by
Tom Sanford
There was no officially advertised theme for this year's meeting, but several appeared to emerge during the convention. Marketing certainly stood out, especially with the concurrent committee meetings of the National Honey Board. Other topics mirrored this theme to some degree, including a focus on the antidumping suit dedicated to helping address large imports from China, the NAFTA and GATT agreements, and what has become an epidemic of domestic honey adulteration. Finally, the significance of meeting in the Texas capital, one of many taken over by the Republican sweep during the November 1994 elections was not lost on the attendees. This state of affairs also became the banquet theme when Senator Kika de la Garza, always a friend of the beekeeper, accepted a last-minute invitation to speak.
Changes in government Dr. Knutson said, will be driven by radical shifts in policy to bring spending under control by some 200 billion dollars the first year and 500 billion the second. This will be reflected in a reduced regulatory agenda and cuts in food stamps and farm subsidies. The major philosophic change will be from government intervention in markets to a more market-driven system. Dr. Knutson said the election could be considered a victory for private property and the winners will be taxpayers, property rights advocates and international business. The losers, he said, are environmentalists, welfare recipients, bureaucrats and some farmers. How hard individual growers are hit will very much depend on the kind of farming one does, he concluded. In all probably wheat producers will be worse off because they need subsidies (keeping wheat land in the government-controlled retirement program) more than corn and soybean growers who are well served by a more market oriented approach.
Considerations affecting agriculturists, Dr. Knutson said, will also be driven by other factors. One is whether or not the President can keep middle management appointees in the Agriculture Department from "bailing out." If the degree of infighting can be minimized and strong leadership is exerted at the top, things will be better for all concerned. The changes will even affect the International Trade Commission which is considered independent, but nevertheless is subject to political influence and has its decisions tempered by U.S. foreign policy.
The bottom line besides contacting committee members, Dr. Knutson said, is for the beekeeping industry to do three things:
1. Cooperate and speak with a common voice. There is strength in numbers and a house divided
is a certain recipe for political impotence.
2. Build a factual basis for any requests. Numbers will be necessary to convince anyone in the
new Congress about any issue, and the facts must be unequivocal, if any progress is to be
made.
3. Find as many political allies as possible. This may mean searching in unlikely places. The
possibilities include farm organizations, environmentalist groups, and food safety and assistance
advocates.
In addition to slower-than-expected movement, the bees' genetic makeup is also different than what predominates in northern Mexico, Dr. Collins said. Bees south of the border appear to be much more African like than in Texas .This is based on the kind of enzymes (hexokinase and malate dehydrogenase) they have. In addition, in one wildlife refuge in Texas AHB country, the European patterns characteristic of feral populations are not changing. Other research, according to Dr. Collins, reveals that drone flight times found in European and Africanized bees are not much different. This may account in part for the genetic mixing that appears to be happening. In addition, beekeepers are purposefully massing their bees in melon fields to reduce AHB genetic influence.
Dr. Fowden Maxwell, Chair of Entomology, at Texas A & M provided an update on his activities coordinating AHB research, extension and regulatory efforts in the state. Texas identification services completed 657 samples in 1994; the vast majority were European. Since the AHB was first detected in 1990, some 6,000 identifications have been made. In June, an 86-year-old man was stung to death and there have been other multiple stinging incidents. One individual received 1,400 stings, yet survived. Twenty-six stinging incidents involved European bees and nine were by AHB with evidence of European genetic introgression.. Animals continue to be Most vulnerable to stinging attacks, according to Dr. Maxwell, especially penned or tied dogs.
With reference to other states, Dr. Maxwell said four counties have been declared infested in New Mexico. That state has no regulatory program and no certification. The Cooperative Extension Service in New Mexico has led the way in informing the public about the bees. Almost the same thing has occurred in Arizona, where eight counties are affected and there are no quarantines or certification. The bee laboratory in Tucson has helped that state cope with the AHB in a number of ways. Finally, Dr. Maxwell concluded that one county in California (Riverside) has now been infested, although again, no regulatory activity exists and no certification program is in place. However, on a local scale there are some noteworthy efforts in public communications about honey bees by counties like Riverside and San Diego.
