Michael Palmer said:

>> I work damn hard to make a living with my bees, and I don't need
>> some GD novice inspector, who doesnt know how to handle bees,
>> screwing up. Is the inspection program so short on help that they
>> can't hire knowledgeable help?

Perhaps they ARE short on help, short on funds, and operating
"as best they can" with "the best people they can afford".

I think that it is important to note that this is the FIRST harsh
word anyone has had for any inspector on Bee-L in several years.
In that time, how many inspections were done?  Thousands?
That's a very, very low error rate.

Offhand, I'd say that the level of professionalism is thereby
proven to be superior in bee inspection as compared to other
"professional services", such as doctors, plumbers, mechanics,
lawyers, and engineers, where complaints are more common as
a percentage of the total "service events".

Dee Lusby said:

> This is one reason I had (when President of Arizona Beekeepers Assoc) The
> laws changed in beekeeping here (finally wiped statutes off books by the way).
> There was a U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling on way to Supreme Court of
USA
> that was never altered or challenged against 'illegal search and seasure' even
> concerning bees, that went against the state of Ohio I think if I am
> remembering correctly. It said a beekeepers bees is just like a home or place
of
> business and written notice MUST be given to beekeeper prior to stepping foot
in
> apiary or inspection is illegal trespass like illegal search and seasure.

Gee, that's a grrrrrreat solution!  Let's make the inspector's job HARDER to
do, by spouting gibberish about bogus rulings by backwater appeals courts
that won't even stand up to a cursory sanity check:

a)  Can bees be a public health issue?    Yes.
b)  Are bee inspectors "public health officials"?  Yes!
c)  What powers do a "public health official" have?

   c1)  The power to enter and inspect any premises
        even against the will of the owner, at point
        of gun, if required.  (Why?  To protect the public!)

   c2)  The power to seize and destroy diseased animals,
        quarantine people, entire buildings, whatever it takes.
        (Why?  To protect the public!)

   c3)  The power to "request assistance" from any armed force
        (police, National Guard, even regular Army) might be
        required to subdue resistance to their efforts.

The recent "SARS" scare has shown that "public health officials"
have powers that go far beyond that of police, and can stomp upon
the (USA) 4th Amendment protection against "unreasonable search
and seizure" at the drop of a virus.  Yes, this is legal.  Yes,
it is fair and required in any modern society for "health of the
public" to trump any legal mumbo-jumbo that might apply to criminal cases.

It is a real shame that Michael's hives were inspected by someone
with less-than tidy habits, and I can offer no clue as to why
any randomly-selected  person would NOT stack supers on an overturned
outer cover as a default approach, but the answer here is to put a
word in the ear of the state apiarist, and let him manage his people.
I am sure that the error will be corrected, and not happen again.

It is a worse shame that Arizona eliminated laws specific to
bee inspections, but that would not stop a single one of the
"feared" scenarios in the event of a clear and compelling
public health issue, for example, a serious Africanized Bee
problem.  All they did in Arizona was to prevent a bee
inspector from helping those who suffer from clumsy arrogance
born of ignorance.

Not to worry, those types rarely stay beekeepers for long.

                jim (Who keeps cold beer, hot coffee, and
                 fine single-malts at the ready just in
                 case a bee inspector might ever visit)

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