APIS Volume 7, Number 1, January 1989
In this issue
- Reflections on Management in Extraordinary Times
- Making Decisions in Times of Risk
REFLECTIONS ON MANAGEMENT IN EXTRAORDINARY TIMES
There has been much discussion recently about the state of the bee industry in Florida and elsewhere. As I talk to beekeepers, it becomes increasingly clear that we are in extraordinary times. Yet, like Dickens' famous quotation, "It was the best of times, it was the worst of times," there seems to be a favorable side to many of the adverse changes that surround us. This reminds me of a speech by an extension man from South America a while back. He said that we should welcome tracheal mites, Varroa and the African bee. That we would be better beekeepers and have a stronger beekeeping industry as a result of their introduction.
Managing in Turbulent Times is the title of a recent book by Peter Drucker. He is considered by pundits to be one of the foremost analytical futurists and management philosophers of the age. As we all take stock this new year, it might be well worth the time to look carefully at what Dr. Drucker has to say.
Consider the enigma of the unknown dieoff of bees in Florida's panhandle. In several instances, upwards of 90% winter loss has been observed. In addition, during early spring, a great number of bees can be found crawling on the ground and dying for no apparent reason, further weakening colonies. Apiaries may also get "hit" with this several times during the spring buildup period. The collective experience by beekeepers in the region for the last 30 years includes none of these symptoms.
Response to the dieoff has been varied, but boils down to an intensive search for a specific cause. During a brainstorming session I conducted in the region last year, we came up with 18 things that might contribute to the situation. Topping the list were various diseases and pests, including unknown viruses and tracheal mites. Also listed, however, were more mundane reasons, like protein deficiency, acid rain, air quality and love bugs.
Meanwhile, the enigma continues. And, as scientists scratch their heads and bees are sampled for tracheal mites, nosema and as yet unidentified viruses, most beekeepers in the area are continuing to manage their bees exactly as they have done for the last three decades. Given there is yet no registered treatment for tracheal mites (considered by many to be the major cause), that few believe it necessary to feed for nosema control and that plenty of sugar syrup and pollen appears to be available, what's a person to do? The brainstorming session led me to propose a feeding study which will probably continue for another season or so. The thinking is provide a colony with a known balanced nutritional source for brood rearing in the fall and spring. This would help eliminate poor nutrition as a possible cause.
Other strategies might be tried as well. How about raising queens only from those colonies that survive over the winter instead of purchasing stock from other areas over which the beekeeper has little control? One can also feed for nosema control, something very few do in spite of evidence that it is an effective practice. A colleague wrote suggesting that too much honey is always stripped off bees and this creates tremendous stress on a colony. Any change in beekeeping practice, however, involves risks and increased costs, something I'll discuss later on.
Professor Drucker writes, "a time of turbulence is a dangerous time, but its greatest danger is a temptation to deny reality. The new realities...do not mesh at all with 'what everybody knows.' The most dangerous turbulence today results from the collision between the delusions of the decisionmakers ...and the realities...the temptation of the certainties of yesterday, which are about to become the deleterious superstitions of tomorrow."
Dr. Drucker also mentions inherent problems with the concept of planning. As he states: "Planning starts out, as a rule, with the trends of yesterday and projects them into the future--using a different 'mix' perhaps, but with very much the same elements and the same configuration...The most probable assumption in a period of turbulence is the unique event which changes the configuration--and unique events cannot, by definition, be 'planned.' But they can often be forseen."
Such strategies are already being tried and the results published in bee journals and other sources of information. A humorous account of a lady scrambling about underneath an aircraft and recapturing queens purchased from abroad in no way diminishes the significance of her actions. The Canadian border is closed to U.S. bees. Studies have also been published that producing package bees as far north as Canada may be a viable enterprise. The reduced population is stimulated to replace those bees very quickly. Raising queens in the northern U.S. and the Caribbean is being looked at by a number of breeders.
I suggested above that the possibilities for raising one's own queens should be considered. Alternatively, entering into contracts with breeders to produce a certain kind of stock is being explored. Queens can no longer be taken for granted as "good." Most authorities now agree that the long-range solution to many of these unique events is resistant stock. Unfortunately, there is great variability in stock purchased from many queen producers in the U.S.
Very few queens sold have in any way been tested for resistance to diseases or pests. In the past, this was thought unnecessary. Fortunately, the presence of variability means that strides can be made quickly in the arena of bee breeding. This has already been shown in selecting for stinging behavior, American foulbrood resistance, high and low nectar hoarding and alfalfa pollen collecting.
The industry is now involved in "negotiated rule making" with USDA's APHIS concerning the orderly movement of bees. This is an innovative way to decide on issues which have no technical solutions, but require decisions none the less. Information from these sessions shows that the process is extremely successful in bringing those with opposite views into agreement. So much so, that many of those agreeing can't believe they said yes.