Dr. William McKenna provided some insight into the conditions most likely to cause death in a stinging incident. Allergy is one possibility; the venom contains many allergens, including phospholipase A. However, most deaths do not occur because of allergy, Dr. McKenna said, but because of toxic venomation (too much venom for the body to handle). Several venom components are quite poisonous, especially hyaluronidase, acid phosphotase and mellitin. The latter chemical breaks down blood cells.
The age distribution in deaths, according to Dr. McKenna, suggests that many are related to the general health of the individual. Most occur in ages between 50 and 70 years. The more fit one is, the better he/she can handle the venom. It boils down to body weight in most instances with the human LD50 level (the amount needed to cause the death of 50% of the individuals of any population) equal to 19 stings per kilogram (2.2 pounds). Something needed, Dr. McKenna concluded, is an antivenin, like that available for snake bite. The best starting place, he said, would be beekeepers themselves. Because they are stung innumerable times, the amount of potential protection in a beekeeper's blood would be maximum, ideal to begin developing an antivenin.
Apistan® continues to be the preferred treatment for Varroa, according to Dr. Collins It relies on physical transfer of the active ingredient (fluvalinate) from plastic strip to bee and finally to mite. There are efforts underway to have an alternative material, formic acid, registered for mite control. It is presently registered in Canada and there seems a good likelihood that this can also be accomplished for the U.S.
James Baxter, entomologist at Dr. Collins' laboratory (Weslaco, TX) provided the audience with a review of detection methods for both mites. The difference is that the tracheal mite requires a microscope and dissection. Detecting the Varroa mite, by contrast is less problematic because it is easily visible to the naked eye. Detection methods vary for Varroa. The ether roll was described by Mr. Baxter in some detail. In one of the breakout sessions he demonstrated mite detection techniques.
Dr. Marion Ellis, new Secretary-Treasurer of the American Association of Professional Apiculturists (AAPA) said it is impossible to treat for every Varroa mite. The only logical strategy he said was not only to monitor the bees themselves, but also to take other factors into consideration when determining mite populations Of particular importance, Dr. Ellis said, is the changing ratio of bees to mites during the active season. Early in the year, the bee population can often outrun that of the mites; treating then may not produce optimal results. Later in the season, however, when bee populations fall off, the Varroa population can quickly outstrip the bee population, and multiple infestations of single bees may occur. Waiting too long during this period will cause colony death.
Thus, the mite/adult bee ratio is a key detection index, Dr. Ellis said, and when 30 to 40 percent of bees have one adult Varroa, the bees' colony structure begins to collapse. Dr. Ellis concluded his remarks with an impassioned plea that was to be echoed at other times during the convention. Because only one product, Apistan®, is registered, legal and effective, beekeepers must assiduously protect it. This means avoiding abuse of the material (leaving the strips in too long; treating at inappropriate times; not following the dosage recommendations on the label; and reusing strips) and not using unregistered, illegal formulations of fluvalinate. Any of the above could result in withdrawal of the material by regulatory authorities and/or rapid buildup of resistance to fluvalinate by Varroa.
This warning was also voiced by Oscar Coindreau, representative for Apistan's® manufacturer, Sandoz Agro. His presentation on the product at one of the breakout sessions was significant because he reported that Varroa resistance to fluvalinate has indeed been found in Italy. This occurrence has been linked to using the formulation known in Europe as Klaritan® soaked into wooden strips. Wooden strips, paper towels and cloth rags dipped in commercial solutions of fluvalinate give off the pesticide more quickly and in greater amounts than does Apistan®, Mr. Coindreau said.
When this occurs, Mr Coidreau said, control of Varroa is irregular which causes resistance to build up in mite populations. These practices also introduce too much fluvalinate into a colony. It then contaminates wax and honey. According to Mr. Coindreau, fluvalinate, as formulated in Apistan®, has little opportunity to contaminate honey because the plastic slowly releases the material into a colony. In addition, it is hydrophobic, and not soluble in honey, but can contaminate wax over time. In contrast, other formulations like Maverik® and Karitan® have surfactants and emulsifiers that permit honey to be contaminated along with wax.
