> I find it surprising that Allen would heap the blame of our narrowed 
> perspective on the "stifling" influence of state and provincial 
> inspectors.

Actually, that was not my intent.  Inspectors, for the most part, simply do 
what they are asked to do by legislation and regulations, and the beekeeping 
community.  Some are over-zealous, others lax and incompetent, but, by the 
large they are decent, helpful, and moderate.  As I said, I was one, and saw 
the thing from the inside, as well as the outside.  Times have changed a 
lot, too from the first several decades after WWII, when pressure for 
conformity was stronger.  Moreover, from what I have heard, some 
jurisdictions are very straight-arrow, but some others have been accused of 
being somewhat corrupt, and I can confirm that from my own experience.  I've 
seen inspection and enforcement used as a tool in personal vendettas.

> This over estimates the influence of the inspectors and give beekeepers 
> too little credit for their ability to think for themselves.

The impetus for legislation and enforcement came from within the beekeeping 
community, but then, as now, the most vocal and successful beekeeper 
politicians were not necessarily the smartest, or the ones with the most to 
lose.  Those who valued individual liberty and personal responsibility were 
often shouted down or worn down by endless blather from people who were 
small-time beekeepers, but bigtime organisers and manipulators, and 
unburdened by the facts.  Additionally, civil servants, intent on protecting 
and/or building their turf weighed in, often on the side of more regulation 
and restriction.  Does this picture sound familiar?  (Take a look at the 
Canada/U.S. border story over the last few decades and the poitical 
involvement of some CAPA members in what is really none of their business).

Then--going back in time--as now, many large beekeepers, ignored or avoided 
the bee organisations, ignored or dodged the inspectors and did pretty well 
as they pleased.  When caught, they paid the fines quietly and kept 
trucking.

Have legislation, regulation and inspection benefitted the industry or have 
they simply placed an unneccessay burden on it?  The answer to that question 
depends on who you are and where you sit?  It is the centre of continuing 
debate, and we must not forget that those on the 'nay' side is often not as 
well represented in the forums as it is in the population.  These guys are 
independent businessmen, and usually don't turn up to mud wrestle and argue 
endlessly with the small-time idealogues who have seemingly unlimited time 
and money--after all most of that group have jobs to support their 
beekeeping or work for government--to try to repress and control them.

> Personally the inspectors I have met have been knowledgeable, helpful and 
> well-respected.  They do not warrant this blame.

I don't think I blamed the inspectors.  They were just doing what was asked. 
many are also beekeepers.

It was the entire spirit of the times which formed beekeepers and regulators 
into a herd.

What, exactly, I said:

>> Moreover, the bans and inspections brought about a political change, and 
>> the inspection process became an 'industry' --an end in itself--and in 
>> many places a strong political tool to manage and control beekeepers. I 
>> know, I was an inspector a more than a quarter decade ago and inspection 
>> at that time was a mini-empire in the beaurocracy.

I'm not indicting the inspectors, per se.  I'm saying that the beaurocrats 
some places saw and opportunity to extend government influence, with all the 
things (costs, abuses, red tape, self-dealing, pork barrelling, restraint of 
trade, seizure and destruction of private property, even incarceration) that 
go with it.

You can probably guess from my perspective that I tend to be somewhat 
libertarian, but not to the point that I can't see good in almost everything 
and also imagine constructive uses for govenment.

I also pointed out that Alberta has a very liberal (in the traditional, not 
the socialist sense) regime and beekeepers have a fairly enightened 
relationship with extension, inspection and enforcement, so we have to go 
over to Saskatraz to see the abuses of an overzealous and restrictive regime 
in place--and the negative impact on open discusssion and freedom that such 
regimes always have.

>> In Alberta, as an expression of the wishes of the beekeepers of the 
>> province, we have inspection only on request, although we deliberately 
>> kept and updated recently the law that permits mandatory inspection.

> It would be interesting to know if non-movable frame beekeeping was at all 
> prevalent at the time of the Bee Acts or if it had already gone into 
> decline.

This would be interesting research.

allen 

-- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and  other info ---