Need Bees Removed?
International
Beekeeping Forums
July 29, 2014, 04:21:15 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: 24/7 Ventrilo Voice chat -click for instructions and free software here
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar bee removal Login Register Chat  

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: New Ramblings for 2011  (Read 6545 times)
deknow
Field Bee
***
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 731


Location: Massachusetts


WWW
« Reply #80 on: January 07, 2011, 02:10:02 PM »

Who you kidding?  The public (the consumer) has no idea what honey is and what is in it because it hasn't been defined.
our customers do know the difference, as do our readers and conference attendees.
Quote
...I got blasted because I said I wouldn't feed anything but honey
i didn't blast you for that...we only feed honey, and although i think it's necessary to feed in some cases, and that good honey from a known source is the best feed, i also think that in many cases feeding sugar _is_ the best option.
Quote
...and now you are surprised to find various sugars in honey? huh You got a hard sell on this forum trying to eliminating sugar from honey.  Good luck with that one.
surprised?  i was surprised to see 30% beet sugar.  ...but what you say above is exactly my point wrt to a honey standard.  _any_ standard that has no tollerance for feeds in the honey has to consider that tests become more and more sensitive, the will detect them eventually.  any standard that allows "pure honey" to have .5%, 1%, 5% "other sugars" is simply not "pure honey"...might as well define pi as "3" for simplicity.
but of course, i brought all this up not to "sell" members of the forum, but to point out how any honey standard (the thing that you want yet can't define) is both absurd ("lets define honey as something other than honey") and/or problematic.

deknow
Logged
AllenF
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 8113

Location: Hiram, Georgia


« Reply #81 on: January 07, 2011, 02:11:28 PM »

Back in the summer, one of the guys that work for me was bragging about the sugar free honey he bought from Kroger.   He thought he had done good in buying it.   It was imitation honey.  He just did not know.
Logged
BjornBee
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 3773


Location: Lewisberry, PA


« Reply #82 on: January 07, 2011, 02:17:06 PM »

Ok, I thought after glancing over the posts, that this was about foreign honey. I understand now it is about testing local beekeepers honey, and calling it snakeoil while denigrating them, for what their bees sometimes go out and collect.

For "pure" honey, you would need to.....

....never feed.
....not allow your bees to collect from anything other than flowers.

Ok, I'll stop at two. No need to go further since no beekeeper could ever guarantee their bees were not working the recycling bin with the neighbors soda cans, the farmers feed bin, the hummingbird feeder down the street, or anything else.

And if this is the reasoning and testing that will ultimately be used to condemn local beekeepers who happen to put honey on the shelves that happen to be "tainted" with certain sugars....God help us all.

Here is a beekeeper, that would never of even know of what his bees were collecting, if it were not for the red dye. His bees do what every other beekeeper's bees do. they collect from any source they want. Of course I would never outright call this beekeeper, or any beekeeper, someone peddling "snakeoil". What a nasty thing to say about beekeepers, when you have no clue probably how any sugars got into their honey.

http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2010/11/there_are_red_bees_in_red_hook.html

I have no doubts that this "pure" honey standard will come back and bite many in the butt in ways we can not even imagine.

This may be the unforeseen consequences of a honey law, originally put in place by folks to protect the money flow of honey assessments, but I have no doubts this will be used to harm good natured beekeepers in the future.

Logged

www.bjornapiaries.com
www.pennapic.org
Please Support "National Honey Bee Day"
Northern States Queen Breeders Assoc.  www.nsqba.com
deknow
Field Bee
***
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 731


Location: Massachusetts


WWW
« Reply #83 on: January 07, 2011, 02:38:59 PM »

And if this is the reasoning and testing that will ultimately be used to condemn local beekeepers who happen to put honey on the shelves that happen to be "tainted" with certain sugars....God help us all.
i think we can agree that if the honey is 30% beet sugar, there is a real problem?  that regardless of "intentions", this should not be on the shelf as pure honey?

Quote
Of course I would never outright call this beekeeper, or any beekeeper, someone peddling "snakeoil". What a nasty thing to say about beekeepers, when you have no clue probably how any sugars got into their honey.
what if the beekeeper is large enough scale that they are having their honey tested, and selling the rejects to the unwitting local beekeepers?  we are actually seeing this, this is not theory.

"snakeoil" was acebird's term, not mine.

no, in the case of the marachino cherries, no one was trying to pull anything off (except perhaps keep bees where there isn't adequate forage)....but should that end up in a jar called "pure honey"?  if it does and someone is allergic to cherry syrup or corn sugar, what happens?  it isn't honey, and the person selling it is ultimately responsible.

deknow

Logged
BjornBee
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 3773


Location: Lewisberry, PA


« Reply #84 on: January 07, 2011, 02:56:39 PM »

And if this is the reasoning and testing that will ultimately be used to condemn local beekeepers who happen to put honey on the shelves that happen to be "tainted" with certain sugars....God help us all.
i think we can agree that if the honey is 30% beet sugar, there is a real problem?  that regardless of "intentions", this should not be on the shelf as pure honey?

