Richard H. Glassford II wrote: > >I was reading in our local paper the following article. "Don't put your >honey where your mouth is". In the article it advises consumers not to >purchase honey from backyard bee keepers. The article mentioned that >the suburban landscape may have flowers that produces poisonous honey. >The following plants were listed as causing problems: rhododendrons, >azaleas, jessamine, strawberry trees, melaleuca trees, agave plants or >privet. Is this true? I think this is a case of those opposed to back yard beekeepers attempting to manipulate public opinion. There is a reference to poisonous honey obtained from rhododendrons and mountain laurel in the ABC and XYZ of Beekeeping but the evidence is anecdotal and has not been chemically analysed (in my edition anyway). Bees kept in suburban areas have access to a very wide variety of nectar sources and the honey is not a pure varietal - in the early days of settlement in Adelaide it was labelled as a garden source and was prized for its taste, being a darker type honey. I do migrate hives to melaleuca sources (there are many, many types of melaleucas). Bees do very well on them because there is generally good quality pollen as well as nectar. I do note that if the season is dry the melaleuca may blossom but the bees will simply ignore them so presumably the nectar is rationed in the interests of survival of the tree. Certainly the pure melaleuca honeys are very popular with honey buyers - again they are darker with a full bodied flavour but not bitter. It might be interesting to attempt to trace the source of these rumours. Betty McAdam HOG BAY APIARY Penneshaw, Kangaroo Island J.H. & E. McAdam<[log in to unmask] http://kigateway.kin.on.net/hogbay/hogbay1.htm Why not visit the South Australian Superb Websites Ring? http://kw.mtx.net/sawebring/sawebring.html