufficient information indicating the potential harmful effects to wildlife resources from commercial beekeeping on the refuge. As a result most refuges have discontinued this activity. Finally, commercial beekeeping requires expenditure of staff time and money that could be more effectively spent on wildlife-related programs and activities on the refuge.
Although Mr. Klett’s position is clear, I believe that employing some creativity in communicating directly with him or managers in other refuges might lead to some possibilities for beekeepers. Any proposal should relate to the goals of the refuges, which are "extensively used for biological research for the benefit of wildlife and for improved understanding of our environment. Scientific programs of wildlife management, wetlands management, forestry, agriculture, and soil conservation are combined for the enhancement and management of wildlife populations. Refuges also provide opportunities for wildlife observation, hunting, fishing, nature photography, and other recreational activities, all of which attract more than 33 million visitors annually <http://www.fws.gov/directives/029fw3.html>." Mr. Klett continues to express an interest in hearing opinions on this issue and is asking for interested persons to send him comments and any specific research data to show how honey bee activity would benefit wildlife on the refuge. Send comments to him at Crocodile Lake National Wildlife Refuge, P.O. Box 370, Key Largo, FL 33037, ph 305/451-4223, e-mail: steve_klett@fws.gov.
TESTING FOR COUMAPHOS: ADPEN LABORATORIES
Recently, a large wax reprocessor asked me about rules in place to ensure that rendered beeswax foundation would not be contaminated by coumaphos used to control Varroa mites. To my knowledge, there is no set of regulations for Florida, and I suspect none are in place for other states as well. The old saying caveat emptor, "let the buyer beware," applies. Testing is the only way to determine what levels of the chemical might be found in wax or honey. The only facility in the U.S., to my knowledge, that can test for coumaphos in either product is Adpen Laboratories <http://www.adpen.com/>. Mr. Steve Perez has written me a letter dated March 1, 2000, which says that the Adpen test has been independently validated and will be used for pesticide enforcement. Right now the price for honey or wax analysis is $300 per sample. Liquid chromatography and mass spectroscopy are used to determine the presence of either coumaphos or its metabolite. Mr. Perez indicates that discounts might be available for bulk testing (five or six samples). For more information, contact him at 11757 Central Parkway, Jacksonville, FL 32224, ph 904-645-9169, fax 904-641-8423, e-mail sp@aden.com.
REDUCING RISK MANAGEMENT THROUGH COOPERATIVES:
Dr. Jim Sartwelle of Texas A & M University at the January 2000 meeting of the American Beekeeping Federation in Fort Worth, Texas said risk management was the basis of most farming, no matter the commodity. Most operations are highly leveraged and capital intensive he said, and producers should, therefore, focus on profitability rather than profits. Risk equals uncertainly and risk management is an attempt to find a preferred combination of activities to increase profitability or margin <http://www.ifas.ufl.edu/~mts/apishtm/apis89/apjan89.htm#2>. Margin is a measure of how close one is to being in or out of business and the dynamic is always present that the next most vulnerable person could fail.
Dr. Sartwelle discussed the concept and development of the Texas Risk Management Education Project funded by the Texas Legislature<http://trmep.tamu.edu/>. Risk management is based on knowing the costs of production <http://www.ifas.ufl.edu/~mts/apishtm/apis84/apsep84.htm#1>, according to Dr. Sartwelle. Without these, it is impossible to market successfully because resulting profitability can only be guesswork. The risk education program covers sources of risk such as price and yield variability, changes in input costs, and environmental regulations. It discusses a large number of specific strategies, including debt management, enterprise diversification, forward contracting, selling and hedging. This information is all available free on the World Wide Web <http://trmep.tamu.edu/guide.htm >, and it is also possible to receive the risk management guide via regular mail. Much of this is tailored specifically to livestock and grain operations, however, and may not apply directly to honey-producing operations. The cost is $150 for two 4-inch notebooks. To purchase the curriculum guide, please make the check payable to: TAEX Account 222114, and mail it to: Dean McCorkle, Texas Agricultural Extension Service, Department of Agricultural Economics, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas 77843-2124.
Several beekeeping operations have taken risk management to heart and repositioned themselves for survival in the new millennium as described in Forth Worth. Pat Heitkam has become a pollination broker in California. In essence, he handles others’ bees for almond pollination. Growers are better served under this system. They get a steady supply of good-quality bees and are able to hold someone accountable for their pollination. Beekeepers get more stable and predictable prices for their pollinating bees as well. Darrel Rufer, who used to only produce honey, now sells both nuclei and splits out of Minnesota. Pat Niemeyer delivers package bees. He has purchased a special truck (equipped with insulation and sprinklers) that ensures the bees make it to their destination in the best shape possible. Finally, Fred Rossman has shifted much of his queen and package-bee business into equipment manufacture.
One of the best possibilities for reducing one’s risk mentioned on the Texas Risk Management Education Project is forming cooperatives. That concept was discussed by Mr. James Matson, cooperative marketing specialist at the USDA’s Rural-Business Cooperative Service in Fort Worth. Cooperatives often fill expressed needs, Mr. Matson said, and they can improve bargaining power tremendously. Costs can be reduced and products and services not available to single entrepreneurs may be bargained for collectively. In comparison to corporations owned by stockholders, cooperatives are owned by their members. Some special benefits of cooperatives include single-tax treatment and limited anti-trust exemption. Cooperatives also provide marketing power, diverse ownership, access to value chains and markets (more direct contact with the consumer), ability to provide vertical product control and, of course, risk sharing.