Quote
Of course I would never outright call this beekeeper, or any beekeeper, someone peddling "snakeoil". What a nasty thing to say about beekeepers, when you have no clue probably how any sugars got into their honey.
what if the beekeeper is large enough scale that they are having their honey tested, and selling the rejects to the unwitting local beekeepers?  we are actually seeing this, this is not theory.

"snakeoil" was acebird's term, not mine.

no, in the case of the marachino cherries, no one was trying to pull anything off (except perhaps keep bees where there isn't adequate forage)....but should that end up in a jar called "pure honey"?  if it does and someone is allergic to cherry syrup or corn sugar, what happens?  it isn't honey, and the person selling it is ultimately responsible.

deknow



Should the beekeeper put the tainted honey in a jar? Not since it's obvious that the bees collected the cherry juice.

But I guess my point is that unless every beekeeper tests their honey, there is no way to even know what is in it.

And now that everyone jumped on this bandwagon, pointing fingers, making accusations,...is it a far stretch to think that one day we may all have too have testing to prove honey is not tainted?

Honey for all beekeepers, has always been what the bees collect. Discounting obvious sugar feeding (which lets be honest, is not a huge problem in this country) and obvious cases like the cherry company, no beekeeper could even guarantee that honey is pure.

Asking about some customer being allergic and the liability to the beekeeper from something like HFCS, has NEVER been  problem up to now. But guess what....set a standard, call attention, and make statements like some do....and now you have a situation that liability as an issue.

Has there ever been a case of someone being sued? I am not aware of it.

So we will have a honey standard in place, that each and ever beekeeper has one choice to protect themselves....have your honey tested every year. And this is exactly what I said would eventually happen when this all first started. And to do so, makes every beekeeper open to the possibilities only limited by what their bees go out and collect.

I find all this about the same as beekeepers seeking protection, getting a gun, shooting themselves in the foot, suggesting it's for their best interest and the best interest of the public (which never complained before), and walking down the street bleeding all over the place, thinking they were better than they were before. The grass is always greener before you get to the other side of the fence. But it rarely ends up being true.
Logged

www.bjornapiaries.com
www.pennapic.org
Please Support "National Honey Bee Day"
Northern States Queen Breeders Assoc.  www.nsqba.com
rdy-b
Super Bee
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2210


Location: clayton ca


« Reply #85 on: January 07, 2011, 03:29:55 PM »

  Gota do better than this--back to square one--MOISTURE CONTENT not to exceed 23%
every one keeps reverting to this as it should be the foundation for others to follow
I say in spirit yes-But this is not the best we can do--RDY-B
http://www.americanhoneyproducers.org/standards/FL%20Standard%20of%20Identity.pdf
Logged
D Coates
Queen Bee
****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1060


Location: Lee's Summit, MO


« Reply #86 on: January 07, 2011, 03:59:58 PM »

But I guess my point is that unless every beekeeper tests their honey, there is no way to even know what is in it.  ...one day we may all have too have testing to prove honey is not tainted?

Honey for all beekeepers, has always been what the bees collect. Discounting obvious sugar feeding (which lets be honest, is not a huge problem in this country) and obvious cases like the cherry company, no beekeeper could even guarantee that honey is pure.  So we will have a honey standard in place, that each and ever beekeeper has one choice to protect themselves....have your honey tested every year. And this is exactly what I said would eventually happen when this all first started. And to do so, makes every beekeeper open to the possibilities only limited by what their bees go out and collect.

I find all this about the same as beekeepers seeking protection, getting a gun, shooting themselves in the foot, suggesting it's for their best interest and the best interest of the public (which never complained before), and walking down the street bleeding all over the place, thinking they were better than they were before. The grass is always greener before you get to the other side of the fence. But it rarely ends up being true.

Well crud, that's an uncomfortable but good point.  Imagine if you harvest your honey and find (through testing that does make me uncomfortable) that your girls got some sugar in there from somewhere.  What are you to do then?  Your complete harvest or year could be made useless, by someone intentionally or unintentionally leaving out a few gallons of something the bees collect.  You could resubmit something else get the approval then sell what failed earlier, or sell it to someone else who has gotten approval for them to sell it off.  Or you could go out of business...

Ooofff  tongue  I don't like this game.  I just want to have my bees and sell my honey.
Logged

Ninja, is not in the dictionary.  Well played Ninja's, well played...
Acebird
Field Bee
***
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 955


Location: Utica, NY

Just getting started


« Reply #87 on: January 07, 2011, 04:27:50 PM »

Quote
i was surprised to see 30% beet sugar

Why?  Monsanto has GMO'd corn and now they are GMOing beets.  The two sugars are interchangeable in the food industry.  So why does it shock you?

Yes, my wife just showed me the cherry juice article.  At least they finally legalized bee keeping in the city even though it has been going on for years.

