Friends of the Earth Honey guideline

[mbc]

To add a little international flavour, especially with the Scotland vs Wales 6 nations match coming up, I'd like to tell you all that my first ever vote was for the UK's first green mp, Cynog Dafis, who got in under a green/ plaid Cymru aliance. I had no trouble whatsoever choosing who to vote for that time round, but since plaid and the Welsh green party have chosen not to put forward joint candidates it's been much tougher to decide.

[Calum]

wow got a reply.... interesting read...
Ethical Consumer Honey Report
Response to questions raised, March 2015
Recently, you raised with Friends of the Earth comments and concerns about the honey
report produced by Ethical Consumer (EC) in 2014, which contained one article written by
our senior nature campaigner.
Many points that have been raised about the report are important to debate, and deserve
more study. Friends of the Earth welcome this opportunity to explore the issues and has
contacted the authors and researchers to obtain responses. These are summarised below.
In its work across the different topics it examines, EC advocates transparency in business
practices and strives to present ethical alternatives to standard practice and consumption. In
the case of its Honey Report, this explores a range of bee-keeping practices on the
spectrum between industrial scale bee keeping and bee conservation – from large
commercial brands deriving honey from multiple EU and non EU sources to local
beekeepers producing modest amounts of honey and bee products such as wax for little
commercial gain, for pleasure and for conservation interest.
EC regards that consumers have a right to know the range of practices that could potentially
be involved in the supply chain of products they buy, in this case, honey. The report
encourages consumers to question the businesses supplying honey and to be informed on a
range of issues and practices whether mainstream or fringe. Central to EC’s approach of
encouraging enquiry and consumer action is the encouragement to consumers to ask key
questions to help ensure the product they buy aligns to their personal ethical values.
The report should have been clearer in its references to the EU, UK and practices outside of
the EU. The report is not intended as a criticism of beekeepers or beekeeping and
references to some practices and techniques that may be performed in the production of
some honey brands does not mean that these apply in all cases of beekeeping and honey
production - that would be incompatible with the report’s recommendation of some brands of
honey as ‘best buys’.
Responses to specific comments received
Report section: Page 4 - “Organic standards encourage the feeding of bees with organic
honey rather than sugar water; limit the use of antibiotics; prohibit the clipping of a queen
bee’s wings and prohibit artificial insemination.”
Comments on the report included that:
- The use of antibiotics for controlling bee health issues is forbidden in the UK and
Europe
- Contamination of honey with antibiotics from farming use is controlled.
Response: Agreed. It is illegal to use antibiotics for controlling bee health in the UK and
some European countries. However, a large number of brands covered in the report source
honey from outside these areas where the use of antibiotics is not illegal. For example, as
highlighted later in the report - on page 16 of the report - Chloramphenicol has been found in
honey imported from China.
Recommended limits on antibiotics in honey is stipulated in the UK, but organic certification
is the simplest way for a consumer concerned about this aspect to buy honey with no or low
levels of antibiotics. It is noted that UK honey cannot receive organic certification at present
because of the widespread use of pesticides and herbicides in the UK.
Report section: “But organic beekeeping can still include a number of practices that could
be conceived of as ‘unnatural’, and as violating animal rights, and are argued by ‘natural
beekeepers’ to be linked to a higher incidence of pests, disease and stress.”
Comments on the report included that:
- Some beekeepers and bee specialists link ‘natural beekeeping’ to higher risks of
infection from pests and disease and stress to bees.
Response: This is an important matter for discussion and the ‘natural beekeepers’
association can be contacted directly to discuss and explore comment on any single
practices. We understand that those promoting ‘natural beekeeping’ do so as a whole
integrated system and holistic approach with multiple practices rather than singular
responses to a particular issue.
Report section: Page 5 – “the beekeeper becomes a giver rather than just a taker.”
Comments on the report included that:
- Beekeepers give more than they take, providing shelter, care, food etc.
Response: Beekeepers do give a lot but the point in the report was a specific reference to
those reading from a vegan perspective. This was included in the report given the general
position that honey is not a vegan product, however benignly it may be produced. For people
with a vegan outlook, the view can probably be described as being that if bees are kept, they
should be kept for the bees themselves and not for the honey they produce.
Report section: “5. Natural Report section: beekeeping: similar to ‘balanced beekeeping’,
with the emphasis on ‘do-nothing’ approaches. Little or no management is attempted.
6. Conservation beekeeping: bees for their own sake; no honey is taken and no inspections,
treatments or feeding.”
Comments on the report included that:
- These two methods promote the spread of varroa
- Allowing bees to swarm raises the chance of bees dying
- Deliberate swarming can spread varroa to surrounding hives.
Response: This is another area worth further debate and, probably, extensive scientific study
to compare the range of bee keeping practices. Conventional beekeepers may frown upon
these minimal management espoused by those in the ‘natural beekeeping’ movement. The
report sought to acknowledge that there is debate on the entire spectrum of beekeeping with
some choosing to question some of the practices in conventional use.
Report section: “Winter survival rates are far better in colonies that have swarmed and
overwintered on their own honey as opposed to sugar water or worse…” and “…mounting
evidence of feral colonies faring better than those kept by beekeepers.”
Comments on the report included that:
- Sugar water is the best energy source for overwintering bees as its lower ‘ballast’
places less pressure on bees’ digestive tracts and can help reduce the instances of
nosema virus
- No scientific study has shown that feral colonies are doing better than others.
Response: These points from the Natural Beekeeping Trust were included as part of
showing that debate exists; proper scientific comparisons would help this debate and cast
more light on the hearsay and observations of different beekeepers which do not always
come to light.
Report section: “smaller cell sizes, or ‘natural’ sized cells. A number of studies have linked
smaller cells to reduced Varroa mite populations.”
Comments on the report included that:
- A number of studies do not support the report on the use of smaller cell sizes
- Fries (2004) found no lasting difference in the effect of cell sizes
- Liebig & Aumeier (2007) found no effect on the pre-treatment natural mite drop and
the extent of varroa infestation of cells
- Dahle (2008) which concluded that smaller cell sizes supplement but not substitute
for oxalic acid treatment.
Response: As stated in the article a number of studies could not prove this assertion. Two of
the studies listed above observed slight drops in varroa mite numbers, they were just not
statistically significant.
Considering the importance of varroa as an issue, this finding, although statistically
insignificant, should be explored further and should be considered as one of several ways to
control varroa, as part of an integrated approach to pest management.
The importance of small cell sizes or, more importantly 'natural cell sizes' made from frames
without foundation, is still ongoing. We are aware of conventional beekeepers experimenting
with smaller cells.
Report section: Page 8 – “These include artificial feeding regimes, artificial insemination,
treatment with antibiotics and pesticides, inhumane transportation conditions and culling.”
Comments on the report included that:
- Artificial feeding regimes (mainly replacing high ballast honey with low ballast honey)
is healthier for the bees
- Treatment with antibiotics is not permitted in the EU
- Use of the term ‘pesticides’ in the report should differentiate between treatments for
varroa and crop spraying.
Response: Beekeepers feed various sugar solutions to bees in a number of circumstances
and some cite different recipe for sugar-based honey replacements
http://www.wimbledonbeekeepers.co.uk...%20recipes.pdf
Antibiotic use within the EI is not permitted but many honeys on sale in the UK and EU come
from locations where no such regulations exist. The report is a consumers’ report about
products which may enter the EU and UK markets.
Apologies, the use of ‘pesticide’ in the report does create the wrong impression in this
instance and has been removed from the copy.
Report section: “Some beekeepers use cyanide gas while others will burn the beehives,
killing all the bees inside.”
Comments on the report included that:
- This is incorrect and use of cyanide would render hives, frames and products from
the hive poisonous
- Whole hives must be burnt when infected with American foul brood and the colony
put to sleep with sulphur dioxide.
Response: Apologies, this is a mistake. EC re-checked the source and do not regard it as
reliable. The reference to cyanide is removed.

