Balanced Beekeeping

In my last post I recommended a guide to buying ethical honey which highlights the different ways that bees are kept and for what purpose. I've recently subscribed to Permaculture Magazine, and bought Issue number 81 as a download as it had an article by Philip Chandler about bees and permaculture. An interesting read: he proposes that beekeeping is a continuum from full-on honey farming to purely conservational and I found this a helpful concept, as it is irrespective of both hive choice and number of hives. He points out that bees can't be 'domesticated' like sheep or cows (even though a lot of people refer to honeybees as domesticated and/or livestock) and the choice of management is down to the beekeeper rather than purely the size of the operation.

Although drawing a line between natural and conventional beekeeping is possibly detrimental to the discussion, the greater subdivisions within the spectrum of beekeeping means that the consumer (and beekeeper!) can have a good idea of what husbandry practices can be expected from a particular methodology.

The one that sums up my approach is that of Balanced Beekeeping. He outlines the lack of regular intervention, and that honey harvests are based on the individual circumstances of each hive. Low stocking densities and naturally mated queens are another factor, and swarming is managed by working with the bees' natural rhythms. Drones are left as part of the population of the colony rather than culled. Good forage is required and this encourages more biodiversity and benefits all the species reliant on nectar- and pollen-rich planting for as much of the year as possible.

It is an excellent summary of the different ways we keep and live with our bees and would thoroughly recommend that people ask questions about the provanence of the honey that they're buying to ensure it has been produced in keeping with their own ethical spectrum.

Just Insects?

There have been a couple of entomological media items that have caught my eye recently: this report by Ethical Shopper about honey, and also Chris Packham's letter to the hosts of I'm a Celebrity about the use of animals and animal parts on the show.

Firstly, the honey report. It outlines the production techniques of the different honey suppliers and the implications to bee populations and welfare as a consequence. Much of the commercial honey available in large retail outlets is from management regimes that are little more than factory-farming for bees and the honey itself is a poor relation to the product it's meant to be. Filtering, heat treating, homogenisation can denature the delicate structure and as with all foodstuffs that are processed for long shelf life and standardised for retail use, the nutritional qualities can be compromised.

However, even small scale producers with a small back garden apiary might well be adopting practices that do not put the bees' welfare first. Clipping of the queen's wing to prevent swarming, annual stripping out the stores of honey in autumn and feeding nutritionally poor sugar water as a substitute are not in the bees' own interests in my view and ultimately have a cost to the bees' health, which in turn costs the beekeeper. This opinion of mine is based on the information I've gathered and observations I've made on my own hives: it's not a criticism of beekeepers as we all 'parent' our bees in our own way. However, with annual winter losses pitched at an unsustainable 30% and viruses and disease afflicting many honeybee colonies, surely putting the bees' wellbeing first rather than honey production is the logical conclusion?

I've been really pleased that there is increasing awareness of the medicinal properties of raw honey. The last four customers who have purchased my final few jars have said they are taking it for health benefits rather than simply to spread on toast. If this could be the norm rather than the exception then beekeepers would be encouraged to produce a high-quality artisan product alive with local provenance and consumers would value the medicinal aspects as well as the delicious taste, and the price would reflect this.

On the subject of I'm a Celebrity, the aspect I wanted to pick up on is the responses of the public over Chris' condemning of the program on the basis of animal cruelty. Many people agree with the substance of his letter but there are others who have disagreed on the grounds that 'you don't call an animal welfare charity every time you step on an ant...'

It's completely true, but then us (and indeed many other animals) treading on an ant and swatting at an irritating fly have occurred over time immemorial. People have also eaten insects - cultures that collect wild honeycomb also relish the bee grubs within the comb as a rich and necessary source of protein. However, to say that it's ok to use live animals for gratuitous entertainment is, as Chris states, outdated; the fact they are 'just insects' is irrelevant.

There is a good quote from Bradley Millar: "Teaching a child not to step on a caterpillar is as valuable to the child as it is to the caterpillar" which I think ties in with this issue. Having a respect for the natural world and viewing every part of it as having its place (even if we then choose to eat or control it) might go some way to redressing the balance on our crowded planet.

Privet Hawk Moth Caterpillar