Honey Industry Votes to Continue the Research and Promotion Program
Date September 08, 2022
The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) today announced that U.S. honey first handlers and importers have approved continuing the National Honey Board research and promotion program.
In the referendum, 73.8% of first handlers and importers voting, who represented 85.5% of the volume of honey or honey products voting in the referendum, were in favor of continuing the program. Over 50% of the first handlers and importers voting and over 50% of the volume voting in the referendum were required for the program to continue.
To be eligible to participate in the referendum, first handlers and importers had to handle or import at least 250,000 pounds of honey or honey products during the representative period of Jan. 1 through Dec. 31, 2021, and be subject to assessments under the program.
The Honey Packers and Importers Research, Promotion, Consumer Education and Industry Information Order, which has been administered by the National Honey Board since 2008, requires USDA to conduct a referendum every seven years to determine whether the industry is in favor of continuing the program. For the program to continue, first handlers and importers had to approve the program by a majority of handlers and importers voting in the referendum, who also represent a majority of the volume represented in the referendum.
The honey research and promotion program is authorized under the Commodity Promotion, Research and Information Act of 1996. The program was developed to administer an effective and coordinated program of generic promotion, consumer information and related research designed to drive consumption of honey and honey products in the U.S.
For more information about the National Honey Board, visit the National Honey Board AMS webpage page or visit their website at honey.com.
Since 1966, Congress has authorized the development of industry-funded research and promotion boards to provide a framework for agricultural industries to pool their resources and combine efforts to develop new markets, strengthen existing markets and conduct important research and promotion activities. The Agricultural Marketing Service provides oversight of 22 boards, paid for by industry assessments, which helps ensure fiscal accountability and program integrity.
USDA Honey Outlook Report: U.S. Demand for Honey Hits All-Time High
The USDA has published its annual Honey Outlook Report, and the news is overwhelmingly positive. The United States is the second largest honey consumer behind China, according to the latest data available from the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization in 2019. And in 2021, consumption reached a new record high of 618 million pounds, up 8 percent from the previous year.
The previous record was 596 million pounds in 2017. Between 1991 and 2021, the average rate of growth has been 10.7 million pounds per year. This translates to about 1.9 pounds per capita of honey consumption in 2021 compared with 1.2 pounds per capita in the early 1990s. The growth in demand, in part due to the growing population, has also been attributed to consumers’ association of honey as a “superfood”—along with garlic, ginger and turmeric—and perception of honey being a healthy sweetener.
According to the Honey Outlook Report, the national average price paid to honey producers in 2021 was $2.54 per pound, up from last year’s $2.10. This is now the highest price, surpassing 2018’s record-high price of $2.21. Prices in 2021 were higher than 2020 by 23 to 28 percent in the top 3 producing states and by 8 percent in the rest of the states. Read the full report here.
Shared by request as a resource for our membership. The original article can be found – https://www.consumernotice.org/environmental/pesticides/roundup/alternatives/
Roundup alternatives without glyphosate are available and can be effective. Organic brand options use naturally occurring oils or acids, and some alternatives can even be made with household ingredients. Farmers may find it easier to use different herbicides or farming methods.
Interest in alternatives to Roundup has grown quickly since concerns emerged over the herbicide’s safety. Its active ingredient, glyphosate, is branded as a probable cause of cancer by the United Nation’s International Agency for Research on Cancer. But regulators in the United States have said glyphosate does not pose a risk to people’s health or the environment.
At the same time, more than 13,000 Roundup lawsuits claiming the pesticide caused non-Hodgkin lymphoma or other cancers have been filed in courts around the United States.
Everyday consumers may be in a better position than farmers to adopt alternatives to Roundup. Large farms or landscaping operations may have a harder — and more expensive — time giving up glyphosate-based herbicides.
There are several glyphosate alternatives for controlling weeds around your house. You may need to consider different options for different parts of your yard or garden. Not all options may work in all cases.
Putting down a 2- to 3-inch layer of mulch will cut off the sunlight weeds need to sprout. Any weeds that manage to germinate will suffocate under the weight of the mulch.
A handful of iron-based weed killers have been approved by the Environmental Protection Agency. Broadleaf weeds absorb iron more easily and in higher amounts than the grass in your lawn. As the iron oxidizes, it kills weeds within just hours after applying it.