Unfortunately, the idea of a cooperative is sometimes difficult to sell to farmers, Mr. Matson said. He said that getting producers to cooperate is often comparable to "herding cats." There are also some pitfalls, including boards of directors that may try to micromanage. Most successful co-ops have professional management, which is one way to establish objective control. On the other hand, the manager must also be able to relate to the member owners. Very few beekeeping cooperatives seem to have survived for long periods, Mr. Matson said. He suggested that case studies done on those that have longevity would be valuable exercises.
To my knowledge, the U.S. beekeeping cooperative that has survived longest is located near Sioux City, Iowa. With $200 and 3,000 pounds of honey, five beekeepers formed a cooperative marketing organization in 1921 named Sioux Honey Association. The association is a cooperative in every sense of the word. Members own and control the organization through a board of directors elected by members. The management of the association is responsible to the directors <http://www.suebee.com/sha.html>. Other examples exist in Canada, such as Bee Maid, Canada's largest marketer of consumer packaged honey with distributing centers around the world. Honey for Bee Maid is produced by beekeepers in the WesternPrairies and is processed and packaged at the HACCP-approved facilities in Spruce Grove, Alberta and Winnipeg, Manitoba <http://www.beemaid.com/beemaid/beemaid.html>.
The USDA publishes several documents on cooperatives, including a circular on how to begin their formation (Cooperative Information Report #7) and the characteristics (Cooperative Information Report #55). The Rural Business-Cooperative Web site <http://www.rurdev.usda.gov/rbs/coops/csdir.htm> also has some good information. A financial profile of the top 100 cooperatives for both 1996 and 1997 is found there. A publication on how to develop a business plan, the first step in forming a cooperative, can be found on the Small Business Administration’s site. <http://www.sba.gov/starting/indexbusplans.html>.
Marketing through Farmer-Owned Cooperatives is the lead article in the Winter 2000 edition of Small Farm Digest (Vol. 3, No. 2) <http://www.reeusda.gov/agsys/sfd/index.htm>. This publication from the U.S. Department of Agriculture Cooperative State, Research, Education, and Extension Service (CSREES) states that the 100-year-old cooperative business structure is as American as President Franklin Roosevelt, who championed co-ops to bring needed services to rural America. More than 4,000 agricultural co-ops operate in the U.S. today, with a net income of nearly $1.7 billion and net business volume of more than $104.7 billion. Types of co-ops that exist include marketing, bargaining, farm supplying and purchasing, servicing, pooling machinery and so-called new generation co-ops. The latter are enjoying a renewed interest. They integrate farm producers further up the agricultural marketing food processing chain, have closed or limited member policies, and require larger contributions of risk or equity than traditional limited-equity cooperative.
Specific examples of co-ops listed in the article are: Maryland’s Mt. Pride Cooperative with 80 members processing and shipping rabbit meat, The Federation of Southern Cooperatives/Land Assistance Fund marketing pecans and pecan candy, Central Kentucky Hog Marketing Association (10 families) , North American Bison Cooperative (480 members), Maine Potato Growers, Inc., and The Hiawatha Sustainable Woods Cooperative in Wisconsin.
CSREES has recently launched a new program to assist small farms. There are scheduled to be newsletters, fact sheets, bulletins and other information sources as part of this effort, including a toll-free number: 1-800-583-3071. For those with electronic mail access, there is a discussion group. To join, send a message to Majordomo@reeusda.gov. In the body, type subscribe smallfarm.
BEE MEETINGS:
The Second International Conference on Africanized Honey Bees and Bee Mites convenes at the Carl Hayden Bee Research Laboratory in Tucson, Ariz., April 10-12, 2000 <http://gears.tucson.ars.ag.gov/conference/CONF2000.htm>. This will be a remarkable event, with researchers all over the world participating. The first conference was held some 13 years ago, just prior to detection of the Varroa mite in Florida. For more information, contact Dr. Eric Erickson, The Carl Hayden Bee Research Center, Agriculture Research Service – USDA, 2000 E. Allen Road , Tucson, AZ 85719-1596.
The 2nd Caribbean Beekeeping Congress meets August 14-18, 2000, on the Caribbean island of Nevis. The official call for papers ends April 30, 2000. For more information, contact Elvin Bailey, Nevis Beekeepers Co-operative Society, Ltd., ph 869-469-5521, fax 469-1698, e-mail: psalhc@hotmail.com.
The Tampa Bay Beekeepers Association will be hosting a honey bee seminar on Saturday, May 6, 2000, at the Hillsborough County Cooperative Extension Office, 5339 South County Rd. 579, Seffner, FL 33584 <http://www.ifas.ufl.edu/~hillsboro/home_horticulture.htm#contactus>. Advance registration before May 1, 2000, is $15 and $5 for additional family members. There will be a $5 late charge for those registering after the first of May. To register, send a check payable to the Tampa Bay Beekeepers Association, 10002 Ida St., Riverview, FL 33569. For more information, phone 813-677-0577.
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
©2000 M.T. Sanford "All Rights Reserved"
