What’s in an Advisory Group? Speak Up or be Told

Beekeepers? Technical experts? A mix of both? Just who should make up advisory groups to New Zealand Bee Health and Biosecurity (NZBB) is the topic of consultation between the American foulbrood (AFB) agency and the beekeepers who fund it – and if sufficient beekeepers don’t speak up the decision will be made for them.

NZBB notified all beekeepers, on February 16, that a two-month consultation period was opening on the topic of advisory groups, with options for their structure laid out. The former AFB Management Agency reformed as an independent trust in June 2025, and among its new rules is the ability to form advisory groups.

The groups – plural as they may have finite lifespans to address certain topics – are expected to advise on new or improved ways to tackle problems facing the beekeeping sector, with NZBB providing the example ‘such as improving the traceability of hives during pollination season to assist with AFB elimination’. Increasing knowledge in specific areas would also be a focus, ‘such as investigating the feasibility of AFB-detection by dogs or proposing a model for regional AFB elimination’.

An online survey asks beekeepers to rank the four options presented to them. Option A, which NZBB seems to favour, would see a technical advisory group appointed by the board who gives them topics to advise on. Option B would see a mix of experts appointed by the board and self-nominated beekeepers. Option C has beekeeping organisations nominate advisor group candidates to sit alongside NZBB’s appointed experts, while Option D leads to a permanent group established to be populated by beekeepers who have been elected through their beekeeping organisation.

Beekeepers have four advisory group options to choose from, but without a 157% increase in consultation response over the most recent round, option A will be implemented.

And if less than five percent of registered beekeepers respond to the consultation, then option A will be rolled out.

“We established the 5% threshold in response to historically low participation rates across every consultation round we have held with beekeepers in recent years. We believe 5% of all registered beekeepers is a realistic expectation for meaningful engagement,” NZBB general manager Niha Long says.

Whether the 5% threshold is a carrot or a stick is contentious though considering the vast majority of New Zealand’s 7550 beekeepers have small hive-holdings. Motivating them to vote on a topic considered incidental to their hobby will likely prove challenging. Recent evidence, where just 147 beekeepers engaged in consultation on the topic of future levy rates and a potential expanded biosecurity role for NZBB, suggests it will not be reached. That number would need to increase 157%, by some 230 respondents, to hit the 5% mark.

A nine-page consultation document has been provided by NZBB to detail the four options, all of which would see roles unremunerated.

The formation of the NZBB Trust last year received heated criticism from some commercial beekeeping quarters, not least due to the apparent self-appointed nature of trustees, or board members. Now, with NZBB favouring a collective appointed by their own board as the default option for an advisory group, both commercial and non-commercial beekeepers will have to respond together if options B, C or D are to get a look in.

The industry has a recent example of ‘option A’ to look to – the technical advisory group (TAG) helping with the yellow-legged hornet response. Long has sat in on several meetings where that group has advised.

“The TAG receives questions and issues raised by the Ministry for Primary industries or by Government industry Agreement partners within governance, the beekeeping community, or the public,” Long explains.

“The TAG then works through those questions, forming considered views and recommendations, which are presented to governance for consideration.”

The ball is ultimately now in the beekeeper’s court to determine the advisory group structure, but it would be a turn-up for the books should anything but the default result. 

“In proposing Option A as default, we have listened to beekeepers who have long asked whether we are fully exploring new possibilities, innovation, and fresh thinking to fast-track or improve the efficiency of AFB elimination; and whether we have a clear enough picture of the gaps that may be standing in the way of success,” Long says.

The consultation details can be found here.