<< Previous Page        April  1st to 9th, 2005       Next Page >>
Left panel on? Yes | No

Out of Province Trip Report
For the CAPA-CHC Meetings
Saskatoon, Saskatchewan
Feb.1-4, 2005

By Doug McRory
Apiculture Specialist

Tuesday all day was a PMRA Stakeholder Meeting. This was excellent as it gave the beekeeping industry a higher profile with PMRA in Canada. All areas of concern were put on the table. The large group of over 40 participants was divided into four sections to discuss solutions to the area of major concern to the industry as related to disease and pest control. Present control methods and proposed new controls that need development were discussed. A report from this meeting will be produced by PMRA and it will be useful in giving direction to future development of disease and pest management.

CHC has submitted the Oxalic Acid Application as of January 10, 2005. PMRA has it on the fast track system which normally is 15 months but it is hoped to have it through sooner.

Tuesday evening was a meeting with CFIA Honey Inspection group, CAPA and CHC. There was a great deal of discussion about the current marketing problems being caused by ultra-filtered Chinese honey which is flooding the world market a prices below the cost of production in Canada and United States. CFIA was ask what they can do on two levels - testing and labeling to assist correct this problem that will destroy commercial beekeeping if it is not resolved quickly. CFIA did not come to a planned session on Wednesday evening but did present proposals for major changes to the Federal Honey Grading Regulations on Thursday. CFIA proposes to take the term "Canada" out of the grade name and have the country of origin right on the front panel of the label the same size, font and color as the grade. CFIA proposes to change the grade names and color classifications to No.1 White (0-34 mm), Extra Light Amber (35-50 mm), Amber 51-85 mm and Dark >85mm. These colors fit more with the terminology and color ranges used internationally. There was discussion about changing the term "Golden" to "Light Amber". If the honey were the product of one country i.e. Canada - it would be stated on the next line on the front label. If the honey is a blend it would say blend of (list countries by % to nearest 25%) right on the front label. All of these statements would be the same size, font and color as the grade and be on the front panel. CFIA also proposes to get rid of the term pasteurized and not allow opposite indicators. CFIA will adopt the Codex standard for honey. There is work being done internationally to develop the Codex standard to rule out ultrafiltered honey. There are suspicions that the ultrafiltered honey is also being adulterated. CFIA is working like all other importing countries to develop methods of detection for this product. Ultrafiltered honey is diluted then put through a filtering system that removes everything (including Chloramphenical) and leaves the simple sugars from the honey. 20% clean honey is added back to this product and that makes it very hard to analysis. US importers have also found a way around the quotas and duties going into United States and have totally flooded that market with this product. The US market is the largest importer in the world market. It has the most influence on the world price of honey. The current honey price was reported to be about $.85 per pound Canadian dollars. Canadian Beekeepers need at least $1.00 to break even.

The other problem that brought much heated discussion was that of "Honey Flavored Spreads" that are on the Canadian market but do not contain any honey. Carla Berry of the CFIA Forensic Lab is working on how to prevent the use of the name honey on products that do not contain any honey such as these honey-flavored spreads. This was another very hot issue as these products are also taking market share away from real honey.

CFIA will regulate honey with added ingredients under the Honey Grading Regulations.

CFIA proposes to allow raw, unprocessed honey with no declared grade.

CFIA proposes to retain the standard sizes for honey containers.

CFIA proposes to keep export certificates optional - regulatory requirements must still be met and only registered establishments will be permitted to export.

CFIA propose to maintain the exemption for bulk honey movement across provincial boundaries if shipped to a registered establishment.

This process will take time and Pre-publication in Part 1 of Canada Gazette can not happen before 2006.

There were two interesting presentations on the world and Canadian honey production situations. There has actually been an increase in colonies in China. There are a number of new countries on the world scene with major amounts of honey. India, Turkey, and Brazil are examples. There are some indications that Chinese honey is being moved to other countries where it is declared as product of that country to gain access to United States. There is also the build up of Chinese honey due to the embargo over Chloramphenicol from several countries in the world. Apparently Chine has negotiated with the EU to open up to honey trade again but apparently not much has happened yet as the labs in Europe and China are not on the same page yet as far as testing is concerned.

The Canadian production is down about 10% from last year. Production in Canada per colony was down from 135 to 124 pounds per colony. The number of beekeepers was down about 400 to 7990. The number of colonies in Canada was up by 20,000 to 582,000. Canada produced about 33,000 tonnes of honey. Canada exported about 12,000 tonnes mainly to United States (about10, 000 tonnes). Canada imported about 8,000 tonnes of honey. Of this amount, 2/3 was from China (which has doubled) and Argentina was about 1/3.

United States has produced about 80,000 tonnes and imported about 85,000 tonnes. About 10 tonnes of the imports have been from Canada. The US Imports are about 1/3 from China and 1/3 from other countries (some of which it is believed originated in China). Argentina has been reduced considerably in the US market.

The most interesting scientific talk was by Dr. Marla Spivak were she was able the show that the SMR trait is really an enhanced form of hygienic behavior. This was real interesting to hear, as it has been very difficult to find much of the SMR trait in Ontario bees.

The discussions on the border protocols with Dr. Clarice Lulia lead to no action being taken for one year. Ontario had suggested adding morphometrics to the import protocol to give better assurance that the queens do not carry any Africanized genes and Alberta ask that battery boxes be allowed instead of hand picked queens and attendants. The Canadian Honey Producers group also met with Dr. Lulia and requested that the border be opened for package bees. Ontario will allow queens in from mainland United States this season under Federal Permit but continues to press for a safer protocol to protect against the introduction of Africanized genes into Ontario.

Dr. Ernesto did receive one of the grants from Canadian bee Research Fund.

On Farm Food Safety for Canadian honey continues to be worked on by CHC.

Fred Butterworth of CFIA Calgary Lab reported on the reported on the residue testing that was done this past year. CFIA is looking for Nitrofuran, Penicillin, Tylosin, Chloramphenical, Oxy-tetracycline, sulfathiazole, Phenol and Benzaldehyde. No major problems occurred but several beekeepers did receive notices of being out of compliance. Beekeepers need to be aware that CFIA is doing these tests and they can go to parts per billion.

CHC also is looking at finding a way to raise more money and increase membership. The directors could not agree and an equitable way to make CHC work better.

This was a very educational and useful trip.

Doug McRory
Provincial Apiarist
Crop Technology Branch
Ministry of Agriculture and Food
1 Stone Road West
3rd Floor SW
Guelph, Ontario
N1G 4Y2

Tel: 519 826 3595
Fax: 519 826 3567
E-mail: doug.mcrory@omaf.gov.on.ca