OCTOKKR, 19J-J 



(i L I'", A N 1 N (i S IN Ji 10 K C U I. T U R K 



THE MARKETING PROBLEM 



A National Honey Marketing Or- 

 ganization Needed to 'Bring About 

 Better 'Distribution of Honey 



By Geo. W. York 



IT seems to me, 

 as I review the 

 past 111 a u y 



years of honey 



production in the 



United States, 



with whicli I am 



somewliat well 



atM|uainted, the 



greatest need of 



beokeeijers today is a national organization 



that will keep in touch witli all the leading 



wholesale honey markets, and direct the 



shipping of honey in carlots where they 

 are most needed to supply the market. 

 After giving the subject considerable 

 thought 1 cannot conclude otherwise than 

 that the leading commercial honey produc- 

 ers of tliis country should get together and 

 form this kind of organization. 



For a number of 3'ears I have thought that 

 tlie iiroduction end of beekeeping has been 

 rather overworked. Most Avide-awake hon- 

 ey producers do not seem to lack the ability 

 to liarvest a good crop whenever the nectar 

 is in the flowers. What really worries them 

 most is to find a profitable market for their 

 honey after it is boxed up ready for ship- 

 ment. 



I am just wondering if it would not be a 

 wise move on the part of the United States 

 Government, through its eflicient Division of 

 Apiculture, to "lay off" for a while on the 

 effort to teach beekeepers how to produce 

 more honey, and for a year or two endeavor 

 to discover some ways in which the com- 

 mercial beekeeper can dispose of his crops 

 of honey to a profitable advantage to him- 

 self. 



[Tills is already being done by the Bu- 

 reau of Agricultural Economics, of the 

 United States Department of Agriculture, 

 through a careful study of the honey market 

 and the Market News service on Honey. 

 The apicultural division of the Bureau of 

 Entomology could not take up tlie problem 

 of marketing, since this is tlie function of 

 another bureau. — Editor. 1 



Two Cars of Honey Sold Below Cost of 



Production. 

 The thing tliat has caused me to discuss 

 the honey marketing question again is a 

 private letter received from central Califor- 

 nia, and dated August 10, 1922, in which the 

 writer reports that "two carloads of new 

 alfalfa honey sold lecently in San Fran- 

 cisco for .514 cents a pound — about half the 

 cost of production." Ts there any good 

 reason why good table Iioney should sell at 

 any such low jjrice as tliait, when at tlie 

 same time sugar is ascending in price? Sure- 

 ly, there is something wrong somewhere. 



There is no use blinking the fact, the hon- 

 ey marketing problem is becoming a very 

 serious one, and it w^ould seem that, if some- 

 thing really effective is not done about it 

 pretty soon, there will be no large crops of 

 honey to worry about in the not very far 

 distant future. Just why should any pro- 



635 



ducors of honey 

 accejit only 5% 

 cents a pound 

 for good alfalfa 

 extracted lioney 

 at the present 

 time? Was it be- 

 cause the produc- 

 er "needed the 



.money 



If so, 



had there been a suitable marketing organi- 

 zation, then no doubt it could have arranged 

 to loan the producer about 25 per cent of 

 the value of the honey offered for sale, un- 

 til such time as it might have been dis- 

 posed of at perhaps nearly twice the figure 

 per pound at which it was sold. 



It may be, too, that if a really live mar- 

 keting organization had been "on the job" 

 at the time the two cars of honey were 

 ready for delivery, the organization, being 

 in touch with all the principal markets, pos- 

 sibly might have directed that the two cars 

 be sent where they would have brought 

 more than double the juice for which they 

 were sold. 



Is This a Function of the League? 



It is just possible that the American 

 Iioney Producers' League could include such 

 a work in its plans. One of its present aims 

 seems to be to develop a wider family and 

 individual consumption of honey, which is 

 all right and a very worthy object; but this 

 should be followed up by an effort to see 

 that there is a more even distribution of 

 honey in the markets. It certainly is not 

 good business to ship most of the honey 

 crop to one or two cities like Chicago or 

 New York, and let the rest of the large 

 centers of population go without any honey. 

 Such unwise practice tends to demoralize 

 prices where too much honey is sent, and 

 then those forced low prices are likely to 

 be taken as the standard for the rest of the 

 country. 



It does seem that tliere ought to be enough 

 clear-minded beekeepers in the United 

 States to take hold of this problem of mar- 

 keting and solve it in a manner that would 

 result in a fair profit to the producers of 

 honey, and yet be entirely just to tlie con- 

 sumers. It may take a few sessions to in- 

 duce all the large producers to unite, but T 

 believe when the stubborn and unwise ones 

 once see the advantage of the kind of co- 

 operation suggested, they will be only too 

 glad to come in with the rest. 



I do not suppose that anything T might 

 say will cause the formation of such a honey 

 marketing organization as T have indicated, 

 but it may possibly set some others to think- 

 ing who may evolve a plan of handling large 

 individual crops of honey so tliat tliere shall 

 result a substantial profit to the i)roducer 

 rather than even a verj' small loss. There 

 must be the right kind of method of doing 

 this very necessary work — the question is, 

 Can enough commercial honev producers be 

 induced to get together, and stay together 



