Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Sun, 16 Dec 2001 20:19:52 -0800 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
I was surprised too, but have a slightly different take on it to suggest:
Beekeepers are in need of as much help as we can get. Many times in this forum, it has been noted that processors and marketers swing a lot more weight when it comes to policy matters. This kind of contact may be a point of entry for grass roots influence.
My experience has been that local and even State agriculture agents are anxious to see farmers succeed. Their jobs depend on it. Usually they are doing the work they do because they enjoy it. If they encounter a friendly person, especially one who asks questions, they will go out of their way to be helpful.
But that doesn't mean that information flows only one direction. A well informed client can influence the agent who will either spread the word or question policy which appears to be contrary to the best interests of his clients. If you can provide them with authoritative references, if sure doesn't hurt. Most agents have email addresses and access to the web. You can provide references via the web. I don't think it hurts to ask them if they know about this forum and to invite them to sign on.
That suggests that beekeepers should be as well informed as possible, in compliance with regulations, especially label directions on pesticides and hazardous materials. Look on most contacts you have with inspectors and other USDA representatives as resources rather than enforcers. They'll usually reciprocate.
If you're misusing chemicals and abusing the public trust to produce a good and safe product, you probably deserve what the inspectors dish out.
Quoting James Fischer <[log in to unmask]>:
> I was surprised to read that members of this list
> were suggesting things like:
> > ...But don't volunteer any information.
> and
> > The first option is not to bother to call back.
> > It sounds like a fishing expedition...
> I must strongly disagree with both suggestions, as
> they advise a posture that is less than 100% open
> and honest, and are hence the postures of defeat.
Richard Yarnell, Shambles Workshops, Beavercreek, OR
|
|
|