Keith Holyoake was always well-thought of by New Zealand beekeepers. He was invariably jovial, and was quick to promise that the industry would get whatever it needed from the Government while he had a say in it.
In reality, Keith Holyoake failed the honey industry on enough occasions that it is surprising that he seemed to stay in such favour. I have written before about the failures when setting up the NZ Honey Marketing Authority at the end of 1953.
https://www.beekeeping.nz/the-beginnings-of-the-honey-marketing-authority/
This article describes the events from several years earlier. Through the late 1940’s, with honey prices quite possibly below the cost of production, the issues relating to “abandoned or neglected” bee hives were clearly in the industry’s sights. The Dept of Agriculture claimed that their hands were tied, that without a change to the Apiaries Act no effective actions could be taken simply because hives were abandoned or neglected, but only when they were found with AFB.
Remits to the NBA conferences made it clear that beekeepers would welcome more action, and especially when it involved foulbrood. In 1950 the NBA conference agreed that “grossly neglected” apiaries in which AFB had been found should be destroyed. That became a pretty consistent ‘policy’ of the NBA for the following years.
https://www.beekeeping.nz/NZBDA/NZBkpr/1950_08_NZBkpr.pdf#page13
When first presented with the issue Holyoake appears to have agreed, but later wrote “From a legal point of view it was inferred that when disease was found in a grossly neglected apiary that it would be present throughout the apiary”. He reverted to the position that inspectors could only destroy individual hives when found with AFB, and he offered no real solution to the abandoned/neglected aspects.
https://beekeeping.nz/NZBDA/timeline/1950_07_10_Ministers_response_to_grossly_neglected_hives.pdf
The NBA continued to raise the issue with Holyoake over the next months, noting that department officials had said nothing more could be done without an amendment to the Apiaries Act to allow for the power of destruction of an entire apiary when it was found to be grossly neglected and AFB had been found.
https://www.beekeeping.nz/NZBDA/NBA_minutes/1950_Exec_minutes.pdf#page=17
https://beekeeping.nz/NZBDA/timeline/1950_11_30_Grossly_neglected_hives.pdf
In October 1951, Holyoake (then Minister of Agriculture) met with Des Williams and Garnie Fraser (president and general secretary of the NBA), two Dept of Ag officials and the Acting Director of Marketing to (finally!) discuss an amendment to the Apiaries Act.
https://beekeeping.nz/NZBDA/timeline/1951_10_05_Meeting_re_grossly_neglected_hives.pdf
Holyoake still seemed to feel the current powers were sufficient. If/when AFB was identified in any hive, it could be destroyed. Garnie Fraser tried to point out to him the inadequacies of that approach, destroying the apiary one or two hives at a time while the AFB was still being spread. (One of the department officials naively felt that the local NBA branch could make a “personal appeal” to the beekeeper to encourage them to deal with their abandoned or neglected hives…)
The two Dept Agriculture officials (A.M.W Grieg, Director of the Horticulture Division, and T.S. Winter, Superintendent of Beekeeping) tried to back the NBA’s submission, pointing out that a grossly neglected apiary will eventually become a menace to the industry, and said they felt it should be dealt with at the same time as the first AFB case, rather than waiting for each hive to ultimately be infected.
Holyoake at that point in the meeting did not have a very good grasp on what was being said to him. He said he was not inclined to allow the destruction of an apiary if AFB had not been found. The NBA quickly tried to clarify that that was not what they were seeking. The NBA hoped that as soon as the first AFB was found in an apiary that was abandoned/neglected, that the Apiary Inspector could require the entire apiary to be destroyed. And even then, there would be a right of appeal to a committee of the Apiary Instructor and two beekeepers appointed by the local NBA branch.
Holyoake promised to look into the matter…
A few weeks later Holyoake told the NBA he would not support a move to destroy abandoned/neglected apiaries when the first AFB was found. Ironically he said it was in part because the NBA did not seek the destruction of abandoned/neglected regardless of whether AFB had been found, which it now sounds like he might have supported!
https://beekeeping.nz/NZBDA/timeline/1951_10_18_Ministers_response_to_meeting.pdf
But wait… Rather than really do anything meaningful Keith Holyoake used his well-developed delaying skills. He asked his officials for a list of beekeepers who had abandoned/neglected apiaries so that he could approach them individually.
That took several months, with exchanges between the Dept of Ag Head Office and the Apiary Instructors out in the districts. Ultimately, the NZ Minister of Agriculture Keith Holyoake wrote to six beekeepers who were identified as major offenders, ranging from Greymouth to Rotorua.
https://beekeeping.nz/NZBDA/timeline/1951_12_07_Minister_writes_to_grossly_neglected_hive_owners.pdf
Even in his personal letter, Holyoake still seemed determined to be the good guy, simply making “an appeal” to them to give immediate attention to “bring them up to normal working condition” and that he wasn’t aware of the conditions that led to the beekeeper’s name being included on the list given to him.
The files at Archives NZ that I viewed did not have any record of any of those six beekeepers doing anything or even responding to this personal letter of appeal from a Minister of the Crown!
The issue of abandoned or neglected apiaries remained a problem for many years after that, with the Dept of Agriculture feeling constrained about doing anything unless/until AFB was found and even then, only as it was found, with no provision for dealing with the rest of the (infected) apiary.
Keith Holyoake may have been pretty slow to act, but when he did, he was often ineffectual – at least as far as it would be seen by ordinary beekeepers. It was 1953, several years later, before an amendment to the Apiaries Act was made – but it addressed only the issue of keeping access to hives clear so that they could be readily inspected. While that might have been a nice thing, it did nothing to address many/most of the cases of abandoned or neglected apiaries.
https://www.nzlii.org/nz/legis/hist_act/aaa19531953n29198/
And even then, it did not provide for destruction of the hives, only that if there wasn’t adequate access to the hives, the inspector would be able to order the beekeeper to make it better, or charge the beekeeper to have the work done.
It wasn’t until 1969 that the Apiaries Act was finally worded in such a way that the problem could be, potentially, dealt with effectively. Section 10 of that Act finally gave the power to destroy an abandoned/neglected apiary after giving the owner a chance to comply.
https://www.nzlii.org/nz/legis/hist_act/aa19691969n53118/
In a 1989 review of the Apiaries Act, MAF described deficiencies with the system as it existed.
https://beekeeping.nz/NZBDA/timeline/1989_06_Review_of_Apiaries_Act.pdf#page=19
When the time came to transition from Apiaries Act to the Biosecurity Act’s Pest Management Strategy, that was one of the powers that MAF Regulatory was slow to agree to. And yet just about all beekeepers would agree that an apiary that is either abandoned or even just badly neglected poses a distinct risk to all beekeepers, even before the first case of AFB might be found…