The United States does not import much honey other than red honey, which is the lower grade honey. Mr. RAY. Imports? Mr. JENKINS. Yes. Mr. RAY. Not being an importer, I can't give you the quality of all of the honey. Mr. JENKINS. While it costs no more to produce the sourwood or floral honey, its production is limited to a certain part of the honey when that is produced, and the United States does not import the white honey. Is this correct? Mr. RAY. There are some countries that produce a white grade of honey that is being imported, yes, at the same prices. Mr. JENKINS. To follow up on Mr. Steiger's question of a few moments ago regarding the domestic hobby beekeepers who produce 40 to 50 percent of the domestic honey, is it your testimony that these imports will decrease the number of hobby farmers? Mr. RAY. I think very much, especially the sideliners. Mr. JENKINS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. RAY. Their honey has to reach a retail market. That is their principal source of sales. So, their price would follow the general price of demand. Mr. JENKINS. Has it affected either yet? Mr. RAY. Yes, I think it has, definitely in the last 12 months considerably. Mr. VANIK. Mr. Holland? Mr. HOLLAND. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Is this honey concentrated in any particular part of this country? Mr. RAY. There are 8, 9, 10 States that produce more honey than the other States-Minnesota, Nebraska, South Dakota. Mr. HOLLAND. A huge part of your argument relates to pollination. Is there any real relationship between the existence of a honey industry and the impact bees have on pollination? Mr. RAY. Yes; there is a sideline to this industry that is receiving a fee for pollination. In the spring bees are moving from a great many States, as an example, into the State of California-actually, from almost as far as Minnesota-to pollinate almonds. They demand they have bees for pollination and they pay these beekeepers to move in there from a lot of States, they need so many bees, and they are being paid for their pollination. That is what I referred to in my testimony as commercial beekeepers have a tendency to confine their bees to certain areas, while your hobbyists and sideliner beekeepers are scattered over the entire 50 States, in towns and outside, in the countryside, in the rural area. They cover a great deal of pollination, producing 40 percent of the honey. Half of the bees are really scattered out. Mr. HOLLAND. In parts of the country where we don't have an appreciable honey industry, the bees still pollinate onions, for instance in South Carolina. Mr. RAY. I am sure if you are raising onionseeds in South Carolina, if you are making some arrangements for bees to cover them because that is one of the crops that practically demands-onionseed demands. insect pollination. Mr. VANIK. Mr. Frenzel. Mr. FRENZEL. I would like to give our witness a special welcome because he comes from the State of Minnesota and he is a constituent of our colleague Albert Quie who prepared the concurrent resolution offered by Mr. Pressler. He did it last year, of course. I would like to thank the witness for his testimony. I am a little confused by the pollination matter, too. Your statement indicates honeybees pollinate 85 percent of agricultural crops. What percentage of the 85 percent are your honey bees and how many are wild honeybees? Mr. RAY. I think my statement should explain that. Thank you for your remarks about Minnesota, Mr. Frenzel. In my statement I tried to say that these crops depend entirely upon insects for pollination. There is cross-pollination that has to be transferred by an insect and honeybees constitute 85 percent of the insects that man has, and even that figure is fast decreasing as we use insecticides indiscriminately, the wild bees, the crawling insects, and that sort of thing are diminishing, so it will become much more important for man-controlled insects to do that work. Mr. FRENZEL. Let me ask that question again. Do you mean the 85 percent is provided by your honeybees? Mr. FRENZEL. You indicated that the threat which was predicted by the ITC has now become a reality. Could you tell us briefly what is going to happen to the industry in the coming year, absent this protection? Mr. RAY. In my own operation, it is just a simple business proposition. If I can't sell my honey for a profit, I cannot last in the industry. When my production costs exceed my sales basically, I am all through. Mr. FRENZEL. I notice that when the Commission was conducting its hearings, it sent a questionnaire to beekeepers of 300 or more colonies and received a rather sparse reply. Are there some people not being affected as much as you are? Why do you suppose they were not willing to return a questionnaire on this question which seems so important for some people? Mr. RAY. I can only answer that in one way. In asking the Commission the same question, I found out in all their inquiries they only get a certain percent of replies, and in the beekeepers, it was higher than the average. Mr. FRENZEL. So you think only a