Manually digging up weeds by the root may be the most effective way to get rid of them. It is also the most labor intensive.
Organic Alternatives to Roundup
Several brands of organic herbicides are available in the United States. They tend to use naturally occurring oils or acids to kill weeds. These products typically work on weeds after they’ve sprouted. However, they are not usually effective against perennial weeds.
Organic Roundup alternatives include herbicidal soaps that use fatty acids to kill weeds and industrial vinegar, which contains much higher levels of acetic acid than what you have in your kitchen. Acid-based herbicides burn down some young weeds.
Corn gluten meal can kill grass weeds and broadleaf weeds. To use it, spread 20 pounds for every 1,000 square feet of garden. Wait five days to water the area if it hasn’t rained. It should kill weeds for up to six weeks.
Organic herbicides are most effective when weeds are still small and less effective as weeds get older, according to a study by the University of California Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources.
The study found that the organic weed killers were 60 percent to 100 percent effective if used in high volume against certain weeds before they were 12 days old. But they were less than 40 percent effective if used on broadleaf weeds after 26 days.
They were also expensive for large scale use, costing $400 to $600 an acre in 2010, which was more costly than pulling weeds by hand.
Home Recipe for a Roundup Alternative
If you’re worried about Roundup and cancer risks, you can cook up an alternative using easy-to-find household ingredients. The internet is full of formulas you can make at home, but you should be careful. Even seemingly safer or organic mixtures can kill plants you want to protect, damage your soil or cause you harm.
Researchers at North Dakota State University tested a popular vinegar, salt and soap homemade herbicide formula in 2014. They found it was effective at killing small annual weeds. It didn’t work very well on large annual weeds or perennials. Annuals are plants that only live a year. Perennials are those that live two years or more, coming back each year.
The researchers found glyphosate was cheaper, but the homemade mix, using store brand ingredients, was still less than $3 a gallon. That made it practical for home use against certain weeds.
The mixture can still be toxic to humans and animals if swallowed. Based on animal tests, the researchers estimated that a gallon of the salt and vinegar concoction was nearly 10 times more toxic than the store brand glyphosate they tested it against. So it should be stored away from children and pets.
So the vinegar you are using to spray your weeds is probably made from corn that was sprayed with glyphosate: the very herbicide you were trying to avoid.
You should also be aware that vinegar may contain glyphosate. That’s because most vinegar is made with corn and most corn in the United States is grown from Roundup Ready seed. Those are crops genetically modified so farmers can continue using Roundup as the crop matures.
“So the vinegar you are using to spray your weeds is probably made from corn that was sprayed with glyphosate: the very herbicide you were trying to avoid,” the researchers wrote.
You might get around this problem by using certified organic vinegar.
Farming Techniques, Other Herbicides and Robots as Alternatives
Long before people started worrying about potential health risks with glyphosate, farmers were already looking for Roundup alternatives.
The first Roundup-resistant weeds cropped up in a Delaware soybean field in 2000 and have been a growing problem ever since. By 2014, at least 24 species of weeds had developed a resistance to glyphosate.
Other Herbicides
A study in 2008 in the journal Pest Management Science called glyphosate “a once-in-a-century herbicide.” Despite the rise of Roundup resistant weeds, it’s been difficult for researchers to find anything that works as well as glyphosate at controlling weeds.
But Bayer AG, the drug and chemical giant that makes Roundup, promised in June 2019 to spend $5.6 billion over the next 10 years on herbicide research.
One alternative may be biopesticides, a staple of organic farming. They’re made of naturally occurring substances found in plants, animals, minerals, fungi and bacteria. The Environmental Protection Agency reported more than 18 million acres were being treated with biopesticides in 2015.
Some farmers have switched to an older pesticide called dicamba. It can be sprayed on crops that have been genetically modified to be resistant to it while killing the weeds around them. But it’s been blamed for drifting and destroying 3.6 million acres of unprotected crops in 2017 alone.
Alternative Farming Techniques
Crop rotation — changing the crops grown in a field from season-to-season or year-to-year — can break up weeds’ growth and reproductive cycles. Growing cover crops that protect and enrich the soil during the rotation also helps.
EXPAND
Crop rotation — planting different crops in a specific order — is one of the oldest and most effective ways to control weeds on farms.