[Calum]

continued..
Report section: “In many cases it is cheaper to kill off entire hives rather than feed the bees
through the winter.”
Comments on the report included that:
- The costs and worth of over-wintering a colony varies depending on the methods of
calculation used; an over-wintered colony may be worth between £100- £240
- Beekeepers would not cull given the high of concern about the scarcity of bees.
Response: Culling of drones is performed in the autumn to reduce the impact of mites or
indeed the potential impact of mites. Financial considerations are factored into the decisions
made by large scale industrial operations. The source of EC’s section on culling is The
Bioeconomics of Honey Bees and Pollination (Champetier et al, 2012)
http://aic.ucdavis.edu/publications/Beedynamics2012.pdf
Report section: “One tactic used by beekeepers (in both large- and smaller-scale farming)
to keep production high is clipping the queen’s wings. This helps to prevent swarming.
Because the queen is not able to fly, the swarm simply masses next to the hive. They are
then collected by the beekeeper and returned to the hive. A second tactic used by
beekeepers is to periodically kill and replace the queen.”
Comments on the report included that:
- Nowadays less clipping takes place.
Response: Accepted although clipping remains a practice which ethical consumer readers
and consumers in general may wish to be appraised of.
Report section: “In wild colonies the queen is selected by the worker bees and specially fed
to become sexually mature. In factory farmed hives the beekeeper selects the queen and
often replaces her every two years. In managed colonies the process of queen rearing is the
same as in wild colonies.”
Comments on the report included that:
- Beekeeping promotes the best stock through selective breeding rather than natural
selection and is the basis of all food production since the agricultural revolution.
Response: Agreed, although the thrust of this piece in the report is that bee farming is similar
to that of other forms of farming.
Report section: “A key natural defence for honey bees against Varroa is for the bees to
groom one another and become ‘hygienic’ and able to remove the mites from larvae and
their bodies.”
Comments on the report included that:
- This is hearsay; studies show that improved hygienic attributes help, but cannot
replace supplemental treatments
- Varroa is an alien infection specialised for Asian bees. Native European breeds with
a longer pupation, especially drones, have no defence
- Lack of treatment means accepting higher rates of mortality rate.
Response: We are aware that different beekeepers are trialling different ways of managing
their colonies and observing what works, what doesn’t and so on. An account of the method
described in the report is detailed here: http://scientificbeekeeping.com/choosing-yourtroops-
breeding-mite-fighting-bees/