Statistical information like this is always rubbish.
Who was it who said, 'There are lies, there are dammed lies, and there are statistics'?
I once had to go through a years worth of the RUC daily incident reports and compile a list of terrorist weapons and munition finds; by weapon and ammunition type.
My briefing was, 'It has to be as accurate as possible, since this information is for the highest levels of government' (possibly as an indicator on how we're doing defeating terrorism; or something).
Anyway, what a load of rollocks was my eventual report.
In the end it was pure guess work. Some of the information I had to wade through had accurate finding reports, i.e 500 rounds of 5.62 ammunition.
Other reports just said a small or large 'quantity' of ammunition.
But my Masters wanted numbers, so I guessed a small quantity was 100 or so, and a large quantity was 500 or so. In reality a small quantity could've been 20 rounds and a large quantity could've been 10,000! Who knows?
My point is, don't believe what you read in the papers.
At the end of the day, some organisation has been paid for compiling what amounts to be nothing more than a 'hearsay' story amounting to an interesting read.