All of the examples above are a testament to the ability of the beekeeping industry to come to grips with present and future problems by adopting new strategies. The most successful are, according to Dr. Drucker: "... strategies that anticipate where the greatest changes are likely to occur and what they are likely to be, strategies...to take advantage of new realities and to convert turbulence into opportunity."
MAKING DECISIONS IN TIMES OF RISK
As a postscript to the above, I am publishing the following information to suggest one way to help make decisions during turbulent times. In 1977, Drs. John Holt (University of Florida) and Kim Anderson (Oklahoma State University) published "Teaching Decision Making Under Risk and Uncertainty to Farmers," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol. 60, No. 2, pp: 249-255. The examples in this paper pertain specifically to cattle and wheat, but the principles are valid for any activity. Apiculture seems particularly suited to this kind of decision making because of the number of variables inherent in the craft.
According to the authors, the objectives were to show producers a systematic procedure for analyzing decisions. There was an express need to include a range of results. In addition, the authors wanted to include the possibility that a number of managers, because of personal differences, could make widely differing decisions when faced with the same external conditions. They also wished to incorporate yield and price uncertainty into the decision-making process.
A decision making tree was constructed based on likely variation in both yield (bushels) and price ($/acre). While constructing the tree, farmers were considerably less comfortable with establishing both price levels and their probabilities than for yields. This information alone suggests where agriculturalists might consider investing a larger share of their efforts in their business. Potential incomes were then calculated, followed by joint probabilities, or likelihood, of obtaining those incomes. The joint probabilities were considered the strongest part of the procedure and most persons were comfortable in using them.
Here is an example produced by the authors:
Table 1. Expected Wheat Incomes, Considering a Range of Yields, Prices and
Their Probabilities.
Yield Crop Price Crop Joint
Yield Probability Price Probability Income Probability
(bu.) (%) ($/bu.) (%) ($/acre) (%)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
2.40 20 71.50 3.76
35 18.8 2.15 60 62.75 11.28
1.90 20 54.00 3.76
========================================================================
2.40 20 52.30 12.50
27 62.5 2.15 60 45.55 37.50
1.90 20 38.80 12.50
========================================================================
2.40 20 33.10 3.74
19 18.7 2.15 60 28.25 11.22
1.90 20 23.60 3.74The expected value based on experience for the above scenario was $45.57. This value was developed using enterprise budgets. The authors comment on how close it is to that value developed in the decision-making tree with the highest joint probability. At 27 bushels with a yield probability of 62.5% and price probability of 60% at $2.15/bushel the expected income is $45.55 $/acre. The crop income figure was price times yield minus an arbitrary $12.50 per acre harvest cost. The joint probability is the product of yield probability multiplied by price probability. In the above example, the highest joint probability of 37.50% was calculated by multiplying 60 times 62.5.
Other examples were provided by the authors by intermixing decisions on wheat income with those of stocker cattle grazing. The most complex analysis had 81 possible results or outcomes using three yields and three prices for both cattle and wheat. This was considered too complex, however, so examples were simplified to provide at most, 9 outcomes. If anyone is interested in reading the full paper, send me a request and I'll mail you a copy. The significance of the decision-making process as implemented above in times of uncertainty is clear. As the author's conclude: "A manager's central role is making choices among uncertain results. In that role, he needs decisionmaking aids which permit him to incorporate uncertainty into his decisionmaking framework...focusing on the decision-making process itself, and adding the treatment of yield and price uncertainty to farmers' 'rule-of-thumb' procedures, can aid farmers as they make choices among uncertain outcomes and commit present resources to an unknowable future."
BEEKEEPERS INSTITUTE SET FOR SEPTEMBER 15-17, 1989
It's not too early to begin thinking about this year's Beekeepers Institute. The event has been tentatively scheduled for September 15-17 at 4-H Camp Ocala. Changes in 4-H policy have dictated a different time frame this year. The Institute's schedule is also modified to omit the Sunday lunch. This means that participants will only eat five meals instead of the traditional six, saving some costs.
I would like some feedback from persons who have attended past events and/or are contemplating coming to this year's on the suitability of these changes. If the timing is too inconvenient or some consideration has been left out that I'm unaware of, it is important to bring these to my attention.
Malcolm T. Sanford
Bldg 970, Box 110620
University of Florida
Gainesville, FL 32611-0620
Phone (904) 392-1801, Ext. 143 FAX: 904-392-0190
http://www.ifas.ufl.edu/~entweb/apis/apis.htm
INTERNET Address: MTS@GNV.IFAS.UFL.EDU
©1989 M.T. Sanford "All Rights Reserved
