" 30% of commercial beekeepers reported losses in excess of 50%."

The data looks to me like it says 24% of commercial bee keepers experienced 43% of the total losses.  On the other hand 41% of commercial bee keepers experienced only 18% of the total losses.  So, 24% did really terrible and 41% did quite well.  From the data it is impossible to glean any clue as to why the huge disparity in losses.  I can not even tell if bigger guys did better or worse than smaller guys.  But, just looking at the data it sure looks to me like there are two distinct populations of commercial guys.  The data is no place close to a normal distribution, in fact it looks bimodal, so the results sure do not look a bit like the result of chance.  I would suspect either some major cultural difference is going on or some major difference in the environment is going on.  We all know that some do a better job of controlling mites than others regardless of scale.    It is hard for me to think mite control is not part of the equation that leads to such disparate results.  But, some queen lines might well do a lot better than others, wintering in sheds versus in the open could make a big difference and on and on.  What we have here is raw data that is so raw it tells you nothing much about how to do better other than some do fine so it must be possible to do a lot better.

Dick

HL Mencken said: "The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed — and hence clamorous to be led to safety — by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary. "

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