quarter replied? Mr. RAY. Well, I think it was a very poor reply. Mr. VANIK. The Commission noted the price spread between what the honey producer received and what the retail consumer paid, pointing out this narrowing in 1973, but a widening in 1974 and 1975. On Saturday we did a little checking with some local stores, at Safeway and Giant. These are unit prices per pound: Sioux Bee Honey, 24 ounces, 99.4 cents; Sioux Bee, 40 ounces, 91.6 cents; Empress, 12 ounces, $1.11; Empress, 24 ounces, 95.4 cents; Giant brand, 8 ounces, $1.18; Giant brand, 21⁄2 pounds, 96 cents. For the merchandise which appeared on the store shelf Saturday, what would the producers be receiving for that? Mr. RAY. Our projected price for some of this honey? Mr. VANIK. I would suppose that would be 4, 5, 6 months earlier. What would you have received 5 or 6 months earlier? Mr. RAY. Our present price is in the neighborhood of 42 cents. Mr. VANIK. Isn't some of the problem in the spread, what you get and what it sells for on the shelf? Mr. RAY. Did you ask if that was some of the problem? Mr. VANIK. That is what I am asking you? Mr. RAY. As I tried to point out in my testimony, I don't think the price of honey has come down. It is my opinion that imports have brought the price down and the domestic producer is taking less, but the shelf price of honey has not changed-very slowly. I think maybe the testimony that will follow will answer some of those questions more specifically as to price. Mr. VANIK. Thank you very much. We appreciate your testimony, Mr. Ray. If you like, you can get your reply to the one question. Mr. RAY. I am having a little trouble sorting that out in my mind. [The following was recieved for the record:] Hon. AL ULLMAN, [Mailgram] AMERICAN BEEKEEPING FEDERATION, Chairman, House Ways and Means Committee, Essential pollination of more than 60 major crops by honey bees is in jeopardy as a result of greatly increased imports which reached a staggering 661⁄2 million pounds in 1976 at an average F.A.S. price of 30.9 cents per poound thereby substantially reducing domestic producer returns from honey sales which provide major sustenance for the industry. We urge your support for Concurrent Resolution No. 80 or your assistance in providing other avenues of relief from this very serious problem which may result in sharply reduced production of essential food and fibre. ROBERT RAY, President. Mr. VANIK. My staff will give you a copy of it. We would like to call up our distinguished colleague, Mr. James Abdnor from South Dakota. You have with you Mr. Weldon of the Sioux Honey Association. I wonder if Mr. Weldon would sit with you. The committee would be pleased to hear from you. STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES ABDNOR, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA Mr. ABDNOR. I certainly appreciate this opportunity for allowing Mr. Walter Weldon to join me here. My testimony is very short. I basically want to introduce him. Mr. Chairman and members, I want to commend you for calling this hearing to consider disapproval of President Ford's negative action on the recommendation of the International Trade Commission. We feel quite strongly about this. Much of the matter I was going to cover you have gone through, and you have heard from experts in the business. I leave it in my testimony I submit to the committee. I will submit my testimony. Mr. VANIK. Without objection, your entire statement will be submitted. [The prepared statement follows:] STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES ABDNOR, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA IN CONGRESS Mr. Chairman, I commend you for calling this hearing to consider disapproval of President Ford's negative action on the recommendation of the International Trade Commission that import relief be provided to the domestic honey industry under Section 203 of the Trade Act of 1974. The ITC concluded from its investigations that the industry had valid cause for relief under these provisions, and I agree. The President does have the authority to deny such relief to the industry if he feels doing so is in the overall national economic interest, but I believe he was wrong in so concluding in this instance. As one of my constituents, Mrs. Ruth Wischmann of Burke, South Dakota, pointed out in a recent letter addressed to me, USDA studies indicate that a large number of crops in the U.S. depend on bees for pollination. Mrs. Wischmann goes on to say that we can get along without honey; but without bees for pollination of many of our essential crops our national economic well-being would be seriously affected. William and Margaret Brazell of Hermosa, South Dakota, put it still more succinctly when they wrote, "You can import honey but you can't import pollination." Another of my constituents, Mr. Walter Weldon, who is vice president of Sioux Honey Association, is here today and will be able to give the Subcommittee further insight into the views of beekeepers in my part of the country. Before I defer to Mr. Weldon there is just one further general observation I'd like to make. I believe international trade, properly conceived, can contribute to the well-being of all concerned. When relatively more restrictive policies of other nations threaten to make the U.S. a dumping ground for unduly low-priced. imports, however, it is extremely short-sighted of our Federal government to allow injury to be inflicted upon our domestic industry. The importance of the pollinating function of the domestic beekeeping industry seems to me to be a still more compelling reason why action must be taken to protect the industry, not only for its own sake but for that of the nation as well. In summary, I believe the ITC's judgment on this matter was sound. Congress will serve the nation well to see the Commission's recommendations put in force. