> And again I must ask to how the way that the number of hives is counted has anything to do with the calculated per-hive yield.
As stated by Daberkow, Rucker, Thurman, and Burgett in the ABJ, in 2009:
> From 1982 to 1985, colony inventory data were not collected at all. In 1986, when the surveys were re-instituted, data were collected only from beekeepers who maintained at least five colonies. This resulted in a sharp drop in the estimated number of colonies. We estimate that this resulted in an artificial drop of nearly one million colonies from the series.
* However, the method of collecting data on honey production did not change, so when total honey production is divided by the number of colonies, there is an apparent jump in the per colony average. My contention is that this is not real.
ΒΆ
> NASS really wants to do a good job, and produce meaningful figures. He didn't sound whimsical at all, and would likely feel insulted by that comment.
In 2009, Rucker, Thurman, and Burgett state:
> The national data are [compiled in the] "USDA Honey Report." As the name suggests, the primary purpose of USDA's annual survey is to obtain estimates of the number of colonies used to produce honey. Beekeepers participating in the survey are asked to list the states in which they had colonies during the year just completed, and then to indicate from how many colonies they harvested honey (and how much honey they harvested) in each of those states.
> This approach can yield inaccurate estimates of the number of managed honey bee colonies for two reasons. First, insofar as beekeepers have bee colonies that are not used for honey production (e.g., they are used solely to provide pollination services), then the numbers reported by the USDA will underestimate the actual number of managed colonies.
> Second, to the extent that individual beekeepers use hives to produce honey in more than one state, those hives will be counted more than once, and the numbers reported by the USDA will overestimate the actual number of managed colonies.
> We are aware of no research that assesses the magnitude of these two sources of bias. Champetier et al. (2010) suggest, however, that the USDA annual colony estimates are misleading, particularly in recent years.
Sources:
Daberkow, S., Rucker, R., Thurman, W., & Burgett, M. (2009). US honey markets: Recent changes and historical perspective. American Bee Journal.
Rucker, R. R., Thurman, W. N., & Burgett, M. (2016). Colony Collapse and the Economic Consequences of Bee Disease: Adaptations to Environmental Change. Montana State University, Department of Agricultural Economics and Economics.
***********************************************
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
|
