Surveys are imperfect tools. The non-responders are problematic
enigmas in every survey. Speculation could go on forever on whether
the information of non-responders could significantly skew the data,
but there is no way to know. BIP has been pretty straight forward in
presenting how the data is collected and summarized. It is what it is,
and more useful than no information at all.
A more precise, more complicated, but more realistic way of tracking
how an operation is doing would be to generate an idealized matrix for
each region/management system. Rather than number of colonies, it
should show expected number of total workers (or some constant
management unit) at any given time for a standardized subcomponent of
an operation, for example an apiary of 25 colonies in a stable
situation in the summer, regardless of how they are housed later or
earlier in the year. The idealized number of bees (or some other
metric) would obviously change through the year. Against this matrix,
each person could report how closely or far off they are from this
proposed matrix. A system like this would accommodate the common
practice of taking colony "losses" in the fall by combining units, the
inevitable losses during the dearth season, and then the division of
colonies to "increase" number of colonies in the spring. As some have
pointed out, counting total "colonies" can become pretty nonsensical in
many situations.
As Randy pointed out, some successful operations are net exporters of
workers (and queens), generally commercial operations with many years
of experience. And some populations of beekeepers, largely hobbyists,
less experienced ones, or ones with unrealistic expectations about
management, are net importers of workers and queens in the form of
packages and nuclei, every year, from repeat customers.
***********************************************
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
|