Physical weed control uses brute force against weeds. Mechanical weeders pulled behind tractors can rip weeds out between rows. Thermal weeding uses flames, steam or hot water sprayed onto weeds to kill them with heat.
Robotic Weeding
New agriculture robots may soon take over mechanical weeding chores or reduce the amount of pesticides sprayed on crops.
French company Naio Technologies has been testing its Dino weeding robot in the Unites States. Its operator types in instructions, such as field and crop row dimensions, on the four-wheeled robot’s controls. It then uses GPS and cameras to move through the field using cultivator blades to rip up weeds.
The company says the electric robot can cover 12 acres in eight hours on its own. And it could potentially cut labor costs. The New Food Economy, a nonprofit news organization, quoted a farm production engineer as saying one person could manage a fleet of 10 such robots, eliminating the need for 10 people to man a tractor each.
We see these herbicides eventually being used commercially with camera-based precision applicators that ‘see’ weeds and deliver herbicides only to the weeds, not to the crop or bare ground.
Coupling robots with organic herbicides could be an economically and environmentally friendly combination.
“We see these herbicides eventually being used commercially with camera-based precision applicators that ‘see’ weeds and deliver herbicides only to the weeds, not to the crop or bare ground,” W. Thomas Lanini of the University of California wrote in a report on research into organic herbicides.
The solar-powered ecoRobotix does just that using artificial intelligence and cameras to navigate and to identify weeds as it passes over. Two robotic arms spray pesticide precisely on weeds. And it uses 20 times less herbicide than conventional sprayers.
Why Is Roundup Still So Widely Used?
Roundup became the first glyphosate-based herbicide when it hit the market in the 1970s. Today, glyphosate is the most widely used weed killer in the world. Much of its appeal is that it is cheap and effective, according to researchers at North Carolina State University.
In a 2018 Extension Service publication, weed scientists Joel Neal and Andrew Senesac wrote that glyphosate has several advantages over other weed-killing options. It kills a wide variety of weeds, doesn’t get into the soil and kill other plants, and it’s less expensive than other herbicides.
In general, the results suggested that, compared to conventional herbicides, the alternative methods chosen for research were less effective and more costly,” researchers wrote in their report.
The scientists said there are effective alternatives to glyphosate, but each tends to have a drawback. They wrote that alternatives “will be, in some way, less effective, less convenient, and/or more expensive.”
State transportation departments have looked at alternatives for controlling weeds along thousands of miles of highway right of way. A 2008 report for Massachusetts’ transportation department found the same problems the North Carolina State researchers found.
“In general, the results suggested that, compared to conventional herbicides, the alternative methods chosen for research were less effective and more costly,” researchers wrote in their report.
Please seek the advice of a qualified professional before making decisions about your health or finances.
ARTICLE VIII the bylaws states that the “bylaws may be amended or repealed, in whole or in part, by a majority vote at any organized meeting of the Association preceded by a thirty (30) day advance written notice to the membership of such proposed change. This will be done by means of publication in the TBA Journal in a timely issue, and/or sent to the members last recorded preferred contact address preceding such meeting.” The bylaws are posted on the TBA website.
The membership will be asked to consider and approve the following change to Article II Section 2 of the current bylaws at the 2022 Annual Meeting regarding the members of the Nominations Committee: “The Nominations Committee will consist of but not be limited to, the Immediate Past President, two “Directors at Large” shall be changed to “Executive Committee members serving currently or who have served in the previous five years” selected by the Executive Committee, and two members from the general membership.”
Having representation on the Nominations Committee from both the general membership and those who have had the experience of serving on the Executive Committee brings a well-rounded perspective to the Nominations Committee. This change is recommended to broaden the pool of potential Nominations Committee members selected from the Executive Committee because Directors At Large selected to the Nominations Committee who want to be considered for nomination to other positions must recuse themselves from the process of interviewing nominees for those positions. If the pool of potential members is broadened slightly, the Nominations Committee can function with less of these conflicts arising.
Even the royal bees are mourning the death of Queen Elizabeth II. In a new report from The Daily Mail, royal beekeeper John Chapple revealed that he was required to inform the royal hive at Buckingham Palace and Clarence House of Queen Elizabeth’s passing in accordance with a tradition that dates back centuries. “I’m at the hives now and it is traditional when someone dies that you go to the hives and say a little prayer and put a black ribbon on the hive,” Chapple said.