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to appear before you, and with your permission may I present Mr. Walter Weldon, one of my outstanding constituents from Winner, South Dakota. Mr. ABDNOR. I have with me Mr. Weldon, vice president of the Sioux Honey Association, former past president of the South Dakota Beekeepers Association, and he is going to give further insight in the views of the beekeepers in my part of the country because he does come from my State, very close to where I live, so I will defer to his remarks and observations. I would say, I believe the International Trade Commission, properly conceived, can contribute to the well-being of all concerned. When relatively more restrictive policies of other nations threaten to make the United States a dumping ground over unduly low-priced imports, however, it is extremely shortsighted of our Federal Government to allow injury to be inflicted upon our domestic industry, so I really feel strongly about this. Again, I think Mr. Weldon can do a better job of covering it, and I will defer to Mr. Weldon at this time. Mr. VANIK. I want to say we welcome you to the committee. Are there questions-statements or questions-with respect to this statement? Mr. STEIGER. We are delighted to have Jim here. Mr. VANIK. That speaks for all of us. Mr. FRENZEL. I want to join in that, too. Mr. VANIK. We would be very pleased to hear from you, Mr. Weldon. We will have the same provision that your statement will be printed in the record entirely as presented. You may either read from your statement or speak informally. STATEMENT OF WALTER WELDON, VICE PRESIDENT, SIOUX HONEY ASSOCIATION Mr. WELDON. I think I would like to read from the statement. I would like to express my appreciation to the committee and the chairman. Mr. VANIK. You do understand the problem we were faced with in the organization of the Congress and the time factor? Mr. WELDON. Would you prefer that I not read? Mr. VANIK. No; you may proceed. The reason we were moving with such short a notice was because of the time factor and the organization of the Congress. Mr. WELDON. I will be as brief as I can and read rapidly. I am Walter Weldon, vice president of Sioux Honey Association representing 1,200 beekeepers that produced 56 million pounds of honey in 1976. Sioux Honey Association has been blamed for importing honey from Canada in 1974 and 1975 instead of buying domestic honey. This was also presented by the opponents of the tariff request as evidence that American honey was not available and imports were necessary. This is not true. Sioux Honey sales volume increased during that period and we needed additional supplies of white clover honey to maintain our quality. Our members did not produce enough honey to supply these needs, and it is our policy not to make cash purchases of nonmember honey. For that reason we arranged with our neighbor honey cooperative in Canada to supply this honey on a regular member basis. The Canadian cooperative paid the import duty and freight to the U.S. border and then were treated exactly as a domestic member of our association from that point on, including initial payments, periodic advances and final payment, with the same participation certificates deducted from their payments as all other members. To correct this situation, our association accepted new members to provide the needed types and volume of honey. During a 12-month period, 86 new members were accepted, operating a total of 92,712 colonies of bees. This provided all the honey that we were able to market in an orderly manner, and so we were forced to close our organization to any new members until we are able to increase our market potential to accommodate additional volume. During the past 12 months, we have been forced to table applications from 93 honey producers, operating a total of 73,614 colonies of bees. We have also taken no Canadian honey during that time, except for 338,074 pounds from two Sioux Honey members in Montana and one member in North Dakota who operate on both sides of the border. This amounts to a fraction of 1 percent of our annual volume. With the number of applications that have been turned down, and the number that we now have on file waiting for a chance to join, we are unable to accept the story that no American honey is available to 84-544-77-4 |