A key fact, Mr. Coindreau said, is that not much resistance by Varroa is required to render Apistan ® ineffective. Killing any less than 99 percent of the mite population is in reality no control, because the population rebounds so quickly, especially in a populous colony of bees. This makes it critical to protect the product from being abused in the field.
Although mite treatments are in place, Dr. Shimanuki said, there continues to be evidence that mite-bee interactions in themselves are causing problems. Samples now coming into his laboratory are showing signs of what appears to be American foulbrood, but the causitive organism, Bacillus larvae, is absent. This could be the results of a viral infection, however, non have been isolated. This work is progressing slowly, according to Dr. Shimanuki as only a very few laboratories worldwide are working on bee viruses. In the meantime, he and those at his laboratory, have coined a temporary name, parasitic mite syndrome. This is because mites are invariably associated with symptoms. And although apparently a viral disease, bee colonies are helped by Terramycin® and Apistan® treatment as well as feeding sugar syrup, none of which are known treatments for such a condition.
Possible causes of parasitic mite syndrome, Dr. Shimanuki said, are Kashmir bee virus or acute paralysis bee virus. It is not known how much Kasmir bee virus is present in the U.S., Dr. Shimanuki said, but there have been confirmed cases in Florida and California. It is known to be latent (perhaps being activated by mite feeding injuries) and it does affect larvae. Acute paralysis bee virus has no specific symptoms and may also be triggered by the trauma of mite parasitism. In the meantime, Dr. Shimanuki concluded, the only real recommendation to reduce the incidence of this disease is to continue controlling mite populations with registered treatments.
The foundation for the NHB is market research, Mr. Smith said, which then is used in advertising and promotion to maintain existing demand for honey and increase the demand in selected markets. The NHB must not be crisis oriented; it must focus on what it does best, he continued, and a long-term view should be maintained. One indication of industry support, Mr. Smith concluded, is that the vast majority of handlers are assiduously collecting assessments in a timely manner.
The budget of the NHB funded by assessments on the beekeeping industry is about $3 million. Sherry Jennings the Board's Industry Relations Director provided an overview on how this money is being used. The following table shows that most funds being expended in consumer promotion. NHB Budget of $3 Million:
Programs Percent of Budget Consumer Promotion 50 Food Technology 16 Food Service 10 Product Research 6 Crisis Management 4 Market Research 3 Export Promotion 2 Contingency and Others 9 Total 100
Ms. Jennings said the consumer the Board is targeting is the average upscale female, age 25 to 40, who does all the shopping and is responsible for most food buying decisions. This consumer continues to change in behavior, Ms. Jennings said. Although there is a return to traditional values, there is also less and less time to prepare meals. If a meal can't get accomplished in 30 minutes, it more than often will not be contemplated. This means more quick, processed foods and the Board is positioning honey to take advantage of this behavioral shift.
Beyond the supermarket, the Board has established some fine relations with the press, according to Ms. Mary Humann. Hints from Heloise, for example, has had several articles about use of honey since Ms. Humann pointed out some errors in one column. Willard Scott continues to plug the sweet on the Today Show and Bert Wolf and other television food preparers have spoken well of the product. This would not have occurred without Board promotion efforts, Ms. Humann said. To see what else the Board has planned, look for a full-color feature article on honey (a ROP) in many magazines for Valentine's day and a honey cooking contest sponsored by Family Circle Magazine. There have also been collaborations with Golden Corral Restaurants, Tony Roma products and Quaker Oats. Any beekeeper can also request a honey sales kit from the Board, as well as sales brochures. Contact the Board at 1-800-553-7162.
An exciting area for the Board is development of new products, described by Ms. Jennings the following day. These include honey meats (poultry particularly), honey frozen deserts (yogurt), honey spreads, and honey beers. Several microbreweries have launched honey-based beer with good success, including Samuel Adams. Other research being supported by the Board, Ms. Jennings said, is that concerned with honey and fat systems (peanut butter), honey and flavor enhancement, honey in microwaveable foods, and honey use in fat-free potato chips and frozen baking dough. The research into new products, Ms. Jennings concluded, is one of foundations of the Board that Mr. Smith discussed. It is somewhat expensive and long-range because the research must be concluded and published (sometimes taking as long as two years) before it can be marketed to the end food processor.
