Both the 2018/2019 and the 2019/2020 report on the National Pest Management Plan (both available from Reports to Industry | The Management Agency, National American Foulbrood Pest Management Plan New Zealand) use an interesting ratio in interpreting some AFB reports and findings.
In both years, the target group, those who are being described, are beekeeping operations that considered 'high risk'. In the first year, there were 3 'high risk' operations. The second report refers to 12 high risk (quite likely including the 3 from the previous year?). It considers the total number of hives owned by these high risk operations, and the total number of AFB cases found by the Management Agency when concentrating efforts on these beekeepers, and concludes that operations that are in trouble such as these might well be under-reporting their AFB findings... I understand it fine up to that point.
But the report compares that "percentage of AFB found/reported in high-risk operation" with "percentage of AFB found/reported by all beekeepers". One might expect the high risk operations to be either commercial or at least semi-commercial in nature - but the "all beekeepers" includes (presumably) a reasonably large number of hobbyists, each of whom would be reporting a small number of hives each. Another large number of hobbyists would perhaps not be finding AFB at all. It just makes the comparison a bit questionable in value to me...
Don't get me wrong. I am not expressing upset at these large numbers of AFB hives found in a small group of beekeeping operations. I would like to hope that the Management Agency is both effective at dealing with the problem, but also making sure it all gets charged back to those beekeepers...
In both years, the target group, those who are being described, are beekeeping operations that considered 'high risk'. In the first year, there were 3 'high risk' operations. The second report refers to 12 high risk (quite likely including the 3 from the previous year?). It considers the total number of hives owned by these high risk operations, and the total number of AFB cases found by the Management Agency when concentrating efforts on these beekeepers, and concludes that operations that are in trouble such as these might well be under-reporting their AFB findings... I understand it fine up to that point.
But the report compares that "percentage of AFB found/reported in high-risk operation" with "percentage of AFB found/reported by all beekeepers". One might expect the high risk operations to be either commercial or at least semi-commercial in nature - but the "all beekeepers" includes (presumably) a reasonably large number of hobbyists, each of whom would be reporting a small number of hives each. Another large number of hobbyists would perhaps not be finding AFB at all. It just makes the comparison a bit questionable in value to me...
Don't get me wrong. I am not expressing upset at these large numbers of AFB hives found in a small group of beekeeping operations. I would like to hope that the Management Agency is both effective at dealing with the problem, but also making sure it all gets charged back to those beekeepers...