Hello Jim & All,
I have read Jim's reply post a couple times and I feel I need to explain the
USDA, grower & beekeeper part better. I am only a beekeeper close to the
problem but not involved other than speaking with two of the USDA people
overseeing the Missouri boll weevil program which asked me for my advice.
Jim asks:
How long are beekeepers going to continue to be utter fools
in their business dealings?
These beekeeper friends of mine are not by any strech of the imagination
"utter fools". One comes from a long line of beekeepers and runs around
8,000 hives in the boot heel of Missouri. The other friend beekeeper works
for the Missouri dept. of Ag. and was reassigned to a desk job when he
became vocal about the problem .
He lost all his sideline hives to cotton spraying.
Jim said:
The "offender" here is the GROWER. The guy you can take to
small claims court, or general district court. All the
pointing at the federal government is simple misdirection.
Actually when you understand the boll weevil program you might think
differently. The program both in Texas & Missouri was formed by the USDA to
erradicate the boll weevil. The USDA said all these different spray
chemicals and methods being used against the boll weevil were not working
and decided to start the program like they set up in Texas (which killed
many many hives of Texas beekeepers).
They held meetings with cotton growers and the growers voted to set up the
program. Once the growers have signed on the USDA takes control of the spray
program. Hires the crop dusters, decides which sprays to use *and when*.
Decides which chemicals to use.
If a person on BEE-L has better information and any of what I am writting
is not EXACTLY correct please post as I want the information to be correct.
I am an outsider looking in and maybe my facts are not exactly correct *but*
I have talked directly to those in charge about the problem in the boot heel
and am trying to explain the problem as honestly as possible from a neutral
position.
When the subject came up on BEE-L awhile back Texas beekeepers posted.
Please do again and give an update! Thanks!
Jim said;
If the beekeeper chooses to not demand a "pesticide kill clause"
in his contract, then he clearly is tolerating an unacceptable
situation. If beekeepers adopted a "standard form contract",
rather like the standardized real estate and rental agreements
used in all US states, there would be less opportunity for
growers to play one beekeeper against another, as they clearly
are doing.
The above is the place I believe Jim and possibly others on the list are not
understanding. Cotton does not need bees to produce cotton. Cotton produces
honey. Growers do not pay beekeepers to put bees on cotton. Those locations
on cotton have been bee locations for over 75 years. The Robbin's honey farm
ran around 7,000 hives in the boot heel before the present owner bought the
bee farm. The cotton locations went with the bee farm purchase and represent
a large part of the bee farms income. When the growers handled their own
spraying many were successful and bee kills were rare. Growers which did not
spray fields for the weevil had fields which became breeding grounds for the
boll weevil and actually were the problem in my opinion. Most growers
controlled the weevil fine and WITHOUT KILLING BEES. Being direclty involved
with the beekeeper they alomost always called the beekeeper and took care
not to kill bees.
Jim asks:
Agreement terms aside, I don't see how a grower's overt and willing
participation in an effort that yields tangible economic benefit to his
operation can be viewed as anything but classic "negligence"
if pesticide kills result.
The boll weevil program has taken over the spraying and telling crop dusters
when and what to spray with. The Missouri cotton growers see the treatment
of Missouri beekeepers by the program as an injustice but do not know what
to do about the problem. The same scenario in Texas I have been told by
Texas beekeepers.
If its any consulation I was told the USDA has fired one crop duster, is
trying to sober another up and a third crop duster blames the whole problem
on the USDA so they are quietly trying to shut him up by threatning to stop
giving him spray contracts I have been told.
Jim said:
Since the USDA contracts out the spraying as part of a program in
which growers actively participate, the USDA is really nothing more than
another "hired hand" for the grower, clearly under the control of the
grower.
The USDA is of the position that they can handle the boll weevil situation
better than the growers. Reduced prices for chemicals are a lure to sign
onto the program. I believe all cotton growers have to agree to the program
before the program can be started but I could be wrong but I don't think so.
In my opinion the USDA is in charge and the crop dusters are the hired hands
so to speak.
Jim said:
liability, as he owns the land, grows the crop, knows of the spray
program, and knowingly contracted for bees to be placed upon his land (or
allowed bees to be placed upon his land).
Growers & beekeepers have got along together since cotton was planted in the
delta of the boot heel. The problem has started both in Texas & Missouri
when the boll weevil eradication took control! The boll weevil program sees
the beekeeper as a thorn in its side. The boll weevil program has outlasted
the beekeeper as the beekeeper has quit for the most part sitting hives on
cotton both in the bootheel and in Texas. Still the boll weevil program *to
my knowledge* has not yet paid for hives in either state they killed by not
following label and especially not notifing beekeepers of spraying.
Why would the sprayer not notify the beekeeper. BECAUSE HE PLANNED TO SPRAY
AT AN OFF LABEL TIME AND THE BEEKEEPER COULD DRIVE TO THE FIELD AND DOCUMENT
THE ILLEGAL SPRAYING!
jim said:
Trying to sue the federal government is simply a waste of time.
We both agree here!
Jim said:
"Negotiating" with the government is a waste of time.
Most of us beekeepers consider the USDA our friend. I feel the people in the
boll weevil problem are trying to keep a lid on the problem because of their
own mismanagement of the situation.
Jim said:
Begging is futile.
Begging has not been tried but reasonable attempts to settle the problem
have been tried.
Jim said:
The only practical approach is to use the courts.
Beekeeper friends of mine used the courts in Florida against huge bee kills
from spraying around Miami. The trial lasted over two years in the courts
and the beekeepers lost . One of the beekeepers said he lost around 50,000
in lawyers fees as his share of the case. Five beekeepers were involved.
Jim said:
Any beekeeper who continues, year after year, to willingly expose
their bees to such risks has no one to blame but himself
I agree! Issues similar to the above have came up many times on the list. My
answer is to always move away from growers which do not respect honeybees
when spraying. Its hard to teach old growers new tricks!
Giving up the cotton honey crop of hives is hard but may be the only option
beekeepers in Texas & Missouri have got!
"justice is the will of the stronger".
Bob
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
-- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/BEE-L for rules, FAQ and other info ---
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
|