It is impossible to describe all the programs and initiatives described by the NHB at the Austin meeting. Fortunately, the Board has published a brochure detailing many of them, along with thumbnail sketches and photos of all Board members. It is called "Building a Successful Future," and to my knowledge, copies are still available from the Board. This publication reveals the vitality of the Board's programs and makes excellent promotional material for those who ask where their assessments are going and how they are being spent.
As an example of focused marketing, Dr. Nichols discussed the cotton industry. The cotton program was in trouble for a number of years, but has made a comeback by establishing a new strategic vision for cotton fibers. The same thing is true for beef, Dr. Nichols said. The first promotional efforts used established movie stars to tell the beef story, but this failed to excite the consumer. More recently the program has found a different focus, concentrating on a lower fat image.
No commodity promotion program can be successful without the help of producers, Dr. Nichols said. They can do a number of things to assist in promotional efforts, including finding and using niche markets, cooperating with brand marketing efforts and, of course, paying assessments. The market for a commodity must be considered a resource, according to Dr. Nichols. It requires development, exploitation and protection to remain viable. If devalued, it can be lost.
Nationwide, commodity programs are a relatively big business. Dr. Nichols said there were some 100 programs of various sorts, including 14 national checkoff plans. About 50 commodities are involved with a total budget of $750 million. The largest program is dairy ($200 million), followed by beef ($60 million). Cotton is $40 million and honey is $3 million, with the assessment currently at a penny a pound.
Promotional objectives are expressed in many ways in commodity programs, according to Dr. Nichols. These may include increasing sales, maximizing producer return, changing beliefs and attitudes of consumers, or reducing surplus stocks. They may also be accomplished in a variety of ways. Generic advertising, research on new products and processes, and providing information to processors and producers are all valid methods.
Other issues to be considered in these diverse programs, Dr. Nichols said, are how assessments are collected and when referenda are conducted. With reference to assessments, debates rage about whether they should be mandatory and/or imports should be charged. Most programs have moved toward both these goals, Dr. Nichols said. The options concerning referenda (voting by producers to maintain the program or change assessments) are also extremely variable. A final consideration is how much federal oversight is required.
The bottom line for producers, Dr. Nichols said, is whether these programs work. Unfortunately, there is no cut and dried answer. Most evaluations look at only the advertising component. One study for beef found an aggregate sales increase of 5 percent; for dairy it was a 3 percent increase. Some studies have shown as much as a seven dollar return for every one expended! Unfortunately, some studies have found no market response at all. The weakness in most investigations continues to be the focus on advertising, Dr. Nichols said. This means that effects of new product development, rapid response to changing consumer habits and increased knowledge of the market by producers are not taken into account.
For any commodity promotion program, the evaluation must be broad enough to take into consideration the full range of promotional efforts to be valid Dr. Nichols said. It must also address both the market and industry goals. He suggested an ideal program would have the following characteristics:
1.
Broad industry coverage.
2. Clear strategic vision.
3. A balanced strategy covering all important markets.
4. Willingness to invest in the long run.
5. Wide breadth of evaluation.
6. Contribution to industry vertical coordination.
With specific reference to the honey program, Dr. Nichols concluded it was necessary to determine what is the critical threshold for promotional activities in the U.S.. In addition, he said it was important to find a way to differentiate domestic honey from imports and to also develop marketing niches based on differences in the domestic product mix.
As has become custom at recent Federation meetings, there were two presentations on beekeeping in other parts of the world. It would be difficult to find two views more contrasting than those at this year's convention. A tour of New Zealand with its neat cottages, immaculate gardens and bee yards, and prosperous human population was presented by David Sundberg. It is obvious the apicultural industry there is thriving. However, this idyllic state was quickly replaced by the description of appalling conditions now present in eastern Russia as described by Randall Johnson.
