* * *

Again, the figures are flawed. When the government stopped counting holders with less than five hives, the number slipped by almost a million. What is interesting is that the estimate for honey production is almost the same from 1910 to 2012.

             
Very interesting information.   I am troubled a bit by the early numbers and the slight attempt to "correct" them to what we think was going on.  What is disappointing is we really have no clue if production was highly underestimated,  or just as possible overestimated. We don't know the persons responsible for the data, and if they tried to "adjust" the numbers one way or the other, to try to get them right,  used as reported,  or just in fact made them up from the end of the pencil.   Sure wish we did!

Unfortunately here we are 100 years later, and we are still mentally trying to "correct" the numbers!

It seems to me the writings of Root and many others is probably the best place to get averages of production.  Even with writers inflation, I would trust any of them over the GOV figures.  We would just have to be careful to look at like areas.   Some areas of the country are better for production than others.  But it does seem to me that the old writers are a better source of comparison.

If we take these numbers at face values,  we produce more honey with less hives than ever before,  Might be true,  but not what I would consider the general consensus.



Charles

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