Peter took issue with my Nov 2007 Bee Culture
article, "Beepocalypse Now?"
http://bee-quick.com/reprints/beepocalypse.pdf:
> I am highly offended that you are so disrespectful of
> our very strict biosecurity protocols for both import
> and export of bees and bee products.
While I agree that Australia's biosecurity protocols for
the IMPORT of bees and bee products are strict and work
well, please understand that the USA had exactly the
same protocol (NO IMPORTS ALLOWED WITHOUT A QUARANTINE
PERIOD) until Australia came along and demanded "market
access" under the WTO's non-existent biosecurity rules.
But I fail to see how printing and explaining a one
page export document could offend, or be "disrespect".
I also noticed that you did not attempt to argue with the
facts I presented, so I can only conclude that the facts
themselves are to blame here. If it helps at all, I was
also offended by the facts as they stand. Deeply offended.
I have said before that Australia's IMPORT biosecurity, as it
is described ON PAPER, is a good model for what the US should
implement for all imported goods. As for exports of bees, the
bee export certificate says what it says, and is not open to
subjective interpretation.
> You stated "The document (Health Certificate) flatly states that
> Australia is free of three kinds of undesirable bees, and five
> different pests and pathogens."
I did. It does.
> "This is true only if Australia is actually looking for
> these bees and pests"
That's self-evident - one certainly won't find that which
is not being sought, will one?
OK, perhaps you think I was too harsh.
Well, let's see if I was.
Let's take Australia's claim that it is "free of Apis cerana",
for example. How's that Apis cerana invasion going?
From what news I get from Australia about it, things don't
appear to be going very well at all:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/05/05/1915185.htm
May 5, 2007 - "The Department of Primary Industries says
it has found an exotic species of bee on a yacht in the
Cairns harbour, in far north Queensland."
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/05/07/1916257.htm
May 7, 2007 - "The hive was found in the mast of a yacht
that had been docked in the far north Queensland port
for two years."
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/05/14/1921807.htm
May 14, 2007 - "The Queensland Opposition says the response
by the Department of Primary Industries to an incursion
of exotic bees in Cairns, in the state's far north, has
been a disgrace."
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/05/17/1925218.htm
May 17, 2007 - "A second hive of suspected Asian honey bees
has been found on the waterfront in the far north Queensland
city of Cairns in less than two weeks. The hive, inside a
cable reel at a boat yard in Portsmith... was located
LESS THAN 100 METRES from where the first hive was found
nearly a fortnight ago."
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/09/25/2042826.htm
Sept 25, 2007 - "The sixth Asian honey beehive has been
found in far north Queensland, nearly five months after
the pest species was first found. The quarantine watchdog
says chances are it was the last nest."
That's an interesting quote in the most recent report -
"CHANCES ARE IT WAS THE LAST NEST". Well, if they
stopped looking, it certainly will be the last nest
they find, won't it? It doesn't sound to me like
there's much motivation to keep looking. I'm not
sure one wants biosecurity managers thinking this way at all.
So, I don't think I was anywhere near as harsh as the
Queensland Opposition Party members who called the effort
"a disgrace". When your own elected officials critique
a government program so harshly, I'd conclude that my
little article is in fairly respectable company.
Yet, somehow, we still get these official-looking documents
claiming that Australia is "free from... Apis cerana".
Somehow, recent events do not inspire confidence.
When does Australia at last admit that it is NOT free of
Apis cerana? Six different hives found over a summer
does not seem to be sufficient. How much of the Top End
has to be infested before Australia is not "free" of them?
How many hives of Apis cerana have to be found before
those doing the looking realize that "chances are, it
is NOT the last nest"?
Given Australia's track record with Small Hive Beetle, and
the fortnight (2 week) delay between killing of the first
Apis cerana hive, and the discovery of the 2nd hive within
shouting distance of the first, I see a pattern.
The subsequent finds as the summer dragged on tended to make
the pattern hard to ignore.
But I'm not worried about Apis cerana as much as I am
worried about the pests and diseases of Apis cerana,
which seem to have no trouble jumping to Apis mellifera.
> "No actual tests for any pathogens or diseases are done
> and none of the listed diseases and pathogens can be
> confirmed without lab analyses."
Yes, that is what I said, and it is an accurate statement
as applied to Australia's exports of live bees to the US.
> To say that we do not inspect or test for these problems
> is NOT TRUE. For example, here in Western Australia,
> my bees (and those of another 99 beekeepers, ie 100
> beekeepers per annum) are annually inspected on a
> random basis for all those problems you described.