The latter two countries are involved in NAFTA, but Dr. Rosson chose to focus on Mexico. The immediate change according to the agreement was to eliminate the U.S. tariff on Mexican honey (one penny per pound) and that of Mexico on U.S. product (20 percent advalorum). In the balance, this means that there will be an incentive for Mexico to export honey to the U.S., particularly with the recent devaluation of the peso. Nevertheless, Dr. Rosson said there should be a market for specialty U.S. honeys in Mexico, where such products continue to be in demand.
It is not so much honey, but trade in bees that appears to be of importance in the GATT agreement. Mr. John Greifer, USDA APHIS Trade Support Team, discussed the complexities of liberalizing trade, yet avoiding pest introductions. One philosophy is clear, Mr. Greifer said. Risks must be documented and based on science; import regulations can then be tailored to a published risk assessment. Thus, it will not be enough just to bring up a potential risk to change a trading policy.
"Regionalization" will also be an important issue Mr. Greifer said. This concept is that although a country may be infested with a pest, certain regions can be declared free. Thus, only such affected regions will have trade controlled based on risk of introducing pests. Within this context, Mr. Greifer said, there is a possibility that "minimal" or "low prevalence" standards could be recognized. This would call for certain standards. For the honey bee trade, this takes on special significance, according to Mr. Greifer, because in Europe, veterinarians are responsible for honey bee regulations and health, whereas in the U.S., this role falls to biologists and entomologists. Finally, disputes will invariably have to be adjudicated. Probably this will be through expert panels. Solutions to most of the above considerations have not been worked out yet, Mr. Greifer said, and so a great deal of work is needed to make GATT a reality.
Adulteration was enormous back in the 1880s and 1890s, Dr. White said, and it was this practice that at least in part led to the first Pure Food Act of 1908. For a good while,therfore, honey has been analyzed for presence of cane, beet or ordinary corn syrup. Dr. White began his career in the 1940s by developing new methods of analyzing honey for the U.S. government chemistry laboratory in Philadelphia. In 1962, this culminated in Technical Report 1261, which characterized the compositions of a good many U.S. honeys. Up until the 1970s, adulteration was fairly easy to test for and monitor. Then came the new generation of high fructose corn syrups (HFCS), which, Dr. White said, sent him back to the laboratory. In three years, he and colleagues perfected the isotope ratio analysis. This test, along with a thin-layer chromatography confirmation for questionable samples, was able to definitively detect adulteration by corn syrup in most cases.
In spite of this, purposeful adulteration continued to be a problem Dr. White said. It was still prevalent even after he left government service and began a private testing lab. During this period, the American Beekeeping Federation began its honey defense fund. This is still continuing; it allows beekeepers to send in suspicious samples for free testing. In spite of all these events, the practice of honey adulteration continues today. Beet sugar is a particular problem, Dr. White said, and no test is 100% correct in all cases. Natural honeys may be outside established boundaries and could falsely be declared adulterated. Thus, Dr. White said, the honey industry needs a dedicated laboratory for honey analysis.
Dr. Ken Winters of the Coastal Sciences Laboratory in Austin discussed his views on the role a commercial lab. No laboratory at the present time can provide an absolute purity guarantee, Dr. Winters said. It is possible, nevertheless, to provide a generally good appraisal of what is adulterated. In selecting a laboratory, Dr. Winters suggested the industry look for one that provides data with a measure of precision and accuracy that is reliable and repeatable. This means that not only is the appraisal provided, but also a comparison of expected range and distribution of values. In addition, the lab should always be ready to examine and change tests should others that are more reliable become available. At the present time, he concluded, labs are stymied by the lack of standards in honey.
Adding fuel to the adulteration fire was an open letter to the honey industry, distributed at the convention by Ronald Phipps, President, China Products of North America, and Mike Ingalls, President of Pure Foods, Inc. In their letter, they stated that the "need for a comprehensive study of the global supply of honey is now obvious...Tests and standards derived from limited data have already been cynically manipulated in order to falsely condemn American, Chinese, and Argentine honey." The authors go on to say that "Scientists, regulatory experts, and eminent legal professionals have affirmed:
1) The common use of 'average values' based on limited scientific data defies
logic and.should be vigorously opposed for its absurdity.
