Hi everybody,
A question arose during my recent stay in Nova Scotia, Canada whilst
talking to various beekeepers and growers requiring bee hives for
pollination contracts - and I would like to hear what others think or
have done in a similar position!

A colony (hive) that is in good pollinating condition is hired out at a
set cost to a grower.
The beekeeper delivers the colony to the required area for the duration
of the flowering period of the crop.
The grower sees that the weather conditions have been good and considers
that the colony has done its work in the area in a shorter period of
time than usual.
Due to geographical and climatic conditions there is another area that
has a slightly later flowering period, maybe 50km. away - but of the
same crop.
Is it acceptable for the grower to expect that because the initial site
has been well pollinated that he (she) may then move that hive to the
new area - seeing as under normal conditions the hive would be at the
disposal of the grower for the first site and consider that it may do
the second site's pollination and here is the crux of the question! -
and claim that this may be done for the amount agreed for a pollination.

In other words -1. should the grower pay for the second pollination.
                           2. should the grower therefore effectively be
able to cut down on the number of hives required by moving hives from an
initial site to a second one instead of paying for a hive in the first
site and a second one on the second site.

This may be complicated by having for example 20 hive delivered to the
first site and after 5 days moving 10 of them to a second site, leaving
the remainder to "finish" the pollination.

Further complication - depending on the hive density in the sites (
adjacent fields may have different owners and therefore hives from
different beekeepers - resulting in a lower or higher hive count in the
area than the potential carrying capacity) the potential well being for
the colony is in play.

Should the beekeeper reject this situation, claim partial secondary
pollination fee or accept this as fair play and normal.
I realise that it is up to the beekeeper to form an agreement with the
grower - but when neither side can call upon "standard" practice and
have different opinions on what is best, I suggest that it be thrashed
out in public rather than something become standard and cause underlying
resentment for one side or the other.

Hope this makes sense!

Peter