BEE-L Archives

Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology

BEE-L@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
James Fischer <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Date:
Sat, 13 Dec 2003 03:36:59 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (106 lines)
   Up late tonight.  Sitting here by a woodstove in a
   tack room with my Palm Pilot, waiting for a mare to
   give birth, expecting problems that may require human
   intervention and assistance.  (And yeah, this is not
   a good month for a colt to be born, tell the owner of
   the horses...)

Chuck said:

> "In the next few months, [US Honey] Board staff will be
> evaluating proposals for research opportunities, including
> investigating honey's glycemic index..."

Its interesting that the Honey Board is still soliciting proposals
for research when the studies they fund may not be completed until
after the Honey Board itself is long gone, and in theory to be
replaced by some sort of "Packer/Importer board".

Here's a pitch by a very well-connected person in favor of the
"seamless transition" from the NHB to a Packer-Importer board:

http://www.abfnet.org/Industry_News/NHBPIBConversion.html

The problem with this approach is that it appears at first
glance to be what a lawyer would call "conversion", and what
a plain-spoken man would call "simple theft".

The apparent "conversion" is the taking of beekeeper paid-for
assets (intellectual property, trademarks, good will, and a
pile of ready-to-reprint promotional materials estimated at
several stories high), and the future use and control of these
assets at the sole whim of the packers and importers.

So, if you read the NHB's requests for proposals, you will find
that researchers are required to agree that the NHB will be
the sole "owner" of the research (as if anyone can "own" an
understanding of the inner workings of the highly public-domain
human body, revision 1.0, unchanged for millennia, or the
glycemic index of honey, also highly public-domain...)

But if the NHB "owns" things, both tangible and intangible,
who "inherits" these things when the NHB disbands?

While I have questions and concerns about the "transition",
the pitch is factually correct - there is no possible scenario
where the NHB can survive, as explained here:

http://www.beeculture.com/beeculture/months/03nov/03nov2.htm

I'm sure that the packers and importers would like to make
a transition "seemingly seamless", as it would facilitate
the usurpation of the property of the NHB so that it can be
used at the whim of the Packer-Importer board to advance their
goal of promoting generic commodity honey from far-off places
blended with just enough US-produced honey to mask the "flavor
profile" characteristic of the stuff that arrives in drums
stenciled in languages we can't read.

I'm certainly not claiming that US beekeepers have sole claim
to the assets of the NHB, but it seems reasonable that beekeepers
who were assessed, some against their will, should expect
to have their investment in the NHB "bought out", or should
expect to take title to some portion of the assets when the
NHB closes its doors.

And even if US beekeepers have no idea what they might do
with the assets of the NHB, does anyone want to watch
such assets be handed over at no charge to a highly-organized
and closely-knit group of people, most who directly compete
with US beekeepers?

But who might represent US honey producers, or at least act
as trustee for the assets?  The AHPA? A new producer-only
board, dedicated to promte US honey?  The EAS, WAS, and HAS?


And it is not just honey - the whole consumer-goods cargo-cult
dance has gone screwy - US citizens take equity out of their
houses (mortgage them to the hilt) and run up credit card bills
with balances larger than their retirement savings so they can
pretend that they are wealthy, buying goods made by workers paid
24 cents an hour, and meanwhile, the countries that export goods
to the US keep telling themselves that they can expand their
economies by selling things to people who can't pay for them.

We engineering folks have a term for systems like that.
"Broken As Designed", or "B.A.D."

Ya see, to be able to consume, first you have to produce something.

Times sure have changed from my father's day.  Back then, the
USA could sell anything and everything we made to every country
on the planet, and even lend them money to buy it.

What can US beekeepers expect?
No one ever gets what they deserve,
they only get what they can negotiate.


        jim (And what do you do the day AFTER you live
           a day like it was the last day of your life?)

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

ATOM RSS1 RSS2