The impact of change in population of bee colonies on agriculture crop production in the US.

1. Using the NASS data to Measure the
Impact of Bee Colony Collapse
Disorder (CCD) on US Agriculture
Gaetan Lion
August 22, 2011
1

2. Introduction
The Media has given extensive coverage
on the bee Colony Collapse Disorder
(CCD), a mysterious condition associated
with a decimation of bee colonies during
the mid 2000s. In turn, the Media has
conveyed the crisis it represents for US
agriculture as many crops rely extensively
on bee pollination. We will investigate
those assertions studying the NASS data.
2

3. The number of Bee Colonies
Source: NASS
While the Media has frequently mentioned loss of 30% per year in bee
colonies starting in 2005, the NASS records show this is a wild exaggeration.
Over the entire period, the loss has been less than 1% per year. 3

4. Annual % change in # of Bee Colonies
Source: NASS
The drop in bee colonies in 2005 was nowhere near 30% (this supposedly massive
loss was attributed to CCD). Instead, it was only – 5.6%. When looking at the
longer data set going back to 1986, you see up and down cycles. And, the impact
of CCD in 2005 looks more like an otherwise natural down cycle that was short
when compared with the 1991 – 1996 down cycle. 4

5. Hollywood’s really bad timing…
Source: NASS
This documentary conveying a crisis “Vanishing of the Bees” came out in October
2009, just as bee colonies experienced their most rapid 2-year growth in the history
of the disclosed NASS data (see ellipse in graph). A more accurate title for this
documentary would have been “Resurging Bees.”
5

6. Relation between Bees and Crops
Source: NASS
Out of seven major crops supposedly greatly dependent on bee pollination,
four have a negative correlation with number of bee colonies, one has no
relationship with bee colonies, and only two have a positive relationship with
bee colonies.
6

7. An interesting case: Almonds
Some crops, including…almonds, depends
entirely on the honey bee… [Quote from ABF]
The NASS data suggests
something different. It would
readily support that bees are
bad for almonds. Given that
this is botanically not the case,
we have to conclude that if
bees are so critical to almonds,
we have far more bees than
we need to grow almonds.
And, that’s why the scatter plot
could show a negative
relationship between the two.
How else could you explain it?
7

8. Another look at Bees vs Almonds
We standardized the NASS data (# of bee colonies vs almond production) so we
could more readily compare the two data sets on a similar scale. One can
observe the perplexing strong negative relationship between the two. When bee
colonies increase, almond production decreases and vice versa. 8

9. Another case: Cherries
Some crops, including … cherries, are 90%
dependent on honey bee. [Quote from ABF].
Again the NASS data is not
supportive of the above ABF
statement. Here the scatter plot
illustrates a relationship
between bees and cherry
production that is fairly close to
random. If we accept this is not
botanically true, again this
graph suggests we must have
plenty more bees than we need
to grow cherries.
9

10. Another look at Bees vs Cherries
We standardized the NASS data (# of bee colonies vs cherries production) so we
could more readily compare the two data sets on a similar scale. As is, one can
readily observe a random relationship between the two. 10

11. Conclusion
• The bees are more resilient than the Media or the ABF
convey. The CCD crisis is overhyped.
• Bee colonies are in the midst of a resurgence (2009 &
2010). The Media has ignored this fact. It will pay
attention to bees upon their next natural down cycle.
• The relationship between bee colonies and crops relying
on bees for pollination is not strong. This suggests there
are more than enough bees to do the job. Thus, the next
downturn in bee colonies should not cause a food
shortage.
11