2) The data base for the 'protein test' is limited, and lacks sufficient theoretical basis.
3) The data bases for the original carbon ration (sic) studies, the HPLC and CGC tests are far
removed from what can be considered an adequate statistical sampling of the world's supply of
honey.
4) None of the SIRA, HPLC or CGC tests have undergone the rigors of scientific validation.
"In summary," the writers conclude, "...efforts, purportedly designed to 'protect the pure image of honey through the use of applied science', mask an attempt to eliminate Chinese competition." This letter provoked some heated discussion and clearly neither scientists nor honey producers and packers could agree on the validity of these remarks.
The variability in honey and lack of standards is why no one test will tell with 100 percent reliability if a sample is adulterated, Mr. Jerry Probst, Vice President for research of the Sioux Honey Association, said during the panel discussion. A specific marker does not exist and so what is often needed is a matrix of tests to help resolve areas of conflicting data. This, of course, can drive up the testing costs.
Mr. Probst also added to Dr. White's remarks concerning enforcement. For a number of reasons, neither the states nor the FDA appear to be pursuing some flagrant adulteration that has reached huge proportions in the southeastern U.S. The reasons for lack of enforcement include a scarcity of inspectors. Of those actively engaged in food examinations, the vast majority are concentrated on food safety not adulteration of product, And with budget cutbacks in the offing, this will probably get worse, not better. Mr. Probst suggested that alternative routes to criminal prosecution be taken to punish adulterers, including using the RICO (Rackeetering and Influencing law) to attack the profits made from adulteration. Putting people in jail has historically not stopped adulteration, Mr. Probst concluded, but reducing the incentive, which is the reason for the activity to begin with, can make a difference.
Besides other domestic firms like Mann Lake Ltd., Dadant & Sons, several foreign companies made the trip to Austin. Two stand out as the farthest traveled. David and son, Tom, Penrose from Christchurch, New Zealand demonstrated the Penrose Uncapper and Deboxer. These machines are capable of uncapping 14-15 frames per minute, over 100 boxes per hour. The Deboxer removes frames quickly from supers using compressed air and attaches easily to the uncapper.
Mr. Robin J. Mountain was also on hand selling custom made bee veils that have experience standing up to African bees. Real African bees, that is, for he is from South Africa. His company, Mountain Bee Products, also sells other beekeeping paraphernalia.
B.J. Sherriff exhibited his extensive line of bee suits from the United Kingdom. Canada was also represented by among others, River Valley Apiaries. This outfit has come up with a new snap-on lid cut-comb honey tray that promises to keep the product neat and clean on store shelves.
Besides the exhibits and general session, there were special interest breakout workshops on Friday for those interested in package bees and queens, commercial beekeeping and/or activities of researchers, inspectors and extension specialists. In addition, workshops on preparing honey for show and beekeeping basics were held.
Saturday was given over to another series of workshops including topics as diverse as almond pollination, apitherapy, mite detection and using computers in apicultural operations. This reporter participated in two sessions. One was dedicated to finding beekeeping papers and publications on what has been called "the information superhighway." Efrain Escobedo, one of the many talented members of the Capital Area Honey Stewards, "surfed" the internet, checking in at the University of Florida, Washington State University and The Ohio State University for bee information. He retrieved both text and graphics to the wonder of those in attendance. After that the audience was treated to a demonstration off how to find information from as far away as Quito, Ecuador and the Eukraine in what was once the Soviet Union.
The other session had the aforementioned performance of the trained pig, "Blossom." That workshop, called "Kids 'n Bees," included a great many hands-on activities for local children. They could visit a face painter and tables loaded with beeswax crafts, honey sticks and bee suits. But as one colleague put it, nothing could posssibly upstage "Blossom" dressed as a bee. And whether the next Federation meeting, scheduled for Portland, OR, can compete with the one just concluded in Texas also remains to be seen.
© 1995, M.T. Sanford, "All Rights Reserved"