In addition to informing them of the Queen’s death, the official beekeeper also alerted the bees of their new master, King Charles III.
Chapple explained the process to the publication, saying, “You knock on each hive and say, ‘The mistress is dead, but don’t you go. Your master will be a good master to you.’”
According to The Daily Mail, this tradition stems from a superstition that if the bees are not informed of the change in monarch, then they might stop producing honey, or even die. Chapple, who has been the royal beekeeper for 15 years, was clearly not going to be the one to let this custom fade away. “I was the Queen’s beekeeper and hopefully now I’ll get the job of being the King’s beekeeper,” he added.
In the past, it’s been revealed that the palace has enough bees to provide the family with a year’s supply of honey. On World Bee Day in 2020, the official royal family Instagram shared a post that explained, “Buckingham Palace is home to four Italian honey bee (Apis mellifera ligustica) hives. The bees live on an island in the Palace gardens and forage on a wealth of nectar plants, both native and exotic.”
It added, “During the season, the bees produce enough honey for the palace to be self-sufficient, with over 200 jars produced [in 2019]. The honey is used by Palace chefs throughout the year at Garden Parties and receptions, where it is served in honey madeleines, as a filling for chocolate truffles and in honey and cream sponge.”
Let’s hope the bees understood Chapple’s message loud and clear.
As AHPA continues to work on behalf of all beekeepers, one of our initiatives is advocating with the FDA in Washington D.C. to update honey labeling guidelines. As part of this effort, we need your help to collect pictures of honey labels from around the United States. Our goal is primarily to find honey that is mislabeled according to current FDA guidelines. Secondarily, we need examples of any labels which misrepresent country of origin or are purposefully confusing to consumers so that we can advocate for positive changes and updates.
Search the App Store or Google Play for “AHPA app”. We need to collect as many pictures from honey on the store shelf as possible. Please take a few minutes to help collect this data.
May 11, 2022
News Release 22-058
Inv. No. 731-TA-1560-1562 and 731-TA-1564 (Final)
Contact: Jennifer Andberg, 202-205-1819
Raw Honey from Argentina, Brazil, India, and Vietnam Injures U.S. Industry, Says USITC
The United States International Trade Commission (USITC) today determined that a U.S. industry is materially injured by reason of imports of raw honey from Argentina, Brazil, India, and Vietnam that the U.S. Department of Commerce (Commerce) has determined are sold in the United States at less than fair value.
Chair Jason E. Kearns, Vice Chair Randolph J. Stayin, and Commissioners David S. Johanson, Rhonda K. Schmidtlein, and Amy A. Karpel voted in the affirmative.
As a result of the Commission’s affirmative determinations, Commerce will issue antidumping duty orders on imports of this product from Argentina, Brazil, India, and Vietnam.
The Commission made a negative critical circumstances finding with regard to imports of this product from Argentina. The Commission made an affirmative critical circumstances finding with regard to imports of this product from Vietnam.
The Commission’s public report Raw Honey from Argentina, Brazil, India, and Vietnam (Inv. Nos. 731-TA-1560-1562 and 731-TA-1564 (Final), USITC Publication 5327, May 2022) will contain the views of the Commission and information developed during the investigations.
UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
Washington, DC 20436
FACTUAL HIGHLIGHTS
Raw Honey from Argentina, Brazil, India, and Vietnam
Investigation Nos.: 731-TA-1560-1562, 1564 (Final)
Product Description: Honey is a sweet, viscous fluid produced from the nectar of plants and flowers which is collected by honeybees, transformed, and combined with substances of their own, and stored and left in honeycombs to mature and ripen. Raw honey is honey as it exists in the beehive or as obtained by extraction, settling and skimming, or straining.
Status of Proceedings:
Type of investigation: Final antidumping duty investigations.
Petitioners: American Honey Producers Association (“AHPA”), Bruce, South Dakota; and Sioux Honey Association (“SHA”), Sioux City, Iowa.
USITC Institution Date: Wednesday, April 21, 2021.
USITC Hearing Date: Tuesday, April 12, 2022.
USITC Vote Date: Wednesday, May 11, 2022.
USITC Notification to Commerce Date: Tuesday, May 31, 2022.
U.S. Industry in 2020:
Number of U.S. producers: approximately 30,000 to 60,000.
Location of producers’ plants: North Dakota, South Dakota, California, Texas, Montana, Florida, Minnesota, and Michigan
Production and related workers: 1,360.