The honey industry is no different than the maple syrup industry.  It has all been done already.  There is no need to drawn a new road map.  Anybody that wants to tap a tree and sell a few gallons can do so.  Once you get to a certain size then you need to be regulated.  What size that is, I don't know but it all starts with defining what you want to call maple syrup and what you want to call imitation. It would be the same for honey.  Nothing is pure, not one single food item is ever pure and non of the regulations expect it.
Logged

Never thought I would do it!
skatesailor
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 111

Location: Millbrook,NY


« Reply #88 on: January 07, 2011, 04:35:51 PM »

Considering all the atttention contaminated Chinese honey is getting don't be surprised if some well-intentioned :?congressman with little knowledge of the bee industry proposes legislation that affects us all. As always the most fearful words one can hear are "I'm from the government and I'm here to help you." Does anyone know if honey is being addressed in the latest Food Safety Modernization Act.
Logged
deknow
Field Bee
***
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 731


Location: Massachusetts


WWW
« Reply #89 on: January 07, 2011, 04:44:07 PM »

Quote
Nothing is pure, not one single food item is ever pure and non of the regulations expect it.
did you read the florida honey standard i posted earlier?
Quote
"Honey" means the natural food product resulting from the harvest of nectar by honeybees and the
natural activities of the honeybees in processing nectar.
...that leaves no room for feeds, for any sugar other than nectar, no matter the source.

deknow
Logged
Scadsobees
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 3198


Location: Jenison, MI

Best use of smileys in a post award.


« Reply #90 on: January 07, 2011, 04:51:02 PM »

Quote
i was surprised to see 30% beet sugar

Why?  Monsanto has GMO'd corn and now they are GMOing beets.  The two sugars are interchangeable in the food industry.  So why does it shock you?


<sigh> tumbleweed
Logged

Rick
hardwood
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 3482


Location: Osteen, Fl (just south of Daytona)

Alysian Apiaries youtube.com/MrBeedude


« Reply #91 on: January 07, 2011, 05:01:32 PM »

I would think that regs for maple syrup could be more straight forward than for honey. After all...maple trees don't fly around getting in to who knows what.

Scott
Logged

"In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag...We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language...And we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people."

Theodore Roosevelt 1907
fat/beeman
House Bee
**
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 73


Location: Lula, Georgia


WWW
« Reply #92 on: January 07, 2011, 05:34:14 PM »

I guess I should just shut up and just read might learn been told I ramble too. that's what old men do I guess. I don't want to change anyone's mind on any thing if it works for you go for it.
Don

I'll not post for couple weeks to let you rest=bye
Logged
D Coates
Queen Bee
****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1060


Location: Lee's Summit, MO


« Reply #93 on: January 07, 2011, 05:55:55 PM »

GMO'd anything has nothing to do with this discussion.
Logged

Ninja, is not in the dictionary.  Well played Ninja's, well played...
BjornBee
Galactic Bee
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 3773


Location: Lewisberry, PA


« Reply #94 on: January 07, 2011, 06:14:17 PM »

I guess I should just shut up and just read might learn been told I ramble too. that's what old men do I guess. I don't want to change anyone's mind on any thing if it works for you go for it.
Don

I'll not post for couple weeks to let you rest=bye

Yo, Yo,....and YO!

Don't start some trend. You start that "I'll give you guys a break" crap, and then there will be more pressure on others to do the same. Like ME! And I bet some are praying for that right now.  grin

Long days, a few extra beers, dim light, too many kids running around, lack of sleep.....I would like to think everyone throws stuff out that makes no sense. It's just some are better than others.  Wink
Logged

www.bjornapiaries.com
www.pennapic.org
Please Support "National Honey Bee Day"
Northern States Queen Breeders Assoc.  www.nsqba.com
T Beek
Super Bee
*****
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 2776


Location: USA, N/W Wisconsin


« Reply #95 on: January 07, 2011, 06:38:35 PM »

I would think that regs for maple syrup could be more straight forward than for honey. After all...maple trees don't fly around getting in to who knows what.

Scott

Back when we had slave labor (our kids were still in the home Smiley) along with another like minded family we made syrup every year and it was great fun.  We always had plenty for ourselves and made a few bucks each spring while waiting for the roads to dry up, always selling out locally.  Well one year we went hog-wild and put out over 400 taps (bless those little chillins) and made syrup like it was nobodys business, but we saturated the local market quick and none of the stores around here would take it, "fresh, raw with no label" as it was, so we hauled it about 100 miles away to.XXX..Company where they just let us dump it in a big vat along with all the other syrup being made or bought up that day.  Definitely an eye opener, nearly 25 years ago, we never put that many taps out again after that and since the kids have all left its more like 25-50.  Just thought I'd share that with you all.  Time for an Ale.

thomas
Logged

"Trust those who seek the truth, doubt those who say they've found it."
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Beemaster's Beekeeping Ring
Previous | Home | Join | Random | Next
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines | Sitemap Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 3.276 seconds with 22 queries.

Google visited last this page June 27, 2014, 09:03:54 AM