If you count only those on the list, and assume half of them viewed my 
two posts we start with a base of about 300. 16 participated or 5%, 
which is about the norm for something like this.

Of those respondents, four reported CCD, but of those four, three were 
not sure it was CCD and were hobby beekeeper with few colonies. Only one 
large operation reported definite CCD loss and they lost over 500 colonies.

My poll at our annual meeting showed 2 out of 154 reported CCD (both 
were hobby beekeepers) and after interviewing one, it was probably 
Tracheal. Even so, you have the 2% figure that Florida reported.

Those who used Formic or Thymol products had no losses they could 
ascribe to CCD. They knew how to use both and they knew what killed the 
few colonies they lost. Few is the operative word here. The losses were 
pre-mite winter loss.

These numbers track those of the CCD group. A few large operations have 
sustained the greatest loss. The problem is not wide spread, just the 
numbers from those who have it magnify the problem.

I came into this poll with major bias problem. First, I know some who 
claim it is CCD have no idea what they actually have and are only 
blaming the newest buzz word. CCD covers a variety of ills.

Second, some who claim it is CCD had heavy mite loads before their 
losses and were warned that they would lose their colonies that year. 
They did, but that did not stop them from claiming CCD. It appears the 
group has accepted CCD over mites.

Third, reliance is placed on the word of the beekeeper of their prior 
state and there is no good pre-CCD data to rule out mites or other 
things that could have led to CCD symptoms. Since there is such a small 
number who may actually suffer from CCD, with no pre-collapse data taken 
by the group, we are looking at residue and not necessarily cause. As a 
chemist, I want to know not what the end compound is, but the beginning 
materials, process and end.

Fourth, we really do not know the extent of CCD, mostly because of 1-3 
and also because it has been hyped and amplified by fear mongers 
championing their agendas. It has hurt some large operations but a 
minority. It is not nearly as wide spread as the Tracheal kills of the 
90s. Figures like 25% of colonies and 2% of beekeepers are not a 
disaster except to the beekeeper who suffers the loss. We recovered from 
Tracheal and it was worse than CCD.

Fifth, those who I talk with, and I have talked (email and phone) with 
many across the country, have not seen CCD. I know the group has. My 
correspondents have seen supposed CCD but are much closer to those who 
claim that and know the practices of the affected beekeeper. They tend 
to discount CCD and blame the beekeeper since they know what is actually 
going on in those apiaries.In some cases it is more than practices, it 
is actual inspection.

Sixth, CCD will be the cause of all colony losses as soon as an 
indemnity program is established by the government.

That is only a start and probably mirrors others who have a problem with 
the hype, and I use that word guardedly, with CCD. It maybe nosema or 
stone brood or any of a variety of pathogens, but  it has taken away the 
real beekeeping issue, and I will continue that thought in another post.

Bill Truesdell
Bath, Maine

******************************************************
* Full guidelines for BEE-L posting are at:          *
* http://www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l/guidelines.htm  *
******************************************************