U.S. producers’ U.S. shipments: $302 million.
Apparent U.S. consumption: $690 million.
Ratio of subject imports to apparent U.S. consumption: 42.8 percent.
U.S. Imports in 2020:
Subject imports: $296 million.
Nonsubject imports: $93 million.
Leading import sources: Argentina, Brazil, India, Vietnam.
The decision will be transmitted to the Commerce Department, which will issue antidumping duty orders shortly. In addition, the Commission reached an affirmative critical circumstances determination against Vietnam. This means that U.S. Customs will collect antidumping duties on entries going back an additional 90 days prior to the preliminary antidumping duty determination—from August 28, 2020, forward. This is an important additional finding, and one that the Commission rarely makes.
These results should continue to ensure that the American honey producer gets the fair prices they deserve.
We truly appreciate all of the donations that we have received to cover legal fees.
The good fight isn’t over yet, however, and we still need your support.
To donate to the Antidumping Fund, please contact
Cassie Cox: cassie@ahpanet.com
281-900-9740
The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) today announced that U.S. honey first handlers and importers have approved continuing the National Honey Board research and promotion program.
In the referendum, 73.8% of first handlers and importers voting, who represented 85.5% of the volume of honey or honey products voting in the referendum, were in favor of continuing the program. Over 50% of the first handlers and importers voting and over 50% of the volume voting in the referendum were required for the program to continue.
To be eligible to participate in the referendum, first handlers and importers had to handle or import at least 250,000 pounds of honey or honey products during the representative period of Jan. 1 through Dec. 31, 2021, and be subject to assessments under the program.
The Honey Packers and Importers Research, Promotion, Consumer Education and Industry Information Order, which has been administered by the National Honey Board since 2008, requires USDA to conduct a referendum every seven years to determine whether the industry is in favor of continuing the program. For the program to continue, first handlers and importers had to approve the program by a majority of handlers and importers voting in the referendum, who also represent a majority of the volume represented in the referendum.
The honey research and promotion program is authorized under the Commodity Promotion, Research and Information Act of 1996. The program was developed to administer an effective and coordinated program of generic promotion, consumer information and related research designed to drive consumption of honey and honey products in the U.S.
Since 1966, Congress has authorized the development of industry-funded research and promotion boards to provide a framework for agricultural industries to pool their resources and combine efforts to develop new markets, strengthen existing markets and conduct important research and promotion activities. The Agricultural Marketing Service provides oversight of 22 boards, paid for by industry assessments, which helps ensure fiscal accountability and program integrity.
Food Handler’s Course – need your Food Handler’s Certification for your honey sales in Texas? Texas A&M AgriLife is offering a virtual course, November 3, 2022, 6-8pm, for $20. This certification is good for 2 years!
This class is geared for those who want or need that certification to sell Honey in Texas (with the new rules/laws by DSHS). Honey producers are NOT REQUIRED to have a this certification, but anyone selling honey/honey products under Cottage Food laws IS required to have this. DSHS encourages everyone (even beekeepers) to go through the course, but beekeepers are not required to do so. Please pre-register at Online Survey Software | Qualtrics Survey Solutions this is also where you will receive information for the course!
Please mail $20 payment to:
Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Attn: Angie Gutierrez 3355 Cherry Ridge Suite 212 San Antonio, TX 78230
Questions? Contact Angie at 210-631-0400 | aogutierrez@ag.tamu.edu
Keystone, Colo., August 22, 2022 — The Honey Bee Health Coalition unveiled the 8th Edition of the Tools for Varroa Management Guide today. The guide provides information on the latest tools and options for beekeepers in the USA and Canada to keep bees healthy and manage varroa mites, which spread disease within and among honey bee colonies.
The full guide is offered free of charge at the Honey Bee Health Coalition’s Website: https://honeybeehealthcoalition.org/resources/varroa-management/
As AHPA continues to work on behalf of all beekeepers, one of our initiatives is advocating with the FDA in Washington D.C. to update honey labeling guidelines. As part of this effort, we need your help to collect pictures of honey labels from around the United States. Our goal is primarily to find honey that is mislabeled according to current FDA guidelines. Secondarily, we need examples of any labels which misrepresent country of origin or are purposefully confusing to consumers so that we can advocate for positive changes and updates.
