Sender: |
|
Date: |
Tue, 2 Jul 2013 10:00:14 -0400 |
Reply-To: |
|
Message-ID: |
|
Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
7bit |
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed |
In-Reply-To: |
|
Organization: |
Deep Thought |
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
> But Allen, did you read your cited article to the end?
Yup. It is actually somewhat confusing.
> It says,
> "Beekeepers who reported reusing old brood comb in their colonies reported
> losing on average 12.6 more colonies per 100 (49.5% more) than beekeepers
> who did not report reusing brood comb that had been taken out of production
> or purchased."
I seem to recall that there was mention that the survey did not
investigate the nature of this comb in depth. What was considered old
comb or the criteria for accepting or rejecting it were not discussed,
Neither was the expertise -- or probable lack thereof -- of the
responders. In my experience, large numbers of smaller beekeepers are
likely to respond while larger and more experienced operators tend to
ignore such surveys as they think they are a waste of time and will be
skewed anyhow.
The possibility that some or even most of the 'old comb' was actually
scaled up with AFB -- as is very likely the case -- was not considered
that I noticed and we have no insight into how the data was analyzed.
Were the results tabulated by responders count or by hive count? That
would make a huge difference. Tyros very often get some old outfit that
is riddled with disease. Those running thousands of hives are less
likely to do so or suffer disaster from any resulting outbreak.
> ...where the average age of the brood comb in their operation was
> less than 1 year old, lost on average 7.5 more colonies per hundred when
> compared to beekeepers who managed bees in colonies where the average age
> of the brood comb in their operation was between 1 and 2 years old."
>
> Could the above result be an artifact of the fact that first year
> beekeepers tend to have higher losses?
Possibly. The report raises more questions than it answers. To form
solid conclusions from it would be a mistake.
I liked the parts that confirmed my biases, though.
***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html
|
|
|