Western Australia does not export any bees, so tests done
to 100 randomly selected hives spread hither and yon across
Western Australia's 976,790 square miles don't say anything
about the exports. Western Australia's hives are nowhere
near the specific apiaries from which bees are exported, and
inspecting one hive in every 9,767 square miles on average
seems a little less than rigorous.
That's like inspecting one and only one hive in each of
the following US States:
MA = 10,555 sq mi
VT = 9,615 sq mi
NH = 9,351 sq mi
NJ = 8,722 sq mi
Using the same logic, one could argue that a random set
of 100 people going go to their doctors for regular
check-ups and testing as healthily prove that there is
no human disease or sickness anywhere in Western Australia!
That would be utter nonsense, wouldn't it?
> as far as I am aware there are currently no exporters
> of bees from WA to USA, you can see we pay a high
> price to maintain our reputation in case someone like
> yourself wants proof that we are what we say we are!
Allow us to help. The USDA Beltsville Bee Lab
will run samples of bees and/or comb through their
standard battery of tests for beekeepers WORLDWIDE
at no charge. Read this for the specifics:
http://www.masterbeekeeper.org/pdf/diagnosis.pdf
Yeah, its my tax dollars working for you, but
its the least I can do, if $27 a year in random
years is too large a burden to know about
specific diseases and pests.
Given the program as described, how did Small Hive Beetle
escape detection for "at least a year" (as admitted here
http://www.zeta.org.au/~anbrc/small_hive_beetle.html)
until it had gotten into the domestic queen and package
producers, and spread to New South Wales and Queensland?
Small Hive Beetle is an obvious external pest of bees,
easy for even the novice beekeeper to detect. As it
escaped detection for at least a year, and spread far
and wide before it was detected (not by any official
effort, but by a beekeeper slightly more alert than
his peers) you can understand how I remain somewhat
unimpressed.
> Behind the scenes, the states departments of agriculture
> are very diligent in policing Biosecurity protocols,
> which in turn are then checked and certified by the
> Federal agency AQIS.
I'm not sure what any of the above has to do with running
bees through standard lab tests, but I am certain that any
specific tests on the hives from which exported bees come
from would have been mentioned by now. Funny how no one has
mentioned any data being available, even in the face of
rather pointed questions from US Senators, and during the
high-profile forum of Apimondia.
> The visual inspection about which you are so concerned, is in fact the
> last in a whole chain of checks and inspections which underpin our
> Biosecurity status,
While these tests may "underpin" your "biosecurity status",
these tests are NOT done on the hives from which exported
bees are bred and shaken, so they say nothing about the
actual bees that get shipped.
If any tests have ever been done on hives in the
operations that export bees, the results of these tests
have not been made public, nor has Australia offered
any assurance that such tests will be done in addition
to the so-called "visual inspections".
Given the hints and clues provided by two different
teams of researchers working independently (the first
team announcing preliminary results in April 2007 at
a Working group meeting, and the second team, announcing
preliminary results in the journal "Science"), there is
cause to be wary of further imports of bees. I don't
think the solution is to simply ban the imports, but
sampling and testing is clearly required on both ends
of every shipment, if for no other reason that to
protect the innocent from accusations.
> I understand that you are not advocating for a ban on
> imports of bees from Oz to USA
Don't be so hasty to assume that I will not change
my mind.
My position has remained unchanged since before the
first bees arrived at our ports - imports should be
allowed, but only with sampling and testing of every
pallet. This has not been done on the US end yet
due to the fact that bees don't get no respect.
But the discovery that the assurances made by Australia
about the exported bees are based upon nothing more than
a dangerous mix of hubris and "visual inspections"
prompts serious reconsideration.
Unless such tests on both the exporting and importing
ends of the process can be implemented quickly, I
have no choice but to join the voices calling for an
outright ban.
Without such tests, there are fingers being pointed.
With such tests, we would have facts.
I can't speak for you, but I'd rather have facts.
> Your apology would be much appreciated.
Apology? But you confirmed the facts and the conclusions
presented in the article! I owe you a thank-you, and
co-author credit in the next article I must now write as
a result of the revelations you offered. The title will
be "Hubris".
I should also thank you for explaining the rigorous testing
program that tests, on average, one hive every 10,000 square
miles or so in Western Australia, and explaining that this
testing program is intended to "underpin" your "biosecurity
status". What we need is tests that verify the actual health
of the specific bees that are exported.
Game 4 - Bottom of the 4th, 1 - 0 Baaawstaaaan!
******************************************************
* Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at: *
* http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm *
******************************************************
|
