The reason I started looking hard at the BIP data was because of some very unexpected results in a small (23 people) survey I did at my bee clubs.  Years of experience did not predict % of colonies survived.  What monitoring (or whether they monitored) for mites was done did not predict % of colonies survived.

So I figured, well, 23 people, of course it's wacko.  What about across the nation?

Same story - looking at backyard beekeepers, all states, for 2017 only - monitoring DOES NOT result in an improvement of colonies that survived.  42ish% losses for those who did monitor, about the same for those who did not (but presumbably treated on a schedule).  

The BIP best practices recommend monitoring monthly for mites.  The evidence does not support that practice for reducing losses.  This is one interpretation between the condition (treating or not) and losses.  Another could be that people who monitor then wait for a threshold to be reached get hammered - 42% losses.  Those who don't monitor but treat seasonally do great (let's pretend 20% losses) and the same number don't monitor because they don't treat (60% losses).  So... we are again looking at recommending to beginners that they not monitor but treat on a schedule.

I'm going to pretend you can teach an old dog new tricks and disregard that explanation for these kind of results. ;)  especially since new beeks aren't doing any better in the losses department.  

I'm going to assume that those who monitor for mites and those who don't are equally able to accurately report whether they monitored and what their colony count was.  I would completely disregard self-reports of CAUSE of death for the colony, agreed.  

If we want to tell our new beeks the best practices for their best chances for their colonies to survive, what is the BIP evidence for best practices?  
1) lowest losses (again, 2017, all states, backyard only, commercial guys have their own problems) were for those who were using 3 or more products to treat.  Which in OH definitely means treating during a broodless period, possibly multiple times during fall/winter/early spring.  So, treat at least 3 times.
2) Best products (when looking at losses by which product was used) was Amitraz, at 28% losses, people using formic had 34% losses.  So, Amitraz wins over formic, when stictly using evidence for lowest losses.

For the record, I will still be monitoring for mites, but I look at monitoring very differently now that I have been using Randy O's mite model.  But I won't be recommending new beekeepers look for their mite levels to hit a threshold - I will be recommending they expect to treat 3x a year.  That means during the fall/winter for sure.  

             ***********************************************
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