BEE-L Archives

Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology

BEE-L@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Hervé Logé <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 29 Dec 2003 19:31:57 +0100
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (64 lines)
> Currently there is no Maximum Residue
> Level (MRL) for oxalic acid in honey so the CFIA
> operates on zero
> tolerance.

... which is unapplicable since honeys naturally
contain OA, concentrations varying from floral
sources. If they try to persecut with such argument
they will lose the case in court. My experience as a
person who wrote by-laws, conducted public
consultations and provide technical data to persecut
companies is : when you want to bite, make sure you
have the sharp teeth and a large mouth enough. When
you just enlarge your feathers as a bird to look big,
you lose your credibility sooner or later. Anyway,
this "position of principe" does not make sense in
this particular case. They are several wagons behind
the train but refuse to assume responsablities for
beeing late...

I already had this discussion with a provincial
representativ here. I understand they have the best
willingness as possible but no money to perform the
job. Well, but institutions have to bear
responsabilities for their lack of means, and their
consequent lack of action. Each year spent, the price
is paid by beekeepers, it does not make sense, IMHO.

Most of the work is done, if not all. It does not cost
30 000$ for a bibliographic review and obtaining
documents from Europeans. We currently use others
works to develop laws and by-laws, particulary in
Canada. I could multiply examples in the
pharmaceutical sector with Healt Canada. Most HC
pharmaceutic guides are essentially copied from an
American/European/Japanese harmonization committee.


> There is a risk that beekeepers may be applying
> too much product or mistiming the treatments.
> Without an official method,
> honey may become contaminated through inappropriate
> use of the product.

The risk exist as well with approuved products with
official recommandations. If they publish
recommandations, the best. If they do not, they have
to assume the resposabilities for this lack of
diligent action. OA is officialy in use for several
years in many european countries now. Diligent is a
sweet euphemism, and I do not want to know if it is a
provincial or federal jurisdiction. They just have to
do it.

Hervé

_________________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse @yahoo.fr gratuite et en français !
Yahoo! Mail : http://fr.mail.yahoo.com

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
-- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/BEE-L for rules, FAQ and  other info ---
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

ATOM RSS1 RSS2